Peak ages of risk for starting nonmedical use of prescription stimulants

The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder

The American Society of Addiction Medicine/American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (ASAM/AAAP) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder provides guidance on evidence-based strategies for the treatment of stimulant use disorders (StUDs), stimulant intoxication, and stimulant withdrawal, as well as secondary and tertiary prevention of harms associated with stimulant use. The Clinical Guideline Committee (CGC) comprised experts from ASAM and AAAP representing a range of clinical settings and patient populations. The guideline was developed following modified GRADE methodology. The process included a systematic literature review as well as several targeted supplemental searches. The CGC utilized Evidence to Decision tables to review available evidence and rate the strength of each recommendation. The clinical practice guideline was revised based on external stakeholder review. Key takeaways included: Contingency management represents the current standard of care for treatment of StUDs; Pharmacotherapies may be utilized off-label to treat StUDs; Acute stimulant intoxication can result in life-threatening complications that should be addressed in an appropriate level of care; Secondary and tertiary prevention strategies should be used to reduce harms related to risky stimulant use.

Cigarette and e-cigarette use trajectories and prospective prescription psychotherapeutic drug misuse among adolescents and young adults

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the potential longitudinal impact of different cigarette and e-cigarette use trajectories among people aged 10-24 on prescription drug misuse of psychotherapeutic drugs.

METHODS

Data came from waves 1-5 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study (2013-2019; n = 14,454). Group-based trajectory modeling identified groups of adolescents and young adults based on cigarette and e-cigarette use across the five waves. Weighted logistic regression models were fit to examine the association of group membership with two outcomes at all waves: 1) misuse of opioids, sedatives, and/or tranquilizers, and 2) misuse of Ritalin and/or Adderall, adjusting for background characteristics.

RESULTS

Five trajectory groups emerged: (1) non-use (77.7 %); (2) early-onset cigarette use with reducing use (4.6 %); (3) ever-increasing e-cigarette use (6.1 %); (4) stable dual use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (3.2 %); and (5) accelerating dual use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (8.4 %). In comparison to the non-use group, all other groups had significantly higher odds of misuse of opioids, tranquilizers, and/or sedatives and all but the early-onset cigarette use with reducing use group had significantly higher odds of misuse of Ritalin and/or Adderall by the end of wave 5.

DISCUSSION

Patterns of cigarette and e-cigarette use in adolescent and young adult populations may serve as important indicators for concurrent and prospective prescription psychotherapeutic drug misuse. Findings highlight the need for cigarette and e-cigarette use prevention, harm reduction, and/or cessation efforts among adolescents and young adults.

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.

Intranasal Use of Prescription Stimulants Among Adults Aged 18 to 30: Results From A Crowdsourcing Platform

OBJECTIVE

Few studies of prescription stimulant non-oral, non-medical use (NMU) (defined by use not as prescribed) have been conducted in adults beyond the college population. The purpose of this study was to characterize prescription stimulant non-oral use, specifically intranasal (IN) use (snorting) in young adults.

METHOD

Amazon's MTurk platform was used to recruit participants for an online survey. Data were collected from March to April 2020.

RESULTS

Thirty-two percent (n = 157) of survey respondents (N = 975), aged 18 to 30, reported IN prescription stimulant use (average of 32.1 episodes of lifetime IN use). Adderall was the most-reported prescription stimulant used intranasally (89.2%). Most IN users (82%; n = 68) reported spending no more than 5 minutes tampering with prescription stimulants. Intranasal users said they would take the medication orally if unable to tamper or manipulate medication for IN use.

CONCLUSION

These data help quantify a complex public health issue of ongoing IN use of prescription stimulants and suggest a potential role for manipulation-deterrent medications.

Addressing adolescent substance use with a public health prevention framework: the case for harm reduction

Adolescence is a developmental stage defined in part by risk-taking. Risk-taking is critical to normal development and has important benefits including trying new activities and exploring new relationships. Risk-taking is also associated with the initiation of substance use. Because substance use often begins in adolescence, much focus has been on primary prevention with the goal of preventing initial substance use. Secondary or tertiary prevention approaches, such as counselling to eliminate substance use or offering treatment, are common approaches for adolescents with problematic substance use or a substance use disorder. While this is important, for some adolescents, treatment or cessation of use may not be desired. In these cases, Healthcare Practitioners (HCPs) can offer clear advice that incorporates harm reduction. Harm reduction, which is often applied for adults who use substances, reduces the negative impacts associated with drug use without requiring abstinence. Harm reduction is crucial to keeping adolescents safe and healthy and can offer opportunities for future engagement in treatment. The objective of this review is to describe strategies for integrating harm reduction principles in clinical settings that are developmentally appropriate. A patient-centered, harm reduction approach can validate perceived benefits of substance use, offer strategies to minimise harm, and advise reduction of use and abstinence.KEY MESSAGES:Substance use often begins in adolescence and traditional approaches are often rooted in prevention framework.Harm reduction should be incorporated for adolescents with problematic substance use or a substance use disorder.This review offers strategies for integration of harm reduction principles tailored towards adolescents.

Use of Alcohol, Cannabinoids, Psychostimulants, and Sedatives before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Students in 40 European Countries

In March 2020, the WHO announced the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been ongoing for over 2 years. To stop the spread of the virus, the governments of many countries decided to introduce reasonable social restrictions that were suitable for pandemic waves. This led to radical changes in people's lives, especially among students, who are very active in society. Before COVID-19, being of student age was associated with the highest frequency of stimulants use. It is important to note that drugs are taken disparately in various areas. Therefore, using the Computer-Assisted Web Interview type of study, the impact of the pandemic on the use of alcohol, cannabinoids, psychostimulants (e.g., amphetamine, methamphetamine, ecstasy) and sedatives (e.g., zolpidem, zopiclone, alprazolam, lorazepam, etc.) was assessed among students from European countries. The questionnaire included single- and multiple-answer questions. The first part concerned sociodemographic questions, while the second included questions about the use of stimulants in the last 3 months prior to participation in the study. Distribution of the survey covered the period from 31 January 2016 to 30 April 2021. A total of 17,594 European students participated in the study. The vast majority of participants were women (80.4%) and students of non-medical universities (77.2%) living in Eastern European countries (86.1%). Of all students, 15,613 (89.6%) reported alcohol drinking, 2538 (14.1%) the use of cannabinoids, 650 (3.6%) psychostimulants, and 2252 (12.5%) sedatives in the past three months. It has been shown that women are far less likely to use alcohol (OR 0.81), psychostimulants (OR 0.44) and cannabinoids (OR 0.49), while they are more likely to use sedatives (OR 1.41). During the COVID-19 pandemic, the consumption of alcohol (OR 0.55) and psychostimulants (OR 0.72) decreased and that of sleep medications increased (OR 1.17). To conclude, the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the pattern of stimulants used by students in European countries. The restriction of social interactions contributed to the decrease in the consumption of alcohol and psychostimulants but increased the use of sedatives and the frequency of their use. Women were found to use sedatives more often, while men preferred to drink alcohol and use cannabinoids or psychostimulants. It has also been shown that students of Central and Eastern Europe more often use alcohol and sedatives, while in Southern European countries psychostimulants and cannabinoids are preferred.

Stimulant misuse among youth

Rates of stimulant use, including misuse of prescription stimulants and use of cocaine and methamphetamine, are rising rapidly among adolescents and young adults ("youth"). Stimulant misuse is associated with overdose, polysubstance use, substance use disorders, and other medical harms. Substance use is often initiated during adolescence and young adulthood, and interventions during these crucial years have the potential to impact the lifetime risk of stimulant use disorder and associated harms. In this narrative review, we review recent data on prescription and illicit stimulant use in youth. We describe the rising contribution of stimulants to polysubstance use involving opioids and other substances and to overdose, as well as ways to minimize harm. We also discuss prescription stimulant misuse, which is especially prevalent among youth relative to other age groups, and the limited evidence on potential pathways from prescription stimulant use to illicit stimulant use. Last, we assess potential strategies for the prevention and treatment of stimulant use disorder in youth.

Investigating sex differences and the effect of drug exposure order in the sensory reward-enhancing effects of nicotine and d-amphetamine alone and in combination

Nicotine enhances the rewarding effects of other environmental stimuli; this reward-enhancement encourages and maintains nicotine consumption. Nicotine use precedes other psychostimulant use, but receiving a stimulant prescription also predicts future smoking. Previously, no study has investigated effects of drug exposure order in reward-enhancement, nor with nicotine and d-amphetamine. Thus, we aimed to investigate how drug exposure order impacted the reward-enhancing effects of nicotine and d-amphetamine, alone and in combination. We used 20 male and 20 female Sprague-Dawley rats. Enhancement was investigated within-subjects by examining responding maintained by a visual stimulus reinforcer following a pre-session injection of either d-amphetamine (Sal, 0.1, 0.3, or 0.6 mg/kg) or nicotine (Sal, 0.03, 0.06, 0.1, 0.3 mg/kg). Twenty rats (10 M, 10 F) completed enhancement testing with nicotine before d-amphetamine. The other 20 rats (10 M, 10 F) completed testing with d-amphetamine before nicotine. Following these phases, rats were then given two pre-session injections: one of d-amphetamine (Sal, 0.1, 0.3, or 0.6 mg/kg) and another of nicotine (Sal, 0.03, 0.06, 0.1, or 0.3 mg/kg). Experiencing amphetamine before nicotine increased reward-enhancing effects of nicotine. Females exhibited greater effects of d-amphetamine on reward-enhancement, with no effect of exposure order. During the interaction phase, receiving nicotine before amphetamine enhanced the interaction between nicotine and d-amphetamine for females whereas amphetamine before nicotine heightened this interaction for males. From this, prior and current amphetamine use, in addition to sex, should be considered when treating nicotine dependency and when examining factors driving poly-substance use involving nicotine and d-amphetamine. Keywords: Adderall, ADHD, Dexedrine, operant, smoking, polysubstance use.

Alcohol-related cognitions: Implications for concurrent alcohol and marijuana use and concurrent alcohol and prescription stimulant misuse among young adults

INTRODUCTION

This study examined the associations between alcohol-related cognitions within the social reaction pathway of the Prototype Willingness Model and concurrent (use of two or more substances within a specified time period) use of 1) alcohol and marijuana and 2) alcohol and prescription stimulant misuse.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 1,062 emerging adults in the U.S. (18-20 years old; 54.5% female) who reported past 3-month alcohol use completed a baseline survey as part of a larger randomized controlled trial.

RESULTS

Results indicate that controlling for age, biological sex, race, ethnicity, and college enrollment, perceived descriptive norms and willingness to drink were associated with past 3-month concurrent alcohol and marijuana use and concurrent alcohol and prescription stimulant misuse. However, alcohol prototype similarity and alcohol-related perceived vulnerability were not associated with either concurrent use outcome examined.

DISCUSSION

These findings suggest that alcohol-related perceived descriptive norms and willingness to drink are associated with concurrent substance use among young adults. Thus, it is possible that existing efficacious alcohol interventions that target descriptive norms and willingness to drink may have the added benefit of also reducing concurrent substance cognitions and ultimately use.

Prescription Drug Misuse: Taking a Lifespan Perspective

Prescription drug misuse (PDM), or medication use without a prescription or in ways not intended by the prescriber, is a notable public health concern, especially in the United States. Accumulating research has characterized PDM prevalence and processes, but age-based or lifespan changes in PDM are understudied. Given age-based differences in the medical or developmental concerns that often underlie PDM, it is likely that PDM varies by age. This review summarizes the literature on PDM across the lifespan, examining lifespan changes in prevalence, sources, motives and correlates for opioid, stimulant, and tranquilizer/sedative (or benzodiazepine) PDM. In all, prevalence rates, sources and motives vary considerably by age group, with fewer age-based differences in correlates or risk factors. PDM prevalence rates tend to decline with aging, with greater use of physician sources and greater endorsement of self-treatment motives in older groups. Recreational motives (such as to get high) tend to peak in young adulthood, with greater use of peer sources or purchases to obtain medication for PDM in younger groups. PDM co-occurs with other substance use and psychopathology, including suicidality, across age groups. The evidence for lifespan variation in PDM is strongest for opioid PDM, with a need for more research on tranquilizer/sedative and stimulant PDM. The current literature is limited by the few studies of lifespan changes in PDM within a single sample, a lack of longitudinal research, little research addressing PDM in the context of polysubstance use, and little research on minority groups, such as sexual and gender minorities.

[Adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with comorbid addictive disorder. Therapeutic challenges using the example of a survey of clinical practice]

BACKGROUND

ADHD in childhood and adolescence is characterized by the symptoms hyperactivity, impulsivity, and inattentiveness; these symptoms may persist into adulthood or may manifest as restlessness, emotional instability, and disorganized behavior. In adults ADHD often occurs with increased substance use and is associated with an early onset of substance use, development of severe addiction, and decreased treatment effectiveness.

METHOD

This overview will present and critically discuss current study results and evidence-based and consensus-oriented recommendations that ensure the most adequate care for patients with ADHD and addictive disorder.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

For drug therapy, the current S3 guideline recommends methylphenidate, amphetamine salts, and atomoxetine, among others. Treatment of adult patients with ADHD and addiction with stimulants tends to be viewed critically; if required, long-acting medications should be used. Integrated treatment of ADHD and addiction, consisting of a combination of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, is recommended.

Co-administration of amphetamine with alcohol results in decreased alcohol withdrawal severity in adolescent rats

Simultaneous use of stimulants and alcohol is a growing problem, particularly among older adolescents already prone to binge alcohol consumption. Adolescent rats consume high levels of alcohol when administered in a liquid diet and develop a strong alcohol withdrawal syndrome. We exploited this system to administer amphetamine in combination with alcohol and to test the effect of co-administration of amphetamine on alcohol withdrawal-induced hypoactivity and overall withdrawal severity. The presence of dietary amphetamine (≤40 mg/l) had no effect on consumption of control or alcohol-containing diets. Measured in an activity chamber, alcohol withdrawal hypoactivity was reduced significantly by co-administration of amphetamine with alcohol. Overall withdrawal severity was also reduced significantly when rats consumed amphetamine with alcohol. The results suggest that amphetamine co-use may mask physical signs of alcohol dependency and add to the importance of educational strategies pointing out the potential problems associated with co-use of stimulants and alcohol.

International Consensus Statement on Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment of Substance Use Disorder Patients with Comorbid Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Adult attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often co-occurs with substance use disorders (SUD) and is associated with early onset and more severe development of SUD and with reduced treatment effectiveness. Screening tools allow for a good recognition of possible ADHD in adults with SUD and should be used routinely, followed by an ADHD diagnostic process initiated as soon as possible. Simultaneous and integrated treatment of ADHD and SUD, using a combination of pharmaco- and psychotherapy, is recommended. Long-acting methylphenidate, extended-release amphetamines, and atomoxetine with up-titration to higher dosages may be considered in patients unresponsive to standard doses. This paper includes evidence- and consensus-based recommendations developed to provide guidance in the screening, diagnosis and treatment of patients with ADHD-SUD comorbidity.

Developmental course of non-medical use of prescription drugs from adolescence to adulthood in the United States: national longitudinal data

AIMS

To identify the developmental course of non-medical use of four separate prescription drug classes (opioids, sedatives, stimulants and tranquilizers) by examining the general functional growth and related covariates during the transition from adolescence to adulthood in the United States.

DESIGN

Nationally representative probability samples of high school seniors were followed longitudinally across five waves (waves 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5: modal ages 18, 19/20, 21/22, 23/24 and 25/26 years, respectively).

SETTING

Data were collected via self-administered questionnaires to high school seniors and young adults in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample consisted of nearly 72 000 individuals in 30 cohorts (high school senior years of 1977-2006) who participated in at least one wave.

MEASUREMENTS

Self-reports of annual non-medical use of prescription opioids, sedatives, stimulants, and tranquilizers.

FINDINGS

The annual non-medical use of prescription opioids, sedatives, stimulants and tranquilizers was highest at wave 1 over the five waves. There was a consistent descending path (linear and quadratic slopes, P < 0.001) in annual non-medical use from baseline across all four prescription drug classes (e.g. opioids linear slope = -0.043 and opioids quadratic slope = 0.034, P < 0.001). While the annual non-medical use of stimulants declined over time (linear slope = 0.063, P < 0.01; quadratic slope = -0.133, P < 0.001), the same decrease was not observed for the annual non-medical use of prescription opioids, sedatives or tranquilizers when controlling for socio-demographic and substance use behaviors at baseline. The covariates associated with the general functional growth differed across the four prescription drug classes.

CONCLUSIONS

The non-medical use of prescription opioids, sedatives, stimulants and tranquilizers appears to peak during late adolescence, suggesting preventive intervention efforts should be initiated in early adolescence. The developmental course of non-medical use is not the same among all four classes of prescription drugs, suggesting that each drug class warrants individual research.

Personal and perceived peer use and attitudes towards the use of nonmedical prescription stimulants to improve academic performance among university students in seven European countries

BACKGROUND

Overestimations of non-prescribed stimulant use of peers are well documented in the USA and have also been identified as predictive of personal stimulant consumption. This study aimed to examine whether overestimations of peer use and approval of the use are associated with personal use and attitude towards the use of non-prescribed stimulants among European university students.

METHOD

The EU funded 'Social Norms Intervention for the prevention of Polydrug usE (SNIPE)' study was conducted in seven European countries. In a web-based questionnaire, 4482 students were asked about their personal use and their attitude towards non-prescribed stimulant use, as well as the perceived peer use and peer attitude.

RESULTS

59% of students thought that the majority of their peers used non-prescribed stimulants more frequently than themselves, and only 4% thought that the use of the majority was lower than their personal use. The perception that the majority of peers had used non-prescribed stimulants at least once was significantly associated with higher odds for personal use of non-prescribed stimulants (OR: 3.30, 95% CI: 2.32-4.71). In addition, the perception that the majority of peers approved of the non-prescribed use of stimulants was associated with a 4.03 (95% CI: 3.35-4.84) times higher likelihood for personal approval.

DISCUSSION

European university students generally perceived the non-prescribed use of stimulants of peers to be higher than their personal use. This perception, as well as a perception of higher approval in the peer group, was associated with a higher likelihood of personal non-prescribed stimulant medication use and approval.

Prescription stimulant medication misuse: Where are we and where do we go from here?

Prescription stimulants, including methylphenidate (e.g., Ritalin) and amphetamine compounds (e.g., dextroamphetamine; Adderall), have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and are classified by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration as Schedule II medications because of their high potential for abuse and dependence (Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, 2015). Despite the potential health and judicial consequences, misuse of prescription stimulants, typically defined as taking stimulants without a valid prescription, or use of stimulants other than as prescribed, has become a serious problem in the United States and abroad, especially on college campuses. The purpose of the present article is to review historical information concerning prescription stimulants and to summarize the literature with respect to misuse among adults, particularly college students, including risk factors, mediators and moderators, and motivations for prescription stimulant misuse. In addition, evidence is presented concerning the question of whether prescription stimulants truly enhance cognitive functioning in individuals with and without ADHD, and the ethical and professional implications of these findings are explored. Lastly, recommendations for addressing prescription stimulant misuse and suggestions for future research are advanced. (PsycINFO Database Record

DSM-5 changes enhance parent identification of symptoms in adolescents with ADHD

This study evaluates the impact of the DSM-5 ADHD symptom wording changes on symptom endorsement among adolescents with ADHD. Parents of adolescents with systematically diagnosed DSM-IV-TR ADHD (N=78) completed counterbalanced DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 ADHD symptom checklists in a single sitting. General linear models were conducted to evaluate whether the new DSM-5 symptom descriptors influenced the total number of ADHD symptoms and overall ADHD symptom severity endorsed by parents, how demographic factors were associated with noted changes in symptom endorsement when moving to the DSM-5, and which DSM ADHD items displayed notable changes in endorsement rates under the new wording. On average, parents identified 1.15 additional symptoms of ADHD in adolescents when moving from the DSM-IV-TR to the DSM-5. Increased symptom identification was not specific to age, sex, ethnicity, race, or socioeconomic status. Over half of the sample experienced increased symptom endorsement when changing texts (59.0%). Under the new DSM-5 wording, four symptoms had statistically significant endorsement increases (range: 11.2-16.7%): difficulty sustaining attention, easily distracted, difficulty organizing tasks and activities, and does not seem to listen.

Classics in Chemical Neuroscience: Methylphenidate

As the first drug to see widespread use for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), methylphenidate was the forerunner and catalyst to the modern era of rapidly increasing diagnosis, treatment, and medication development for this condition. During its often controversial history, it has variously elucidated the importance of dopamine signaling in memory and attention, provoked concerns about pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement, driven innovation in controlled-release technologies and enantiospecific therapeutics, and stimulated debate about the impact of pharmaceutical sales techniques on the practice of medicine. In this Review, we will illustrate the history and importance of methylphenidate to ADHD treatment and neuroscience in general, as well as provide key information about its synthesis, structure-activity relationship, pharmacological activity, metabolism, manufacturing, FDA-approved indications, and adverse effects.

Impact of alcohol and alcohol mixed with energy drinks on non-medical prescription stimulant use in a nationally representative sample of 12th-grade students

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Approximately 30% of high school students use energy drinks. Alcohol use and alcohol mixed with energy drink use (AmED) is associated with risky behavior, including non-medical prescription stimulant use. We assessed alcohol-only, AmED and non-medical prescription stimulant use among 12th grade students in the U.S. using a nationally representative secondary data from the 2012 Monitoring the Future Study.

METHODS

Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests and logistic regression analyses were used to determine differences in non-medical prescription stimulant use by students who used alcohol-only versus AmED and to identify covariates of non-medical prescription stimulant use. Pearson-product moment coefficients were used to determine strength of variable relationships.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found in frequency of Ritalin (p < .001, Cohen's d = .23) and Adderall (p < .001, Cohen's d = .32) use between alcohol-only students and AmED students. Greater frequency of AmED use was also associated with greater frequency of Ritalin use (r = .293, p < .001) and Adderall use (r = .353, p < .001). Males (b = .138, OR = 1.148) were more likely to use prescription stimulants non-medically than females.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the need to better understand influences on non-medical prescription stimulant, energy drink and AmED use, as the combined effects of stimulants contained in energy drinks and the depressant effects of alcohol appear to be associated with increased non-medical prescription stimulant use.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Research on the influential factors related to energy drinks, alcohol, and non-medical prescription stimulants will help practitioners to more appropriately design prevention and intervention strategies addressing these high-risk behaviors. (Am J Addict 2016;25:378-384).