A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Guanfacine Extended Release in Adolescents With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Recent advances in pharmacological management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: moving beyond stimulants

INTRODUCTION

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioral disorder characterized by impairing inattention and/or hyperactivity and impulsivity in children and adults. Although medications have been available to treat ADHD symptoms for decades, many are stimulant formulations. Stimulants, such as amphetamine and methylphenidate, are available in more than two dozen formulations, but all have similar adverse effects and carry a risk of misuse and dependence.

AREAS COVERED

In the United States (US), several nonstimulants are available to treat ADHD. Two, including atomoxetine and viloxazine extended-release (ER), are approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of ADHD in children and adults. Two others, clonidine ER and guanfacine ER, are only approved for children and adolescents in the US. Several other compounds are under investigation. Drugs in Phase 3 trials include centanafadine, solriamfetol, and L-threonic acid magnesium salt. Efficacy and safety data for nonstimulants is presented.

EXPERT OPINION

Although many effective formulations for the treatment of ADHD are available, more than 33% of children and 50% of adults discontinue treatment during the first year. The lack of individual drug response and tolerability are reasons many stop treatment. The development of new nonstimulants may offer hope for patients who need medication alternatives.

An adolescent boy with kleptomania and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder treated with methylphenidate and guanfacine: A case report

We present the case of a patient, a boy of 16 years of age at initial presentation, with kleptomania, an impulse disorder characterized by an impulse to steal unneeded items, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The patient's parents reported that he would frequently impulsively steal items and money that he did not need. Cognitive and physical assessments revealed no abnormalities, and the patient had no history of substance abuse. The patient was diagnosed with kleptomania and ADHD. The patient was started on Osmotic Release Oral System Methylphenidate (OROS-MPH), a medication commonly used to treat ADHD, and experienced improvement in ADHD symptoms and stealing behavior. At 19 years of age, it was discovered that the patient's behavioral symptoms were uncontrolled during times of the day when the blood concentration of MPH was likely to have waned. After starting an additional dose of guanfacine at night, his symptoms during these times of day improved. While existing research is not definitive, there may be a connection between ADHD and kleptomania. Further, there are some reports that treatment of ADHD with MPH also reduced stealing behavior, aligning with our present findings. We discuss the potential mechanisms behind these improvements and further present the first evidence of the efficacy of guanfacine in the treatment of kleptomania.

An updated safety review of the current drugs for managing ADHD in children

INTRODUCTION

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a highly prevalent condition that causes persistent problems with attention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity and often results in significant impairment when left untreated. Medications for this disorder continue to evolve and provide new treatment options. Ongoing review of related medication safety and tolerability remains an important task for prescribers.

AREAS COVERED

This manuscript provides an updated safety review of medications used to treat ADHD in children and adolescents. PubMed and OneSearch online databases were utilized to search for literature relevant to the topic of ADHD medications and safety. Clinical trials of medications used to treat ADHD, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and articles covering specific safety issues (adverse or unfavorable events) such as cardiovascular effects, seizures, impact on growth, depression, suicidal ideation, substance use disorders, psychosis, and tics are described.

EXPERT OPINION

Available pharmacologic treatments for ADHD have favorable efficacy, safety and tolerability and allow many patients to achieve significant improvement of their symptoms. Despite the availability of multiple stimulant and non-stimulant formulations, some individuals with ADHD may not tolerate available medications or attain satisfactory improvement. To satisfy unmet clinical needs, ADHD pharmaceutical research with stimulant and nonstimulant formulations targeting dopamine, norepinephrine, and novel receptors is ongoing.

The Role of Alpha-2 Agonists for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children: A Review

INTRODUCTION

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders, characterized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), which is marked by symptoms such as inappropriate levels of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity that can affect academic, social, and personal functioning in children and adolescents. This review summarizes clinical trials demonstrating the effectiveness of Alpha-2 agonists in reducing symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity in children with ADHD. Studies were identified through a systematic search of PubMed and Cochrane databases. However, these medications' long-term safety and efficacy remain uncertain, with a lack of data on their effects on growth, cardiovascular function, and other adverse events. Further studies are required to determine these medications' optimal dose and treatment duration.

METHODS

Medications that target the noradrenergic system, such as Alpha-2 agonists, have been increasingly used as a treatment option for ADHD, with guanfacine and clonidine being two of the most commonly used medications. They function by selectively targeting Alpha-2 adrenergic receptors in the brain leading to improved attention and reduced hyperactivity and impulsivity symptoms in children with ADHD.

RESULTS

Clinical trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of Alpha-2 agonists in treating ADHD in children by reducing symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. However, these medications' long-term safety and efficacy still need to be completely understood. Due to a lack of information on the effects of Alpha-2 agonists on growth, cardiovascular function, and other long-term adverse events, more studies must investigate the optimal dose and treatment duration for these medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite these concerns, Alpha-2 agonists remain a valuable treatment option for ADHD in children, especially those unable to tolerate stimulant medications or who have coexisting conditions such as tic disorders. Future research should continue to explore the safety and efficacy of Alpha-2 agonists in the long term. In conclusion, Alpha-2 agonists show promise as a treatment for ADHD in children; however, the safety and efficacy of these drugs in the long term are not yet completely understood. Additional studies are required to investigate the optimal dose and treatment duration for these medications in their use as a treatment for this debilitating disease.

Dexmedetomidine alleviates host ADHD-like behaviors by reshaping the gut microbiota and reducing gut-brain inflammation

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most prevalent psychiatric disorders that affects children and even continues into adulthood. Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a short-term sedative, can selectively activate the α2-adrenoceptor. Treatment with α2-adrenergic agonists in patients with ADHD is becoming increasingly common. However, the therapeutic potential of DEX for the treatment of ADHD is unknown. Here, we evaluated the effect of DEX on ADHD-like behavior in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHRs), a widely used animal model of ADHD. DEX treatment ameliorated hyperactivity and spatial working memory deficits and normalized θ electroencephalogram (EEG) rhythms in SHRs. We also found that DEX treatment altered the gut microbiota composition and promoted the enrichment of beneficial gut bacterial genera associated with anti-inflammatory effects in SHRs. The gut pathological scores and permeability and the level of inflammation observed in the gut and brain were remarkably improved after DEX administration. Moreover, transplantation of fecal microbiota from DEX-treated SHRs produced effects that mimicked the therapeutic effects of DEX administration. Therefore, DEX is a promising treatment for ADHD that functions by reshaping the composition of the gut microbiota and reducing inflammation in the gut and brain.

Guanfacine for the Treatment of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Non-stimulant guanfacine is a common second-line medication for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored the efficacy of guanfacine in ADHD treatment. This meta-analysis combined data from selected RCTs to analyze the efficacy and safety of guanfacine in treating ADHD. Methods: RCTs were identified from published sources through searches in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase (up to February 2022), defining the Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) treatment response score of ≤2 as the primary outcome. Subgroup analysis was performed with a bound treatment duration of 10 weeks. Safety was defined by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: Twelve out of 332 studies with 2653 participants were included. All studies compared guanfacine with placebos. Guanfacine was significantly more effective in treating ADHD (Risk Ratio [RR] 1.78, 95% CI: 1.59-2.01). In the <10 weeks subgroup, the efficacy in the guanfacine group compared with the placebo group was 58.5% versus 29.4%, respectively (RR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.71-2.26). In the >10 weeks subgroup, the efficacy in the guanfacine group compared with the placebo group was 63.6% versus 39.7%, respectively (RR 1.57, 95% CI: 1.37-1.79). Both subgroups lacked heterogeneity (I² = 0), and a funnel plot showed a low publication bias risk. Around 80% of participants in the guanfacine group experienced at least one TEAE, compared with 66.5% in the placebo group (RR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.14-1.32), with low heterogeneity (I² = 46, p = 0.05). The most common TEAEs in the guanfacine group were somnolence (38.6%), headaches (20.5%), and fatigue (15.2%). Conclusions: Guanfacine is safe and effective for treating ADHD, with no serious adverse events. Guanfacine should be considered as an effective treatment option where effectiveness or tolerability of the central nervous system stimulant is of concern. There is stronger evidence of efficacy for children; more clinical studies are needed for adults.

A post hoc analysis of the effect of viloxazine extended-release capsules on learning and school problems in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Improvement in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms vs. placebo was reported in a series of pediatric clinical trials of viloxazine extended-release capsules (viloxazine ER; Qelbree™). This post hoc analysis of those studies evaluated the effect of viloxazine ER on learning and school problems (LSPs). We used data from four Phase 3 placebo-controlled trials of 100-600 mg/day viloxazine ER (N = 1354; 6-17 years of age). LSPs were evaluated using the School domain of the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P-S) and the Learning Problems content scale of the Conners 3rd Edition-Parent Short Form (C3PS-LP) at baseline and end of study (≥ Week 6). ADHD symptoms were assessed weekly using the ADHD Rating Scale 5th Edition. The analyses were performed using the general linear mixed model with participant as a random effect. The responder analyses were performed using the Chi-square test. Viloxazine ER demonstrated significantly greater improvements in WFIRS-P-S (p < 0.0001) and C3PS-LP (p = 0.0113) scores vs. placebo. The response rate for the WFIRS-P-S was significantly greater for viloxazine ER vs. placebo (p = 0.001), and the number needed to treat (NNT) was 10.3 (effect size 0.7). Conversely, response rates for C3PS-LP did not differ between groups (p = 0.9069). In addition to ADHD symptoms improvement demonstrated in previous studies, viloxazine ER significantly reduced LSPs in pediatric subjects with ADHD. The responder analyses and NNT estimates indicate that a substantial number of children and adolescents with ADHD treated with viloxazine ER improved in clinically assessed LSPs.

Methylphenidate, Guanfacine, and Combined Treatment Effects on Electroencephalography Correlates of Spatial Working Memory in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The combination of d-methylphenidate and guanfacine (an α-2A adrenergic agonist) may be an effective alternative to either agent as monotherapy in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study investigated the neural mechanisms underlying medication effects using cortical source analysis of electroencephalography (EEG) data.

METHOD

A total of 172 children with ADHD (aged 7-14; 118 boys) completed an 8-week randomized, double-blind, comparative study with 3 treatment arms: d-methylphenidate, guanfacine, or their combination. EEG modulations of brain oscillations at baseline and end point were measured during a spatial working memory task from cortical sources localized within the anterior cingulate (midfrontal) and primary visual cortex (midoccipital), based on previously reported ADHD and control differences. Linear mixed models examined treatment effects on EEG and performance measures.

RESULTS

Combined treatment decreased midoccipital EEG power across most frequency bands and task phases. Several midoccipital EEG measures also showed significantly greater changes with combined treatment than with monotherapies. D-methylphenidate significantly increased midoccipital theta during retrieval, while guanfacine produced only trend-level reductions in midoccipital alpha during maintenance and retrieval. Task accuracy improved with combined treatment, was unchanged with d-methylphenidate, and worsened with guanfacine. Treatment-related changes in midoccipital power correlated with improvement in ADHD severity.

CONCLUSION

These findings show that combined treatment ameliorates midoccipital neural activity associated with treatment-related behavioral improvements and previously implicated in visuo-attentional deficits in ADHD. Both monotherapies had limited effects on EEG measures, with guanfacine further showing detrimental effects on performance. The identified midoccipital EEG profile may aid future treatment monitoring for children with ADHD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Single Versus Combination Medication Treatment for Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Project1); https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00429273.

DIVERSITY & INCLUSION STATEMENT

We worked to ensure race, ethnic, and/or other types of diversity in the recruitment of human participants. We worked to ensure sex and gender balance in the recruitment of human participants. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our reference list. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group.

Viloxazine for the Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Purpose of Review

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a widely diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorder giving rise to symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsivity, and inattentiveness that can impair daily functioning. Stimulants, such as methylphenidate and amphetamines, are the mainstay of treatment for ADHD. However, nonstimulant drugs such as viloxazine, atomoxetine, guanfacine, and clonidine are becoming more popular due to minimal adverse effects when compared to stimulants.

Recent Findings

Viloxazine is a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (NRI) originally used to treat depression in adults with activity in both the noradrenergic as well as serotonergic pathways. Studies have demonstrated its efficacy for its use in the treatment of ADHD. Unlike stimulants, viloxazine has a decreased chance of substance abuse, drug dependance, and withdrawal symptoms upon the cessation of therapy. Additionally, dopamine levels in the nucleus accumbens after treatment with viloxazine are elevated considerably less in comparison with traditional stimulant ADHD treatments. Viloxazine provides an alternative, nonstimulant approach to treating ADHD.

Summary

Viloxazine is a recently approved, non-stimulant medication functions by inhibiting the uptake of norepinephrine which has been seen to be decreased in patients with ADHD. When patients do not respond to first-line stimulants, cannot tolerate the side effects, or have contraindications to stimulants, viloxazine may be a nonstimulant option offering patients an increasing arsenal of medications to treat ADHD.

Nonstimulant Treatments for ADHD

Nonstimulants have an important role when response or tolerability to psychostimulants is poor, when certain comorbid disorders are present, or if patients prefer nonstimulants. Here, we discuss monotherapy and combined treatment of ADHD and review mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, tolerability, and safety of approved, off-label, and pipeline nonstimulants. We present detailed information regarding the 4 FDA-approved nonstimulant medications-the norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, atomoxetine and viloxazine extended release, and the α-2 adrenergic agonists, clonidine XR and guanfacine XR. We additionally review evidence regarding the off-label use of a variety of other medications. Variability across and within drug classes in nature of response, approach to titration, and temporal characteristics of treatment allow a nuanced treatment approach for individuals with comorbid disorders and complicated clinical presentations. Availability of nonstimulant medications enhances our opportunity to offer personalized treatment of ADHD across the lifespan.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder: A Narrative Review

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has a growing incidence and prevalence in the United States and throughout the world, much of which is contributed to increased awareness of the condition and solidified diagnostic criteria. Substance use disorder (SUD) similarly has seen a sharp increase, particularly with the rising cases of opioid abuse. Management of ADHD is done primarily with pharmacologic therapy, often stimulants and with psychosocial interventions (i.e., exercise, meditation, peer-to-peer intervention, etc.) for adjunctive management. Management of SUD involves cessation and treatment based on the underlying drug of abuse. Many clinicians are uncomfortable treating ADHD in patients with SUD based on concerns the intervention may lead to an adverse event, including drug relapse, and the development of other psychiatric comorbidities. Concerns also arise about stimulants acting as a gateway drug in adolescents leading to the onset of SUD. Thus, in this narrative review, we aim to shed light on ADHD in relation to SUD and to provide clinical insight based on the current scientific literature on the topic. ADHD causes lesions in subcortical structures in the basal ganglia and limbic system. Treatment of ADHD with stimulants has been shown to normalize malformed neuroanatomical variations and lead to improved long-term outcomes compared to non-treatment of ADHD. Based on current scientific literature, it is recommended to treat ADHD with guideline-directed pharmacologic agents including stimulants along with non-pharmacologic interventions primarily exercise. There may be some improvement in reducing risky behavior, such as substance abuse, and may even help prevent the development of SUD.

Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Substance Use Disorder and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Review

Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for the development of substance abuse and substance use disorders (SUD) in adolescence and (early) adulthood. ADHD and SUD also frequently co-occur in treatment-seeking adolescents, which complicates diagnosis and treatment, and is associated with poor treatment outcomes. In this study, we provide a systematic review of controlled studies on the effectiveness of pharmacological, psychosocial, and complementary treatments of ADHD in adolescents with and without comorbid SUD. In addition, we review the longitudinal association between pharmacotherapy for childhood ADHD and the development of SUD in adolescence and early adulthood. We conducted a systematic review of the research literature published since 2000 using Medline, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases to select randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses. The quality of the evidence from each study was rated using the SIGN grading system. Based on the limited evidence available, strong clinical recommendations are not justified, but provisionally, we conclude that stimulant treatment in children with ADHD may prevent the development of SUD in adolescence or young adulthood, that high-dose stimulant treatment could be an effective treatment for adolescents with ADHD and SUD comorbidity, that cognitive behavior therapy might have a small beneficial effect in these patients, and that alternative treatments are probably not effective. More studies are needed to draw definitive conclusions that will allow for strong clinical recommendations.

[International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder]

International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder Abstract. Background: Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for substance misuse and substance use disorder (SUD) in adolescence and (early) adulthood. ADHD and SUD also frequently co-occur in treatment-seeking adolescents, which complicates diagnosis and treatment and is associated with poor treatment outcomes. Research on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on the prevention of adolescent SUD is inconclusive, and studies on the diagnosis and treatment of adolescents with ADHD and SUD are scarce. Thus, the available evidence is generally not sufficient to justify robust treatment recommendations. Objective: The aim of the study was to obtain a consensus statement based on a combination of scientific data and clinical experience. Method: A modified Delphi study to reach consensus based upon the combination of scientific data and clinical experience with a multidisciplinary group of 55 experts from 17 countries. The experts were asked to rate a set of statements on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on adolescent SUD and on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of adolescents with comorbid ADHD and SUD. Results: After 3 iterative rounds of rating and adapting 37 statements, consensus was reached on 36 of these statements representing 6 domains: general (n = 4), risk of developing SUD (n = 3), screening and diagnosis (n = 7), psychosocial treatment (n = 5), pharmacological treatment (n = 11), and complementary treatments (n = 7). Routine screening is recommended for ADHD in adolescent patients in substance abuse treatment and for SUD in adolescent patients with ADHD in mental healthcare settings. Long-acting stimulants are recommended as the first-line treatment of ADHD in adolescents with concurrent ADHD and SUD, and pharmacotherapy should preferably be embedded in psychosocial treatment. The only remaining no-consensus statement concerned the requirement of abstinence before starting pharmacological treatment in adolescents with ADHD and concurrent SUD. In contrast to the majority, some experts required full abstinence before starting any pharmacological treatment, some were against the use of stimulants in the treatment of these patients (independent of abstinence), while some were against the alternative use of bupropion. Conclusion: This international consensus statement can be used by clinicians and patients together in a shared decision-making process to select the best interventions and to reach optimal outcomes in adolescent patients with concurrent ADHD and SUD.

α2-Adrenergic Agonists or Stimulants for Preschool-Age Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Importance

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is diagnosed in approximately 2.4% of preschool-age children. Stimulants are recommended as first-line medication treatment. However, up to 25% of preschool-age children with ADHD are treated with α2-adrenergic agonist medications, despite minimal evidence about their efficacy or adverse effects in this age range.

Objective

To determine the frequency of reported improvement in ADHD symptoms and adverse effects associated with α2-adrenergic agonists and stimulant medication for initial ADHD medication treatment in preschool-age children.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective electronic health record review. Data were obtained from health records of children seen at 7 outpatient developmental-behavioral pediatric practices in the Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics Research Network in the US. Data were abstracted for 497 consecutive children who were younger than 72 months when treatment with an α2-adrenergic agonist or stimulant medication was initiated by a developmental-behavioral pediatrician for ADHD and were treated between January 1, 2013, and July 1, 2017. Follow-up was complete on February 27, 2019.

Exposures

α2-Adrenergic agonist vs stimulant medication as initial ADHD medication treatment.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reported improvement in ADHD symptoms and adverse effects.

Results

Data were abstracted from electronic health records of 497 preschool-age children with ADHD receiving α2-adrenergic agonists or stimulants. Median child age was 62 months at ADHD medication initiation, and 409 children (82%) were males. For initial ADHD medication treatment, α2-adrenergic agonists were prescribed to 175 children (35%; median length of α2-adrenergic agonist use, 136 days) and stimulants were prescribed to 322 children (65%; median length of stimulant use, 133 days). Improvement was reported in 66% (95% CI, 57.5%-73.9%) of children who initiated α2-adrenergic agonists and 78% (95% CI, 72.4%-83.4%) of children who initiated stimulants. Only daytime sleepiness was more common for those receiving α2-adrenergic agonists vs stimulants (38% vs 3%); several adverse effects were reported more commonly for those receiving stimulants vs α2-adrenergic agonists, including moodiness/irritability (50% vs 29%), appetite suppression (38% vs 7%), and difficulty sleeping (21% vs 11%).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this retrospective review of health records of preschool-age children with ADHD treated in developmental-behavioral pediatric practices, improvement was noted in the majority of children who received α2-adrenergic agonists or stimulants, with differing adverse effect profiles between medication classes. Further research, including from randomized clinical trials, is needed to assess comparative effectiveness of α2-adrenergic agonists vs stimulants.

Once-Daily SPN-812 200 and 400 mg in the treatment of ADHD in School-aged Children: A Phase III Randomized, Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

SPN-812 (viloxazine extended-release) is under investigation for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents. This Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of SPN-812 200 and 400 mg once daily in children 6-11 years of age with ADHD.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive SPN-812 200 mg, SPN-812 400 mg, or placebo, once daily for 8 weeks (including ≤3 weeks titration period). The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline (CFB) in ADHD Rating Scale (RS)-5 Total score at end of study (EOS). Key secondary endpoints included Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) score at EOS, CFB in Conners 3-Parent Short Form (PS) composite T-score at EOS, and CFB in Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent (WFIRS-P) Total average score at EOS.

FINDINGS

A total of 313 patients were enrolled, with 301 in the intent-to-treat population (194 boys, 107 girls; mean age [SD], 8.4 [1.7] years). At EOS, the CFBs in ADHD-RS-5 Total score and CGI-I score were significantly improved with both 200- and 400-mg/d SPN-812 versus placebo (ADHD-RS-5, P = 0.0038 and 0.0063, respectively; CGI-I, P = 0.0028 and 0.0099). At EOS, the CFB in Conners 3-PS composite T-score was significantly improved with 200- (P = 0.0064), but not 400-mg/d (P = 0.0917), SPN-812 compared to placebo. No significant difference between the groups was found in WFIRS-P Total average score. The rate of discontinuations due to adverse events in both SPN-812 treatment groups combined was <5%.

IMPLICATIONS

SPN-812 200 and 400 mg once daily was associated with improvements in ADHD symptoms in school-aged children and was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03247543.

Functional impairment outcomes in clinical trials of different ADHD medications: post hoc responder analyses and baseline subgroup analyses

Several recent phase 3 clinical trials of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications have used the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P). Here, we assess WFIRS-P response in individual patients in two pivotal trials of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and guanfacine extended release (GXR). We also analysed pooled WFIRS-P data from seven phase 3 studies of ADHD medications to shed light on factors associated with baseline functional impairment. The proportion of patients with a change in WFIRS-P score that exceeded the minimal important difference (MID) criteria for response was greater for LDX than placebo in the Family, Learning and School, and Risky Activities domains, and was greater for GXR than placebo in the Social Activities, Learning and School, and Family domains. Responders had significantly worse baseline scores in all WFIRS-P domains (all p < 0.001) than non-responders. In the pooled analyses, baseline WFIRS-P scores in all domains were significantly worse in participants with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) than in those without ODD. Having combined type or hyperactive-impulsive type ADHD, being enrolled into a study in Europe, being male and being younger also had modest negative effects on baseline WFIRS-P scores. The present analysis of WFIRS-P response shows that previously reported group-level improvements in WFIRS-P functional impairment score translated into clinically relevant improvements in many individual participants. Functional impairment is a diverse and subjective construct that is influenced by multiple factors. Optimal management of individuals with ADHD should involve monitoring improvements in functioning and quality of life, as well as symptomatic improvement.

Efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended-release in Japanese adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Exploratory post hoc subgroup analyses of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Aim

Previously, we reported on the efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended‐release (GXR) in Japanese adults with attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from a phase 3, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomized trial. In this exploratory post hoc analysis, we assessed the efficacy and/or safety of GXR in the following subgroups: ADHD‐combined (ADHD‐C) and ADHD‐predominantly inattentive (ADHD‐I) subtypes, age (≥31, <31 years), sex (male, female), and body weight (≥50, <50 kg).

Methods

The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the Japanese version of the investigator‐rated ADHD‐Rating Scale‐IV (ADHD‐RS‐IV) with adult prompts (total scores) at week 10.

Results

The efficacy analysis population included 200 patients (GXR, 100; placebo, 100). ADHD‐RS‐IV total score effect sizes (GXR vs placebo) were similar across all subgroups (total population: 0.52, ADHD‐C: 0.51, ADHD‐I: 0.52, ≥31 years: 0.61, <31 years: 0.47, male: 0.50, female: 0.57). There were no major differences in the incidence/types of treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) across the subgroups. The incidence of significant TEAEs (34.3%, 10.6%) and TEAEs leading to discontinuation (34.3%, 12.1%) were approximately three times higher in females than males, respectively. The incidence of TEAEs in patients weighing <50 kg and ≥50 kg was 100% and 73.6% during dose optimization and 40% and 24.4% during the maintenance period, respectively.

Conclusion

Findings from this post hoc analysis in adults with ADHD support the efficacy and safety of GXR regardless of ADHD subtype, age, or sex and suggest that careful monitoring for TEAEs and GXR dose optimization is considered for all patients, as needed.

In this exploratory post hoc analysis, we assessed the efficacy and/or safety of guanfacine extended release (GXR) in the following subgroups: attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) subtypes (ADHD‐combined, ADHD‐predominantly inattentive), age (≥31 years, <31 years), sex (male, female), and body weight (<50 kg, ≥50 kg). ADHD‐Rating Scale‐IV with adult prompts total score effect sizes (GXR vs placebo at 10 weeks) were similar across all subgroups. The findings support the efficacy and safety of GXR in adults regardless of ADHD subtype, age, or sex and suggest that careful monitoring for TEAEs and GXR dose optimization is considered for all patients, as needed.

Efficacy of Guanfacine Extended Release in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Comorbid Oppositional Defiant Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of the non-stimulant guanfacine extended release (GXR) on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in children and adolescents, with and without comorbid oppositional defiant disorder (ODD).

METHODS

Data were derived from 4 phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of dose-optimized GXR monotherapy, in which at least 10% of participants had a diagnosis of comorbid ODD. SPD503-312 and SPD503-316 were 10- to 13-week studies of GXR (1-7 mg/d). SPD503-314 and SPD503-307 were 8-week studies of GXR (1-4 mg/d). Efficacy was assessed using the ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total scores.

RESULTS

In total, 1,084 participants were included (SPD503-312 and SPD503-316, n = 537; SPD503-314, n = 333; and SPD503-307, n = 214). GXR was associated with significant improvements in ADHD core symptoms at endpoint in participants with and without ODD (p < 0.01 in all studies). Placebo-adjusted least-squares mean (95% confidence interval) changes from baseline to endpoint in the ADHD-RS-IV total scores in participants with and without ODD were -8.6 (-14.4, -2.8) and -7.3 (-9.5, -5.0) in the pooled data from SPD503-312 and SPD503-316, -12.6 (-19.6, -5.7) and -8.7 (-11.8, -5.5) in SPD503-314, and -12.7 (-17.3, -8.1) and -11.8 (-19.3, -4.4) in SPD503-307, respectively. The corresponding effect sizes were 0.688 and 0.598 in SPD503-312 and SPD503-316, 0.876 and 0.729 in SPD503-314, and 0.962 and 0.842 in SPD503-307.

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrate the efficacy of GXR for treating ADHD in children and adolescents with comorbid ODD.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), like other psychiatric disorders, represents an evolving construct that has been refined and developed over the past several decades in response to research into its clinical nature and structure. The clinical presentation and course of the disorder have been extensively characterised. Efficacious medication-based treatments are available and widely used, often alongside complementary psychosocial approaches. However, their effectiveness has been questioned because they might not address the broader clinical needs of many individuals with ADHD, especially over the longer term. Non-pharmacological approaches to treatment have proven less effective than previously thought, whereas scientific and clinical studies are starting to fundamentally challenge current conceptions of the causes of ADHD in ways that might have the potential to alter clinical approaches in the future. In view of this, we first provide an account of the diagnosis, epidemiology, and treatment of ADHD from the perspective of both the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the eleventh edition of the International Classification of Diseases. Second, we review the progress in our understanding of the causes and pathophysiology of ADHD on the basis of science over the past decade or so. Finally, using these discoveries, we explore some of the key challenges to both the current models and the treatment of ADHD, and the ways in which these findings can promote new perspectives.

Guanfacine treatment improves ADHD phenotypes of impulsivity and hyperactivity in a neurofibromatosis type 1 mouse model

Background

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is an autosomal dominant disorder with a mutation in one copy of the neurofibromin gene (NF1^+/−). Even though approximately 40–60% of children with NF1 meet the criteria for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), very few preclinical studies, if any, have investigated alterations in impulsivity and risk-taking behavior. Mice with deletion of a single NF1 gene (Nf1^+/−) recapitulate many of the phenotypes of NF1 patients.

Methods

We compared wild-type (WT) and Nf1^+/− mouse strains to investigate differences in impulsivity and hyperactivity using the delay discounting task (DDT), cliff avoidance reaction (CAR) test, and open field. We also investigated whether treatment with the clinically effective alpha-2A adrenergic receptor agonist, guanfacine (0.3 mg/kg, i.p.), would reverse deficits observed in behavioral inhibition.

Results

Nf1^+/− mice chose a higher percentage of smaller rewards when both 10- and 20-s delays were administered compared to WT mice, suggesting Nf1^+/− mice are more impulsive. When treated with guanfacine (0.3 mg/kg, i.p.), Nf1^+/− mice exhibited decreased impulsive choice by waiting for the larger, delayed reward. Nf1^+/− mice also exhibited deficits in behavioral inhibition compared to WT mice in the CAR test by repetitively entering the outer edge of the platform where they risk falling. Treatment with guanfacine ameliorated these deficits. In addition, Nf1^+/− mice exhibited hyperactivity as increased distance was traveled compared to WT controls in the open field. This hyperactivity in Nf1^+/− mice was reduced with guanfacine pre-treatment.

Conclusions

Overall, our study confirms that Nf1^+/− mice exhibit deficits in behavioral inhibition in multiple contexts, a key feature of ADHD, and can be used as a model system to identify alterations in neural circuitry associated with symptoms of ADHD in children with NF1.

International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for substance misuse and substance use disorder (SUD) in adolescence and (early) adulthood. ADHD and SUD also frequently co-occur in treatment-seeking adolescents, which complicates diagnosis and treatment and is associated with poor treatment outcomes. Research on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on the prevention of adolescent SUD is inconclusive, and studies on the diagnosis and treatment of adolescents with ADHD and SUD are scarce. Thus, the available evidence is generally not sufficient to justify robust treatment recommendations.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to obtain a consensus statement based on a combination of scientific data and clinical experience.

METHOD

A modified Delphi study to reach consensus based upon the combination of scientific data and clinical experience with a multidisciplinary group of 55 experts from 17 countries. The experts were asked to rate a set of statements on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on adolescent SUD and on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of adolescents with comorbid ADHD and SUD.

RESULTS

After 3 iterative rounds of rating and adapting 37 statements, consensus was reached on 36 of these statements representing 6 domains: general (n = 4), risk of developing SUD (n = 3), screening and diagnosis (n = 7), psychosocial treatment (n = 5), pharmacological treatment (n = 11), and complementary treatments (n = 7). Routine screening is recommended for ADHD in adolescent patients in substance abuse treatment and for SUD in adolescent patients with ADHD in mental healthcare settings. Long-acting stimulants are recommended as the first-line treatment of ADHD in adolescents with concurrent ADHD and SUD, and pharmacotherapy should preferably be embedded in psychosocial treatment. The only remaining no-consensus statement concerned the requirement of abstinence before starting pharmacological treatment in adolescents with ADHD and concurrent SUD. In contrast to the majority, some experts required full abstinence before starting any pharmacological treatment, some were against the use of stimulants in the treatment of these patients (independent of abstinence), while some were against the alternative use of bupropion.

CONCLUSION

This international consensus statement can be used by clinicians and patients together in a shared decision-making process to select the best interventions and to reach optimal outcomes in adolescent patients with concurrent ADHD and SUD.

The use of reaction time distributions to study attention in male rats: the effects of atomoxetine and guanfacine

RATIONALE

Norepinephrine (NE) is involved in the control of sustained attention. Studies of sustained attention in humans include measures of reaction time (RT) and RT variability (RTV). The present study tested the role of NE using components of the RT distribution in rats in a manner thought to be similar to human studies of RTV.

OBJECTIVES

This study tested the effects of increased synaptic NE (atomoxetine (ATX)) and α-2 receptor binding (guanfacine) on attentional lapses in rats.

METHODS

Male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 20) were trained and tested in a two-choice RT task (2CRTT). Atomoxetine dose (saline, 0.1, 0.5, 1.0 mg/kg, i.p.), guanfacine dose (saline, 0.01, 0.1, 0.3 mg/kg, i.p.), and distractors were manipulated in three experiments. RT was divided into initiation time (IT) and movement time (MT). Analyses of distribution mode (peak) and deviation from the mode (skew) were then performed.

RESULTS

ATX and guanfacine had no effect on IT mode, reduced IT devmode, and increased MT mode. When distractors were introduced, ATX again improved devmode, but a lack of interaction between ATX and distractor indicated that ATX did not prevent distractor-induced impairments.

CONCLUSIONS

IT devmode is a measure of distribution skew thought to reflect lapses of attention. The effects of ATX on IT devmode suggest that increased synaptic NE reduces attentional lapses. These findings are consistent with human reports of reduced RTV after ATX administration. The same pattern of results with guanfacine suggests that the effects of increased NE are due in part to binding at α-2 noradrenergic receptors.

Correlations Between Clinical Trial Outcomes Based on Symptoms, Functional Impairments, and Quality of Life in Children and Adolescents With ADHD

OBJECTIVE

To assess relationships between treatment-associated changes in measures of ADHD symptoms, functional impairments, and health-related quality of life in children and adolescents with ADHD.

METHOD

Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated post hoc for changes from baseline to endpoint in outcomes of one randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trial of lisdexamfetamine (osmotic-release methylphenidate reference) and one of guanfacine extended-release (atomoxetine reference).

RESULTS

Changes in ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score generally correlated moderately with changes in Child Health and Illness Profile-Child Edition: Parent Report Form (CHIP-CE:PRF) Achievement and Risk Avoidance ( r ≈ .4), but weakly with Resilience, Satisfaction, and Comfort ( r ≈ .2); and moderately with Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent (WFIRS-P) total score ( r ≈ .5).

CHIP-CE

PRF Achievement and Risk Avoidance correlated moderately to strongly with WFIRS-P total score ( r ≈ .6).

CONCLUSION

The ADHD-RS-IV, CHIP-CE:PRF, and WFIRS-P capture distinct but interconnected aspects of treatment response in individuals with ADHD.

Weight and Height in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Longitudinal Database Study Assessing the Impact of Guanfacine, Stimulants, and No Pharmacotherapy

Objectives: To assess the impact of long-term pharmacotherapy with guanfacine immediate- or extended-release (GXR), administered alone or as an adjunctive to a stimulant, on weight and height in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: Data were extracted from U.S. Department of Defense medical records for patients 4-17 years of age at index date (initiation of any study medication following a year without ADHD medications, or diagnosis if unmedicated) with weight/height measurements for the analysis period (January 2009-June 2013) and the previous year (baseline). Longitudinal weight and height z-scores were analyzed using multivariable regression in three cohorts: guanfacine (initial period of guanfacine exposure), first-line stimulant monotherapy (initial period of exposure), and unmedicated. Guanfacine cohort subgroups were based on previous/concurrent stimulant exposure. Results: The weight analyses included 47,910 patients (66.8% male) and the height analyses 41,248 (67.2% male). Mean initial exposure in the weight analyses was 237 days (standard deviation [SD] = 258, median = 142) for guanfacine and 257 days (SD = 284, median = 151) for first-line stimulant monotherapy, and was similar in the height analyses. Modeling indicated that guanfacine monotherapy was not associated with clinically meaningful deviations from normal z-score trajectories for weight (first-line, n = 943; nonfirst-line, n = 796) or height (first-line, n = 741; nonfirst-line, n = 644). In patients receiving guanfacine adjunctive to a stimulant, modeled weight (n = 1657) and height (n = 1343) z-scores followed declining trajectories. In this subgroup, mean standardized weight/height had decreased during previous stimulant monotherapy. For first-line stimulant monotherapy, modeled weight (n = 32,999) and height (n = 28,470) z-scores followed declining trajectories during year 1. In the unmedicated cohort, modeled weight (n = 11,515) and height (n = 10,050) z-scores were stable. Conclusions: Guanfacine monotherapy (first-line or nonfirst-line) was not associated with marked deviations from normal growth in this modeling study of children and adolescents with ADHD. In contrast, growth trajectories followed an initially declining course with stimulants, whether given alone or with adjunctive guanfacine.

Distinguishing the efficacy and sedative effects of guanfacine extended release in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

The present study investigated whether symptom reduction in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treated with guanfacine extended release (GXR) can be explained by sedative effects of the medication. Data from four double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials of GXR monotherapy (1-7 mg/day; morning administration) in children (aged 6-12 years) and adolescents (aged 13-17 years) with ADHD were analyzed post hoc. Two studies used forced-dose titration and two used flexible-dose titration. Efficacy was determined using ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) scores. Sedative treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) included somnolence, sedation and hypersomnia. The proportion of responders (≥ 30% reduction in ADHD-RS-IV total score) increased from weeks 1 to 4 and remained stable to study endpoint. Sedative TEAEs generally peaked at the first week in which the target dose was achieved and then declined. In subgroup analyses, significant placebo-adjusted improvements in ADHD-RS-IV total scores were observed in participants without any sedative TEAEs in the forced-dose and flexible-dose studies (nominal p < 0.001). In addition, GXR was associated with significant improvements in both inattentive and hyperactive-impulsive symptoms, as assessed by the ADHD-RS-IV subscale scores (nominal p < 0.001) and by the ADHD-RS-IV total score in participants with different ADHD subtypes (nominal p < 0.05). Thus, the efficacy of GXR in children and adolescents with ADHD is not primarily due to sedation, although some contribution to symptom reduction cannot be excluded, especially early in treatment when rates of sedative TEAEs are at their highest.

Treatment strategies for ADHD: an evidence-based guide to select optimal treatment

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common and impairing disorder affecting children, adolescents, and adults. Several treatment strategies are available that can successfully ameliorate symptoms, ranging from pharmacological to dietary interventions. Due to the increasing range of available options, an informed selection or prioritization of treatments is becoming harder for clinicians. This review aims to provide an evidence-based appraisal of the literature on ADHD treatment, supplemented by expert opinion on plausibility. We outline proposed mechanisms of action of established pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments, and we review targets of novel treatments. The most relevant evidence supporting efficacy and safety of each treatment strategy is discussed. We review the individualized features of the patient that should guide the selection of treatments in a shared decision-making continuum. We provide guidance for optimizing initiation of treatment and follow-up of patients in clinical settings.

Conceptual review of measuring functional impairment: findings from the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale

Objective

This is a narrative review of validation and outcome studies using the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale (WFIRS). The objective of the review is to establish a framework for understanding functional impairment and create a definition for functional response and remission.

Methods

We conducted a literature search via MEDLINE, EBSCO and Google Scholar with no date restrictions and reviewed bibliographies of selected publications. Publications found in languages other than English were translated and clarification obtained from the author(s) if needed. Inclusion criteria were any manuscript that was either a WFIRS psychometric validation study or a clinical trial using the WFIRS as an outcome. There were no exclusion criteria.

Results

The WFIRS has been validated in multiple cultures, and in clinical, research and control populations. The WFIRS has robust psychometric properties across ages, psychiatric status and informants. Outcome studies show variable improvement, with different response patterns between domains and among different interventions.

Conclusion

Symptom improvement and remission needs to be complemented with evaluation of functional improvement and remission to obtain a full picture of clinical status over the course of treatment.

Relationship Between Symptomatic and Functional Improvement and Remission in a Treatment Response to Stimulant Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between symptom and functional improvement and remission in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) enrolled in an 11-week open-label dose-optimization phase of an methylphenidate extended release (MPH-MLR) pivotal study.

METHODS

Assessments included the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent (WFIRS-P) and ADHD Rating Scale, Fourth Edition (ADHD-RS-IV). Definitions included the following: symptom improvement (≥30% decrease in ADHD-RS-IV total score); symptom remission (ADHD-RS-IV total score ≤18); functional improvement (decrease in WFIRS-P total score ≥0.25 [minimally important difference]); and functional remission (WFIRS-P total score ≤0.65).

RESULTS

Two hundred children completed the open-label phase. At initial assessment, functional impairment was evident across all WFIRS-P domains and similar between children and adolescents. Those who were treatment naive had more functional impairment (WFIRS-P total: 0.82 vs. 0.70, p = 0.02). Significant improvements in all WFIRS-P domains were noted at open-label end (p < 0.001), with the largest improvement in Learning. At open-label end, 94% of children and adolescents demonstrated symptom improvement, of which 57% also showed functional improvement, and 75% of children and adolescents showed symptom remission, of which 81% also showed functional remission.

CONCLUSIONS

Children and adolescents treated with MPH-MLR showed moderate-to-large improvement in functioning during 3 months of treatment, both overall and in specific domains. However, a significant number of those who would be considered symptomatic responders failed to show improvement in functioning or continue to have significant functional impairment. Treatment with MPH-MLR showed that both symptomatic and functional remission are achievable goals. Identification of children and adolescents who have been successfully treated for their symptoms, but continue to suffer functional impairment, will allow us to offer additional targeted treatment interventions over and above medication to address residual difficulties.

Long-term safety and efficacy of guanfacine extended release in children and adolescents with ADHD

Data are reported from SPD503-318, a phase 3, open-label, safety study of guanfacine extended release (GXR) in European children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Participants received dose-optimized GXR (1-7 mg/day) for up to 2 years. Of 215 enrolled participants, 214 were included in the safety population and 133 completed the study. Participants' mean age was 11.7 years and 73.8% were male. Overall, 177 participants (82.7%) experienced a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). TEAEs reported in at least 10% of participants were somnolence (36.0%), headache (28.5%), fatigue (20.1%), and nasopharyngitis (11.7%). Serious TEAEs were reported in 4.7% of participants and TEAEs leading to discontinuation were reported in 3.3% of participants. There were no deaths. Mean z-scores for BMI were stable throughout the study. The incidence of sedative TEAEs (somnolence, sedation, and hypersomnia) peaked during week 3 and decreased thereafter. Small changes from baseline to the final assessment in mean supine pulse [- 5.5 bpm (standard deviation, 12.98)] and blood pressure [systolic, 0.6 mmHg (9.32); diastolic, 0.2 mmHg (9.17)] were reported. ADHD symptoms initially decreased and remained significantly lower than baseline at study endpoint. At the final assessment, the mean change in ADHD-RS-IV total score from baseline was - 19.8 (standard error of mean, 0.84; nominal p < 0.0001). In conclusion, GXR was well tolerated and more than 60% of participants completed the 2-year study.

The Effects of Long-Acting Stimulant and Nonstimulant Medications in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of stimulant and nonstimulant medications in children and adolescents using as an outcome measure the Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV), and to examine the effect of medications in different ADHD subtypes (i.e., inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, EBSCO (E-journal, CINAHL and SportDiscus), PUBMED, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with parallel group or placebo-controlled studies comparing the effect of medications (stimulants or nonstimulants) in children and adolescents with ADHD were included. The main outcomes were the ADHD-RS-IV total score and subtypes (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and secondary outcomes such as systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and pulse rate were considered.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 15 RCTs, including a total of 4648 children and/or adolescents diagnosed with ADHD aged 6 to 17 years old. Overall, both stimulant and nonstimulant medications reduce the ADHD-RS-IV score with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.70 (confidence interval [95% CI], -0.85 to -0.55); in subgroup analyses, the SMD was -0.83 (95% CI, -1.11 to -0.54) for stimulant medications and -0.58 (95% CI, -0.69 to -0.46) for nonstimulant medications. Similar results were observed in inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity subtypes. The placebo group also showed a medium effect SMD of -0.68 (95% CI, -0.82 to -0.54). The most frequent TEAEs for stimulant and nonstimulant medications, respectively, were decreased appetite (28.6% and 14.2%) and somnolence (4.4% and 34.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that both stimulant and nonstimulant medications mitigate ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents, although subgroup analyses suggest a greater effectiveness of stimulant medications.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Transitional Aged Youth

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Extensive research has been conducted on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adults; however, less is known about ADHD during the transition from childhood to adulthood. Transitional aged youth (TAY) with ADHD represents a particularly vulnerable population as their newfound independence and responsibility often coincides with the development of comorbid disorders. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of TAY-ADHD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies discovering ADHD symptoms emerging in TAY call the classification of ADHD as a disorder necessarily developing in childhood into question. TAY-ADHD are also shown to be vulnerable to academic and social impairments, increased risky behavior, and comorbid psychiatric disorders. Due to the risk of stimulant diversion in TAY, providers are advised to take precaution when prescribing medication to this population. Recent studies demonstrating the efficacy of psychotherapy in conjunction with non-stimulant or extended release stimulant medication provide a feasible alternative. This review highlights research on the course and evaluation of ADHD, impairments and comorbidities specific to TAY, and treatments tailored to address the unique challenges associated with TAY-ADHD.

Autonomic instability in a dehydrated child on guanfacine: Case report and literature review

An 8-year-old girl on guanfacine extended-release (GXR) for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder presented with somnolence, bradycardia and hypotension during a heat wave. No overdose was suspected. She was admitted to the intensive care unit for monitoring and ongoing fluid resuscitation for hypotension. Electrocardiogram showed intermittent atrioventricular dissociation. Upon restarting the drug post-discharge, blood pressures were normal, and follow-up electrocardiograms documented asymptomatic bradycardia but no dissociation. GXR is used as monotherapy or adjunct therapy in the treatment of inattention and hyperactivity in children. No published paediatric or adult study has documented atrioventricular dissociation, bradycardia or hypotension significant enough to warrant hospital admission. This case suggests that GXR can pose a hemodynamic risk to children in the context of elevated environmental temperatures and dehydration. Clinicians should be aware of this potential complication and should counsel patients about signs and symptoms of hypotension, bradycardia, bradypnea and somnolence.

Systematic review of quality of life and functional outcomes in randomized placebo-controlled studies of medications for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Children, adolescents and adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) experience functional impairment and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in addition to symptoms of inattention/hyperactivity-impulsivity. To synthesize qualitatively the published evidence from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy on functional impairment or HRQoL in patients with ADHD, a systematic PubMed searching and screening strategy was designed to identify journal articles meeting pre-specified criteria. Post hoc analyses and meta-analyses were excluded. HRQoL outcomes, functional outcomes and the principal ADHD symptom-based outcome were extracted from included studies. An effect size of 0.5 versus placebo was used as a threshold for potential clinical relevance (unreported effect sizes were calculated when possible). Of 291 records screened, 35 articles describing 34 studies were included. HRQoL/functioning was usually self-rated in adults and proxy-rated in children/adolescents. Baseline data indicated substantial HRQoL deficits in children/adolescents. Placebo-adjusted effects of medication on ADHD symptoms, HRQoL and functioning, respectively, were statistically or nominally significant in 18/18, 10/12 and 7/9 studies in children/adolescents and 14/16, 9/11 and 9/10 studies in adults. Effect sizes were ≥0.5 versus placebo for symptoms, HRQoL and functioning, respectively, in 14/16, 7/9 and 4/8 studies in children/adolescents; and 6/12, 1/6 and 1/8 studies in adults. Effect sizes were typically larger for stimulants than for non-stimulants, for symptoms than for HRQoL/functioning, and for children/adolescents than for adults. The efficacy of ADHD medication extends beyond symptom control and may help reduce the related but distinct functional impairments and HRQoL deficits in patients with ADHD.

Targeting Functional Impairments in the Treatment of Children and Adolescents with ADHD

The diagnostic criteria for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) require both symptoms and impairment to be present. Impairment in functioning is commonly the primary reason for referral, and is also a better predictor of long-term outcomes than ADHD symptoms. And yet, only recently has research begun to examine the impact of ADHD treatments on functional impairment using efficient and psychometrically sound outcome measures. In this article, we identify several noteworthy multidimensional measures of functional impairment (ADHD FX, Barkley Functional Impairment Scale [BFIS], Impairment Rating Scale [IRS], Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale [WFIRS]) utilized in recent clinical trials for ADHD, and describe their psychometric properties and clinical utility. We also review existing evidence on the impact of pharmacological and behavioral treatments on different domains of functional impairment in ADHD youth as measured by these specific measures. Further research is needed to evaluate longitudinal effects of ADHD treatments on functional impairment, and the use of these measures in adaptive treatment designs.

Comparative efficacy and safety of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder pharmacotherapies, including guanfacine extended release: a mixed treatment comparison

This study compared the clinical efficacy and safety of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) pharmacotherapy in children and adolescents 6-17 years of age. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacologic monotherapies among children and adolescents with ADHD. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare change in symptoms using the ADHD Rating Scale Version IV (ADHD-RS-IV), Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) response, all-cause discontinuation, and adverse event-related discontinuation. Thirty-six RCTs were included in the analysis. The mean (95% credible interval [CrI]) ADHD-RS-IV total score change from baseline (active minus placebo) was -14.98 (-17.14, -12.80) for lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), -9.33 (-11.63, -7.04) for methylphenidate (MPH) extended release, -8.68 (-10.63, -6.72) for guanfacine extended release (GXR), and -6.88 (-8.22, -5.49) for atomoxetine (ATX); data were unavailable for MPH immediate release. The relative risk (95% CrI) for CGI-I response (active versus placebo) was 2.56 (2.21, 2.91) for LDX, 2.13 (1.70, 2.54) for MPH extended release, 1.94 (1.59, 2.29) for GXR, 1.77 (1.31, 2.26) for ATX, and 1.62 (1.05, 2.17) for MPH immediate release. Among non-stimulant pharmacotherapies, GXR was more effective than ATX when comparing ADHD-RS-IV total score change (with a posterior probability of 93.91%) and CGI-I response (posterior probability 76.13%). This study found that LDX had greater efficacy than GXR, ATX, and MPH in the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD. GXR had a high posterior probability of being more efficacious than ATX, although their CrIs overlapped.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Different Interventions in Children and Adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

BACKGROUND

Our study is an analysis of multiple publications involving assessing the comparable efficacy and tolerability of six interventions, which are lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), atomoxetine (ATX), methylphenidate (MPH), clonidine hydrochloride (CLON), guanfacine extended release (GXR), and bupropion, for young patients (6-18 years old) suffering from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

A conventional meta-analysis (MA) was performed to give direct comparisons and a network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to show the combination of direct and indirect evidence. Ranking preference for all the interventions under a certain outcome was given by the surface of cumulative ranking curve area (SUCRA).

RESULTS

Overall, 15,025 participants from 73 studies were involved in our analysis. In the pairwise MA, LDX was associated with less withdrawal than ATX for lack of efficacy. MPH showed less effectiveness than LDX according to ADHD Rating Scale score. Based on the analysis of our NMA, significant results of efficacy that LDX is a competitive drug were observed when evaluating LDX in comparison with other drugs except for CLON. ATX and GXR presented higher rates of abdominal pain morbidity versus inactive treatment.

CONCLUSION

The stimulants LDX and MPH are still highly recommended because they are highly effective and are tolerated well by patients. Among the non-stimulants, CLON can be taken into consideration for its appreciable effectiveness and tolerability. ATX and GXR can be seen as moderate choices.

Combined Stimulant and Guanfacine Administration in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Controlled, Comparative Study

OBJECTIVE

Because models of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) therapeutics emphasize benefits of both enhanced dopaminergic and noradrenergic signaling, strategies to enhance D1 and α2A agonism may yield enhanced clinical and cognitive responses. This study tested the hypothesis that combined effects of a dopamine and noradrenergic agonist, d-methylphenidate extended-release (DMPH) with guanfacine (GUAN), an α2A receptor agonist, would be clinically superior to either monotherapy and would have equal tolerability.

METHOD

An 8-week, double-blind, 3-arm, comparative trial randomized 7- to 14-year-olds with DSM-IV ADHD to GUAN (1-3 mg/day), DMPH (5-20 mg/day), or a combination (COMB) with fixed-flexible dosing. Outcome measures were the ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale. Data on adverse events and safety measures were obtained.

RESULTS

A total of 207 participants were randomized and received drug. Analyses showed significant treatment group main effects for ADHD-RS-IV ADHD total (p = .0001) and inattentive symptoms (p = .0001). COMB demonstrated small but consistently greater reductions in ADHD-RS-IV Inattentive subscale scores versus monotherapies (DMPH: p = .05; f(2) = .02; and GUAN: p = .02; f(2) = .02), and was associated with a greater positive response rate by CGI-I (p = .01). No serious cardiovascular events occurred. Sedation, somnolence, lethargy, and fatigue were greater in both guanfacine groups. All treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

COMB showed consistent evidence of clinical benefits over monotherapies, possibly reflecting advantages of greater combined dopaminergic and α2A agonism. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate, and COMB treatment showed no differences in safety or tolerability.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Single Versus Combination Medication Treatment for Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Project1); http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00429273.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder During Adolescence in the Primary Care Setting: A Concise Review

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a chronic neurodevelopmental disorder with a worldwide prevalence of about 5% in school-age children. This review is intended to assist primary care providers (PCPs) in diagnosing and treating ADHD in adolescents. PubMed, PsychInfo, and Science Citation Index databases were searched from March 1990 to 2015 with the keywords: ADHD, primary care/pediatrics, and children/adolescents. Abstracts addressing diagnosis and/or treatment with 105 citations were identified including supplementary treatment guidelines/books. Adolescent ADHD presents with significant disturbances in attention, academic performance, and family relationships with unique issues associated with this developmental period. Diagnostic challenges include the variable symptom presentation during adolescence, complex differential diagnosis, and limited training and time for PCPs to conduct thorough evaluations. The evidence base for treatments in adolescence in comparison to those in children or adults with ADHD is relatively weak. Providers should be cognizant of prevention, early identification, and treatment of conditions associated with ADHD that emerge during adolescence such as substance use disorders. Adolescent ADHD management for the PCP is complex, requires further research, and perhaps new primary care psychiatric models, to assist in determining the optimal care for patients at this critical period.

▼Guanfacine for ADHD in children and adolescents

Prolonged-action ▼guanfacine (Intuniv-Shire Pharmaceuticals Ltd) is a non-stimulant drug that has recently been licensed in Europe for the management of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents aged 6-17 years for whom stimulants are unsuitable.(1) The company suggests that it has a unique mechanism of action in ADHD, providing improvement in core symptoms within 3 weeks with once-daily flexible dosing.(2) Here we review the evidence on the efficacy and safety of guanfacine in ADHD and consider whether it offers any advantages over other therapeutic options.