NWP06, an extended-release oral suspension of methylphenidate, improved attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms compared with placebo in a laboratory classroom study

A critical review of the dextroamphetamine transdermal system for the treatment of ADHD in adults and pediatric patients

INTRODUCTION

The dextroamphetamine transdermal system (d-ATS) is a stimulant patch recently approved by the United States (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

AREAS COVERED

The composition of the d-ATS, pharmacokinetics, and metabolism are presented along with data from dermal trials evaluating the tolerability of patch application at various skin sites. Efficacy and safety data from a laboratory classroom study in children and adolescents including effect sizes are assessed. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of variable wear times is also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Although stimulants are recommended as first-line treatment for ADHD in the U.S. some patients may have difficulty swallowing intact tablets and capsules, or dislike the taste or texture of chewable, oral disintegrating, or liquid formulations. The d-ATS fills an unmet need for those with ADHD who are unable or prefer not to take medication orally. Varying wear time of the d-ATS also gives flexibility in length of stimulant effect which may be useful for patients with changing schedules. However, dermal discomfort must be considered in addition to the usual amphetamine side effects when prescribing the d-ATS. Patient and provider experience will determine how frequent the use of d-ATS becomes.

Diagnosis and Treatment of ADHD in the Pediatric Population

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood with approximately 6 million children (age 3 to 17 years) ever diagnosed based on data from 2016-2019. ADHD is characterized by a constant pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms that interferes with development or functioning. Specific criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition Text Revision assist with the diagnosis with multiple guidelines available providing non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic recommendations for the treatment of ADHD in the pediatric population. While all guidelines similarly recommend behavioral and/or stimulant therapy as first-line therapy based on age, not all stimulant products are equal. Their differing pharmacokinetic profiles and formulations are essential to understand in order to optimize efficacy and safety for patients. Additionally, new stimulant products and non-stimulant medications continue to be approved for use of ADHD in the pediatric population and it is important to know their differences in formulation, efficacy, and safety to other products currently available. Lastly, due to drug shortages, it is important to understand product similarities and differences to select alternative therapy for patients.

Oral Drug Delivery Systems Applied to Launched Products: Value for the Patients and Industrial Considerations

Drug delivery systems (DDS) control the amount, rate, and site of administration of drug substances in the body as well as their release and ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion). Among the various types of DDS, amount-controlled DDS for solubilization and absorption increase the bioavailability. Time- and amount-controlled DDS are controlled release formulations classified as (1) membrane-type, (2) matrix-type, (3) osmotic-type, and (4) ion-exchange type. Timed-release formulations also control the time and amount of release and the absorption of drugs. Site- and amount-controlled DDS are characterized by colonic delivery and intestinal lymph-targeting to improve release and ADME of drug substances. Finally, site-, time-, and amount-controlled DDS are gastroretentive formulations and local delivery in the oral cavity to improve site retention, release, and ADME of drugs. DDS can enhance efficacy, reduce adverse effects, and optimize the dosing frequency of various drug products to increase patient value. This review focuses on patient value and industrial considerations of launched oral DDS. We provide a technological overview of candidate and marketed DDS, as well as the pros/cons of the technologies for industrialization with consideration to excipients, manufacturing, and storage stability. Moreover, to demonstrate the usefulness of the technology and support the selection and development of the best technologies for patients, we also describe patient value from clinical studies and analyses, particularly with regard to increased new medical options, higher efficacy, reduced adverse effects, reduced number of doses and clinic visits, easier administration, higher quality of life, greater adherence, and satisfaction.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

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

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Analysis of Daily Sleep Diary Measures From Multilayer Extended-Release Methylphenidate (PRC-063) Studies in Children and Adults With ADHD

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of a once-daily extended-release methylphenidate formulation (PRC-063) versus placebo on sleep, measured via daily electronic diary in two clinical trials in pediatric (6-12 years) and adult (≥18 years) patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHOD

A diary was completed by adult patients or parents/caregivers of pediatric patients during two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled laboratory classroom studies. Following dose optimization of PRC-063, patients were randomized to 1 week of double-blind treatment with PRC-063 or placebo before attending a full-day laboratory classroom session.

RESULTS

In the studies, 148 pediatric patients and 239 adult patients were randomized to either PRC-063 or placebo. When compared with the diaries of placebo patients, the sleep diaries in both pediatric and adult patients showed no statistical difference in total sleep time, efficiency, or latency.

CONCLUSION

PRC-063 did not impact subjective measures of sleep versus placebo in pediatric and adult patients with ADHD.

Stimulants

Stimulants have been available for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for more than 70 years and are the most effective medications available. During the past 2 decades, several new immediate-release (IR) and extended-release methylphenidate (MPH) and amphetamine (AMPH) formulations have become available. These products differ by dose form (capsules, tablets, oral suspensions, oral disintegrating tablets, and patch), by onset and duration of effect, and by bioavailability. The side effect profile is generally similar for all compounds. Although the products are similar, individual patients may have a better response or tolerability to a particular class (MPH or AMPH) or formulation.

A Randomized, Controlled Laboratory Classroom Study of Serdexmethylphenidate and d-Methylphenidate Capsules in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily serdexmethylphenidate/dexmethylphenidate (SDX/d-MPH) capsules (Azstarys^™) compared with placebo in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in a randomized, double-blind, dose-optimized laboratory classroom study. Methods: Children ages 6-12 with ADHD were enrolled. During a 3-week, open-label, Dose Optimization Phase, subjects initiated treatment with 39.2 mg/7.8 mg/day of SDX/d-MPH and were titrated weekly to an optimal dose (maximum dose of 52.3/10.4 mg). During the double-blind Treatment Phase, subjects were randomized to receive their optimal dose of SDX/d-MPH or placebo for 7 days. On day 7, efficacy was assessed in the laboratory classroom using the Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) Rating Scale and Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP). To evaluate safety, adverse events (AEs), vital signs, and electrocardiograms were assessed, and suicide risk was assessed. Results: A total of 149 subjects completed the study. In the primary efficacy analysis, the mean postdose change from baseline in SKAMP-Combined scores averaged over the laboratory classroom day was significantly improved with SDX/d-MPH versus placebo (least-squares mean treatment difference [95% confidence interval]: -5.41 [-7.10 to -3.71]; p < 0.001). A significant treatment effect for SDX/d-MPH compared with placebo was observed from 1 to 10 hours postdose. A post hoc analysis more comparable with that conducted in similar studies indicated a 0.5- to 13-hour onset and duration of efficacy. Both average postdose PERMP-Attempted and PERMP-Correct score changes from baseline were significantly improved among those treated with SDX/d-MPH versus placebo (p < 0.001 for both). No serious AEs were reported. During the Dose Optimization Phase, two-thirds of subjects reported AEs; the most common being insomnia and decreased appetite. Conclusions: SDX/d-MPH showed significant improvement in ADHD symptoms compared with placebo in children 6-12 years of age, with a rapid onset and extended duration of treatment effect. SDX/d-MPH was safe, with AEs comparable with those observed with other stimulant treatments.

Open-Label Dose Optimization of Methylphenidate Extended-Release Orally Disintegrating Tablet in a Laboratory Classroom Study of Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Objective: To examine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of methylphenidate extended-release orally disintegrating tablets (MPH XR-ODT) for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) during the open-label dose-optimization/stabilization period of a phase 3 laboratory classroom study. Methods: Children (6-12 years) diagnosed with ADHD were enrolled. Treatment was initiated with MPH XR-ODT 20 mg daily. Doses were adjusted weekly by 10-20 mg during the 4-week dose-optimization period (visits 2-5) until an optimal dose was reached. The optimal dose was sustained during a 1-week stabilization period (visits 6-7). Efficacy was assessed using the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) score and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) score. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded throughout the study. A secondary subgroup analysis by baseline ADHD-RS-IV score, sex, age, and weight was also performed. Results: The mean (standard deviation [SD]) final optimized MPH XR-ODT daily dose was 41.8 (14.6) mg and ranged from 20 to 60 mg. Final optimized dose was higher for children with more severe baseline ADHD-RS-IV total scores. ADHD-RS-IV total scores decreased progressively during dose optimization, with a mean (SD) change from baseline at visit 7 of -21.4 (8.9). CGI-I scores shifted from "minimally improved" (mean [SD]: 3.1 [1.1]) at visit 3 to "much improved" (1.6 [0.6]) at visit 7. Baseline ADHD-RS-IV total score was highest for participants optimized to 40 mg (mean [standard error]: 40.0 [1.4]) and lowest for those optimized to 20 mg (34.8 [2.1]). By visit 6, mean ADHD-RS-IV score was comparable for all optimized dose groups. Common treatment-emergent AEs (≥5% of participants) included decreased appetite, upper abdominal pain, headaches, and insomnia. Conclusions: Dose optimization of MPH XR-ODT led to a reduction in ADHD symptoms, indicated by a decrease in ADHD-RS-IV and CGI-I scores. AEs were consistent with those of other MPH products. Clinical Trial Registry: NCT01835548 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Adult Patient Preferences for Long-Acting ADHD Treatments: A Discrete Choice Experiment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) requires a multifaceted approach including psychosocial interventions and pharmacological treatment. This study evaluates preferences for specific attributes associated with different long-acting stimulant treatment among US adults with ADHD.

METHODS

Patients completed an online, cross-sectional survey, incorporating a discrete choice experiment to assess preferences for attributes.

RESULTS

Analyses included 200 adults with ADHD (mean age 33.0 years; 60% self-reporting moderate severity); the mean (SD) Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale-v1.1 score was 45.9 (12.4). Overall, patients valued speed of onset most and risk of rebound least. Three population groups with distinct preferences were identified: side effect-driven (n=69, 35%), quick onset-driven (n=47, 24%) and quick onset and long duration-driven (n=84, 42%).

CONCLUSION

This study shows differences in how adults with ADHD value and assess benefit-risk trade-offs when considering the desired attributes of stimulant treatments, highlighting the importance of patient-physician shared decision-making to optimize the desired benefits of individualized treatment.

Novel Formulations of ADHD Medications: Stimulant Selection and Management

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most commonly diagnosed psychiatric disorder in children and adolescents in the United States. In 2016, approximately 3.8 million U.S. children ages 2 to 17 years with ADHD were being treated with medication. There are approximately 30 different amphetamine (AMPH) and methylphenidate (MPH) formulations on the market. These include immediate-release and extended-release compounds. The extended-release formulations contain various ratios of immediate-release and extended-release components, which determine the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile. For stimulants, the PK and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles are tightly linked, and the immediate-release and extended-release percentages influence onset and duration of drug effects. Choosing the right stimulant medication for a patient depends on an understanding of the PK/PD profile, the time of day that symptoms are most impairing, the need for morning and evening symptom control and individual patient preferences.

Efficacy and Safety of Multilayer, Extended-Release Methylphenidate (PRC-063) in Children 6-12 Years of Age with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Laboratory Classroom Study

Objective: To determine the safety and efficacy of PRC-063, a once-daily, multilayer, extended-release (ER) formulation of methylphenidate (MPH) hydrochloride, in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children in a randomized, double-blind, parallel group, dose-optimized, placebo-controlled phase 3 study. Methods: Boys and girls aged 6-12 years diagnosed with ADHD were enrolled. During a 6-week, open-label, dose-optimization phase, subjects began treatment at 25 mg/day of PRC-063 and were titrated until an optimal dose (maximum 85 mg/day) was reached. During the double-blind period, subjects were randomized to receive treatment with their optimal dose of PRC-063 or placebo for 1 week. Efficacy was assessed in a laboratory classroom setting on the final day of the double-blind treatment using the Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) Rating Scale and Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP). Safety was assessed measuring adverse events (AEs), vital signs, and electrocardiograms. Results: The study was completed by 147 subjects. In the primary efficacy analysis, significant improvements were demonstrated with PRC-063 versus placebo (p < 0.0001) when SKAMP-Combined scores were averaged over the 13-hour full-day laboratory classroom (least squares mean difference = -8.6, 95% confidence interval = -10.6 to -6.6). Mean average PERMP-Total scores were also significantly improved with PRC-063 versus placebo at all time points postdose (p < 0.01). The onset of treatment effect was present by 1-hour postdose (the first time point measured) and duration of efficacy was up to and including 13 hours postdose. AEs reported in ≥5% of subjects during the dosing optimization period were decreased appetite, abdominal pain upper, affect lability, weight decreased, headache, irritability, and insomnia. Conclusions: PRC-063 was effective in improving attention and reducing symptoms of ADHD versus placebo and had a rapid onset and extended duration of effect. AEs were consistent to those reported with other ER MPH treatments. Clinical Trial Registry: NCT03172481.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of HLD200, a Delayed-Release and Extended-Release Methylphenidate, in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: An Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy Throughout the Day and Across Settings

Objectives: HLD200, a once-daily, evening-dosed, delayed-release and extended-release methylphenidate (DR/ER-MPH), was designed to provide therapeutic effect beginning upon awakening and lasting into the evening. This pivotal, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial assessed improvements in functional impairment across the day using multiple validated measures tailored for different settings and time of day in children (6-12 years) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: Following a 6-week, open-label titration of DR/ER-MPH to an optimal dose (20, 40, 60, 80, or 100 mg/day) and dosing time (8:00 PM ±1.5 hours), participants were randomized to treatment-optimized DR/ER-MPH or placebo for 1 week. The primary endpoint was the model-adjusted average of postdose Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham Scale combined scores (SKAMP CS) over a 12-hour laboratory classroom day (8:00 AM to 8:00 PM). The key secondary endpoint was the Parent Rating of Evening and Morning Behavior-Revised, Morning (PREMB-R AM) subscale. Secondary/exploratory measures included the PREMB-R Evening (PREMB-R PM) subscale and Permanent Product Measure of Performance (Attempted [PERMP-A] and Correct [PERMP-C]). Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: After the treatment-optimization phase, the mean optimized dose was 66.2 mg and the most common prescribed dosing time was 8:00 PM. Double-blind DR/ER-MPH treatment significantly improved functional impairment versus placebo in the early morning (PREMB-R AM: p < 0.001), averaged over the classroom day (SKAMP CS: p < 0.001), and in the late afternoon/evening (PREMB-R PM: p = 0.003) in the intent-to-treat population (N = 117). Average PERMP-A (p = 0.006) and PERMP-C (p = 0.009) also indicated improved classroom performance with DR/ER-MPH versus placebo. In the double-blind phase, TEAEs did not differ between DR/ER-MPH and placebo groups and no serious TEAEs or TEAEs leading to discontinuation were reported. Conclusion: DR/ER-MPH was well tolerated and demonstrated significant improvements versus placebo in functional impairment throughout the day across different settings in children with ADHD.

Phase II/III Study of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate in Japanese Pediatric Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Objective: To further define the efficacy and safety profiles of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) in Japanese pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of LDX 30, 50, or 70 mg/day for 4 weeks in 76 patients 6-17 years of age with ADHD in Japan. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score from baseline to 4 weeks. Secondary efficacy endpoints were: Conners' Third Edition (Japanese version) Parent Rating Scale (Conners 3), Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale, and Parent Global Assessment (PGA) scale. Results: Change in the ADHD-RS-IV total score from baseline to 4 weeks was significantly greater (p < 0.0001) in all LDX dosage groups versus placebo (30 mg, -16.38; 50 mg, -18.10; 70 mg, -16.47; placebo, -2.78). At all time points, improvements (decreases) in the ADHD-RS-IV total score were significantly greater in all LDX groups versus placebo. At weeks 3 and 4, improvements from baseline in Conners 3 inattention plus hyperactivity/impulsivity subscale scores were significantly greater (p ≤ 0.0082) for all LDX dosages versus placebo. At week 4, the proportion of LDX-treated patients "much improved" or "very much improved" was 61%-71% on the CGI-I scale (p ≤ 0.0019) and 56%-65% on the PGA scale (p ≤ 0.0170). LDX was generally well tolerated. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were decreased appetite, headache, and initial insomnia. No severe/serious AEs occurred, and no AEs specific to Japanese patients were evident. Conclusions: The superiority of LDX 30, 50, and 70 mg/day over placebo was confirmed in Japanese pediatric patients with ADHD, and no major safety or tolerability concerns were identified.

Efficacy and Safety of Dasotraline in Children With ADHD: A Laboratory Classroom Study

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dasotraline for treatment of ADHD in children. Method: Children (ages 6-12 years; N = 112) with ADHD were randomized, double-blind, to 14 days of once-daily evening doses of dasotraline 4 mg or placebo. ADHD symptom severity was measured at baseline and Day 15 in seven, 30-min classroom sessions using the Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) and the Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP) math test. Results: Significant improvement was observed for dasotraline versus placebo in the SKAMP-combined score (-3.2 vs. +2.0; p < .001; effect size = 0.85) and SKAMP and PERMP subscale scores. The three most common adverse events for dasotraline (vs. placebo) were insomnia (19.6% vs. 3.6%), headache (10.7% vs. 8.9%), and decreased appetite (10.7% vs. 3.6%). Conclusion: In this laboratory classroom study, dasotraline 4 mg was found to be an efficacious and generally well-tolerated treatment for ADHD in children aged 6 to 12 years.

Laboratory School Protocol Mini-Review: Use of Direct Observational and Objective Measures to Assess ADHD Treatment Response Across the Lifespan

Introduction

The time of onset and the duration of treatment effect are important considerations in the choice of the medication to be prescribed in treating children, adolescents, and adults with ADHD. Early onset of effect may facilitate preparation for school, improved behavior during the trip to school, and attention during morning classes. Sustained treatment effect through afternoon and evening hours can be important because impairments associated with ADHD are not limited to the naturalistic classroom. Laboratory school protocols (LSPs) provide a simulated, rigorously controlled classroom setting environment and have proven valuable for providing pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information about medications, and other treatments used in managing ADHD in school-aged children and across the lifespan.

Methods

This paper is an invited mini-review of LSPs of stimulant medication, which includes data from multiple, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled medication trials for ADHD. Assessment endpoints included the permanent product measure of performance (PERMP), Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) rating scale in the preschool assessment laboratory (PAL), child/adolescent, and adult workplace environment (AWE) studies. These measures allow the study of improvement in attention and behavior in individuals with ADHD.

Results

Analog classroom settings (LSP or AWE) have been used to assess immediate and modified-release stimulant formulations of medications to treat ADHD in multiple age groups. Results based on both subjective (e.g., SKAMP ratings) and objective (e.g., PERMP) measures are used as clinical outcomes in testing drugs currently in development for ADHD.

Conclusion

The LSP and its extension to PAL and AWE settings continue to be used to assess the time-course of effect of ADHD medications because they provide valuable information in their respective structured, controlled environments.

QuilliChew extended-release chewable tablets for the treatment of ADHD in patients ages 6 years old and above

INTRODUCTION

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioral disorder affecting as many as 6.4 million children and adolescents in the United States. Since amphetamine (AMPH) and methylphenidate (MPH) were found to be effective more than 60 years ago, numerous formulations of these compounds have been developed. New preparations have focused on convenience, with extended-release (ER) drugs allowing once-daily dosing. Multiple ER formulations do not require patients to swallow a tablet or capsule. Recent ER preparations include liquids, oral disintegrating tablets, and chewable tablets. Several new formulations use ion exchange technology containing both immediate-release and ER components. Areas covered: Quillichew ER^TM (MPH-ERCT) is an ER methylphenidate designed to be chewed before swallowing. The technology and pharmacokinetics, along with efficacy and safety data, are presented. Expert opinion: Extensive safety and efficacy data exist for MPH. ER formulations can be distinguished by preparation (tablet, capsule, liquid) and onset and duration of effect, but efficacy is similar for all ER MPH products. Each formulation has attributes, such as ease of titration, portability, and taste, that make it more acceptable for certain patients. Because AMPH and MPH are so effective, current technology research is focused on improving safety, convenience, and onset and duration of effect.

Adverse drug events related to mood and emotion in paediatric patients treated for ADHD: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

ADHD is frequently comorbid with anxiety and mood disorders, which may increase the severity of inattention and hyperactivity symptoms. Emotional symptoms (anxiety, irritability, mood lability) also affect patients without comorbidity or emerge as adverse drug events. The influence of ADHD drugs on emotional symptoms demands investigation to improve therapies.

METHODS

Systematic review of trials reporting adverse events in patients pharmacologically treated for ADHD. Meta-analysis of the occurrence of irritability, anxiety, apathy, reduced talk, sadness, crying, emotional lability, biting nails, staring, perseveration, euphoria. Meta-regression analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-five trials were meta-analysed. The most frequently reported outcomes were irritability, anxiety, sadness, and apathy. Methylphenidates, especially immediate-release formulations, were most studied; amphetamines were half as studied and were predominantly mixed amphetamine salts. Reports on atomoxetine were scant. Meta-analysis showed that methylphenidates reduced the risk of irritability, anxiety, euphoria, whereas they worsened the risk of apathy and reduced talk; amphetamines worsened the risk of emotional lability. Factors influencing risks were study year and design, patients' sex and age, drug dose and release formulation.

LIMITATIONS

Possible discrepancy between adverse events as indicated in clinical trials and as summarised herein. Confounding due to the aggregation of drugs into groups; uninvestigated sources of bias; incomplete lists of adverse events; lack of observations on self-injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Methylphenidates appeared safer than amphetamines, although younger patients and females may incur higher risks, especially with high-dose, immediate-release methylphenidates. Only atomoxetine holds a black-box warning, but amphetamines and methylphenidates also did not show a safe profile regarding mood and emotional symptoms.

Optimization of Methylphenidate Extended-Release Chewable Tablet Dose in Children with ADHD: Open-Label Dose Optimization in a Laboratory Classroom Study

OBJECTIVE

To examine methylphenidate extended-release chewable tablets (MPH ERCT) dose patterns, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptom scores, and safety during the 6-week, open-label (OL) dose-optimization period of a phase 3, laboratory classroom study.

METHODS

Boys and girls (6-12 years) diagnosed with ADHD were enrolled. MPH ERCT was initiated at 20 mg/day; participants were titrated in 10-20 mg/day increments weekly based on efficacy and tolerability (maximum dose, 60 mg/day). Dose-optimization period efficacy assessments included the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS-IV), analyzed by week in a post hoc analysis using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures with final optimized dose (20, 30/40, or 50/60 mg), visit, final optimized dose and visit interaction, and baseline score as terms. Adverse events (AEs) and concomitant medications were collected throughout the study.

RESULTS

Mean MPH ERCT daily dose increased weekly from 29.4 mg/day after the first dose adjustment at week 1 (n = 90) to 42.8 mg/day after the final adjustment at week 5 (n = 86). Final optimized MPH ERCT dose ranged from 20 to 60 mg/day. Mean final optimized MPH ERCT dose ranged from 40.0 mg/day in 6-8 year-old participants to 44.8 mg/day for 11-12 year-old participants. There was a progressive decrease in mean (standard deviation) ADHD-RS-IV total score from 40.1 (8.72) at baseline to 12.4 (7.88) at OL week 5, with similar improvement patterns for hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattentiveness subscale scores. Participants optimized to MPH ERCT 50/60 mg/day had a significantly higher mean (standard error) ADHD-RS-IV score at baseline compared with participants optimized to MPH ERCT 20 mg/day (42.4 [1.34] vs. 35.1 [2.55]; p = 0.013). Treatment-emergent AEs were reported by 65/90 (72.2%) participants in the dose-optimization period.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose-optimization period results describing relationships between change in ADHD symptom scores and final optimized MPH ERCT dose will be valuable for clinicians optimizing MPH ERCT dose.

Methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents - assessment of adverse events in non-randomised studies

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder in childhood. The psychostimulant methylphenidate is the most frequently used medication to treat it. Several studies have investigated the benefits of methylphenidate, showing possible favourable effects on ADHD symptoms, but the true magnitude of the effect is unknown. Concerning adverse events associated with the treatment, our systematic review of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrated no increase in serious adverse events, but a high proportion of participants suffered a range of non-serious adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the adverse events associated with methylphenidate treatment for children and adolescents with ADHD in non-randomised studies.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2016, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, 12 other databases and two trials registers. We also checked reference lists and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included non-randomised study designs. These comprised comparative and non-comparative cohort studies, patient-control studies, patient reports/series and cross-sectional studies of methylphenidate administered at any dosage or formulation. We also included methylphenidate groups from RCTs assessing methylphenidate versus other interventions for ADHD as well as data from follow-up periods in RCTs. Participants had to have an ADHD diagnosis (from the 3rd to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or the 9th or 10th edition of theInternational Classification of Diseases, with or without comorbid diagnoses. We required that at least 75% of participants had a normal intellectual capacity (intelligence quotient of more than 70 points) and were aged below 20 years. We excluded studies that used another ADHD drug as a co-intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Fourteen review authors selected studies independently. Two review authors assessed risk of bias independently using the ROBINS-I tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. All review authors extracted data. We defined serious adverse events according to the International Committee of Harmonization as any lethal, life-threatening or life-changing event. We considered all other adverse events to be non-serious adverse events and conducted meta-analyses of data from comparative studies. We calculated meta-analytic estimates of prevalence from non-comparative cohorts studies and synthesised data from patient reports/series qualitatively. We investigated heterogeneity by conducting subgroup analyses, and we also conducted sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 260 studies: 7 comparative cohort studies, 6 of which compared 968 patients who were exposed to methylphenidate to 166 controls, and 1 which assessed 1224 patients that were exposed or not exposed to methylphenidate during different time periods; 4 patient-control studies (53,192 exposed to methylphenidate and 19,906 controls); 177 non-comparative cohort studies (2,207,751 participants); 2 cross-sectional studies (96 participants) and 70 patient reports/series (206 participants). Participants' ages ranged from 3 years to 20 years. Risk of bias in the included comparative studies ranged from moderate to critical, with most studies showing critical risk of bias. We evaluated all non-comparative studies at critical risk of bias. The GRADE quality rating of the evidence was very low.Primary outcomesIn the comparative studies, methylphenidate increased the risk ratio (RR) of serious adverse events (RR 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 1.57; 2 studies, 72,005 participants); any psychotic disorder (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.57; 1 study, 71,771 participants); and arrhythmia (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.48 to 1.74; 1 study, 1224 participants) compared to no intervention.In the non-comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate experiencing any serious adverse event was 1.20% (95% CI 0.70% to 2.00%; 50 studies, 162,422 participants). Withdrawal from methylphenidate due to any serious adverse events occurred in 1.20% (95% CI 0.60% to 2.30%; 7 studies, 1173 participants) and adverse events of unknown severity led to withdrawal in 7.30% of participants (95% CI 5.30% to 10.0%; 22 studies, 3708 participants).Secondary outcomesIn the comparative studies, methylphenidate, compared to no intervention, increased the RR of insomnia and sleep problems (RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.24 to 5.34; 3 studies, 425 participants) and decreased appetite (RR 15.06, 95% CI 2.12 to 106.83; 1 study, 335 participants).With non-comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate with any non-serious adverse events was 51.2% (95% CI 41.2% to 61.1%; 49 studies, 13,978 participants). These included difficulty falling asleep, 17.9% (95% CI 14.7% to 21.6%; 82 studies, 11,507 participants); headache, 14.4% (95% CI 11.3% to 18.3%; 90 studies, 13,469 participants); abdominal pain, 10.7% (95% CI 8.60% to 13.3%; 79 studies, 11,750 participants); and decreased appetite, 31.1% (95% CI 26.5% to 36.2%; 84 studies, 11,594 participants). Withdrawal of methylphenidate due to non-serious adverse events occurred in 6.20% (95% CI 4.80% to 7.90%; 37 studies, 7142 participants), and 16.2% were withdrawn for unknown reasons (95% CI 13.0% to 19.9%; 57 studies, 8340 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that methylphenidate may be associated with a number of serious adverse events as well as a large number of non-serious adverse events in children and adolescents, which often lead to withdrawal of methylphenidate. Our certainty in the evidence is very low, and accordingly, it is not possible to accurately estimate the actual risk of adverse events. It might be higher than reported here.Given the possible association between methylphenidate and the adverse events identified, it may be important to identify people who are most susceptible to adverse events. To do this we must undertake large-scale, high-quality RCTs, along with studies aimed at identifying responders and non-responders.

Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of a Novel Methylphenidate Extended-Release Oral Suspension (MEROS) in ADHD

OBJECTIVE

To test whether an optimal dose of Quillivant XR (methylphenidate extended-release oral suspension [MEROS]) would significantly reduce symptoms of ADHD in children.

METHOD

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over, efficacy, safety, and tolerability study of MEROS in 45 children aged 6 to 12 years (open-label dose-optimization phase, followed by double-blind cross-over period).

RESULTS

MEROS was significantly more efficacious than placebo during double-blind cross-over laboratory classroom days (Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham Rating Scale and Permanent Product Measure of Performance). During the open-label phase, improvements were observed in scores of ADHD Rating Scale-IV, and Clinical Global Impression-Severity and -Improvement Scales. No occurrences of suicidal ideation or behavior were recorded; the most common open-label treatment-emergent adverse events were typical of stimulant use: decreased appetite, insomnia, and abdominal pain.

CONCLUSION

MEROS was efficacious in the treatment of children aged 6 to 12 years with ADHD, with a safety profile similar to that of other extended-release methylphenidate pharmacotherapies.

Diagnosis and treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurobehavioral disorder characterized by signs and symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity that typically begin in childhood. ADHD can persist into adulthood, causing impairments in occupational performance and peer and family relationships. This article reviews the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of ADHD.

Methylphenidate extended-release oral suspension for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a practical guide for pharmacists

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental condition that affects children, adolescents, and adults worldwide. The purpose of this review was to inform pharmacists of the numerous options to treat ADHD, with a focus on one of the more recently approved formulations, methylphenidate extended-release oral suspension (MEROS). Symptoms of ADHD can negatively impact an individual’s health and quality of life and impair function in multiple settings. Psychostimulants such as methylphenidate- and amphetamine-based agents are first-line pharmacologic treatments for ADHD. However, there are multiple formulations, including immediate release (administered two to three times/day), solid extended release (ER), or transdermal patch. MEROS is a once daily, long-acting liquid preparation that has demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy in patients with ADHD. MEROS may improve treatment adherence in patients who cannot tolerate or have difficulties administering pill or transdermal patch formulations.

Efficacy and Safety of a Chewable Methylphenidate Extended-Release Tablet in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

This phase 3, laboratory classroom study assessed the efficacy and safety of methylphenidate hydrochloride extended-release chewable tablets (MPH ERCT) compared with placebo in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

Following a 6-week, open-label, dose-optimization period, children 6-12 years of age (n = 90) with ADHD were randomly assigned to double-blind MPH ERCT at the final optimized dose (20-60 mg/day) or placebo. After 1 week of double-blind treatment, efficacy was assessed predose and 0.75, 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, and 13 hours postdose in a laboratory classroom setting. The primary efficacy measure was the average of postdose Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) Rating Scale-Combined scores, analyzed using a mixed-model, repeated-measures analysis. Secondary efficacy measures included Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP) total number of problems attempted and total number of problems correct. Safety assessments included adverse event (AE) monitoring and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS).

RESULTS

MPH ERCT treatment statistically significantly reduced the average of all postdose SKAMP-Combined scores versus placebo (least-squares mean difference [95% confidence interval], -7.0 [-10.9, -3.1]; p < 0.001). Statistically significant treatment differences in SKAMP-Combined scores were observed at 2 hours postdose through 8 hours postdose (p-values <0.001). Statistically significant differences between MPH ERCT and placebo in PERMP total number of problems attempted and total number of problems correct were observed at 0.75 hours postdose through 8 hours postdose (p-values ≤0.049). Common AEs in the open-label period (≥5%) were decreased appetite, upper abdominal pain, mood swings, irritability, insomnia, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), dysgeusia, and headache; URTI was the only AE reported by >1 subject receiving MPH ERCT in the double-blind period (placebo: URTI, contusion, wound, and initial insomnia). No suicidal ideation or behavior was reported on the C-SSRS at baseline or at any postbaseline assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

MPH ERCT 20-60 mg significantly improved ADHD symptoms compared with placebo at 2 hours postdose through at least 8 hours postdose. MPH ERCT was generally safe and well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with other MPH ER formulations. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01654250. www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01654250 .

Effect of Food Intake on the Pharmacokinetics of a Novel Methylphenidate Extended-Release Oral Suspension for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

We conducted an open-label, single-dose, randomized, crossover study in healthy adults to assess the impact of food on the bioavailability of 60 mg methylphenidate extended-release oral suspension (MEROS; Quillivant XR™)-a long-acting stimulant for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder-by comparing the pharmacokinetic parameters under fed and fasting conditions. When MEROS 60 mg was administered under fed conditions compared with fasting conditions, the exposure of methylphenidate (d enantiomer) was higher, with a mean area under the plasma concentration-vs-time curve (AUC)_0-t of 160.2 ng·h/mL vs 140.4 ng·h/mL, and a mean AUC_0-inf of 163.2 ng·h/mL vs 143.7 ng·h/mL, respectively. The ratios of the ln-transformed geometric means for methylphenidate for AUC_0-t and AUC_0-inf were 119.5% (90%CI, 115.7% to 123.5%) and 119.0% (90%CI, 115.2% to 122.8%), respectively, within the standard 80% to 125% bioequivalence acceptance range indicating no food effect on the overall exposure (rate and extent). There was a small increase in the peak plasma concentration (127.6% [90%CI, 119.9% to 135.8%]). However, this effect was small and not likely to be clinically significant. Overall, MEROS 60 mg was safe in both the fed and fasting condition when administered to healthy volunteers in this study.

Methylphenidate use and school performance among primary school children: a descriptive study

BACKGROUND

There is no conclusive evidence that stimulants have beneficial effects on major associated outcome parameters, particularly school performance. We assessed the differences in school performance among children using methylphenidate at the end of primary school in relation to various parameters of methylphenidate use.

METHODS

We linked children from a pharmacy prescription database with standardized achievement test results at the end of primary school. We explored differences in test scores between current methylphenidate users versus never users and methylphenidate users who stopped treatment at least 6 months before the test, early versus late starters, different dosage of methylphenidate, and concurrent antipsychotic or asthma treatment.

RESULTS

Out of the 7736 children, 377 (4.9%) children were treated with methylphenidate at the time of the test. After adjusting for confounders the methylphenidate users (532.58 ± .48) performed significantly lower on the test than never users (534.72 ± .11). Compared with late starters of methylphenidate treatment (536.94 ± 1.51) we found significantly lower test scores for the early starters (532.33 ± .50).

CONCLUSION

Our study indicates that children using methylphenidate still perform less at school compared to their peers. Our study also suggests that earlier start of methylphenidate treatment is associated with a lower school performance compared to children starting later with the treatment. This result could either indicate a limited effect of long term treatment or a more strongly affected group of early starters.

New Formulations of Methylphenidate for the Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Pharmacokinetics, Efficacy, and Tolerability

Psychostimulants are the recommended first-line pharmacological treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methylphenidate is one of the most commonly used psychostimulants worldwide. Given that immediate-release and/or tablet/capsule formulations may decrease adherence to methylphenidate treatment, several drug companies have been developing novel long-acting and/or liquid/chewable formulations that may improve adherence as well as (for long-acting formulations) reduce abuse potential, decrease stigma associated with multiple administrations per day, and decrease the potential for adverse effects related to dosage peak. Here, we review the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and tolerability of novel formulations of methylphenidate that are in development or have been approved by the US FDA or European Medicines Agency (EMA) in the last 5 years. We searched the websites of the FDA, EMA, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the pertinent drug companies. We also searched PubMed, Ovid databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase + Embase classic), and ISI Web of Knowledge (Web of Science [Science Citation Index Expanded], Biological Abstracts, Biosis, Food Science and Technology Abstracts) to retrieve any additional pertinent information. We found data from trials for the following compounds: (1) methylphenidate extended-release oral suspension (MEROS; NWP06, Quillivant™); (2) methylphenidate extended-release chewable capsules (NWP09, QuilliChew ER™); (3) methylphenidate hydrochloride extended-release capsules (Aptensio XR™); (4) methylphenidate extended-release orally disintegrating tablets (XR-ODT; NT-0102, Cotempla™); (5) ORADUR technology (once-daily tamper-resistant formulation) methylphenidate sustained release (SR); and (6) methylphenidate modified-release (HLD-200; Bejorna™). Overall, available evidence based on trials suggests these compounds have good efficacy and tolerability. Future research should further explore the effectiveness and tolerability of these new formulations as well as their potential to improve adherence to treatment in the 'real world' via pragmatic trials.

Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of an Extended-Release Orally Disintegrating Methylphenidate Tablet in Children 6-12 Years of Age with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in the Laboratory Classroom Setting

OBJECTIVE

Methylphenidate extended-release orally disintegrating tablets (MPH XR-ODTs) represent a new technology for MPH delivery. ODTs disintegrate in the mouth without water and provide a pharmacokinetic profile that is consistent with once-daily dosing. This study sought to determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of this novel MPH XR-ODT formulation in school-age children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in a laboratory classroom setting.

METHODS

Children aged 6-12 years with ADHD (n = 87) were enrolled in this randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, laboratory classroom study. The MPH XR-ODT dose was titrated to an optimized dose during a 4-week open-label period and maintained on that dose for 1 week. Participants (n = 85) were then randomized to receive their optimized dose of MPH XR-ODT or placebo once daily for 1 week (double blind), culminating in a laboratory classroom testing day. Efficacy was evaluated using the Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) Attention, Deportment, and Combined scores along with Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP; Attempted and Correct) assessments. Onset and duration of drug action were also evaluated as key secondary endpoints. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), physical examinations, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS).

RESULTS

The average SKAMP-Combined score on the classroom study day was significantly better for the MPH XR-ODT group (n = 43) than for the placebo group (n = 39; p < 0.0001). The effect was evident at 1 hour and lasted through 12 hours postdose. The average SKAMP-Attention, SKAMP-Deportment, PERMP-A, and PERMP-C scores were indicative of significantly greater ADHD symptom control for the MPH XR-ODT group. The most common AEs reported were decreased appetite, upper abdominal pain, headache, insomnia, upper respiratory tract infection, affect lability, irritability, cough, and vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

MPH XR-ODT was effective and well tolerated for the treatment of children with ADHD in a laboratory classroom setting. Clinical Trial Registry: NCT01835548 ( ClinicalTrials.gov ).

The use of modified-release methylphenidate in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

INTRODUCTION

Since Ritalin® (Methylphenidate-Immediate release or MPH-IR) was introduced for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, multiple formulations of MPH have been developed. The specific formulation determines the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile and the onset and duration of action for the compound. Areas covered: Aptensio XR® is a multilayer-release MPH (MPH-MLR) consisting of an MPH-IR layer (40%) and an extended-release (ER) portion of 60% of MPH. It has an initial maximum MPH concentration at about two hours (h) and a second concentration peak at approximately 8 h. This formulation allows for a rapid onset of effect by 1 h and a duration of action through 12 h after dosing. The chemistry, PK, efficacy and adverse event profile of MPH-MLR will be reviewed. Expert commentary: Although the PK profile may prove beneficial to patients in the late afternoon and early evening, it is not clear if this is a significant advantage compared with other MPH-ER formulations.

A Single-Dose, Single-Period Pharmacokinetic Assessment of an Extended-Release Orally Disintegrating Tablet of Methylphenidate in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To determine the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of a proprietary formulation of methylphenidate (MPH) in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in a phase 1 study. Methylphenidate extended-release orally disintegrating tablets (MPH XR-ODTs) combine two technologies in a single-tablet formulation-an extended-release profile that was designed for once-daily dosing in an ODT that does not require water or chewing for ingestion.

METHODS

This was a single-dose, open-label, single-period, single-treatment study, in which 32 children with ADHD who were receiving MPH in doses of 40 or 60 mg before beginning the study each received a 60-mg dose (2 × 30 mg) of MPH XR-ODT. The following plasma PK parameters of MPH were determined for participants grouped by age (6-7, 8-9, 10-12, and 13-17 years old): maximum concentration (Cmax), time to maximum concentration (Tmax), elimination half-life (T½), area under the curve from 0 hours to infinity (AUCinf), oral clearance (CL/F), and volume of distribution in the terminal phase (Vz/F). Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 32 participants received the study drug. For all participants, plasma concentration-time profiles of MPH exhibited a broad peak after administration of MPH XR-ODT through ∼8 hours, indicating extended release from the formulation, followed by an apparent first-order elimination phase. As age increased, MPH exposure decreased and mean estimates of CL/F increased; however, weight-normalized CL/F values were comparable across age groups. Similarly, mean estimates of Vz/F increased with age, but weight-normalization decreased differences across age groups, with the exception of the youngest age group, which had higher values. All adverse events (AEs) were mild.

CONCLUSION

This XR-ODT formulation of MPH demonstrated weight-normalized clearance rates that were consistent across all age groups, a PK profile consistent with once-daily dosing, and an AE profile consistent with this class of medication in children and adolescents with ADHD.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Methylphenidate and dexmethylphenidate formulations for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

PURPOSE

Current literature on the safety and efficacy of various intermediate- and long-acting preparations of methylphenidate and dexmethylphenidate for pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is reviewed.

SUMMARY

The efficacy of methylphenidate in controlling ADHD symptoms is firmly established. Given the drug's relatively short half-life in pediatric patients (about 2.5 hours), a number of intermediate- and long-acting products have been developed; these extended-release methylphenidate products provide the same efficacy as immediate-release (IR) formulations, with the convenience of less frequent dosing. Intermediate-acting methylphenidate preparations have effects lasting as long as 8 hours, but peak concentrations are not attained for up to 5 hours, and many patients may require twice-daily dosing. Long-acting methylphenidate products developed to address these challenges include a controlled-release tablet and bimodal-delivery capsules containing mixtures of IR and extended-release beads (durations of effect, 8-12 hours). Options for patients with difficulty swallowing tablets or capsules include a once-daily transdermal delivery system and a once-daily liquid formulation. Dexmethylphenidate (the more pharmacologically active d-isomer of racemic methylphenidate) can provide efficacy comparable to that of IR methylphenidate at half the dose; an extended-release form of dexmethylphenidate can provide less fluctuation in peak and trough concentrations than the IR form. Methylphenidate and dexmethylphenidate products in capsule form can be opened and sprinkled on applesauce.

CONCLUSION

The various formulations of IR and intermediate- and extended-release methylphenidate and dexmethylphenidate can be useful options in satisfying patients' individual needs in the management of ADHD. All are equally efficacious in controlling ADHD symptoms.

The use of methylphenidate hydrochloride extended-release oral suspension for the treatment of ADHD

More than 50 years ago, methylphenidate immediate-release (MPH-IR) was found to be effective in relieving symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Although the exact mechanism of the action is unknown, the efficacy of MPH is thought to be mediated by blocking the reuptake of norepinephrine and dopamine into the presynaptic neuron and increasing the release of these neurotransmitters into the extraneuronal space. Because of its short duration of effect, MPH-IR had to be dosed multiple times daily. In recent years, several methyphenidate extended-release (MPH-ER) formulations have been developed. Methylphenidate hydrochloride for extended-release oral suspension (MEROS or Quillivant(TM) XR) is the first long-acting MPH-ER oral suspension developed to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. It offers advantages when compared with other MPH-ER preparations for patients who cannot or prefer not to swallow or manipulate capsules or wear a transdermal patch, while maintaining comparable efficacy and duration of effect. The pharmacokinetic, efficacy and safety profiles of this controlled substance are reviewed.

Methylphenidate hydrochloride modified-release in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial

Introduction

Treatment options for adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are limited. The study was conducted to confirm the clinically effective and safe dose of methylphenidate hydrochloride modified-release (MPH-LA) in adults with ADHD and evaluate the maintenance of effect of MPH-LA.

Methods

The study consisted of three treatment phases. The double-blind dose-confirmation phase: 9-week double-blind period (3-week titration period, 6-week fixed dose) with randomization to MPH-LA 40, 60, or 80 mg/day or placebo. The real-life dose-optimization phase: a 5-week re-titration period to optimal dose; and the double-blind maintenance of effect phase, a 6-month double-blind randomized placebo-controlled maintenance of effect phase. The three co-primary endpoints were change in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV ADHD Rating Scale (DSM-IV ADHD RS) and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total scores from baseline to end of 9-week confirmation phase and the percentage of treatment failures during the 6-month maintenance of effect phase.

Results

725 of 863 screened patients were randomized to 40 (N = 181), 60 (N = 182), or 80 mg (N = 181) MPH-LA or placebo (N = 181), and 584 (80.6%) completed. 489 (83.7%) of completers were re-randomized to the double-blinded maintenance of effect phase and 235 (48.1%) of them completed. Improvement from baseline in DSM-IV ADHD RS (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons) and SDS (40 mg, P = 0.0003; 60 mg, P = 0.0176; 80 mg, P < 0.0001) total scores was significantly greater vs. placebo for all MPH-LA doses. Treatment failure rate was significantly lower with MPH-LA (21.3%) versus placebo (49.6%) during the 6-month maintenance of effect phase. Safety profile was consistent with the profile for MPH-LA in children; percentage of serious adverse events was comparable between all MPH-LA arms (1.3%) and placebo (1.5%), while percentage of adverse events was higher in MPH-LA arms.

Conclusion

MPH-LA provided and maintained significant symptomatic and functional improvement in adult ADHD patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-013-0085-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.