A pilot study of atomoxetine in young children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of atomoxetine during acute treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in 5 and 6 year olds. METHOD: Twenty two children (male n = 19, 86%) with ADHD were treated with atomoxetine for 8 weeks in a three-site, open-label pilot study. Dosing was flexible, with titration to a maximum of 1.8 mg/kg per day. Parent education on behavior management was provided as part of each pharmacotherapy visit. RESULTS: Subjects demonstrated a mean decrease of 20.68 points (SD = 12.80, p \u3c 0.001)) on the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-IV-RS) total score, 10.18 (SD = 7.48, p \u3c 0.001) on the inattentive subscale and 10.50 (SD = 7.04, p \u3c 0.001) on the hyperactive/impulsive subscale. Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) was improved in 82% of the children (95% CI, 66-98%) and Children\u27s Global Assessment (CGAS) scores improved 18.91 points on average (SD = 12.20, p \u3c 0.001). The mean final dose of atomoxetine was 1.25 mg/kg per day (SD = 0.35 mg/kg per day). Mood lability was the most commonly reported adverse event (n = 12, 54.5%). Eleven subjects (50%) reported decreased appetite and a mean weight loss of 1.04 kg (SD = 0.80 kg) (p \u3c 0.001) was observed for the group. Vital sign changes were mild and not clinically significant. There were no discontinuations due to adverse events or lack of efficacy. CONCLUSION: Atomoxetine was generally effective for reducing core ADHD symptoms in the 5 and 6 year olds in this open-label study

A 13-hour laboratory school study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

BackgroundLisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is indicated for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children 6 to 12 years of age and in adults. In a previous laboratory school study, LDX demonstrated efficacy 2 hours postdose with duration of efficacy through 12 hours. The current study further characterizes the time course of effect of LDX.MethodsChildren aged 6 to 12 years with ADHD were enrolled in a laboratory school study. The multicenter study consisted of open-label, dose-optimization of LDX (30, 50, 70 mg/d, 4 weeks) followed by a randomized, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover phase (1 week each). Efficacy measures included the SKAMP (deportment [primary] and attention [secondary]) and PERMP (attempted/correct) scales (secondary) measured at predose and at 1.5, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12, and 13 hours postdose. Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), physical examination, vital signs, and ECGs.ResultsA total of 117 subjects were randomized and 111 completed the study. Compared with placebo, LDX demonstrated significantly greater efficacy at each postdose time point (1.5 hours to 13.0 hours), as measured by SKAMP deportment and attention scales and PERMP (P < .005). The most common treatment-emergent AEs during dose optimization were decreased appetite (47%), insomnia (27%), headache (17%), irritability (16%), upper abdominal pain (16%), and affect lability (10%), which were less frequent in the crossover phase (6%, 4%, 5%, 1%, 2%, and 0% respectively).ConclusionIn school-aged children (6 to 12 years) with ADHD, efficacy of LDX was maintained from the first time point (1.5 hours) up to the last time point assessed (13.0 hours). LDX was generally well tolerated, resulting in typical stimulant AEs.Trial registrationOfficial Title: A Phase IIIb, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center, Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Optimization, Cross-Over, Analog Classroom Study to Assess the Time of Onset of Vyvanse (Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate) in Pediatric Subjects Aged 6-12 With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00500149 http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00500149

Efficacy and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: sex and age effects and effect size across the day

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Efficacy and safety profiles by sex and age (6-9 vs 10-12 years) and magnitude and duration of effect by effect size overall and across the day of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) vs placebo were assessed.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study enrolled children (6-12 years) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in an open-label dose optimization with LDX (30-70 mg/d) followed by a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover phase. Post hoc analyses assessed interaction between sex or age and treatment and assessed effect sizes for Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) and Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP) scales and ADHD Rating Scale IV measures. No corrections for multiple testing were applied on time points and subgroup statistical comparisons.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>129 participants enrolled; 117 randomized. Both sexes showed improvement on all assessments at postdose time points; females showed less impairment than males for SKAMP and PERMP scores in treatment and placebo groups at nearly all times. Both age groups improved on all assessments at postdose time points. Children 10-12 years had less impairment in SKAMP ratings than those 6-9 years. Treatment-by-sex interactions were observed at time points for SKAMP-D, SKAMP total, and PERMP scores; no consistent pattern across scales or time points was observed. LDX demonstrated significant improvement vs placebo, by effect size, on SKAMP-D from 1.5-13 hours postdose. The overall LS mean (SE) SKAMP-D effect size was -1.73 (0.18). In the dose-optimization phase, common (≥2%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in males were upper abdominal pain, headache, affect lability, initial insomnia, and insomnia; in females were nausea and decreased weight. During the crossover phase for those taking LDX, higher incidence (≥2% greater) was observed in males for upper abdominal pain and insomnia and in females for nausea and headache. Overall incidence of TEAEs in age groups was similar.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Apparent differences in impairment level between sex and age groups were noted. However, these results support the efficacy of LDX from 1.5 hours to 13 hours postdose in boys and girls with medium to large effect sizes across the day with some variability in TEAE incidence by sex.</p> <p>Trial Registration Number</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: <a href="http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00500149">NCT00500149</a>.</p

The pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: A systematic review with network meta-analyses of randomised trials

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed psychiatric disorders in childhood. A wide variety of treatments have been used for the management of ADHD. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological, psychological and complementary and alternative medicine interventions for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a systematic review with network meta-analyses. Randomised controlled trials (≥ 3 weeks follow-up) were identified from published and unpublished sources through searches in PubMed and the Cochrane Library (up to April 7, 2016). Interventions of interest were pharmacological (stimulants, non-stimulants, antidepressants, antipsychotics, and other unlicensed drugs), psychological (behavioural, cognitive training and neurofeedback) and complementary and alternative medicine (dietary therapy, fatty acids, amino acids, minerals, herbal therapy, homeopathy, and physical activity). The primary outcomes were efficacy (treatment response) and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation). Secondary outcomes included discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability), as well as serious adverse events and specific adverse events. Random-effects Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted to obtain estimates as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credibility intervals. We analysed interventions by class and individually. 190 randomised trials (52 different interventions grouped in 32 therapeutic classes) that enrolled 26114 participants with ADHD were included in complex networks. At the class level, behavioural therapy (alone or in combination with stimulants), stimulants, and non-stimulant seemed significantly more efficacious than placebo. Behavioural therapy in combination with stimulants seemed superior to stimulants or non-stimulants. Stimulants seemed superior to behavioural therapy, cognitive training and non-stimulants. Behavioural therapy, stimulants and their combination showed the best profile of acceptability. Stimulants and non-stimulants seemed well tolerated. Among medications, methylphenidate, amphetamine, atomoxetine, guanfacine and clonidine seemed significantly more efficacious than placebo. Methylphenidate and amphetamine seemed more efficacious than atomoxetine and guanfacine. Methylphenidate and clonidine seemed better accepted than placebo and atomoxetine. Most of the efficacious pharmacological treatments were associated with harms (anorexia, weight loss and insomnia), but an increased risk of serious adverse events was not observed. There is lack of evidence for cognitive training, neurofeedback, antidepressants, antipsychotics, dietary therapy, fatty acids, and other complementary and alternative medicine. Overall findings were limited by the clinical and methodological heterogeneity, small sample sizes of trials, short-term follow-up, and the absence of high-quality evidence; consequently, results should be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical differences may exist between the pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment used for the management of ADHD. Uncertainties about therapies and the balance between benefits, costs and potential harms should be considered before starting treatment. There is an urgent need for high-quality randomised trials of the multiple treatments for ADHD in children and adolescents. PROSPERO, number CRD42014015008

A randomised controlled trial of the Neuro Emotional Technique (NET) for childhood Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): a protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>An abundance of literature is dedicated to research for the treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Most, is in the area of pharmacological therapies with less emphasis in psychotherapy and psychosocial interventions and even less in the area of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).</p> <p>The use of CAM has increased over the years, especially for developmental and behavioral disorders, such as ADHD. 60–65% of parents with children with ADHD have used CAM. Medical evidence supports a multidisciplinary approach (i.e. pharmacological and psychosocial) for the best clinical outcomes. The Neuro Emotional Technique (NET), a branch of Chiropractic, was designed to address the biopsychosocial aspects of acute and chronic conditions including non-musculoskeletal conditions. Anecdotally, it has been suggested that ADHD may be managed effectively by NET.</p> <p>Design/methods</p> <p>A placebo controlled, double blind randomised clinical trial was designed to assess the effectiveness of NET on a cohort of children with medically diagnosed ADHD.</p> <p>Children aged 5–12 years who met the inclusion criteria were randomised to one of three groups. The control group continued on their existing medical regimen and the intervention and placebo groups had the addition of the NET and sham NET protocols added to their regimen respectively. These two groups attended a clinical facility twice a week for the first month and then once a month for six months.</p> <p>The Conners' Parent and Teacher Rating Scales (CRS) were used at the start of the study to establish baseline data and then in one month and in seven months time, at the conclusion of the study. The primary outcome measures chosen were the Conners' ADHD Index and Conners' Global Index. The secondary outcome measures chosen were the DSM-IV: Inattentive, the DSM-IV:Hyperactive-Impulsive, and the DSM-IV:Total subscales from the Conners' Rating Scales, monitoring changes in inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity.</p> <p>Calculations for the sample size were set with a significance level of 0.05 and the power of 80%, yielding a sample size of 93.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The present study should provide information as to whether the addition of NET to an existing medical regimen can improve outcomes for children with ADHD.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registration Number: ANZCTRN 012606000332527</p

BAMBI Regulates Angiogenesis and Endothelial Homeostasis through Modulation of Alternative TGFβ Signaling

BACKGROUND: BAMBI is a type I TGFβ receptor antagonist, whose in vivo function remains unclear, as BAMBI(-/-) mice lack an obvious phenotype. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Identifying BAMBI's functions requires identification of cell-specific expression of BAMBI. By immunohistology we found BAMBI expression restricted to endothelial cells and by electron microscopy BAMBI(-/-) mice showed prominent and swollen endothelial cells in myocardial and glomerular capillaries. In endothelial cells over-expression of BAMBI reduced, whereas knock-down enhanced capillary growth and migration in response to TGFβ. In vivo angiogenesis was enhanced in matrigel implants and in glomerular hypertrophy after unilateral nephrectomy in BAMBI(-/-) compared to BAMBI(+/+) mice consistent with an endothelial phenotype for BAMBI(-/-) mice. BAMBI's mechanism of action in endothelial cells was examined by canonical and alternative TGFβ signaling in HUVEC with over-expression or knock-down of BAMBI. BAMBI knockdown enhanced basal and TGFβ stimulated SMAD1/5 and ERK1/2 phosphorylation, while over-expression prevented both. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Thus we provide a first description of a vascular phenotype for BAMBI(-/-) mice, and provide in vitro and in vivo evidence that BAMBI contributes to endothelial and vascular homeostasis. Further, we demonstrate that in endothelial cells BAMBI interferes with alternative TGFβ signaling, most likely through the ALK 1 receptor, which may explain the phenotype observed in BAMBI(-/-) mice. This newly described role for BAMBI in regulating endothelial function has potential implications for understanding and treating vascular disease and tumor neo-angiogenesis

Disagreements with implications: diverging discourses on the ethics of non-medical use of methylphenidate for performance enhancement

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is substantial evidence that methylphenidate (MPH; Ritalin), is being used by healthy university students for non-medical motives such as the improvement of concentration, alertness, and academic performance. The scope and potential consequences of the non-medical use of MPH upon healthcare and society bring about many points of view.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To gain insight into key ethical and social issues on the non-medical use of MPH, we examined discourses in the print media, bioethics literature, and public health literature.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Our study identified three diverging paradigms with varying perspectives on the nature of performance enhancement. The beneficial effects of MPH on normal cognition were generally portrayed enthusiastically in the print media and bioethics discourses but supported by scant information on associated risks. Overall, we found a variety of perspectives regarding ethical, legal and social issues related to the non-medical use of MPH for performance enhancement and its impact upon social practices and institutions. The exception to this was public health discourse which took a strong stance against the non-medical use of MPH typically viewed as a form of prescription abuse or misuse. Wide-ranging recommendations for prevention of further non-medical use of MPH included legislation and increased public education.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Some positive portrayals of the non-medical use of MPH for performance enhancement in the print media and bioethics discourses could entice further uses. Medicine and society need to prepare for more prevalent non-medical uses of neuropharmaceuticals by fostering better informed public debates.</p

Effects of maternal and paternal smoking on attentional control in children with and without ADHD

Maternal smoking during pregnancy is a risk factor for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but data on its adverse effects on cognitive functioning are sparse and inconsistent. Since the effect of maternal smoking during pregnancy may be due to correlated genetic risk factors rather than being a pure environmental effect, we examined the effect of prenatal exposure to smoking on attentional control, taking into account the effects of both maternal and paternal smoking, and examined whether these effects were genetically mediated by parental genotypes. We further examined whether the effect of prenatal exposure to smoking on attentional control interacted with genotypes of the child. Participants were 79 children with ADHD, ascertained for the International Multi-centre ADHD Gene project (IMAGE), and 105 normal controls. Attentional control was assessed by a visual continuous performance task. Three genetic risk factors for ADHD (DRD4 7-repeat allele of the exon 3 variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR), DAT1 10/10 genotype of the VNTR located in the 3′ untranslated region, and the DAT1 6/6 genotype of the intron 8 VNTR) were included in the analyses. Paternal smoking had a negative effect on attentional control in children with ADHD and this effect appeared to be mediated by genetic risk factors. The prenatal smoking effect did not interact with genotypes of the child. Maternal smoking had no main effect on attentional control, which may be due to lower smoking rates. This study suggests that the effects of paternal smoking on attentional control in children with ADHD should be considered a proxy for ADHD and/or smoking risk genes. Future studies should examine if the results can be generalized to other cognitive domains

Treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder beyond symptom control alone in children and adolescents: a review of the potential benefits of long-acting stimulants

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), one of the most common neuropsychiatric conditions of childhood, often has a chronic course and persists into adulthood in many individuals. ADHD may have a clinically important impact on health-related quality of life in children, a significant impact on parents’ emotional health and interfere with family activities/cohesion. To date, the main targets of ADHD treatment have focused on reducing the severity of symptoms during the school day and improving academic performance. However, the treatment of ADHD should reach beyond symptom control to address the issues of social competencies and improvement of health-related quality of life from the perspectives of individuals with ADHD and their families, to support them in reaching their full developmental potential. Methylphenidate (MPH) is recognised as the first-line choice of pharmacotherapy for ADHD in children and adolescents. This paper focuses on the importance and benefits to child development of ADHD symptom control beyond the school day only, i.e. extending into late afternoon and evening and uses the example of an extended-release MPH formulation (OROS® MPH) to demonstrate the potential benefits of active full day coverage (12 h) with a single daily dose. Concerns of long-term stimulant treatment are also discussed

The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement:208 Evidence-based conclusions about the disorder

Background: Misconceptions about ADHD stigmatize affected people, reduce credibility of providers, and prevent/delay treatment. To challenge misconceptions, we curated findings with strong evidence base. Methods: We reviewed studies with more than 2000 participants or meta-analyses from five or more studies or 2000 or more participants. We excluded meta-analyses that did not assess publication bias, except for meta-analyses of prevalence. For network meta-analyses we required comparison adjusted funnel plots. We excluded treatment studies with waiting-list or treatment as usual controls. From this literature, we extracted evidence-based assertions about the disorder. Results: We generated 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD. The status of the included statements as empirically supported is approved by 80 authors from 27 countries and 6 continents. The contents of the manuscript are endorsed by 366 people who have read this document and agree with its contents. Conclusions: Many findings in ADHD are supported by meta-analysis. These allow for firm statements about the nature, course, outcome causes, and treatments for disorders that are useful for reducing misconceptions and stigma.</p