Major depression and treatment response in adolescents with ADHD and substance use disorder

Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed and treated psychiatric disorders in childhood. Typically, children and adolescents with ADHD find it difficult to pay attention and they are hyperactive and impulsive. Methylphenidate is the psychostimulant most often prescribed, but the evidence on benefits and harms is uncertain. This is an update of our comprehensive systematic review on benefits and harms published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two trials registers up to March 2022. In addition, we checked reference lists and requested published and unpublished data from manufacturers of methylphenidate.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention in children and adolescents aged 18 years and younger with a diagnosis of ADHD. The search was not limited by publication year or language, but trial inclusion required that 75% or more of participants had a normal intellectual quotient (IQ > 70). We assessed two primary outcomes, ADHD symptoms and serious adverse events, and three secondary outcomes, adverse events considered non-serious, general behaviour, and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment for each trial. Six review authors including two review authors from the original publication participated in the update in 2022. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Data from parallel-group trials and first-period data from cross-over trials formed the basis of our primary analyses. We undertook separate analyses using end-of-last period data from cross-over trials. We used Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA) to control for type I (5%) and type II (20%) errors, and we assessed and downgraded evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 212 trials (16,302 participants randomised); 55 parallel-group trials (8104 participants randomised), and 156 cross-over trials (8033 participants randomised) as well as one trial with a parallel phase (114 participants randomised) and a cross-over phase (165 participants randomised). The mean age of participants was 9.8 years ranging from 3 to 18 years (two trials from 3 to 21 years). The male-female ratio was 3:1. Most trials were carried out in high-income countries, and 86/212 included trials (41%) were funded or partly funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Methylphenidate treatment duration ranged from 1 to 425 days, with a mean duration of 28.8 days. Trials compared methylphenidate with placebo (200 trials) and with no intervention (12 trials). Only 165/212 trials included usable data on one or more outcomes from 14,271 participants. Of the 212 trials, we assessed 191 at high risk of bias and 21 at low risk of bias. If, however, deblinding of methylphenidate due to typical adverse events is considered, then all 212 trials were at high risk of bias.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.88 to -0.61; I² = 38%; 21 trials; 1728 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to a mean difference (MD) of -10.58 (95% CI -12.58 to -8.72) on the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS; range 0 to 72 points). The minimal clinically relevant difference is considered to be a change of 6.6 points on the ADHD-RS. Methylphenidate may not affect serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.67; I² = 0%; 26 trials, 3673 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The TSA-adjusted intervention effect was RR 0.91 (CI 0.31 to 2.68).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

methylphenidate may cause more adverse events considered non-serious versus placebo or no intervention (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; I² = 72%; 35 trials 5342 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The TSA-adjusted intervention effect was RR 1.22 (CI 1.08 to 1.43). Methylphenidate may improve teacher-rated general behaviour versus placebo (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.33; I² = 68%; 7 trials 792 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but may not affect quality of life (SMD 0.40, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.83; I² = 81%; 4 trials, 608 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The majority of our conclusions from the 2015 version of this review still apply. Our updated meta-analyses suggest that methylphenidate versus placebo or no-intervention may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms and general behaviour in children and adolescents with ADHD. There may be no effects on serious adverse events and quality of life. Methylphenidate may be associated with an increased risk of adverse events considered non-serious, such as sleep problems and decreased appetite. However, the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes is very low and therefore the true magnitude of effects remain unclear. Due to the frequency of non-serious adverse events associated with methylphenidate, the blinding of participants and outcome assessors is particularly challenging. To accommodate this challenge, an active placebo should be sought and utilised. It may be difficult to find such a drug, but identifying a substance that could mimic the easily recognised adverse effects of methylphenidate would avert the unblinding that detrimentally affects current randomised trials. Future systematic reviews should investigate the subgroups of patients with ADHD that may benefit most and least from methylphenidate. This could be done with individual participant data to investigate predictors and modifiers like age, comorbidity, and ADHD subtypes.

Society for Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics Clinical Practice Guideline for the Assessment and Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Complex Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most common childhood neurodevelopmental disorder and is associated with an array of coexisting conditions that complicate diagnostic assessment and treatment. ADHD and its coexisting conditions may impact function across multiple settings (home, school, peers, community), placing the affected child or adolescent at risk for adverse health and psychosocial outcomes in adulthood. Current practice guidelines focus on the treatment of ADHD in the primary care setting. The Society for Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics has developed this practice guideline to facilitate integrated, interprofessional assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with "complex ADHD" defined by age (<4 years or presentation at age >12 years), presence of coexisting conditions, moderate to severe functional impairment, diagnostic uncertainty, or inadequate response to treatment.

Randomized Controlled Trial of an Integrated Family-Based Treatment for Adolescents Presenting to Community Mental Health Centers

Most adolescents presenting to community mental health centers have one or more comorbidities (internalizing, externalizing, and substance use problems). We evaluated an integrated family-based outpatient treatment for adolescents (OPT-A) that can be delivered in a community mental health center by a single therapist. A sample of 134 youth/families were randomized to receive OPT-A or usual services, delivered at the same public sector mental health center. Repeated, multi-informant assessments occurred through 18-months post-baseline. At baseline, the sample displayed low internalizing symptoms, moderate substance use, and high externalizing problems. Compared to usual services, OPT-A had effects on abstinence rates, retention, motivation, parent involvement, and satisfaction, but not on internalizing or externalizing problems. While OPT-A achieved some key improvements for youth who present to community mental health centers, and families were satisfied with treatment, continued work is necessary to examine treatments for comorbidity while balancing treatment feasibility and complex strategies to boost treatment effectiveness.

Alcohol use disorders and ADHD

Despite a growing literature on the complex bidirectional relationship of ADHD and substance use, reviews specifically focusing on alcohol are scarce. ADHD and AUD show a significant genetic overlap, including genes involved in gluatamatergic and catecholaminergic neurotransmission. ADHD drives risky behavior and negative experiences throughout the lifespan that subsequently enhance a genetically increased risk for Alcohol Use Disorders (AUD). Impulsive decisions and a maladaptive reward system make individuals with ADHD vulnerable for alcohol use and up to 43 % develop an AUD; in adults with AUD, ADHD occurs in about 20 %, but is vastly under-recognized and under-treated. Thus, routine screening and treatment procedures need to be implemented in AUD treatment. Long-acting stimulants or non-stimulants can be used to treat ADHD in individuals with AUD. However, it is crucial to combine medical treatment for ADHD with pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy for AUD, and other comorbid disorders. Identification of individuals at risk for AUD, especially those with ADHD and conduct disorder or oppositional defiant disorder, is a key factor to prevent negative outcomes.

Depression and ADHD-Related Risk for Substance Use in Adolescence and Early Adulthood: Concurrent and Prospective Associations in the MTA

Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is prospectively linked to substance use and disorder. Depression emerging in adolescence is an understudied risk factor that may explain some of this risk. In the present study, we considered mediating and moderating roles of adolescent depression in explaining this association by using longitudinal data from the prospective 16-year follow-up of the Multimodal Treatment Study of ADHD (MTA). Participants were 547 children diagnosed with DSM-IV ADHD Combined Type, and 258 age- and sex-matched comparison children. In adolescence, depressive symptoms did not exacerbate effects of childhood ADHD on any substance use. For both groups, time-varying and average depressive symptoms were associated with more frequent use of all substances. Prospectively, we found no evidence of depression mediation to adult substance use. However, adolescent depression moderated the association between childhood ADHD and adult marijuana use. Although adults without ADHD histories used marijuana more frequently if they had elevated depressive symptoms in adolescence, marijuana use by adults with ADHD histories was independent of their adolescent depression. In adulthood, depression diagnoses and ADHD persistence continued to operate as independent, additive correlates of substance use risk. Our findings suggest a circumscribed role for depression in substance use risk that adds to, but does not alter or explain, ADHD-related risk.

Home-based delivery of XR-NTX in youth with opioid addiction

Early experience with relapse prevention medications in the treatment of opioid addiction in youth has been positive, but barriers to effectiveness and broader adoption have included problems with adherence and retention, and lack of evidence or consensus about implementation. In particular there is relatively little known about either the effectiveness of extended release naltrexone (XR-NTX) in youth, or optimal models of care for its delivery. The purpose of this study is to report on a pilot initiative to improve the effectiveness of XR-NTX by delivering doses at home with assertive outreach to patients enrolled in a community treatment outpatient program. This is a naturalistic case series based on retrospective chart abstractions of 14 young adults (mean age=20.5), who enrolled in the pilot program, and in particular, the 9 who received home-based doses of XR-NTX. They are compared to a historical group of patients (n=21) prior to the pilot, who were referred to receive standard clinic-based doses of XR-NTX. Home-based administration was viewed favorably by patients and families. Although the small sample size is not amenable to statistical analysis, patients in the home based group, compared to the historical clinic-based group, received a greater number of doses overall and over 16 weeks of treatment, had longer retention, and attended similar numbers of clinic-based counseling sessions. These preliminary findings suggest that home-based delivery of XR-NTX and assertive outreach are feasible and promising in this critical target population, may compare favorably to clinic-based treatment as usual, and should be explored further in more rigorous evaluations.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and substance abuse: An investigation in young Austrian males

BACKGROUND

Many studies have found an association between Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children, adolescents and adults. We intended to determine whether substance abuse and SUDs are associated with former and current ADHD symptomatology in a non-clinical sample of 17 and 18 year old males.

METHOD

A representative sample of 3280 young men (6.8% of all males born in Austria in the respective year) was investigated during the examination for military service. We collected data on past (WURS) and current (ADHD symptom checklist) ADHD symptomatology, substance abuse, parental substance use and abuse and motives for substance use.

RESULTS

Measured by WURS, 10.1% had scored positive for past ADHD symptoms. 2.7% of all subjects stated that they have been treated for ADHD and 1.5% reported that they had at one point received pharmacological treatment for the condition. Abuse of alcohol, nicotine and illicit substances was significantly (p<.01) more frequent in subjects with ADHD syndrome. Perceived parental alcohol abuse increased the risk for ADHD in the offspring. Motives for substance use differed greatly between groups.

LIMITATIONS

The sample consists of men only. Subjects had to be fit enough to be enlisted military service, generating a possible bias towards healthier subjects. The cross-sectional design does not allow conclusions about the temporal relationships between ADHD symptoms and substance abuse.

CONCLUSION

Identification of vulnerability factors for comorbid ADHD and SUD in adolescence should be intensified. Preventive strategies ought to be established.

Treating Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders in Adolescents: What Is on the Menu?

Specific treatments targeting adolescents with substance use disorders (SUDs) have been developed over the last couple of decades. Despite these developmentally tailored treatments, long-term abstinence rates remain relatively low among adolescents receiving care. Research over the last decade has increasingly focused on adolescents with comorbid substance use and psychiatric disorders, in recognition of the barriers caused by inadequate treatment of co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Treatments targeting dually diagnosed youth are now regarded as essential to improving SUD treatment outcomes, but remain underutilized. A variety of treatment modalities such as behavioral therapy, family therapy, 12-step groups, motivational interviewing, contingency management, and combinations of these interventions have been modified for adolescents. In this article, we review the research on these treatments, as they apply to dually diagnosed youth. Furthermore, we explore the evidence for various treatments targeting comorbid SUD, specific to the presence of externalizing or internalizing disorders. The current evidence base supports the importance of integrated treatment targeting both SUD and psychiatric disorders simultaneously. High-quality treatment programs offering combinations of behavioral and family therapy, particularly with motivational interviewing and contingency management, are particularly well supported. In addition, we review various psychotropic medication treatments that have also been studied in conjunction with adolescent SUD treatment. Finally, we review research on post-treatment, supportive care that has been shown to improve long-term SUD outcomes. Recently conceptualized modular treatments, which offer personalized combinations of evidence-based treatments for specific disorders, have been proposed as a means of improving outcomes. Future research on modular programs must test the efficacy of individualized treatments when applied to combinations of psychiatric and SUDs in adolescents.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder comorbidity and antidepressant resistance among patients with major depression: A nationwide longitudinal study

The comorbidity between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and major depression is common. However, the influence of ADHD comorbidity in the response or resistance to antidepressants remains unknown among patients with major depression. 1891 patients with major depression and ADHD and 1891 age-/sex-matched patients with major depression only were enrolled and followed for 1 year in our study. Use of antidepressants and ADHD medications during 1-year follow-up period were assessed. Antidepressant resistance was defined as treatment failure in two or more than two different antidepressants for adequate treatment dose and duration. Patients with major depression and ADHD had an increased risk of treatment resistance to antidepressants (odds ratio [OR]: 2.32, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.63-3.32) compared with patients with major depression only after adjusting for demographic characteristics and other psychiatric comorbidities. Regular treatment for ADHD would reduce this risk (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 0.72-4.27). Anxiety (OR: 3.15, 95% CI: 2.24-4.44) and substance use (OR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.16-5.17) disorders were also associated with an elevated likelihood of resistance to antidepressants during the follow-up. Patients who had dual diagnoses of major depression and ADHD were more likely to have treatment resistance to antidepressants compared with patients with major depression only. Prompt and regular treatment for ADHD would reduce this risk.

Neurobiology of hedonic tone: the relationship between treatment-resistant depression, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and substance abuse

Anhedonia, defined as the state of reduced ability to experience feelings of pleasure, is one of the hallmarks of depression. Hedonic tone is the trait underlying one's characteristic ability to feel pleasure. Low hedonic tone represents a reduced capacity to experience pleasure, thus increasing the likelihood of experiencing anhedonia. Low hedonic tone has been associated with several psychopathologies, including major depressive disorder (MDD), substance use, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The main neural pathway that modulates emotional affect comprises the limbic-cortical-striatal-pallidal-thalamic circuits. The activity of various components of the limbic-cortical-striatal-pallidal-thalamic pathway is correlated with hedonic tone in healthy individuals and is altered in MDD. Dysfunction of these circuits has also been implicated in the relative ineffectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors used to treat anxiety and depression in patients with low hedonic tone. Mood disorders such as MDD, ADHD, and substance abuse share low hedonic tone as well as altered activation of brain regions involved in reward processing and monoamine signaling as their features. Given the common features of these disorders, it is not surprising that they have high levels of comorbidities. The purpose of this article is to review the neurobiology of hedonic tone as it pertains to depression, ADHD, and the potential for substance abuse. We propose that, since low hedonic tone is a shared feature of MDD, ADHD, and substance abuse, evaluation of hedonic tone may become a diagnostic feature used to predict subtypes of MDD, such as treatment-resistant depression, as well as comorbidities of these disorders.

Relapse prevention medications in community treatment for young adults with opioid addiction

BACKGROUND

Despite the well-known effectiveness and widespread use of relapse prevention medications such as extended release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and buprenorphine for opioid addiction in adults, less is known about their use in younger populations.

METHODS

This was a naturalistic study using retrospective chart review of N = 56 serial admissions into a specialty community treatment program that featured the use of relapse prevention medications for young adults (19-26 years old) with opioid use disorders. Treatment outcomes over 24 weeks included retention and weekly opioid-negative urine tests.

RESULTS

Patients were of mean age 23.1, 70% male, 86% Caucasian, 82% with history of injection heroin use, and treated with either buprenorphine (77%) or XR-NTX (23%). The mean number of XR-NTX doses received was 4.1. Retention was approximately 65% at 12 weeks and 40% at 24 weeks, and rates of opioid-negative urine were 50% at 12 weeks and 39% at 24 weeks, with missing samples imputed as positive. There were no statistically significant differences in retention (t = 1.87, P = .06) or in rates of weekly opioid-negative urine tests (t = 1.96, P = .06) between medication groups, over the course of 24 weeks. The XR-NTX group had higher rates of weekly negative urine drug tests for other nonopioid substances (t = 2.83, P < .05) compared with the buprenorphine group. Males were retained in treatment longer and had higher rates of opioid-negative weeks compared with females.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that relapse prevention medications including both buprenorphine and XR-NTX can be effectively incorporated into standard community treatment for opioid addiction in young adults with good results. Specialty programming focused on opioid addiction in young adults may provide a promising model for further treatment development.

Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed and treated psychiatric disorders in childhood. Typically, children with ADHD find it difficult to pay attention, they are hyperactive and impulsive.Methylphenidate is the drug most often prescribed to treat children and adolescents with ADHD but, despite its widespread use, this is the first comprehensive systematic review of its benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2015 we searched six databases (CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Conference Proceedings Citations Index), and two trials registers. We checked for additional trials in the reference lists of relevant reviews and included trials. We contacted the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture methylphenidate to request published and unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention in children and adolescents aged 18 years and younger with a diagnosis of ADHD. At least 75% of participants needed to have an intellectual quotient of at least 70 (i.e. normal intellectual functioning). Outcomes assessed included ADHD symptoms, serious adverse events, non-serious adverse events, general behaviour and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Seventeen review authors participated in data extraction and risk of bias assessment, and two review authors independently performed all tasks. We used standard methodological procedures expected within Cochrane. Data from parallel-group trials and first period data from cross-over trials formed the basis of our primary analyses; separate analyses were undertaken using post-cross-over data from cross-over trials. We used Trial Sequential Analyses to control for type I (5%) and type II (20%) errors, and we assessed and downgraded evidence according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for high risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness, heterogeneity and publication bias.

MAIN RESULTS

The studies.We included 38 parallel-group trials (5111 participants randomised) and 147 cross-over trials (7134 participants randomised). Participants included individuals of both sexes, at a boys-to-girls ratio of 5:1, and participants' ages ranged from 3 to 18 years across most studies (in two studies ages ranged from 3 to 21 years). The average age across all studies was 9.7 years. Most participants were from high-income countries.The duration of methylphenidate treatment ranged from 1 to 425 days, with an average duration of 75 days. Methylphenidate was compared to placebo (175 trials) or no intervention (10 trials). Risk of Bias.All 185 trials were assessed to be at high risk of bias. Primary outcomes. Methylphenidate may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.90 to -0.64; 19 trials, 1698 participants; very low-quality evidence). This corresponds to a mean difference (MD) of -9.6 points (95% CI -13.75 to -6.38) on the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS; range 0 to 72 points; DuPaul 1991a). A change of 6.6 points on the ADHD-RS is considered clinically to represent the minimal relevant difference. There was no evidence that methylphenidate was associated with an increase in serious (e.g. life threatening) adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.22; 9 trials, 1532 participants; very low-quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis-adjusted intervention effect was RR 0.91 (CI 0.02 to 33.2).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Among those prescribed methylphenidate, 526 per 1000 (range 448 to 615) experienced non-serious adverse events, compared with 408 per 1000 in the control group. This equates to a 29% increase in the overall risk of any non-serious adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.51; 21 trials, 3132 participants; very low-quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis-adjusted intervention effect was RR 1.29 (CI 1.06 to 1.56). The most common non-serious adverse events were sleep problems and decreased appetite. Children in the methylphenidate group were at 60% greater risk for trouble sleeping/sleep problems (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.23; 13 trials, 2416 participants), and 266% greater risk for decreased appetite (RR 3.66, 95% CI 2.56 to 5.23; 16 trials, 2962 participants) than children in the control group.Teacher-rated general behaviour seemed to improve with methylphenidate (SMD -0.87, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.71; 5 trials, 668 participants; very low-quality evidence).A change of seven points on the Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ; range 0 to 100 points; Landgraf 1998) has been deemed a minimal clinically relevant difference. The change reported in a meta-analysis of three trials corresponds to a MD of 8.0 points (95% CI 5.49 to 10.46) on the CHQ, which suggests that methylphenidate may improve parent-reported quality of life (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.80; 3 trials, 514 participants; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of meta-analyses suggest that methylphenidate may improve teacher-reported ADHD symptoms, teacher-reported general behaviour, and parent-reported quality of life among children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD. However, the low quality of the underpinning evidence means that we cannot be certain of the magnitude of the effects. Within the short follow-up periods typical of the included trials, there is some evidence that methylphenidate is associated with increased risk of non-serious adverse events, such as sleep problems and decreased appetite, but no evidence that it increases risk of serious adverse events.Better designed trials are needed to assess the benefits of methylphenidate. Given the frequency of non-serious adverse events associated with methylphenidate, the particular difficulties for blinding of participants and outcome assessors point to the advantage of large, 'nocebo tablet' controlled trials. These use a placebo-like substance that causes adverse events in the control arm that are comparable to those associated with methylphenidate. However, for ethical reasons, such trials should first be conducted with adults, who can give their informed consent.Future trials should publish depersonalised individual participant data and report all outcomes, including adverse events. This will enable researchers conducting systematic reviews to assess differences between intervention effects according to age, sex, comorbidity, type of ADHD and dose. Finally, the findings highlight the urgent need for large RCTs of non-pharmacological treatments.

The efficacy of two adolescent substance abuse treatments and the impact of comorbid depression: results of a small randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this randomized trial was to investigate the efficacy of 2 behavioral treatments focusing on different change mechanisms in ameliorating a borderline personality disorder constellation of behaviors and substance use in adolescents referred by juvenile diversion programs.

METHODS

Forty adolescents 14-17 years of age and meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.) criteria for borderline personality disorder and substance use disorders were randomized to integrative borderline personality disorder-oriented adolescent family therapy (I-BAFT) or individual drug counseling. This design allowed a comparison of 2 manualized interventions, 1 family based and 1 individually oriented. Profiles of clinical change were used to detect impact and estimate treatment effect sizes.

RESULTS

Primary analyses showed that both interventions had a clinically significant impact on borderline personality disorder behaviors 12 months after baseline but with no differential treatment effects. The impact on substance use was more complex. Subgroup analyses revealed that adolescents with depression had significantly more severe profiles of borderline personality disorder and substance use. These youths were the only group to show reductions in substance use, but they only did so if they received the I-BAFT intervention. Study data also documented the high dosage of intensive residential treatment needed by this population.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Results highlight the intensive treatment needs of juvenile justice-involved youths with co-occurring substance use and borderline personality disorder including depression, the hybrid outpatient and residential treatment often required by this population, and the promise of a family-oriented approach, particularly for youths with severe symptoms and co-occurring depression. (PsycINFO Database Record

Risk factors for incident major depressive disorder in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

The greater burden of illness in youth with co-occurring attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and major depressive disorder (MDD) deserves further investigation, specifically regarding the influence of other psychiatric or medical conditions and the pharmacotherapies prescribed. A retrospective cohort design was employed, using South Carolina's (USA) Medicaid claims' dataset covering outpatient and inpatient medical services, and medication prescriptions between January, 1996 and December, 2006 for patients ≤17 years of age. The cohort included 22,452 cases diagnosed with ADHD at a mean age 7.8 years; 1,259 (5.6 %) cases were diagnosed with MDD at a mean age of 12.1 years. The probability of a child with ADHD developing MDD was significantly associated with a comorbid anxiety disorder (aOR = 3.53), CD/ODD (aOR = 3.45), or a substance use disorder (aOR = 2.31); being female (aOR = 1.77); being treated with pemoline (aOR = 1.69), atomoxetine (aOR = 1.31), or mixed amphetamine salts (aOR = 1.28); a comorbid obesity diagnosis (aOR = 1.29); not being African American (aOR = 1.23), and being older at ADHD diagnosis (aOR = 1.09). Those developing MDD also developed several comorbid disorders later than the ADHD-only cohort, i.e., conduct disorder/oppositional-defiant disorder (CD/ODD), at mean age of 10.8 years, obesity at 11.6 years, generalized anxiety disorder at 12.2 years, and a substance use disorder at 15.7 years of age. Incident MDD was more likely in individuals clustering several demographic, clinical, and treatment factors. The phenotypic progression suggested herein underscores the need for coordinated early detection and intervention to prevent or delay syndromal MDD, or to minimize its severity and associated impairment over time.

Psychological therapies versus antidepressant medication, alone and in combination for depression in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are common in children and adolescents and, if left untreated, are likely to recur in adulthood. Depression is highly debilitating, affecting psychosocial, family and academic functioning.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of psychological therapies and antidepressant medication, alone and in combination, for the treatment of depressive disorder in children and adolescents. We have examined clinical outcomes including remission, clinician and self reported depression measures, and suicide-related outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) to 11 June 2014. The register contains reports of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were eligible for inclusion if they compared i) any psychological therapy with any antidepressant medication, or ii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy alone, or an antidepressant medication alone, or iii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a placebo or'treatment as usual', or (iv) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy or antidepressant medication plus a placebo.We included studies if they involved participants aged between 6 and 18 years, diagnosed by a clinician as having Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the quality of the studies. We applied a random-effects meta-analysis, using the odds ratio (OR) to describe dichotomous outcomes, mean difference (MD) to describe continuous outcomes when the same measures were used, and standard mean difference (SMD) when outcomes were measured on different scales.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eleven studies, involving 1307 participants in this review. We also identified one ongoing study, and two additional ongoing studies that may be eligible for inclusion. Studies recruited participants with different severities of disorder and with a variety of comorbid disorders, including anxiety and substance use disorder, therefore limiting the comparability of the results. Regarding the risk of bias in studies, just under half the studies had adequate allocation concealment (there was insufficient information to determine allocation concealment in the remainder), outcome assessors were blind to the participants' intervention in six studies, and in general, studies reported on incomplete data analysis methods, mainly using intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. For the majority of outcomes there were no statistically significant differences between the interventions compared. There was limited evidence (based on two studies involving 220 participants) that antidepressant medication was more effective than psychotherapy on measures of clinician defined remission immediately post-intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.98), with 67.8% of participants in the medication group and 53.7% in the psychotherapy group rated as being in remission. There was limited evidence (based on three studies involving 378 participants) that combination therapy was more effective than antidepressant medication alone in achieving higher remission from a depressive episode immediately post-intervention (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.47), with 65.9% of participants treated with combination therapy and 57.8% of participants treated with medication, rated as being in remission. There was no evidence to suggest that combination therapy was more effective than psychological therapy alone, based on clinician rated remission immediately post-intervention (OR 1.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.68).Suicide-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) were reported in various ways across studies and could not be combined in meta-analyses. However, some trials measured suicidal ideation using standardised assessment tools suitable for meta-analysis. In one study involving 188 participants, rates of suicidal ideation were significantly higher in the antidepressant medication group (18.6%) compared with the psychological therapy group (5.4%) (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.72) and this effect appeared to remain at six to nine months (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.98), with 13.6% of participants in the medication group and 3.9% of participants in the psychological therapy group reporting suicidal ideation. It was unclear what the effect of combination therapy was compared with either antidepressant medication alone or psychological therapy alone on rates of suicidal ideation. The impact of any of the assigned treatment packages on drop out was also mostly unclear across the various comparisons in the review.Limited data and conflicting results based on other outcome measures make it difficult to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of any specific intervention based on these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence upon which to base conclusions about the relative effectiveness of psychological interventions, antidepressant medication and a combination of these interventions. On the basis of the available evidence, the effectiveness of these interventions for treating depressive disorders in children and adolescents cannot be established. Further appropriately powered RCTs are required.

The severity of attention deficit hyperactivity symptoms and its relationship with lifetime substance use and psychological variables among 10th grade students in Istanbul

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the severity of attention deficit hyperactivity symptoms (ADHS) and related psychological and behavioral variables among 10th grade students in Istanbul/Turkey.

METHODS

Cross-sectional online self-report survey conducted in 45 schools in 15 districts Istanbul. The questionnaire included sections about demographic data and use of substances including tobacco, alcohol and drugs. Also ADHS, depression, anxiety, anger and sensation seeking subscales of Psychological Screening Test for Adolescents (PSTA) were used. The analyses were conducted based on the 4938 subjects.

RESULTS

Mean ADHS score was higher in females and among those with a lifetime use of tobacco, alcohol and drug, and having self-harming behavior and suicidal thoughts. ADHS score was correlated with depression, anxiety, anger and sensation seeking scores. In univariate covariance analysis (ANCOVA); depression, anxiety, anger, sensation seeking, lifetime alcohol use and suicidal thoughts predicted the severity of ADHS.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that, since ADHS is associated with depression, anxiety, anger, sensation seeking, lifetime alcohol use and suicidal thoughts among 10th grade students, clinicians should screen suicidality and comorbid psychiatric symptoms routinely in adolescents with ADHS.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and substance abuse

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and substance use disorders are inextricably intertwined. Children with ADHD are more likely than peers to develop substance use disorders. Treatment with stimulants may reduce the risk of substance use disorders, but stimulants are a class of medication with significant abuse and diversion potential. The objectives of this clinical report were to present practical strategies for reducing the risk of substance use disorders in patients with ADHD and suggestions for safe stimulant prescribing.

Sequenced versus coordinated treatment for adolescents with comorbid depressive and substance use disorders

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated 3 methods of integrating interventions for depression (Adolescent Coping With Depression Course; CWD) and substance use disorders (Functional Family Therapy; FFT), examining (a) treatment sequence effects on substance use and depression outcomes and (b) whether the presence of major depressive disorder (MDD) moderated effects.

METHOD

Participants were 170 adolescents (ages 13-18; 22% female; 61% non-Hispanic White) with comorbid depressive disorder (54% MDD, 18% dysthymia) and substance use disorders who were randomized to (a) FFT followed by CWD (FFT/CWD), (b) CWD followed by FFT (CWD/FFT), or (c) coordinated FFT and CWD (CT). Acute treatment (24 treatment sessions provided over 20 weeks) and 6- and 12-month follow-up effects are presented for substance use (percentage of days of substance use; Timeline Followback) and depression (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised).

RESULTS

FFT/CWD achieved better substance use outcomes than CT at posttreatment, and 6- and 12-month follow-ups; substance use effects for CWD/FFT were intermediate. For participants with baseline MDD, the CWD/FFT sequence resulted in lower substance use than either FFT/CWD or CT. Depressive symptoms decreased significantly in all 3 treatment sequences with no evidence of differential effectiveness during or following treatment. Attendance was lower for the second of both sequenced interventions. A large proportion of the sample received treatment outside the study, which predicted better outcomes in the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Depression reductions occurred early in all 3 treatment sequences. Of the examined treatment sequences, FFT/CWD appeared most efficacious for substance use reductions but addressing depression early in treatment may improve substance use outcomes in the presence of MDD.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and risk of substance use disorder: developmental considerations, potential pathways, and opportunities for research

Many opportunities to explain attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-related risk of substance use disorder (SUD) remain available for study. We detail these opportunities by considering characteristics of children with ADHD and factors affecting their outcomes side by side with overlapping variables in the developmental literature on SUD etiology. Although serious conduct problems are a known contributor to ADHD-related risk of SUD, few studies have considered their emergence developmentally and in relation to other candidate mediators and moderators that could also explain risk and be intervention targets. Common ADHD-related impairments, such as school difficulties, are in need of research. Heterogeneous social impairments have the potential for predisposing, and buffering, influences. Research on neurocognitive domains should move beyond standard executive function batteries to measure deficits in the interface between cognitive control, reward, and motivation. Ultimately, maximizing prediction will depend, as it has in the SUD literature, on simultaneous consideration of multiple risk factors.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adolescence predicts onset of major depressive disorder through early adulthood

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine the prospective relationship between a history of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) assessed in mid-adolescence and the onset of major depressive disorder (MDD) through early adulthood in a large school-based sample. A secondary aim was to examine whether this relationship was robust after accounting for comorbid psychopathology and psychosocial impairment.

METHOD

One thousand five hundred seven participants from the Oregon Adolescent Depression Project completed rating scales in adolescence and structured diagnostic interviews up to four times from adolescence to age 30.

RESULTS

Adolescents with a lifetime history of ADHD were at significantly higher risk of MDD through early adulthood relative to those with no history of ADHD. ADHD remained a significant predictor of MDD after controlling for gender, lifetime history of other psychiatric disorders in adolescence, social and academic impairment in adolescence, stress and coping in adolescence, and new onset of other psychiatric disorders through early adulthood (hazard ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.04, 3.06). Additional significant, robust predictors of MDD included female gender, a lifetime history of an anxiety disorder, and poor coping skills in mid-adolescence, as well as the onset of anxiety, oppositional defiant disorder, and substance-use disorder after mid-adolescence.

CONCLUSIONS

A history of ADHD in adolescence was associated with elevated risk of MDD through early adulthood and this relationship remained significant after controlling for psychosocial impairment in adolescence and co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Additional work is needed to identify the mechanisms of risk and to inform depression prevention programs for adolescents with ADHD.

Effect of depressive symptoms on asthma intervention in urban teens

BACKGROUND

The literature suggests that depression is an important comorbidity in asthma that can significantly influence disease management and quality of life (QOL).

OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of coexisting depressive symptoms on the effectiveness of self-management interventions in urban teens with asthma.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a randomized controlled trial of Puff City, a web-based, tailored asthma management intervention for urban teens, to determine whether depression modulated intervention effectiveness for asthma control and QOL outcomes. Teens and caregivers were classified as depressed based on responses collected from baseline questionnaires.

RESULT

Using logistic regression analysis, we found that a lower percentage of treatment students had indicators of uncontrolled asthma compared with controls (adjusted odds ratios <1). However, for teens depressed at baseline, QOL scores at follow-up were significantly higher in the treatment group compared with the control group for the emotions domain (adjusted relative risk, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-3.63; P = .01; interpreted as emotional QOL for treatment students increased by a factor of 2.08 above controls). Estimates for overall QOL and symptoms QOL were borderline significant (adjusted relative risk, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-2.63; P = .09; and adjusted relative risk, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-3.15; P = .08; respectively). Among teens not depressed at baseline, no significant differences were observed between treatment and control groups in QOL domains at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that depression modified the relationship between the effectiveness of an asthma intervention and emotional QOL in urban teens. Further assessment of self-management behavioral interventions for asthma should explore the mechanism by which depression may alter the intervention effect.