Treatment for Adolescents with Depression Study (TADS): safety results.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates of physical, psychiatric, and suicide-related events in adolescents with MDD treated with fluoxetine alone (FLX), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), combination treatment (COMB), or placebo (PBO). METHOD: Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) collected by spontaneous report, as well as systematic measures for specific physical and psychiatric symptoms. Suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior were systematically assessed by self- and clinician reports. Suicidal events were also reanalyzed by the Columbia Group and expert raters using the Columbia-Classification Algorithm for Suicidal Assessment used in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reclassification effort. RESULTS: Depressed adolescents reported high rates of physical symptoms at baseline, which improved as depression improved. Sedation, insomnia, vomiting, and upper abdominal pain occurred in at least 2% of those treated with FLX and/or COMB and at twice the rate of placebo. The rate of psychiatric AEs was 11% in FLX, 5.6% in COMB, 4.5% in PBO, and 0.9% in CBT. Suicidal ideation improved overall, with greatest improvement in COMB. Twenty-four suicide-related events occurred during the 12-week period: 5 patients (4.7%) in COMB, 10 (9.2%) in FLX, 5 (4.5%) in CBT, and 3 (2.7%) in placebo. Statistically, only FLX had more suicide-related events than PBO (p =.0402, odds ratio (OR) = 3.7, 95% CI 1.00-63.7). Only five actual attempts occurred (2 COMB, 2 FLX, 1 CBT, 0 PBO). There were no suicide completions. CONCLUSIONS: Different methods for eliciting AEs produce different results. In general, as depression improves, physical complaints and suicidal ideation decrease in proportion to treatment benefit. In this study, psychiatric AEs and suicide-related events are more common in FLX-treated patients. COMB treatment may offer a more favorable safety profile than medication alone in adolescent depression

Recent developments and strategies in pediatric pharmacology research in the USA

Research in pediatric pharmacology has undergone major changes in the last ten years, with an expansion in both publicly and privately funded activities. A number of pharmacokinetics studies and multi-site controlled efficacy trials have been conducted, so that treatment of children and adolescents can now be better informed and evidence-based. Regulatory financial incentives to industry in return for studies on drugs still covered by patent exclusivity have resulted in a substantial increase in pediatric research funded by pharmaceutical companies. In parallel, public funding has supported research on off-patent medications and other clinical important aspects of treatment, such as comparisons between active treatments, including non-pharmacological interventions. With greater interest by industry in pediatric research, the role of government funding agencies has been redefined to avoid duplication and ensure better integration of efforts and utilization of resources. The present review discusses some of the recent developments in pediatric pharmacology with focus on psychiatric medications

Child/Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Study (CAMS): rationale, design, and methods

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To present the design, methods, and rationale of the Child/Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Study (CAMS), a recently completed federally-funded, multi-site, randomized placebo-controlled trial that examined the relative efficacy of cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT), sertraline (SRT), and their combination (COMB) against pill placebo (PBO) for the treatment of separation anxiety disorder (SAD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and social phobia (SoP) in children and adolescents.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Following a brief review of the acute outcomes of the CAMS trial, as well as the psychosocial and pharmacologic treatment literature for pediatric anxiety disorders, the design and methods of the CAMS trial are described.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>CAMS was a six-year, six-site, randomized controlled trial. Four hundred eighty-eight (N = 488) children and adolescents (ages 7-17 years) with DSM-IV-TR diagnoses of SAD, GAD, or SoP were randomly assigned to one of four treatment conditions: CBT, SRT, COMB, or PBO. Assessments of anxiety symptoms, safety, and functional outcomes, as well as putative mediators and moderators of treatment response were completed in a multi-measure, multi-informant fashion. Manual-based therapies, trained clinicians and independent evaluators were used to ensure treatment and assessment fidelity. A multi-layered administrative structure with representation from all sites facilitated cross-site coordination of the entire trial, study protocols and quality assurance.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>CAMS offers a model for clinical trials methods applicable to psychosocial and psychopharmacological comparative treatment trials by using state-of-the-art methods and rigorous cross-site quality controls. CAMS also provided a large-scale examination of the relative and combined efficacy and safety of the best evidenced-based psychosocial (CBT) and pharmacologic (SSRI) treatments to date for the most commonly occurring pediatric anxiety disorders. Primary and secondary results of CAMS will hold important implications for informing practice-relevant decisions regarding the initial treatment of youth with anxiety disorders.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00052078.</p

Self-care support for children and adolescents with long-term conditions : the REfOCUS evidence synthesis

Background: Self-care support (e.g. education, training, peer/professional support) is intended to enhance the self-care capacities of children and young people, while simultaneously reducing the financial burden facing health-care systems. Objectives: To determine which models of self-care support for long-term conditions (LTCs) are associated with significant reductions in health utilisation and costs without compromising outcomes for children and young people. Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Population: Children and young people aged 0–18 years with a long-term physical or mental health condition (e.g. asthma, depression). Intervention: Self-care support in health, social care, educational or community settings. Comparator: Usual care. Outcomes: Generic/health-related quality of life (QoL)/subjective health symptoms and health service utilisation/costs. Design: Randomised/non-randomised trials, controlled before-and-after studies, and interrupted time series designs. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ISI Web of Science, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, The Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment database, Paediatric Economic Database Evaluation, IDEAS, reference scanning, targeted author searches and forward citation searching. All databases were searched from inception to March 2015. Methods: We conducted meta-analyses, simultaneously plotting QoL and health utilisation effects. We conducted subgroup analyses for evidence quality, age, LTC and intervention (setting, target, delivery format, intensity). Results: Ninety-seven studies reporting 114 interventions were included. Thirty-seven studies reported adequate allocation concealment. Fourteen were UK studies. The vast majority of included studies recruited children and young people with asthma (n = 66, 68%). Four per cent of studies evaluated ‘pure’ self-care support (delivered through health technology without additional contact), 23% evaluated facilitated self-care support (≤ 2 hours’/four sessions’ contact), 65% were intensively facilitated (≥ 2 hours’/four sessions’ contact) and 8% were case management (≥ 2 hours’ support with multidisciplinary input). Self-care support was associated with statistically significant, minimal benefits for QoL [effect size (ES) –0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.23 to –0.11], but lacked clear benefit for hospital admissions (ES –0.05, 95% CI –0.12 to 0.03). This finding endured across intervention intensities and LTCs. Statistically significant, minimal reductions in emergency use were observed (ES –0.11, 95% CI –0.17 to –0.04). The total cost analysis was limited by the small number of data. Subgroup analyses revealed statistically significant, minimal reductions in emergency use for children aged ≤ 13 years (ES –0.10, 95% CI –0.17 to –0.04), children and young people with asthma (ES –0.12, 95% CI –0.18 to –0.06) and children and young people receiving ≥ 2 hours per four sessions of support (ES –0.10, 95% CI –0.17 to –0.03). Preliminary evidence suggested that interventions that include the child or young person, and deliver some content individually, may optimise QoL effects. Face-to-face delivery may help to maximise emergency department effects. Caution is required in interpreting these findings. Limitations: Identification of optimal models of self-care support is challenged by the size and nature of evidence available. The emphasis on meta-analysis meant that a minority of studies with incomplete but potentially relevant data were excluded. Conclusions: Self-care support is associated with positive but minimal effects on children and young people’s QoL, and minimal, but potentially important, reductions in emergency use. On current evidence, we cannot reliably conclude that self-care support significantly reduces health-care costs. Future work: Research is needed to explore the short- and longer-term effects of self-care support across a wider range of LTCs. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014015452. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme