Methylphenidate and the risk of psychotic disorders and hallucinations in children and adolescents in a large health system

Stimulant Medication Use and Risk of Psychotic Experiences

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The prescription of stimulant medications for young people with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is common and increasing. Concerns have been raised about potentially psychotogenic effects of stimulants, and previous observational research has documented an increased risk of psychotic experiences in young people prescribed stimulants. Our aim was to estimate the causal effect of stimulants on psychotic experiences.

METHODS

The trial was emulated using Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study data. Eligible participants were aged between 9 and 14 years. Treatment (stimulant prescription) propensities were derived using covariates indexing demographic factors and mental illness severity. The average causal effect of first stimulant prescription on psychotic experiences by 1-year follow-up was derived using inverse probability of treatment weighting followed by standardization (doubly robust estimation).

RESULTS

Of 8391 participants included in the analytical sample, 460 (5.5%) reported 1 or more stimulant prescriptions. In unweighted analyses, stimulant prescription was associated with subsequent psychotic experiences (odds ratio [OR]: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.15-1.84). The reverse, however, was also true, in that baseline psychotic experiences predicted subsequent stimulant treatment (OR: 1.93; 95% CI: 1.57-2.37). When applying doubly robust estimation, there was no evidence of a causal effect of stimulant prescription on the subsequent occurrence of psychotic experiences (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.71-1.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings do not support a causal relationship between stimulant prescription and psychotic experiences. Rather, the association appears to be confounded by factors that both increase probability of stimulant prescription and lead to psychotic experiences.

Electronic Health Records for Research on Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Pharmacotherapy: A Comprehensive Review

Objectives: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications significantly reduce symptomatology at a group level, but individual response to ADHD medication is variable. Thus, developing prediction models to stratify treatment according to individual baseline clinicodemographic characteristics is crucial to support clinical practice. A potential valuable source of data to develop accurate prediction models is real-world clinical data extracted from electronic healthcare records (EHRs). Yet, systematic information regarding EHR data on ADHD is lacking. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review of studies that included EHR reporting data regarding individuals with ADHD, with a specific focus on treatment-related data. Relevant studies were identified from PubMed, Ovid, and Web of Science databases up to February 24, 2024. Results: We identified 103 studies reporting EHR data for individuals with ADHD. Among these, 83 studies provided information on the type of prescribed medication. However, dosage, duration of treatment, and ADHD symptom ratings before and after treatment initiation were only reported by a minority of studies. Conclusion: This review supports the potential use of EHRs to develop treatment response prediction models but emphasizes the need for more comprehensive reporting of treatment-related data, such as changes in ADHD symptom ratings and other possible baseline clinical predictors of treatment response.

Risk of Incident Psychosis and Mania With Prescription Amphetamines

OBJECTIVE

Amphetamine prescribing has increased in the United States in recent years. Previous research identified an increased risk of incident psychosis with prescription amphetamines. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of dose levels of prescription amphetamines on the risk of this rare but serious adverse outcome.

METHODS

A case-control study using electronic health records was conducted to compare the odds of incident psychosis or mania with past-month exposure to prescription amphetamines. Case subjects were patients ages 16-35 hospitalized at McLean Hospital for incident psychosis or mania between 2005 and 2019. Control subjects were patients with an initial psychiatric hospitalization for other reasons, most commonly depression and/or anxiety. Amphetamine doses were converted to dextroamphetamine equivalents and divided into terciles. Secondary analyses evaluated the odds of psychosis or mania with methylphenidate use.

RESULTS

Among 1,374 case subjects and 2,748 control subjects, the odds of psychosis and mania were increased for individuals with past-month prescription amphetamine use compared with no use (adjusted odds ratio=2.68, 95% CI=1.90-3.77). A dose-response relationship was observed; high doses of amphetamines (>30 mg dextroamphetamine equivalents) were associated with 5.28-fold increased odds of psychosis or mania. Past-month methylphenidate use was not associated with increased odds of psychosis or mania compared with no use (adjusted odds ratio=0.91, 95% CI=0.54-1.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Although use of hospitalized control subjects excludes individuals with less severe disease, leading to selection bias, the study results suggest that caution should be exercised when prescribing high doses of amphetamines, with regular screening for symptoms of psychosis or mania.

Practice Pearls for Stimulant Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Youth

Over half of youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have co-occurring psychiatric or medical conditions that present treatment challenges. Stimulants are the most effective pharmacologic treatment of ADHD for preschoolers to adults but questions about safety with co-occurring conditions frequently arise. In addition, stigma surrounding diagnosis and treatment can negatively impact care. This manuscript presents evidence-based practice pearls to guide treatment decisions for youth with ADHD and common coexisting psychiatric and medical conditions. Recommendations address specific stimulant adverse effects (i.e., anxiety, cardiac, growth, mania, psychosis) along with management strategies. Pearls were developed for the most common clinical questions, controversial topics, or therapeutic issues that may not be widely known. The goals of this manuscript are to: 1) provide a detailed resource for interprofessional teams regarding stimulant use in youth with ADHD, 2) improve therapeutic outcomes for youth with ADHD and co-occurring psychiatric and/or medical conditions through evidence-based recommendations, and 3) decrease stigma associated with stimulant use through education.

Drug-induced psychiatric disorders: A pharmacovigilance update

The psychiatric risks associated with drugs are sometimes one of the few restrictions on the use of certain drug classes, such as corticosteroids in patients with a history of severe psychotic episodes associated with this drug class. In this non-exhaustive review, we propose to deal with the most recent issues concerning psychiatric disorders induced by drugs and encountered in doctors' clinical practice. Firstly, we look at depressive disorders and suicide risks, secondly at psychotic and manic disorders and thirdly at anxiety and sleep disorders. While lot of drugs are associated with psychiatric disorders, the confounding by indication represents an important methodological gap since information on the psychiatric profile of patients is not always available. This is particularly the case for serotonin reuptake inhibitors and esketamine used as antidepressants. Recent pharmacovigilance concerns of psychiatric disorders emerged with montelukast, orexin receptor antagonists or cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) modulators.

Pharmacotherapy for ADHD in children and adolescents: A summary and overview of different European guidelines

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by a persistent pattern of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. It is the most common neurodevelopmental disorder presenting to pediatric services, and pediatricians are often involved in the early assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of children with ADHD. The treatment of ADHD typically involves a multimodal approach that encompasses a combination of psychoeducation, parent/teacher training, psychosocial/psychotherapeutic interventions, and pharmacotherapy. Concerning pharmacotherapy, guidelines vary in drug choice and sequencing, with psychostimulants, such as methylphenidate and (lis)dexamfetamine, generally being the favored initial treatment. Alternatives include atomoxetine and guanfacine. Pharmacotherapy has been proven effective, but close follow-up focusing on physical growth, cardiovascular monitoring, and the surveillance of potential side effects including tics, mood fluctuations, and psychotic symptoms, is essential. This paper presents an overview of current pharmacological treatment options for ADHD and explores disparities in treatment guidelines across different European countries.   Conclusion: Pharmacological treatment options for ADHD in children and adolescents are effective and generally well-tolerated. Pharmacotherapy for ADHD is always part of a multimodal approach. While there is a considerable consensus among European guidelines on pharmacotherapy for ADHD, notable differences exist, particularly concerning the selection and sequencing of various medications. What is Known: • There is a significant base of evidence for pharmacological treatment for ADHD in children and adolescents. • Pediatricians are often involved in assessment, diagnosis and management of children with ADHD. What is New: • Our overview of different European guidelines reveals significant agreement in the context of pharmacotherapy for ADHD in children and adolescents. • Discrepancies exist primarily in terms of selection and sequencing of different medications.

Psychopharmacology in children and adolescents: unmet needs and opportunities

Psychopharmacological treatment is an important component of the multimodal intervention approach to treating mental health conditions in children and adolescents. Currently, there are many unmet needs but also opportunities, alongside possible risks to consider, regarding the pharmacological treatment of mental health conditions in children and adolescents. In this Position Paper, we highlight and address these unmet needs and opportunities, including the perspectives of clinicians and researchers from the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology-Child and Adolescent Network, alongside those of experts by lived experience from national and international associations, via a survey involving 644 participants from 13 countries, and of regulators, through representation from the European Medicines Agency. We present and discuss the evidence base for medications currently used for mental disorders in children and adolescents, medications in the pipeline, opportunities in the development of novel medications, crucial priorities for the conduct of future clinical studies, challenges and opportunities in terms of the regulatory and legislative framework, and innovations in the way research is conducted, reported, and promoted.

Drug-induced delusion: A comprehensive overview of the WHO pharmacovigilance database

INTRODUCTION

A number of prescribed medicines have been reported in cases of drug-induced delusion, such as dopaminergic agents or psychostimulants. But to this day, most studies are based on a limited number of cases and focus on a few drug classes, so a clear overview of this topic remains difficult. To address this issue, we provide in this article a comprehensive analysis of drug-induced delusion, based on the World Health Organization (WHO) pharmacovigilance database.

METHODS

We performed a disproportionality analysis of this database using the information component (IC). The IC compares observed and expected values to find associations between drugs and delusion, using disproportionate Bayesian reporting. An IC0.25 (lower end of the IC 95% credibility interval) > 0 is considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Here we present an analysis of 4559 suspected drug-induced delusion reports in the WHO pharmacovigilance database. These results identified 66 molecules statistically associated with delusion and an extensive analysis of confounding factors and coprescriptions was performed, using full database as background with an IC0.25 > 0. The main drug classes involved were antidepressants, antiepileptics, dopaminergic agents, opioids, antiinfective agents, benzodiazepines, anti-dementia drugs and psychostimulants.

CONCLUSION

These results will help clinicians identify potential suspected drugs associated with delusion and decide which drug to discontinue and eventually lead to a re-evaluation of drug labels for some molecules.

A systematic review of pharmacotherapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents with bipolar disorders

INTRODUCTION

The data suggests that in children and adolescents, bipolar disorder (BD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) may be strongly correlated. Even though drugs for ADHD and BD are largely accepted, there is relatively little research on the management of comorbidity in children and adolescents, particularly in terms of safety. We provide a synthesis of these findings because one hasn't been made yet.

AREAS COVERED

As a primary outcome, we wanted to determine whether stimulant or non-stimulant treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid BD was effective. As a secondary outcome, we wanted to determine tolerability, especially the risk of mood switch.

EXPERT OPINION

The findings of this systematic review suggest that methylphenidate, when used with a mood stabilizer, may be safe and not significantly increase the risk of a manic switch or psychotic symptoms when used to treat ADHD that co-occurs with a BD. In situations where stimulants are ineffective or have low tolerance, atomoxetine also seems to be a good alternative, and also in cases of co-morbid anxiety, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorders, ICT disorders, and substance use disorders. Additional research with a higher level of evidence is necessary to corroborate these preliminary findings.

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.

Long-term safety of methylphenidate in children and adolescents with ADHD: 2-year outcomes of the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Drugs Use Chronic Effects (ADDUCE) study

BACKGROUND

Methylphenidate is the most frequently prescribed medication for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents in many countries. Although many randomised controlled trials support short-term efficacy, tolerability, and safety, data on long-term safety and tolerability are scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of methylphenidate over a 2-year period in relation to growth and development, psychiatric health, neurological health, and cardiovascular function in children and adolescents.

METHODS

We conducted a naturalistic, longitudinal, controlled study as part of the ADDUCE research programme in 27 European child and adolescent mental health centres in the UK, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, and Hungary. Participants aged 6-17 years were recruited into three cohorts: medication-naive ADHD patients who intended to start methylphenidate treatment (methylphenidate group), medication-naive ADHD patients who did not intend to start any ADHD medication (no-methylphenidate group), and a control group without ADHD. Children with ADHD diagnosed by a qualified clinician according to the DSM-IV criteria and, in the control group, children who scored less than 1·5 on average on the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham IV rating scale for ADHD items, and whose hyperactivity score on the parent-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire was within the normal range (<6) were eligible for inclusion. Participants were excluded if they had previously taken any ADHD medications but remained eligible if they had previously taken or were currently taking other psychotropic drugs. The primary outcome was height velocity (height velocity SD score; estimated from at least two consecutive height measurements, and normalised with reference to the mean and SD of a population of the same age and sex).

FINDINGS

Between Feb 01, 2012, and Jan 31, 2016, 1410 participants were enrolled (756 in methylphenidate group, 391 in no-methylphenidate group, and 263 in control group). 1070 (76·3%) participants were male, 332 (23·7%) were female, and for eight gender was unknown. The average age for the cohort was 9·28 years (SD 2·78; IQR 7-11). 1312 (93·0%) of 1410 participants were White. The methylphenidate and no-methylphenidate groups differed in ADHD symptom severity and other characteristics. After controlling for the effects of these variables using propensity scores, there was little evidence of an effect on growth (24 months height velocity SD score difference -0·07 (95% CI -0·18 to 0·04; p=0·20) or increased risk of psychiatric or neurological adverse events in the methylphenidate group compared with the no-methylphenidate group. Pulse rate and systolic and diastolic blood pressure were higher in the methylphenidate group compared with the no-methylphenidate group after 24 months of treatment. No serious adverse events were reported during the study.

INTERPRETATION

Our results suggest that long-term treatment with methylphenidate for 2 years is safe. There was no evidence to support the hypothesis that methylphenidate treatment leads to reductions in growth. Methylphenidate-related pulse and blood pressure changes, although relatively small, require regular monitoring.

FUNDING

EU Seventh Framework Programme.

Psychosis Induced by Methylphenidate in Children and Young Patients With Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders diagnosed in children of this era. ADHD in children and adults is challenging but highly manageable. Children with ADHD cannot focus, are hyperactive, and appear withdrawn. These symptoms make them endure difficulties in learning and create academic challenges. Methylphenidate (MPH) is one of the psychostimulants used as a first-line therapy for ADHD. In this literature review, we have gathered information that describes the evidence of psychotic symptoms in children and young patients with ADHD as a side effect of MPH. We used articles from the National Library of Medicine (PubMed) and Google Scholar to gather the relevant information. Our findings concluded that MPH can increase the risk of psychosis, particularly when taken in high doses. It is still unclear whether the psychotic range of symptoms occurred due to an increased dopamine (DA) level caused by MPH or as a predominant feature of ADHD or if there was another comorbid feature in the history of the patient that led to psychosis. However, a necessary step for every medical practitioner prescribing psychostimulants is that they enlighten the patient and caregiver that this rare but threatening side effect is a possibility.

Long-term methylphenidate use for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and risk for depression, conduct disorder, and psychotic disorder: a nationwide longitudinal cohort study in South Korea

BACKGROUND

Methylphenidate (MPH) is the most frequently prescribed medication for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, the safety of its long-term use remain unclear. In particular, real-world evidence of long-term MPH treatment regarding the risk of depression, conduct disorders, and psychotic disorders in children and adolescents is needed. This study aimed to compare the risks of depression, conduct disorder, and psychotic disorder between long- and short-term MPH treatments in children and adolescents.

METHODS

This population-based cohort study used a nationwide claims database of all patients with ADHD in South Korea. Patients aged less than 18 years who were prescribed MPH were included in the study. Long- and short-term MPH were defined as > 1 year, and < 1 year, respectively. Overall, the risk of developing depressive disorder, conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and psychotic disorder were investigated. A 1:2 propensity score matching was used to balance the cohorts, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the safety of MPH.

RESULTS

We identified 1309 long-term and 2199 short-term MPH users. Long-term MPH use was associated with a significantly lower risk of depressive (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.88]) and conduct disorders and ODD (HR, 0.52 [95% CI 0.38-0.73]) than short-term MPH use. Psychotic disorder was not significantly associated with long-term MPH use (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-1.32]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that long-term MPH use may be associated with a decreased risk of depression, conduct disorders and ODD. Moreover, the long-term use of MPH does not increase the risk of psychotic disorders. Long-term MPH administration may be considered as a favourable treatment strategy for children and adolescents with ADHD regarding depressive, conduct, and psychotic disorders.

Stimulant treatment effectiveness, safety and risk for psychosis in individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate an association between stimulant treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in individuals with 22q11.2DS and the development of psychotic disorders, to evaluate long-term effectiveness and safety of stimulant treatment in individuals with 22q11.2DS compared to individuals with idiopathic ADHD, and to explore effects of catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) genotype on 22q11.2DS response to stimulants and risk of side effects. Rates of stimulant use and methylphenidate equivalent exposure were compared among individuals with 22q11.2DS, between 51 with psychotic disorders and a control group of 57 22q11.2DS without psychotic disorders, from Tel Aviv and Geneva. In addition, 44 individuals with 22q11.2DS and ADHD from Tel Aviv who initiated stimulants before age 18 years were compared to a control group of 35 age- and sex-matched controls with idiopathic ADHD, for treatment effectiveness (Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement), and rates of side effects. Stimulant use history and methylphenidate equivalent exposure did not differ among individuals with 22q11.2DS, between those with and without psychotic disorders. The long-term retrospective follow-up (5.3 ± 4.1 years) of stimulant-treated individuals with 22q11.2DS showed a higher rate of significant clinical improvement of ADHD symptoms, compared to idiopathic ADHD individuals (p = 0.013), and similar side effect rates. There was no effect of the COMT genotype on response to stimulants or on any side effects. This preliminary long-term retrospective analysis suggests that stimulant treatment in 22q11.2DS is apparently safe in terms of psychosis conversion and rates of side effects, and that it is effective in alleviating ADHD symptoms.

General practice database on mortality in adults on methylphenidate: cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Methylphenidate is a 'prescription only' drug against attention disorders which is increasingly used by adults. We investigated whether methylphenidate in adults was associated with an increased risk of psychiatric events such as depression, and suicide attempt and overall mortality.

DESIGN

A population-based matched cohort design.

SETTING

The Integrated Primary Care Information system, a general practitioners (GP) database in the Netherlands with a source population of 2.5 million inhabitants.

PARTICIPANTS

During the study period between 1 June 1996 and 1 January 2018, 8905 adults started methylphenidate and were matched to 10 non-users on sex, age, GP practice and ad prescription date. The total study population consisted of 97 198 participants.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Serious psychiatric events such as depression and suicide attempts, and overall mortality.

ANALYSES

Risks of development of each event during the use of methylphenidate were expressed as HR with 95% CI, adjusted for relevant confounders with methylphenidate as a time-dependent determinant. Additional adjustment was performed for the intervention ('intention-to-treat').

RESULTS

Although during follow-up, the unadjusted risks of depression and suicide attempt were strongly increased in users, depression and psychosis became non-significant after adjustment for alcohol-abuse and substance-abuse and psychiatric disease in the medical history and after adjustment for 'intention-to-treat'. However, the risk of suicide attempts remained significantly increased after full adjustment (HR 2.0; 95% CI 1.1 to 3.6), and was highest in women and in participants within the age-group of 18-40 years. The unadjusted risk of overall mortality was strongly increased, but this lowered to a significant 30% risk increase (HR 1.3; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.6) after full adjustment.

CONCLUSION

There is an increased risk of suicide attempts in adults up to 40 years of age after starting methylphenidate and this risk should be carefully considered before prescribing to this group.

Association of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics and Oral Antipsychotics With Disease Relapse, Health Care Use, and Adverse Events Among People With Schizophrenia

IMPORTANCE

Evidence for improved clinical outcomes with long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) vs oral antipsychotics (OAs) is limited in Asian populations and special patient groups, including older people (>65 years), people with substance use, and early initiators of LAIAs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risk of disease relapse, health care use, and adverse events associated with the use of LAIAs vs OAs among people in Hong Kong with schizophrenia.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this self-controlled case series study, individuals with a diagnosis of schizophrenia who were prescribed LAIAs and OAs between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2019, were identified from the Clinical Database Analysis and Reporting System of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. Data analysis was conducted from May to August in 2021.

EXPOSURES

Use of LAIAs vs OAs.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Risk of disease relapse (hospitalizations for psychiatric disorders, hospitalizations for schizophrenia, and suicide attempts), health care use (all-cause emergency department visits and hospitalizations), and adverse events (hospitalizations for somatic disorders, hospitalizations for cardiovascular diseases, and extrapyramidal symptoms) between the period in which patients were treated with LAIAs and the period in which patients were treated with OAs were compared using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Of the 70 396 individuals with schizophrenia (37 200 women [52.8%]; mean [SD] age, 44.2 [15.8] years), 23 719 (33.7%) were prescribed both LAIAs and OAs. Compared with OAs, LAIAs were associated with a lower risk of hospitalizations for any cause (n = 20 973; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.61-0.65]), hospitalizations for psychiatric disorders (n = 19 283; IRR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.50-0.53]), hospitalizations for schizophrenia (n = 18 385; IRR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.51-0.55]), and incident suicide attempts (n = 1453; IRR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.44-0.71]). During full treatment with LAIAs, there was a reduction in hospitalizations for somatic disorders (n = 15 396; IRR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.85-0.91]), hospitalizations for cardiovascular diseases (n = 3710; IRR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.81-0.96]), and extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 22 182; IRR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.82-0.91]) compared with full treatment with OAs. No significant difference was found for emergency department visits. Similar associations were observed during the subsequent treatment periods (beyond 90 days) and among older people and those with substance use, except for an increased risk of extrapyramidal symptoms among older people when initiating LAIAs (first 90 days). Compared with late initiators, early LAIA initiators had a greater reduction in these outcome events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This self-controlled case series study of people in Hong Kong with schizophrenia suggests that LAIAs were associated with a lower risk of disease relapse and hospitalization than OAs, without an increased risk of adverse events. Clinicians should more broadly consider the long-term use of LAIAs for Chinese people with schizophrenia, especially early in the course of illness.

Associations between childhood maltreatment and psychiatric disorders: analysis from electronic health records in Hong Kong

There has been a lack of high-quality evidence concerning the association between childhood maltreatment and psychiatric diagnoses particularly for Axis II disorders. This study aimed to examine the association between childhood maltreatment exposure and Axis I and Axis II psychiatry disorders using electronic health records. In this study, the exposed group (n = 7473) comprised patients aged 0 to 19 years with a first-time record of maltreatment episode between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2010, whereas the unexposed group (n = 26,834) comprised individuals of the same gender and age who were admitted into the same hospital in the same calendar year and month but had no records of maltreatment in the Hong Kong Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System (CDARS). Data on their psychiatric diagnoses recorded from the date of admission to January 31, 2019 were extracted. A Cox proportional hazard regression model was fitted to estimate the hazard ratio (HR, plus 95% CIs) between childhood maltreatment exposure and psychiatric diagnoses, adjusting for age at index visit, sex, and government welfare recipient status. Results showed that childhood maltreatment exposure was significantly associated with subsequent diagnosis of conduct disorder/ oppositional defiant disorder (adjusted HR, 10.99 [95% CI 6.36, 19.01]), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (7.28 [5.49, 9.65]), and personality disorders (5.36 [3.78, 7.59]). The risk of psychiatric disorders following childhood maltreatment did not vary by history of childhood sexual abuse, age at maltreatment exposure, and gender. Individuals with a history of childhood maltreatment are vulnerable to psychiatric disorders. Findings support the provision of integrated care within the primary health care setting to address the long-term medical and psychosocial needs of individuals with a history of childhood maltreatment.

Prescription Stimulants and the Risk of Psychosis: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Stimulants can cause psychotic symptoms at high doses and with parenteral use, but it remains uncertain whether the clinical use of prescription stimulants (PS) at therapeutic doses precipitates psychosis or influences long-term psychosis risk. Although serious, psychosis is a relatively uncommon event that is difficult to detect in brief randomized controlled trials. There have been several large-scale observational studies of PS and psychosis risk, which have not been reviewed; therefore, we conducted a systematic review of observational studies of PS and psychosis risk in adults and children.

METHODS/PROCEDURE

We conducted a systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The protocol was registered with International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021243484). Eligible studies were longitudinal observational studies, either cohort or case-control, published in English that reported on PS exposure and risk of psychotic events or disorders. Risk of bias assessments were performed with the ROBINS-I instrument.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

There were 10,736 reports screened, and 8 were ultimately included (n = 232,567 patients): 4 retrospective cohort studies, 1 nested case-control study, 2 self-controlled case series, and 1 prospective cohort study. Exposure to methylphenidate (MPH) was more commonly studied than amphetamine (AMPH). In the 3 studies with lowest risk of bias, there was no effect of MPH exposure on psychosis risk, but there was evidence for increased risk with AMPH in 1 study.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that observational studies do not support a clear-cut effect of prescribed MPH on psychosis risk but that AMPH has been less well studied and may increase psychosis risk.

The Benefits and Limitations of Stimulants in Treating ADHD

This chapter focusses on the benefits and limitations of stimulant medications in the treatment of ADHD. We highlight the key similarities and differences between the different stimulants used to treat ADHD and briefly discuss mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. We will discuss some of the political, ethical, and moral discussions about the use of stimulants including a consideration of the treatment of subsyndromal ADHD and the use of stimulants as cognitive enhancers. We review the comparative efficacy and effectiveness between stimulants and non-pharmacological treatments for ADHD, between stimulant classes and formulations and between stimulant and non-stimulant medications. We discuss the effects on core symptoms, common associated symptoms, cognition, and more distal outcomes including quality of life and functioning and issues related to tolerance, tolerability and adverse effects. Looking at the clinical implications of these findings, we discuss the importance of measurement-based care in the treatment of ADHD. Finally, we will look at the benefits and limitations of stimulants across several different populations and clinical subgroups.

The management of ADHD in children and adolescents: bringing evidence to the clinic: perspective from the European ADHD Guidelines Group (EAGG)

ADHD is the most common neurodevelopmental disorder presenting to child and adolescent mental health, paediatric, and primary care services. Timely and effective interventions to address core ADHD symptoms and co-occurring problems are a high priority for healthcare and society more widely. While much research has reported on the benefits and adverse effects of different interventions for ADHD, these individual research reports and the reviews, meta-analyses and guidelines summarizing their findings are sometimes inconsistent and difficult to interpret. We have summarized the current evidence and identified several methodological issues and gaps in the current evidence that we believe are important for clinicians to consider when evaluating the evidence and making treatment decisions. These include understanding potential impact of bias such as inadequate blinding and selection bias on study outcomes; the relative lack of high-quality data comparing different treatments and assessing long-term effectiveness, adverse effects and safety for both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments; and the problems associated with observational studies, including those based on large national registries and comparing treatments with each other. We highlight key similarities across current international clinical guidelines and discuss the reasons for divergence where these occur. We discuss the integration of these different perspective into a framework for person/family-centered evidence-based practice approach to care that aims to achieve optimal outcomes that prioritize individual strengths and impairments, as well as the personal treatment targets of children and their families. Finally, we consider how access to care for this common and impairing disorder can be improved in different healthcare systems.

The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement: 208 Evidence-based conclusions about the disorder

BACKGROUND

Misconceptions about ADHD stigmatize affected people, reduce credibility of providers, and prevent/delay treatment. To challenge misconceptions, we curated findings with strong evidence base.

METHODS

We reviewed studies with more than 2000 participants or meta-analyses from five or more studies or 2000 or more participants. We excluded meta-analyses that did not assess publication bias, except for meta-analyses of prevalence. For network meta-analyses we required comparison adjusted funnel plots. We excluded treatment studies with waiting-list or treatment as usual controls. From this literature, we extracted evidence-based assertions about the disorder.

RESULTS

We generated 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD. The status of the included statements as empirically supported is approved by 80 authors from 27 countries and 6 continents. The contents of the manuscript are endorsed by 366 people who have read this document and agree with its contents.

CONCLUSIONS

Many findings in ADHD are supported by meta-analysis. These allow for firm statements about the nature, course, outcome causes, and treatments for disorders that are useful for reducing misconceptions and stigma.

Practitioner Review: Pharmacological treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in children and youth with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinically significant attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms are common and impairing in children and youth with autism spectrum disorder(ASD). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to (a) evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for the treatment of ADHD symptoms in ASD and (b) distil findings for clinical translation.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases and clinical trial registries (1992 onwards). We selected randomized controlled trials conducted in participants <25 years of age, diagnosed with ASD that evaluated ADHD outcomes (hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattention) following treatment with stimulants (methylphenidate or amphetamines), atomoxetine, alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonists, antipsychotics, tricyclic antidepressants, bupropion, modafinil, venlafaxine, or a combination, in comparison with placebo, any of the listed medications, or behavioral therapies. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies (4 methylphenidate, 4 atomoxetine, 1 guanfacine, 14 antipsychotic, 1 venlafaxine, and 1 tianeptine) were included. Methylphenidate reduced hyperactivity (parent-rated: standardized mean difference [SMD] = -.63, 95%CI = -.95,-.30; teacher-rated: SMD = -.81, 95%CI = -1.43,-.19) and inattention (parent-rated: SMD = -.36, 95%CI = -.64,-.07; teacher-rated: SMD = -.30, 95%CI = -.49,-.11). Atomoxetine reduced inattention (parent-rated: SMD = -.54, 95%CI = -.98,-.09; teacher/investigator-rated: SMD = -0.38, 95%CI = -0.75, -0.01) and parent-rated hyperactivity (parent-rated: SMD = -.49, 95%CI = -.76,-.23; teacher-rated: SMD = -.43, 95%CI = -.92, .06). Indirect evidence for significant reductions in hyperactivity with second-generation antipsychotics was also found. Quality of evidence for all interventions was low/very low. Methylphenidate was associated with a nonsignificant elevated risk of dropout due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct pooled evidence supports the efficacy and tolerability of methylphenidate or atomoxetine for treatment of ADHD symptoms in children and youth with ASD. The current review highlights the efficacy of standard ADHD pharmacotherapy for treatment of ADHD symptoms in children and youth with ASD. Consideration of the benefits weighed against the limitations of safety/efficacy data and lack of data evaluating long-term continuation is undertaken to help guide clinical decision-making regarding treatment of co-occurring ADHD symptoms in children and youth with ASD.

Treatment with Methylphenidate for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the Risk of All-Cause Poisoning in Children and Adolescents: A Self-Controlled Case Series Study

BACKGROUND

Children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are at higher risk of all-cause poisoning by drugs and chemicals (intentional or accidental). Currently, there is limited data on whether medication treatment for ADHD can reduce the risk of all-cause poisoning.

METHODS

Patients aged 5-18 years with a methylphenidate (MPH) prescription and an incident poisoning diagnosis between January 2001 and June 2020 were identified from the Hong Kong Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System. A self-controlled case series study design was used to compare the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of all-cause poisoning during different risk windows (30 days before the first MPH prescription, exposure periods within 30 days of the first prescription, and periods of subsequent exposure) compared with the reference window (other non-exposure periods).

RESULTS

42,203 patients were prescribed ADHD medication in Hong Kong during the study period. Of these, 417 patients who had both an MPH prescription and poisoning incident recorded were included in the main analysis. Compared with other non-exposed periods, a higher risk of poisoning was found in the 30 days before the first prescription (IRR 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33-5.22) and exposure periods within 30 days of the first prescription (IRR 2.18, 95% CI 1.06-4.48), but not during prolonged exposure. However, compared with 30 days before the first prescription as well as exposure periods within 30 days of the first prescription, there was a lower risk during the subsequent exposure (IRRs 0.49 and 0.60, respectively). Similar results to the main analysis were also found in the subgroup analysis of intentional poisoning and females, but not in that of accidental poisoning and males.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of all-cause poisoning was higher shortly before and after the first MPH prescription and became lower during the subsequent prescription period. Our results do not support an association between the use of MPH and an increased risk of all-cause poisoning in children and adolescents and, in fact, suggest that longer-term use of MPH may be associated with a lower risk of all-cause poisoning, although this latter finding requires further study.

Understanding the Association Between Antidepressants and the Risk of Being Diagnosed with Dementia in Older People: A Self-Controlled Case Series Study

BACKGROUND

Given concerns about adverse outcomes for older people taking antidepressants in the literature, we investigated whether taking antidepressants elevates the risk of dementia.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the putative association of antidepressants with the risk of dementia.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based self-controlled case series analysis of older people with dementia and taking antidepressants, using territory-wide medical records of 194,507 older patients collected by the Hospital Authority of Hong Kong, to investigate the association between antidepressant treatment and the risk of developing dementia in older people.

RESULTS

There was a significantly higher risk of being diagnosed with dementia during the pre-drug-exposed period (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 20.42 (95% CI: 18.66-22.34)) compared to the non-drug-exposed baseline period. The IRR remained high during the drug-exposed period (IRR 8.86 (7.80-10.06)) before returning to a baseline level after washout (IRR 1.12 (0.77-1.36)).

CONCLUSION

The higher risk of dementia before antidepressant treatment may be related to emerging psychiatric symptoms co-occurring with dementia, which trigger medical consultations that result in a decision to begin antidepressants. Our findings do not support a causal relationship between antidepressant treatment and the risk of dementia.

Comparative cardiovascular risk in users versus non-users of xanthine oxidase inhibitors and febuxostat versus allopurinol users

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to determine major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all-cause mortality comparing between xanthine oxidase inhibitors (XOIs) and non-XOI users, and between allopurinol and febuxostat.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of gout patients prescribed anti-hyperuricemic medications between 2013 and 2017 using a territory-wide administrative database. XOI users were matched 1:1 to XOI non-users using propensity scores. Febuxostat users were matched 1:3 to allopurinol users. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on colchicine use.

RESULTS

Of the 13 997 eligible participants, 3607 (25.8%) were XOI users and 10 390 (74.2%) were XOI non-users. After propensity score matching, compared with non-users (n = 3607), XOI users (n = 3607) showed similar incidence of MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.997, 95% CI, 0.879, 1.131; P>0.05) and all-cause mortality (HR = 0.972, 95% CI 0.886, 1.065, P=0.539). Febuxostat (n = 276) users showed a similar risk of MACE compared with allopurinol users (n = 828; HR: 0.672, 95% CI, 0.416, 1.085; P=0.104) with a tendency towards a lower risk of heart failure-related hospitalizations (HR = 0.529, 95% CI 0.272, 1.029; P=0.061). Concurrent colchicine use reduced the risk for all-cause mortality amongst XOI users (HR = 0.671, 95% 0.586, 0.768; P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

In gout patients, XOI users showed similar risk of MACE and all-cause mortality compared with non-users. Compared with allopurinol users, febuxostat users showed similar MACE and all-cause mortality risks but lower heart failure-related hospitalizations.

Association between methylphenidate treatment and risk of seizure: a population-based, self-controlled case-series study

BACKGROUND

Individuals with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are at increased risk of seizures. Stimulant medications such as methylphenidate are the most commonly prescribed treatment for ADHD, but the association between their therapeutic use and the risk of seizures is unclear. We aimed to investigate the association between methylphenidate treatment and the risk of seizure.

METHODS

For this population-based observational study, we used the electronic medical record database of the Hong Kong Clinical Data Analysis And Reporting System to identify individuals aged 6-25 years who received at least one methylphenidate prescription during the study period. Individuals with records of seizure or epilepsy before the study period were excluded. Individuals treated with methylphenidate who had seizures during the study period were included in the subsequent analyses, and a self-controlled case-series design was used to control for time-invariant individual characteristics. We did additional analyses using skin infection as a negative control outcome. We compared relative incidence of seizure during periods when individuals were exposed to methylphenidate with that during non-exposed periods.

FINDINGS

Of 29 604 individuals prescribed methylphenidate between Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2017, 269 (199 males and 70 females) had incident seizures. The mean age at baseline was 6·66 years (SD 2·01) and the median age at the incident seizure was 9·69 years (IQR 7·62-12·99). The overall incidence of seizure during methylphenidate treatment was 4·4 per 10 000 patient-years. We detected an increased risk of seizure during the first 30 days of methylphenidate treatment compared with that during non-exposed periods, with an incidence rate ratio of 4·01 (95% CI 2·09-7·68). No increase in risk was identified during the following 31-180 days of treatment (1·13, 0·56-2·25) or during subsequent treatment (1·38, 0·92-2·07). We did not identify an increased risk in any risk window for the negative control outcome analysis. No individuals died because of a seizure during the study period.

INTERPRETATION

The incidence of seizures was higher in the period immediately after the start of methylphenidate treatment than in the non-exposed period. No increased risk was observed during continuation of methylphenidate treatment. The association between methylphenidate treatment and seizures immediately after initiation of medication can be seen as a potential safety signal. Monitoring of neurological outcomes in individuals with ADHD is recommended when they first start methylphenidate treatment.

FUNDING

Hong Kong Research Grants Council.

Mortality, Revascularization, and Cardioprotective Pharmacotherapy After Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients With Psychotic Disorders: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of mortality in psychotic disorders. There is a paucity of research comprehensively evaluating short-term mortality, cardiovascular complications, and treatment inequality after cardiac events in patients with psychotic disorders. This population-based cohort study examined 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality, cardiovascular complication rates, 30-day and 1-year receipt of invasive cardiac procedures, and 90-day post-discharge cardioprotective medication treatment following admission for first-recorded acute coronary syndrome (ACS) among patients with psychotic disorders (n = 703) compared with patients without psychotic disorders (n = 66 989) between January 2006 and December 2016 in Hong Kong (HK). Study data were retrieved from territory-wide medical record database of public healthcare services to 7.5 million HK residents. Multivariate regression analyses (ORs and 95% CIs), adjusting for demographics and medical comorbidities, were conducted to evaluate associations between psychotic disorders and post-ACS outcomes. Our results showed that patients with psychotic disorders had higher 30-day (OR: 1.99 [95% CI: 1.65-2.39]) and 1-year (2.13 [1.79-2.54]) mortality, and cardiovascular complication rates (1.20 [1.02-1.41]), lower receipt of cardiac catheterization (30-d: 0.54 [0.43-0.68]; 1-y: 0.46 [0.38-0.56]), percutaneous coronary intervention (30-d: 0.55 [0.44-0.70]; 1-y: 0.52 [0.42-0.63]) and reduced β-blockers (0.81 [0.68-0.97]), statins (0.54 [0.44-0.66]), and clopidogrel prescriptions (0.66 [0.55-0.80]). Associations between psychotic disorder and increased mortality remained significant even after complications and treatment receipt were additionally adjusted. Our findings indicate that psychotic disorders are associated with increased risks of short-term post-ACS mortality, cardiovascular complications, and inferior treatment. Excess mortality is not substantially explained by treatment inequality. Further investigation is warranted to clarify factors for suboptimal cardiac-care and elevated mortality in psychotic disorders to enhance post-ACS outcome.

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and risk for non-affective psychotic disorder: The role of ADHD medication and comorbidity, and sibling comparison

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is the most common psychiatric disorder in childhood. It is unclear whether ADHD increases the risk of non-affective psychotic disorder (NAPD). The study included a matched cohort, drawn from all born in Sweden 1987-1991 (n = 548,852). ADHD was defined as ICD diagnosis and/or prescription of ADHD medication. We distinguished between stimulants and non-stimulants, and usage duration (<1 year, 1-2 years and ≥2 years). We calculated odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for NAPD, adjusted for confounders, comorbid autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and substance abuse. ADHD cases were also compared to their unaffected full siblings. We analyzed 18,139 ADHD cases and 72,437 sex and birth year matched controls. NAPD was more common in cases than controls (2.7 and 0.4%, respectively). After adjustment for confounders, ADHD cases had markedly high risk for NAPD (OR: 6.99; 95% CI 6.03-8.10), which attenuated further after adjustment for ASD and substance abuse (OR: 2.57; 95% CI 2.09-3.16). Utilization of ADHD medication increased the risk for NAPD (ORs for change in odds of NAPD for every 5 extra prescriptions of stimulants 1.06 (95% CI 1.02-1.10) and, non-stimulants 1.15 (95% CI 1.01-1.30)). There was no association between usage length of medication and risk for NAPD. The risk was higher in individuals with ADHD than their unaffected siblings (OR: 2.95 (95% CI 2.07-4.20)). Overall, ADHD was associated with elevated risk for NAPD, which is not entirely explained by shared familial factors. The clinical severity leading to medical treatment may also increase NAPD risk. Ethics approval: Approved by the ethical committee in Stockholm, Sweden (dnrs: 2010-1185-31/5 and 2013/1118-32).

Comorbidity of Narcolepsy and Psychotic Disorders: A Nationwide Population-Based Study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Narcolepsy is a chronic sleep disorder that is likely to have neuropsychiatric comorbidities. Psychotic disorders are characterized by delusion, hallucination, and reality impairments. This study investigates the relationship between narcolepsy and psychotic disorders.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This study involves patients who were diagnosed with narcolepsy between January 2002 and December 2011 (n = 258) and age- and gender-matched controls (n = 2580) from Taiwan's National Health Insurance database. Both the patients and the controls were monitored from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2011 to identify any occurrence of a psychotic disorder. Drugs that have been approved for treating narcolepsy: immediate-release methylphenidate (IR-MPH), osmotic controlled-release formulations of methylphenidate (OROS-MPH), and modafinil, were analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to evaluate the potential comorbidity of narcolepsy with psychotic disorders.

RESULTS

During the study period, 8.1% of the narcoleptic patients exhibited comorbidity with a psychotic disorder, whereas only 1.5% of the control subjects (1.5%) had psychotic disorders (aOR, 4.07; 95% CI, 2.21-7.47). Of the narcolepsy patients, 41.5, 5.4, and 13.2% were treated with MPH-IR, MPH-OROS, and modafinil, accordingly. Pharmacotherapy for narcolepsy did not significantly affect the risk of exhibiting a psychotic disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study revealed that narcolepsy and psychotic disorders commonly co-occur. Pharmacotherapy for narcolepsy was not associated with the risk of psychotic disorders. Our findings serve as a reminder that clinicians must consider the comorbidity of narcolepsy and psychosis.

Systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis of the efficacy, safety, and biological effects of psychostimulants and atomoxetine in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to summarize the efficacy and safety of atomoxetine, amphetamines, and methylphenidate in schizophrenia.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review, searching PubMed/Scopus/Clinicaltrials.gov for double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of psychostimulants or atomoxetine in schizophrenia published up to 1 January 2017. A meta-analysis of outcomes reported in two or more studies is presented.

RESULTS

We included 22 studies investigating therapeutic effects of stimulants (k=14) or measuring symptomatic worsening/relapse prediction after stimulant challenge (k=6). Six studies of these two groups plus one additional study investigated biological effects of psychostimulants or atomoxetine. No effect resulted from interventional studies on weight loss (k=1), smoking cessation (k=1), and positive symptoms (k=12), and no improvement was reported with atomoxetine (k=3) for negative symptoms, with equivocal findings for negative (k=6) and mood symptoms (k=2) with amphetamines. Attention, processing speed, working memory, problem solving, and executive functions, among others, showed from no to some improvement with atomoxetine (k=3) or amphetamines (k=6). Meta-analysis did not confirm any effect of stimulants in any symptom domain, including negative symptoms, apart from atomoxetine improving problem solving (k=2, standardized mean difference (SMD)=0.73, 95% CI=0.10-1.36, p=0.02, I2=0%), and trending toward significant improvement in executive functions with amphetamines (k=2, SMD=0.80, 95% CI=-1.68 to +0.08, p=0.08, I2=66%). In challenge studies, amphetamines (k=1) did not worsen symptoms, and methylphenidate (k=5) consistently worsened or predicted relapse. Biological effects of atomoxetine (k=1) and amphetamines (k=1) were cortical activation, without change in β-endorphin (k=1), improved response to antipsychotics after amphetamine challenge (k=2), and an increase of growth hormone-mediated psychosis with methylphenidate (k=2). No major side effects were reported (k=6).

CONCLUSIONS

No efficacy for stimulants or atomoxetine on negative symptoms is proven. Atomoxetine or amphetamines may improve cognitive symptoms, while methylphenidate should be avoided in patients with schizophrenia. Insufficient evidence is available to draw firm conclusions.

Neurological and psychiatric adverse effects of long-term methylphenidate treatment in ADHD: A map of the current evidence

Methylphenidate (MPH), the most common medication for children with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in many countries, is often prescribed for long periods of time. Any long-term psychotropic treatment in childhood raises concerns about possible adverse neurological and psychiatric outcomes. We aimed to map current evidence regarding neurological and psychiatric outcomes, adverse or beneficial, of long-term MPH (> 1 year) treatment in ADHD. We coded studies using a "traffic light" system: Green: safe/favours MPH; Amber: warrants caution; Red: not safe/not well-tolerated. Un-categorisable study findings were coded as "Unclear". Although some evidence suggests an elevated risk of psychosis and tics, case reports describe remission on discontinuation. Several studies suggest that long-term MPH may reduce depression and suicide in ADHD. Evidence suggests caution in specific groups including pre-school children, those with tics, and adolescents at risk for substance misuse. We identified a need for more studies that make use of large longitudinal databases, focus on specific neuropsychiatric outcomes, and compare outcomes from long-term MPH treatment with outcomes following shorter or no pharmacological intervention.

Risks and Benefits of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Medication on Behavioral and Neuropsychiatric Outcomes: A Qualitative Review of Pharmacoepidemiology Studies Using Linked Prescription Databases

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication is one of the most commonly prescribed medication classes in child and adolescent psychiatry, and its use is increasing rapidly in adult psychiatry. However, major questions and concerns remain regarding the benefits and risks of ADHD medication, especially in real-world settings. We conducted a qualitative systematic review of studies that investigated the effects of ADHD medication on behavioral and neuropsychiatric outcomes using linked prescription databases from the last 10 years and identified 40 studies from Europe, North America, and Asia. Among them, 18 used within-individual designs to account for confounding by indication. These studies suggested short-term beneficial effects of ADHD medication on several behavioral or neuropsychiatric outcomes (i.e., injuries, motor vehicle accidents, education, substance use disorder), with estimates suggesting relative risk reduction of 9% to 58% for these outcomes. The within-individual studies found no evidence of increased risks for suicidality and seizures. Replication studies are needed for several other important outcomes (i.e., criminality, depression, mania, psychosis). The available evidence from pharmacoepidemiology studies on long-term effects of ADHD medication was less clear. We discuss time-varying confounding and other limitations that should be considered when interpreting results from pharmacoepidemiology studies. Furthermore, we highlight several knowledge gaps to be addressed in future research and implications for research on mechanisms of outcomes of ADHD medications.

Methylphenidate and the risk of psychosis in adolescents and young adults: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

There is a clinical concern that prescribing methylphenidate, the most common pharmacological treatment for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), might increase the risk of psychotic events, particularly in young people with a history of psychosis. We aimed to determine whether the risk of psychotic events increases immediately after initiation of methylphenidate treatment or, in the longer term, 1 year after treatment initiation in adolescents and young adults with and without a previously diagnosed psychotic disorder.

METHODS

In this cohort study, we used population-based observational data from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register, the National Patient Register, and the Total Population Register, three population-based registers containing data on all individuals in Sweden, to attain data on sex, birth, death, migration, medication use, and psychotic events for all eligible participants. We screened individuals on these registers to identify those receiving methylphenidate treatment, and who were aged 12-30 years at the start of treatment, for their inclusion in the study. We used a within-individual design to compare the incidence of psychotic events in these individuals during the 12-week periods immediately before and after methylphenidate initiation. Longer term risk was assessed by comparing the incidence of psychotic events 12 weeks before methylphenidate initiation and during a 12-week period one calendar year before the initiation of methylphenidate with the incidence of these events during the 12-week period one calendar year after methylphenidate initiation. We estimated the incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% CIs of psychotic events after the initation of methylphenidate treatment, relative to the events before treatment, which were defined as any hospital visit (inpatient admission or outpatient attendance, based on data from the National Patient Register) because of psychosis, using the International Classification of Diseases version 10 definition. Analyses were stratified by whether the individual had a history of psychosis.

FINDINGS

We searched the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register to find eligible individuals who had received methylphenidate between Jan 1, 2007 and June 30, 2012. 61 814 individuals were screened, of whom 23 898 (38·7%) individuals were assessed and 37 916 (61·3%) were excluded from the study because they were outside of the age criteria at the start of treatment, they had immigrated, emigrated, or died during the study period, or because they were administered other ADHD medications. The median age at methylphenidate initiation was 17 years, and a history of psychosis was reported in 479 (2·0%) participants. The IRR of psychotic events in the 12-week period after initiation of methylphenidate treatment relative to that in the 12-week period before treatment start was 1·04 (95% CI 0·80-1·34) in adolescents and young adults without a history of psychosis and 0·95 (0·69-1·30) among those with a history of psychosis.

INTERPRETATION

Contrary to clinical concerns, we found no evidence that initiation of methylphenidate treatment increases the risk of psychotic events in adolescents and young adults, including in those individuals with a history of psychosis. Our study should reassure clinicians considering initiating methylphenidate treatment for ADHD in adolescents and young adults, and it challenges the widely held view in clinical practice that methylphenidate should be avoided, or its use restricted, in individuals with a history of psychosis.

FUNDING

Swedish Research Council, National Institute of Mental Health, UK National Institute of Health Research Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre.

Emerging challenges in pharmacotherapy research on attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder-outcome measures beyond symptom control and clinical trials

Although pharmacological therapies are recommended as a key component in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, their use continues to prompt intense debate. Despite considerable research efforts, several gaps in the knowledge base and several questions over the quality of evidence exist. Particular issues surrounding pharmacological treatments include uncertainties about long-term effectiveness and safety, safety profiles in adults, and the comparative effectiveness of different medications. In this Review, we focus on four key methodological issues for future research: (1) the use of appropriate trial designs; the need for (2) outcome measures targeting effectiveness beyond symptom control and (3) safety outcome measures; and (4) the application of clinical and administrative research databases to assess real-world outcomes. Potential solutions include increased use of randomised placebo-controlled withdrawal trials and large pharmacoepidemiological studies that use electronic health-care records on the long-term effectiveness and safety of medications. Pragmatic head-to-head randomised trials would also provide direct evidence on comparative effectiveness and safety profiles.

Le TDAH chez les enfants et les adolescents, partie 2 : le traitement

Le trouble de déficit de l’attention/hyperactivité (TDAH) est un trouble neurodéveloppemental chronique. La Société canadienne de pédiatrie a préparé trois documents de principes après avoir effectué des analyses bibliographiques systématiques. Leurs objectifs s’établissent comme suit : 1) Résumer les données probantes cliniques à jour sur le TDAH. 2) Établir une norme pour les soins du TDAH. 3) Aider les cliniciens canadiens à prendre des décisions éclairées et fondées sur des données probantes pour rehausser la qualité des soins aux enfants et aux adolescents qui présentent cette affection.

La partie 2, axée sur le traitement, porte sur les données probantes et le contexte entourant diverses approches cliniques, la combinaison des interventions comportementales et pharmacologiques pour assurer un traitement plus efficace, le rôle de la formation des parents et des enseignants (ou des autres personnes qui s’occupent de l’enfant), le recours aux stimulants et aux non-stimulants, leurs effets et leurs risques, leur posologie et les protocoles de surveillance. Les recommandations thérapeutiques reposent sur les lignes directrices à jour, les données probantes tirées de publications scientifiques et le consensus d’experts.

ADHD in children and youth: Part 2-Treatment

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a chronic neurodevelopmental disorder. Three position statements have been developed by the Canadian Paediatric Society, following systematic literature reviews. Statement objectives are to: 1) Summarize the current clinical evidence regarding ADHD,2) Establish a standard for ADHD care, and3) Assist Canadian clinicians in making well-informed, evidence-based decisions to enhance care of children and youth with this condition. Specific topics reviewed in Part 2, which focuses on treatment, include: evidence and context for a range of clinical approaches, combining behavioural and pharmacological interventions to address impairment more effectively, the role of parent and teacher (or other caregiver) training, the use of stimulant and nonstimulant medications, with effects and risks, and dosing and monitoring protocols. Treatment recommendations are based on current guidelines, evidence from the literature, and expert consensus.

Hallucinations and other psychotic symptoms in response to methylphenidate in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a Cochrane systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Scand J Child Adolesc Psychiatr Psychol 2018;6:52-71. [PMID: 33520751 PMCID: PMC7750702 DOI: 10.21307/sjcapp-2018-003]

BACKGROUND

There is little evidence in the literature on the association between methylphenidate treatment and psychotic symptoms in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

OBJECTIVE

We examine the occurrence of psychotic symptoms during methylphenidate treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD. The data arise from our two Cochrane systematic reviews on methylphenidate, reported elsewhere.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched up to January 2016 (for observational studies) and March 2017 (for randomized trials). We summarized data as risk ratios and pooled prevalences. Trial Sequential Analysis was used to control for random errors. We assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence according to Cochrane guidelines.

RESULTS

Ten randomized trials (1103 participants), 17 non-randomized studies (76,237 participants) and 12 patient reports or series (18 patients) were identified. In the randomized trials, there was no significant difference in the risk of developing psychotic symptoms [10 of 654 (pooled prevalence, 2.5%) methylphenidate versus 1 of 508 (pooled prevalence, 1.7%) placebo patients; risk ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 7.35]. Nine of 10 trials had a high risk of bias, and according to the Trial Sequential Analysis, the required information size was not achieved, that is, the meta-analysis was considerably underpowered. There were 873 instances of psychotic symptoms in the non-randomized studies among 55,603 participants (pooled prevalence, 1.2%; 95% confidence interval, 0.7 to 2.4). In the comparative cohort study, methylphenidate significantly increased the risk for any psychotic disorder by 36% (risk ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.17 to 1.57). The overall risk of bias was rated as critical for this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of sparse data and low quality of evidence, we cannot confirm or refute whether methylphenidate increases the risk of psychotic symptoms in children and adolescents with ADHD. This possible adverse event may affect 1.1% to 2.5%, and physicians, patients and caregivers should be aware of this to ensure proper treatment in case of occurrence during methylphenidate treatment.

Effectiveness of Pharmacological Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder on Physical Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are more prone to physical injuries, including motor vehicle accidents, fractures and brain injuries. Several observational studies have been published investigating the association between the use of pharmacological treatment for ADHD and the incidence of physical injuries among patients with ADHD; however, the findings are not concordant.

OBJECTIVE

This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature and estimates the overall association between the use of ADHD medications and physical injury. Injury is defined as medically attended physical injuries in the form of hospitalisations, emergency department visits or general practitioners visits.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Review databases were searched for relevant studies published up to May 2017 relating to ADHD medication and risk of injuries. Observational studies with any study design, all age groups (children and adults) and all ADHD medications (stimulant and non-stimulants) were included. Studies relevant to the association between ADHD medication exposure and risk of injuries in ADHD patients were extracted and compiled for meta-analysis. Both within-individual and between-individual analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Overall, 2001 citations were identified and 10 observational studies were included. Three self-controlled case series and two self-controlled cohorts were eligible for meta-analysis of within-individual studies. Five cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis of between-individual studies. The adjusted rate ratio of the within-individual methods was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.93) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.85-0.92) for between-individual studies.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this meta-analysis support a reduced risk of injuries among ADHD patients who were treated with ADHD medications.

Association of Risk of Suicide Attempts With Methylphenidate Treatment

IMPORTANCE

Patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are at an increased risk of attempting suicide. Stimulants, such as methylphenidate hydrochloride, are the most common treatment for ADHD, but the association between their therapeutic use and suicide is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between methylphenidate and the risk of suicide attempts.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A population-based, electronic medical records database from the Hong Kong Clinical Data Analysis & Reporting System was used to identify 25 629 individuals aged 6 to 25 years who were treated with methylphenidate between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2015. Those who had attempted suicide were included in the analysis. A self-controlled case series design was used to control for time-invariant characteristics of the patients.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Relative incidence of suicide attempt during periods when patients were exposed to methylphenidate compared with nonexposed periods.

RESULTS

Among 25 629 patients with methylphenidate prescriptions, 154 had their first recorded suicide attempt within the study period; of these individuals, 111 (72.1%) were male; mean (SD) age at baseline was 7.15 (2.19) years. The overall incidence of suicide attempts during methylphenidate treatment was 9.27 per 10 000 patient-years. An increased risk of suicide attempts was detected during the 90-day period before methylphenidate was initiated, with an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 6.55 (95% CI, 3.37-12.72). The IRR remained elevated during the first 90 days of treatment (IRR, 3.91; 95% CI, 1.62-9.42) before returning to baseline levels during ongoing treatment (IRR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.77-2.38). When the risk during the first 90 days of treatment was compared with the 90 days preceding first treatment, the incidence of suicide attempts was not elevated (IRR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.26-2.35).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The incidence of suicide attempts was higher in the period immediately before the start of methylphenidate treatment. The risk remained elevated immediately after the start of methylphenidate treatment and returned to baseline levels during continuation of methylphenidate treatment. The observed higher risk of suicide attempts before treatment may reflect emerging psychiatric symptoms that trigger medical consultations that result in a decision to begin ADHD treatment. Therefore, this study's results do not support a causal association between methylphenidate treatment and suicide attempts.

An update on the safety of psychostimulants for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

INTRODUCTION

Methylphenidate is the first-line pharmacological treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Although methylphenidate has a well-established evidence base for treating ADHD, its long-term benefits are unclear. Areas covered: Physical adverse effects, psychiatric adverse events and brain development Expert opinion: Some physical adverse events have been described (e.g. sleep disturbances, growth reduction, loss of appetite), although most are of transient nature. Psychiatric adverse events seem more related to the diagnosis ADHD itself, and not stimulant treatment. Concluding, short-to-mid-term use (i.e., up to 2 years) stimulants are relatively safe, but much less is known about longer-term efficacy and safety of these drugs.