Symptomatic response to divalproex in subtypes of conduct disorder

Brain Anatomy in Boys with Conduct Disorder: Differences Among Aggression Subtypes

Aggression is a core feature of conduct disorder (CD), but the motivation, execution of aggression may vary. A deeper understanding of the neural substrates of aggressive behaviours is critical for effective clinical intervention. Seventy-six Boys with CD (50 with impulsive aggression (I-CD) and 26 with premeditated aggression (P-CD)) and 69 healthy controls (HCs) underwent a structural MRI scan and behavioural assessments. Whole-brain analyses revealed that, compared to HCs, the I-CD group showed significant cortical thinning in the right frontal cortex, while the P-CD group demonstrated significant folding deficits in the bilateral superior parietal cortex. Both types of aggression negatively correlated with the left amygdala volume, albeit in different ways. The present results demonstrated that the complex nature of aggression relies on differentiated anatomical substrates, highlighting the importance of exploring differential circuit-targeted interventions for CD patients.

Current pharmacotherapy options for conduct disorders in adolescents and children

INTRODUCTION

Conduct disorder (CD) is a common mental health disorder of childhood and adolescence. CD's complexity, with its heterogenous clinical manifestations and overlapping comorbidities makes the application of evidence-based management approaches challenging. This article aims to combine a systematic review of the available literature, with a consensus opinion from both child and adolescent psychiatrists and developmental pediatricians on the clinical and pharmacological management of children and adolescents with conduct disorder (CD).

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the CD population and provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapies using preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) and strength of evidence recommendation taxonomy (SORT) guidelines. The authors then provide an expert clinical opinion for the use of different pharmacotherapies to address aggressive and disruptive behavior in children.

EXPERT OPINION

Atypical antipsychotics (e.g. risperidone) demonstrate evidence for efficacy in CD. Other pharmacotherapies (e.g. mood stabilizers, anticonvulsants, psychostimulants and selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors) have a low level of evidence for CD alone, however, can sometimes be effective in managing the symptoms of CD when other psychiatric disorders are also present.

Pharmacotherapy of conduct disorder: Challenges, options and future directions

There is a critical need for evaluation of the pharmacotherapies used in conduct disorder (CD), due to the high incidence of off-label prescribing. The aim of this review was to identify concerns associated with the safety, efficacy and impact on quality of life (QOL) that pharmacotherapy has in children and adolescents with CD. A systematic review was undertaken using pre-defined search criteria and four databases, including reference searches. We assessed these studies using the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, and Review Manager Risk of Bias (RevMan®) tools. There were 12 randomised controlled trials that met our inclusion criteria.

STUDIES INCLUDED

antipsychotics, atomoxetine, lithium, clonidine, divalproex sodium and psychostimulants. The antipsychotics demonstrated efficacy, but were associated with adverse effects. Other agents demonstrated mixed responses, highlighting the lack of clinical significance and increased incidence of adverse effects. The management of related adverse effects was addressed to assist with clinical gaps. Overall, there is limited evidence regarding the role of pharmacotherapy in CD. More research is needed that takes into account the heterogeneity of CD and analysis of pharmacotherapy in pure CD.

Randomized controlled trials of psychopharmacological interventions of children and adolescents with conduct disorder: a descriptive analysis

This study reviews and assesses published psychopharmaceutical randomized controlled trials targeting youths with the singular diagnosis of conduct disorder. Computerized database searches were completed to identify all randomized controlled trials. Fifteen studies were located and reviewed. Of the 15 studies, none were longer than 10 weeks in length, and none had more than 100 participants. The majority were conducted in inpatient hospital settings, with all-male participants. Methodological quality reporting of trials was poor and inconsistent. Findings indicate that there is a need to plan and implement future, lengthy conduct disorder medication trials that follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. The relevance for social work practice and policy is discussed.

Response to treatments in youth with disruptive behavior disorders

OBJECTIVE

Predictors of poor response to treatments in youths with disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs), including conduct disorder (CD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), are under-studied. Multimodal psychosocial interventions are the best option, but a significant portion of patients needs adjunctive pharmacotherapy. The concept of "psychopathy", and namely, the callous (lack of empathy and guilt) and unemotional (shallow emotions) trait, has been considered a possible specifier indicating a more severe subgroup of patients. We explored whether the callous-unemotional trait (CU) may affect the response to multimodal treatment in referred youths with DBDs.

METHOD

118 youths (102 males, age range 6-14years, mean age 11.1±2.5years) completed a 12-month multimodal intervention, 48 of whom (41%) needed an associated pharmacotherapy. The patients were assessed according to psychopathological profile (Child Behavior Checklist, CBCL), severity and improvement (Clinical Global Impression-Severity and Improvement scores, CGI-S and CGI-I), functional impairment (Children-Global Assessment Scale, C-GAS), and psychopathic dimension (Antisocial Process Screening Device, APSD), including CU dimension.

RESULTS

58 patients (49.2%) were non-responders. They had more frequently a diagnosis of CD than ODD, presented a comorbid mood disorder, higher CBCL scores in rule-breaking behavior, and higher APSD ("psychopathic") scores. Subjects with higher or lower CU differed only according to the rate of responders (35% vs. 60%, p<.05). The linear blockwise regression indicated that pre-treatment functional impairment (C-GAS) and baseline CU trait were predictors of non-response. The logistic regression indicated that only the value of baseline APSD-CU trait was a predictor of non-response.

CONCLUSIONS

A careful assessment of baseline clinical functioning and psychopathological features, namely the psychopathic traits, can identify the most problematic patients, and has specific prognostic and treatment implications.

Psychopathology, trauma and delinquency: subtypes of aggression and their relevance for understanding young offenders

OBJECTIVE

To examine the implications of an ontology of aggressive behavior which divides aggression into reactive, affective, defensive, impulsive (RADI) or "emotionally hot"; and planned, instrumental, predatory (PIP) or "emotionally cold." Recent epidemiological, criminological, clinical and neuroscience studies converge to support a connection between emotional and trauma related psychopathology and disturbances in the emotions, self-regulation and aggressive behavior which has important implications for diagnosis and treatment, especially for delinquent populations.

METHOD

Selective review of preclinical and clinical studies in normal, clinical and delinquent populations.

RESULTS

In delinquent populations we observe an increase in psychopathology, and especially trauma related psychopathology which impacts emotions and self-regulation in a manner that hotly emotionally charged acts of aggression become more likely. The identification of these disturbances can be supported by findings in cognitive neuroscience. These hot aggressive acts can be delineated from planned or emotionally cold aggression.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support a typology of diagnostic labels for disruptive behaviors, such as conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder, as it appears that these acts of hot emotional aggression are a legitimate target for psychopharmacological and other trauma specific interventions. The identification of this subtype of disruptive behavior disorders leads to more specific clinical interventions which in turn promise to improve hitherto unimpressive treatment outcomes of delinquents and patients with disruptive behavior.