Atomoxetine for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Effects of Pharmacological Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder on Quality of Life

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the effect of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication on quality of life (QoL), and to understand whether this effect differs between stimulants and non-stimulants.

METHOD

From the dataset of a published network meta-analysis (Cortese et al., 20181), updated on 27th February 2023 (https://med-adhd.org/), we identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ADHD medications for individuals aged 6 years or more with a diagnosis of ADHD based on the DSM (from third to fifth editions) or the International Classification of Diseases (ICD; ninth or tenth revision), reporting data on QoL (measured with a validated scale). The risk of bias for each RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2. Multi-level meta-analytic models were conducted with R 4.3.1.

RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs (5,388 participants in total; 56% randomized to active medication) in the meta-analyses. We found that amphetamines (Hedge's g = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.08, 0.94), methylphenidate (0.38; 0.23, 0.54), and atomoxetine (0.30; 0.19, 0.40) were significantly more efficacious than placebo in improving QoL in people with ADHD, with moderate effect size. For atomoxetine, these effects were not moderated by the length of intervention, and did not differ between children/adolescents and adults.

CONCLUSION

In addition to being efficacious in reducing ADHD core symptom severity, both stimulant and non-stimulant medications are efficacious in improving QoL in people with ADHD, albeit with lower effect sizes. Future research should explore whether, and to what degree, combining pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions is likely to further improve QoL in people with ADHD.

STUDY PREREGISTRATION INFORMATION

Effects of pharmacological treatment for ADHD on quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis; https://osf.io/;qvgps.

Psychopharmacological treatment of disruptive behavior in youths: systematic review and network meta-analysis

To conduct a systematic review of the comparative efficacy of various psychotropic medications for the treatment of disruptive behavior (DBs) in youths. To this aim, we systematically reviewed randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of various psychotropic medications targeting symptoms of DBs and applied network meta-analysis to investigate their relative efficacy. Fifty-five RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria were selected. To predict and interpret relative treatment efficacy, we compared the efficacy of various psychotropic medications prescribed for DB symptoms based on their mechanism of action. Network meta-analysis revealed that for reducing DBs, second-generation antipsychotics, stimulants, and non-stimulant ADHD medications were more efficacious than placebo, and second-generation antipsychotics were the most efficacious. The dopaminergic modulation of top-down inhibitory process by these medications is discussed in this review. This study offers information on the relative efficacy of various psychotropic medications for the treatment of DB, and insight into a potential neurobiological underpinning for those symptoms. It also illustrates the potential utility of these neurobiological mechanisms as a target for future treatment studies.

Exploring the Effects of Pharmacological, Psychosocial, and Alternative/Complementary Interventions in Children and Adolescents With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Meta-Regression Approach

BACKGROUND

There have been various therapies for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but the previous meta-analysis of ADHD efficacy remains unclear. This study aims to systemically meta-regress the effect sizes (ES) of psychostimulant pharmacotherapy (methylphenidate and lisdexamfetamine), non-stimulant pharmacotherapy (atomoxetine and alpha-2 agonists), psychosocial therapy (parental behavioral therapy [PBT]), combination therapy (psychostimulant plus PBT), and alternative/complementary interventions to determine the right treatment for ADHD.

METHODS

We searched various ADHD interventions from the MEDLINE and PubMed databases (National Center for Biotechnology Information) between January 1, 1980, and July 30, 2018. Following the meta-analysis of random effects, the meta-regression analyses were used to explore factors potentially influencing treatment efficacy. The confounding variables included type of treatment, type of study, age, type of symptom scale used, and year of publication.

RESULTS

A total of 107 trials (n = 9883 participants) were included. After adjustment, compared with the psychostimulant therapy (28 trial, 2134 participants), non-stimulant pharmacotherapy (28 trials, 4991 participants) and alternative/complement intervention (25 trials, 1195 participants) were less effective by the ES of -0.384 (P = .004) and -0.419 (P = .028), respectively. However, compared with psychostimulant, PBT (19 trials, 1122 participants; ES = -0.308, P = .095) and the combination of psychostimulant and PBT (7 trials, 441participants; ES = -0.196, P = .209) did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychostimulant therapy surpassed non-stimulant pharmacotherapy and alternative/complement intervention. Psychostimulant therapy, PBT, and the combination of psychostimulant therapy and PBT appear to be similar in efficacy according to this meta-regression.

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

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Supplementary Information

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

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.

Comparative Efficacy of Methylphenidate and Atomoxetine on Emotional and Behavioral Problems in Youths with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Methylphenidate and atomoxetine are efficacious in reducing core symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but little is known about their efficacy in improving emotional/behavioral problems among youths with ADHD.

METHODS

One hundred sixty drug-naïve youths with DSM-IV-defined ADHD, aged 7-16 years, were recruited and randomly assigned to osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-methylphenidate; n = 80) and atomoxetine (n = 80) in a 24-week, open-label, head-to-head clinical trial. The primary efficacy measure was parent-reported Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), and the secondary efficacy measures included Youth Self Report (YSR) and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), which was based on the ratings of parents, teachers, and subjects.

RESULTS

For CBCL, both methylphenidate and atomoxetine groups showed significant improvement in all scores at weeks 8 and 24 except Somatic Complaints in the atomoxetine group. For SDQ, both treatment groups showed significant improvements in the Hyperactive and Conduct subscales for parent ratings, and the Externalizing subscale for teacher ratings at week 24. Methylphenidate was associated with greater improvements in Aggressive Behavior and Somatic Complaints of CBCL and in Conduct subscale of self-reported SDQ at week 24 compared with atomoxetine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide evidence to support that both methylphenidate and atomoxetine were effective in improving a wide range of emotional/behavioral problems in youths with ADHD after 24 weeks of treatment, with greater improvement in aggressive behavior, somatic complaints, and conduct problems in the methylphenidate group.

[A strategy for increasing the efficiency of psychopharmacological treatment of hyperkinetic behavior disorder with pantogam]

AIM

To assess short-term efficiency of hopantenic acid (pantogam) in the treatment of children with hyperkinetic behavior disorder, in whom the previous treatment with atomoxetine was not efficient.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-four children (16 boys and 8 girls), aged 6-11 years, diagnosed with hyperkinetic behavior disorder (ICD-10 item F90.1) were enrolled in this open non-randomized study.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

A short-term positive therapeutic dynamics was observed when introducing hopantenic acid (pantogam) augmentation strategy to existing atomoxetine therapy. Qualitative improvements in children's state were found not only in the ability to control symptoms but also in their social functioning levels and quality of life. The proposed therapeutic strategy can help to improve treatment outcomes for children with certain clinical forms of hyperkinetic behavior disorder.

Atomoxetine treatment for children and adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): a comprehensive meta-analysis of outcomes on parent-rated core symptomatology

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) impacts a significant number of children and adolescents and often leads to deleterious functional impairment. Psychostimulant medication has historically been the first line of pharmacological intervention, though recent years have seen greater attention paid to non-stimulant alternatives. The objective of the present study was to conduct the most comprehensive meta-analysis to date evaluating the efficacy of atomoxetine in reducing core symptomatology of ADHD according to parent report. Selection criteria were applied, and studies were located by searching electronic databases, review of reference sections, and contact with expert researchers; article searching began on 10/01/2013, and the final search was conducted on 09/01/2014. A total of 42 studies met inclusion criteria-33 with control groups and 9 without-for a total sample of 8398 individuals. For those receiving atomoxetine, the summary pre-post (e.g., standardized mean gain) effect size estimate was 1.37 (95% CI [1.24, 1.51], p < .001); atomoxetine was found to statistically significantly outperform control conditions overall (Z = 4.07, p < .001), though results differed by the type of control group; for instance, when comparing atomoxetine to alternative medications as controls, significant differences were no longer present. The non-stimulant atomoxetine led to significant improvement in core ADHD symptomatology and should be considered as a viable pharmacological treatment option for ADHD.

A review of the efficacy of atomoxetine in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adult patients with common comorbidities

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neuropsychiatric disorder that is often diagnosed during childhood, but has also increasingly been recognized to occur in adults. Importantly, up to 52% of children (including adolescents) and 87% of adults with ADHD also have a comorbid psychiatric disorder. The presence of a comorbid disorder has the potential to impact diagnosis and could affect treatment outcomes. Atomoxetine is a nonstimulant treatment for ADHD. Despite numerous published studies regarding efficacy of atomoxetine in the treatment of ADHD in patients with comorbid disorders, there is limited information about the impact of individual common comorbid disorders on the efficacy of atomoxetine for ADHD, especially with regard to adults. Moreover, a cumulative review and assessment of these studies has not been conducted. For this reason, we performed a literature review to find, identify, and cumulatively review clinical studies that examined the efficacy of atomoxetine in the treatment of patients with ADHD and comorbid psychiatric disorders. We found a total of 50 clinical studies (37 in children; 13 in adults) that examined the efficacy of atomoxetine in patients with ADHD and a comorbid disorder. The comorbidities that were studied in children or in adults included anxiety, depression, and substance use disorder. Overall, the presence of comorbidity did not adversely impact the efficacy of atomoxetine in treatment of ADHD symptoms in both patient populations. In the studies identified and assessed in this review, atomoxetine did not appear to exacerbate any of the comorbid conditions and could, therefore, be an important therapy choice for the treatment of ADHD in the presence of comorbid disorders.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Different Interventions in Children and Adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

BACKGROUND

Our study is an analysis of multiple publications involving assessing the comparable efficacy and tolerability of six interventions, which are lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), atomoxetine (ATX), methylphenidate (MPH), clonidine hydrochloride (CLON), guanfacine extended release (GXR), and bupropion, for young patients (6-18 years old) suffering from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

A conventional meta-analysis (MA) was performed to give direct comparisons and a network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to show the combination of direct and indirect evidence. Ranking preference for all the interventions under a certain outcome was given by the surface of cumulative ranking curve area (SUCRA).

RESULTS

Overall, 15,025 participants from 73 studies were involved in our analysis. In the pairwise MA, LDX was associated with less withdrawal than ATX for lack of efficacy. MPH showed less effectiveness than LDX according to ADHD Rating Scale score. Based on the analysis of our NMA, significant results of efficacy that LDX is a competitive drug were observed when evaluating LDX in comparison with other drugs except for CLON. ATX and GXR presented higher rates of abdominal pain morbidity versus inactive treatment.

CONCLUSION

The stimulants LDX and MPH are still highly recommended because they are highly effective and are tolerated well by patients. Among the non-stimulants, CLON can be taken into consideration for its appreciable effectiveness and tolerability. ATX and GXR can be seen as moderate choices.

Efficacy of atomoxetine in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in patients with common comorbidities in children, adolescents and adults: a review

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed mental health disorders and is associated with higher incidence of comorbid oppositional or conduct, mood, anxiety, pervasive developmental, and substance-use disorders. Comorbid mental health conditions may alter the presence of symptoms and treatment of ADHD. Atomoxetine (ATX), a nonstimulant medication for the treatment of ADHD, may be prescribed for individuals with ADHD and comorbid conditions despite some risk for certain undesirable side effects and lower effectiveness for the treatment of ADHD than stimulants. In this paper, we review studies utilizing randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) as well as within-subject designs to determine the effectiveness of ATX in the treatment of children and adults with ADHD and comorbid conditions. The current review uses an expanded methodology beyond systematic review of randomized controlled trials in order to improve generalizability of results to real-world practice. A total of 24 articles published from 2007 to 2015 were reviewed, including 14 RCTs: n = 1348 ATX, and n = 832 placebo. The majority of studies show that ATX is effective in the treatment of ADHD symptoms for individuals with ADHD and comorbid disorders. Cohen's d effect sizes (ES) for improvement in ADHD symptoms and behaviors range from 0.47 to 2.21. The effectiveness of ATX to improve symptoms specific to comorbidity varied by type but appeared to be most effective for diminishing the presence of symptoms for those with comorbid anxiety, ES range of 0.40 to 1.51, and oppositional defiant disorder, ES range of 0.52 to 1.10. There are mixed or limited results for individuals with ADHD and comorbid substance-use disorders, autism spectrum disorders, dyslexia or reading disorder, depression, bipolar disorder, and Tourette syndrome. Results from this review suggest that ATX is effective in the treatment of some youth and adults with ADHD and comorbid disorders, and may be a treatment option in these patients.

Behavioral and electrophysiological indicators of auditory distractibility in children with ADHD and comorbid ODD

Involuntary switching of attention to distracting sounds was studied by measuring effects of these events on auditory discrimination performance and event-related brain potentials (ERPs) in 6-11-year-old boys with Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and comorbid Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) and in age-matched controls. The children were instructed to differentiate between two animal calls by pressing one response button, for example, to a dog bark and another button to a cat mew. These task-relevant sounds were presented from one of two loudspeakers in front of the child, and there were occasional task-irrelevant changes in the sound location, that is, the loudspeaker. In addition, novel sounds (e.g., a sound of hammer, rain, or car horn) unrelated to the task were presented from a loudspeaker behind the child. The percentage of correct responses was lower for target sounds preceded by a novel sound than for targets not preceded by such sound in the ADHD group, but not in the control group. In both groups, a biphasic positive P3a response was observed in ERPs to the novel sounds. The later part of the P3a appeared to continue longer over the frontal scalp areas in the ADHD group than in the controls presumably because a reorienting negativity (RON) ERP response following the P3a was smaller in the ADHD group than in the control group. This suggests that the children with ADHD had problems in reorienting their attention to the current task after a distracting novel sound leading to deterioration of performance in this task. The present study also indicates that children with ADHD and comorbid ODD show same kind of distractibility as found in previous studies for children with ADHD without systematic comorbid ODD.

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Guanfacine Extended Release in Adolescents With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Despite the continuity of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) into adolescence, little is known regarding use of nonstimulants to treat ADHD in adolescents. This phase 3 trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of guanfacine extended release (GXR) in adolescents with ADHD.

METHOD

This 13-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated once-daily GXR (1-7 mg per day) in adolescents with ADHD aged 13 to 17 years. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score; key secondary endpoints included scores from the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S), and Learning and School domain and Family domain scores from the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P) at week 13.

RESULTS

A total of 314 participants were randomized (GXR, n = 157; placebo, n = 157). The majority of participants received optimal doses of 3, 4, 5, or 6 mg (30 [22.9%], 26 [19.8%], 27 [20.6%], or 24 [18.3%] participants, respectively), with 46.5% of participants receiving an optimal dose above the currently approved maximum dose limit of 4 mg. Participants receiving GXR showed improvement in ADHD-RS-IV total score compared with placebo (least-squares mean score change, -24.55 [GXR] versus -18.53 [placebo]; effect size, 0.52; p <.001). More participants on GXR also showed significant improvement in CGI-S scores compared with placebo (50.6% versus 36.1%; p = .010). There was no statistically significant difference between treatments at week 13 in the 2 WFIRS-P domains. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate, with sedation-related events reported most commonly.

CONCLUSION

GXR was associated with statistically significant improvements in ADHD symptoms in adolescents. GXR was well tolerated, with no new safety signals reported.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Dose-Optimization in Adolescents Aged 13-17 Diagnosed With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Using Extended-Release Guanfacine HCl; http://ClinicalTrials.gov/; NCT01081132.

Pharmacological Management of Pediatric Patients with Comorbid Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Oppositional Defiant Disorder

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common developmental neurobiological condition of childhood characterized by age-inappropriate degrees of hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattention to tasks requiring sustained vigilance. Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is an externalizing behavior disorder characterized by difficulties with emotional and behavioral regulation that frequently brings the child into conflict with authority figures. In the clinical setting, ODD is the most common ADHD comorbidity. The combination portends more severe symptom severity, daily impairment, and a more at-risk prognosis than either disorder alone. We briefly review the literature on the characteristics and treatment of the ADHD and ODD child. A clinical approach to evaluation and treatment of ADHD and ODD is then presented. This approach emphasizes the importance of child and parent psychoeducation about the two disorders alone and in combination, the importance of behavioral management therapy approaches, the possible need for school and academic supports, and the decision to use evidence-based stimulant or non-stimulant ADHD medications depending on symptom severity combined with child and parental wishes and choice.

Does Comorbid Disruptive Behavior Modify the Effects of Atomoxetine on ADHD Symptoms as Measured by a Continuous Performance Test and a Motion Tracking Device?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the reduction of ADHD symptoms under atomoxetine in patients with and without comorbid oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) or conduct disorder (CD) using a computer-based continuous performance test (cb-CPT) combined with an infrared motion tracking (MT) device.

METHOD

Secondary analysis of a placebo-controlled study in ADHD patients (6-12 years old) treated with atomoxetine (target dose: 1.2 mg/kg per day). Cb-CPT/MT scores were analyzed using ANCOVA (last observation carried forward [LOCF]).

RESULTS

The data (N = 125) suggested a more pronounced atomoxetine effect in the group with comorbid ODD/CD as measured by all cb-CPT/MT parameters except for "normalized variation of reaction time" (nVRT).

CONCLUSION

The results showed that atomoxetine reduced ADHD severity as measured by cb-CPT and MT parameters regardless of whether comorbid ODD/CD was present. The treatment effect of atomoxetine on hyperactivity appears to be more pronounced in the subgroup of patients with comorbid ODD/CD than in the subgroup without this comorbidity.

Comparative efficacy of methylphenidate and atomoxetine in oppositional defiant disorder comorbid with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

BACKGROUND

Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is frequently comorbid with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and is associated with substantial functional impairments. Methylphenidate and atomoxetine are well-established drugs for the management of ADHD. Some studies from Western countries have reported these drugs to be effective in the management of ODD comorbid with ADHD. This study aimed to assess if methylphenidate and atomoxetine are efficacious in treating Indian children with ODD comorbid with ADHD.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In this prospective, open-label study, 37 patients of age 6-14 years with a diagnosis of ODD comorbid with ADHD randomly received either methylphenidate (dose 0.2-1 mg/kg/day) or atomoxetine (dose 0.5-1.2 mg/kg/day) for 8 weeks. Improvements in ADHD and ODD symptoms were assessed using Vanderbilt ADHD diagnostic parent rating scale (VADPRS).

RESULTS

At 8 weeks, there were statistically significant improvements in both ADHD and ODD symptoms in both methylphenidate and atomoxetine groups, as per VADPRS. The improvements produced and tolerability was comparable in the two groups. 80% of the patients from methylphenidate group and 64.3% patients from atomoxetine group ceased to fulfill the criteria for the presence of ODD at 8 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Methylphenidate and atomoxetine are effective in the treatment of ODD comorbid with ADHD in short duration.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of atomoxetine, lisdexamfetamine, bupropion and methylphenidate in treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis with focus on bupropion

OBJECTIVES

There is a lack of comparative effectiveness research among attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) drugs in terms of efficacy and acceptability, where bupropion is compared with atomoxetine, lisdexamfetamine and methylphenidate. The main aim of this work was to compare the efficacy and acceptability of these drugs in children and adolescents using a metaanalysis.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted to identify double-blind, placebo-controlled, noncrossover studies of ADHD. PubMed/Medline and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched. Comparative drug efficacy to placebo was calculated based on the standardized mean difference (SMD), while the comparative drug acceptability (all cause discontinuation) to placebo was estimated on the odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

In total 28 trials were included in the meta-analysis. Efficacy in reducing ADHD symptoms compared to placebo was small for bupropion (SMD=-0.32, 95% CI; -0.69, 0.05), while modest efficacy was shown for atomoxetine (SMD=-0.68, 95% CI; -0.76, -0.59) and methylphenidate (SMD=-0.75, 95% CI; -0.98, -0.52) and high efficacy was observed for lisdexamfetamine (SMD=-1.28, 95% CI; -1.84, -0.71). Compared to placebo treatment discontinuation was statistically significantly lower for methylphenidate (OR=0.35, 95% CI; 0.24, 0.52), while it was not significantly different for atomoxetine (OR=0.91, 95% CI; 0.66, 1.24), lisdexamfetamine (OR=0.60, 95% CI, 0.22, 1.65), and bupropion (OR=1.64, 95% CI; 0.5, 5.43).

LIMITATIONS

The heterogeneity was high, except in atomoxetine trials. The crossover studies were excluded. The effect sizes at specific time points were not computed. Studies with comorbid conditions, except those reporting on oppositional defiant disorder, were also excluded. All studies involving MPH were combined.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that lisdexamfetamine has the best benefit risk balance and has promising potential for treating children and adolescents with ADHD. More research is needed for a better clinical evaluation of bupropion.

The efficacy of atomoxetine for the treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a comprehensive review of over a decade of clinical research

Atomoxetine was first licensed to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents in the US in 2002. The aim of this paper is to comprehensively review subsequent publications addressing the efficacy of atomoxetine in 6- to 18-year-olds with ADHD. We identified 125 eligible papers using a predefined search strategy. Overall, these papers demonstrate that atomoxetine is an effective treatment for the core ADHD symptoms (effect sizes 0.6-1.3, vs. placebo, at 6-18 weeks), and improves functional outcomes and quality of life, in various pediatric populations with ADHD (i.e., males/females, patients with co-morbidities, children/adolescents, and with/without prior exposure to other ADHD medications). Initial responses to atomoxetine may be apparent within 1 week of treatment, but can take longer (median 23 days in a 6-week study; n=72). Responses often build gradually over time, and may not be robust until after 3 months. A pooled analysis of six randomized placebo-controlled trials (n=618) indicated that responses at 4 weeks may predict response at 6-9 weeks, although another pooled analysis of open-label data (n=338) suggests that the probability of a robust response to atomoxetine [≥40% decrease in ADHD-Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) scores] may continue to increase beyond 6-9 weeks. Atomoxetine may demonstrate similar efficacy to methylphenidate, particularly immediate-release methylphenidate, although randomized controlled trials are generally limited by short durations (3-12 weeks). In conclusion, notwithstanding these positive findings, before initiating treatment with atomoxetine, it is important that the clinician sets appropriate expectations for the patient and their family with regard to the likelihood of a gradual response, which often builds over time.

Life-threatening QT prolongation in a boy with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder on atomoxetine

As a noncentral nerve-stimulating agent blocking reuptake of noradrenalin, atomoxetine is used for treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Because it has less potential for addiction and abuse and improves core symptoms of ADHD, it is commonly prescribed in many children and adolescents internationally. Its common side effects include headache, abdominal pain, decreased appetite, and weight loss. In addition, cardiac effects such as tachycardia and hypertension have also been reported. In this case report, an 11-year-old Japanese boy with a past medical history of ADHD on atomoxetine for more than 2 years presented with a loss of consciousness. Initial electrocardiogram (ECG) showed significant QT prolongation, and 9 h later, it worsened, along with bradycardia, inversed T waves, and multiple premature ventricle contractions (PVCs). Transthoracic echocardiography showed akinesis with dilation and systolic ballooning of the left ventricle's (LV) apical segment (Takotsubo cardiomyopathy). At that point, bisoprolol and transcutaneous pacing were started. After 5 days, transcutaneous pacing was discontinued due to improvement in his cardiac rhythm. He continued to remain asymptomatic for the next year, while his QT interval returned to normal. Conclusion: This case report suggests a serious side effect of atomoxetine, and to avoid life-threatening cardiovascular events for children and adolescents with ADHD on atomoxetine, prior screening for cardiovascular conditions by ECG with close monitoring is necessary.

Meta-analysis of suicide-related behavior or ideation in child, adolescent, and adult patients treated with atomoxetine

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis examined suicide-related events in the acute phases of double-blind, placebo-controlled atomoxetine trials in pediatric and adult patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

A total of 3883 pediatric and 3365 adult patients were included. Potential events were identified from the adverse events database using a text-string search. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (MHRR) were calculated for potential suicide-related events categorized according to United States Food and Drug Administration defined codes.

RESULTS

In this data set, no completed suicides were reported in the pediatric or adult populations. One pediatric (attempted suicide) (and no adult patient events) was categorized as suicidal behavior in the atomoxetine group. The frequency of combined suicidal behavior or ideation with atomoxetine treatment was 0.37% in pediatric patients (vs. 0.07% with placebo) and 0.11% in adults (vs. 0.12% with placebo) and the risk compared with placebo was not statistically significant (MHRR=1.57; p=0.42 and MHRR=0.96; p=0.96, respectively). In pediatric patients, suicidal ideation only was reported more frequently compared with placebo (MHRR=1.63; p=0.41).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall in this data set, no completed suicides and 1 pediatric patient suicidal behavior event were reported in atomoxetine-treated pediatric and adult patients. Suicidal ideation was uncommon among atomoxetine-treated pediatric and adult patients, although it was reported more frequently in atomoxetine-treated pediatric patients compared with placebo; the reporting rate difference was not statistically significant. The MHRR of suicidal ideation was consistent with a previous meta-analysis of similar design. There was no evidence of increased risk for suicidal behavior in atomoxetine-treated pediatric or adult patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . The data reported are from an analysis of 23 pediatric and 9 adult clinical trials completed between 1998 and 2011. Ten pediatric (Studies HFBD, HFBK, LYAC, LYAS, LYAT, LYAW, LYAX, LYBG, LYBI, and LYBP) and two adult trials (Studies LYAA and LYAO) were conducted before the requirement to post trials at initiation (ongoing as of July 1, 2005) and, therefore, do not have a registration number. The registration numbers for the 13 pediatric trials meeting this requirement are: NCT00191698 (LYBX), NCT00486122 (LYCC), NCT00386581 (LYCZ), NCT00485459 (S010), NCT00191542 (LY15), NCT00191295 (LYBC), NCT00191906 (LYCK), NCT00192023 (LYCY), NCT00191945 (LYDM), NCT00546910 (LYDV), NCT00406354 (LYDW), NCT00380692 (S017), and NCT00607919 (LYEB). For the seven adult trials, the registration numbers are: NCT00190931 (LYBV), NCT00190957 (LYBY), NCT00190736 (LYCU), NCT00190775 (LYCW), NCT00190879 (LYDQ), NCT00510276 (LYDZ), and NCT00962104 (LYEE).

Systematic evidence synthesis of treatments for ADHD in children and adolescents: indirect treatment comparisons of lisdexamfetamine with methylphenidate and atomoxetine

OBJECTIVE

Systematically review and synthesize the clinical evidence of treatments for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by indirectly comparing established treatments in the UK with a drug recently approved in Europe (lisdexamfetamine [LDX]).

POPULATION

children and adolescents.

SETTING

Europe. Comparators: methylphenidate (MPH), atomoxetine (ATX), and dexamphetamine (DEX). Electronic databases and relevant conference proceedings were searched for randomized, controlled clinical trials evaluating efficacy and safety of at least one of the comparators and LDX. Quality assessments for each included trial were performed using criteria recommended by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Network meta-analysis methods for dichotomous outcomes were employed to evaluate treatment efficacy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Response, as defined by either a reduction from baseline of at least 25% in the ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] total score or, separately, as assessed on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement [CGI-I] scale, and safety (all-cause withdrawals and withdrawal due to adverse events).

RESULTS

The systematic review found 32 trials for the meta-analysis, including data on LDX, ATX, and different formulations of MPH. No trials for DEX meeting the inclusion criteria were found. Sufficient data were identified for each outcome: ADHD-RS, 16 trials; CGI-I, 20 trials; all-cause withdrawals, 28 trials; and withdrawals due to adverse events, 27 trials. The relative probability of treatment response for CGI-I (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for ATX versus LDX was 0.65 (0.53-0.78); for long-acting MPH versus LDX, 0.82 (0.69-0.97); for intermediate release MPH versus LDX, 0.51 (0.40-0.65); and for short-acting MPH versus LDX, 0.62 (0.51-0.76). The relative probabilities of ADHD-RS treatment response also favored LDX.

CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of ADHD, the synthesis of efficacy data showed statistically significant better probabilities of response with LDX than for formulations of MPH or ATX. The analysis of safety data proved inconclusive due to low event rates. These results may be limited by the studies included, which only investigated the short-term efficacy of medications in patients without comorbid disorders.

Guanfacine extended release adjunctive to a psychostimulant in the treatment of comorbid oppositional symptoms in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of guanfacine extended release (GXR) adjunctive to a psychostimulant on oppositional symptoms in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-optimization study of GXR (1-4 mg/d) or placebo administered morning (a.m.) or evening (p.m.) adjunctive to psychostimulant was conducted in subjects ages 6-17 with suboptimal response to psychostimulant alone. Suboptimal response was defined as treatment with a stable dose of psychostimulant for ≥4 weeks with ADHD Rating Scale IV total score ≥24 and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness score ≥3, as well as investigator opinion. Primary efficacy and safety results have been reported previously. Secondary efficacy measures included the oppositional subscale of the Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised: Long Form (CPRS-R:L); these are reported herein.

RESULTS

Significant reductions from baseline to the final on-treatment assessment on the oppositional subscale of the CPRS-R:L were seen with GXR plus psychostimulant compared with placebo plus psychostimulant, both in the overall study population (placebo-adjusted least squares [LS] mean change from baseline to the final on-treatment assessment: GXR a.m.+psychostimulant, -2.4, p=0.001; GXR p.m.+psychostimulant, -2.2, p=0.003) as well as in the subgroup of subjects with significant baseline oppositional symptoms (GXR a.m.+psychostimulant, -3.6, p=0.001; GXR p.m.+psychostimulant, -2.7, p=0.013). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 77.3%, 76.3%, and 63.4% of subjects in the GXR a.m., GXR p.m., and placebo groups, respectively, in the overall study population.

CONCLUSIONS

GXR adjunctive to a psychostimulant significantly reduced oppositional symptoms compared with placebo plus a psychostimulant in subjects with ADHD and a suboptimal response to psychostimulant alone.

Does EEG-neurofeedback improve neurocognitive functioning in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder? A systematic review and a double-blind placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

The number of placebo-controlled randomized studies relating to EEG-neurofeedback and its effect on neurocognition in attention-deficient/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is limited. For this reason, a double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was designed to assess the effects of EEG-neurofeedback on neurocognitive functioning in children with ADHD, and a systematic review on this topic was performed.

METHODS

Forty-one children (8-15 years) with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of ADHD were randomly allocated to EEG-neurofeedback or placebo-neurofeedback treatment for 30 sessions, twice a week. Children were stratified by age, electrophysiological state of arousal, and medication use. Neurocognitive tests of attention, executive functioning, working memory, and time processing were administered before and after treatment. Researchers, teachers, children and their parents, with the exception of the neurofeedback-therapist, were all blind to treatment assignment. Outcome measures were the changes in neurocognitive performance before and after treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00723684.

RESULTS

No significant treatment effect on any of the neurocognitive variables was found. A systematic review of the current literature also did not find any systematic beneficial effect of EEG-neurofeedback on neurocognitive functioning.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the existing literature and this study fail to support any benefit of neurofeedback on neurocognitive functioning in ADHD, possibly due to small sample sizes and other study limitations.

Efficacy and safety of atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: results from a comprehensive meta-analysis and metaregression

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of atomoxetine (ATX) in pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHOD

Meta-analysis of all double-blind randomized controlled trials (DBRCTs) evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of ATX for ADHD. Pooled, random-effects analyses were conducted, calculating standardized mean difference (SMD), yielding effect sizes (ES), relative risk (RR), and number-needed-to-treat/harm (NNT/NNH).Moderator/mediator analyses were also conducted, including metaregression.

RESULTS

Across 25 DBRCTs (56 treatment arms, N = 3,928), ATX outperformed placebo regarding overall ADHD symptoms (ES = -0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.56 to -0.71, p < 0.0001), hyperactivity/impulsivity (ES = -0.67, CI = -0.53 to -0.81, p < 0.0001), and inattention (ES = -0.59, CI = -0.51 to -0.67, p < 0.0001). Altogether, 44.4% versus 21.4% of patients improved by ≥40% (NNT = 4), whereas 39.9% versus 65.9% improved by <25% (NNT = 4). Oppositional defiant disorder symptoms (ES = -0.33) and quality-of-life-related outcomes (ES = -0.48 to -0.25) improved somewhat less. A higher percentage of treatment-naïve patients moderated the efficacy of ATX for overall ADHD symptoms (p = 0.017). All-cause discontinuation with ATX was similar to that for placebo (p = 1.00), with lower discontinuation because of inefficacy (relative risk [RR] = 0.51, CI = 0.36-0.74, p < 0.0001, NNT = 34), but higher discontinuation because of adverse effects (AEs) (RR = 1.89, CI = 1.08-3.31, p = 0.03, NNH = 50) with ATX. At least 1 adverse effect (AE) (70.4% versus 56.1%, p < 0.01, NNH = 6) and ≥1 psychiatric AE (21.5% versus 7.4%, NNH = 7, p < 0.01) were more frequent with ATX, whereas serious AEs (1.5% versus 1.0%), aggression (7.5% versus 6.0%), and suicidal ideation (1.3% versus 0.9%) were not different from placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term ATX treatment is safe and superior to placebo for overall ADHD symptoms and key secondary outcomes, with a medium ES. However, a relevant patient subgroup (40%) continues to have significant symptomatology, requiring additional clinical attention.

Does stimulant pretreatment modify atomoxetine effects on core symptoms of ADHD in children assessed by quantitative measurement technology?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the reduction of ADHD symptoms under atomoxetine (ATX) in patients with and without pretreatment with a stimulant medication using a computer-based Continuous Performance Test (cb-CPT) combined with an infrared motion tracking (MT) device.

METHOD

Double-blind, placebo-controlled study in ADHD patients (6-12 years) treated with ATX (target dose = 1.2 mg/kg per day). The cb-CPT/MT scores were analyzed using ANCOVA (last observation carried forward).

RESULTS

Patient data (n = 125) suggested a differential ATX treatment effect between pretreated and stimulant-naïve patients in terms of three cb-CPT/MT parameters.

CONCLUSION

This secondary analysis provided evidence that ATX reduced ADHD symptom severity measured by cb-CPT/MT parameters regardless of stimulant pretreatment. A few differential effects were seen based on the cb-CPT/MT. However, no clear pattern could be identified and, overall, the observed differences have no larger clinical relevance. The ATX effect in this study seemed to be largely independent of any previous exposure to stimulants.

Pharmacological treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: functional outcomes in children and adolescents from non-Western countries

OBJECTIVE

Functional outcomes were measured over a 12-month period in children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) after they received monotherapy.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational, noninterventional study.

SETTING

Conducted in six non-Western countries.

PARTICIPANTS

Outpatients 6 to 17 years of age with a verified diagnosis of ADHD in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), together with their physicians, decided to initiate or switch treatment for ADHD. Patients were prescribed pharmacological monotherapy: methylphenidate (n=221), nootropic agents (n=91), or atomoxetine (n=234).

MEASUREMENTS

Patients were followed for changes in their functional status and quality of life, which were assessed with the Child Health and Illness Profile-Child Edition (CHIP-CE) Achievement domain.

RESULTS

At the end of the study, a mean improvement on the CHIP-CE Achievement domain score was observed for all countries and therapies except in Taiwan, where patients received atomoxetine, and in Lebanon, where patients received methylphenidate. No patient experienced a serious adverse event during the study. Four patients discontinued due to a treatment-emergent adverse event.

CONCLUSION

After 12 months of treatment, clinical and functional outcomes were improved in children and adolescents from non-Western countries who initiated and remained on their prescribed pharmacological monotherapy.

Combination use of atomoxetine hydrochloride and olanzapine in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid disruptive behavior disorder in children and adolescents 10-18 years of age

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the use of atomoxetine and olanzapine in combination to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid disruptive behaviors in children and adolescents 10-18 years of age.

METHODS

Eleven subjects ages 10-18 received open-label atomoxetine and olanzapine for a 10 week treatment period. Patients were assessed at baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 6 weeks, and 10 weeks (posttreatment). ADHD improvement was measured through the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) (Investigator and Parent ratings). Aggression was measured through the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS).

RESULTS

The combined use of atomoxetine and olanzapine resulted in statistically significant improvement in ADHD symptoms and overt aggression from baseline to posttreatment. As evidenced by a 33% reduction in symptoms on the ADHD-RS-I and the MOAS, 73% of patients were considered responders to ADHD treatment, whereas 55% responded to treatment for aggression. Both medications were generally well tolerated. Olanzapine treatment was associated with significant weight gain. Patients gained, on average, 3.9 kg. throughout the treatment period.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide initial evidence that combination use of atomoxetine and olanzapine for the treatment of ADHD and comorbid disruptive behaviors was effective in reducing ADHD symptoms and aggressive behavior in a 10 week treatment period.

Atomoxetine does not alter cocaine use in cocaine dependent individuals: double blind randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Cocaine abuse continues to be a significant public health problem associated with morbidity and mortality. To date, no pharmacotherapeutic approach has proven effective for treating cocaine use disorders. Preclinical and clinical evidence suggests that noradrenergic activity may play a role in mediating some effects of cocaine and may be a rational target for treatment.

METHODS

This double blind, placebo-controlled randomized, parallel group, 12-week outpatient clinical trial enrolled cocaine dependent individuals seeking treatment to examine the potential efficacy of the selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, atomoxetine (80 mg/day; p.o.; n = 25), compared to placebo (n = 25). Subjects were initially stratified on cocaine use (< 15 days or ≥ 15 days of the last 30), age and race using urn randomization. Attendance, medication adherence and study compliance were reinforced with contingency management, and weekly counseling was offered. An array of measures (vital signs, laboratory chemistries, cognitive and psychomotor tests, cocaine craving and urine samples for drug testing) was collected throughout the study and at follow-up.

RESULTS

Survival analysis revealed no differences in study retention between the two groups, with approximately 56% of subjects completing the 12-week study (Cox analysis χ(2) = .72; p = .40; Hazard Ratio 1.48 [95% CI 0.62-3.39]). GEE analysis of the proportion of urine samples positive for benzoylecgonine, a cocaine metabolite, revealed no differences between the atomoxetine and placebo groups (χ(2) = 0.2, p = .66; OR = 0.89 [95% CI 0.41-1.74]). Atomoxetine was generally well tolerated in this population.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide no support for the utility of atomoxetine in the treatment of cocaine dependence.

Drug therapy of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: current trends

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a developmental disorder with an age onset prior to 7 years. Children with ADHD have significantly lower ability to focus and sustain attention and also score higher on impulsivity and hyperactivity. Stimulants, such as methylphenidate, have remained the mainstay of ADHD treatment for decades with evidence supporting their use. However, recent years have seen emergence of newer drugs and drug delivery systems, like osmotic release oral systems and transdermal patches, to mention a few. The use of nonstimulant drugs like atomoxetine and various other drugs, such as α-agonists, and a few antidepressants, being used in an off-label manner, have added to the pharmacotherapy of ADHD. This review discusses current trends in drug therapy of ADHD and highlights the promise pharmacogenomics may hold in the future.

A 12-month prospective, observational study of treatment regimen and quality of life associated with ADHD in central and eastern europe and eastern Asia

OBJECTIVES

This prospective, observational, non-randomized study aimed to describe the relationship between treatment regimen prescribed and the quality of life (QoL) of ADHD patients in countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and Eastern Asia over 12 months.

METHODS

977 Male and female patients aged 6-17 years seeking treatment for symptoms of ADHD were assessed using the Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory-4 Parent Checklists, and the Clinical Global Impressions-ADHD-Severity scale. QoL was assessed using the Child Health and Illness Profile-Child Edition parent report form. Patients were grouped according to whether they were prescribed psycho- and/or pharmacotherapy (treatment) or not (no/'other' treatment).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed between cohorts (treatment vs. no/'other' treatment) in terms of change in QoL, although there was improvement over 12 months, with a greater improvement experienced by patients in the treatment cohort in both study regions (CEE and Eastern Asia). Psychoeducation/counselling and methylphenidate were the predominant ADHD treatments prescribed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although both treatment and no/'other' treatment cohorts showed improvements in mean QoL over 12 months, the difference was small and not statistically significant. A major limitation was the higher than anticipated number of patients switching treatments, predominantly from the no/'other' treatment cohort.

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

BACKGROUND

Psychostimulants and non stimulants are effective in the treatment of ADHD. Efficacy of both methylphenidate and atomoxetine has been established in placebo controlled trials. Direct comparison of efficacy is now possible due to availability of results from several head-to-head trials of these two medications.

METHODS

All published, randomized, open label or double blind trials, comparing efficacy of methylphenidate with atomoxetine, in treatment of ADHD in children, diagnosed using DSM-IV™ criteria were included. The outcome studied was ADHDRS-IVParent:Inv score. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used as a measure of effect size.

RESULTS

Nine randomized trials comparing methylphenidate and atomoxetine, with a total of 2762 participants were included. Meta-analysis did not find a significant difference in efficacy between methylphenidate and atomoxetine (SMD=0.09, 95% CI -0.08-0.26) (Z=1.06, p=0.29). Synthesis of data from eight trials found no significant difference in response rates (RR=0.93 95% CI 0.76-1.14, p=0.49). Sub group analysis showed a significant standardized mean difference favouring OROS methylphenidate (SMD=0.32, 95% CI 0.12-0.53 (Z=3.05, p<0.002). Immediate release methylphenidate was not superior to atomoxetine (SMD=-0.04, 95% CI -0.19-0.12) (Z=0.46, p=0.64). Excluding open label trials did not significantly alter the effect size (SMD=0.08, 95% CI -0.04-0.21) (Z=1.27, p=0.20). All-cause discontinuation was used as a measure of acceptability. There was no significant difference in all cause discontinuation between atomoxetine and methylphenidate (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.87-1.71). There was significant heterogeneity among the studies (p=0.002, I2=67%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated the heterogeneity to be due to the open label trials (p=0.001, I2=81%).

CONCLUSIONS

In general atomoxetine and methylphenidate have comparable efficacy and equal acceptability in treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. However OROS methylphenidate is more effective than atomoxetine and may be considered as first line treatment in treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents.

Guanfacine extended-release for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Guanfacine extended-release (GXR) is a non-stimulant approved in the US for treatment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). GXR is a 'first in class' α(2A)-adrenoceptor agonist reformulated to optimize efficacy. GXR enters a rapidly growing but crowded ADHD market as an alternative not only to psychostimulants but also to atomoxetine.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

Pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety of GXR are covered based on a literature review (MEDLINE and EMBASE) from 1980 to 2010. Two large pivotal controlled trials are reviewed along with companion safety studies over 24 months. Collateral studies in ADHD children with oppositional symptoms and combination use of GXR in psychostimulant partial-responders are featured.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Novel aspects of apparent GXR mechanism of action may complement existing treatments. Study evidence indicates that GXR is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for children and adolescents with ADHD, and appears efficacious to reduce oppositional symptoms in children with these complicating features. The GXR safety database reflects mild and asymptomatic decreases in both blood pressure and heart rate throughout, with most adverse events being somnolence-related and time-limited.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

This review of GXR will allow the reader to determine the place for GXR in the ADHD treatment landscape.

Mental health service use by children with serious emotional and behavioral disturbance: results from the LAMS study

OBJECTIVE

The study described service utilization among children with emotional and behavioral disorders making a first visit to outpatient mental health clinics in four Midwest cities.

METHODS

Data were from the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms study. A total of 707 youths aged six to 12 years 11 months and their parents completed diagnostic assessments; demographic information and mental health service use was self-reported. Analyses examined the relationship of demographic variables, diagnoses, impairment, and comorbidity with type and level of services utilized.

RESULTS

Utilization was multimodal; half the youths had received outpatient and school services during their lifetime. Factors unrelated to need (age, sex, race, and insurance) were associated with service type. Children with a bipolar spectrum disorder had higher use of inpatient services than those with depressive or disruptive disorders and were more likely to currently use two or more services. More than half of youths with bipolar or depressive disorders had lifetime use of both medication and therapy, whereas youths with a disruptive behavior disorder were more likely to have used only therapy. Impairment and comorbidity were not related to service utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of services began at a very young age and occurred in multiple service sectors. Type of service used was related to insurance and race, underscoring the need for ongoing disparities research. Contrary to findings from administrative data analyses, use of medication alone was infrequent. The low rate of use of combination therapy suggests that clinicians and families need to be educated about the effectiveness of multimodal treatment.

Mental health service use by children with serious emotional and behavioral disturbance: results from the LAMS study

OBJECTIVE

The study described service utilization among children with emotional and behavioral disorders making a first visit to outpatient mental health clinics in four Midwest cities.

METHODS

Data were from the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms study. A total of 707 youths aged six to 12 years 11 months and their parents completed diagnostic assessments; demographic information and mental health service use was self-reported. Analyses examined the relationship of demographic variables, diagnoses, impairment, and comorbidity with type and level of services utilized.

RESULTS

Utilization was multimodal; half the youths had received outpatient and school services during their lifetime. Factors unrelated to need (age, sex, race, and insurance) were associated with service type. Children with a bipolar spectrum disorder had higher use of inpatient services than those with depressive or disruptive disorders and were more likely to currently use two or more services. More than half of youths with bipolar or depressive disorders had lifetime use of both medication and therapy, whereas youths with a disruptive behavior disorder were more likely to have used only therapy. Impairment and comorbidity were not related to service utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of services began at a very young age and occurred in multiple service sectors. Type of service used was related to insurance and race, underscoring the need for ongoing disparities research. Contrary to findings from administrative data analyses, use of medication alone was infrequent. The low rate of use of combination therapy suggests that clinicians and families need to be educated about the effectiveness of multimodal treatment.

Atomoxetine versus placebo in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and comorbid oppositional defiant disorder: a double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial in Germany

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of atomoxetine (ATX, target dose 1.2 mg/kg daily) on symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). A secondary objective was to compare fast versus slow up-titration of ATX.

METHODS

This was a 3-arm, 9-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study in ADHD patients (6-17 years) with comorbid ODD (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition [DSM-IV] criteria A-C) or conduct disorder (CD). ATX-treatment arms were as follows-ATX-fast: 7 days 0.5 mg/kg, then 1.2 mg/kg; ATX-slow: 7 days each at 0.5 and 0.8 mg/kg, then 1.2 mg/kg. Primary outcome was the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale-Revised (SNAP-IV) ODD-score after 9 weeks (Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measures, ATX-up-titration groups pooled).

RESULTS

In total, 181 patients were randomized, and 180 evaluated (ATX-fast/ATX-slow/placebo: 60/61/59). Baseline characteristics were comparable (84.4% boys; mean age 11.0 years; DSM-IV: 100% ADHD, 75.6% with combined type, 74.4% ODD, 24.4% CD; SNAP-IV ODD-scores, mean ± standard deviation 15.5 ± 4.35). At week 9, SNAP-IV ODD scores were significantly lower versus placebo in both ATX-groups (least square mean [95% confidence interval]: ATX-fast 8.6 [7.2;9.9]; ATX-slow 9.0 [7.7;10.3]; placebo 12.0 [10.6;13.5]; least square mean, ATX-pooled minus placebo: -3.2 [-5.0, -1.5], effect size: -0.69, p < 0.001). SNAP-IV ADHD-scores, CD symptoms (investigator-rated Attention-Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders Instrument, disruptive behavior), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity, and individual treatment behaviors showed corresponding results. Post-hoc analyses indicated interrelationships between the medication effects on ADHD, ODD, and CD symptom scores. For ATX-slow, time to early dropout was significantly longer versus placebo (Hazard Ratio [95% confidence interval]: 3.57 [1.42;8.94]; p = 0.007). Clinically relevant adverse effects (fatigue, sleep disorders, nausea, and gastrointestinal complaints; weeks 1-3) were reported in 60.0% of ATX-fast, 44.3% of ATX-slow, and 18.6% of placebo group patients.

CONCLUSIONS

ATX for 9 weeks significantly reduced symptoms of ODD/CD and ADHD; slower ATX-up-titration may be better tolerated.

A comparison of atomoxetine administered as once versus twice daily dosing on the school and home functioning of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE

This secondary analysis examined the efficacy and tolerability of atomoxetine (ATX) dosed once (QD) versus twice (BID) daily in 55 children aged 6-12 with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

The original 8-week trial was designed to assess the benefits of adding behavioral therapy to ATX. In it, all subjects were treated openly with ATX, with 50% randomly assigned to additional behavioral treatments. Every subject was started on QD dosing with a target dose of 1.2 mg/kg per day. A switch to BID dosing was allowed at study midpoint to improve tolerability and efficacy. Subjects not responding to ATX at midpoint were also given the option of 0.6 mg/kg dose increase. ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) symptoms, global functioning, side effects, and classroom performance were measured weekly.

RESULTS

There were 22 subjects (40%) who switched to BID dosing at midpoint (mean dose = 1.56 mg/kg per day) with the other 33 remaining on QD dosing (mean dose = 1.33 mg/kg per day). The BID group did not display any improvement in parent-rated ODD symptoms during the first 4 weeks of the study on QD dosing, but there was a significant improvement seen after the addition of the second ATX dose (p < 0.05). However, BID dosing was not associated with differential rates of change for parent-rated ADHD symptoms or impairment, teacher ratings, or other measures of classroom functioning. BID dosing was associated with decreased rates of stomachaches (p < 0.05) but more persistent appetite loss than QD dosing. The degree of improvement observed during the first half of the study in ratings of global impairment and ODD but not ADHD symptoms predicted a switch to BID dosing at midpoint (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of an afternoon dose of ATX was associated with improved control of ODD symptoms at home, with no change in school functioning.

Psychopharmacologic control of aggression and violence in children and adolescents

Aggression in children and adolescents is commonly displayed in the community and is even more commonly seen in clinical settings. As symptoms of an underlying disorder, aggressive behaviors should be comprehensively evaluated, and developmental, medical, and substance-use disorders should be identified and treated. This article reviews the most common psychiatric conditions associated with aggression and suggests appropriate psychopharmacologic interventions. Tables with recommended agents for each psychiatric disorder, as well as dosing ranges for each agent, are included.

ADHD and EEG-neurofeedback: a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled feasibility study

Electroencephalography (EEG)-neurofeedback has been shown to offer therapeutic benefits to patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in several, mostly uncontrolled studies. This pilot study is designed to test the feasibility and safety of using a double-blind placebo feedback-controlled design and to explore the initial efficacy of individualized EEG-neurofeedback training in children with ADHD. Fourteen children (8–15 years) with ADHD defined according to the DSM-IV-TR criteria were randomly allocated to 30 sessions of EEG-neurofeedback (n = 8) or placebo feedback (n = 6). Safety measures (adverse events and sleep problems), ADHD symptoms and global improvement were monitored. With respect to feasibility, all children completed the study and attended all study visits and training sessions. No significant adverse effects or sleep problems were reported. Regarding the expectancy, 75% of children and their parent(s) in the active neurofeedback group and 50% of children and their parent(s) in the placebo feedback group thought they received placebo feedback training. Analyses revealed significant improvements of ADHD symptoms over time, but changes were similar for both groups. This pilot study shows that it is feasible to conduct a rigorous placebo-controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of neurofeedback training in children with ADHD. However, a double-blind design may not be feasible since using automatic adjusted reward thresholds may not work as effective as manually adjusted reward thresholds. Additionally, implementation of active learning strategies may be an important factor for the efficacy of EEG-neurofeedback training. Based on the results of this pilot study, changes are made in the design of the ongoing study.

Effect of atomoxetine on quality of life and family burden: results from a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study in children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid oppositional defiant or conduct disorder

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of atomoxetine on quality of life (QoL) and family burden in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid oppositional defiant (ODD) or conduct disorder (CD).

METHODS

This secondary analysis was based on a randomized, double-blind, 9-week study of atomoxetine (target dose 1.2 mg/kg body weight) versus placebo. The study included 180 patients (atomoxetine 121, placebo 59), aged 6-17 years. QoL was measured using the KINDL-R questionnaire. The total score encompasses six dimensions (or subscales) measuring QoL in terms of "physical well-being", "emotional well-being", "self-esteem", "friends", "family", and "school". Family burden of illness was measured using the FaBel questionnaire.

RESULTS

With atomoxetine, the KINDL-R total score improved significantly (P = 0.021) more than with placebo. This improvement also applied to the subscales except for "physical well-being" (opposite effect) and "school" (no effect). No significant treatment group differences were seen on the FaBel questionnaire. No differences were found between the fast and slow titration groups in terms of ADHD, ODD, and disruptive behavior severity. Furthermore, no such differences were observed for QoL and family burden.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests positive effects of atomoxetine on quality of life, as measured by the KINDL-R scores on emotional well-being, self-esteem, friends and family, in children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid ODD/CD. No significant treatment effects were seen on family burden, as measured by FaBel total score.

Review of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder comorbid with oppositional defiant disorder

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper was to conduct a practitioner review of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) co-occurring with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) encompassing aetiological factors, associated factors, assessment, treatment and prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

ADHD and ODD have both shared and unique genetic influences. Persistence of ADHD and ODD in adolescence is linked with an increased risk of delinquent behaviour, substance dependence, anxiety, depression, and possibly bipolar disorder. The diagnostic work up for ADHD must include screening for ODD, which may be achieved through targeted questioning or the use of standard symptom checklists. Treatment requires management of the core symptoms of ADHD plus, in many cases, augmentation with other treatment to address the ODD. Mild cases may respond to behaviour management alone, or monotherapy with stimulant medication or atomoxetine. Moderate to severe cases usually require a combination of pharmacotherapy, which may include clonidine, and behaviour management. Severe or refractory cases may require the introduction of an atypical antipsychotic such as risperidone.

Effects of guanfacine extended release on oppositional symptoms in children aged 6-12 years with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and oppositional symptoms: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended release (XR, Intuniv; Shire Development Inc., Wayne, PA, USA) in the treatment of oppositional symptoms in children aged 6-12 years with a diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and the presence of oppositional symptoms.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, flexible-dose, dose-optimization study, children aged 6-12 years were randomized to receive guanfacine XR (1-4 mg/day) or placebo for 9 weeks. Screening and washout periods were followed by a 5-week dose-optimization period, a 3-week dose-maintenance period and a 1-week tapering period. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to endpoint in the oppositional subscale of the Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised: Long Form (CPRS-R:L) score. Change in ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score was a secondary efficacy measure. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), vital signs, ECG readings and laboratory studies.

RESULTS

A total of 217 children were enrolled: 138 were randomized to receive guanfacine XR and 79 to receive placebo. Least-squares mean reductions from baseline to endpoint in CPRS-R:L oppositional subscale scores were 10.9 in the guanfacine XR group compared with 6.8 in the placebo group (p < 0.001; effect size = 0.59). A significantly greater reduction in ADHD-RS-IV total score from baseline to endpoint was also seen in the guanfacine-treated group compared with the placebo group (23.8 vs 11.5, respectively; p < 0.001; effect size = 0.92). A post hoc correlation analysis between percentage reduction from baseline to endpoint in CPRS-R:L oppositional subscale and ADHD-RS-IV total scores indicated that the decreases in oppositional symptoms and ADHD symptoms were highly correlated (r = 0.74). The most commonly reported, treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) in the guanfacine XR group were somnolence (50.7%), headache (22.1%), sedation (13.2%), upper abdominal pain (11.8%) and fatigue (11.0%) and most were mild or moderate in severity. TEAEs of sedation, somnolence or hypersomnia were experienced by 62.5% of subjects in the guanfacine XR group. These events were most common during the dose-titration period but most (63.5%) resolved prior to the taper period. TEAEs of fatigue, lethargy and asthenia were reported in 11.0%, 3.7% and 0.0% of subjects in the guanfacine XR group, respectively. Most subjects receiving guanfacine XR demonstrated modest changes in blood pressure, pulse rate and ECG readings that were not considered clinically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population of children aged 6-12 years with ADHD and the presence of oppositional symptoms, significant reductions in CPRS-R:L oppositional subscale and ADHD-RS-IV total scores were observed with guanfacine XR treatment compared with placebo. Treatment with guanfacine XR at optimized doses was associated with mostly mild or moderate TEAEs. The findings of this study support the efficacy of guanfacine XR in the treatment of children with ADHD and the presence of oppositional symptoms.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00367835.

A prospective observational study of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in Central and Eastern Europe and Turkey: Symptom severity and treatment options in a paediatric population

Abstract Objective. This study investigates the relationship between treatment regimen, symptom severity, comorbidities and health outcomes of paediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Methods. Males and females aged 6-17 years with ADHD symptoms participated in this 12-month, prospective, observational, non-randomised study. Symptoms and comorbidities were assessed using the Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory-4 Parent Checklists (CSI-4; ASI-4, categories L/O), and the Clinical Global Impressions-ADHD-Severity scale (CGI-ADHD-S). Baseline data are presented. Results. The study included 566 patients from Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and Turkey. Psychiatrists made all diagnoses using The American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV), World Health Organization International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10), and "other" criteria (73, 27 and 0.4%, respectively). Patients were grouped into two cohorts based on whether they were prescribed psycho- and/or pharmacotherapy (n=443) or not (n=123). Patients receiving prescribed treatment were older and demonstrated higher symptom severity scores than those receiving no or "other" treatment. Most patients were prescribed conventional treatment for ADHD at baseline. Conclusions. Continued assessment of this population may aid the treatment and outcomes of ADHD in CEE.

Factors associated with atomoxetine efficacy for treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to determine if relationships exist between the efficacy of atomoxetine for treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and demographic characteristics, specific co-morbid diagnoses, subtype of ADHD, and/or additional use of a stimulant medication.

METHOD

A retrospective chart review was performed using data from an institutional electronic medical record system. Children aged 5-17 years who were diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed atomoxetine were included; 432 study subjects were categorized as treatment success (TS), treatment failure (TF), or undetermined. Co-morbid diagnoses, demographic factors, subtype of ADHD, and additional use of stimulant medications were examined for association with TS.

RESULTS

A total of 88 children were categorized as TS, 197 as TF, and 147 as undetermined. More subjects in the TS group were receiving stimulant medication in addition to the atomoxetine than in the TF group (p = 0.0319; 95% Wald confidence interval [CI], 1.064-3.972). There was no significant difference between groups for any demographic characteristic, the presence of any co-morbid diagnosis, or type of ADHD. In particular, the presence of anxiety or depression was not associated with a response to atomoxetine.

CONCLUSION

Children who were prescribed a stimulant medication in addition to atomoxetine had better outcomes in treating ADHD than those receiving only atomoxetine.

A review of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder complicated by symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder

BACKGROUND

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a highly prevalent disorder with significant functional impairment. ADHD is frequently complicated by oppositional symptoms, which are difficult to separate from comorbidity with oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and aggressive symptoms. This review addresses the impact of oppositional symptoms on ADHD, disease course, functional impairment, clinical management, and treatment response.

REVIEW OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE

Oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder may be comorbid in more than half of ADHD cases and are more common with the combined than with the inattentive ADHD subtype. Comorbid symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder in patients with ADHD can have a significant impact on the course and prognosis for these patients and may lead to differential treatment response to both behavioral and pharmacologic treatments.

IMPACT ON CLINICAL MANAGEMENT

Assessment of oppositional symptoms is an essential part of ADHD screening and diagnosis and should include parental, as well as educator, input. Although clinical evidence remains limited, some stimulant and nonstimulant medications have shown effectiveness in treating both core ADHD symptoms and oppositional symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Oppositional symptoms are a key consideration in ADHD management, although the optimum approach to treating ADHD complicated by such symptoms remains unclear. Future research should focus on the efficacy and safety of various behavioral and medication regimens, as well as longitudinal studies to further clarify the relationships between ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder.

Improvement of executive functions in boys with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: an open-label follow-up study with once-daily atomoxetine

Atomoxetine is efficacious in reducing symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) but its effect on executive functions needs more investigation. We examined the effect of atomoxetine on a wide range of non-verbal executive functions among 30 drug-naive male patients with DSM-IV ADHD, aged 8-16 yr, in an open-label 12-wk atomoxetine treatment trial. Before administration of atomoxetine, the participants were assessed by psychiatric interviews, the WISC-III, and the tasks involving executive functions of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB): Intra-dimensional/Extra-dimensional Shifts (IED), Rapid Visual Information Processing (RVIP), Spatial Span (SSP), Spatial Working Memory (SWM), and Stockings of Cambridge (SOC); and reassessed at weeks 4 and 12. All the raw scores of the CANTAB were transformed to z scores based on a normative sample of 180 children aged 8-16 yr. Results showed significant improvement in executive functions after treatment with atomoxetine for 4 wk or 12 wk including improved shifting and flexibility of attention in the IED; improved spatial short-term memory in the SSP; improved sustained attention and increased response inhibition in the RVIP; improved spatial working memory in the SWM; and improved spatial planning and problem solving in the SOC. Our findings suggested that atomoxetine was associated with significant improvement in various non-verbal executive functions among boys with ADHD, in addition to its well-known efficacy in ADHD-related symptom reductions. However, owing to lack of a placebo-controlled trial design, the findings should be interpreted with caution that changes in performance may be due to practice effects.