Children with ADHD and symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder improved in behavior when treated with methylphenidate and adjuvant risperidone, though weight gain was also observed - Results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

Current nonstimulant medications for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

INTRODUCTION

Stimulants, including methylphenidate and amphetamines, are the first-line pharmacological treatment of ADHD in adults. However, in patients who do not respond or poorly tolerate stimulants, non-stimulant medications are usually recommended.

AREAS COVERED

The authors provide a narrative review of the literature on non-stimulant treatments for adult ADHD, including controlled and observational clinical studies conducted on adult samples. Atomoxetine has been extensively studied and showed significant efficacy in treating adult ADHD. Issues related to dosing, treatment duration, safety, and use in the case of psychiatric comorbidity are summarized. Among other compounds indicated for ADHD in adults, antidepressants sharing at least a noradrenergic or dopaminergic component, including tricyclic compounds, bupropion, and viloxazine, have shown demonstratable efficacy. Evidence is also available for antihypertensives, particularly guanfacine, as well as memantine, metadoxine, and mood stabilizers, while negative findings have emerged for galantamine, antipsychotics, and cannabinoids.

EXPERT OPINION

While according to clinical guidelines, atomoxetine may serve as the only second-line option in adults with ADHD, several other nonstimulant compounds may be effectively used in order to personalize treatment based on comorbid conditions and ADHD features. Nevertheless, further research is needed to identify and test more personalized treatment strategies for adults with ADHD.

Contemporary diagnosis and treatment of conduct disorder in youth

INTRODUCTION

Conduct disorder (CD) is characterized by repetitive and persistent antisocial behaviors, being among the most frequently reported reasons of referral in youth. CD is a highly heterogeneous disorder, with possible specifiers defined according to age at onset, Limited Prosocial Emotions (LPE) otherwise known as Callous-Unemotional (CU) traits, Emotional Dysregulation (ED), and patterns of comorbidity, each with its own specific developmental trajectories.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the evidence from published literature on the clinical presentations, diagnostic procedures, psychotherapeutic and psychoeducational approaches, and pharmacological interventions from RCT and naturalistic studies in youth. Evidence from studies including youths with LPE/CU traits, ED and aggression are also reviewed, as response moderators.

EXPERT OPINION

Due to its clinical heterogeneity, relevant subtypes of CD should be carefully characterized to gain reliable information on prognosis and treatments. Thus, disentangling this broad category in subtypes is crucial as a first step in diagnosis. Psychosocial interventions are the first option, possibly improving LPE/CU traits and ED, especially if implemented early during development. Instead, limited information, based on low-quality studies, supports pharmacological options. Second-generation antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and stimulants are first-line medications, according to different target symptoms, such as aggression and emotional reactivity. Developmental pathways including ADHD suggest a specific role of psychostimulants.

Antipsychotics in the Management of Disruptive Behavior Disorders in Children and Adolescents: An Update and Critical Review

Disruptive behaviour disorders (DBDs) in childhood include conduct disorder (CD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). Though psychological therapies are considered to be the first-line treatment for DBDs, many patients require adjunctive pharmacotherapy for the control of specific symptoms, such as aggression. Three prior systematic reviews have examined the evidence for the use of antipsychotics in DBDs and have concluded that their efficacy is marginal and limited by adverse effects. This paper has two objectives: (i) to summarize the findings of existing systematic reviews of antipsychotics for the management of DBDs in children and adolescents (2012-2017), and (ii) to provide an update to these reviews by examining recent clinical trials of antipsychotics in this population, published in the period from 2 January 2017 to 10 October 2022. The PubMed, Scopus and ScienceDirect databases were searched for relevant citations using the search terms "disruptive behaviour disorder", "oppositional defiant disorder", "conduct disorder" and their variants, along with "antipsychotic", "atypical antipsychotic" and the generic names of all currently approved atypical antipsychotics. Six relevant trials were identified during this period, including five randomized controlled trials and one naturalistic open-label trial. These trials were critically evaluated in terms of outcome measures, efficacy and safety. Overall, the data from these trials suggests that of all available antipsychotics, risperidone appears to be effective in the short-term management of DBDs. All available antipsychotics are associated with significant metabolic adverse effects in this population. These results are discussed in the light of global trends towards increasing off-label prescription of antipsychotic medication in children and adolescents and of recent literature on the neuropharmacology of aggression in this patient population. The need for rational, short-term use of these drugs is highlighted, as well as the importance of post-marketing surveillance for long-term or severe adverse events.

A Meta-Analysis of Antipsychotic-Induced Hypo- and Hyperprolactinemia in Children and Adolescents

Objective: Antipsychotic-related prolactin changes may expose children and adolescents to severe adverse reactions (ARs) related to pubertal development and growth. We therefore aimed to assess the effects of antipsychotics on prolactin levels and associated somatic ARs in children and adolescents. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed and CENTRAL for placebo-controlled randomized trials of antipsychotics in children and adolescents aged ≤18 years, reporting prolactin levels and related ARs. We conducted a random-effect meta-analysis and assessed risk of bias version 2 (ROB2). Results: Thirty-two randomized controlled trials with an average trial duration of 6 weeks, covering 4643 participants with an average age of 13 years and a male majority of 65.3%. Risk of bias across domains was low or unclear. The following antipsychotic compounds: aripiprazole (n = 810), asenapine (n = 506), lurasidone (n = 314), olanzapine (n = 179), paliperidone (n = 149), quetiapine (n = 381), risperidone (n = 609), and ziprasidone (n = 16) were compared with placebo (n = 1658). Compared with placebo, statistically significant higher prolactin increase occurred with risperidone (mean difference [MD] = 28.24 ng/mL), paliperidone (20.98 ng/mL), and olanzapine (11.34 ng/mL). Aripiprazole significantly decreased prolactin (MD = -4.91 ng/mL), whereas quetiapine, lurasidone, and asenapine were not associated with significantly different prolactin levels than placebo. Our results on ziprasidone are based on a single study, making it insufficient to draw strong conclusions. On average, 20.8% of patients treated with antipsychotic developed levels of prolactin that were too high (hyperprolactinemia), whereas only 1.03% of patients reported prolactin-related ARs. Data were highly limited for long-term effects. Conclusions: In children and adolescents, risperidone, paliperidone, and olanzapine are associated with significant prolactin increase, whereas aripiprazole is associated with significant decrease. Despite the significant changes in prolactin level, few ARs were reported. Study protocol on PROSPERO: CRD42018116451.

The Use of Brexpiprazole Combined With a Stimulant in Adults With Treatment-Resistant Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

BACKGROUND

This is the first controlled pharmacologic study in either adults or children with uncomplicated, treatment-resistant attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study augmented stimulant therapy with the atypical antipsychotic brexpiprazole. The Food and Drug Administration preapproved primary outcome measure (Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale [CAARS]) showed no drug-placebo differences. Often studies showing no efficacy on the prestudy, defined primary outcome variable go unpublished. While this is decried, publishing studies with equivocal results remains rare. This reanalysis highlights trends in secondary measures having implications for treatment and research regarding treatment resistant ADHD.

METHODS

Initially, 559 stimulant-naive and 174 prior stimulant nonresponders received methylphenidate osmotic-release oral system, dexmethylphenidate hydrochloride, lisdexamfetamine, or mixed amphetamine salts. After 5 weeks, 168 stimulant-naive patients and 68 prior stimulant nonresponders who failed treatment were randomized to brexpiprazole or placebo in a 2:1 ratio while the remaining were on the stimulant. Outcome was measured with the CAARS, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Clinical Global Impression, and the Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale (WRAADDS). The WRAADDS contains 2 factors: attention and emotional dysregulation.

RESULTS

Stimulant-naive patients showed no improvement with adjunctive brexpiprazole. Prior stimulant nonresponders displayed no brexpiprazole effect on the CAARS, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, or Beck Depression Inventory. In contrast, the WRAADDS detected a trend in treatment benefit, primarily through emotional dysregulation symptoms. Adverse effects on brexpiprazole and placebo were equivalent.

CONCLUSIONS

Brexpiprazole might be effective in ADHD adults who are nonresponders to 2 or more stimulants. Future trials in treatment-resistant ADHD should use a 1:1 randomization and use a measure of ADHD symptoms that includes emotional dysregulation.

Generalized structural equation modeling: Symptom heterogeneity in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder leading to poor treatment efficacy

BACKGROUND

Treatment efficacy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is reported to be poor, possibly due to heterogeneity of ADHD symptoms. Little is known about poor treatment efficacy owing to ADHD heterogeneity.

AIM

To use generalized structural equation modeling (GSEM) to show how the heterogeneous nature of hyperactivity/impulsivity (H/I) symptoms in ADHD, irritable oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and the presentation of aggression in children interferes with treatment responses in ADHD.

METHODS

A total of 231 children and adolescents completed ADHD inattention and H/I tests. ODD scores from the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham, version IV scale were obtained. The child behavior checklist (CBCL) and parent’s satisfaction questionnaire were completed. The relationships were analyzed by GSEM.

RESULTS

GSEM revealed that the chance of ADHD remission was lower in children with a combination of H/I symptoms of ADHD, ODD symptoms, and childhood aggressive behavior. ODD directly mediated ADHD symptom severity. The chance of reaching remission based on H/I symptoms of ADHD was reduced by 13.494% [= exp (2.602)] in children with comorbid ADHD and ODD [odds ratio (OR) = 2.602, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.832-3.373, P = 0.000] after adjusting for the effects of other factors. Childhood aggression mediated ODD symptom severity. The chance of reaching remission based on ODD symptoms was lowered by 11.000% [= 1 - exp (-0.117)] in children with more severe baseline symptoms of aggression based on the CBCL score at study entry [OR = -0.117, 95%CI: (-0.190)-(-0.044), P = 0.002].

CONCLUSION

Mediation through ODD symptoms and aggression may influence treatment effects in ADHD after adjusting for the effects of baseline ADHD symptom severity. More attention could be directed to the early recognition of risks leading to ineffective ADHD treatment, e.g., symptoms of ODD and the presentation of aggressive or delinquent behaviors and thought problems in children with ADHD.

Odds of fussy eating are greater among children with obesity and anxiety

BACKGROUND

Fussy eating has been associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder (ADHD), anxiety, and depression. Despite these disorders being prevalent in obesity treatment, no studies have been published on the association of fussy eating in children with obesity and these disorders. Understanding fussy eating in children with obesity and comorbid disorders is important as acceptance of healthy foods tends to be low, especially in children with sensory sensitivities.

OBJECTIVES

Investigate the prevalence of fussy eating in a cross-sectional sample of children with obesity and ASD, ADHD, anxiety, and depression; and whether they were more likely to be fussy eaters, comparing those with and without these disorders.

METHODS

One hundred and four children referred to family-based obesity treatment in Iceland 2011-2016, mean age 12.0 (SD = 3.0), mean body mass index standard deviation score 3.5 (SD = 0.9). Binary logistic regression was used to estimate the relationship between fussy eating and disorders, adjusting for medication use.

RESULTS

A large minority (41.6%) were fussy eaters and 48.9% had at least one comorbid disorder. Over a third of children rejected bitter and sour tastes, and 1.9% and 7.9% rejected sweet and salty tastes, respectively. Compared with those without disorders, the odds of being a fussy eater were increased by a factor of 4.11 when having anxiety (95% confidence intervals) (1.02-16.58, p = 00.046), adjusting for medication use. The odds of being a fussy eater were not increased for other disorders; ASD, ADHD, or depression.

CONCLUSIONS

In children attending obesity treatment, fussy eating was common. Clinical care models in pediatric obesity treatment should address fussy eating, especially in children with anxiety.

Folinic Acid as Adjunctive Therapy in Treatment of Inappropriate Speech in Children with Autism: A Double-Blind and Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trial

This is a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial to investigate the potential therapeutic effects of folinic acid/placebo as an adjuvant to risperidone on inappropriate speech and other behavioral symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Fifty-five ASD children (age (mean ± standard deviation) = 13.40 ± 2.00; male/female: 35/20) were evaluated for behavioral symptoms at baseline, week 5, and week 10 using the aberrant behavior checklist-community (ABC-C). Folinic acid dosage was 2 mg/kg up to 50 mg per day for the entire course of the study. The repeated measures analysis showed significant effect for time × treatment interaction on inappropriate speech (F = 3.51; df = 1.61; P = 0.044), stereotypic behavior (F = 4.02; df = 1.37; P = 0.036), and hyperactivity/noncompliance (F = 6.79; df = 1.66; P = 0.003) subscale scores. In contrast, no significant effect for time × treatment interaction was found on lethargy/social withdrawal (F = 1.06; df = 1.57; P = 0.336) and irritability (F = 2.86; df = 1.91; P = 0.064) subscale scores. Our study provided preliminary evidence suggesting that folinic acid could be recommended as a beneficial complementary supplement for alleviating speech and behavioral symptoms in children with ASD.Clinical trial registeration: This trial was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials ( www.irct.ir ; No. IRCT20090117001556N114).

Efficacy and Safety of Medication for Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents with Common Comorbidities: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Comorbid psychiatric conditions in children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) occur frequently, complicate management, and are associated with substantial burden on patients and caregivers. Very few systematic reviews have assessed the efficacy and safety of medications for ADHD in children and adolescents with comorbidities. Of those that were conducted, most focused on a particular comorbidity or medication. In this systematic literature review, we summarize the efficacy and safety of treatments for children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid autism spectrum disorders, oppositional defiant disorder, Tourette’s disorder and other tic disorders, generalized anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov (to October 2019) for studies of patients (aged < 18 years) with an ADHD diagnosis and the specified comorbidities treated with amphetamines, methylphenidate and derivatives, atomoxetine (ATX), and guanfacine extended-release (GXR). For efficacy, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or meta-analyses of RCTs were eligible for inclusion; for safety, all study types were eligible. The primary efficacy outcome measure was ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score.

Results

Of 2177 publications/trials retrieved, 69 were included in this systematic literature review (5 meta-analyses, 37 placebo-controlled RCTs, 16 cohort studies, 11 case reports). A systematic narrative synthesis is provided because insufficient data were retrieved to combine ADHD-RS-IV total scores or effect sizes. Effect sizes for ADHD-RS-IV total scores were available for ten RCTs and ranged from 0.46 to 1.0 for ATX and from 0.92 to 2.0 for GXR across comorbidities. The numbers and types of adverse events in children with comorbidities were consistent with those in children without comorbidities, but treatment should be individualized to ensure children can tolerate the lowest effective dose.

Conclusion

Limited information is available from placebo-controlled RCTs on the efficacy (by ADHD-RS-IV) or safety of medication in children with ADHD and psychiatric comorbidities. Further studies are required to support evidence-based drug selection for these populations.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40120-021-00249-0.

Polypharmacy in the Management of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents: A Review and Update

Objective: Prescription of multiple medications concurrently for children and adolescents has increased in recent years. Examination of this practice has been undervalued relative to its incidence. This article reviews studies investigating effectiveness of medication combinations for youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: A literature search identified studies that combined two or more prescribed medications for the treatment of ADHD. Included studies focused on youth; had study design of randomized controlled trial (RCT), nonrandomized trial, or case review (n > 10); and included an outcome measure of treatment effectiveness. Results: Thirty-nine pertinent studies were identified. All studies combined two medications, with the vast majority including a stimulant (n = 37). The largest group (n = 16) combined stimulant and alpha-agonist, finding greater efficacy than alpha-agonist alone but not stimulant alone in all cases. A few RCTs found benefit from the addition of risperidone or divalproex to stimulant for comorbid aggression. Four studies adding atomoxetine found mixed reports of benefit, including the only small RCT showing no benefit. RCTs with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors found minimal evidence of benefit for mood or anxiety comorbidities. Conclusion: The best studied combination is stimulant and alpha-agonist; addition of alpha-agonist to stimulant seems effective for residual symptoms of ADHD. Stimulant plus risperidone has the most evidence of efficacy for comorbid aggression or disruptive behavior. Limited support exists for the effectiveness of other medication combinations, including no trials studying three or more medications concurrently. Combinations frequently yielded more side effects, leaving monotherapy preferable if a sufficient treatment response can be achieved.

Pharmacotherapy of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: common quandaries, dilemmas and challenges

Multiple studies have shown that pharmacologic treatments for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), especially stimulants, are generally effective. There is yet a paucity of empirical data, however, for some common clinical conditions overlooked in the ADHD treatment guidelines. Some examples include: in cases of first line treatment failure, it is unclear whether switching from one type of stimulant to another is beneficial. In cases of comorbid ADHD and severe aggressive/disruptive behavior in children, it is unclear whether the best first-line treatment is stimulants or atypical antipsychotics like risperidone. In cases of ADHD with comorbid anxiety disorders, there is no clear evidence regarding optimal treatment. The objectives of this article are to review these issues and propose possible answers for such clinical dilemmas.

Current follow-up practices often fail to detect metabolic and neurological adverse reactions in children treated with second-generation antipsychotics

AIM

This study examined the use and adverse reactions of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), alone or combined with other psychotropic medication, to identify areas for standardising prescribing and monitoring practices.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study at Tampere University Hospital, Finland, involving 128 patients (81% boys) who were under 13 years old at SGA initiation and had SGA treatment between October 2013 and October 2014.

RESULTS

The median age at baseline was 9.4 years. Weight gain was reported as an adverse reaction in 33%, but an increase in standardised body mass index, adjusted for age and sex (BMI z-score), was detected in 75% of patients with sufficient data. The statistically significant median changes during the study were an increase of 0.46 in BMI z-score, a reduction of 0.25 mmol/L in fasting plasma high-density lipoprotein and an increase of 0.28 mmol/L in triglyceride values. The weight gain was most apparent in patients treated with just an SGA or SGA plus melatonin. Patients treated with an SGA plus medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder were less likely to gain weight.

CONCLUSION

SGA-induced metabolic disturbances remained partly unrecognised in children under 13 years of age and more systematic monitoring is needed.

Population-Based Epidemiology of Pediatric Patients with Treated Tic Disorders from Real-World Evidence in Korea

Objectives: Although tic disorder (TD) is a common mental disorder in children and adolescents, epidemiological data based on real-world evidence (RWE) are insufficient. Using RWE, this study sought to examine the prevalence of treated TD, use of medical utilization, and use of prescription drugs among patients with TD with respect to TD type and comorbid psychiatric illness. Methods: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study. Using the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service Pediatric Patient Sample data from 2009 to 2016, we analyzed 20,599 patients with TD (Korean Standard Classification of Diseases-6/7 code: F95.x) aged 2-19 years. Results: The annual average TD prevalence was 2.6/1000 population (95% confidence interval, 2.3-2.8/1000). Between 2009 and 2016, a slight increase in TD prevalence was observed from 1.9 to 2.9/1000 population. The TD prevalence rate in male patients was four times higher than that in female patients. Differences were observed in health care utilization and drug prescription types between patients with Tourette syndrome and chronic or transient TD. In addition, more than half of patients with TD had comorbid psychiatric disorders, and one-third of patients with TD had attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Patients with TD without comorbidities were frequently prescribed aripiprazole, while patients with TD and comorbid ADHD were frequently prescribed atomoxetine, methylphenidate, risperidone, and aripiprazole. Conclusion: This study described the epidemiological characteristics of TD based on recent RWE from Korea, and its findings can help establish future TD evidence-based clinical guidelines and related policies.

Management of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Primary Care

Management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders require provider skill, rapport, and referral acumen to treat patients across the life span. Incidence and prevalence have increased in the United States and globally. There are innovative models of evidence-informed screening techniques, treatment strategies to help providers work with patients and their families. Diplomatic management of highly charged treatment controversies, drug diversion, and risk factor reduction helps to ethically address this growing public health phenomenon. This article examines risk factors and treatment considerations in the United States for evidence-informed care, with a focus on affordable and readily accessible treatment in primary care settings.

A Focused Review on the Treatment of Pediatric Patients with Atypical Antipsychotics

OBJECTIVES

The use of atypical antipsychotic medications in pediatric patients has become more prevalent in recent years. The purpose of this review is to provide a clinically relevant update of recent selected key publications regarding the use of atypical antipsychotics in this population.

METHODS

Studies reviewed included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled medication trials conducted within the past 5 years. A PubMed search was conducted for each of the 11 second-generation antipsychotic medications currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the United States: clozapine, risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, ziprasidone, paliperidone, asenapine, iloperidone, lurasidone, and cariprazine. Trials published in English with subjects 18 years of age and younger were included in this review. Additional studies, chosen for their significance to clinical practice, were also included at the discretion of the authors.

RESULTS

This review demonstrates that more empiric data are available regarding both the acute efficacy and, to a lesser extent, the longer-term efficacy and tolerability for several of the considered antipsychotic medications. The clinical conditions for which these medications have been studied include schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, Tourette's disorder, and autism spectrum disorder. They have also been used as an adjunctive treatment for disruptive behavior disorders with aggression, which have not responded to treatment with stimulants.

CONCLUSION

Evidence regarding the efficacy and tolerability of antipsychotic medications for mental health disorders in children and adolescents has expanded exponentially in recent years. However, more information is needed so that evidence-based comparisons between medications can be made. In the future, data enabling the selection of medications based upon individual patient characteristics could potentially lead to greater efficacy and efficiency in treating what are frequently debilitating medical conditions. Maladaptive aggression in children, often treated with antipsychotics, is one such area in which there is a dearth of actual information available to the clinician. It is to be hoped that additional, longer-term studies of these medications will further inform evidence-based practice in clinical settings.

Atypical antipsychotics for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane Review, last published in 2012 (Loy 2012). Children and youths with disruptive behaviour disorders may present to health services, where they may be treated with atypical antipsychotics. There is increasing usage of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of disruptive behaviour disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect and safety of atypical antipsychotics, compared to placebo, for treating disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths. The aim was to evaluate each drug separately rather than the class effect, on the grounds that each atypical antipsychotic has different pharmacologic binding profile (Stahl 2013) and that this is clinically more useful.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of atypical antipsychotics versus placebo in children and youths aged up to and including 18 years, with a diagnosis of disruptive behaviour disorders, including comorbid ADHD. The primary outcomes were aggression, conduct problems and adverse events (i.e. weight gain/changes and metabolic parameters). The secondary outcomes were general functioning, noncompliance, other adverse events, social functioning, family functioning, parent satisfaction and school functioning.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors (JL and KS) independently collected, evaluated and extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analyses for each of our primary outcomes, except for metabolic parameters, due to inadequate outcome data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (spanning 2000 to 2014), involving a total of 896 children and youths aged five to 18 years. Bar two trials, all came from an outpatient setting. Eight trials assessed risperidone, one assessed quetiapine and one assessed ziprasidone. Nine trials assessed acute efficacy (over four to 10 weeks); one of which combined treatment with stimulant medication and parent training. One trial was a six-month maintenance trial assessing symptom recurrence.The quality of the evidence ranged from low to moderate. Nine studies had some degree of pharmaceutical support/funding. Primary outcomesUsing the mean difference (MD), we combined data from three studies (238 participants) in a meta-analysis of aggression, as assessed using the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist (ABC) ‒ Irritability subscale. We found that youths treated with risperidone show reduced aggression compared to youths treated with placebo (MD -6.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.79 to -4.19; low-quality evidence). Using the standardised mean difference (SMD), we pooled data from two risperidone trials (190 participants), which used different scales: the Overt Aggression Scale ‒ Modified (OAS-M) Scale and the Antisocial Behaviour Scale (ABS); as the ABS had two subscales that could not be combined (reactive and proactive aggression), we performed two separate analyses. When we combined the ABS Reactive subscale and the OAS-M, the SMD was -1.30 in favour of risperidone (95% CI -2.21 to -0.40, moderate-quality evidence). When we combined the ABS Proactive subscale and OAS-M, the SMD was -1.12 (95% CI -2.30 to 0.06, moderate-quality evidence), suggesting uncertainty about the estimate of effect, as the confidence intervals overlapped the null value. In summary, there was some evidence that aggression could be reduced by risperidone. Data were lacking on other atypical antipsychotics, like quetiapine and ziprasidone, with regard to their effects on aggression.We pooled data from two risperidone trials (225 participants) in a meta-analysis of conduct problems, as assessed using the Nisonger Child Behaviour Rating Form ‒ Conduct Problem subscale (NCBRF-CP). This yielded a final mean score that was 8.61 points lower in the risperidone group compared to the placebo group (95% CI -11.49 to -5.74; moderate-quality evidence).We investigated the effect on weight by performing two meta-analyses. We wanted to distinguish between the effects of antipsychotic medication only and the combined effect with stimulants, since the latter can have a counteracting effect on weight gain due to appetite suppression. Pooling two trials with risperidone only (138 participants), we found that participants on risperidone gained 2.37 kilograms (kg) more (95% CI 0.26 to 4.49; moderate-quality evidence) than those on placebo. When we added a trial where all participants received a combination of risperidone and stimulants, we found that those on the combined treatment gained 2.14 kg more (95% CI 1.04 to 3.23; 3 studies; 305 participants; low-quality evidence) than those on placebo. Secondary outcomesOut of the 10 included trials, three examined general functioning, social functioning and parent satisfaction. No trials examined family or school functioning. Data on non-compliance/attrition rate and other adverse events were available from all 10 trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that in the short term risperidone may reduce aggression and conduct problems in children and youths with disruptive behaviour disorders There is also evidence that this intervention is associated with significant weight gain.For aggression, the difference in scores of 6.49 points on the ABC ‒ Irritability subscale (range 0 to 45) may be clinically significant. It is challenging to interpret the clinical significance of the differential findings on two different ABS subscales as it may be difficult to distinguish between reactive and proactive aggression in clinical practice. For conduct problems, the difference in scores of 8.61 points on the NCBRF-CP (range 0 to 48) is likely to be clinically significant. Weight gain remains a concern.Caution is required in interpreting the results due to the limitations of current evidence and the small number of high-quality trials. There is a lack of evidence to support the use of quetiapine, ziprasidone or any other atypical antipsychotic for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths and no evidence for children under five years of age. It is uncertain to what degree the efficacy found in clinical trials will translate into real-life clinical practice. Given the effectiveness of parent-training interventions in the management of these disorders, and the somewhat equivocal evidence on the efficacy of medication, it is important not to use medication alone. This is consistent with current clinical guidelines.