Effect of Atomoxetine Treatment on Reading and Phonological Skills in Children with Dyslexia or Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Comorbid Dyslexia in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES: Evaluated the effects of atomoxetine on the reading abilities of children with dyslexia only or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid dyslexia. METHODS: Children aged 10-16 years (N = 209) met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for dyslexia only (n = 58), ADHD and comorbid dyslexia (n = 124), or ADHD only (n = 27) and were of normal intelligence. Patients were treated with atomoxetine (1.0-1.4 mg/kg/day) or placebo in a 16-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. The dyslexia-only and ADHD and comorbid dyslexia groups were randomized 1:1; the ADHD-only group received atomoxetine in a blinded manner. Reading abilities were measured with the Woodcock Johnson III (WJIII), Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP), Gray Oral Reading Tests-4, and Test of Word Reading Efficiency. RESULTS: Atomoxetine-treated dyslexia-only patients compared with placebo patients had significantly greater improvement (p < 0.02) with moderate to approaching high effect sizes (ES) on WJIII Word Attack (ES = 0.72), Basic Reading Skills (ES = 0.48), and Reading Vocabulary (ES = 0.73). In the atomoxetine-treated ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group, improvement on the CTOPP Elision measure (ES = 0.50) was significantly greater compared with placebo (p < 0.02). Total, inattentive, and hyperactive/impulsive ADHD symptom reductions were significant in the atomoxetine-treated ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group compared with placebo, and from baseline in the ADHD-only group (p ≤ 0.02). ADHD symptom improvements in the ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group were not correlated with improvements in reading. CONCLUSIONS: Atomoxetine treatment improved reading scores in patients with dyslexia only and ADHD and comorbid dyslexia. Improvements for patients with dyslexia only were in critical components of reading, including decoding and reading vocabulary. For patients with ADHD and comorbid dyslexia, improvements in reading scores were distinct from improvement in ADHD inattention symptoms alone. These data represent the first report of improvements in reading measures following pharmacotherapy treatment in patients with dyslexia only evaluated in a randomized, double-blind trial

Economic burden and comorbidities of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder among pediatric patients hospitalized in the United States

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This retrospective database analysis used data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to examine common primary diagnoses among children and adolescents hospitalized with a secondary diagnosis of attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and assessed the burden of ADHD.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Hospitalized children (aged 6-11 years) and adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with a secondary diagnosis of ADHD were identified. The 10 most common primary diagnoses (using the first 3 digits of the ICD-9-CM code) were reported for each age group. Patients with 1 of these conditions were selected to analyze demographics, length of stay (LOS), and costs. Control patients were selected if they had 1 of the 10 primary diagnoses and no secondary ADHD diagnosis. Patient and hospital characteristics were reported by cohort (i.e., patients with ADHD vs. controls), and LOS and costs were reported by primary diagnosis. Multivariable linear regression analyses were undertaken to adjust LOS and costs based on patient and hospital characteristics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 126,056 children and 204,176 adolescents were identified as having a secondary diagnosis of ADHD. Among children and adolescents with ADHD, the most common diagnoses tended to be mental health related (i.e., affective psychoses, emotional disturbances, conduct disturbances, depressive disorder, or adjustment reaction). Other common diagnoses included general symptoms, asthma (in children only), and acute appendicitis. Among patients with ADHD, a higher percentage were male, white, and covered by Medicaid. LOS and costs were higher among children with ADHD and a primary diagnosis of affective psychoses (by 0.61 days and $51), adjustment reaction (by 1.71 days and$940), or depressive disorder (by 0.41 days and $124) versus controls. LOS and costs were higher among adolescents with ADHD and a primary diagnosis of affective psychoses (by 1.04 days and$352), depressive disorder (by 0.94 days and $517), conduct disturbances (by 0.86 days and$1,330), emotional disturbances (by 1.45 days and $1,626), adjustment reaction (by 1.25 days and$702), and neurotic disorders (by 1.60 days and $541) versus controls.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Clinicians and health care decision makers should be aware of the potential impact of ADHD on hospitalized children and adolescents.</p

Atomoxetine for the treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children with ADHD and dyslexia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of this study was to assess the effects of atomoxetine on treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), on reading performance, and on neurocognitive function in youth with ADHD and dyslexia (ADHD+D).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with ADHD (n = 20) or ADHD+D (n = 36), aged 10-16 years, received open-label atomoxetine for 16 weeks. Data from the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHDRS-IV), Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (K-TEA), Working Memory Test Battery for Children (WMTB-C), and Life Participation Scale for ADHD-Child Version (LPS-C) were assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Atomoxetine demonstrated significant improvement for both groups on the ADHDRS-IV, LPS-C, and K-TEA reading comprehension standard and composite scores. K-TEA spelling subtest improvement was significant for the ADHD group, whereas the ADHD+D group showed significant reading decoding improvements. Substantial K-TEA reading and spelling subtest age equivalence gains (in months) were achieved for both groups. The WMTB-C central executive score change was significantly greater for the ADHD group. Conversely, the ADHD+D group showed significant phonological loop score enhancement by visit over the ADHD group. Atomoxetine was well tolerated, and commonly reported adverse events were similar to those previously reported.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Atomoxetine reduced ADHD symptoms and improved reading scores in both groups. Conversely, different patterns and magnitude of improvement in working memory component scores existed between ADHD and ADHD+D patients. Though limited by small sample size, group differences in relation to the comparable changes in improvement in ADHD symptoms could suggest that brain systems related to the therapeutic benefit of atomoxetine in reducing ADHD symptoms may be different in individuals with ADHD+D and ADHD without dyslexia.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Clinical Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00191048</p

Atomoxetine Improved Attention in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Dyslexia in a 16 Week, Acute, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate atomoxetine treatment effects in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD-only), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid dyslexia (ADHD+D), or dyslexia only on ADHD core symptoms and on sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT), working memory, life performance, and self-concept. Methods: Children and adolescents (10?16 years of age) with ADHD+D (n=124), dyslexia-only (n=58), or ADHD-only (n=27) received atomoxetine (1.0?1.4?mg/kg/day) or placebo (ADHD-only subjects received atomoxetine) in a 16 week, acute, randomized, double-blind trial with a 16 week, open-label extension phase (atomoxetine treatment only). Changes from baseline were assessed to weeks 16 and 32 in ADHD Rating Scale-IV-Parent-Version:Investigator-Administered and Scored (ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv); ADHD Rating Scale-IV-Teacher-Version (ADHDRS-IV-Teacher-Version); Life Participation Scale?Child- or Parent-Rated Version (LPS); Kiddie-Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (K-SCT) Interview; Multidimensional Self Concept Scale (MSCS); and Working Memory Test Battery for Children (WMTB-C). Results: At week 16, atomoxetine treatment resulted in significant (p<0.05) improvement from baseline in subjects with ADHD+D versus placebo on ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv Total (primary outcome) and subscales, ADHDRS-IV-Teacher-Version Inattentive subscale, K-SCT Interview Parent and Teacher subscales, and WMTB-C Central Executive component scores; in subjects with Dyslexia-only, atomoxetine versus placebo significantly improved K-SCT Youth subscale scores from baseline. At Week 32, atomoxetine-treated ADHD+D subjects significantly improved from baseline on all measures except MSCS Family subscale and WMTB-C Central Executive and Visuo-spatial Sketchpad component scores. The atomoxetine-treated dyslexia-only subjects significantly improved from baseline to week 32 on ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv Inattentive subscale, K-SCT Parent and Teacher subscales, and WMTB-C Phonological Loop and Central Executive component scores. The atomoxetine-treated ADHD-only subjects significantly improved from baseline to Week 32 on ADHDRS-Parent:Inv Total and subscales, ADHDRS-IV-Teacher-Version Hyperactive/Impulsive subscale, LPS Self-Control and Total, all K-SCT subscales, and MSCS Academic and Competence subscale scores. Conclusions: Atomoxetine treatment improved ADHD symptoms in subjects with ADHD+D and ADHD-only, but not in subjects with dyslexia-only without ADHD. This is the first study to report significant effects of any medication on SCT. Clinical Trials Registration: This study was registered at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home, NCT00607919.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140320/1/cap.2013.0054.pd

Table e-1. Baseline cardiovascular risk factors

Baseline cardiovascular risk factor

Data from: Lasmiditan is an effective acute treatment for migraine A phase 3 randomized study

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan in the acute treatment of migraine. Methods: Adult patients with migraine were randomized (1:1:1) to a double-blind dose of oral lasmiditan 200 mg, lasmiditan 100 mg, or placebo, and were asked to treat their next migraine attack within 4 hours of onset. Over 48 hours following dosing, patients used an electronic diary to record headache pain, and also the presence of nausea, phonophobia, and photophobia, one of which was designated their most bothersome symptom (MBS). Results: Of the 1,856 patients who treated an attack, 77.9% had ≥1 cardiovascular risk factor in addition to migraine. Compared with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg were free from headache pain at 2 hours after dosing (32.2% vs 15.3%; odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 2.6 [2.0, 3.6]; p<0.001); and similarly for lasmiditan 100 mg (28.2%; 2.2 [1.6, 3.0]; p<0.001). Furthermore, compared with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg (40.7% vs 29.5%; 1.6 [1.3, 2.1]; p<0.001), and lasmiditan 100 mg (40.9%; 1.7 [1.3, 2.2]; p<0.001), were free from their MBS at 2 hours after dosing. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in intensity. Conclusions: Lasmiditan, dosed at 200 mg and 100 mg, was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of acute migraine among patients with a high level of cardiovascular risk factors