Practice parameter for the use of stimulant medications in the treatment of children, adolescents, and adults

Long-acting versus short-acting methylphenidate for paediatric ADHD: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative efficacy

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise existing knowledge of the efficacy and safety of long-acting versus short-acting methylphenidate for paediatric attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic literature search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Scopus and Web of Science for articles published in the English language between 1950 and 2012. Reference lists of included studies were checked for additional studies.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials of paediatric ADHD patients (<18 years), comparing a long-acting methylphenidate form to a short-acting methylphenidate form.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Continuous outcomes were compared using standardised mean differences (SMDs) between treatment groups. Adverse events were compared using risk differences between treatment groups. Heterogeneity was explored by subgroup analysis based on the type of long-acting formulation used.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs were included; data from 882 participants contributed to the analysis. Meta-analysis of three studies which used parent ratings to report on hyperactivity/impulsivity had an SMD of -0.30 (95% CI -0.51 to -0.08) favouring the long-acting forms. In contrast, three studies used teacher ratings to report on hyperactivity and had an SMD of 0.29 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.52) favouring the short-acting methylphenidate. In addition, subgroup analysis of three studies which used parent ratings to report on inattention/overactivity indicate that the osmotic release oral system generation long-acting formulation was favoured with an SMD of -0.35 (95% CI -0.52 to -0.17), while the second generation showed less efficacy than the short-acting formulation with an SMD of 0.42 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.68). The long-acting formulations presented with slightly more total reported adverse events (n=578) as compared with the short-acting formulation (n=566).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this systematic review indicate that the long-acting forms have a modest effect on the severity of inattention/overactivity and hyperactivity/impulsivity according to parent reports, whereas the short-acting methylphenidate was preferred according to teacher reports for hyperactivity.

Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics of Multilayer-Release Methylphenidate and Immediate-Release Methylphenidate in Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

The objective of this study was to compare the single-dose pharmacokinetics of multilayer-release and immediate-release methylphenidate in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Patients 6- to 12-years-old with a DSM-IV diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder were randomized to receive multilayer-release methylphenidate (qd) or immediate-release methylphenidate (bid) at equivalent doses, with a 14-day washout between treatments. Plasma samples were collected predosing and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours postdose. Pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted on 14 patients (1 female, 13 male; mean age: 9.6 +/- 2.5 years [range, 6-12]). The mean dose of methylphenidate received by these patients in both phases of the study was 38.6 mg/d (range, 20-80 mg/d). The relative AUC(0-t) and C(max 0-4) ratios for multilayer-release compared with immediate-release methylphenidate were 100.8% and 78.8%, respectively. Multilayer-release methylphenidate produces a biphasic concentration-time profile, with a rapid initial increase in plasma concentration that is maintained throughout the school day.

A long-term open-label safety and effectiveness trial of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE

Information on psychostimulant treatment in long-term studies for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adolescents is limited. This study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) over 52 weeks in adolescents with ADHD.

METHODS

This open-label multicenter study enrolled eligible participants after their participation in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 4 week trial in adolescents with ADHD. Following a 4 week dose-optimization phase, participants were maintained on treatment for up to ∼48 weeks on an optimal dose. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, laboratory findings, and electrocardiograms. Effectiveness measures included the ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV; primary) and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I). The Youth Quality of Life-Research Version (YQOL-R) was also included in this study; raw scores are transformed to a 0-100 point scale.

RESULTS

Of 269 enrolled (from the antecedent study), 265 (98.5%) were in the safety population and effectiveness population. Common TEAEs (≥5%) with LDX included upper respiratory tract infection (21.9%), decreased appetite (21.1%), headache (20.8%), decreased weight (16.2%), irritability (12.5%), insomnia (12.1%), nasopharyngitis (7.2%), influenza (6.8%), dizziness (5.3%), and dry mouth (5.3%). At end point, for all LDX doses in the overall safety population, mean (SD) increase from baseline in systolic blood pressure was 2.3 (10.53) mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure was 2.5 (8.37) mm Hg, and pulse rate was 6.3 (12.74) bpm. No clinically meaningful electrocardiogram or vital sign changes were observed. At end point with LDX treatment, the ADHD-RS-IV mean (SD) total score change from antecedent study baseline was -26.2 (9.75) (p<0.001); 87.2% of participants were improved (CGI-I=1 or 2). Baseline (antecedent study) mean (SD) YQOL-R perceptual total score was 79.8 (11.28) and increased by 3.9 (9.73) at end point (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LDX demonstrated a long-term safety profile similar to that of other long-acting psychostimulants and was effective, as indicated by improvements in ADHD symptoms and participant-perceived YQOL, in adolescents with ADHD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00764868, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00764868?term=SPD489-306&rank=1.

Enhancing ADHD medication adherence: challenges and opportunities

Safe and effective medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is available and recommended as first-line treatment for the core symptoms of inattention, overactivity and impulsiveness. Despite impaired functioning during adolescence, many discontinue medication treatment. For children, healthcare decisions are usually made by the parent; older youth make their own decisions. Beliefs and attitudes may differ widely. Some families understand that ADHD is a neurobiological condition and accept that medication is indicated, for others, such treatment is unacceptable. Converging evidence describes negative perceptions of the burden associated with medication use as well as concerns about potential short and long term adverse effects. Indeed experiences of adverse effects are a frequent explanation for discontinuation among youth. Ways to improve shared decision making among practitioners, parents and youth, and to monitor effectiveness, safety and new onset of concurrent difficulties are likely to optimize outcomes.

Health-related quality of life and functional outcomes from a randomized, controlled study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

BACKGROUND

Optimal management of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) aims not only to ameliorate patients' symptoms, but also to improve health-related quality of life (HRQL) and functioning. A pivotal, 7-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study in children and adolescents in ten European countries demonstrated that the stimulant prodrug lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for symptoms of ADHD.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess HRQL and functional impairment outcomes in this clinical trial, using the Child Health and Illness Profile-Child Edition: Parent Report Form (CHIP-CE:PRF) and the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P), respectively.

METHODS

Patients (aged 6-17 years) with diagnosed ADHD and a baseline ADHD Rating Scale IV total score ≥28 were randomized (1:1:1) to 7 weeks of double-blind treatment with once-daily LDX, placebo or the reference treatment, osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH). Participants' parents (or legally authorized representatives) completed the CHIP-CE:PRF and WFIRS-P questionnaires at baseline, at weeks 4 and 7, and/or at early termination. Endpoint was defined as the last on-treatment visit with valid data (≤30 % missing items). The CHIP-CE:PRF Achievement domain was pre-specified as the primary HRQL outcome.

RESULTS

The full analysis set comprised 317 patients (LDX, n = 104; placebo, n = 106; OROS-MPH, n = 107), the majority of whom completed the study (LDX, n = 77; placebo, n = 42; OROS-MPH, n = 72). Baseline CHIP-CE:PRF T-scores in four of the five domains were ≥1 standard deviation below norms (US community samples). Compared with placebo, LDX was associated with statistically significantly improved T-scores from baseline to endpoint in these four domains, with effect sizes of 1.280 (p < 0.001) in Achievement, 1.079 (p < 0.001) in Risk Avoidance, 0.421 (p < 0.01) in Resilience and 0.365 (p < 0.05) in Satisfaction. In LDX-treated patients, placebo-adjusted improvements from baseline to endpoint in WFIRS-P scores were statistically significant (p < 0.001) for total score and four of the six domains, with effect sizes of 0.924 (total score), 1.249 (Learning and School), 0.730 (Family), 0.643 (Social Activities) and 0.640 (Risky Activities). OROS-MPH treatment showed similar patterns of improvement from baseline to endpoint in both CHIP-CE:PRF and WFIRS-P scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline HRQL and functional impairment scores reflect the burden of untreated ADHD. The benefits of short-term stimulant treatment in children and adolescents with ADHD extend beyond symptomatic relief and impact positively on HRQL and daily functioning.

Low-dose adolescent nicotine and methylphenidate have additive effects on adult behavior and neurochemistry

Adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have higher rates of smoking than adolescents without ADHD. Since methylphenidate is the primary drug used to treat ADHD, it is likely that many adolescents are exposed to both methylphenidate and nicotine. Recent studies have established that adolescent nicotine induces long-term changes in several neurobehavioral variables. Limited data also suggest that adolescent methylphenidate may affect neural development. Nicotine tolerance is a well-established behavioral phenomenon in rodents, yet the underlying mechanism remains elusive. Recent theories suggest that changes in ventral striatal dopamine indices may relate to nicotine tolerance. As an initial determination of whether nicotine and methylphenidate have additive effects on neurobehavioral development, the present study investigated the combined effects of adolescent nicotine [2mg/kg/d] alone or in conjunction with methylphenidate [1.5mg/kg, 2× daily] following a one-month drug free period on adult behavioral tolerance to nicotine [0.5mg/kg s.c.] and its relation to dopamine receptor mRNA expression in the ventral striatum. Animals with chronic combined (nicotine+methylphenidate) adolescent exposure displayed stronger tolerance as adults to the nicotine-induced locomotor effects in comparison to animals with adolescent exposure to nicotine alone, methylphenidate alone, or controls. Combined chronic adolescent exposure significantly elevated adult D3nf mRNA expression levels in the nucleus accumbens, however a single nicotine injection in adults increased D3nf mRNA levels in naïve animals and decreased D3nf mRNA levels in those that had been previously exposed to combined stimulants during adolescence. Conversely, a single adult nicotine injection increased D1 mRNA levels in the adult nucleus accumbens, particularly in the shell, but only in rats previously exposed to nicotine or methylphenidate as adolescents. To our knowledge this is the first study that has shown long-term behavioral and neurochemical changes stemming from low chronic exposure of these two commonly co-consumed stimulants during adolescence.

Efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder previously treated with amphetamines: analyses from a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled titration study

Background

To examine the efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who remained symptomatic (ADHD Rating Scale IV [ADHD-RS-IV] total score >18) on amphetamine (AMPH) therapy (mixed AMPH salts and/or d-AMPH formulations) prior to enrollment in a 4-week placebo-controlled LDX trial vs the overall study population. In these post hoc analyses from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, forced-dose titration study, clinical efficacy of LDX (30-70 mg/d) in adults with ADHD receiving AMPH treatment at screening vs the overall study population was evaluated. ADHD symptoms were assessed using the ADHD-RS-IV with adult prompts at screening, baseline (after prior treatment washout), and endpoint. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, laboratory findings, and electrocardiogram.

Results

Of 414 participants (62, placebo; 352, LDX) included in the overall study population, 41 were receiving AMPH therapy at screening (2, placebo; 39, LDX); mean AMPH dose was 35.0 and 34.1 mg/d for participants in placebo and all LDX groups, respectively. Of the 41 participants, 36 remained symptomatic (ADHD-RS-IV >18) at screening despite receiving AMPH. For the 36 participants in the placebo (n = 2) and LDX (n = 34) groups, respectively, at endpoint, mean change from screening ADHD-RS-IV total scores were -5.5 and -14.8 and from baseline scores were -13.5 and -17.8. For the overall study population, endpoint mean change from baseline ADHD-RS-IV total scores were -7.8 for placebo and -17.5 for LDX. In the prior AMPH subgroup, 2/2 (100.0%) in the placebo group and 22/39 (56.4%) participants in the LDX (all doses) group reported any TEAE. Events that occurred in ≥5% for LDX were dry mouth (5/39; 12.8%), headache (5/39; 12.8%), fatigue (3/39; 7.7%), insomnia (3/39; 7.7%), decreased appetite (2/39; 5.1%), and nausea (2/39; 5.1%). None of these events occurred in the 2 placebo patients with prior AMPH use.

Conclusion

In these post hoc analyses, adults with significant baseline ADHD symptoms despite adequate AMPH treatment dose showed similar improvements in ADHD symptoms with LDX treatment as the overall study population. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings. The safety profile of LDX in the overall study population was consistent with long-acting psychostimulant use.

Trial registry

Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of NRP104 in Adults With Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00334880

Weight loss on stimulant medication: how does it affect body composition and bone metabolism? - A prospective longitudinal study

Objective

Children treated with stimulant medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often lose weight. It is important to understand the implications of this during growth. This prospective study was designed to quantify the changes in body composition and markers of bone metabolism on starting treatment.

Methods

34 children (29 boys) aged 4.7 to 9.1 years newly diagnosed with ADHD were treated with dexamphetamine or methylphenidate, titrating the dose to optimise the therapeutic response. Medication was continued for as long as clinically indicated. Body composition and bone density (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) were measured at baseline, 6 months and 3 years; changes were analysed in Z-scores based on data from 241 healthy, local children. Markers of bone turnover were measured at baseline, 3 months and 3 years.

Results

Fat loss of 1.4±0.96kg (total fat 5.7±3.6 to 4.3±3.1kg, p<0.001) occurred in the first 6 months. There were significant reductions over 3 years in the sex and height corrected Z-scores for lean tissue, bone mineral content, bone mineral density and ratio of central to total fat (−0.84±0.86, p=0.003; -0.55±0.31, p<0.0001; -0.41±0.28, p<0.0001 and −0.55±0.62, p=0.006 respectively). Propeptide of type I collagen indicated a significant reduction in bone turnover after 3 months (564±202 to 458±96ng/ml, p=0.019), which was fully recovered after 3 years (619±276ng/ml).

Conclusions

Stimulant medication was associated with early fat loss and reduced bone turnover. Lean tissue including bone increased more slowly over 3 years of continuous treatment than would be expected for growth in height. There was long-term improvement in the proportion of central fat for height. This study shows that relatively minor reductions in weight on stimulant medication can be associated with long-term changes in body composition. Further study is required to determine the effects of these changes on adult health.

Comprehensive phenotype/genotype analyses of the norepinephrine transporter gene (SLC6A2) in ADHD: relation to maternal smoking during pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

Despite strong pharmacological evidence implicating the norepinephrine transporter in ADHD, genetic studies have yielded largely insignificant results. We tested the association between 30 tag SNPs within the SLC6A2 gene and ADHD, with stratification based on maternal smoking during pregnancy, an environmental factor strongly associated with ADHD.

METHODS

Children (6-12 years old) diagnosed with ADHD according to DSM-IV criteria were comprehensively evaluated with regard to several behavioral and cognitive dimensions of ADHD as well as response to a fixed dose of methylphenidate (MPH) using a double-blind placebo controlled crossover trial. Family-based association tests (FBAT), including categorical and quantitative trait analyses, were conducted in 377 nuclear families.

RESULTS

A highly significant association was observed with rs36021 (and linked SNPs) in the group where mothers smoked during pregnancy. Association was noted with categorical DSM-IV ADHD diagnosis (Z=3.74, P=0.0002), behavioral assessments by parents (CBCL, P=0.00008), as well as restless-impulsive subscale scores on Conners'-teachers (P=0.006) and parents (P=0.006). In this subgroup, significant association was also observed with cognitive deficits, more specifically sustained attention, spatial working memory, planning, and response inhibition. The risk allele was associated with significant improvement of behavior as measured by research staff (Z=3.28, P=0.001), parents (Z=2.62, P=0.009), as well as evaluation in the simulated academic environment (Z=3.58, P=0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

By using maternal smoking during pregnancy to index a putatively more homogeneous group of ADHD, highly significant associations were observed between tag SNPs within SLC6A2 and ADHD diagnosis, behavioral and cognitive measures relevant to ADHD and response to MPH. This comprehensive phenotype/genotype analysis may help to further understand this complex disorder and improve its treatment. Clinical trial registration information - Clinical and Pharmacogenetic Study of Attention Deficit with Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD); www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00483106.

Chronic D-amphetamine administered from childhood to adulthood dose-dependently increases the survival of new neurons in the hippocampus of male C57BL/6J mice

Adderall is widely prescribed for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) though long term neurological effects of the main ingredient d-amphetamine are not well understood. The purpose of this study was to examine effects of clinically prescribed doses of d-amphetamine and one abuse dose administered from childhood to adulthood on adult hippocampal neurogenesis and activation of the granule layer of the dentate gyrus. Beginning in early adolescence (age 28 days) to adulthood (age 71), male C57BL/6J mice were administered twice daily i.p. injections of vehicle, 0.25, 0.5 or 2mg/kg d-amphetamine. Locomotor activity was measured in home cages by video tracking. At age 53-56, mice received bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) injections to label dividing cells. Immunohistochemical detection of BrdU, neuronal nuclear protein (NeuN), doublecortin (DCX) and Ki67 was used to measure neurogenesis and cell proliferation at age 71. ΔFosB was measured as an indicator of repeated neuronal activation. An additional cohort of mice was treated similarly except euthanized at age 58 to measure activation of granule neurons from d-amphetamine (by detection of c-Fos) and cell proliferation (Ki67) at a time when the fate of BrdU cells would have been determined in the first cohort. d-Amphetamine dose-dependently increased survival and differentiation of BrdU cells into neurons and increased number of DCX cells without affecting the number of Ki67 cells. Low doses of d-amphetamine decreased c-Fos and ΔFosB in the granule layer. Only the high dose induced substantial locomotor stimulation and sensitization. Results suggest both therapeutic and abuse doses of d-amphetamine increase the number of new neurons in the hippocampus when administered from adolescence to adulthood by increasing survival and differentiation of cells into neurons not by increasing progenitor cell proliferation. Mechanisms for amphetamine-induced neurogenesis are unknown but appear activity independent. Results suggest part of the beneficial effects of therapeutic doses of d-amphetamine for ADHD could be via increased hippocampal neurogenesis.

How parents make decisions to use medication to treat their child's ADHD: a grounded theory study

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of efficacy, a substantial percentage of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) either do not begin medication prescribed for their core symptoms or fail to continue treatment.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to understand (a) how parents decide to use medication to treat their child's ADHD and (b) the factors that influence their adherence to medication over time.

DESIGN

Grounded theory guided data collection and analysis. Sixteen semistructured interviews with parents (13 mothers, 3 fathers) of children with ADHD were conducted.

RESULTS

The substantive theory developed from the data demonstrates that in seeking to help their child and restore a sense of stability around family life, parents engage in a process of "doing what helps most" in deciding to use medication to treat their child's ADHD.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to support and guide parents throughout the decisional process are critical to meet the needs of families of children with ADHD.

Drug therapy of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: current trends

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a developmental disorder with an age onset prior to 7 years. Children with ADHD have significantly lower ability to focus and sustain attention and also score higher on impulsivity and hyperactivity. Stimulants, such as methylphenidate, have remained the mainstay of ADHD treatment for decades with evidence supporting their use. However, recent years have seen emergence of newer drugs and drug delivery systems, like osmotic release oral systems and transdermal patches, to mention a few. The use of nonstimulant drugs like atomoxetine and various other drugs, such as α-agonists, and a few antidepressants, being used in an off-label manner, have added to the pharmacotherapy of ADHD. This review discusses current trends in drug therapy of ADHD and highlights the promise pharmacogenomics may hold in the future.

Pharmacotherapy of pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

This article describes the practical use of available attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) pharmacotherapies, their formulations and durations of action, and the extent of Food and Drug Administration approvals. It provides data on short-term and long-term safety of these medications, their use in ADHD with comorbid conditions, and strategies for formulating individualized, effective, and well-tolerated pharmacotherapy treatment plans. A clinical vignette focusing on a male child with ADHD is presented. Summaries are presented of ADHD pharmacotherapies and Food and Drug Administration approval status, atomoxetine and stimulant comparator trials, adverse effects and ADHD pharmacotherapy, and delivery system and duration of effect.

Guanfacine ER for the treatment of adolescent attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

INTRODUCTION

Guanfacine extended release (GXR) is an alpha 1A noradrenergic agonist that has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) as a monotherapy, and as an adjunctive therapy to stimulants for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents age 6 - 17.

AREAS COVERED

PubMed, the Ovid Medline database, and the PsycInfo database were searched using the term 'guanfacine'. Results were then limited to criteria such as English and human, from 1990 through December 2011. The resulting yield from the comprehensive literature search was 4391 articles. The titles and abstracts of all articles were reviewed. Studies were selected for full-text review based upon their place in the hierarchy of evidence (e.g., randomized controlled trials), relevance and quality of individual studies, and generalizability to clinical practice. The search was augmented by further search of article reference lists. A total of 15 articles were selected for full-text examination.

EXPERT OPINION

Due to the absence of positive evidence for the efficacy of GXR for monotherapy in adolescents, clinicians should be guarded in the use of GXR for monotherapy in adolescents with ADHD. The use of GXR has considerable promise as an adjunct to stimulants for other behavioral conditions associated with ADHD.

Titrating Optimal Dose of Osmotic-Controlled Release Oral Delivery (OROS)-Methylphenidate and Its Efficacy and Safety in Korean Children with ADHD: A Multisite Open Labeled Study

OBJECTIVE

This study was aimed to determine effectiveness and tolerability of Osmotic-controlled Release Oral delivery (OROS) methylphenidate (MPH) and its optimal dose administered openly over a period of up to 12 weeks in drug naïve Korean children with ADHD.

METHODS

Subjects (n=143), ages 6 to 18-years, with a clinical diagnosis of any subtype of ADHD were recruited from 7 medical centers in Korea. An individualized dose of OROS-MPH was determined for each subject depending on the response criteria. The subjects were assessed with several symptom rating scales in week 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12.

RESULTS

77 of 116 subjects (66.4%) achieved the criteria for response and the average of optimal daily dose for response was to 30.05±12.52 mg per day (0.90±0.31 mg/kg/d) at the end of the study. Optimal dose was not significantly different between ADHD subtypes, whereas, significant higher dose was needed in older aged groups than younger groups. The average of optimal daily dose for response for the subjects aged above 12 years old was 46.38±15.52 per day (0.81±0.28 mg/kg/d) compared to younger groups (p<0.01). No serious adverse effects were reported and the dose did not have a significant effect on adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Optimal mean dose of OROS-MPH was significantly different by age groups. Higher dose was needed in older aged groups than younger groups. Effectiveness and tolerability of OROS-MPH in symptoms of ADHD is sustained for up to 12 weeks.

Assessment of physician practices in adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE

Adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neuropsychiatric disorder, yet only 1 in 10 affected adults receives treatment. The study objective was to assess gaps in knowledge and describe current practice patterns of primary care physicians and psychiatrists in the United States in the management of adult patients with ADHD.

METHOD

Primary care physicians and psychiatrists completed an Internet survey as a needs assessment of customary care related to management of adults with ADHD. Adult clinical case vignettes were followed by practice, confidence, and barrier questions. Survey data were collected from April 15, 2010, to August 22, 2010, and were deidentified and analyzed in aggregate to maintain confidentiality. χ(2) and t tests were used to compare responses of primary care physicians with those of psychiatrists.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 1,924 physicians: 1,216 primary care physicians and 708 psychiatrists. Fewer primary care physicians than psychiatrists were "extremely confident" in diagnosis (8% vs 28%, respectively, P < .001) and treatment (8% vs 27%, respectively, P < .001). Limited experience with ADHD diagnosis was more of a barrier in primary care than in psychiatry (44% vs 19%, respectively, P < .001). Mean scores on 12 evidence-based questions were lower for primary care physicians than for psychiatrists (6.1 vs 6.8 correct, respectively, P < .001). Awareness of adult ADHD prevalence was lower among primary care physicians than among psychiatrists (32% vs 47% correct, respectively, P < .001). Fewer primary care physicians than psychiatrists recognized comorbid substance use disorder (76% vs 82%, respectively, P = .002), but more primary care physicians than psychiatrists recognized eating disorders (35% vs 21%, respectively, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The self-assessment survey results indicate physician practices in primary care and psychiatry differ and show areas in which further education will be useful to improve care for adults with ADHD.

Treatment for co-occurring attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder

Interest in the co-occurrence of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has grown in the last decade. Research on clinical populations supports the frequent co-occurrence of ADHD traits (e.g., hyperactivity) in individuals with ASD and ASD traits (e.g., social communication deficits) in individuals with ADHD. Similar trends in co-occurring traits have been observed in population-based samples, as well as family and genetic studies of affected individuals. Despite increased interest in co-occurring ADHD and ASD, relatively little research has been devoted to treatment considerations. The vast majority of intervention research has examined pharmacological treatment using traditional ADHD medications. Relatively few psychosocial interventions have directly addressed co-occurring symptoms. Treatment development will benefit from enhanced understanding of the phenomenon of co-occurring ADHD and ASD. Key topics for future research include examining developmental trajectories of co-occurring disorders, comorbid psychiatric conditions, deficits in social skills, and the nature of executive functioning impairment in individuals with co-occurring ADHD and ASD. In the current review, research in these areas is reviewed along with recommendation for future study. Given that clinicians are routinely observing and treating individuals with co-occurring symptoms, further research will yield needed information to inform intervention development and maximize benefits for affected individuals.

Systematic review of national and international guidelines on attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

During the last few years several clinical guidelines on attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been published by national and international medical societies. To systematically review and compare recommendations of selected ADHD guidelines, we performed a systematic search in online guideline databases and PubMed in order to retrieve guideline texts. Guidelines meeting inclusion criteria were reviewed and recommendations on assessment and treatment extracted. The AGREE instrument was used to assess methodological quality. Of the 26 guidelines identified, 13 were selected for further analysis: 11 guidelines deal with ADHD in childhood and adolescence and 5 guidelines cover transitional patients and/or ADHD in adults. The methodological quality of ADHD guidelines is moderate to good. They reflect similarities and differences of healthcare systems. Diagnosis throughout the lifespan is based on a detailed clinical history. There is greater agreement on evidence-based pharmacological treatment than on psychosocial interventions, reflecting the strength of evidence.

Effects of osmotic-release methylphenidate on height and weight in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) following up to four years of treatment

There is some controversy concerning \the potential negative influence of methylphenidate on growth. The authors reviewed clinical records of 187 patients with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder under treatment with methylphenidate. The patients' weight, height, and body mass index were measured at diagnosis and during 4 years of follow-up. The dose of methylphenidate was gradually increased up to 1.31 ± 0.2 mg/kg/d. At diagnosis, mean weight value was lower than mean weight expected for age by 0.697 kg. This difference increased to 4.274 kg (at 30 months of treatment), although it subsequently decreased to 1.588 kg (at 48 months of treatment). Mean value of height was lower than expected mean height for age by 0.42 cm at diagnosis. This difference increased to 2.69 cm (at 30 months of treatment), but it subsequently decreased to 0.83 cm (at 48 months of treatment). The relationship between nutritional status and the negative effects on the height curve in those patients would require nutritional optimization to return anthropometric variables to normal.

Randomized clinical study of a histamine H3 receptor antagonist for the treatment of adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

BACKGROUND

Psychostimulants, including methylphenidate and amphetamine preparations, are commonly prescribed for the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adults. Histamine H3 receptors reside on non-histamine neurons and regulate other neurotransmitters (e.g. acetylcholine, noradrenaline [norepinephrine]) suggesting that H3 antagonists have the potential to improve attention and impulsivity. Research indicates that H3 receptor antagonists due to their novel mechanism of action may have a unique treatment effect offering an important alternative for the treatment of ADHD. Bavisant (JNJ-31001074) is a highly selective, orally active antagonist of the human H3 receptor with a novel mechanism of action, involving wakefulness and cognition, with potential as a treatment for ADHD.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of three dosages of bavisant compared with placebo in adults with ADHD.

STUDY DESIGN

This randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study evaluated three dosages of bavisant (1 mg/day, 3 mg/day or 10 mg/day) and two active controls in adults with ADHD. The study consisted of a screening phase of up to 14 days, a 42-day double-blind treatment phase and a 7-day post-treatment follow-up phase. Efficacy and safety assessments were performed.

SETTING

The study was conducted at 37 study centres in the US from April 2009 through January 2010.

PARTICIPANTS

Men and women aged 18-55 years with an established diagnosis of ADHD as confirmed by clinician and self-report diagnostic measures were enrolled.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomly assigned equally to one of six treatment groups: placebo, bavisant 1 mg/day, 3 mg/day or 10 mg/day, atomoxetine hydrochloride 80 mg/day or osmotic-release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate hydrochloride 54 mg/day.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale, Version IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score from baseline (day 1) to the end of the treatment phase (day 42), and included all randomized participants who received one or more doses of study drug and had baseline and one or more post-baseline assessments (intent-to-treat [ITT] population). Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), laboratory tests and ECG readings.

RESULTS

430 participants were randomized, 424 received one or more doses of study medication and 335 (78%) of those randomized completed the study. Study participants had a mean age of 33.9 years and were predominantly White men. Mean treatment duration ranged from 31.4 to 38.8 days across groups. Mean change from baseline in the total ADHD-RS-IV score at day 42 (primary efficacy endpoint) was -8.8 in the placebo group versus -9.3, -11.2 and -12.2 in the bavisant 1 mg/day, 3 mg/day and 10 mg/day groups, respectively; the change in the 10 mg/day group was not statistically superior to placebo (p=0.161), and hence statistical comparisons of the 1 mg/day and 3 mg/day groups with placebo based on a step-down closed testing procedure were not performed. Mean change from baseline in the total ADHD-RS-IV score at day 42 was superior to placebo in the atomoxetine (-15.3) and OROS methylphenidate (-15.7) groups (p<0.005). Secondary efficacy assessments demonstrated a similar pattern with a non-significant trend towards improvement in the bavisant groups. The two lower dosages showed a good tolerability profile, but the higher dosage of bavisant was less well tolerated, as evidenced by the incidence of total TEAEs (61.8%, 82.4%, 89.0%), and discontinuations due to TEAEs (4.4%, 7.4%, 19.2%) in the bavisant 1 mg/day, 3 mg/day and 10 mg/day groups, respectively, compared with 58.9% and 2.7%, respectively on placebo. In the atomoxetine and OROS methylphenidate groups, the incidence of total TEAEs was 83.8% and 82.4% and discontinuations due to TEAEs was 10.8% and 8.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Bavisant, a highly selective, wakefulness-promoting H3 antagonist, did not display significant clinical effectiveness in the treatment of adults with ADHD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00880217.

An update on the pharmacotherapy of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults

Adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are more frequently presenting for diagnosis and treatment. Medication is considered to be appropriate among available treatments for ADHD; however, the evidence supporting the use of pharmacotherapeutics for adults with ADHD remains less established. In this article, the effectiveness and dosing parameters of the various agents investigated for adult ADHD are reviewed. In adults with ADHD, short-term improvements in symptomatology have been documented through the use of stimulants and antidepressants. Studies suggest that methylphenidate and amphetamine maintained an immediate onset of action, whereas the ADHD response to the nonstimulants appeared to be delayed. At a group level, there appears to be some, albeit not entirely consistent, dose-dependent responses to amphetamine and methylphenidate. Generally speaking, variability in diagnostic criteria, dosing parameters and response rates between the various studies was considerable, and most studies were of a relatively short duration. The aggregate literature shows that the stimulants and catecholaminergic nonstimulants investigated had a clinically significant beneficial effect on treating ADHD in adults.

Reading performance as a function of treatment with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in elementary school children diagnosed with ADHD

BACKGROUND

Medication treatment studies of ADHD have typically not assessed effects on reading performance, although reading difficulties frequently co-occur in children with ADHD. The current study characterizes the effects of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX; Vyvanse(®), Shire US Inc.), at peak efficacy, on reading performance in children with ADHD.

METHOD

Children (ages 6-12; N = 26) with ADHD enrolled in a modified laboratory school study with an open-label, dose-optimization phase of LDX (30-70 mg/d). The Gray Oral Reading Test-4 (GORT-4) with measures of rate, accuracy, and comprehension was administered at baseline and 3-4 hr postdose, following 4 to 5 weeks of optimal dose titration.

RESULTS

Treatment reduced ADHD symptoms. Reading rate was improved, especially among children with higher verbal fluid reasoning without additional symptoms of neurodevelopmental delay. No differences were observed for reading accuracy or comprehension.

CONCLUSION

Endophenotypical profiles may predict drug effects in specific skill areas, such as reading rate.

A controlled trial of extended-release guanfacine and psychostimulants for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE

To examine efficacy, tolerability, and safety of guanfacine extended release (GXR; ≤4 mg/d) adjunctive to a long-acting psychostimulant for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents 6 to 17 years of age with suboptimal, but partial, response to psychostimulant alone.

METHOD

In this multicenter, 9-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-optimization study, subjects (N = 461) continued their stable dose of psychostimulant given in the morning and were randomized to receive GXR in the morning (GXR AM), GXR in the evening (GXR PM), or placebo. Efficacy measures included ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) and Clinical Global Impressions of Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and Improvement (CGI-I) scales. Safety measures included adverse events (AEs), vital signs, electrocardiograms, and laboratory evaluations.

RESULTS

At endpoint, GXR treatment groups showed significantly greater improvement from baseline ADHD-RS-IV total scores compared with placebo plus psychostimulant (GXR AM, p = .002; GXR PM, p < .001). Significant benefits of GXR treatment versus placebo plus psychostimulant were observed on the CGI-S (GXR AM, p = .013; GXR PM, p < .001) and CGI-I (GXR AM, p = .024; GXR PM, p = .003). At endpoint, small mean decreases in pulse, systolic, and diastolic blood pressure were observed in GXR treatment groups versus placebo plus psychostimulant. No new safety signals emerged following administration of GXR with psychostimulants versus psychostimulants alone. Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Morning or evening GXR administered adjunctively to a psychostimulant showed significantly greater improvement over placebo plus psychostimulant in ADHD symptoms and generated no new safety signals. Clinical trial registration information-Efficacy and Safety of SPD503 in Combination With Psychostimulants; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00734578.

Willingness to use ADHD treatments: a mixed methods study of perceptions by adolescents, parents, health professionals and teachers

Little is known about factors that influence willingness to engage in treatment for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). From 2007 to 2008, in the context of a longitudinal study assessing ADHD detection and service use in the United States, we simultaneously elicited ADHD treatment perceptions from four stakeholder groups: adolescents, parents, health care professionals and teachers. We assessed their willingness to use ADHD interventions and views of potential undesirable effects of two pharmacological (short- and long-acting ADHD medications) and three psychosocial (ADHD education, behavior therapy, and counseling) treatments. In multiple regression analysis, willingness was found to be significantly related to respondent type (lower for adolescents than adults), feeling knowledgeable, and considering treatments acceptable and helpful, but not significantly associated with stigma/embarrassment, respondent race, gender and socioeconomic status. Because conceptual models of undesirable effects are underdeveloped, we used grounded theory method to analyze open-ended survey responses to the question: "What other undesirable effects are you concerned about?" We identified general negative treatment perceptions (dislike, burden, perceived ineffectiveness) and specific undesirable effect expectations (physiological and psychological side effects, stigma and future dependence on drugs or therapies) for pharmacological and psychosocial treatments. In summary, findings indicate significant discrepancies between teens' and adults' willingness to use common ADHD interventions, with low teen willingness for any treatments. Results highlight the need to develop better treatment engagement practices for adolescents with ADHD.

Expectation to receive methylphenidate enhances subjective arousal but not cognitive performance

Nonmedical use of prescription-stimulant medication such as methylphenidate (MPH) has increased among college students over the past several years. Common motivations for use include enhancements in cognition and subjective arousal. As it is unclear whether stimulant medication exerts the same effect on healthy individuals as for those with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, it is possible that many reported effects of prescription stimulants by healthy individuals may stem from placebo effects, which may be an important mechanism underlying initiation and maintenance of nonmedical use. This study examined whether placebo effects influence reports of subjective mood and cognitive performance among college students who endorsed several risk factors for prescription-stimulant misuse (i.e., low grade point average, fraternity/sorority involvement, binge drinking, cannabis use). Ninety-six subjects (60% male) completed cognitive tests and questionnaires assessing present mood state on two occasions. Forty-seven participants were randomized to an experimental condition and orally ingested what they believed to be MPH, though actually placebo, on one visit and received no medication on the other visit. The control group received no medication on either visit. During the administration visit, experimental participants reported feeling significantly more high and stimulated compared with the nonadministration visit and to the control subjects. However, cognitive enhancement differences were not generally seen between visits or groups. This research demonstrates that placebo effects for prescription stimulants do influence subjective mood and may be implicated in nonmedical stimulant use. This knowledge may be useful in challenging prescription-stimulant-related expectancies to decrease the prevalence of use among college students.

Dose effects and comparative effectiveness of extended release dexmethylphenidate and mixed amphetamine salts

OBJECTIVE

To compare the dose effects of long-acting extended-release dexmethylphenidate (ER d-MPH) and ER mixed amphetamine salts (ER MAS) on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptom dimensions, global and specific impairments, and common adverse events associated with stimulants.

METHODS

Fifty-six children and adolescents with ADHD participated in an 8-week, double-blind, crossover study comparing ER d-MPH (10, 20, 25-30 mg) and ER MAS (10, 20, 25-30) with a week of randomized placebo within each drug period. Efficacy was assessed with the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV), whereas global and specific domains of impairment were assessed with the Clinical Global Impressions Severity and Improvement Scales and the parent-completed Weiss Functional Impairment Scale, respectively. Insomnia and decreased appetite, common stimulant-related adverse events, were measured with the parent-completed Stimulant Side Effects Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Both ER d-MPH and ER MAS were associated with significant reductions in ADHD symptoms. Improvement in Total ADHD and Hyperactivity/Impulsivity symptoms were strongly associated with increasing dose, whereas improvements in Inattentive symptoms were only moderately associated with dose. About 80% demonstrated reliable change on ADHD-RS-IV at the highest dose level of ER MAS compared with 79% when receiving ER d-MPH. Decreased appetite and insomnia were more common at higher dose levels for both stimulants. Approximately 43% of the responders were preferential responders to only one of the stimulant formulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose level, rather than stimulant class, was strongly related to medication response.

Misuse of prescribed stimulant medication for ADHD and associated patterns of substance use: preliminary analysis among college students

OBJECTIVES

To explore the prevalence and characteristics associated with college students who misuse their prescribed stimulants for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and examine diversion and substance use behaviors as a function of misuse.

METHODS

Cohort of 55 past-year prescribed stimulant users was identified from a random sample (n = 1738) at a large Midwestern research university following the self-administration of a web-based survey. An index was created to assess misuse of prescribed stimulants (i.e., Misuse Index).

RESULTS

Of 55 college students who reported past-year use of prescribed stimulants for ADHD, 22 (40%) endorsed at least one item on the misuse index. The most frequently endorsed misuse items were used too much (36%), self-reported misuse (19%), and intentionally used with alcohol or other drugs (19%). Misusers of prescribed stimulant medication were more likely to report cigarette smoking (p = 0.022), binge drinking (p = 0.022), illicit use of cocaine (p = 0.032), and screen positive on the Drug Abuse Screening test (DAST-10) criteria (p = 0.002). The bivariate odds ratio for the DAST-10 findings was 8.4 (95% CI: 2.0-34.6). Diversion of prescribed stimulants was common (36%) and occurred more frequently among stimulant misusers (57%; p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

There is a strong relationship between misuse of prescribed stimulants for ADHD and substance use behaviors, as well as other deleterious behaviors such as diversion. These findings suggest the need for close screening, assessment, and therapeutic monitoring of medication use in the college population.

Response inhibition in adults with autism spectrum disorder compared to attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are hypothesised to involve core deficits in executive function. Previous studies have found evidence of a double dissociation between the disorders on specific executive functions (planning and response inhibition). To date most research has been conducted with children. No studies have directly compared the stable cognitive profile of adults. It was hypothesised that adults with ASD would show generally intact response inhibition whereas those with ADHD would show more global impairment. Participants were 24 adults aged 18-55 with high functioning ASD, 24 with ADHD, and 14 age and IQ matched controls. Participants completed three standardised measures of response inhibition. Participants with ASD had generally intact response inhibition but slow response latencies, possibly due to deficits in response initiation. Adults with ADHD did not show the more global impairments hypothesised. There were some significant differences between the clinical groups across measures of inhibition. In terms of performance style, adults with ASD were slow and accurate whilst those with ADHD showed an impulsive style.

Methylphenidate lacks genotoxic effects in mouse peripheral blood erythrocytes

Methylphenidate (MPH; Ritalin®; Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Basel, Switzerland) has been prescribed to treat attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) since its approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration over 50 years ago. Due to concerns that MPH might induce cytogenetic alterations in children, treatment with this drug has been a controversial issue. In the present study, we assessed the frequency of micronucleated erythrocytes (MNEs), micronucleated polychromatic erythrocytes (MNPCEs), and polychromatic erythrocytes (PCEs) in peripheral blood samples from mice treated with three different doses of MPH (30, 60, or 125 mg/kg). We found no evidence of increased MNEs or MNPCEs, nor did PCEs decline. These results add to the accumulating evidence that MPH does not induce genotoxic or cytotoxic damage.

Methylphenidate transdermal system in adults with past stimulant misuse: an open-label trial

OBJECTIVE

This 8-week, open-label trial assessed the efficacy of methylphenidate transdermal system (MTS) in 14 adult individuals diagnosed with ADHD and with a history of stimulant misuse, abuse, or dependence.

METHOD

The primary efficacy endpoint was the Wender-Reimherr Adult ADHD Scale (WRAADS), and secondary efficacy endpoints included the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) ratings and substance abuse as quantified by urine drug screens and self-reported use.

RESULTS

Significant improvements from baseline were found on both the WRAADS and CGI measurements. No abuse of the study medication was observed.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggested that MTS may improve ADHD symptoms in adults with a history of stimulant misuse; however, there were limitations. The study data showed the need for subsequent randomized studies that further explore findings made in this study.

Medical misuse of controlled medications among adolescents

OBJECTIVES

To determine the past-year medical misuse prevalence for 4 controlled medication classes (pain, stimulant, sleeping, and antianxiety) among adolescents, and to assess substance use outcomes among adolescents who report medical misuse.

DESIGN

A Web-based survey was self-administered by 2744 secondary school students in 2009-2010.

SETTING

Two southeastern Michigan school districts.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample had a mean age of 14.8 years and was 51.1% female. The racial/ethnic distribution was 65.0% white, 29.5% African American, 3.7% Asian, 1.3% Hispanic, and 0.5% other.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Past-year medical use and misuse of 4 controlled medication classes.

RESULTS

Eighteen percent of the sample reported past-year medical use of at least 1 prescribed controlled medication. Among past-year medical users, 22.0% reported misuse of their controlled medications, including taking too much, intentionally getting high, or using to increase alcohol or other drug effects. Medical misusers were more likely than nonmisusers to divert their controlled medications and to abuse other substances. The odds of a positive screening result for drug abuse were substantially higher among medical misusers (adjusted odds ratio, 7.8; 95% confidence interval, 4.3-14.2) compared with medical users who used their controlled medications appropriately. The odds of drug abuse did not differ between medical users who used their controlled medications appropriately and nonusers.

CONCLUSIONS

Most adolescents who used controlled medications took their medications appropriately. Substance use and diversion of controlled medications were more prevalent among adolescents who misused their controlled medications. Careful therapeutic monitoring could reduce medical misuse and diversion of controlled medications among adolescents.

Preliminary reliability and validity of a new time-sensitive ADHD symptom scale in adolescents with ADHD

OBJECTIVES

To validate the Time-Sensitive ADHD Symptom Scale (TASS) in the assessment of symptom change during the day in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

A total of 40 participants with ADHD aged 13 to 17 years completed 1 or 2 visits, 1 to 9 weeks apart. The TASS and the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) were completed twice at each visit: at the time of the clinic visit (in-clinic assessment) and 2 to 6 hours afterwards (evening assessment).

RESULTS

Internal consistency of the TASS was high, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients of 0.91 (in-clinic) and 0.90 (evening) for visit 1, and 0.88 (in-clinic) and 0.86 (evening) for visit 2. Pearson's correlation coefficients between the TASS and ADHD-RS-IV were significant at both visits (P < 0.0001). Stability analyses of the TASS found no significant effect between ratings performed at different visits (P = 0.936), but there was a significant effect of the assessment time within visits (P < 0.0001). There was not a significant visit by assessment time interaction (P = 0.924).

CONCLUSIONS

The TASS showed high internal consistency and high concurrent validity with the ADHD-RS-IV. Results of this preliminary study indicate that the TASS is a valid and reliable self-report scale for adolescents with ADHD.

A Prospective Examination of the Association of Stimulant Medication History and Drug Use Outcomes among Community Samples of ADHD Youths

A continuing debate in the child psychopathology literature is the extent to which pharmacotherapy for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), in particular stimulant treatment, confers a risk of subsequent drug abuse. If stimulant treatment for ADHD contributes to drug abuse, then the risk versus therapeutic benefits of such treatment is greatly affected. We have prospectively followed an ADHD sample (N = 149; 81% males) for approximately 15 years, beginning at childhood (ages 8 to 10 years) and continuing until the sample has reached young adulthood (ages 22 to 24 years). The sample was originally recruited via an epidemiologically derived community procedure, and all youths were diagnosed with ADHD during childhood. We report on the association of childhood psychostimulant medication and subsequent substance use disorders and tobacco use. The substance use outcomes were based on data collected at three time points when the sample was in late adolescence and young adulthood (age range approximately 18 to 22 years old). We did not find evidence to support that childhood treatment with stimulant medication, including the course of stimulant medication, was associated with any change in risk for adolescent or young adulthood substance use disorders and tobacco use. These results from a community-based sample extend the growing body of literature based on clinically derived samples indicating that stimulant treatment does not create a significant risk for subsequent substance use disorders.

Intranasal versus oral administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate: a randomized, open-label, two-period, crossover, single-dose, single-centre pharmacokinetic study in healthy adult men

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Data on pharmacokinetic parameters of the prodrug stimulant lisdexamfetamine dimesylate via alternate routes of administration are limited. The pharmacokinetics of d-amphetamine derived from lisdexamfetamine dimesylate after single oral (PO) versus intranasal (IN) administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate were compared.

METHODS

In this randomized, two-period, crossover study, healthy men without a history of substance abuse were administered single PO or IN (radiolabelled with ≤100 μCi (99m)Tc-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid and confirmed by scintigraphy) lisdexamfetamine dimesylate 50 mg ≥7 days apart. Serial blood samples were drawn to measure d-amphetamine and intact lisdexamfetamine at 0 (pre-dose), 15, 30 and 45 minutes and at 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours post-dose for PO administration and at 0 (pre-dose), 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours post-dose for IN administration. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed.

RESULTS

Eighteen subjects were enrolled and completed the study. The mean ± SD maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration (AUC(last)) of d-amphetamine following PO administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate were 37.6 ± 4.54 ng/mL and 719.1 ± 157.05 ng · h/mL, respectively; after IN administration, these parameters were 35.9 ± 6.49 ng/mL and 690.5 ± 157.05 ng · h/mL, respectively. PO and IN administration demonstrated similar median time to reach C(max) (t(max)) for d-amphetamine: 5 hours for PO administration versus 4 hours for IN administration. Mean ± SD elimination half-life (t(1/2)) values were also similar for PO (11.6 ± 2.8 hours) and IN (11.3 ± 1.8 hours) lisdexamfetamine dimesylate. TEAEs after PO and IN administration were reported by 27.8% of subjects (5/18) and 38.9% of subjects (7/18), respectively; all AEs were mild or moderate in severity, and TEAEs such as anorexia, dry mouth, headache and nausea were consistent with known amphetamine effects.

CONCLUSION

IN administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate resulted in d-amphetamine plasma concentrations and systemic exposure to d-amphetamine comparable to those seen with PO administration. Subject variability for d-amphetamine pharmacokinetic parameters was low. Both PO and IN lisdexamfetamine dimesylate demonstrated a tolerability profile similar to that of other long-acting stimulants.

To stop or not to stop? How long should medication treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder be extended?

ADHD is a common neuropsychiatric disorder with a strong persistence over time. Medication is frequently used in the clinical management of ADHD. After response, medication is typically prescribed for months to years. It is unclear whether extended medication treatment provides long-term benefits and how long it should be continued. Furthermore, there is concern about the long-term safety of ADHD medication. The aim of this systematic review is to address these issues and provide recommendations about the decision to stop or not to stop ADHD medication. We performed a search in PubMed and focused on medication studies with a treatment longer than 12weeks in subjects 6-18years old. Extended placebo-controlled double-blind parallel studies are not available. Placebo-controlled discontinuation studies and prospective long-term observational treatment studies provide evidence that medication management leads to a substantial reduction of ADHD symptoms and less impairment of functioning for a period of about 2years. There is limited and inconsistent evidence for long-term advantage of medication treatment beyond symptom control, such as improved social functioning, academic achievement, employment status and less adverse psychiatric outcome. In terms of safety, long-term effects of medication on growth, blood pressure and heart rate are limited and the occurrence of suicidal, psychotic and manic symptoms is rare. Animal data about neurotoxic effects of psycho stimulants cannot be directly extrapolated to humans. Therefore, clinical decisions about starting, continuing, and stopping of ADHD medication should be made on an individual basis. Medication free periods should be implemented at regular times to investigate the need for an ongoing benefit of medication. Unfounded assumptions about continuing benefit of medication use should be abandoned. Careful monitoring of side effects is necessary and must be able to detect early alarming signals.

Improved functionality, health related quality of life and decreased burden of disease in patients with ADHD treated with OROS® MPH: is treatment response different between children and adolescents?

BACKGROUND

To compare clinical and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between children and adolescents with ADHD treated with OROS® MPH, using data from two large similarly-designed multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-arm, non-interventional studies.

METHODS

Pooled analysis (42603ATT4037, 42603 - ATT - 4001) including patients (6 to 18 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of ADHD. Patients were treated with OROS® MPH for 12 weeks; ADHD symptoms, functioning, HRQoL, safety and tolerability parameters were assessed.

RESULTS

822 patients (583 children [6-12 years], 239 adolescents [13-18 years]) were included in the pooled analysis. Mean daily OROS® MPH starting doses in the child and adolescent subgroups were 29.0 ± 11.7 and 37.6 ± 15.6 mg, respectively (p < 0.001). At study end (week 12), the overall mean daily dose was 35.5 ± 14.0 mg, with children and adolescents receiving 32.8 ± 12.7 and 42.0 ± 15.1 mg/day, respectively (p < 0.001). Significant (p < 0.0001: overall population, children, adolescents) symptomatic, functional and HRQoL improvements were observed from baseline to study end using the Conners' Parents Rating Scale (overall: 29.2 ± 10.7 [baseline] to 19.3 ± 11.3 [endpoint]), Children's Global Assessment Scale (overall: 58.5 ± 14.5 [baseline] to 69.6 ± 16.1 [endpoint]), and ILC-LQ0-28. At week 12, between-age group differences were seen in the individual ILC-LQ0-28 parameters: school performance (p = 0.001 [parents' assessment], p = 0.032 [childrens' assessment]), global QoL (p = 0.012 [parents']) and interests and hobbies (p = 0.023 [childrens']). Treating physician's planned continued use of OROS® MPH in 76.9%, 86.0% and 79.3% of children, adolescents and the total population, respectively, at study end (p = 0.029 between-age subgroups). 195 of 822 patients (23.7%) experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event; most commonly reported AEs in the total group (≥4%) were insomnia (7.2%), anorexia (4.3%) and involuntary muscle contractions (4.1%). No clinically relevant changes in body weight or vital signs were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically relevant differences between children and adolescents with ADHD are present. Adolescents appeared to have a lower health related quality of life and functioning compared to children at baseline, however, they were able to reach comparable ratings at endpoint for most items. Similarly, burden of disease decreased in patients and their carers. OROS MPH was generally safe and well tolerated.

Effects of open-label lisdexamfetamine dimesylate on self-reported quality of life in adults with ADHD

OBJECTIVE

To assess improvements in quality of life measurements during the open-label portion of a trial examining duration of efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in a simulated adult workplace environment.

METHODS

A 4-week, open-label, dose-optimization phase followed by a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover phase to evaluate safety and efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in the adult workplace environment was conducted. Clinical assessments included the ADHD Impact Module for Adults (AIM-A) to assess the effect of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate on perception of quality of life and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity/Improvement to assess symptom severity at baseline and improvement over time. Safety assessments included physical examination, treatment-emergent adverse events, vital signs, and electrocardiogram measurements.

RESULTS

Questions 1 and 4 of the AIM-A suggest improvement from baseline in overall quality of life at week 4 with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment. Post-hoc analysis revealed no significant differences attributable to either age or sex. Overall responses to questions 2 and 3, which related to overall life goals, did not change in a majority of participants during the 4-week open-label phase of this study. For all lisdexamfetamine dimesylate doses combined, treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in ≥ 5% of participants during the dose-optimization phase were decreased appetite (36.6%), dry mouth (30.3%), headache (19.7%), insomnia (18.3%), upper respiratory tract infection (9.9%), irritability (8.5%), nausea (7.7%), anxiety (5.6%), and feeling jittery (5.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

At the end of the dose-optimization phase, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment suggested quality of life improvements in adults with ADHD, with a safety profile consistent with long-acting stimulant use.

Efficacy and safety of methylphenidate in treating ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents with uncontrolled seizures: a Brazilian sample study and literature review

OBJECTIVE

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is observed in 30% of children and adolescents with epilepsy. Recent studies have demonstrated the safety of methylphenidate (MPH) in patients with controlled epilepsy. There are few studies of patients with uncontrolled epilepsy. The goal was to study the efficacy and safety of MPH use in children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD and uncontrolled epilepsy.

METHODS

We evaluated 24 patients ranging from 7 to 16 years of age who took MPH for 6 months. Inclusion criteria were at least two epileptic seizures in the previous 6 months and a diagnosis of ADHD based on DSM-IV criteria.

CONCLUSION

Patients were classified according to ADHD subtype as follows: 41.7% inattentive type, 37.5% combined, and 20.8% hyperactive/impulsive type; 58.3% had partial epilepsy and 41.7% generalized epilepsy. There was an overall improvement in ADHD symptoms in 70.8% of patients, and there was no increase in frequency of epileptic seizures in 22 patients (91.6%).

Computer-assisted management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVES

Medication management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is often suboptimal. We examined whether (1) brief physician training plus computer-assisted medication management led to greater reduction in ADHD symptoms and (2) adherence to the recommended titration protocol produced greater symptomatic improvement.

METHODS

A randomized medication trial was conducted that included 24 pediatric practices. Children who met criteria for ADHD were randomly assigned by practice to treatment-as-usual or a specialized care group in which physicians received 2 hours of didactic training on medication management of ADHD plus training on a software program to assist in monitoring improvement. Parent and teacher reports were obtained before treatment and 4, 9, and 12 months after starting medication.

RESULTS

Children in both specialized care and treatment-as-usual groups improved on the ADHD Rating Scales and SNAP-IV, but there were no group differences in improvement rates. Brief physician training alone did not produce improvements. When recommended titration procedures were followed, however, outcomes were better for total and inattentive ADHD symptoms on both the ADHD Rating Scales and SNAP-IV parent and teacher scales. Results were not attributable to discontinuation because of adverse effects or failure to find an effective medication dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief physician training alone did not lead to reductions in ADHD symptoms, but adherence to a protocol that involved titration until the child's symptoms were in the average range and had shown a reliable change led to better symptom reduction. Computer-assisted medication management can contribute to better treatment outcomes in primary care medication treatment of ADHD.

Medication costs to private insurers of diversion of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

BACKGROUND

The diversion of prescription stimulants for misuse, particularly those used in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), is potentially a significant problem for public health and for healthcare funding and delivery. Most prior research on the diversion of prescription stimulants for misuse, particularly those used in the treatment of ADHD, has focused on the 'end users' of diverted medications rather than the suppliers. Furthermore, little is known about the direct costs of diversion for third-party insurance payers in the US.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to estimate the prevalence in the US of people whose private insurance paid costs for ADHD prescriptions that they gave or sold to another person (diversion), and to estimate medication costs of diversion to private insurers.

METHODS

Estimates are from a cross-sectional survey of respondents from two Internet survey panels targeting individuals aged 18-49 years in the civilian, noninstitutionalized US population, principally for those who filled prescriptions for ADHD medications in the past 30 days that were covered by private health insurance. Analysis weights were post-stratified to control totals from the Current Population Survey and National Health Interview Survey. Weighted prevalence rates and standard errors for diversion are reported, as are the costs of diverted pills using drug prices reported in the 2008 Thomson Reuters RED BOOK™. Sensitivity analyses were conducted that varied the cost assumptions for medications.

RESULTS

Among individuals aged 18-49 years whose private insurance paid some costs for ADHD medications in the past 30 days, 16.6% diverted medications from these prescriptions. Men aged 18-49 years for whom private insurance paid some costs of ADHD drugs in the past 30 days were more than twice as likely as their female counterparts to divert medications from these prescriptions (22.5% vs 9.1%; p = 0.03). After a pro-rated co-payment share was subtracted, the estimated value of diverted medications in a 30-day period was $US8.0 million. Lower- and upper-bound estimates were $US6.9 million to $US17 million, for a range of $US83 million to $US204 million annually. Overall, diversion accounted for about 3.6% of the total costs that private insurers paid for ADHD medications (range: 3.5-4.5%). The percentages varied by medication category, although relative differences were sensitive to inclusion of a pro-rated co-payment. A higher percentage of the costs of extended-release (XR) medications was lost to diversion compared with that for immediate-release (IR) medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs of ADHD medications paid for by private insurers that were lost to diversion were small relative to the total estimated medication costs and relative to total estimated healthcare costs for treating ADHD. Nevertheless, there may be significant cost savings for insurers if diversion can be reduced, particularly for XR medications. These findings represent a first step to informing policies to reduce diversion both in the interest of public health and for direct and indirect cost savings to insurers.

ADHD in adults: current treatment trends with consideration of abuse potential of medications

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature describing impairments in educational, occupational, and social functioning in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), current treatment trends, and factors that may influence the abuse potential of long-acting medications used to treat ADHD in adults.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search was conducted to identify articles relating to functional impairments and treatment options for adults with ADHD, as well as the abuse potential of ADHD medications.

RESULTS

ADHD is one of the most common psychiatric behavioral disorders in children, and its symptoms have been shown to persist into adulthood. Symptoms of ADHD may occur at home, school, work, or in social situations, and symptom occurrence in these different settings can have a profound negative impact for adults with ADHD. Impairments in educational, occupational, and social functioning in adults with ADHD have been described and are summarized in this review article. Although long-acting medications are more frequently prescribed for children with ADHD than short-acting medications, adults with ADHD are equally likely to be treated with short- and long-acting medications. While all medications used to treat ADHD in adults have potential for abuse, there are a number of factors that may contribute to a lower potential for abuse for long-acting agents compared with immediate-release medications.

CONCLUSION

Impairments from ADHD can be chronic and persistent and they can affect daily educational, occupational, and personal functioning. Adults, in particular, have responsibilities that can extend into the late evening hours so that clinicians need to consider medication duration of action when selecting a pharmacotherapy intervention for adults with ADHD.

Heterogeneity in the pharmacological treatment of children with ADHD: cognitive, behavioral, and social functioning differences

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the extent to which children with ADHD in various medication statuses (i.e., medication naïve, pure stimulant, stimulant plus another medication, nonstimulants) varied on cognitive or academic, behavioral, and social functioning during a psychoeducational assessment battery.

METHOD

Participants for this study consisted of 66 children (20 girls) with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.) (DSM-IV) diagnosis of ADHD confirmed by a comprehensive clinical diagnostic assessment, including the use of a semistructured interview and Conners' Parent Rating Scales. Standardized cognitive and academic measures along with parent report of medication status, behavioral, and social functioning were collected.

RESULTS

No differences were found among children in the various medication groups in terms of ADHD symptoms severity, academic performance, processing speed, verbal abilities, or perceptual reasoning skills. However, children in the medication-naïve group performed significantly better than the stimulant-plus-another-medication and nonstimulant groups in terms of overall cognitive abilities, working-memory skills, and social adaptability but had similar scores to children in the pure-stimulant group. Children in the pure-stimulant group also had marginally higher working-memory scores compared to children in the nonstimulant group but not compared to the stimulant-plus-another-medication group. The pure-stimulant group also had significantly lower externalizing and internalizing problems and higher social adaptability compared to the stimulant-plus-another-medication group but not compared to the medication-naïve or nonstimulant groups.

CONCLUSION

Findings showed evidence for distinct cognitive, behavioral, and social profiles among children with ADHD who are proactively not on medication, as well as differences among children with ADHD who are on only one stimulant versus a nonstimulant or stimulant-plus-another-medication regimen.

Long-term treatment outcomes with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder stratified by baseline severity

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of baseline severity on lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) efficacy in a long-term study of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Adults from a 4-week, placebo-controlled, forced dose-escalation study with LDX (30-70 mg/day) or placebo were enrolled in a long-term, open-label dose-optimization study for an additional 12 months. In post hoc analyses, participants were stratified by baseline severity (from the prior short-term study) with Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scores of 4 (moderately), 5 (markedly), or ≥6 (severely/extremely ill). ADHD-Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) with adult prompts (primary) and CGI-Improvement (CGI-I) were used to assess effectiveness. Clinical response was defined as a ≥30% decrease in ADHD-RS-IV from baseline and a CGI-I of 1 or 2; symptomatic remission was defined as ADHD-RS-IV ≤18. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were monitored.

RESULTS

Participants had baseline CGI-S scores of 4 (n = 114), 5 (n = 188), or ≥6 (n = 43). At endpoint, mean (SD) change from baseline in ADHD-RS-IV was greater (p < 0.0001) for participants with CGI-S = 5 (-26.4 [11.77]) and ≥6 (-32.3 [9.81]) than for participants with CGI-S = 4 (-19.5 [9.97]). At endpoint, 81.6%, 84.6%, and 88.4% of participants were very much/much improved (CGI-I of 1 or 2) in CGI-S categories of 4, 5, and ≥6, respectively. Clinical response criteria were met by 78.9%, 83.5%, and 88.4% and symptomatic remission criteria by 64.0%, 65.4%, and 72.1% of participants with CGI-S = 4, 5, and ≥6, respectively. The most frequently reported TEAEs with participant incidence ≥10% for any LDX dose were upper respiratory tract infection (21.8%), insomnia (19.5%), headache (17.2%), dry mouth (16.6%), decreased appetite (14.3%), and irritability (11.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Some aspects of these analyses (e.g., open-label design without placebo control, inclusion and exclusion criteria of the demographic profile of participants, and the post hoc nature of the statistical analysis) limit interpretation. However, long-term LDX treatment demonstrated increased degree of symptom improvement with greater baseline symptom severity. Rates of clinical response and symptomatic remission tended to be greater for those with greater baseline severity. LDX demonstrated a safety profile consistent with long-acting stimulant use.

Use of psychotropic medication guidelines at child-serving community mental health centers as assessed by clinic directors

This study assessed the proportion of large, child-serving community mental health centers that used medication guidelines. Two hundred clinic directors from across the country completed an hour-long semi-structured interview, and 152 of these directors answered whether or not medication guidelines were used at their clinics. Half of these clinics' directors reported that their prescribers followed any form of medication guidelines. Governmental agencies and professional medical societies were among the most common sources of information regarding which specific guidelines to follow. Utilization of standardized child outcome measures, but not the employment of a child psychiatrist, was related to following medication guidelines. Despite the mental health field's recent emphasis on disseminating evidence-base practice, many directors reported their clinics did not use any pediatric medication guidelines.