1
|
Storebø OJ, Storm MRO, Pereira Ribeiro J, Skoog M, Groth C, Callesen HE, Schaug JP, Darling Rasmussen P, Huus CML, Zwi M, Kirubakaran R, Simonsen E, Gluud C. Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 3:CD009885. [PMID: 36971690 PMCID: PMC10042435 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009885.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/29/2023]
Abstract
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 In addition, we checked reference lists and requested published and unpublished data from manufacturers of methylphenidate.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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ole Jakob Storebø
- Psychiatric Research Unit, Region Zealand Psychiatry, Slagelse, Denmark
- Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Department, Region Zealand, Roskilde, Denmark
- Department of Psychology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | | | | - Maria Skoog
- Clinical Study Support, Clinical Studies Sweden - Forum South, Lund, Sweden
| | - Camilla Groth
- Pediatric Department, Herlev University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
| | | | | | | | | | - Morris Zwi
- Islington Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service, Whittington Health, London, UK
| | - Richard Kirubakaran
- Cochrane India-CMC Vellore Affiliate, Prof. BV Moses Centre for Evidence Informed Healthcare and Health Policy, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India
| | - Erik Simonsen
- Research Unit, Mental Health services, Region Zealand Psychiatry, Roskilde, Denmark
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Christian Gluud
- Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, The Capital Region, Copenhagen University Hospital ─ Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research, The Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Boesen K, Paludan-Müller AS, Gøtzsche PC, Jørgensen KJ. Extended-release methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022; 2:CD012857. [PMID: 35201607 PMCID: PMC8869321 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012857.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a psychiatric diagnosis increasingly used in adults. The recommended first-line pharmacological treatment is central nervous system (CNS) stimulants, such as methylphenidate, but uncertainty remains about its benefits and harms. OBJECTIVES To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of extended-release formulations of methylphenidate in adults diagnosed with ADHD. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases and four clinical trial registries up to February 2021. We searched 12 drug regulatory databases for clinical trial data up to 13 May 2020. In addition, we cross-referenced all available trial identifiers, handsearched reference lists, searched pharmaceutical company databases, and contacted trial authors. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trials comparing extended-release methylphenidate formulations at any dose versus placebo and other ADHD medications in adults diagnosed with ADHD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data. We assessed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs), and rating scales and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs). We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess risks of bias, and GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We meta-analysed the data using a random-effects model. We assessed three design characteristics that may impair the trial results' 'generalisability'; exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidity; responder selection based on previous experience with CNS stimulants; and risk of withdrawal effects. Our prespecified primary outcomes were functional outcomes, self-rated ADHD symptoms, and serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes included quality of life, ADHD symptoms rated by investigators and by peers such as family members, cardiovascular variables, severe psychiatric adverse events, and other adverse events. MAIN RESULTS We included 24 trials (5066 participants), of which 21 reported outcome data for this review. We also identified one ongoing study. We included documents from six drug regulatory agencies covering eight trials. Twenty-one trials had an outpatient setting and three were conducted in prisons. They were primarily conducted in North America and Europe. The median participant age was 36 years. Twelve trials (76% of participants) were industry-sponsored, four (14% of participants) were publicly funded with industry involvement, seven (10% of participants) were publicly funded, and one had unclear funding. The median trial duration was eight weeks. One trial was rated at overall unclear risk of bias and 20 trials were rated at overall high risk of bias, primarily due to unclear blinding of participants and investigators, attrition bias, and selective outcome reporting. All trials were impaired in at least one of the three design characteristics related to 'generalisability'; for example, they excluded participants with psychiatric comorbidity such as depression or anxiety, or included participants only with a previous positive response to methylphenidate, or similar drugs. This may limit the trials' usefulness for clinical practice, as they may overestimate the benefits and underestimate the harms. Extended-release methylphenidate versus placebo (up to 26 weeks) For the primary outcomes, we found very low-certainty evidence that methylphenidate had no effect on 'days missed at work' at 13-week follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.15 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.11 to 1.81; 1 trial, 409 participants) or serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.43, CI 95% CI 0.85 to 2.43; 14 trials, 4078 participants), whereas methylphenidate improved self-rated ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.30; 16 trials, 3799 participants). For secondary outcomes, we found very low-certainty evidence that methylphenidate improved self-rated quality of life (small effect; SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05; 6 trials, 1888 participants), investigator-rated ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.36; 18 trials, 4183 participants), ADHD symptoms rated by peers such as family members (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.14; 3 trials, 1005 participants), and increased the risk of experiencing any adverse event (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.37; 14 trials, 4214 participants). We rated the certainty of the evidence as 'very low' for all outcomes, primarily due to high risk of bias and 'indirectness of the evidence'. One trial (419 participants) had follow-up at 52 weeks and two trials (314 participants) included active comparators, hence long-term and comparative evidence is limited. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found very low-certainty evidence that extended-release methylphenidate compared to placebo improved ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effects) measured on rating scales reported by participants, investigators, and peers such as family members. Methylphenidate had no effect on 'days missed at work' or serious adverse events, the effect on quality of life was small, and it increased the risk of several adverse effects. We rated the certainty of the evidence as 'very low' for all outcomes, due to high risk of bias, short trial durations, and limitations to the generalisability of the results. The benefits and harms of extended-release methylphenidate therefore remain uncertain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim Boesen
- Meta-Research Innovation Center Berlin (METRIC-B), Berlin Institute of Health at Charité, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany
- Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet Dept 7811, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Asger Sand Paludan-Müller
- Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO) and Cochrane Denmark, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Open Patient data Exploratory Network (OPEN), Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | | | - Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
- Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO) and Cochrane Denmark, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Open Patient data Exploratory Network (OPEN), Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sabbe M, Sawchik J, Gräfe M, Wuillaume F, De Bruyn S, Van Antwerpen P, Van Hal G, Desseilles M, Hamdani J, Malonne H. Use and misuse of prescription stimulants by university students: a cross-sectional survey in the french-speaking community of Belgium, 2018. Arch Public Health 2022; 80:54. [PMID: 35168683 PMCID: PMC8848864 DOI: 10.1186/s13690-022-00816-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2021] [Accepted: 02/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Misuse of prescription stimulants (PS) has been reported among students to enhance academic performance in Flanders (Belgium). However, PS misuse among students in the French-speaking community is unknown. The main purpose of the study was to estimate the prevalence of medical use and misuse of PS by university students in the French-speaking community (Belgium), and to investigate the reasons and sources associated with PS misuse. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was performed in 2018. All university students 18 years and older were invited to participate and asked about PS use, including medical (i.e., used for therapeutic purposes) and nonmedical reasons and sources of PS. Results In total, 12 144 students participated in the survey (median age = 21 years, 65.5% female). The estimated prevalence of PS use was 6.9% (ever use) and 5.5% (past-year). Among ever users, 34.7% were classified as medical users and 65.3% as misusers. Lifetime prevalence of misuse was estimated at 4.5%. The most common reason for medical use was treatment of attention disorder (85.9%). Reasons for misuse were mainly to improve concentration (76.1%) or to stay awake and study longer (50.7%). Friends or acquaintances inside the student community and general practitioners were the main sources of PS for misuse (41.5% and 23.5%, respectively). Conclusions This study found that rates of misuse of PS in French-speaking universities in Belgium were in line with studies conducted in Flanders and Europe. Academic institutions can use these results to tailor their drug prevention campaigns.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martine Sabbe
- Scientific Directorate of Epidemiology and public health - Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium. .,DG Post authorisation - Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium.
| | - Javier Sawchik
- DG Post authorisation - Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Mégane Gräfe
- Unit of Pharmacology, Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutical Care, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Françoise Wuillaume
- DG Post authorisation - Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Sara De Bruyn
- Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Pierre Van Antwerpen
- RD3-Pharmacognosy, Bioanalysis and Drug Discovery- Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Guido Van Hal
- Unit of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | | | - Jamila Hamdani
- DG Post authorisation - Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Hugues Malonne
- DG Post authorisation - Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium.,Unit of Pharmacology, Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutical Care, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.,Department of Biomedical Sciences, Namur Research Institute for Life Sciences, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tully J. Management of ADHD in Prisoners-Evidence Gaps and Reasons for Caution. Front Psychiatry 2022; 13:771525. [PMID: 35370827 PMCID: PMC8973692 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.771525] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2021] [Accepted: 02/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- John Tully
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Boesen K, Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC. Clinical trials were missing from regulatory documents of extended-release methylphenidate for ADHD in adults: a case study of public documents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021. [PMID: 34752938 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012857] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To assess whether drug regulatory agencies decided on applications for extended-release methylphenidate for use in adult ADHD based on select samples of trials. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Case series of publicly available regulatory documents. We matched an index of extended-release methylphenidate trials for adult ADHD with trials appearing in regulatory documents of extended-release methylphenidate applications. Trials and regulatory documents were identified as part of this systematic review (https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012857). We sought to identify missing trials in the regulatory documents and to clarify regulatory submission requirements. RESULTS We indexed 18 trials and matched those with 13 drug applications (11 approved, 2 rejected) published by 7 agencies. There were trials missing in 7 (54%) of 13 applications, median 4 trials (range 1-6). The median proportion of missing trial participants was 45% (range 23% - 72%). Regulators seemingly require that all trials must be included in new drug applications, but wording is ambiguous. CONCLUSION In this sample of extended-release methylphenidate drug applications for adult ADHD, 7 of 13 regulatory decisions were missing entire trials according to public documents, even though regulatory requirements seem to stipulate that all available trials should be included in drug applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim Boesen
- Meta-Research Innovation Center Berlin (METRIC-B), Berlin Institute of Health at Charité, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Germany; Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
| | - Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
- Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO) and Cochrane Denmark, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Open Patient data Exploratory Network (OPEN), Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Pereira Ribeiro J, Arthur EJ, Gluud C, Simonsen E, Storebø OJ. Does Methylphenidate Work in Children and Adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder? Pediatr Rep 2021; 13:434-443. [PMID: 34449694 PMCID: PMC8396049 DOI: 10.3390/pediatric13030050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2021] [Revised: 07/28/2021] [Accepted: 07/29/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common psychiatric disorder diagnosed in increasing proportions of children and adolescents. The psychostimulant methylphenidate has been considered the first-line pharmacological treatment for children and adolescents with ADHD for more than 60 years. Considering recent publications on methylphenidate for ADHD, we here give an overview of its effects in children and adolescents with ADHD, elicited by a well-disputed Cochrane review and narratively synthesise the evidence in the field. METHOD We searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses that investigated methylphenidate as an intervention for children and adolescence with ADHD compared with placebo or no treatment. We assessed the quality of the evidence using AMSTAR II. RESULTS We found 24 eligible systematic reviews and meta-analyses of which 11 were rated as high- quality evidence according to AMSTAR II. The evidence claiming that methylphenidate is beneficial in treating children and adolescents with ADHD was of very low certainty. The underreporting of adverse events in randomised clinical trials may impede an adequate depiction of the balance between benefits and harms. CONCLUSIONS It appears that there is uncertain evidence on group-level to support the claim that methylphenidate is beneficial in treating children and adolescents with ADHD. Future randomised clinical trials and systematic reviews should include individual participant data, which would allow us to assess intervention effects across modifiers, like age, sex, ADHD subtypes, comorbidities, and dose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johanne Pereira Ribeiro
- Center for Evidence-Based Psychiatry, Psychiatric Research Unit, Psychiatry Region Zealand, 4200 Slagelse, Denmark; (J.P.R.); (E.J.A.); (E.S.)
| | - Emma Jasmine Arthur
- Center for Evidence-Based Psychiatry, Psychiatric Research Unit, Psychiatry Region Zealand, 4200 Slagelse, Denmark; (J.P.R.); (E.J.A.); (E.S.)
| | - Christian Gluud
- Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark;
- The Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, The Capital Region, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Erik Simonsen
- Center for Evidence-Based Psychiatry, Psychiatric Research Unit, Psychiatry Region Zealand, 4200 Slagelse, Denmark; (J.P.R.); (E.J.A.); (E.S.)
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Ole Jakob Storebø
- Center for Evidence-Based Psychiatry, Psychiatric Research Unit, Psychiatry Region Zealand, 4200 Slagelse, Denmark; (J.P.R.); (E.J.A.); (E.S.)
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychiatry Region Zealand, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
- Department of Psychology, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Boesen K, Juhl Jørgensen K, Gøtzsche PC. The US Food and Drug Administration's authorisation of Purdue's controlled-release methylphenidate for adult ADHD: comments on the regulatory practice. J R Soc Med 2021; 114:377-380. [PMID: 33759627 PMCID: PMC8361378 DOI: 10.1177/0141076821994535] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kim Boesen
- Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet Dept. 7112, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Atkins C, Jones A, Clark AB, Stockl A, Fordham R, Wilson AM. Feasibility of investigating methylphenidate for the treatment of sarcoidosis-associated fatigue (the FaST-MP study): a double-blind, parallel-arm randomised feasibility trial. BMJ Open Respir Res 2021; 8:e000814. [PMID: 34020962 PMCID: PMC8144057 DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2020-000814] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2020] [Revised: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 04/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Sarcoidosis-associated fatigue (SAF) is a common clinical problem with limited treatment options. This study was undertaken to determine the feasibility of performing a definitive trial to determine the clinical efficacy methylphenidate in SAF. METHODS This was a parallel-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled feasibility trial enrolling sarcoidosis patients reporting significant fatigue. Patients with a Fatigue Assessment Scale score of more than 21 were randomised to receive up to either 10 mg two times per day methylphenidate or identical placebo capsules two times per day, in a dose escalation fashion, for up to 24 weeks. Outcomes included number of participants eligible and willing to participate, withdrawal rates, adherence rates and ability to maintain blinding. RESULTS Of 385 patients screened, 56 (14.5%) were eligible and 23 (41% of eligible patients) were randomised. No withdrawals occurred. One participant in the methylphenidate arm discontinued study medications due to chest pain. The side effect profile was not different between the groups. Median medication adherence rates were 98% and 99% in the methylphenidate and placebo arms, respectively. A greater proportion of participants receiving methylphenidate predicted their allocated treatment while blinded compared with those receiving placebo (93.3% vs 57.1%). The investigator could not predict the treatment allocation. Both groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in fatigue from baseline, although no between-group difference was seen. CONCLUSIONS The data support the feasibility of performing a double-blind parallel trial powered to determine the clinical efficacy of methylphenidate for SAF, however, a multicentre study will be required. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02643732.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Atkins
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust, Norwich, UK
| | - Andy Jones
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | - Allan B Clark
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | - Andrea Stockl
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | - Richard Fordham
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | - Andrew M Wilson
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust, Norwich, UK
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Speerforck S, Hertel J, Stolzenburg S, Grabe HJ, Carta MG, Angermeyer MC, Schomerus G. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adults: A Population Survey on Public Beliefs. J Atten Disord 2021; 25:783-793. [PMID: 31271090 PMCID: PMC7897776 DOI: 10.1177/1087054719855691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Objective: To investigate beliefs and attitudes of the public toward attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adults. Method: In a representative population survey in Germany (N = 1,008) using computer-assisted telephone interviews, we asked participants about causal beliefs, illness recognition, treatment recommendations, and beliefs about ADHD, presenting an unlabelled vignette of a child or an adult with ADHD. Results: The most frequently endorsed causal beliefs for the depicted child with ADHD were "TV or Internet," "lack of parental affection," and "broken home." In comparison with the child vignette, biological causal beliefs were endorsed more often after the adult vignette. In the child vignette, 66% advised against a treatment with stimulant medication. About 90% of respondents had heard of ADHD. Of those, 20% said they believed ADHD to be not a real disease. Conclusion: Beliefs of the German public partly contradict evidence and should be considered in therapeutical and public contexts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sven Speerforck
- University Medicine Greifswald, Germany,Sven Speerforck, Department of Psychiatry, University of Greifswald, Ellernholzstraße 1-2, 17475 Greifswald, Germany.
| | | | | | | | - Mauro G. Carta
- Center for Public Mental Health, Gösing am Wagram, Austria
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Elliott J, Johnston A, Husereau D, Kelly SE, Eagles C, Charach A, Hsieh SC, Bai Z, Hossain A, Skidmore B, Tsakonas E, Chojecki D, Mamdani M, Wells GA. Pharmacologic treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0240584. [PMID: 33085721 PMCID: PMC7577505 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240584] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2019] [Accepted: 09/29/2020] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 3% of adults globally. Many pharmacologic treatments options exist, yet the comparative benefits and harms of individual treatments are largely unknown. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the relative effects of individual pharmacologic treatments for adults with ADHD. Methods We searched English-language published and grey literature sources for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving pharmacologic treatment of ADHD in adults (December 2018). The primary outcome was clinical response; secondary outcomes were quality of life, executive function, driving behaviour, withdrawals due to adverse events, treatment discontinuation, serious adverse events, hospitalization, cardiovascular adverse events, and emergency department visits. Data were pooled via pair-wise meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed by use of Cochrane’s Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by use of the GRADE framework. Results Eighty-one unique trials that reported at least one outcome of interest were included, most of which were at high or unclear risk of at least one important source of bias. Notably, only 5 RCTs were deemed at overall low risk of bias. Included pharmacotherapies were methylphenidate, atomoxetine, dexamfetamine, lisdexamfetamine, guanfacine, bupropion, mixed amphetamine salts, and modafinil. As a class, ADHD pharmacotherapy improved patient- and clinician-reported clinical response compared with placebo (range: 4 to 15 RCTs per outcome); however, these findings were not conserved when the analyses were restricted to studies at low risk of bias, and the certainty of the finding is very low. There were few differences among individual medications, although atomoxetine was associated with improved patient-reported clinical response and quality of life compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of serious adverse events or treatment discontinuation between ADHD pharmacotherapies and placebo; however, the proportion of participants who withdrew due to adverse events was significantly higher among participants who received any ADHD pharmacotherapy. Few RCTs reported on the occurrence of adverse events over a long treatment duration. Conclusions Overall, despite a class effect of improving clinical response relative to placebo, there were few differences among the individual ADHD pharmacotherapies, and most studies were at risk of at least one important source of bias. Furthermore, the certainty of the evidence was very low to low for all outcomes, and there was limited reporting of long-term adverse events. As such, the choice between ADHD pharmacotherapies may depend on individual patient considerations, and future studies should assess the long-term effects of individual pharmacotherapies on patient-important outcomes, including quality of life, in robust blinded RCTs. Registration PROSPERO no. CRD 42015026049
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jesse Elliott
- Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Amy Johnston
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Brain and Heart Nexus Research Program, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Don Husereau
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Shannon E. Kelly
- Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Caroline Eagles
- Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Alice Charach
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Shu-Ching Hsieh
- Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Zemin Bai
- Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Alomgir Hossain
- Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Becky Skidmore
- Independent Information Specialist, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Eva Tsakonas
- Independent Research Consultant, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | - Muhammad Mamdani
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - George A. Wells
- Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Carton L, Dondaine T, Deheul S, Marquié C, Brigadeau F, Amad A, Devos D, Danel T, Bordet R, Cottencin O, Gautier S, Ménard O. Prescriptions hors AMM supervisées de méthylphénidate dans le TDAH de l’adulte. Encephale 2019; 45:74-81. [DOI: 10.1016/j.encep.2018.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2018] [Revised: 05/17/2018] [Accepted: 05/25/2018] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
12
|
Piper BJ, Ogden CL, Simoyan OM, Chung DY, Caggiano JF, Nichols SD, McCall KL. Trends in use of prescription stimulants in the United States and Territories, 2006 to 2016. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0206100. [PMID: 30485268 PMCID: PMC6261411 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 82] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2018] [Accepted: 10/05/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stimulants are considered the first-line treatment for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in the US and they are used in other indications. Stimulants are also diverted for non-medical purposes. Ethnic and regional differences in ADHD diagnosis and in stimulant use have been identified in earlier research. The objectives of this report were to examine the pharmacoepidemiological pattern of these controlled substances over the past decade and to conduct a regional analysis. METHODS Data (drug weights) reported to the US Drug Enforcement Administration's Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System for four stimulants (amphetamine, methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine, and methamphetamine) were obtained from 2006 to 2016 for Unites States/Territories. Correlations between state level use (mg/person) and Hispanic population were completed. RESULTS Amphetamine use increased 2.5 fold from 2006 to 2016 (7.9 to 20.0 tons). Methylphenidate use, at 16.5 tons in 2006, peaked in 2012 (19.4 tons) and subsequently showed a modest decline (18.6 tons in 2016). The consumption per municipality significantly increased 7.6% for amphetamine and 5.5% for lisdexamfetamine but decreased 2.7% for methylphenidate (all p < .0005) from 2015 to 2016. Pronounced regional differences were also observed. Lisdexamfetamine use in 2016 was over thirty-fold higher in the Southern US (43.8 mg/person) versus the Territories (1.4 mg/person). Amphetamine use was about one-third lower in the West (48.1 mg/person) relative to the Northeastern (75.4 mg/person, p < .05) or the Midwestern (69.9 mg/person, p ≤ .005) states. States with larger Hispanic populations had significantly lower methylphenidate (r(49) = -0.63), lisdexamfetamine (B, r(49) = -0.49), and amphetamine (r(49) = -0.43) use. CONCLUSIONS Total stimulant usage doubled in the last decade. There were dynamic changes but also regional disparities in the use of stimulant medications. Future research is needed to better understand the reasons for the sizable regional and ethnic variations in use of these controlled substances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian J. Piper
- Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Christy L. Ogden
- Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Olapeju M. Simoyan
- Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, Pennsylvania, United States of America
- Department of Addiction Medicine, Geisinger Marworth Alcohol and Chemical Dependency Treatment Center, Waverly, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Daniel Y. Chung
- Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - James F. Caggiano
- Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Stephanie D. Nichols
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Husson University School of Pharmacy, Bangor, Maine, United States of America
- Department of Psychiatry, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Kenneth L. McCall
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of New England College of Pharmacy, Portland, Maine, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
De Crescenzo F, Ziganshina LE, Yudina EV, Kaplan YC, Ciabattini M, Wei Y, Hoyle CHV. Noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (NRIs) for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults. Hippokratia 2018. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Franco De Crescenzo
- Catholic University of the Sacred Heart; Institute of Psychiatry and Psychology; L.go A. Gemelli 8 Rome Italy 00168
| | - Liliya Eugenevna Ziganshina
- Kazan (Volga region) Federal University; Research & Education Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Cochrane Russia; 18 Kremlevskaya Street, 420008 14-15 Malaya Krasnaya Street, 420015 Kazan Tatarstan Russian Federation
- Kazan (Volga region) Federal University; Department of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology; Kazan Russian Federation
| | - Ekaterina V Yudina
- Kazan (Volga region) Federal University; Research & Education Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Cochrane Russia; 18 Kremlevskaya Street, 420008 14-15 Malaya Krasnaya Street, 420015 Kazan Tatarstan Russian Federation
- Kazan (Volga region) Federal University; Department of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology; Kazan Russian Federation
| | - Yusuf Cem Kaplan
- Izmir Katip Celebi University School of Medicine; Department of Pharmacology; Izmir Turkey 35360
| | | | - Yinghui Wei
- University of Plymouth; Centre for Mathematical Sciences, School of Computing, Electronics and Mathematics; Plymouth UK
| | - Charles HV Hoyle
- Kazan (Volga region) Federal University; Research & Education Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Cochrane Russia; 18 Kremlevskaya Street, 420008 14-15 Malaya Krasnaya Street, 420015 Kazan Tatarstan Russian Federation
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Edvinsson D, Ekselius L. Six-year outcome in subjects diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder as adults. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2018; 268:337-347. [PMID: 29143159 PMCID: PMC5956008 DOI: 10.1007/s00406-017-0850-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2017] [Accepted: 11/02/2017] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
There are very few studies on the long-term outcome in subjects diagnosed with ADHD as adults. The objective of the present study was to assess this and relate the outcome to whether there was current medication or not and to other potential predictors of favourable outcome. A prospective clinical cohort of adults diagnosed with ADHD according to DSM-IV criteria was followed-up on an average of 6 years after first evaluation (n = 124; mean age 42 years, 51% males). ADHD symptom trajectories were assessed as well as medication, global functioning, disability, health-related quality of life, and alcohol and drug consumption at follow-up. Ninety percent of those diagnosed were initially treated pharmacologically and half of them discontinued treatment. One-third reported remission, defined as not fulfilling any ADHD subtype and a GAF-value last year ≥ 70, which was not affected by comorbidity at baseline. Current medication was not associated with remission. Subjects evaluated and first diagnosed with ADHD as adults are functionally improved at follow-up 6 years later despite a high percentage of psychiatric comorbidity at baseline. Half dropped out of medication, and there was no difference in ADHD remission between subjects with on-going medication at follow-up or subjects without medication, although current medication was related to a higher degree of self-reported global improvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dan Edvinsson
- Department of Neuroscience, Psychiatry, Uppsala University, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Lisa Ekselius
- Department of Neuroscience, Psychiatry, Uppsala University, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|