Comparative efficacy and acceptability of methylphenidate and atomoxetine in treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis

Pharmacotherapy to Improve Cognitive Functioning After Acquired Brain Injury: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression

Cognitive impairments, common sequelae of acquired brain injury (ABI), significantly affect rehabilitation and quality of life. Currently, there is no solid evidence-base for pharmacotherapy to improve cognitive functioning after ABI, nevertheless off-label use is widely applied in clinical practice. This meta-analysis and meta-regression aims to quantitatively aggregate the available evidence for the effects of pharmacological agents used in the treatment of cognitive impairments following ABI. We conducted a comprehensive search of Embase, Medline Ovid, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases for randomized controlled and crossover trials. Meta-analytic effects were calculated for each pharmaceutical agent and targeted neuromodulator system. Cognitive outcome measures were aggregated across cognitive domains. Of 8,216 articles, 41 studies (4,434 patients) were included. The noradrenergic agent methylphenidate showed a small, significant positive effect on cognitive functioning in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI; k = 14, d = 0.34, 95% confidence interval: 0.12-0.56, P = 0.003). Specifically, methylphenidate was found to improve cognitive functions related to executive memory, baseline speed, inhibitory control, and variability in responding. The cholinergic drug donepezil demonstrated a large effect size, albeit based on a limited number of studies (k = 3, d = 1.68, P = 0.03). No significant effects were observed for other agents. Additionally, meta-regression analysis did not identify significant sources of heterogeneity in treatment response. Our meta-analysis supports the use of methylphenidate for enhancing cognitive functioning in patients with TBI. Although donepezil shows potential, it warrants further research. These results could guide clinical decision making, inform practice guidelines, and direct future pharmacotherapeutic research in ABI.

Efficacy and Safety of Methylphenidate and Atomoxetine in Medication-Naive Children with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in a Real-World Setting

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Methylphenidate (MPH) and atomoxetine (ATX) are the most common medications used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in China; however, despite this, there is still a paucity of studies comparing their efficacy and safety, particularly for different characteristics. To address the lack of research, a real-world prospective cohort study was conducted to examine these properties of MPH and ATX, and to analyze correlations associated with age, sex, and different ADHD presentation.

METHODS

Children with ADHD meeting the eligibility criteria were recruited from January 2016 to July 2021. Study participants were treated with either MPH or ATX prescribed in the real-world setting, and were followed up for 26 weeks. Clinical efficacy response and adverse events (AEs) were recorded and measured. Subgroup analysis was performed to examine the efficacy response and AEs associated with age, sex, and different ADHD presentation.

RESULTS

A total of 1050 children were recruited and 29 children were lost to follow-up. Of the 1021 children remaining, 533 were treated with MPH and 488 were treated with ATX. No significant differences were found in intelligence quotient, age, sex, or ADHD presentation between the MPH- and ATX-treated groups (p > 0.05). The response rates were 84.6% in the MPH-treated group and 63.3% in the ATX-treated group. Subgroup analysis of response rate demonstrated that the treatment effect of MPH over ATX was consistent across subgroups except in the girls (odds ratio [OR] 2.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-4.7) and the hyperactive/impulsive presentation group (OR 2.88, 95% CI 0.77-12.76). A total of 47.8% of children experienced AEs during MPH treatment, significantly lower than the rate of 56.8% during ATX treatment (p < 0.05). The incidence of AEs in the MPH-treated group was higher in young children (<8 years: 56.8%; 8-10 years: 47.2%) and lower in children over 10 years of age (29.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, MPH was more effective and better tolerated than ATX. The incidence of AEs in children treated with MPH varied with age, and was higher in young children and lower in children over 10 years of age.

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.

Pharmacotherapy May Attenuate the Risk of Child Abuse in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder from the Real-World Evidence

Objective: Psychiatric disorders, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), may serve as a risk factor for child abuse. Methods: This study aimed to evaluate the association between children and adolescents with ADHD diagnosis and the risk of child abuse. The effectiveness of a pharmacological intervention on reducing the risk of child abuse was also assessed. A nationwide, population-based, retrospective with a matched-cohort study design was used. Data were from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan over a 15-year period (2000-2015). Results: Increased risk of child abuse in the ADHD group was noticed and the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 1.797 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.245-2.388, p < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly higher cumulative incidence in the ADHD group over the 15-year period (Log-rank test p < 0.001). ADHD patients with other psychiatric comorbidities had a higher risk of child abuse. Pharmacological treatment of either methylphenidate or atomoxetine was associated with a reduced risk of child abuse. The total adjusted HR was 1.466 (95% CI = 1.077-1.883, p < 0.001) in medicine group compared with the controls. Conclusions: ADHD was associated with a subsequent risk of child abuse in Taiwan. Pharmacological treatment could reduce the risk of child abuse in ADHD patients.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Across the Spectrum: From Childhood to Adulthood

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder is a neurodevelopmental disorder involving dysregulation of multiple neural circuits, manifesting in symptoms such as inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity. Diagnosis requires onset of symptoms before age 12 years. However, symptoms often persist throughout lifetime, although they may change over time. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition formally lists the clinical criteria. Management involves pharmacologic agents, such as stimulant and/or nonstimulant medications, and providers should monitor closely for any adverse effects. Nonpharmacologic interventions may be implemented and can be used in conjunction with pharmacotherapy, although medications should be at the forefront of treatment.

Pharmacotherapy interventions for adolescent co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Co-occurring mental health and substance use (SU) disorders among adolescents are common, with two-thirds of adolescents who seek SU treatment also requiring support for mental health. Primary care physicians play a key role in the pharmacological treatment of mental health disorders among adolescents, however, little is known about the impact of these treatments on SU outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review summarizes the evidence regarding commonly used pharmacotherapy interventions for mental health and their impact on adolescent SU.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted across five databases as part of a larger systematic review of adolescent SU interventions. Studies were screened for eligibility by two researchers, and study data were extracted regarding study design, patient and treatment characteristics and results. Risk of bias analyses and qualitative syntheses were completed to evaluate the strength of the evidence and the impact of pharmacotherapy on SU outcomes.

RESULTS

Ten randomized controlled trials exploring seven pharmacotherapies met criteria for inclusion. All studies had low to moderate risk of bias. Four studies evaluated pharmacotherapy for co-occurring depression and SU, three evaluated attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and SU, and three evaluated bipolar disorder and SU. Five of the 10 studies also included a behavioural intervention. We found no evidence that pharmacotherapy for co-occurring mental health diagnoses impacted SU.

CONCLUSION

Family medicine clinicians prescribing pharmacotherapy for mental health should be aware that additional interventions will likely be needed to address co-occurring SU.

New Drugs to Treat ADHD: Opportunities and Challenges in Research and Development

Since the landmark MTA (Multimodal Treatment of ADHD) trial unequivocally demonstrated the efficacy of methylphenidate, catecholaminergic drugs, especially stimulants, have been the therapeutic mainstay in treatment of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). We review the new drugs which have entered the ADHD formulary. The lessons learned from drug-candidates that have succeeded in clinical trials together with those that have not have also been considered. What emerges confirms and consolidates the hypothesis that clinically effective ADHD drugs indirectly or directly increase catecholaminergic neurotransmission in the prefrontal cortex (PFC). Attempts to enhance catecholaminergic signalling through modulatory neurotransmitter systems or cognitive-enhancing drugs have all failed. New drugs approved for ADHD are catecholaminergic reuptake inhibitors and releasing agents, or selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors. Triple reuptake inhibitors with preferential effects on dopamine have not been successful. The substantial number of failures probably accounts for a continued focus on developing novel catecholaminergic and noradrenergic drugs, and a dearth of drug-candidates with novel mechanisms entering clinical development. However, substantial improvements in ADHD pharmacotherapy have been achieved by the almost exclusive use of once-daily medications and prodrugs, e.g. lisdexamfetamine and Azstarys^®, which improve compliance, deliver greater efficacy and reduce risks for diversion and abuse.

Efficacy of Addition of Atomoxetine to Speech Therapy in Stuttering Severity of Children Aged 4-12 Years: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives

Stuttering is a common problem at all ages that is required to be treated since childhood. Atomoxetine is currently used for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It can be effective for the treatment of stuttering due to its selective inhibition of norepinephrine reuptake and dopaminergic properties. Therefore, this randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effect of atomoxetine on children's stuttering.

Materials & Methods

The children aged 4-12 years and diagnosed with stuttering, referred to Pediatric Neurology and Psychology clinics , were randomly divided into experimental (n=50) and control (n=50) groups. One group received atomoxetine plus speech therapy, and the other group received only speech therapy. Both groups completed the Stuttering Severity Instrument-Fourth Edition at the baseline (on the first visit) and 3 months after the intervention. The results were compared between the two groups using SPSS software (version 21).

Results

Most of the children (67%) were male. Moreover, 24%, 46%, and 30% of the subjects were within the age ranges of < 60, 60-95, and > 95 months, respectively. Nearly half of the patients (52%) had a positive family history of stuttering. Stuttering severity was the highest within the age range of 60-95 months, in left-handed children, in those who used formula, and in those who felt insecure in the family; however, there was no difference in stuttering severity based on child's gender, concomitant ADHD, multilingualism, facial or movement tics, sleeping hours, and using teats. The mean stuttering severity reduced in both groups (P<0.001), with a greater decrease in the experimental group, compared to that of the control group (P=0.011).

Conclusion

Atomoxetine plus speech therapy is effective for the treatment of children's stuttering and can be used as a complementary treatment strategy in such patients.

Methylphenidate for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in patients with Smith-Magenis syndrome: protocol for a series of N-of-1 trials

Background

Smith–Magenis syndrome (SMS) is a rare genetic neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by intellectual disability and severe behavioural and sleep disturbances. Often, patients with SMS are diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, the effectiveness of methylphenidate (MPH), the first-line pharmacological treatment for ADHD, in patients with SMS is unclear. Our objective is to examine the effectiveness of MPH for ADHD symptoms in individuals with SMS, proposing an alternative trial design as traditional randomized controlled trials are complex in these rare and heterogeneous patient populations.

Methods and analysis

We will initiate an N-of-1 series of double-blind randomized and placebo-controlled multiple crossover trials in six patients aged ≥ 6 years with a genetically confirmed SMS diagnosis and a multidisciplinary established ADHD diagnosis, according to a power analysis based on a summary measures analysis of the treatment effect. Each N-of-1 trial consists of a baseline period, dose titration phase, three cycles each including randomized intervention, placebo and washout periods, and follow-up. The intervention includes twice daily MPH (doses based on age and body weight). The primary outcome measure will be the subscale hyperactivity/inattention of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), rated daily. Secondary outcome measures are the shortened version of the Emotion Dysregulation Inventory (EDI) reactivity index, Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS), and the personal questionnaire (PQ). Statistical analysis will include a mixed model analysis. All subjects will receive an assessment of their individual treatment effect and data will be aggregated to investigate the effectiveness of MPH for ADHD in SMS at a population level.

Conclusions

This study will provide information on the effectiveness of MPH for ADHD in SMS, incorporating personalized outcome measures. This protocol presents the first properly powered N-of-1 study in a rare genetic neurodevelopmental disorder, providing a much-needed bridge between science and practice to optimize evidence-based and personalized care.

Trial registration

This study is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR9125).

Practitioner's review: medication for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and comorbid conditions

Alleviating the multiple problems of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and its comorbid conditions presents major challenges for the affected children, parents, and therapists. Because of a complex psychopathology, structured therapy and parent training are not always sufficient, especially for those patients with intellectual disability (ID) and multiple comorbidities. Moreover, structured therapy is not available for a large number of patients, and pharmacological support is often needed, especially in those children with additional attention deficit/hyperactivity and oppositional defiant, conduct, and sleep disorders.

Immediate-release methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is characterized by symptoms of inattention or impulsivity or both, and hyperactivity, which affect children, adolescents, and adults. In some countries, methylphenidate is the first option to treat adults with moderate or severe ADHD. However, evidence on the efficacy and adverse events of immediate-release (IR) methylphenidate in the treatment of ADHD in adults is limited and controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and harms (adverse events) of IR methylphenidate for treating ADHD in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2020, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, eight additional databases and three trial registers. We also searched internal reports on the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration websites. We checked citations of included trials to identify additional trials not captured by the electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IR methylphenidate, at any dose, with placebo or other pharmacological interventions (including extended-release formulations of methylphenidate) for ADHD in adults. Primary outcomes comprised changes in the symptoms of ADHD (efficacy) and harms. Secondary outcomes included changes in the clinical impression of severity and improvement, level of functioning, depression, anxiety and quality of life. Outcomes could have been rated by investigators or participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently on the characteristics of the trials, participants, interventions; outcomes and financial conflict of interests. We resolved disagreements by discussion or consulting a third review author. We obtained additional, unpublished information from the authors of one included trial that had reported efficacy data in a graph. We calculated mean differences (MDs) or standardized MDs (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data reported on the same or different scales, respectively. We summarized dichotomous variables as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials published between 2001 and 2016 involving 497 adults with ADHD. Three trials were conducted in Europe and one in Argentina; the remaining trials did not report their location. The RCTs compared IR methylphenidate with placebo, an osmotic-release oral system (OROS) of methylphenidate (an extended-release formulation), an extended-release formulation of bupropion, lithium, and Pycnogenol® (maritime pine bark extract). Participants comprised outpatients, inpatients in addiction treatment, and adults willing to attend an intensive outpatient program for cocaine dependence. The duration of the follow-up ranged from 6 to 18 weeks. IR methylphenidate versus placebo We found very low-certainty evidence that, compared with placebo, IR methylphenidate may reduce symptoms of ADHD when measured with investigator-rated scales (MD -20.70, 95% CI -23.97 to -17.43; 1 trial, 146 participants; end scores; Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Report Scale (AISRS), scored from 0 to 54), but the evidence is uncertain. The effect of IR methylphenidate on ADHD symptoms when measured with participant-rated scales was moderate, but the certainty of the evidence is very low (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.25 to 0.06; I² = 69%; 2 trials, 138 participants; end scores). There is very low-certainty evidence that, compared with placebo, IR methylphenidate may reduce the clinical impression of the severity of ADHD symptoms (MD -0.57, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.28; 2 trials, 139 participants; I² = 0%; change and end scores; Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity scale (scored from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse))). There is low-certainty evidence that, compared with placebo, IR methylphenidate may slightly impact the clinical impression of an improvement in symptoms of ADHD (MD -0.94, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.51; 1 trial, 49 participants; end scores; CGI-Improvement scale (scored from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse))). There is no clear evidence of an effect on anxiety (MD -0.20, 95% CI -4.84 to 4.44; 1 trial, 19 participants; change scores; Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A; scored from 0 to 56); very low-certainty evidence) or depression (MD 2.80, 95% CI -0.09 to 5.69; 1 trial, 19 participants; change scores; Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D; scored from 0 to 52); very low-certainty evidence) in analyses comparing IR methylphenidate with placebo. IR methylphenidate versus lithium Compared with lithium, it is uncertain whether IR methylphenidate increases or decreases symptoms of ADHD (MD 0.60, 95% CI -3.11 to 4.31; 1 trial, 46 participants; end scores; Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (scored from 0 to 198); very low-certainty evidence); anxiety (MD -0.80, 95% CI -4.49 to 2.89; 1 trial, 46 participants; end scores; HAM-A; very low-certainty evidence); or depression (MD -1.20, 95% CI -3.81 to 1.41, 1 trial, 46 participants; end scores; HAM-D scale; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed participant-rated changes in symptoms of ADHD, or clinical impression of severity or improvement in participants treated with IR methylphenidate compared with lithium. Adverse events were poorly assessed and reported. We rated all trials at high risk of bias due to selective outcome reporting of harms and masking of outcome assessors (failure to blind outcome assessor to measure adverse events). Overall, four trials with 203 participants who received IR methylphenidate and 141 participants who received placebo described the occurrence of harms. The use of IR methylphenidate in these trials increased the risk of gastrointestinal complications (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.95) and loss of appetite (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.96). Cardiovascular adverse events were reported inconsistently, preventing a comprehensive analysis. One trial comparing IR methylphenidate to lithium reported five and nine adverse events, respectively. We considered four trials to have notable concerns of vested interests influencing the evidence, and authors from two trials omitted information related to the sources of funding and conflicts of interest.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no certain evidence that IR methylphenidate compared with placebo or lithium can reduce symptoms of ADHD in adults (low- and very low-certainty evidence). Adults treated with IR methylphenidate are at increased risk of gastrointestinal and metabolic-related harms compared with placebo. Clinicians should consider whether it is appropriate to prescribe IR methylphenidate, given its limited efficacy and increased risk of harms. Future RCTs should explore the long-term efficacy and risks of IR methylphenidate, and the influence of conflicts of interest on reported effects.

The Mechanism, Clinical Efficacy, Safety, and Dosage Regimen of Atomoxetine for ADHD Therapy in Children: A Narrative Review

Atomoxetine, a selective norepinephrine (NE) reuptake inhibitor, was approved for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment in children, adolescents and adults. We searched the database PubMed/MEDLINE (2000 to October 1, 2021). Only publications in English were considered. Atomoxetine inhibits the presynaptic norepinephrine transporter (NET), preventing the reuptake of NE throughout the brain along with inhibiting the reuptake of dopamine in specific brain regions such as the prefrontal cortex (PFC). The novel mechanism of atomoxetine also includes several new brain imaging studies and animal model studies. It is mainly metabolized by the highly polymorphic drug metabolizing enzyme cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6). Atomoxetine is effective and generally well tolerated. ADHD is often accompanied by multiple comorbidities. A series of studies have been published suggesting that atomoxetine is effective in the treatment of ADHD symptoms for children with various types of comorbidity. In some cases, it is possible that atomoxetine may have a positive influence on the symptoms of comorbidities. Atomoxetine can be administered either as a single daily dose or split into two evenly divided doses, and has a negligible risk of abuse or misuse. The latest guideline updated that clinical dose selection of atomoxetine was recommended based on both CYP2D6 genotype and the peak concentration. To have a more comprehensive understanding of atomoxetine, this review sets the focus on the mechanism, clinical efficacy and dosage regimen in detail, and also touches on those studies regarding adverse reactions of atomoxetine.

A Brief Replication Study Comparing Stimulants and Non-Stimulants for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Treatment with a Focus on the Compliance, Efficacy, and Satisfaction

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the compliance, efficacy, and satisfaction associated with methylphenidate and atomoxetine for treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Methods

The subjects were 44 patients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder-5 diagnostic criteria for ADHD and were treated with methylphenidate or atomoxetine. The methylphenidate formulations included immediate release (IR), extended release (ER), and osmotic-controlled release oral delivery system (OROS). Patients and parents reported the average number of days per week the medication was taken. Efficacy was assessed using the ADHD Rating Scale. Satisfaction with medication scale (SAMS)–parent report form and SAMS–self-report form were used to evaluate parents’ and patients’ satisfaction, respectively.

Results

Patients and parents were more satisfied with methylphenidate than with atomoxetine. There were no significant differences in the compliance with and efficacy of methylphenidate and atomoxetine. Compliance with methylphenidate IR and ER was markedly lower than that with OROS methylphenidate or atomoxetine.

Conclusion

Methylphenidate OROS formulation can be considered a suitable option given its high rates of compliance, satisfaction, and efficacy.

Review of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE

Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate is a stimulant prodrug with low abuse and diversion potential that is used in treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children, adolescents and adults. This current literature review article aims to examine safety and efficacy of LDX in children and adolescents for the treatment of ADHD based on currently available data.

METHODS

Relevant English language articles were identified through computerized searches of the MEDLINE database (PubMed and EMBASE) and clinical trials registry up to January 2020 using the following search terms: lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, pro-drug stimulant, attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorders, ADHD, safety, efficacy, children, adolescents, Vyvanse. Forty-two articles were reviewed, 34 of which were included into this review, selected by the limit "clinical trials". This article represents the pharmacological profile, efficacy and safety data of LDX for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents.

RESULTS

The collection of studies reviewed identified that LDX was both safe and efficacious in the treatment of ADHD. The most commonly exhibited side effects were appetite suppression, weight loss, headache and insomnia. In comparison to placebo, LDX significantly improved ADHD symptoms and overall quality of life in children and adolescents. In comparison to atomoxetine, LDX showed statistically significant improvements in inattention, impulsivity, and activities of daily living. In comparison to OROS-MPH and placebo, LDX and OROS-MPH showed improvements with the CGI-I score, and ADHD-RS-IV, however, LDX was superior.

CONCLUSION

Patients have seen statistically significant improvements in their ADHD symptomatology in the classroom environment, health related quality of life, and their overall behavior in comparison to placebo, atomoxetine, and OROS-MPH. However, clinical judgment should be utilized when prescribing LDX due to patient specific needs and the side effect profile.

The female side of pharmacotherapy for ADHD-A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

This comprehensive review examined sex differences in prescription rates and efficacy or effectiveness of pharmacotherapy treatment in girls and women with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), while identifying gaps in the scientific knowledge on this topic.

METHOD

A rigorous electronic database search was carried out in order to identify all published studies on female-specific effects of stimulants and non-stimulants in the treatment of ADHD. In total, 2672 studies were screened of which 21 studies (seven on prescription rates, 14 on effects of pharmacotherapy) met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis.

RESULTS

In all seven studies on ADHD prescription rates, girls received significantly less prescriptions than boys, a difference however no longer seen in adults with the exception of one study. Each of the 14 studies on effectiveness / efficacy found at least one sex-difference in the effects of ADHD pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Several sex-differences are demonstrated in the prescription, usage and efficacy /effectiveness of both stimulant and non-stimulant ADHD pharmacotherapy. A single daily use of MPH may possibly not be optimal for girls with ADHD and ATX may be a promising medication for girls and women with ADHD. The robustness of this result requires further investigation.

[Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in childhood and adolescence : Current state of research]

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), defined by the core symptoms impulsiveness, inattention and motor hyperactivity, is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders beginning in early childhood.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews the current state of research on the epidemiology, etiology, diagnostics and therapeutic interventions for ADHD in children and adolescents.

METHODS

A selective literature search was carried out in PubMed with reference to the German S3 clinical guidelines on ADHD in children, adolescents and adults.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The epidemiological prevalence of ADHD in children is estimated to be 5.3%. The etiology is complex and heterogeneous and a high percentage of the phenotypic variance can be explained by genetic influences. The challenge of ADHD diagnostics is to exclude differential diagnoses while simultaneously identifying common coexisting psychiatric conditions. Treatment recommendations depend on the severity of symptoms. In severe ADHD pharmacotherapy should be considered as the first line intervention. Psychostimulants (various methylphenidate and amphetamine preparations) and the non-stimulants atomoxetine and guanfacine are approved in Germany for treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. In milder cases as well as in preschool children, psychosocial interventions (including behavioral psychotherapy) are often sufficient.

Disrupted brain functional networks in drug-naïve children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder assessed using graph theory analysis

Neuroimaging studies have revealed functional brain network abnormalities in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but the results have been inconsistent, potentially related to confounding medication effects. Furthermore, specific topological alterations in functional networks and their role in behavioral inhibition dysfunction remain to be established. Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging was performed on 51 drug-naïve children with ADHD and 55 age-matched healthy controls. Brain functional networks were constructed by thresholding the partial correlation matrices of 90 brain regions, and graph theory was used to analyze network topological properties. The Stroop test was used to assess cognitive inhibitory abilities. Nonparametric permutation tests were used to compare the topological architectures in the two groups. Compared with healthy subjects, brain networks in ADHD patients demonstrated altered topological characteristics, including lower global (FDR q = 0.01) and local efficiency (p = 0.032, uncorrected) and a longer path length (FDR q = 0.01). Lower nodal efficiencies were found in the left inferior frontal gyrus and anterior cingulate cortex in the ADHD group (FDR both q < 0.05). Altered global and nodal topological efficiencies were associated with the severity of inhibitory cognitive control deficits and hyperactivity symptoms in ADHD (p <0 .05). Alterations in network topologies in drug-naïve ADHD patients indicate weaker small-worldization with decreased segregation and integration of functional brain networks. Deficits in the cingulo-fronto-parietal attention network were associated with inhibitory control deficits.

Methylphenidate and atomoxetine prescribing trends in children in the Western Cape Province of South Africa, 2005-2013

Background

There is paucity of data on methylphenidate and atomoxetine prescribing patterns in South African children.

Aim

To describe the prescribing trends of these agents in children residing in the Western Cape Province.

Setting

South African private health sector.

Methods

Longitudinal drug utilisation study on medicine claims data from 2005–2013, focussing on the number of patients and prescriptions per patient.

Results

The total number of patients increased by 29.5% from 2005 to 2013. The majority were boys (male:female ratio, 3.5:1), and between the ages of > 6 and ≤12 years in 2005 and >12 and ≤18 years in 2013. More than 75% of patients received methylphenidate or atomoxetine in the City of Cape Town Metropolitan municipality. Prescriptions for methylphenidate and atomoxetine increased by 45.5% overall from 2005 to 2013 (p < 0.001), with that for methylphenidate and atomoxetine increasing by 36.0% and 314.5%, respectively. The average number of annual methylphenidate prescriptions per patient increased from 3.96 ± 2.92 (95% CI, 3.69–4.23) in 2005 to 4.38 ± 2.85 (95% CI, 4.14–4.61) in 2013 (Cohen’s d = 0.14) and for atomoxetine from 2.58 ± 1.86 (95% CI, 1.80–3.37) in 2005 to 4.85 ± 3.66 (95% CI, 3.84–5.86) in 2013 (Cohen’s d = 0.62).

Conclusion

Although the total number of patients and prescribing of methylphenidate and atomoxetine increased significantly from 2005 to 2013, a slight downward trend was observed in the mean number of prescriptions per patient per year from 2008 onwards. These prescribing patterns warrant further research.

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.

Individualised short-term therapy for adolescents impaired by attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder despite previous routine care treatment (ESCAadol)-Study protocol of a randomised controlled trial within the consortium ESCAlife

BACKGROUND

Despite the high persistence rate of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) throughout the lifespan, there is a considerable gap in knowledge regarding effective treatment strategies for adolescents with ADHD. This group in particular often shows substantial psychosocial impairment, low compliance and insufficient response to psychopharmacological interventions. Effective and feasible treatments should further consider the developmental shift in ADHD symptoms, comorbidity and psychosocial adversity as well as family dysfunction. Thus, individualised interventions for adolescent ADHD should comprise a multimodal treatment strategy. The randomised controlled ESCAadol study addresses the needs of this patient group and compares the outcome of short-term cognitive behavioural therapy with parent-based telephone-assisted self-help.

METHODS/DESIGN

In step 1, 160 adolescents aged 12 to 17 years with a diagnosis of ADHD will undergo a treatment as usual (TAU) observation phase of 1 month. In step 2, those still severely affected are randomised to the intervention group with an Individualised Modular Treatment Programme (IMTP) or a telephone-assisted self-help programme for parents (TASH) as an active control condition. The IMTP was specifically designed for the needs of adolescent ADHD. It comprises 10 sessions of individual cognitive behavioural therapy with the adolescents and/or the parents, for which participants choose three out of 10 available focus modules (e.g. organisational skills and planning, emotion regulation, problem solving and stress management, dysfunctional family communication). TASH combines a bibliotherapeutic component with 10 counselling sessions for the parents via telephone. Primary outcome is the change in ADHD symptoms in a clinician-rated diagnostic interview. Outcomes are assessed at inclusion into the study, after the TAU phase, after the intervention phase and after a further 12-week follow-up period. The primary statistical analysis will be by intention-to-treat, using linear regression models. Additionally, we will analyse psychometric and biological predictors and moderators of treatment response.

DISCUSSION

ESCAadol compares two short-term non-pharmacological interventions as cost-efficient and feasible treatment options for adolescent ADHD, addressing the specific needs and obstacles to treatment success in this group. We aim to contribute to personalised medicine for adolescent ADHD intended to be implemented in routine clinical care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), Current Controlled Trial DRKS00008974, http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=DRKS00008974 ; http://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00008974 ; Registered on 28 December 2015.

Prescription Drug Use and Cost Trends Among Medicaid-Enrolled Children with Disruptive Behavioral Disorders

Disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) are the most common mental health conditions in children. These conditions profoundly affect healthcare utilization and costs. Service use, costs, and diagnostic trends among pediatric Medicaid beneficiaries provide information regarding healthcare quality and potential for smarter spending. Using nationwide Medicaid administrative data, this study investigates diagnoses, prescription drug fills, and payments in 49 states and D.C. from 2006 to 2009 in Medicaid beneficiaries age 20 and under. Psychotherapeutic drug prescriptions and payments were calculated as a proportion of prescription totals. Results were considered by age, gender, race, and state. The results show a trend of increasing DBD diagnosis. Among prescription claims for children with diagnosed DBD, psychotherapeutic drug claims represented 30-40% of prescription claims but over half of prescription costs. This study indicates increasing clinical and financial needs for Medicaid-enrolled children with DBDs. Medicaid could potentially foster reforms in pediatric DBD treatments, particularly regarding medication use.

The Alpha-2A Adrenergic Receptor Gene -1291C/G Single Nucleotide Polymorphism is Associated with the Efficacy of Methylphenidate in Treating Taiwanese Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The therapeutic effect of methylphenidate (MPH) in treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been related to the alpha-2A adrenergic receptor (ADRA2A) gene -1291C/G single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP). We investigated the effect of MPH in treating Taiwanese children and adolescent with ADHD and its relation to the ADRA2A gene -1291C/G SNP.

METHODS

The subjects with DSM-IV ADHD diagnosis underwent a titration period to find out the dose of MPH for maintenance treatment. After 4 weeks maintenance treatment, the effect of MPH was evaluated by the Swanson, Nolan and Pelham version IV total scores. The subjects with more than 25% score reduction were referred to responders and those with ≥50% improvement were considered as better responders. The -1291C/G variant of the ADRA2A gene was identified by DNA sequencing and what relevance it has to the MPH response was examined by binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 59 subjects, 44 (74.6%) were responsive to MPH treatment and the responsiveness was not shown to be associated with the ADRA2A gene -1291C/G SNP. As the responsive subjects were categorized as moderate responders and better responders and subjected to statistical analysis, the GG homozygotes showed a greater chance to have a better response to MPH treatment than CC homozygotes (p=0.02), with an odds ratio of 32.14 (95% CI=1.64-627.80).

CONCLUSION

The ADRA2A gene -1291C/G SNP is associated with the efficacy of MPH for the treatment of ADHD in Taiwanese children and adolescents. The responsive subjects bearing homozygous -1291G allele are more likely to have a better response to MPH treatment.

Investigation of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) sub-types in children via EEG frequency domain analysis

AIM OF THE STUDY

To investigate the frequency domain effects and changes in electroencephalography (EEG) signals in children diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study contains 40 children. All children were between the ages of 7 and 12 years. Participants were classified into four groups which were ADHD (n=20), ADHD-I (ADHD-Inattentive type) (n=10), ADHD-C (ADHD-Combined type) (n=10), and control (n=20) groups. In this study, the frequency domain of EEG signals for ADHD, subtypes and control groups were analyzed and compared using Matlab software. The mean age of the ADHD children's group was 8.7 years and the control group 9.1 years.

RESULTS

Spectral analysis of mean power (μV²) and relative-mean power (%) was carried out for four different frequency bands: delta (0--4 Hz), theta (4--8 Hz), alpha (8--13 Hz) and beta (13--32 Hz). The ADHD and subtypes of ADHD-I, and ADHD-C groups had higher average power value of delta and theta band than that of control group. However, this is not the case for alpha and beta bands. Increases in delta/beta ratio and statistical significance were found only between ADHD-I and control group, and in delta/beta, theta/delta ratio statistical significance values were found to exist between ADHD-C and control group.

CONCLUSION

EEG analyzes can be used as an alternative method when ADHD subgroups are identified.

Psychotherapy for Adolescents With Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Pediatrician's Guide

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) presents with high levels of inattention, impulsiveness, and hyperactivity. ADHD starts in childhood and results in impairments that continue into adulthood. ADHD symptoms lead to decreased functionality in various life domains and result in poor academics, behavioral challenges, delayed independence, and strained relationships. Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment, persistent residual symptoms are common, highlighting the need for novel treatment strategies. This article aims to provide a review of the psychotherapeutic interventions available for teens that receive pharmacotherapy but continue to struggle with the residual symptoms of ADHD that interfere with academic function, relationship formation, and psychological development.

Contribution of Clinical Neuroimaging to the Understanding of the Pharmacology of Methylphenidate

Methylphenidate (MPH) is currently the most widely used molecule in the pharmacologic treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Although experience of its application now extends over several decades, its psychotropic nature, prolonged use in children, and chemical relation to amphetamines still raise doubts in the minds of prescribers and the families of the patients. Brain imaging has shed considerable light on the neuropharmacology of MPH. The two main in vivo neuroimaging techniques are positron-emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and these can be applied in both animal models and humans. The present review seeks to show how human molecular and functional imaging has contributed to determining not only the molecular targets of MPH, and the action kinetics of the various pharmaceutical forms available, but also the connectivity and brain networks activated by treatment. We also discuss the perspectives opened up by new hybrid PET-MRI techniques that enable multimodal tracking of the impact of methylphenidate on neurotransmission.

A unique pattern of cortical connectivity characterizes patients with attention deficit disorders: a large electroencephalographic coherence study

BACKGROUND

Attentional disorders (ADD) feature decreased attention span, impulsivity, and over-activity interfering with successful lives. Childhood onset ADD frequently persists to adulthood. Etiology may be hereditary or disease associated. Prevalence is 5% but recognition may be 'overshadowed' by comorbidities (brain injury, mood disorder) thereby escaping formal recognition. Blinded diagnosis by MRI has failed. ADD may not itself manifest a single anatomical pattern of brain abnormality but may reflect multiple, unique responses to numerous and diverse etiologies. Alternatively, a stable ADD-specific brain pattern may be better detected by brain physiology. EEG coherence, measuring cortical connectivity, is used to explore this possibility.

METHODS

Participants: Ages 2 to 22 years; 347 ADD and 619 neurotypical controls (CON). Following artifact reduction, principal components analysis (PCA) identifies coherence factors with unique loading patterns. Discriminant function analysis (DFA) determines discrimination success differentiating ADD from CON. Split-half and jackknife analyses estimate prospective diagnostic success. Coherence factor loading constitutes an ADD-specific pattern or 'connectome'.  RESULTS: PCA identified 40 factors explaining 50% of total variance. DFA on CON versus ADD groups utilizing all factors was highly significant (p≤0.0001). ADD subjects were separated into medication and comorbidity subgroups. DFA (stepping allowed) based on CON versus ADD without comorbidities or medication treatment successfully classified the correspondingly held out ADD subjects in every instance. Ten randomly generated split-half replications of the entire population demonstrated high-average classification success for each of the left out test-sets (overall: CON, 83.65%; ADD, 90.07%). Higher success was obtained with more restricted age sub-samples using jackknifing: 2-8 year olds (CON, 90.0%; ADD, 90.6%); 8-14 year olds (CON, 96.8%; ADD 95.9%); and 14-20 year-olds (CON, 100.0%; ADD, 97.1%). The connectome manifested decreased and increased coherence. Patterns were complex and bi-hemispheric; typically reported front-back and left-right loading patterns were not observed. Subtemporal electrodes (seldom utilized) were prominently involved.  CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate a stable coherence connectome differentiating ADD from CON subjects including subgroups with and without comorbidities and/or medications. This functional 'connectome', constitutes a diagnostic ADD phenotype. Split-half replications support potential for EEG-based ADD diagnosis, with increased accuracy using limited age ranges. Repeated studies could assist recognition of physiological change from interventions (pharmacological, behavioral).

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents and adults: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a major public health issue. Pharmacological treatments play an important role in the multimodal treatment of ADHD. Currently, there is a lack of up-to-date and comprehensive evidence on how available ADHD drugs compare and rank in terms of efficacy and tolerability, in children or adolescents as well as in adults. We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA), integrating direct and indirect comparisons from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), to rank pharmacological treatments for ADHD according to their efficacy and tolerability profiles.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search a broad range of electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science, with no date or language restrictions. We will also search for unpublished studies using international clinical trial registries and contacting relevant drug companies. We will identify and include available parallel-group, cross-over and cluster randomised trials that compare methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, amphetamine derivatives (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, clonidine, guanfacine, bupropion or modafinil (as oral therapy) either with each other or to placebo, in children, adolescents or adults with ADHD. Primary outcomes will be efficacy (indicated by reduction in severity of ADHD core symptoms measured on a standardised scale) and tolerability (the proportion of patients who left a study early due to side effects). Secondary outcomes will be global functioning, acceptability (proportion of patients who left the study early by any cause) and changes in blood pressure and body weight. NMA will be conducted in STATA within a frequentist framework. The quality of RCTs will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical issues are foreseen. Results from this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and possibly presented at relevant national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42014008976.

Comparative efficacy and safety of methylphenidate and atomoxetine for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: Meta-analysis based on head-to-head trials

INTRODUCTION

Comparative efficacy and safety are important issues for appropriate drug selection for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment. Therefore we conducted a meta-analysis, where we compared atomoxetine (ATX) and methylphenidate (MPH) for ADHD treatment in children and adolescents.

METHOD

Literature retrieval was conducted in relevant databases from their inception to April 2016 to select head-to-head trials that compared ATX and MPH in children and adolescents. Outcomes like response rate, ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) score, and adverse events were compared between ATX and MPH treatments. The standardized mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the effect size for continuous data or dichotomous data, respectively.

RESULTS

Eleven eligible randomized-controlled trials were included, and two of them were double-blind, while the remaining were open-label. Compared to ATX, MPH showed a higher response rate (RR = 1.14, 95% CI [1. 09, 1.20]), decreased inattention (SMD = -0.13, 95% CI [-0.25, -0.01]) and lower risk of adverse events (drowsiness: RR = 0.17, 95% CI [0.11, 0.26; nausea: RR = 0.49; 95% CI [0.29, 0.85; vomiting: RR = 0.41, 95% CI [0.27, 0.63]). However, MPH presented a higher risk of insomnia than ATX (RR = 2.27, 95% CI [1.63, 3.15], p < .01).

CONCLUSION

Results of the meta-analysis add additional evidence of the effectiveness of both ATX and MPH and suggest that MPH should be a first treatment option in most patients with ADHD.

Long-Term Efficacy of Methylphenidate Immediate-Release for the Treatment of Childhood ADHD

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term effects of methylphenidate imediate-release (MPH-IR), and to confirm the efficacy established in previous meta-analyses of short-term studies.

METHOD

Published and unpublished studies in which participants were treated with MPH-IR for 12 weeks or more were searched. Pooled effect sizes from these studies were computed with the DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model. Meta-regression analysis was conducted to estimate covariates associated with treatment effects.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. Pooled parents ratings for inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity resulted in standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.60, 1.32]) and SMD = 1.12 (95% CI = [0.85, 1.39]), respectively; pooled teachers ratings showed SMD = 0.98 (95% CI = [0.09, 1.86]) for inattention and SMD = 1.25 (95% CI = [0.7, 1.81]) for hyperactivity/impulsivity. No evidence of association of any covariates with treatment effect was detected in the meta-regression.

CONCLUSION

MPH-IR is efficacious for childhood ADHD for periods longer than 12 weeks.

Safety of Methylphenidate and Atomoxetine in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): Data from the Italian National ADHD Registry

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the type and frequency of adverse events (AEs) in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treated with methylphenidate or atomoxetine over a 5-year period in a large naturalistic study.

METHODS

We draw on data from the Italian ADHD Registry, a national database for postmarketing phase IV pharmacovigilance of ADHD medications across 90 centers. AEs were defined as severe or mild as per the classification of the Italian Medicines Agency. AE frequency in the two treatment groups was compared using incidence rates per 100 person-years (IR100PY) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs). Mantel-Haenszel adjusted IRRs were calculated to control for psychiatric comorbidity.

RESULTS

A total of 1350 and 753 participants (aged 6-18 years, mean age 10.7 ± 2.8) were treated with methylphenidate and atomoxetine, respectively, from 2007 to 2012. Ninety participants (7 %) were switched from methylphenidate to atomoxetine, and 138 (18 %) from atomoxetine to methylphenidate. Thirty-seven children treated with atomoxetine and 12 with methylphenidate had their medication withdrawn. Overall, 645 patients (26.8 %) experienced at least one mild AE (including decreased appetite and irritability, for both drugs) and 95 patients (3.9 %) experienced at least one severe AE (including severe gastrointestinal events). IR100PY were significantly higher in the atomoxetine-treated group compared with the methylphenidate-treated group for a number of mild and severe AEs and for any severe or mild AEs. After controlling for comorbidities, IRR was still significantly higher in the atomoxetine group compared with the methylphenidate group for a number of mild (decreased appetite, weight loss, abdominal pain, dyspepsia, stomach ache, irritability, mood disorder and dizziness) and severe (gastrointestinal, neuropsychiatric, and cardiovascular) AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

In this naturalistic study, methylphenidate had a better safety profile than atomoxetine.

Functional consequences of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder on children and their families

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder with core symptoms that include hyperactivity, impulsiveness, and inattention, and it is the most common psychiatric disorder among children and adolescents. These core symptoms are continuously recognized throughout the day from childhood to adulthood. Furthermore, children with ADHD from childhood to adulthood might also have various comorbid psychiatric disorders. Recently, bipolar disorder and disruptive mood dysregulation disorder, a new clinical issue, have been discussed as comorbid disorders or differential disorders associated with ADHD. Furthermore, comorbid disorders of ADHD are related to quality of life and family burden. Children with ADHD have poorer long-term outcomes than controls with respect to: academic achievement and attainment, occupational rank and job performance, risky sexual practices and early unwanted pregnancies, substance use, relationship difficulties, marital problems, traffic violations, and car accidents. Irritability of children with ADHD has been a key symptom that clinicians and researchers have used to evaluate the developmental condition of children with ADHD. ADHD is sometimes a chronic disorder that occurs over a long period, increasing the family burden of these children (including health-care costs), which will increase with aging for unremitted children with ADHD. Therefore, clinicians should evaluate not only the mental condition of the child but also the family burden. Children with ADHD should be treated during childhood to reduce their clinical symptoms and family burden.

Neural Correlates of Symptom Improvement Following Stimulant Treatment in Adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The purposes of this study were to examine the impact of 3 weeks of amphetamine administration on intrinsic connectome-wide connectivity patterns in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and explore the association between stimulant-induced symptom improvement and functional connectivity alteration.

METHODS

Participants included 19 adults (age 20-55 years) diagnosed with ADHD using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria per the Adult Clinician Diagnostic Scale taking part in amphetamine trials. For each patient, two 6-minute resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (R-fMRI) scans were acquired at baseline and after treatment. A fully data-driven multivariate analytic approach (i.e., multivariate distance matrix regression [MDMR]) was applied to R-fMRI data to characterize the distributed pharmacological effects in the entire functional connectome. Clinical efficacy was assessed using ADHD rating scale with adult prompts and the Adult Self-Report Scale v1.1 Symptom Checklist. We linked stimulant-induced functional connectivity changes to symptom amelioration using Spearman's correlation.

RESULTS

Three weeks of administration of a stimulant significantly reduced ADHD symptoms. MDMR-based analyses on R-fMRI data highlighted the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC, a key cognitive control region) and the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC, the anterior core of default network) whose distributed patterns of functional connectivity across the entire brain were altered by psychostimulants. Follow-up intrinsic functional connectivity revealed that stimulants specifically decreased the positive functional connectivity between DLPFC-insula, DLPFC-anterior cingulate cortex, and MPFC-insula. Importantly, these functional connectivity changes are associated with symptom improvement.

CONCLUSION

These results suggested that ADHD is associated with increased functional integration or decreased functional segregation between core regions of cognitive control, default, and salience networks. The apparent normalization of intrinsic functional interaction in these circuits (i.e., increased functional segregation) may underlie the clinical benefits produced by 3 weeks of amphetamine treatment.

The Safety of Atomoxetine for the Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Comprehensive Review of Over a Decade of Research

Atomoxetine is a noradrenergic reuptake inhibitor prescribed for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) that first gained approval in the USA in 2002 and has been authorized in 97 countries worldwide. The aim of this paper is to comprehensively review publications that addressed one or more of seven major safety topics relevant to atomoxetine treatment of children and adolescents (aged ≥6 years) diagnosed with ADHD. While the review focuses on children and adolescents, publications in which data from patients aged >18 years and from 6 to 18 years were analyzed in the same dataset were included. Using a predefined search strategy, including agreement of two reviewers when selecting papers, reduced the potential for bias. Using this process, we identified 70 eligible papers (clinical trials, epidemiological studies, and case reports) across the seven topics. We also referred to the European Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) and US label. We found 15 papers about suicidality, three about aggression/hostility, seven about psychosis/mania, six about seizures, seven about hepatic effects, 29 about cardiovascular effects, and 28 about growth and development. The main findings (i.e., those from the largest and most well-conducted studies/analyses) are as follows. A large register-based study of pediatric and adult patients (6818 received atomoxetine) calculated a hazard ratio of 0.96 for suicide-related events during treatment with atomoxetine, and a meta-analysis of 23 placebo-controlled studies (N = 3883), published in 2014, found no completed suicides and no statistically significant association between atomoxetine and suicidality. The frequency of aggression/hostility was not statistically significantly higher with atomoxetine, e.g., experienced by 1.6 % (N = 21/1308) of atomoxetine-treated patients versus 1.1 % (N = 9/806) of placebo-treated patients in one meta-analysis. Symptoms of psychosis and mania were mainly observed in patients with comorbid bipolar disorder/depression. Based on spontaneous reports, during a 2-year period when 2.233 million adult and pediatric patients were exposed to atomoxetine, the reporting rate for seizures was 8 per 100,000 patients. In the manufacturer's database, atomoxetine was a "probable cause" of three hepatic adverse events (AEs) (all reversible hepatitis), and 133 hepatic AEs had possible confounding factors and were "possibly related" to atomoxetine, during 4 years when atomoxetine exposure had reached about 4.3 million patients. Rare cases of severe liver injury are described in the US label and European SPC; a case requiring liver transplantation is described in the US label. In a comprehensive review of a clinical trials database (N = 8417 received atomoxetine), most pediatric patients experienced modest increases in heart rate and blood pressure, and 8-12 % experienced more pronounced changes (≥20 bpm, ≥15 to 20 mmHg). However, in three long-term analyses (≥2 years), blood pressure was within age norms, and few patients discontinued due to cardiovascular AEs. As described in the European SPC, QT interval prolongation is uncommon, e.g., in an open-label study, 1.4 % of 711 children and adolescents had prolonged QTc intervals (≥450 ms in males, ≥470 ms in females) that were not clinically significant at ≥3 years of treatment with atomoxetine. The European SPC warns about potential QT interval prolongation in patients with a personal or family history, or if atomoxetine is administered with other drugs that potentially affect the QT interval. Decreases in growth (weight and height gain) occurred and were greatest in patients of above average weight and height, but appeared to recover over 2-5 years of atomoxetine treatment. In conclusion, suicidality, aggression/hostility, psychosis, seizures, liver injuries, and prolonged QT interval are uncommon or rare in children and adolescents treated with atomoxetine, based on data from the predefined search and from the European SPC. Overall, the data that we assessed from our search do not suggest that associations exist between atomoxetine and suicidality or seizures. The data also suggest that an association may not exist between atomoxetine and aggression/hostility. While atomoxetine may affect the cardiovascular system, the data suggest these effects are not clinically significant in most patients. Reductions in growth appear to be reversible in the long term.

Atomoxetine could improve intra-individual variability in drug-naïve adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder comparably with methylphenidate: A head-to-head randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Intra-individual variability in reaction time (IIV-RT) is common in individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It can be improved by stimulants. However, the effects of atomoxetine on IIV-RT are inconclusive. We aimed to investigate the effects of atomoxetine on IIV-RT, and directly compared its efficacy with methylphenidate in adults with ADHD.

METHODS

An 8-10 week, open-label, head-to-head, randomized clinical trial was conducted in 52 drug-naïve adults with ADHD, who were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: immediate-release methylphenidate (n=26) thrice daily (10-20 mg per dose) and atomoxetine once daily (n=26) (0.5-1.2 mg/kg/day). IIV-RT, derived from the Conners' continuous performance test (CCPT), was represented by the Gaussian (reaction time standard error, RTSE) and ex-Gaussian models (sigma and tau). Other neuropsychological functions, including response errors and mean of reaction time, were also measured. Participants received CCPT assessments at baseline and week 8-10 (60.4±6.3 days).

RESULTS

We found comparable improvements in performances of CCPT between the immediate-release methylphenidate- and atomoxetine-treated groups. Both medications significantly improved IIV-RT in terms of reducing tau values with comparable efficacy. In addition, both medications significantly improved inhibitory control by reducing commission errors.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide evidence to support that atomoxetine could improve IIV-RT and inhibitory control, of comparable efficacy with immediate-release methylphenidate, in drug-naïve adults with ADHD. Shared and unique mechanisms underpinning these medication effects on IIV-RT awaits further investigation.

Pharmacological treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: assessing outcomes

A substantial body of evidence has supported the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatment available for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). There is increasing agreement that the important treatment outcomes for ADHD extend beyond improvement in core symptoms and that a more generic (or global) concept of remission is the overarching goal of treatment. However, there is no consensus on the best definition of remission or on how best to conceptualize and measure broader treatment outcomes. In this article, we provide an overview of the various methods and approaches to measuring treatment outcomes for ADHD with respect to symptoms, impairment, quality of life, adverse events and safety as well as cognition. We will describe the ways that they may be used within routine clinical practice and think ahead about the kinds of studies that are required to move the field forward.

Comparative efficacy of methylphenidate and atomoxetine in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to directly compare efficacy of atomoxetine and methylphenidate in treatment of children and adolescents 6- 18 years.

METHODS

All published, randomized, open label or double blind trials, comparing the efficacy of methylphenidate with atomoxetine in treatment of children diagnosed with ADHD, using DSM-IV criteria were included in this study; ADHD Rating Scale-IV-Parent Version: Investigator Administered and Scored (ADHDRS) scores was used. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used as a measure of effect size.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included with a total of 2,772 participants. The meta-analysis did not find a significant difference in the efficacy between methylphenidate and atomoxetine (SMD= 0.09, 95% CI -0.06, 0.25) (Z= 1.18, p= 0.24). Sub group analysis showed a significant standardized mean difference favoring OROS methylphenidate (SMD= 0.31, 95% CI 0.16, 0.47 (Z= 3.91, p< 0.0001); immediate release methylphenidate was not superior to atomoxetine (SMD= -0.05, 95% CI -0.20, 0.10) (Z= 0.68, p= 0.49). Open label trials did not make a difference in the standardized mean difference (SMD= 0.10, 95% CI -0.02, 0.23) (Z= 1.17, p= 0.09). There was significant heterogeneity among the studies (p= 0.003, I2= 63%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that heterogeneity was because of the open label trials (p= 0.009, I2= 79%).

CONCLUSION

Atomoxetine and methylphenidate showed comparable efficacy in the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD. However, Osmotic (Controlled) Release Oral (Delivery) System (OROS) methylphenidate is more effective than atomoxetine in treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents that is suggested as a first-line treatment in ADHD. Moreover, comparing the immediate release (IR) methylphenidate to atomoxetine did not lead to the benefit of IR methylphenidate.

The influence of paroxetine on the pharmacokinetics of atomoxetine and its main metabolite

Background and aims

To evaluate the effects of paroxetine on the pharmacokinetics of atomoxetine and its main metabolite, 4-hydroxyatomoxetine-O-glucuronide, after coadministration of atomoxetine and paroxetine in healthy volunteers.

Methods

22 healthy volunteers, extensive metabolizers, took part in this open-label, non-randomized, clinical trial. The study consisted of two periods: Reference, when a single oral dose of 25 mg atomoxetine was administrated to each subject and Test, when 25 mg atomoxetine and 20 mg paroxetine were coadministered. Between the two periods, the volunteers received an oral daily dose of 20–40 mg paroxetine, for 6 days. Atomoxetine and 4-hydroxyatomoxetine-O-glucuronide plasma concentrations were determined within the first 48 hours following drug administration. The pharmacokinetic parameters of both compounds were assessed using a non-compartmental method and the analysis of variance aimed at identifying any statistical significant differences between the pharmacokinetic parameters of atomoxetine and its main metabolite, corresponding to each study period.

Results

Paroxetine modified the pharmacokinetic parameters of atomoxetine. C_max increased from 221.26±94.93 to 372.53±128.28 ng/mL, while AUC_0-t and AUC_0-∞ also increased from 1151.19±686.52 to 6452.37±3388.76 ng*h/mL, and from 1229.15±751.04 to 7111.74±4195.17 ng*h/mL respectively. The main metabolite pharmacokinetics was also influenced by paroxetine intake, namely C_max, AUC_0-t and AUC_0-∞ decreased from 688.76±270.27 to 131.01±100.43 ng*h/mL, and from 4810.93±845.06 to 2606.04±923.88 and from 4928.55±853.25 to 3029.82 ±941.84 respectively.

Conclusions

Multiple-dose paroxetine intake significantly influenced atomoxetine and its active metabolite pharmacokinetics, causing a 5.8-fold increased exposure to atomoxetine and 1.6-fold reduced exposure to 4-hydroxyatomoxetine-O-glucuronide.

Functional outcomes from a head-to-head, randomized, double-blind trial of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and an inadequate response to methylphenidate

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with functional impairments in multiple domains of patients' lives. A secondary objective of this randomized, active-controlled, head-to-head, double-blind, dose-optimized clinical trial was to compare the effects of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and atomoxetine (ATX) on functional impairment in children and adolescents with ADHD. Patients aged 6-17 years with an ADHD Rating Scale IV total score ≥ 28 and an inadequate response to methylphenidate treatment (judged by investigators) were randomized (1:1) to once-daily LDX or ATX for 9 weeks. Parents/guardians completed the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P) at baseline and at week 9 or early termination. p values were nominal and not corrected for multiple comparisons. Of 267 randomized patients, 200 completed the study (LDX 99, ATX 101). At baseline, mean WFIRS-P total score in the LDX group was 0.95 [standard deviation (SD) 0.474; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87, 1.03] and in the ATX group was 0.91 (0.513; 0.82, 1.00). Scores in all WFIRS-P domains improved from baseline to endpoint in both groups, with least-squares mean changes in total score of -0.35 (95% CI -0.42, -0.29) for LDX and -0.27 (-0.33, -0.20) for ATX. The difference between LDX and ATX was statistically significant (p < 0.05) for the Learning and School (effect size of LDX vs ATX, 0.43) and Social Activities (0.34) domains and for total score (0.27). Both treatments reduced functional impairment in children and adolescents with ADHD; LDX was statistically significantly more effective than ATX in two of six domains and in total score.

A critical appraisal of atomoxetine in the management of ADHD

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioral disorder beginning in childhood and often continuing into adulthood. A wealth of data shows that ADHD symptoms respond well to pharmacological treatment. Stimulant medications, including amphetamine and methylphenidate, are most commonly used to treat ADHD. However, with the approval of atomoxetine (Strattera^®, [ATX]) by the US Food and Drug Administration in late 2002, an effective non-stimulant option became available. The US Food and Drug Administration approved ATX for the treatment of ADHD in children, adolescents, and adults. Although the effect size of ATX is generally lower than that of stimulants, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Practice Parameter for the treatment of ADHD lists ATX as a first-line treatment option. ATX is widely prescribed and accounted for 6% of the prescriptions of ADHD visits in the US in 2010. Numerous trials have found that ATX improves quality of life and emotional lability in addition to core ADHD symptoms. Although some improvement may be seen in a patient as early as one week after the initiation of treatment, ATX generally takes longer to have a full effect. The median time to response using 25% improvement in ADHD symptoms in pooled trials was 3.7 weeks. Data from these trials indicate that the probability of symptom improvement may continue to increase up to 52 weeks after treatment is initiated. ATX has been shown to be safe and effective in combination with stimulants. It has also been studied systematically in subjects with ADHD and comorbid oppositional defiant disorder, anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders. The mechanism of action of ATX, its efficacy, and adverse events reported in trials is reviewed.

Does intensive multimodal treatment for maternal ADHD improve the efficacy of parent training for children with ADHD? A randomized controlled multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

This is the first randomized controlled multicenter trial to evaluate the effect of two treatments of maternal attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on response to parent-child training targeting children's external psychopathology.

METHODS

Mother-child dyads (n = 144; ADHD according to DSM-IV; children: 73.5% males, mean age 9.4 years) from five specialized university outpatient units in Germany were centrally randomized to multimodal maternal ADHD treatment [group psychotherapy plus open methylphenidate medication; treatment group (TG): n = 77] or to clinical management [supportive counseling without psychotherapy or psychopharmacotherapy; control group (CG): n = 67]. After 12 weeks, the maternal ADHD treatment was supplemented by individual parent-child training for all dyads. The primary outcome was a change in the children's externalizing symptom scores (investigator blinded to the treatment assignment) from baseline to the end of the parent-child training 6 months later. Maintenance therapy continued for another 6 months. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed within a linear regression model, controlling for baseline and center after multiple imputations of missing values.

RESULTS

Exactly, 206 dyads were assessed for eligibility, 144 were randomized, and 143 were analyzed (TG: n = 77; CG: n = 66). After 6 months, no significant between-group differences were found in change scores for children's externalizing symptoms (adjusted mean TG-mean CG=1.1, 95% confidence interval -0.5-2.7; p = .1854), although maternal psychopathology improved more in the TG. Children's externalizing symptom scores improved from a mean of 14.8 at baseline to 11.4 (TG) and 10.3 (CG) after 6 months and to 10.8 (TG) and 10.1 (CG) after 1 year. No severe harms related to study treatments were found, but adverse events were more frequent in TG mothers than in CG mothers.

CONCLUSIONS

The response in children's externalizing psychopathology did not differ between maternal treatment groups. However, multimodal treatment was associated with more improvement in maternal ADHD. Child and maternal treatment gains were stable (CCT-ISRCTN73911400).