Key words
lithium - old age - maintenance therapy - reference serum level - drug monitoring - geriatric patients - withdrawal - renal function
Introduction
Lithium (Li) is considered the gold standard for the treatment of bipolar affective
disorder in the prevention of manic and depressive episodes [1]
[2]
[3]
[4]. However, with patients growing older,
several questions on appropriate drug monitoring, dosage, significant comorbid
diseases, and appropriate control of renal function arise. The percentage of
patients aged 60 years and older with bipolar disorder (old age bipolar disorder,
OABD) is increasing. By 2030, one-half of patients with bipolar disorder will be 60
years or older [5]. Thus, national and
international guidelines for Li treatment in older age ranges are becoming
increasingly important.
Few studies have examined the efficacy and tolerability of Li in OABD indications,
such as augmentation of antidepressant therapy in major depressive disorders.
Sajatovic et al. (2005) surveyed the efficacy and tolerability of Li in the
maintenance treatment of OABD and compared the effects with those of lamotrigine and
a placebo [6]. Their results indicated that Li
is successful in the prevention of manic, hypomanic, and mixed episodes. Compared to
divalproex, Li was associated with a greater reduction in manic symptoms, while the
tolerability of both pharmacological agents did not differ [7]. In a randomized controlled trial, Li was the more
effective treatment option for therapy-resistant major depression
compared to the monoamine oxidase inhibitor phenelzine. [8]. Wilkinson et al. (2002) showed that the
relapse risk of a major depressive episode in old age was significantly higher for
the placebo than for Li [9]. Florenza et al.
(2022) examined 986 participants aged 50 years or older with OABD and
divided them into two groups: “lithium” or
“non-lithium” users. The first group showed significantly lower
depressive symptoms, demonstrated higher global functioning, and was prescribed
fewer antipsychotic drugs [10]. An important
argument for prescribing Li is its proven suicide-preventive effect [4]. Finally, a recent review reported a reduced
risk for dementia in Li-treated patients with bipolar disorder (BD) [11].
In Ontario, Canada, a shift in the prescription patterns in favor of divalproex over
Li for patients aged 65 years and older was noted. However, there was no convincing
rationale for this change [12]. Shulman et al.
(2019) conducted a Delphi survey on the maintenance therapy of Li in OABD. Li was
endorsed as the first-line treatment option for maintenance therapy in OABD. In this
survey, a consensus was achieved regarding necessary blood tests, Li serum levels,
and signs of toxicity. Lamotrigine, quetiapine, olanzapine, and valproic acid were
recommended as second-line choices for the maintenance treatment of OABD, but no
consensus regarding the order of preference was achieved. In addition, there was
controversy about the once or twice-daily dosage of Li. This survey did not focus on
questions regarding concomitant diseases, medication, renal function, or the
withdrawal of Li [13].
The review of Dols et al. (2016) showed that in most guidelines, specific
recommendations for OABD are missing [14]. The
guideline of NICE provides a specific recommendation only for the monitoring of Li
therapy: in older individuals, the plasma Li level should be monitored every 3
months [1]. The CANMAT/ISBD guideline
also recommends monitoring Li blood-levels and renal function at a minimum of every
three to six months. After initiation of concomitant medication with non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB),
angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), or thiazide diuretic, Li blood
levels should be monitored five to seven days afterwards. A lower starting dosage of
Li is recommended, along with an adjustment of dosage depending on tolerability and
effectiveness [2]. The FDA guidelines for Li
state that existing clinical studies did not include a sufficient number of
geriatric patients to evaluate their therapeutic or prophylactic response [15]. The lack of clinical studies and the
difficulties in conducting trials, for example on the modalities for withdrawal of
Li, underline the importance of Delphi surveys.
While many clinicians argue that Li treatment in old age should be based on decisions
surrounding each unique case, a repository of general recommendations based on a
broader formalized consensus might still be desirable. The aim of the present Delphi
Survey was to develop recommendations on issues of concomitant medication, comorbid
diseases, and decisions on the initiation as well as potential withdrawal of Li
therapy in old age. Additionally, we compared our results to those of the Delphi
Survey by Shulman et al. (2019) [13].
Methods
Members of the “Working Group Geriatric Psychiatry” from the
“Bundesdirektorenkonferenz” (federal medical director board) were
invited to participate in the survey. From this group, 19 members joined the Delphi
survey. Additionally, these psychiatrists were asked to nominate further experts on
Li therapy or bipolar disorder. Based on recommendation, the list of experts was
extended to include specialists who were not members of the Working Group. In the
first round, a questionnaire with 22 multiple-choice questions was developed on the
following topics: initiation of Li therapy, drug monitoring during ongoing
treatment, and termination of Li therapy. The questions were based on existing
reviews and guidelines. Each question was accompanied by a commentary section. An
independent reviewer, who did not participate in the survey, analyzed the responses
of experts. After the evaluation of the first round, the results were presented in
an anonymized form to all participants and during a meeting of the Working Group.
The comments were listed, and the percentage of the answers pertaining to each
comment was calculated. The number of abstentions was also determined. For the
second round, responses with a consensus above 60% were transferred into
recommendations. Each recommendation could be adopted or rejected (a binary
“yes” or “no” decision), and additional commentaries
were again permitted. A consensus of 100% in the first round was considered
as acceptance by all participants. Responses with less than 60% consensus
were excluded from the final survey. Recommendations of the second round, endorsed
by at least 80% of the participants, were considered as having achieved
final consensus ([Fig. 1]).
Fig. 1 Illustration of the Algorithm of the Delphi Process
Results
All 24 participants completed the Delphi survey. Many participants made use of the
commentary section in the first questionnaire, which helped to improve and specify
the recommendations in the second questionnaire. The consensus was achieved on 21
recommendations pertaining to various aspects of from Li-therapy, including the
indication, pre-treatment screening, dosage, ongoing treatment monitoring, and
withdrawal. The final recommendations that achieved more than 80% approval
from the experts are summarized in [Table 1].
Seven suggested recommendations of the second questionnaire failed to reach a final
consensus. [Table 2] summarizes these
rejected recommendations and the comments of the experts.
Table 1 Recommendations.
Recommendation
|
% of approval
|
Initiation of lithium therapy
|
|
100
|
|
96
|
-
Treatment with lithium can be initiated under medication
with ACEIs, diuretics, ARBs, and opioids, if close
monitoring of the lithium concentrations and renal
function is provided. Before initiating treatment with
lithium, a possible change of ACEIs, diuretics, ARBs, or
opioids should be evaluated together with the
internist.
|
88
|
|
96
|
|
92
|
|
92
|
|
88
|
|
100
|
|
88
|
Monitoring during ongoing lithium therapy
|
|
100
|
-
In addition to creatinine, eGFR, blood count,
electrolytes (calcium included), TSH, T3,
T4, ECG, weight, blood pressure, and
heart rate, the continuous monitoring of an established
lithium therapy should include:
|
96
|
|
96
|
-
After one lithium intoxication, the medication should not
generally be ended. If the patient responded to lithium,
the lithium intoxication did not cause chronic renal
insufficiency or other injuries, and dementia was not
the reason for intoxication.
|
92
|
Withdrawal from lithium therapy
|
|
96
|
|
96
|
|
92
|
|
88
|
-
For the neuropsychological evaluation, no specific
neuropsychological tests can be recommended.
-
The decision to withdraw from lithium therapy is not
dependent on the results of the neuropsychological
tests. Therefore, the clinical symptoms should be taken
into consideration.
|
100
|
|
92
|
|
88
|
-
Other atypical antipsychotics, which can be prescribed as
an alternative to lithium, are aripiprazole, olanzapine,
and risperidone.
|
83
|
ACEIs: angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors; ARBs: angiotensin receptor
blockers; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate; EEG:
electroencephalogram; TSH: thyroid stimulating hormone.
Table 2 Points without consensus and possible
arguments.
Questions without consensus
|
Discussion/arguments
|
Initiating a lithium therapy
|
|
|
|
-
Consultation of an internal specialist
-
Evaluation of the indication NSAID/digoxine
-
Under close monitoring of lithium concentration and
eGFR
-
Close monitoring in the outpatient setting difficult
-
Risk of intoxication to high
-
Adherence?
-
Education of the patient about the risks
|
-
How often would you monitor the lithium concentration and
eGFR under simultaneous medication with ACE-inhibitors,
diuretics, AT II antagonists, and opioids?
|
-
First weekly, then monthly monitoring
-
After a change of dosage weekly
-
Stable dosage of the concomitant medication or
lithium?
|
|
-
Consultation with a nephrologist
-
Renal function over the lifespan of the patient?
-
Measurement of cystatin C to optimize evaluation of renal
function
-
Adherence?
-
Strong indication for lithium?
|
|
-
Close monitoring of renal function
-
Control of adherence by relatives/caregiver
-
Mild cognitive impairment
-
Depression influences cognitive impairment negatively
-
Rather for augmentation than as maintenance therapy
-
Drinking protocols
|
|
-
High risks for falls is a contraindication
-
Antipsychotic drugs have a higher risk for falls than
lithium – alternatives?
-
What has a higher negative impact on quality of life?
|
|
-
Search for a possible cause of underweight: cancer,
insufficient intake of food and liquid
-
Renal function must be normal
-
Underweight because of depression: lithium can be
life-saving
-
Compliance of patient, liquid intake is sufficient
-
Weight controls
-
Close monitoring
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring during ongoing lithium therapy
|
|
|
Withdrawal from lithium therapy
|
|
-
Answers included a range between 60 and
30 mL/min/1.73 m²
-
Dynamic of renal function, continuous reduction of eGFR
→ withdrawal of lithium
-
Consultation with a nephrologist
-
Mental condition of the patient
-
If the patient is an excellent lithium-responder,
withdrawal at
40–30 mL/min/1.73 m²
|
|
|
|
-
Dependent on the cognitive impairment
-
Compliance
-
Indication for lithium, when the patient has dementia
-
Control of adherence by relatives/caregivers
|
|
-
Dependent on mental condition, patient excellent
lithium-responder?
-
Relative contraindications
-
Dependent on risk-benefit-ratio
-
Combined treatment of epilepsy and bipolar disorders with
anticonvulsant drugs
-
First attempt to reduce lithium
-
Cognition after intracerebral bleeding or cerebral
ischemia, does the patient still benefit from
lithium?
-
Multimorbidity
|
ACEIs: angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors; ARBs: angiotensin receptor
blockers; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate; EEG:
electroencephalogram; NSAID: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; TSH:
thyroid stimulating hormone.
Initiation of Lithium therapy
The consensus was achieved concerning the indication of a de novo Li therapy for
the maintenance therapy of bipolar disorder, the augmentation in
therapy-resistant depression, and the prevention of suicide in old age.
Additionally, consensus was achieved among experts with regard to concomitant
medication with ACEIs, diuretics, ARBs, and opioids and concomitant diseases
like vascular encephalopathy, idiopathic Parkinson’s syndrome, and
syncope.
No consensus was achieved for the indications of manic episodes
(<57% approval) and schizoaffective disorder
(<52% approval). No consensus was obtained for the initiation of
Li therapy under simultaneous medication with NSAID and digoxin. One participant
recommended an evaluation of the indication for the concomitant medication and
consultation with an internal specialist. Lack of consensus also extended to
questions surrounding the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR): only 11
participants would initiate a Li therapy in a patient with an eGFR between 30 to
60 mL/min/1.73 m². In the commentary
section, these participants argued that they would consult a nephrologist before
initiating the medication and would monitor eGFR and Li levels more closely. No
consensus was achieved concerning frailty (<63% approval) and
dementia (<63% approval) as a contraindication. In an
underweight patient, less than 57% of the experts said they would
initiate Li therapy. The responders commented that a differential diagnosis of
underweight individuals should be undertaken. For most experts, a palliative
care situation would be a contraindication for Li treatment. If the cause for
cachexia is a major depressive disorder, Li can be effective. Before initiation
of Li therapy, most participants recommended a neuropsychological examination
(<75% approval). Others responded that neuropsychological
examinations are only required if clinical impressions provide a rationale for
conducting them. Most participants (<75%) would not conduct a
24-hour urine collection as a pre-treatment screening because of its frequent
errors in the complete collection of urine in an out-patient setting. To further
evaluate renal function, some participants recommended additional measurement of
cystatin C to determine eGFR (<67% approval). Li carbonate was
the preferred Li preparation. Because of their missing clinical evaluation and
restricted availability, Li aspartate and orotate were not prescribed
(<79% approval).
Monitoring of Lithium therapy
A Consensus was achieved concerning the concentration of Li in the blood of a
stable and responsive Li patient and routine laboratory parameters that should
be monitored during Li therapy. Additionally, consensus was reached on the
recommendation that Li should not generally be withdrawn after one single
intoxication. Participants noted the importance of evaluating the underlying
reason and the risk for future intoxications. The preferences of the patients
and their previous responsivity should also be considered.
No consensus was achieved concerning the frequency of laboratory checks. Most
participants claimed that they would monitor the eGFR weekly
(<29% approval) or monthly (<71% approval)
during simultaneous medication with ACEIs, diuretics, ARBs, and opioids. In the
commentary section, some participants expressed their view that they would
monitor eGFR and Li concentration every week in the first month and on a monthly
basis in subsequent months after therapy has been successfully established.
Withdrawal from Lithium therapy
The consensus was achieved on aspects related to the interval of withdrawal from
Li, consultation of a nephrologist before the withdrawal of Li in a patient with
a declining glomerular filtration rate, neuropsychological examination before
withdrawal, and alternatives for Li. Most experts (92%) agreed that
malignant carcinoma or diabetes mellitus are not general contraindications for
Li. Furthermore, 88% of the experts would not make the decision to
withdraw depending on the severity of the dementia. Optimized patient care and
accurate supervision of medication dispensation were regarded as crucial to the
decision of whether Li medication could be continued or stopped.
No consensus was achieved regarding Li-responsive patients with newly diagnosed
dementia: less than 67% of the participants would not terminate Li
therapy in such cases. For most participants, the prominent psychopathology is
relevant before ending an ongoing Li therapy in a patient with newly diagnosed
dementia. It was suggested that the initial indication for Li should be
considered.
Discussion
The efficacy of Li has been verified regarding the episode-preventive maintenance
therapy of bipolar disorder [16], the
augmentation strategy in therapy-resistant depression [9]
[17]
[18]
[19], and its suicide-preventive efficacy [20]
[21]
[22]. Li was also the preferred
choice in the maintenance therapy of OABD in the Delphi Survey of Shulman et al.
(2019) [13]. Regarding age, there is no
evidence of a loss of efficacy in geriatric patients. Therefore, all experts favor
Li for these indications. Patients’ higher age was not regarded as a general
contraindication. Moreover, consensus was achieved regarding the statement that mild
cognitive impairment, several falls (more than two falls within the last six
months), and simultaneous medication with ACEIs, diuretics, ARBs, and opioids are no
absolute contraindications for a de-novo Li therapy. However, vascular
encephalopathy, idiopathic Parkinson-syndrome, and syncope were regarded as relative
contraindications. Nevertheless, at least in Parkinson’s disease, a
neuroprotective effect of Li was discussed, which would not support a labeling as a
relative contraindication [23]
[24]. However, this preliminary data did not
lead to a general recommendation of Li in Parkinson’s disease.
With respect to concomitant dementia or frailty, 63% of the experts would not
initiate a de-novo Li therapy. Florenza et al. (2022) supported the efficacy of Li,
since Li users had higher global functioning and fewer depressive symptoms.
Moreover, the study supported the hypothesis of a neuroprotective effect of Li
because Li users performed better in cognitive assessments [10]. In the meta-analysis of Velosa et al.
(2020), a higher risk of developing dementia (odds ratio (OR): 2.96) in patients
with BD was depicted. However, Li use decreased the risk (OR: 0.51) [11]. A hippocampal volume reduction was shown
for patients with BD compared to healthy controls, whereas for Li users, no
difference in hippocampal volume compared to healthy controls was found. However,
the listed trials might not really answer the question whether Li has protective
effects and whether it should be started after dementia has developed [25].
In accordance with Shulman et al. (2019), consensus was also achieved regarding the
serum reference levels for Li. However, the upper limit in our survey was set
somewhat lower: for patients aged 65 to 79 years and for patients aged 80 years and
older: serum level upper limits were 0.4 to 0.7 mmol/L and 0.4 to
0.6 mmol/L, respectively. The minimum limit did not differ. Shulman
et al. (2019) concluded that lower serum levels might already be effective in old
age [13]. In addition, they surveyed the
reported therapeutic range of serum Li levels of the laboratories used by the
experts. In most laboratories, the range was higher than the recommended, which
increases the risk of intoxication for people of older age. Nolen et al. (2019) did
not find a consensus regarding the optimal Li serum levels for the elderly, but the
majority favored ranges similar to the present survey [26]. Rej et al. (2014) showed that the Li dose
required to establish a Li blood concentration of 1.0 mmol/L
decreases threefold across the lifespan [27].
With growing age and decreased eGFR, a smaller Li dose is required to achieve a
given serum Li concentration, which is in accordance with Sproule et al. (2000)
[28] and Rej et al. (2012) [29]. The association of Li dose/Li
blood concentration is not correlated with sex, concurrent hydrochlorothiazide, loop
diuretics, ARBs/ACEIs, NSAIDs, or aspirin use [27]
[29].
Furthermore, patients with one daily dosage required a lesser dosage to establish
equal concentration [27]
[30]. However, the German guideline for bipolar
disorder [3] recommends a twice-a-day dosage
for geriatric patients to prevent serum concentration peaks. Shulman et al. (2019)
did not achieve consensus in regard to once or twice daily dosage, which is similar
to our results [13].
No consensus was achieved on the frequency of laboratory checks. Shulman et al.
(2019) gave advice on blood monitoring: Li serum concentration and renal function
should be monitored every 3–6 months [13]. In comparison to Shulman et al. (2019), in the present survey, there
was a tendency for more frequent controls; 52% of the experts suggested
monthly checks, while a minority of 39% of experts preferred quarterly
controls of renal function. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration
(CKD-EPI) combined equation to estimate the eGFR with creatinine and cystatin C can
improve the reliability and clinical significance of the calculated GFR [31]
[32].
Thyroid sonography and neurological, and psychological examination are additional
recommendations for monitoring a responsive and stable Li patient. No consensus was
achieved concerning the cognitive screening instruments. Shulman et al. (2019)
advised to evaluate cognitive functioning with the Mini-Mental Status Examination
(MMSE) [33] and Montreal Cognitive Assessment
Test (MoCa) [34] every 12 months [13]. In the present survey, the application of
MMSE, MoCa, or a neuropsychological test battery (like the Consortium to Establish a
Registry for Alzheimer’s disease, CERAD [35]) were all possible options for cognitive testing. No specific
screening instrument was recommended because the clinician should use the instrument
with which she/he is familiar. The clinical presentation and global
functioning of the patient and not only the result of a cognitive screening
instrument are decisive factors in an evaluation. Shulman et al. (2019) did not
recommend what consequences or action should be taken if the results of the
screening instrument show cognitive impairment [13].
The risk of Li intoxication increases in elderly patients because of the decline in
renal function and water volume. To prevent Li intoxication, comprehensive education
of patients and caregivers on usage and risks is necessary before and during ongoing
treatment. A survey of elderly patients’ knowledge of Li therapy showed that
many subjects were only poorly informed, which underscores the importance of
continued education [36]. Therefore, experts
agree that the decision to withdraw from Li should depend not only on the cognitive
status alone but also on a consideration of the care setting and dispensation of the
medication. Mild cognitive impairment was not considered as a contraindication for a
de-novo Li therapy, but experts recommend an evaluation of differential diagnosis
and closer monitoring of the Li concentration and renal function. No consensus was
achieved concerning concomitant dementia; most experts (67%) would not
terminate Li in a stable and responsive patient with newly diagnosed dementia.
The consensus was reached on the statement that in case of the decision to stop Li,
it should be tapered out over a period of 3 months if possible. In accordance with
this survey, Tondo et al. (2019) [4]
recommended a 20–25% reduction in the daily Li dose every two weeks.
However, the risk of relapse decreases with prolonged withdrawal from Li [37]
[38].
The risk of relapse was 50% in six months in patients with unipolar
depression [38]. In addition, after withdrawal
from Li, suicidal ideations may re-occur [39].
On the one hand, longer periods of tapering Li (more than six months) may reduce the
risk of relapse. On the other hand, the decision to discontinue Li therapy is likely
to stem from significant contraindications in most cases and would thus be an urgent
matter.
Quetiapine, lamotrigine, valproic acid, and olanzapine were the preferred
alternatives to Li in the maintenance therapy of OABD in the Delphi Survey of
Shulman et al. (2019) [13], which is in
accordance with our results. The experts agreed that valproic acid and lamotrigine
can be considered alternative mood stabilizers. Consensus regarding the order of
preference was not achieved in the Delphi Survey of Shulman et al. (2019) [13]. In comparison to Shulman et al. (2019), in
the group of atypical antipsychotics, quetiapine was the preferred alternative to Li
compared to olanzapine, risperidone, and aripirazole. Lamotrigine has been shown to
be effective in preventing depressive episodes in old age compared to placebo [6]. Nevertheless, Li is more effective in
preventing hypomanic or manic episodes than lamotrigine [40]. Compared to valproic acid, Li-treated
patients had lower relapse rates in old age [7], in congruence with the results of the BALANCE study [41]. Surprisingly, valproic acid did not cause
more sedation compared to Li in the study of Young et al. (2017) [7]. Sajatovic et al. (2008) showed significant
improvement in manic symptoms for quetiapine compared to placebo in patients older
than 55 years. Common reported side effects were nausea, weight gain, dizziness,
somnolence, and postural hypotension [42].
In summary, the present Delphi survey yields several clinical recommendations, which
might be helpful in the Li treatment of elderly patients. Nevertheless, studies are
urgently needed for important questions on Li therapy in OABD. However, the
recruitment of a sufficient number of geriatric patients, and the feasibility of a
randomized controlled trial are difficult to be realized, which underlines the
importance of Delphi surveys. In addition, observational, multicenter studies could
elucidate some clinical aspects. Additionally, there seems to be a gap in the
knowledge concerning potential alternative drugs for older patients when termination
of Li therapy becomes inevitable.
Contributors
Except for JC, all authors participated in the Delphi Survey. JC analyzed the
answers of the participants in anonymized form. JC wrote substantial parts of
the manuscript. TS, MS, and BMO contributed to the writing of the manuscript.
LCR did not participate in the Delphi Survey, but stimulated and answered
questions concerning renal function. All authors contributed to and have
approved the final manuscript.
Notice
This article was changed according to the erratum on
August 30, 2023.
Erratum
The 8th Citation, as well as the sentence which refers to it has
been corrected.