Comparative benefits and harms of competing medications for adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review and indirect comparison meta-analysis

A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of centanafadine versus lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and atomoxetine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: long-term safety and efficacy

Aim: To compare long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of centanafadine versus lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (lisdexamfetamine), methylphenidate hydrochloride (methylphenidate) and atomoxetine hydrochloride (atomoxetine), respectively, in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs). Patients & methods: Patient-level data from a centanafadine trial (NCT03605849) and published aggregate data from a lisdexamfetamine trial (NCT00337285), a methylphenidate trial (NCT00326300) and an atomoxetine trial (NCT00190736) were used. Patient characteristics were matched in each comparison using propensity score weighting. Study outcomes were assessed up to 52 weeks and included safety (rates of adverse events [AEs]) and efficacy (mean change from baseline in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale [AISRS] or ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] score). Results: In all comparisons of matched populations, risks of AEs were statistically significantly lower with centanafadine or non-different between centanafadine and comparator; the largest differences in AE rates included upper respiratory tract infection (risk difference in percentage points: 18.75), insomnia (12.47) and dry mouth (12.33) versus lisdexamfetamine; decreased appetite (20.25), headache (18.53) and insomnia (12.65) versus methylphenidate; and nausea (26.18), dry mouth (25.07) and fatigue (13.95) versus atomoxetine (all p < 0.05). Centanafadine had a smaller reduction in the AISRS/ADHD-RS score versus lisdexamfetamine (6.15-point difference; p < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score versus methylphenidate (1.75-point difference; p = 0.13) and versus atomoxetine (1.60-point difference; p = 0.21). Conclusion: At up to 52 weeks, centanafadine showed significantly lower incidence of several AEs than lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and atomoxetine; efficacy was lower than lisdexamfetamine and non-different from methylphenidate and atomoxetine.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in pregnancy and the postpartum period

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is a childhood-onset neurodevelopmental disorder that frequently persists into adulthood with 3% of adult women having a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Many women are diagnosed and treated during their reproductive years, which leads to management implications during pregnancy and the postpartum period. We know from clinical practice that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms frequently become challenging to manage during the perinatal period and require additional support and attention. There is often uncertainty among healthcare providers about the management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the perinatal period, particularly the safety of pharmacotherapy for the developing fetus. This guideline is focused on best practices in managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the perinatal period. We recommend (1) mitigating the risks associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder that worsen during the perinatal period via individualized treatment planning; (2) providing psychoeducation, self-management strategies or coaching, and psychotherapies; and, for those with moderate or severe attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, (3) considering pharmacotherapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, which largely has reassuring safety data. Specifically, providers should work collaboratively with patients and their support networks to balance the risks of perinatal attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder medication with the risks of inadequately treated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder during pregnancy. The risks and impacts of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in pregnancy can be successfully managed through preconception counselling and appropriate perinatal planning, management, and support.

Drivers and Barriers to Tolerable and Effective Treatment for ADHD: The Importance of Treatment Perseverance and Duration of Effect

OBJECTIVE

To examine treatment outcomes for classes of ADHD drugs in conjunction with physicians' prescribing rationales and the utility of treatment perseverance in treatment effectiveness.

METHODS

A retrospective non-interventional study using physician-provided chart data for treated adolescent and adult ADHD patients in the United States (April-June 2019). Multivariable analyses compared the effectiveness and tolerability of drug classes.

RESULTS

Among the 1,232 ADHD patients included in this study, 37.7% experienced one, 11.8% two, and 6.7% three treatment changes post their first prescribed regimen. These changes were mostly attributed to lack of rapid onset and duration of effect. Achieving best response correlated with the number of previous treatments for adolescents, but not adults. Maintaining full response correlated with the length of current treatment for adolescents and adults.

CONCLUSION

Physicians' prescribing rationales targeted duration of effect and tolerability. ER monotherapy demonstrated potential advantages over other regimens. Treatment perseverance is integral to effective ADHD management.

A systematic meta-review of systematic reviews on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

BACKGROUND

There are now hundreds of systematic reviews on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) of variable quality. To help navigate this literature, we have reviewed systematic reviews on any topic on ADHD.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science and performed quality assessment according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. A total of 231 systematic reviews and meta-analyses met the eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

The prevalence of ADHD was 7.2% for children and adolescents and 2.5% for adults, though with major uncertainty due to methodological variation in the existing literature. There is evidence for both biological and social risk factors for ADHD, but this evidence is mostly correlational rather than causal due to confounding and reverse causality. There is strong evidence for the efficacy of pharmacological treatment on symptom reduction in the short-term, particularly for stimulants. However, there is limited evidence for the efficacy of pharmacotherapy in mitigating adverse life trajectories such as educational attainment, employment, substance abuse, injuries, suicides, crime, and comorbid mental and somatic conditions. Pharmacotherapy is linked with side effects like disturbed sleep, reduced appetite, and increased blood pressure, but less is known about potential adverse effects after long-term use. Evidence of the efficacy of nonpharmacological treatments is mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite hundreds of systematic reviews on ADHD, key questions are still unanswered. Evidence gaps remain as to a more accurate prevalence of ADHD, whether documented risk factors are causal, the efficacy of nonpharmacological treatments on any outcomes, and pharmacotherapy in mitigating the adverse outcomes associated with ADHD.

Quality of life in sarcoidosis

Having sarcoidosis often has a major impact on quality of life of patients and their families. Improving quality of life is prioritized as most important treatment aim by many patients with sarcoidosis, but current evidence and treatment options are limited. In this narrative review, we describe the impact of sarcoidosis on various aspects of daily life, evaluate determinants of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and provide an overview of the different patient-reported outcome measures to assess HRQoL in sarcoidosis. Moreover, we review the current evidence for pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to improve quality of life for people with sarcoidosis.

Psychoactive substance use in patients diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: an exploratory study

Introduction

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was originally treated as a neurodevelopmental disorder that occurs mainly in children and tends to diminish or disappear with age, but we now know that symptoms persist into adulthood in over 50% of ADHD patients. Undiagnosed individuals often turn to psychoactive substance to minimize the negative aspects of functioning and improve quality of life.

Methods

The study was conducted online using random sampling through a Facebook group administered by physicians and targeted to patients diagnosed with ADHD. The study was naturalistic and exploratory, therefore no hypothesis was made. 438 correctly completed questionnaires were received. Analysis of the results showed that people with ADHD turn to psychoactive substances relatively frequently.

Results

The most commonly used stimulants include alcohol, marijuana, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), amphetamine/methamphetamine, and psilocybin. In the study population, methylphenidate is the most commonly used drug among patients. After treatment with psychostimulants, the majority of respondents note a decrease in symptoms of hyperactivity disorder, especially in male patients.

Conclusion

It is necessary to perform proper diagnostics and actively look for ADHD symptoms in patients who tend to use psychoactive substances.

Smartphone-assisted psychoeducation in adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A randomized controlled trial

Psychoeducation is generally recommended in the treatment of adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), but only few studies have systematically assessed the effects of structured clinical psychoeducation. Moreover, although a considerable number of psychoeducational mobile applications exist, none have provided scientific evidence for their effectiveness or safety. Therefore, the present randomized controlled trial investigated a newly developed, free-to-use psychoeducation app for adults with ADHD as a support to a clinical psychoeducation group. 236 adults with ADHD were contacted for study participation, of whom 60 were finally randomized to a psychoeducation group supported either by our developed smartphone app (n = 30) or by traditional pen-and-paper brochures (n = 30). Psychoeducation treatments were conducted in groups of 10, with 8 weekly one-hour sessions between March 2019 and November 2020. Observer-rated ADHD symptom severity (IDA-R interview) was examined as the primary outcome parameter before and after treatment. Across both interventions, ADHD core symptoms were significantly reduced. Notably, the smartphone-assisted psychoeducation was significantly more effective in improving inattention and impulsivity and led to higher homework compliance than the brochure-assisted psychoeducation. No adverse events were reported.

Multimodal treatment efficacy differs in dependence of core symptom profiles in adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: An analysis of the randomized controlled COMPAS trial

There is broad consensus that to improve the treatment of adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the various therapy options need to be tailored more precisely to the individual patient's needs and specific symptoms. This post-hoc analysis evaluates the multimodal effects of first-line medication (methylphenidate [MPH] vs placebo [PLB]) and psychotherapeutic (group psychotherapy [GPT] vs clinical management [CM]) treatments on the ADHD core symptoms inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity. For the two-by-two factorial, observer-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled Comparison of Methylphenidate and Psychotherapy in Adult ADHD Study (COMPAS; ISRCTN54096201), 419 outpatients with ADHD were considered for analysis. ADHD symptoms were assessed by blind observer-rated and patient-rated Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scales before treatment (T1), 13 weeks (T2) and 26 weeks (T3) after T1, at treatment completion after 52 weeks (T4), and at follow-up (130 weeks, T5). MPH was superior to PLB in improving symptoms of inattention at almost all endpoints (observer-rated T2, T3, T4, T5; patient-rated T2, T3, T4), while a significant decrease in hyperactivity and impulsivity was at first found after 6 months of treatment. CM compared to GPT decreased inattention and impulsivity in the early treatment phase only (observer-rated T2, patient-rated T2, T3). In conclusion, while MPH seems to have a direct and sustained effect on inattention, premature medication discontinuation should particularly be avoided in patients with hyperactive-impulsive symptoms. Also, especially in high inattention and/or impulsivity presentations, initial individual patient management might be beneficial. Consequently, considering individual core symptom profiles may enhance the efficacy of treatments in adult ADHD.

Extended-release methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a psychiatric diagnosis increasingly used in adults. The recommended first-line pharmacological treatment is central nervous system (CNS) stimulants, such as methylphenidate, but uncertainty remains about its benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of extended-release formulations of methylphenidate in adults diagnosed with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases and four clinical trial registries up to February 2021. We searched 12 drug regulatory databases for clinical trial data up to 13 May 2020. In addition, we cross-referenced all available trial identifiers, handsearched reference lists, searched pharmaceutical company databases, and contacted trial authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trials comparing extended-release methylphenidate formulations at any dose versus placebo and other ADHD medications in adults diagnosed with ADHD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data. We assessed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs), and rating scales and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs). We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess risks of bias, and GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We meta-analysed the data using a random-effects model. We assessed three design characteristics that may impair the trial results' 'generalisability'; exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidity; responder selection based on previous experience with CNS stimulants; and risk of withdrawal effects. Our prespecified primary outcomes were functional outcomes, self-rated ADHD symptoms, and serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes included quality of life, ADHD symptoms rated by investigators and by peers such as family members, cardiovascular variables, severe psychiatric adverse events, and other adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 trials (5066 participants), of which 21 reported outcome data for this review. We also identified one ongoing study. We included documents from six drug regulatory agencies covering eight trials. Twenty-one trials had an outpatient setting and three were conducted in prisons. They were primarily conducted in North America and Europe. The median participant age was 36 years. Twelve trials (76% of participants) were industry-sponsored, four (14% of participants) were publicly funded with industry involvement, seven (10% of participants) were publicly funded, and one had unclear funding. The median trial duration was eight weeks. One trial was rated at overall unclear risk of bias and 20 trials were rated at overall high risk of bias, primarily due to unclear blinding of participants and investigators, attrition bias, and selective outcome reporting. All trials were impaired in at least one of the three design characteristics related to 'generalisability'; for example, they excluded participants with psychiatric comorbidity such as depression or anxiety, or included participants only with a previous positive response to methylphenidate, or similar drugs. This may limit the trials' usefulness for clinical practice, as they may overestimate the benefits and underestimate the harms. Extended-release methylphenidate versus placebo (up to 26 weeks) For the primary outcomes, we found very low-certainty evidence that methylphenidate had no effect on 'days missed at work' at 13-week follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.15 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.11 to 1.81; 1 trial, 409 participants) or serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.43, CI 95% CI 0.85 to 2.43; 14 trials, 4078 participants), whereas methylphenidate improved self-rated ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.30; 16 trials, 3799 participants). For secondary outcomes, we found very low-certainty evidence that methylphenidate improved self-rated quality of life (small effect; SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05; 6 trials, 1888 participants), investigator-rated ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.36; 18 trials, 4183 participants), ADHD symptoms rated by peers such as family members (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.14; 3 trials, 1005 participants), and increased the risk of experiencing any adverse event (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.37; 14 trials, 4214 participants). We rated the certainty of the evidence as 'very low' for all outcomes, primarily due to high risk of bias and 'indirectness of the evidence'. One trial (419 participants) had follow-up at 52 weeks and two trials (314 participants) included active comparators, hence long-term and comparative evidence is limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low-certainty evidence that extended-release methylphenidate compared to placebo improved ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effects) measured on rating scales reported by participants, investigators, and peers such as family members. Methylphenidate had no effect on 'days missed at work' or serious adverse events, the effect on quality of life was small, and it increased the risk of several adverse effects. We rated the certainty of the evidence as 'very low' for all outcomes, due to high risk of bias, short trial durations, and limitations to the generalisability of the results. The benefits and harms of extended-release methylphenidate therefore remain uncertain.

Clinical trials were missing from regulatory documents of extended-release methylphenidate for ADHD in adults: a case study of public documents

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether drug regulatory agencies decided on applications for extended-release methylphenidate for use in adult ADHD based on select samples of trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Case series of publicly available regulatory documents. We matched an index of extended-release methylphenidate trials for adult ADHD with trials appearing in regulatory documents of extended-release methylphenidate applications. Trials and regulatory documents were identified as part of this systematic review (https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012857). We sought to identify missing trials in the regulatory documents and to clarify regulatory submission requirements.

RESULTS

We indexed 18 trials and matched those with 13 drug applications (11 approved, 2 rejected) published by 7 agencies. There were trials missing in 7 (54%) of 13 applications, median 4 trials (range 1-6). The median proportion of missing trial participants was 45% (range 23% - 72%). Regulators seemingly require that all trials must be included in new drug applications, but wording is ambiguous.

CONCLUSION

In this sample of extended-release methylphenidate drug applications for adult ADHD, 7 of 13 regulatory decisions were missing entire trials according to public documents, even though regulatory requirements seem to stipulate that all available trials should be included in drug applications.

ERS clinical practice guidelines on treatment of sarcoidosis

BACKGROUND

The major reasons to treat sarcoidosis are to lower the morbidity and mortality risk or to improve quality of life (QoL). The indication for treatment varies depending on which manifestation is the cause of symptoms: lungs, heart, brain, skin, or other manifestations. While glucocorticoids (GC) remain the first choice for initial treatment of symptomatic disease, prolonged use is associated with significant toxicity. GC-sparing alternatives are available. The presented treatment guideline aims to provide guidance to physicians treating the very heterogenous sarcoidosis manifestations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A European Respiratory Society Task Force (TF) committee composed of clinicians, methodologists, and patients with experience in sarcoidosis developed recommendations based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) methodology. The committee developed eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions and these were used to make specific evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

The TF committee delivered twelve recommendations for seven PICOs. These included treatment of pulmonary, cutaneous, cardiac, and neurologic disease as well as fatigue. One PICO question regarding small fiber neuropathy had insufficient evidence to support a recommendation. In addition to the recommendations, the committee provided information on how they use alternative treatments, when there was insufficient evidence to support a recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

There are many treatments available to treat sarcoidosis. Given the diverse nature of the disease, treatment decisions require an assessment of organ involvement, risk for significant morbidity, and impact on QoL of the disease and treatment.

MESSAGE

An evidence based guideline for treatment of sarcoidosis is presented. The panel used the GRADE approach and specific recommendations are made. A major factor in treating patients is the risk of loss of organ function or impairment of quality of life.

Block of Voltage-Gated Sodium Channels by Atomoxetine in a State- and Use-dependent Manner

Atomoxetine, a neuroactive drug, is approved for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It is primarily known as a high affinity blocker of the noradrenaline transporter, whereby its application leads to an increased level of the corresponding neurotransmitter in different brain regions. However, the concentrations used to obtain clinical effects are much higher than those which are required to block the transporter system. Thus, off-target effects are likely to occur. In this way, we previously identified atomoxetine as blocker of NMDA receptors. As many psychotropic drugs give rise to sudden death of cardiac origin, we now tested the hypothesis whether atomoxetine also interacts with voltage-gated sodium channels of heart muscle type in clinically relevant concentrations. Electrophysiological experiments were performed by means of the patch-clamp technique at human heart muscle sodium channels (hNav1.5) heterogeneously expressed in human embryonic kidney cells. Atomoxetine inhibited sodium channels in a state- and use-dependent manner. Atomoxetine had only a weak affinity for the resting state of the hNav1.5 (Kr: ∼ 120 µM). The efficacy of atomoxetine strongly increased with membrane depolarization, indicating that the inactivated state is an important target. A hallmark of this drug was its slow interaction. By use of different experimental settings, we concluded that the interaction occurs with the slow inactivated state as well as by slow kinetics with the fast-inactivated state. Half-maximal effective concentrations (2–3 µM) were well within the concentration range found in plasma of treated patients. Atomoxetine also interacted with the open channel. However, the interaction was not fast enough to accelerate the time constant of fast inactivation. Nevertheless, when using the inactivation-deficient hNav1.5_I408W_L409C_A410W mutant, we found that the persistent late current was blocked half maximal at about 3 µM atomoxetine. The interaction most probably occurred via the local anesthetic binding site. Atomoxetine inhibited sodium channels at a similar concentration as it is used for the treatment of ADHD. Due to its slow interaction and by inhibiting the late current, it potentially exerts antiarrhythmic properties.

Immediate-release methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is characterized by symptoms of inattention or impulsivity or both, and hyperactivity, which affect children, adolescents, and adults. In some countries, methylphenidate is the first option to treat adults with moderate or severe ADHD. However, evidence on the efficacy and adverse events of immediate-release (IR) methylphenidate in the treatment of ADHD in adults is limited and controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and harms (adverse events) of IR methylphenidate for treating ADHD in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2020, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, eight additional databases and three trial registers. We also searched internal reports on the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration websites. We checked citations of included trials to identify additional trials not captured by the electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IR methylphenidate, at any dose, with placebo or other pharmacological interventions (including extended-release formulations of methylphenidate) for ADHD in adults. Primary outcomes comprised changes in the symptoms of ADHD (efficacy) and harms. Secondary outcomes included changes in the clinical impression of severity and improvement, level of functioning, depression, anxiety and quality of life. Outcomes could have been rated by investigators or participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently on the characteristics of the trials, participants, interventions; outcomes and financial conflict of interests. We resolved disagreements by discussion or consulting a third review author. We obtained additional, unpublished information from the authors of one included trial that had reported efficacy data in a graph. We calculated mean differences (MDs) or standardized MDs (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data reported on the same or different scales, respectively. We summarized dichotomous variables as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials published between 2001 and 2016 involving 497 adults with ADHD. Three trials were conducted in Europe and one in Argentina; the remaining trials did not report their location. The RCTs compared IR methylphenidate with placebo, an osmotic-release oral system (OROS) of methylphenidate (an extended-release formulation), an extended-release formulation of bupropion, lithium, and Pycnogenol® (maritime pine bark extract). Participants comprised outpatients, inpatients in addiction treatment, and adults willing to attend an intensive outpatient program for cocaine dependence. The duration of the follow-up ranged from 6 to 18 weeks. IR methylphenidate versus placebo We found very low-certainty evidence that, compared with placebo, IR methylphenidate may reduce symptoms of ADHD when measured with investigator-rated scales (MD -20.70, 95% CI -23.97 to -17.43; 1 trial, 146 participants; end scores; Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Report Scale (AISRS), scored from 0 to 54), but the evidence is uncertain. The effect of IR methylphenidate on ADHD symptoms when measured with participant-rated scales was moderate, but the certainty of the evidence is very low (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.25 to 0.06; I² = 69%; 2 trials, 138 participants; end scores). There is very low-certainty evidence that, compared with placebo, IR methylphenidate may reduce the clinical impression of the severity of ADHD symptoms (MD -0.57, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.28; 2 trials, 139 participants; I² = 0%; change and end scores; Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity scale (scored from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse))). There is low-certainty evidence that, compared with placebo, IR methylphenidate may slightly impact the clinical impression of an improvement in symptoms of ADHD (MD -0.94, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.51; 1 trial, 49 participants; end scores; CGI-Improvement scale (scored from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse))). There is no clear evidence of an effect on anxiety (MD -0.20, 95% CI -4.84 to 4.44; 1 trial, 19 participants; change scores; Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A; scored from 0 to 56); very low-certainty evidence) or depression (MD 2.80, 95% CI -0.09 to 5.69; 1 trial, 19 participants; change scores; Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D; scored from 0 to 52); very low-certainty evidence) in analyses comparing IR methylphenidate with placebo. IR methylphenidate versus lithium Compared with lithium, it is uncertain whether IR methylphenidate increases or decreases symptoms of ADHD (MD 0.60, 95% CI -3.11 to 4.31; 1 trial, 46 participants; end scores; Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (scored from 0 to 198); very low-certainty evidence); anxiety (MD -0.80, 95% CI -4.49 to 2.89; 1 trial, 46 participants; end scores; HAM-A; very low-certainty evidence); or depression (MD -1.20, 95% CI -3.81 to 1.41, 1 trial, 46 participants; end scores; HAM-D scale; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed participant-rated changes in symptoms of ADHD, or clinical impression of severity or improvement in participants treated with IR methylphenidate compared with lithium. Adverse events were poorly assessed and reported. We rated all trials at high risk of bias due to selective outcome reporting of harms and masking of outcome assessors (failure to blind outcome assessor to measure adverse events). Overall, four trials with 203 participants who received IR methylphenidate and 141 participants who received placebo described the occurrence of harms. The use of IR methylphenidate in these trials increased the risk of gastrointestinal complications (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.95) and loss of appetite (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.96). Cardiovascular adverse events were reported inconsistently, preventing a comprehensive analysis. One trial comparing IR methylphenidate to lithium reported five and nine adverse events, respectively. We considered four trials to have notable concerns of vested interests influencing the evidence, and authors from two trials omitted information related to the sources of funding and conflicts of interest.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no certain evidence that IR methylphenidate compared with placebo or lithium can reduce symptoms of ADHD in adults (low- and very low-certainty evidence). Adults treated with IR methylphenidate are at increased risk of gastrointestinal and metabolic-related harms compared with placebo. Clinicians should consider whether it is appropriate to prescribe IR methylphenidate, given its limited efficacy and increased risk of harms. Future RCTs should explore the long-term efficacy and risks of IR methylphenidate, and the influence of conflicts of interest on reported effects.

Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy With and Without Medication for Adults With ADHD: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective: Recent trials have demonstrated efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in medicated adults with ADHD. Efficacy of CBT in unmedicated versus medicated adults remains mostly unknown. We evaluated the effects of group CBT alone versus combined with medication on ADHD symptoms and functional outcomes in adult patients. Method: Eighty-eight adults with ADHD received 12 manualized group CBT sessions, accompanied by individual coaching, either without (n = 46) or with (n = 42) medication. Treatment effects were evaluated following treatment and 3-month and 6-month follow-up using un-blinded self-report and observer ratings. Results: CBT + medication resulted in greater improvements than CBT alone in ADHD symptoms, organizational skills, and self-esteem. Group differences diminished over follow-up, as the CBT alone group continued improving, while the combined group maintained the gains. Conclusion: CBT + medication outperformed CBT alone for ADHD symptoms, organizational skills, and self-esteem, although its superiority tended to decrease over follow-up.

ADHD with Comorbid Bipolar Disorders: A Systematic Review of Neurobiological, Clinical and Pharmacological Aspects Across the Lifespan

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity (ADHD) disorder is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by inattention, hyperactivity, disruptive behaviour, and impulsivity. Despite considered typical of children for a long time, the persistence of ADHD symptoms in adulthood gained increasing interest during the last decades. Indeed, its diagnosis, albeit controversial, is rarely carried out even because ADHD is often comorbid with several other psychiatric diosrders, in particular with bipolar disorders (BDs), a condition that complicates the clinical picture, assessment and treatment.

AIMS

The aim of this paper was to systematically review the scientific literature on the neurobiological, clinical features and current pharmacological management of ADHD comorbid with BDs across the entire lifespan, with a major focus on the adulthood.

DISCUSSION

The pharmacology of ADHD-BD in adults is still empirical and influenced by the individual experience of the clinicians. Stimulants are endowed of a prompt efficacy and safety, whilst non-stimulants are useful when a substance abuse history is detected, although they require some weeks in order to be fully effective. In any case, an in-depth diagnostic and clinical evaluation of the single individual is mandatory.

CONCLUSION

The comorbidity of ADHD with BD is still a controversial matter, as it is the notion of adult ADHD as a distinct nosological category. Indeed, some findings highlighted the presence of common neurobiological mechanisms and overlapping clinical features, although disagreement does exist. In any case, while expecting to disentangle this crucial question, a correct management of this comorbidity is essential, which requires the co-administration of mood stabilizers. Further controlled clinical studies in large samples of adult ADHD-BD patients appear extremely urgent in order to better define possible therapeutic guidelines, as well as alternative approaches for this potentially invalidating condition.

A Randomized Controlled Trial to Examine the Posttreatment Efficacy of Neurofeedback, Behavior Therapy, and Pharmacology on ADHD Measures

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficacy of neurofeedback (NF), behavior therapy (BT), and pharmacology (PH) on the improvement of ADHD-related symptoms.

METHOD

Fifty-nine children with ADHD ( M = 8.80 years, SD = 1.92 years) were randomly assigned to one of the three treatments in a pre/post assessment design. Mother- and teacher-rated ADHD scales and children were assessed using The Integrated Visual and Auditory Continuous Performance Test (IVA/CPT).

RESULTS

The three treatments were effective on the IVA/CPT, but with different trends. BT and especially NF achieved improvement on response control and attention, and PH mainly in visual attention. On the rating scales, BT improved all measures, and NF and PH had a minor but interesting influence.

CONCLUSION

From a global perspective, behavior therapy had the most extensive results, but PH had the greatest capacity to improve overall attention. NF was able to improve both control response and inattention. Clinical implications are discussed.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents, and adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefits and safety of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) remain controversial, and guidelines are inconsistent on which medications are preferred across different age groups. We aimed to estimate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of oral medications for ADHD in children, adolescents, and adults.

METHODS

We did a literature search for published and unpublished double-blind randomised controlled trials comparing amphetamines (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, bupropion, clonidine, guanfacine, methylphenidate, and modafinil with each other or placebo. We systematically contacted study authors and drug manufacturers for additional information. Primary outcomes were efficacy (change in severity of ADHD core symptoms based on teachers' and clinicians' ratings) and tolerability (proportion of patients who dropped out of studies because of side-effects) at timepoints closest to 12 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks. We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and confidence of estimates with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for network meta-analyses. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014008976.

FINDINGS

133 double-blind randomised controlled trials (81 in children and adolescents, 51 in adults, and one in both) were included. The analysis of efficacy closest to 12 weeks was based on 10 068 children and adolescents and 8131 adults; the analysis of tolerability was based on 11 018 children and adolescents and 5362 adults. The confidence of estimates varied from high or moderate (for some comparisons) to low or very low (for most indirect comparisons). For ADHD core symptoms rated by clinicians in children and adolescents closest to 12 weeks, all included drugs were superior to placebo (eg, SMD -1·02, 95% CI -1·19 to -0·85 for amphetamines, -0·78, -0·93 to -0·62 for methylphenidate, -0·56, -0·66 to -0·45 for atomoxetine). By contrast, for available comparisons based on teachers' ratings, only methylphenidate (SMD -0·82, 95% CI -1·16 to -0·48) and modafinil (-0·76, -1·15 to -0·37) were more efficacious than placebo. In adults (clinicians' ratings), amphetamines (SMD -0·79, 95% CI -0·99 to -0·58), methylphenidate (-0·49, -0·64 to -0·35), bupropion (-0·46, -0·85 to -0·07), and atomoxetine (-0·45, -0·58 to -0·32), but not modafinil (0·16, -0·28 to 0·59), were better than placebo. With respect to tolerability, amphetamines were inferior to placebo in both children and adolescents (odds ratio [OR] 2·30, 95% CI 1·36-3·89) and adults (3·26, 1·54-6·92); guanfacine was inferior to placebo in children and adolescents only (2·64, 1·20-5·81); and atomoxetine (2·33, 1·28-4·25), methylphenidate (2·39, 1·40-4·08), and modafinil (4·01, 1·42-11·33) were less well tolerated than placebo in adults only. In head-to-head comparisons, only differences in efficacy (clinicians' ratings) were found, favouring amphetamines over modafinil, atomoxetine, and methylphenidate in both children and adolescents (SMDs -0·46 to -0·24) and adults (-0·94 to -0·29). We did not find sufficient data for the 26-week and 52-week timepoints.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings represent the most comprehensive available evidence base to inform patients, families, clinicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the choice of ADHD medications across age groups. Taking into account both efficacy and safety, evidence from this meta-analysis supports methylphenidate in children and adolescents, and amphetamines in adults, as preferred first-choice medications for the short-term treatment of ADHD. New research should be funded urgently to assess long-term effects of these drugs.

FUNDING

Stichting Eunethydis (European Network for Hyperkinetic Disorders), and the UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

Efficacy, Acceptability, and Tolerability of Lisdexamfetamine, Mixed Amphetamine Salts, Methylphenidate, and Modafinil in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective: Psychostimulants are the first-line treatment in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine (LDX), mixed amphetamine salts (MASs), modafinil (MDF), and methylphenidate (MPH) in comparison with placebo. Data Sources: We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Clinicaltrials.gov in May 2016, along with CENTRAL and EU Clinical Trials Register in February 2016, for the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trials conducted on adults diagnosed with ADHD. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Substantial comorbidity, substance abuse or dependence, and nonpharmacological interventions represented grounds for exclusion. Published reports were the sole source for data extraction. Improvement in ADHD symptoms was the primary outcome. Random-effects model meta-analysis was applied to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. Data Synthesis: The search retrieved 701 records, of which 20 studies were eligible for analysis. High effect size (expressed as SMD) in reducing ADHD symptoms was observed for LDX (−0.89; 95% CI = −1.09, −0.70), whereas MASs (−0.64; 95% CI = −0.83, −0.45) and MPH (−0.50; 95% CI = −0.58, −0.41) reduced symptoms moderately compared with placebo. No efficacy was shown for MDF (0.08; 95% CI; −0.18, 0.34). Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: In this meta-analysis, the efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of psychostimulants were compared with that for placebo. Five of the included trials have not been evaluated in any of the previously published meta-analyses. Conclusions: The results suggest that LDX has the largest effect size and has a promising potential for treating adults with ADHD.

Amphetamines for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a childhood-onset disorder characterised by inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. ADHD can persist into adulthood and can affects individuals' social and occupational functioning, as well as their quality of life and health. ADHD is frequently associated with other mental disorders such as substance use disorders and anxiety and affective disorders. Amphetamines are used to treat adults with ADHD, but uncertainties about their efficacy and safety remain.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of amphetamines for adults with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

In August 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, 10 other databases, and two trials registers, and we ran citation searches for included studies. We also contacted the corresponding authors of all included studies, other experts in the field, and the pharmaceutical company, Shire, and we searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews for other published, unpublished, or ongoing studies. For each included study, we performed a citation search in Web of Science to identify any later studies that may have cited it.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of amphetamines (at any dose) for ADHD in adults aged 18 years and over against placebo or an active intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data from each included study. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) and the risk ratio (RR) to assess continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. We conducted a stratified analysis to determine the influence of moderating variables. We assessed trials for risk of bias and drew a funnel plot to investigate the possibility of publication bias. We rated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach, which yielded high, moderate, low, or very low quality ratings based on evaluation of within-trial risk of bias, directness of evidence, heterogeneity of data; precision of effect estimates, and risk of publication bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 studies that investigated three types of amphetamines: dexamphetamine (10.2 mg/d to 21.8 mg/d), lisdexamfetamine (30 mg/d to 70 mg/d), and mixed amphetamine salts (MAS; 12.5 mg/d to 80 mg/d). These studies enrolled 2521 participants; most were middle-aged (35.3 years), Caucasian males (57.2%), with a combined type of ADHD (78.8%). Eighteen studies were conducted in the USA, and one study was conducted in both Canada and the USA. Ten were multi-site studies. All studies were placebo-controlled, and three also included an active comparator: guanfacine, modafinil, or paroxetine. Most studies had short-term follow-up and a mean study length of 5.3 weeks.We found no studies that had low risk of bias in all domains of the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, mainly because amphetamines have powerful subjective effects that may reveal the assigned treatment, but also because we noted attrition bias, and because we could not rule out the possibility of a carry-over effect in studies that used a cross-over design.Sixteen studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry, one study was publicly funded, and two studies did not report their funding sources.Amphetamines versus placeboSeverity of ADHD symptoms: we found low- to very low-quality evidence suggesting that amphetamines reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by clinicians (SMD -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.04 to -0.75; 13 studies, 2028 participants) and patients (SMD -0.51, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.28; six studies, 120 participants).Retention: overall, we found low-quality evidence suggesting that amphetamines did not improve retention in treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.13; 17 studies, 2323 participants).Adverse events: we found that amphetamines were associated with an increased proportion of patients who withdrew because of adverse events (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.63 to 4.45; 17 studies, 2409 participants).Type of amphetamine: we found differences between amphetamines for the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by clinicians. Both lisdexamfetamine (SMD -1.06, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.85; seven studies, 896 participants; low-quality evidence) and MAS (SMD -0.80, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.66; five studies, 1083 participants; low-quality evidence) reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms. In contrast, we found no evidence to suggest that dexamphetamine reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.80 to 0.32; one study, 49 participants; very low-quality evidence). In addition, all amphetamines were efficacious in reducing the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by patients (dexamphetamine: SMD -0.77, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.40; two studies, 35 participants; low-quality evidence; lisdexamfetamine: SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.01; three studies, 67 participants; low-quality evidence; MAS: SMD -0.45, 95% CI -1.02 to 0.12; one study, 18 participants; very low-quality evidence).Dose at study completion: different doses of amphetamines did not appear to be associated with differences in efficacy.Type of drug-release formulation: we investigated immediate- and sustained-release formulations but found no differences between them for any outcome.Amphetamines versus other drugsWe found no evidence that amphetamines improved ADHD symptom severity compared to other drug interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Amphetamines improved the severity of ADHD symptoms, as assessed by clinicians or patients, in the short term but did not improve retention to treatment. Amphetamines were associated with higher attrition due to adverse events. The short duration of studies coupled with their restrictive inclusion criteria limits the external validity of these findings. Furthermore, none of the included studies had an overall low risk of bias. Overall, the evidence generated by this review is of low or very low quality.

Bupropion for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent neurobiological condition, characterised by behavioral and cognitive symptoms such as inattention, impulsivity and/or excessive activity. The syndrome is commonly accompanied by psychiatric comorbidities and is associated with educational and occupational underachievement.Although psychostimulant medications are the mainstay of treatment for ADHD, not all adults respond optimally to, or can tolerate, these medicines. Thus, alternative non-stimulant treatment approaches for ADHD have been explored. One of these alternatives is bupropion, an aminoketone antidepressant and non-competitive antagonism of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Bupropion is registered for the treatment of depression and smoking cessation, but is also used off-label to treat ADHD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and safety of bupropion for the treatment of adults with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and seven other databases in February 2017. We also searched three trials registers and three online theses portals. In addition, we checked references of included studies and contacted study authors to identify potentially relevant studies that were missed by our search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects (including adverse effects) of bupropion compared to placebo in adults with ADHD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (WV, GB) independently screened records and extracted data using a data extraction sheet that we tested in a pilot study. We extracted all relevant data on study characteristics and results. We assessed risks of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used a fixed-effect model to pool the results across studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies with a total of 438 participants. Five studies were conducted in the USA, and one in Iran. All studies evaluated a long-acting version of bupropion, with the dosage ranging from 150 mg up to 450 mg daily. Study intervention length varied from six to 10 weeks. Four studies explicitly excluded participants with psychiatric comorbidity and one study included only participants with opioid dependency. Four studies were funded by industry, but the impact of this on study results is unknown. Two studies were publicly funded and in one of these studies, the lead author was a consultant for several pharmaceutical companies and also received investigator-driven funding from two companies, however none of these companies manufacture bupropion. We judged none of the studies to be free of bias because for most risk of bias domains the study reports failed to provide sufficient details. Using the GRADE approach, we rated the overall quality of evidence as low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence because of serious risk of bias and serious imprecision due to small sample sizes.We found low-quality evidence that bupropion decreased the severity of ADHD symptoms (standardised mean difference -0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.86 to -0.15, 3 studies, 129 participants), and increased the proportion of participants achieving clinical improvement (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.99, 4 studies, 315 participants), and reporting an improvement on the Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scale (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.50, 5 studies, 337 participants). There was low-quality evidence that the proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse effect was similar in the bupropion and placebo groups (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.10, 3 studies, 253 participants). The results were very similar when using a random-effects model and when we analysed only studies that excluded participants with a psychiatric comorbidity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review, which compared bupropion to placebo for adult ADHD, indicate a possible benefit of bupropion. We found low-quality evidence that bupropion decreased the severity of ADHD symptoms and moderately increased the proportion of participants achieving a significant clinical improvement in ADHD symptoms. Furthermore, we found low-quality evidence that the tolerability of bupropion is similar to that of placebo. In the pharmacological treatment of adults with ADHD, extended- or sustained-release bupropion may be an alternative to stimulants. The low-quality evidence indicates uncertainty with respect to the pooled effect estimates. Further research is very likely to change these estimates. More research is needed to reach more definite conclusions as well as clarifying the optimal target population for this medicine. Treatment response remains to be reported in a DSM5-diagnosed population. There is also a lack of knowledge on long-term outcomes.

Adult ADHD and comorbid disorders: clinical implications of a dimensional approach

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the adult population is frequently associated with comorbid psychiatric diseases that complicate its recognition, diagnosis and management.The prevalence of ADHD in the general adult population is 2.5% and it is associated with substantial personal and individual burden. The most frequent comorbid psychopathologies include mood and anxiety disorders, substance use disorders, and personality disorders. There are strong familial links and neurobiological similarities between ADHD and the various associated psychiatric comorbidities. The overlapping symptoms between ADHD and comorbid psychopathologies represent challenges for diagnosis and treatment. Guidelines recommend that when ADHD coexists with other psychopathologies in adults, the most impairing condition should generally be treated first.Early recognition and treatment of ADHD and its comorbidities has the potential to change the trajectory of psychiatric morbidity later in life. The use of validated assessment scales and high-yield clinical questions can help identify adults with ADHD who could potentially benefit from evidence-based management strategies.

The risk of injury in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A nationwide, matched-cohort, population-based study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the risk of injuries associated with adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), even though several studies have suggested a higher risk of injury in children and adolescents with ADHD.

AIMS

To investigate the risk of injury in adults with ADHD.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

We included 665 adults with ADHD from January 1, to December 31, 2000, and 1995 sex-, age- and index day-matched controls without ADHD from the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) subset of the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. The Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyze the associations between the relevant demographics, and the psychiatric comorbidities and the risk of injury.

OUTCOMES AND RESULTS

The patients with ADHD had a 143% increased risk of overall injuries than the controls after considering all the confounding factors. In addition, the use of methylphenidate was associated with a 22.6% decrease in the risk of injuries in the patients with ADHD.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our findings strongly support that adults with ADHD are at an increased risk of injury, and imply that methylphenidate therapy may attenuate this risk.

The South African Society of Psychiatrists/Psychiatry Management Group management guidelines for adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Disclaimer

These guidelines do not aim to provide a comprehensive review of all the pertinent literature comprising the evidence base and, as such, should be utilised in conjunction with other guidelines as well as the responsibility of practitioners to maintain a high level of personal knowledge and expertise. Despite the known efficacy of treatment and the substantial costs of untreated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), access to healthcare and treatment is not a given for many patients in South Africa (SA). In SA, there is poor identification and treatment of common mental disorders at primary healthcare level and limited access to specialist resources with a service delivery and treatment gap of up to 75%. Medication options are also often limited in emerging markets and in SA psychiatrists, and patients do not have access to the medication armamentarium available in established markets. Furthermore, the majority of South Africans currently utilise the public healthcare sector and may not have access to treatment options referred to in these guidelines. These guidelines should therefore not be seen as a policy document.

The process

The South African Society of Psychiatrists' Special Interest Group (SIG) for adult ADHD was launched on 25 September 2015, with doctors Rykie Liebenberg and Renata Schoeman as convenor and co-convenor, respectively. The overall objective of the ADHD SIG is to improve the basket of care available to patients with ADHD. This is only possible through a combined and concerted effort of individuals with a special interest in and passion for ADHD to improve knowledge about and funding for the care of individuals with the disorder. One of the specific aims of the ADHD SIG was to develop South African guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of adult ADHD specifically and update guidelines for the treatment of child, adolescent and adult ADHD. Dr Schoeman has recently completed her MBA at the University of Stellenbosch Business School with a thesis entitled 'A funding model proposal for private health insurance for adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the South African context'. This is first South African study exploring the situation with regard to the prevalence and treatment of adult ADHD. Dr Schoeman was tasked by the SIG with the drafting of guidelines. Dr Liebenberg provided valuable input. The guidelines were then circulated to the SIG members, as well as the Chair of the Public Sector SIG, for written feedback and evidence-based suggestions which were then incorporated into the guidelines. The final guidelines were circulated for written approval by the SIG members, followed by formal approval at a SIG meeting held on 14 August 2016, after which it was submitted to the South African Society of Psychiatrists (SASOP) and Psychiatry Management Group (PsychMG) boards for recommendation and ratification.

The South African Society of Psychiatrists/Psychiatry Management Group management guidelines for adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

DISCLAIMER

These guidelines do not aim to provide a comprehensive review of all the pertinent literature comprising the evidence base and, as such, should be utilised in conjunction with other guidelines as well as the responsibility of practitioners to maintain a high level of personal knowledge and expertise. Despite the known efficacy of treatment and the substantial costs of untreated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), access to healthcare and treatment is not a given for many patients in South Africa (SA). In SA, there is poor identification and treatment of common mental disorders at primary healthcare level and limited access to specialist resources with a service delivery and treatment gap of up to 75%. Medication options are also often limited in emerging markets and in SA psychiatrists, and patients do not have access to the medication armamentarium available in established markets. Furthermore, the majority of South Africans currently utilise the public healthcare sector and may not have access to treatment options referred to in these guidelines. These guidelines should therefore not be seen as a policy document.

THE PROCESS

The South African Society of Psychiatrists' Special Interest Group (SIG) for adult ADHD was launched on 25 September 2015, with doctors Rykie Liebenberg and Renata Schoeman as convenor and co-convenor, respectively. The overall objective of the ADHD SIG is to improve the basket of care available to patients with ADHD. This is only possible through a combined and concerted effort of individuals with a special interest in and passion for ADHD to improve knowledge about and funding for the care of individuals with the disorder. One of the specific aims of the ADHD SIG was to develop South African guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of adult ADHD specifically and update guidelines for the treatment of child, adolescent and adult ADHD. Dr Schoeman has recently completed her MBA at the University of Stellenbosch Business School with a thesis entitled 'A funding model proposal for private health insurance for adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the South African context'. This is first South African study exploring the situation with regard to the prevalence and treatment of adult ADHD. Dr Schoeman was tasked by the SIG with the drafting of guidelines. Dr Liebenberg provided valuable input. The guidelines were then circulated to the SIG members, as well as the Chair of the Public Sector SIG, for written feedback and evidence-based suggestions which were then incorporated into the guidelines. The final guidelines were circulated for written approval by the SIG members, followed by formal approval at a SIG meeting held on 14 August 2016, after which it was submitted to the South African Society of Psychiatrists (SASOP) and Psychiatry Management Group (PsychMG) boards for recommendation and ratification.

Living with symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adulthood: a systematic review of qualitative evidence

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) relates to four dimensions of behavior: inattentiveness, restlessness, impulsiveness and hyperactivity. Symptoms affect multiple areas of daily life such as academic performance and social functioning. Despite the negative effects of ADHD, people diagnosed with ADHD do not necessarily regard themselves as being impaired. However, it is unclear how adults with ADHD experience and manage their symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and synthesize the best available evidence on how adults experience living with ADHD.

INCLUSION CRITERIA TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Adults with confirmed ADHD diagnosis.

PHENOMENA OF INTEREST

How adults with ADHD experience and manage the symptoms of ADHD and links between protective factors provided by relatives, friends, fellow students, mentors and colleagues.

TYPES OF STUDIES

Studies based on qualitative data, including, but not limited to, designs within phenomenology, grounded theory, content analysis or ethnography.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A three-step search strategy identified published and unpublished qualitative studies from 1990 to July 2015.

METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY

Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were independently assessed by two reviewers using the standardized critical appraisal instrument from the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-QARI).

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted from 10 included studies using the JBI-QARI.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Qualitative research findings were synthesized using the JBI-QARI.

RESULTS

A total of 103 findings from 10 studies were aggregated into 16 categories that were meta-synthesized into four synthesized findings: "Adults are aware of being different from others and strive to be an integrated, accepted part of the community;" "Adults with ADHD are creative and inventive;" "Adults with ADHD develop coping strategies in striving for a healthy balance in life" and "For adults with ADHD, accomplishing and organizing tasks in everyday life is a challenge but it can also be rewarding."

CONCLUSION

Adults with ADHD have problems stemming from ADHD symptoms in relation to interacting in social relationships, academic functioning and being part of the community at the workplace and performing work tasks; they work harder to perform tasks and strive to be accepted and to be equal members of the community.Protective factors that support their ability to manage daily life with ADHD are personal strategies such as reminders and performing tasks within a given structure. Others close to them can assist by coaching, reminding them of appointments and so on. Superiors can assist by structuring the work tasks and setting up clear rules and limits for the tasks. Medication has proven to be very useful as it leads to less hyperactivity and enhances ability to stay focused and be more organized. Finally, insight into ADHD has a positive impact on the ability to manage the consequences of ADHD.Health professionals should, when advising adults with ADHD, fundamentally see them as persons who have a problem and not as problem persons, emphasize strategies adults themselves can apply such as structuring everyday tasks and informing them about positive effects and possible side effects of medication. Policy-makers could launch campaigns targeted at employers with information about the competencies adults with ADHD possess and how employers can benefit from these by structuring work tasks. When promoting employees with ADHD, it should be to positions with more advanced hands-on functions and not positions with administrative duties.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents and adults: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a major public health issue. Pharmacological treatments play an important role in the multimodal treatment of ADHD. Currently, there is a lack of up-to-date and comprehensive evidence on how available ADHD drugs compare and rank in terms of efficacy and tolerability, in children or adolescents as well as in adults. We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA), integrating direct and indirect comparisons from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), to rank pharmacological treatments for ADHD according to their efficacy and tolerability profiles.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search a broad range of electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science, with no date or language restrictions. We will also search for unpublished studies using international clinical trial registries and contacting relevant drug companies. We will identify and include available parallel-group, cross-over and cluster randomised trials that compare methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, amphetamine derivatives (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, clonidine, guanfacine, bupropion or modafinil (as oral therapy) either with each other or to placebo, in children, adolescents or adults with ADHD. Primary outcomes will be efficacy (indicated by reduction in severity of ADHD core symptoms measured on a standardised scale) and tolerability (the proportion of patients who left a study early due to side effects). Secondary outcomes will be global functioning, acceptability (proportion of patients who left the study early by any cause) and changes in blood pressure and body weight. NMA will be conducted in STATA within a frequentist framework. The quality of RCTs will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical issues are foreseen. Results from this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and possibly presented at relevant national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42014008976.

Comparative efficacy and safety of methylphenidate and atomoxetine for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: Meta-analysis based on head-to-head trials

INTRODUCTION

Comparative efficacy and safety are important issues for appropriate drug selection for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment. Therefore we conducted a meta-analysis, where we compared atomoxetine (ATX) and methylphenidate (MPH) for ADHD treatment in children and adolescents.

METHOD

Literature retrieval was conducted in relevant databases from their inception to April 2016 to select head-to-head trials that compared ATX and MPH in children and adolescents. Outcomes like response rate, ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) score, and adverse events were compared between ATX and MPH treatments. The standardized mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the effect size for continuous data or dichotomous data, respectively.

RESULTS

Eleven eligible randomized-controlled trials were included, and two of them were double-blind, while the remaining were open-label. Compared to ATX, MPH showed a higher response rate (RR = 1.14, 95% CI [1. 09, 1.20]), decreased inattention (SMD = -0.13, 95% CI [-0.25, -0.01]) and lower risk of adverse events (drowsiness: RR = 0.17, 95% CI [0.11, 0.26; nausea: RR = 0.49; 95% CI [0.29, 0.85; vomiting: RR = 0.41, 95% CI [0.27, 0.63]). However, MPH presented a higher risk of insomnia than ATX (RR = 2.27, 95% CI [1.63, 3.15], p < .01).

CONCLUSION

Results of the meta-analysis add additional evidence of the effectiveness of both ATX and MPH and suggest that MPH should be a first treatment option in most patients with ADHD.

The Efficacy of Computerized Cognitive Training in Adults With ADHD: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

This is a randomized control trial examining the efficiency of computerized cognitive training (CCT) for adults with ADHD, comparing two training conditions with graded levels of executive cognitive demands.

METHOD

Adults with ADHD (n = 60) were randomized into study (n = 34) and control (n = 26) groups. Training was conducted with the computerized AttenFocus program. Control group received a simple, non-hierarchical version with less executive demands.

RESULTS

Significant positive changes in symptoms ratings, ecological measures of executive functions, and occupational performance were found in both groups. No significant changes were found in variables of neurocognitive performance battery and quality of life. No significant time by group interaction effects were found.

CONCLUSION

No benefits of the intervention were found relative to the control. Lack of interaction effects may be due to insufficient power, non-specific cognitive training or placebo effects. Results demonstrate some positive findings for general CCT, yet do not support the inclusion of specific higher level executive training.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder medication use: factors involved in prescribing, safety aspects and outcomes

While treatment of patients with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is based on a multimodal approach that combines medication with specific psychological interventions, pharmacotherapy alone is generally considered an essential and cost-effective element. This paper aims to comprehensively and critically review factors involved in prescribing and medication use in individuals diagnosed with ADHD, focusing on the difficulties facing patients with ADHD seeking treatment, as well as the safety and tolerability aspects of ADHD pharmacotherapies, with particular attention on the cardiovascular adverse events and the potential risk of misuse or diversion of ADHD medications. A comprehensive and systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE database was conducted to identify studies published in peer-reviewed journals until 1 August 2016. Children, adolescents and adults often encounter significant difficulties in the process of accessing specialist assessment and treatment for ADHD as a consequence of disparities in service organization and available treatment provision. Despite the well-established efficacy and overall safety profile, ADHD medications are not exempt from adverse events. The cardiovascular safety of pharmacotherapies used for treating individuals with ADHD has raised particular concerns; however there is little evidence of serious cardiovascular adverse events, including no serious corrected QT (QTc) abnormalities associated with stimulants, atomoxetine or α2-adrenergic receptor agonists. Although the abuse of prescription stimulant drugs, particularly, short-acting stimulants is a prevalent and growing problem, nonmedical use of prescription stimulants within the clinical context is very limited. In addition, nonstimulant ADHD medications lack any reinforcing effects and consequently any abuse potential.

Efficacy of atomoxetine in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in patients with common comorbidities in children, adolescents and adults: a review

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed mental health disorders and is associated with higher incidence of comorbid oppositional or conduct, mood, anxiety, pervasive developmental, and substance-use disorders. Comorbid mental health conditions may alter the presence of symptoms and treatment of ADHD. Atomoxetine (ATX), a nonstimulant medication for the treatment of ADHD, may be prescribed for individuals with ADHD and comorbid conditions despite some risk for certain undesirable side effects and lower effectiveness for the treatment of ADHD than stimulants. In this paper, we review studies utilizing randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) as well as within-subject designs to determine the effectiveness of ATX in the treatment of children and adults with ADHD and comorbid conditions. The current review uses an expanded methodology beyond systematic review of randomized controlled trials in order to improve generalizability of results to real-world practice. A total of 24 articles published from 2007 to 2015 were reviewed, including 14 RCTs: n = 1348 ATX, and n = 832 placebo. The majority of studies show that ATX is effective in the treatment of ADHD symptoms for individuals with ADHD and comorbid disorders. Cohen's d effect sizes (ES) for improvement in ADHD symptoms and behaviors range from 0.47 to 2.21. The effectiveness of ATX to improve symptoms specific to comorbidity varied by type but appeared to be most effective for diminishing the presence of symptoms for those with comorbid anxiety, ES range of 0.40 to 1.51, and oppositional defiant disorder, ES range of 0.52 to 1.10. There are mixed or limited results for individuals with ADHD and comorbid substance-use disorders, autism spectrum disorders, dyslexia or reading disorder, depression, bipolar disorder, and Tourette syndrome. Results from this review suggest that ATX is effective in the treatment of some youth and adults with ADHD and comorbid disorders, and may be a treatment option in these patients.

Personality Disorder in Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Attrition and Change During Long-term Treatment

Personality disorders (PDs) are commonly found in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and are associated with increased ADHD symptoms and psychosocial impairment. To assess the impact of PDs or personality traits on retention rates in ADHD trials and whether treating ADHD affects the expression of PD, data were analyzed from 2 methylphenidate trials. Assessment of PDs and personality traits included using the Wisconsin Personality Disorders Inventory IV and the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition Personality Disorders. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms were evaluated using the Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale. Major findings were that subjects with cluster A, cluster B, passive-aggressive, or more than 1 PD showed more attrition. Subjects dropping out also had more schizoid and narcissistic traits. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms (p < 0.001) and all personality traits (range, p = 0.03 to p = 0.001) improved, but there was almost no correlation between changes on these 2 measures. Conversely, of 11 Wisconsin Personality Disorders Inventory IV items that improved most, 8 resembled ADHD or oppositional defiant disorder symptoms.

Efficacy, safety and variability in pharmacotherapy for adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analysis and meta-regression in over 9000 patients

RATIONALE

The factors underlying the variability in the results of randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials (RPCCT) assessing pharmacological interventions for adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are not fully understood.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of RPCCT comparing pharmacological treatment and placebo in adults with ADHD was carried out. The study outcomes were all-cause treatment discontinuation, efficacy on ADHD symptoms, and safety. Patient-, intervention-, and study design-related covariates were collected. Meta-regression methods were applied.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies involving 9952 patients were included. All-cause treatment discontinuation was slightly higher with pharmacological treatment than with placebo (odds ratio (OR) = 1.18; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.02, 1.36; p = 0.003). A better outcome on all-cause treatment discontinuation was observed in studies that provided concomitant psychotherapy when compared to those that did not (rate of OR (ROR) = 0.68, p = 0.048). Pharmacological treatment was efficacious for reducing ADHD symptoms (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.45; 95 % CI 0.37, 0.52; p < 0.00001), with stronger intervention effects found in studies investigating stimulant drugs (difference of SMD (Diff SMD) = 0.18, p = 0.017), in shorter studies (Diff SMD = -0.01, p = 0.044), and when clinician-rated scales were used (Diff SMD = 0.44, p < 0.0001). Pharmacological treatment was associated with more frequent adverse events (AEs) (OR = 2.29; 95 % CI 1.97, 2.66; p = 0.006). Studies with a lead-in phase and with a higher proportion of patients previously treated with stimulants were associated with a better safety outcome (ROR = 0.59, p = 0.017; ROR = 0.98, p = 0.036, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacological treatment provides mild symptom improvement but is associated with frequent AEs and higher treatment discontinuation than placebo, particularly when no concomitant psychotherapy is administered. Stimulants appear more efficacious than non-stimulant drugs and the former should be preferred over the latter. The efficacy of pharmacological treatment should be monitored over time because it may decrease progressively.

Dasotraline for the Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Proof-of-Concept Trial in Adults

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity associated with clinically significant impairment in functioning. ADHD has an early onset, but frequently persists, with a prevalence estimate of 4% in adults. Dasotraline is a novel compound that is a potent inhibitor of dopamine and norepinephrine transporters that achieves stable plasma concentrations with once-daily dosing. In this study, adult outpatients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for ADHD were randomized to 4 weeks of double-blind, once-daily treatment with dasotraline 4 and 8 mg/day or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline at week 4 in the ADHD Rating Scale, Version IV (ADHD RS-IV) total score. Secondary efficacy end points included the Clinical Global Impression, Severity (CGI-S) scale, modified for ADHD symptoms. Least squares (LS) mean improvements at week 4 in ADHD RS-IV total score were significantly greater for dasotraline 8 mg/day vs placebo (-13.9 vs -9.7; P=0.019), and nonsignificantly greater for 4 mg/day (-12.4; P=0.076). The LS mean improvements in modified CGI-S were significantly greater at week 4 for dasotraline 8 mg/day vs placebo (-1.1 vs -0.7; P=0.013), and for 4 mg/day vs placebo (-1.1 vs -0.7; P=0.021). The most frequent adverse events reported were insomnia, decreased appetite, nausea, and dry mouth. Discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 10.3% and 27.8% of patients in 4 and 8 mg/day treatment groups, respectively. This study provides preliminary evidence that once-daily dosing with dasotraline, a long-acting, dual monoamine reuptake inhibitor, may be a safe and efficacious treatment for adult ADHD.

Use of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Token Economy to Alleviate Dysfunctional Behavior in Children with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Medication has proved highly efficacious as a means of alleviating general symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, many patients remain functionally impaired by inappropriate behavior. The present study analyzed the use of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) with the Token-Economy (TE) technique to alleviate problem behavior for 25 participants with ADHD, all children (19 boys, mean age 10.11) on long-term methylphenidate medication, who were given 20 CBT sessions with 10 weeks of TE introduced as of session 5. Their ten most acute problem behaviors were selected and written records kept. On weekdays, parents recorded each inappropriate behavior and provided a suitable model for their actions. At weekly sessions, problem behaviors were counted and incident-free participants rewarded with a token. To analyze improvement (less frequent problem behavior), a list of 11 behavioral categories was rated: inattention, impulsivity, hyperactivity, disorganization, disobeying rules and routines, poor self-care, verbal/physical aggression, low frustration tolerance, compulsive behavior, antisocial behavior, lacking in initiative and distraction. Two CBT specialists categorized behaviors and an ADHD specialist ruled on discrepancies. Statistical analyses used were Generalized Estimating Equations with Poisson distribution and autoregressive order correlation structure. In the course of the sessions, problematic behaviors decreased significantly in seven categories: impulsiveness, hyperactivity, disorganization, disobeying rules and routine, poor self-care, low frustration tolerance, compulsive behaviors, and antisocial behaviors. Caregiver attitudes to children's inappropriate behavior were discussed and reshaped. As functional improvement was observed on applying TE for 10 weeks, this type of intervention may be useful as an auxiliary strategy combined with medication.

Pharmacological treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder with co-morbid drug dependence

BACKGROUND

Drug dependence is frequent in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Nevertheless, the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments in this population are unclear.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. Randomised placebo-controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy of pharmacological treatment in patients with co-occurring ADHD and substance use disorder (SUD) were included. ADHD symptom severity, drug abstinence and all-cause treatment discontinuation were the primary study endpoints. The effects of patient-, intervention- and study-related covariates over the primary outcomes were investigated by means of meta-regression.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included, enrolling a total of 1,271 patients. A small to moderate reduction of ADHD symptoms was found. Meta-regression analysis identified the presence of a lead-in period as a covariate associated with reduced efficacy. Conversely, no beneficial effect was observed either on drug abstinence or treatment discontinuation. The efficacy on ADHD symptoms was smaller in studies with a lead-in period. A positive correlation between the efficacy for ADHD and that for SUD was found.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of pharmacological interventions for co-occurring ADHD and SUD has been little investigated. Mixed results were obtained: while pharmacological interventions improved ADHD symptoms, no beneficial effect on drug abstinence or on treatment discontinuation was noted. The strength of the recommendation of pharmacological treatment for co-occurring ADHD and SUD is therefore modest. The study was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO): CRD 4212003414.

Profile of guanfacine extended release and its potential in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

The α2-adrenergic receptor agonist guanfacine, in its extended-release formulation (GXR), is the most recent nonstimulant medication approved in several countries for the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as monotherapy and as adjunctive pharmacotherapy to stimulants in children and adolescents. The present paper aims to review comprehensively and critically the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic characteristics and the published evidence on the efficacy and safety profile of GXR in the treatment of ADHD. A comprehensive search of relevant databases (PubMed, Embase, and PsycInfo) was conducted to identify studies published in peer-reviewed journals until January 15, 2015. Though the precise mechanism of action of guanfacine in the treatment of ADHD is not fully understood, it is thought to act directly by enhancing noradrenaline functioning via α2A-adrenoceptors in the prefrontal cortex. Weight-adjusted doses should be used, with a dosing regime on a milligram per kilogram basis, starting at doses in the range 0.05-0.08 mg/kg/day, up to 0.12 mg/kg/day. As evidenced in short-term randomized controlled trials and in long-term open-label extension studies, GXR has been shown to be effective as monotherapy in the treatment of ADHD. Furthermore, GXR has also been found to be effective as adjunctive therapy to stimulant medications in patients with suboptimal responses to stimulants. Many of the adverse reactions associated with GXR, particularly sedation-related effects, were dose-related, transient, mild to moderate in severity, and did not interfere with attention or overall efficacy. There are no reports of serious cardiovascular adverse events associated with GXR alone or in combination with psychostimulants.

Immediate-release methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

BACKGROUND

Symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), diagnosed mainly in children, often persist into adulthood. Adults in this group have a high rate of other psychiatric problems and functional difficulties in a number of key areas such as academic achievement, interpersonal relationships, and employment. Although the usefulness of immediate-release methylphenidate in children has been extensively studied, studies in adults, which are few, demonstrate varying results.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of immediate-release methylphenidate versus placebo in the treatment of adults with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases in November 2013: CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), and two trials registers. Biosis was searched in December 2013. We inspected references of all relevant papers to identify more studies and contacted authors of recently published trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized trials comparing immediate-release methylphenidate versus placebo in participants aged 18 years or older with ADHD. We excluded trials conducted on subpopulations of adults with ADHD such as adults with both ADHD and substance dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed trial risk of bias. We contacted authors of trials to ask for additional and missing data. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs.

MAIN RESULTS

Results from the 11 randomized controlled trials (474 participants, counting participants from cross-over studies as a single arm, and counting both arms from parallel studies) included in the review demonstrated improvement in core clinical ADHD symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsivity, and inattentiveness, and overall improvement. We were able to pool results from 10 studies, which included 466 participants.Most included studies were judged to have unclear risk of bias for most categories. However, as all studies were randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled and, in general, did not contain factors that significantly decreased the quality of the body of evidence, the quality of evidence was assessed as "high" for most outcomes according to the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. For one outcome-inattentiveness-most information came from studies at unclear risk of bias, and so the quality of evidence for this outcome was judged as "moderate."Results are given as SMD for each of the core clinical symptoms of ADHD. In all cases, participant numbers were calculated by counting participants in a single arm from cross-over studies and in both arms from parallel studies. The SMD for the outcome of hyperactivity was -0.60 (95% CI -1.11 to -0.09, 6 studies, number of participants (n) = 245, high-quality evidence) in favor of immediate-release methylphenidate; the SMD for impulsivity was -0.62 (95% CI -1.08 to -0.17, 5 studies, n = 207, high-quality evidence) in favor of immediate-release methylphenidate; and the SMD for inattentiveness was -0.66 (95% CI -1.02 to -0.30, 7 studies, n = 391, moderate-quality evidence) in favor of immediate-release methylphenidate. Moderate to extreme statistical heterogeneity was detected for all outcomes. Subgroup analysis comparing high versus low doses did not indicate that higher doses of immediate-release methylphenidate were associated with greater efficacy.For overall change, the SMD was -0.72 (95% CI -1.12 to -0.32, 9 studies, n = 455, high-quality evidence) in favor of immediate-release methylphenidate.The effects of immediate-release methylphenidate on anxiety and depression as parameters of general changes in mental state were equivocal. Some trials reported reduction in depression and anxiety, others detailed no change, and still others described an increase in depressive and anxious symptoms.The most common adverse effect was loss of appetite, in some cases with weight loss. Although no study reported either of these effects as problematic or severe, the included studies were of short duration; thus clinical significance could not be properly assessed. Five studies reported changes in systolic or diastolic blood pressure, and three reported increases in heart rate. None of these results were judged to present cause for concern. No study reported clinically significant adverse effects-cardiovascular or other. Three studies did not mention adverse effects. We were unable to determine whether adverse effects were not discussed by study authors because none occurred, or because no data on adverse effects were collected.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data from randomized controlled trials suggest that immediate-release methylphenidate is efficacious for treating adults with ADHD with symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsivity, and inattentiveness, and for improving their overall clinical condition. Trial data suggest that adverse effects from immediate-release methylphenidate for adults with ADHD are not of serious clinical significance, although this conclusion may be limited, certainly in the case of weight loss, by the short duration of published studies.

Nonpharmacological treatments for ADHD: a meta-analytic review

OBJECTIVE

The authors replicated and expanded on Fabiano et al.'s meta-analysis of behavioral treatments for ADHD, systematically comparing the efficacy of 7 nonpharmacological interventions.

METHOD

A total of 14 controlled treatment studies conducted post-1994-evaluating behavior modification, neurofeedback therapy, multimodal psychosocial treatment, school-based programs, working memory training, parent training, and self-monitoring-were identified, primarily by searching electronic English-language databases. The results were meta-analyzed: mean-weighted effect sizes for the treatment outcomes of 625 participants (382 treatment, 243 controls) were calculated, and moderator analyses examined contributions of gender, ADHD subtype, and treatment "dosage" to outcome.

RESULTS

Behavior modification and neurofeedback treatments were most supported by this evidence. Interventions were generally more efficacious for girls, and least efficacious for the "combined" ADHD subtype. The authors found no dose or age effects.

CONCLUSION

Based on the small, published literature, this study supports some nonpharmacological interventions for ADHD, and indicates directions for more evaluation research into psychological treatments.

Factors associated with a positive occupational outcome during long-term central stimulant treatment in adult ADHD

There is a lack of long-term studies of central stimulant (CS) treatment in adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and studies on functional outcomes like occupational status are rare. The current study investigated occupational status in adult ADHD patients before and after long-term CS treatment (median duration of treatment 33 months) and aimed to identify variables associated with improvement in occupational status. The collection of data was based on a naturalistic, retrospective approach using the medical records of a sample of all 117 adult ADHD patients consecutively starting treatment with CS in a specific catchment area in Norway in the period 1997 to May 2005. Most patients did not improve in occupational status during long-term CS treatment. The improved group had significantly higher baseline ADHD symptoms as measured by the general adult ADD symptom checklist (83.7 vs. 76.2, p=0.024) and had a significantly shorter period from the first contact with adult psychiatry until they got the ADHD diagnosis (11.7 vs. 50.9 months, p=0.001). The results indicate that long-term CS treatment itself may have limited effect on occupational status in functionally impaired and highly comorbid patients with adult ADHD. A high baseline ADHD symptom level may be related to a superior outcome in occupational status.

Developments and challenges in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent neurodevelopmental disorder, often associated with other psychiatric comorbidities, functional impairments, and poor long-term outcomes. The objective of this selected review is to describe current advances and challenges in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD. The disorder is associated with neurobiological underpinnings and is highly heterogeneous in various aspects, such as symptom profiles, cognitive impairments, and neurobiological and genetic features. The efficacy and safety of short-term pharmacological treatments across the life cycle is well studied, but further research investigating long-term treatment, impact of treatment in preschoolers, and non-pharmacological interventions is needed. Future research is also needed to better characterize the neurodevelopmental pathways of the disorder, linking clinical and neurobiological information, less investigated populations, and new interventions.

Long-term (1 year) safety and efficacy of methylphenidate modified-release long-acting formulation (MPH-LA) in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a 26-week, flexible-dose, open-label extension to a 40-week, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled core study

INTRODUCTION

Previously, in a 40-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled core study comprising three phases (9-week dose confirmation, 5-week open-label dose optimisation and 6-month maintenance of effect) in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), methylphenidate modified-release long-acting formulation (MPH-LA) at 40-80 mg/day controlled ADHD symptoms as well as decreased functional impairment with a good tolerability profile (NCT01259492). Here, we report the long-term efficacy and safety from a 26-week, open-label extension phase of the same study (NCT01338818).

METHODS

Patients in the extension study (n = 298) initiated treatment with MPH-LA (20 mg/day), up-titrated in increments of 20 mg/week to reach individual patient's daily optimal dose of 40-80 mg. Adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported at the end of extension study for events monitored from (1) maintenance of effect phase baseline (core study; 12 months) and (2) extension study baseline (6 months). Mean changes in DSM-IV ADHD Rating Scale (DSM-IV ADHD RS) and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total scores are reported for both the timelines. Efficacy was also evaluated using clinician-rated instruments, namely Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale (CGI-I) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S).

RESULTS

No unexpected AEs were reported in the extension study. Incidence of SAEs reported during 6 months and 12 months were similar (0.7 %), and no deaths were reported. No SAEs were considered attributable to the drug at the end of 12 months. There were no reports of patients with QT, QTcB or QTcF >500 ms. The mean improvement in DSM-IV ADHD RS and SDS total scores at the end of 12 months were 0.9 and 1.4 points, respectively; and at the end of 6 months were 7.2 and 4.8, respectively. The proportion of patients with improvement in CGI-S scale was 31.4 % and 52.1 % at the end of 12 and 6 months, respectively. Overall, 69.4 % of patients showed clinical improvement in CGI-I scale at the end of 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In adult patients with ADHD, use of MPH-LA up to 1 year continued to be well tolerated while maintaining the clinical efficacy.

Psychopharmacology and psychotherapy for the treatment of adults with ADHD-a systematic review of available meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE/INTRODUCTION: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adult life is a prevalent condition. We systematically reviewed the literature available by searching for meta-analyses assessing pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for adults with ADHD.

METHODS

Using wide-ranging search terms, we retrieved 191 titles from the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Two independent evaluators judged all abstracts. Only meta-analyses about the treatment of adults with ADHD were included. Information from meta-analyses found was systematically extracted by 3 independent evaluators.

RESULTS

Eight meta-analyses were identified. Results from those meta-analyses suggest that stimulants are effective in decreasing ADHD symptoms on a short-term basis with a medium to large effect size (ES). Short-acting stimulants might be superior to long-acting stimulants, but no data on difference in adherence are available for the comparison of these two types of formulation. Bupropion is superior to placebo but less effective than stimulants. No conclusions about the impact of psychosocial interventions can be drawn based on meta-analyses so far. Discussion The efficacy of stimulants in reducing ADHD symptoms for adults is well documented in meta-analyses, but there is a concerning lack of meta-analysis about other treatment interventions.

CONCLUSION

The available meta-analytic literature does not cover questions of essential clinical relevance for adults with ADHD.