Safety and efficacy of ABT-089 in pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: results from two randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of ABT-089, a novel α(4)β(2) neuronal nicotinic receptor partial agonist, vs. placebo in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: Two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies of children 6 through 12 years of age were conducted. Study 1 (n = 274) assessed six treatment groups over 8 weeks: 4 once-daily (QD) ABT-089 doses (0.085-0.700 mg/kg), QD atomoxetine, and placebo. Study 2 (n = 119) assessed three treatment groups over 6 weeks: 2 QD ABT-089 doses (0.7 mg/kg, 1.4 mg/kg) and placebo. The primary efficacy variable was the investigator-administered Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV: Home Version (ADHD-RS-IV [HV]) Total Score. Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring, laboratory tests, vital signs, physical examinations, and electrocardiogram measures. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between ABT-089 and placebo in mean change from baseline to final evaluation of ADHD-RS-IV (HV) Total Score or other outcome measures at any dose in either study. In Study 1, atomoxetine showed statistically significant improvement for the primary and most secondary endpoints. ABT-089 was generally safe and well tolerated, with no statistically significant difference between any ABT-089 dose and placebo in the overall incidence of any specific AE, and no clinically significant changes in other safety measures. CONCLUSIONS: ABT-089 did not show efficacy on the primary efficacy variable, the ADHD-RS-IV (HV) Total Score, or other measures of ADHD symptomatology in children with ADHD, and had a safety profile similar to placebo. These results contrast with published reports of efficacy of nicotinic modulators in adults with ADHD

Global Law as Intercontextuality and as Interlegality

Since the 1990s the effects of globalization on law and legal developments has been a central topic of scholarly debate. To date, the debate is however marked by three substantial deficiencies which this chapter seeks to remedy through a reconceptualization of global law as a law of inter-contextuality expressed through inter-legality and materialized through a particular body of legal norms which can be characterized as connectivity norms. The first deficiency is a historical and empirical one. Both critics as well as advocates of ‘non-state law’ share the assumption that ‘law beyond the state’ and related legal norms have gained in centrality when compared with previous historical times. While global law, including both public and private global governance law as well as regional occurrences such as EU law, has undergone profound transformations since the structural transformations which followed the de-colonialization processes of the mid-twentieth century, we do not have more global law relatively to other types of law today than in previous historical times. The second deficiency is a methodological one. The vast majority of scholarship on global law is either of an analytical nature, drawing on insights from philosophy, or empirically observing the existence of global law and the degree of compliance with global legal norms at a given moment in time. While both approaches bring something to the table they remain static approaches incapable of explaining and evaluating the transformation of global law over time. The third deficiency is a conceptual-theoretical one. In most instances, global law is understood as a unitary law producing singular legal norms with a planetary reach, or, alternatively, a radical pluralist perspective is adopted dismissing the existence of singular global norms. Both of these approaches however misapprehend the structural characteristics, function and societal effects of global law. Instead a third positon between unitary and radical pluralist perspectives can be adopted through an understanding of global law and its related legal norms as a de-centred kind of inter-contextual law characterised by inter-legality

Judging Inter-Legality

Peer reviewe

Ritanserin antagonism of m-chlorophenylpiperazine effects in neuroleptic-free schizophrenics patients: support for serotonin-2 receptor modulation of schizophrenia symptoms.

RATIONALE: Serotonin-2 (5-HT(2)) receptor antagonism has been hypothesized to have antipsychotic activity. However, there has been limited evidence directly linking 5-HT(2) receptor antagonism to symptom control in schizophrenic patients. OBJECTIVES: In order to test this hypothesis this study evaluated the capacity of pretreatment with the 5-HT(2) receptor antagonist ritanserin to attenuate the effects of the 5-HT agonist, m-chlorophenylpiperazine (mCPP). METHODS: Twenty-two male inpatients who met DSM-III-R criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder completed 4 test days during which 10 mg ritanserin or matched placebo was administered orally 50 min prior to the intravenous infusion of 0.1 mg/kg mCPP or saline. The test days were conducted in a randomized order under double-blind conditions. RESULTS: mCPP mildly and transiently increased positive symptoms and behavioral activation but not negative symptoms, as assessed by the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. mCPP also raised plasma prolactin and cortisol levels. All of these effects were attenuated by ritanserin pretreatment. CONCLUSIONS: These data support a contribution of 5-HT(2) receptor stimulation to symptom exacerbation in schizophrenic patients and a role for 5-HT(2) receptor antagonism in the prevention of this effect

Interactive effects of subanesthetic ketamine and subhypnotic lorazepam in humans

 Ketamine is an N -methyl- D -aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist with psychotogenic and dissociative effects in healthy humans. These cognitive and perceptual effects in humans are reportedly reduced by benzodiazepine premedication. This study assessed the interactive effects of a ketamine (IV bolus of 0.26 mg/kg followed by an infusion of 0.65 mg/kg per hour) and lorazepam 2 mg., PO, in humans. Twenty-three healthy subjects completed 4 test days involving the oral administration of lorazepam or matched placebo 2 h prior to the IV infusion of ketamine or placebo. Ketamine: 1) produced behaviors similar to the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia as assessed by the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS); 2) evoked perceptual alterations as measured by the Clinician-Administered Dissociative States Scale (CADSS); 3) impaired performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) and other tests sensitive to frontal cortical impairment; and 4) had amnestic effects. Lorazepam produced attention impairments, concrete proverb interpretations, and recall impairments. Lorazepam reduced ketamine-associated emotional distress and there was a non-significant trend for it to decrease perceptual alterations produced by ketamine. However, it failed to reduce many cognitive and behavioral effects of ketamine, including psychosis. Further, lorazepam exacerbated the sedative, attention-impairing, and amnestic effects of ketamine. There was no evidence of pharmacokinetic interaction between these medications. These data suggest that subhypnotic lorazepam and ketamine show a spectrum of interactive effects, ranging from antagonism to potentiation.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/41959/1/213-135-3-213_81350213.pd