Methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents - assessment of adverse events in non-randomised studies

Entecavir for children and adults with chronic hepatitis B

RATIONALE

Chronic hepatitis B is a major worldwide public health concern. Entecavir, one nucleos(t)ide analogue antiviral therapy option, is recommended as the first-line drug for chronic hepatitis B in many clinical guidelines. However, none of the guideline recommendations are based on the findings of a systematic review with meta-analysis, where entecavir versus no treatment or placebo are compared directly.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of entecavir versus no treatment or placebo in children and adults with chronic hepatitis B, who are either hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive or HBeAg-negative.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, three other databases, online trial registries, and reference lists, and contacted authors. The latest search was on 19 July 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials comparing entecavir versus no treatment or placebo in children or adults, or both, with chronic hepatitis B, and irrespective of treatment history with other antiviral drugs and other viral co-infections. We allowed co-interventions when administered equally to all intervention groups.

OUTCOMES

The outcomes reported in this abstract and in the summary of findings table are all-cause mortality, health-related quality of life, and proportion of people with serious adverse events at the longest follow-up.

RISK OF BIAS

We used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool to assess risk of bias in the included trials.

SYNTHESIS METHODS

We used a random-effects model to meta-analyse outcome results, where possible, and presented the results as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Where there was considerable heterogeneity, we performed a narrative analysis. We used a fixed-effect model for sensitivity analysis. We used GRADE to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

INCLUDED STUDIES

We included 22 randomised clinical trials (published from 2005 to 2022) with 2940 participants diagnosed with chronic hepatitis B. All trials had a parallel-group design. The experimental intervention was oral entecavir, with a follow-up duration of 5 weeks to 228 weeks. The comparator in 12 trials was no treatment, and in 10 trials was placebo. Fourteen trials equally administered co-interventions to the trial participants in the entecavir and no treatment and placebo groups. One trial included participants between 14 years and 55 years of age, one trial included only children, 19 trials included only adults, and one trial did not provide the age of participants.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

Twenty trials contributed data to the quantitative analysis. Ten trials (1379 participants) reported all-cause mortality with a mean follow-up duration of 48.9 weeks (range 5 to 100 weeks). The result was not estimable because no deaths occurred in any of the entecavir and no treatment or placebo groups. None of the trials provided data on health-related quality of life. We are very uncertain about the effect of entecavir versus no treatment or placebo on the proportion of people with serious adverse events (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.32; absolute risk difference 22 fewer per 1000 (from 44 fewer to 21 more); 15 trials, 1676 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The mean follow-up duration was 58.4 weeks (range 5 weeks to 228 weeks). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for these outcomes to very low, mainly because the overall risk of bias in most trials was with some concerns or high, and serious imprecision (no events or few events).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the issues of risk of bias and insufficient power of the included trials and the very low certainty of the available evidence, we could not determine the effect of entecavir versus no treatment or placebo on critical outcomes such as all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. There is a lack of data on health-related quality of life. Given the first-line recommendation and wide usage of entecavir in people with chronic hepatitis B, further evidence on clinically important outcomes, analysed in this review, is needed.

FUNDING

This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding.

REGISTRATION

Registration: Entecavir for children and adults with chronic hepatitis B, CD015536 via DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD015536.

Long-term effect of pharmacological treatment on academic achievement of Norwegian children diagnosed with ADHD: a target trial emulation

BACKGROUND

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed mental disorders in children. For many patients, treatment involves long-term medication in order to reduce symptoms, regulate behaviour, and, hopefully, improve school performance and achievement. However, there is little to no evidence to support a long-term effect on the latter complex outcomes.

METHODS

We utilize a target trial framework to emulate a pretest-posttest control group design and estimate the intention-to-treat effect of ADHD medication on national test scores in children diagnosed with ADHD born between 2000 and 2007 in Norway. The data were obtained through linkage of Norwegian registries (NorPD, Norwegian Prescription Database; NPR, Norwegian Patient Registry; KUHR, Database for Control and Payment of Health Reimbursement; SSB, Statistics Norway; MBRN, Medical Birth Registry of Norway).

RESULTS

The resulting analytic sample size consisted of 8548 children diagnosed with ADHD, with about 9% missingness in their grade eight national test scores. We find that initiating ADHD medication had a slight positive average effect on national test scores for all three domains: English, numeracy, and reading [standardized mean differences: 0.037 (95% compatibility interval (CI95), -0.003; 0.076), 0.063 (CI95, 0.016; 0.111), 0.071 (CI95, 0.030; 0.111), respectively].

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the estimated long-term average effect of ADHD medication on learning, as measured by the Norwegian national tests, is not clinically relevant. Study strengths include the use of real-world data on ecologically valid and relevant outcomes and the robustness of results across model specifications. Limitations include possibility of unobserved confounding and lack of prescription data.

Phytoconstituents of Hericium erinaceus Exert Benefits for ADHD Conditions by Targeting SLC6A4: Extraction, Spectroscopic Characterization, Phytochemical Screening, In Vitro, and Computational Perspectives

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a persistent neurodevelopmental disorder. Despite pharmacological interventions, there is a need for effective lead molecules and therapeutic targets. Recently, Hericium erinaceus (HE) has been traditionally reported to treat various diseases. Herein, we aimed to explore the noncytotoxic properties, phytochemical composition, and spectroscopic characterization of HE aqueous extract. Additionally, we used computational workflows to identify key therapeutic targets for ADHD and assess HE extract phytoconstituents for potential targeting. Initially, the HE aqueous extract was obtained using Soxhlet extraction, and its cytotoxicity was assessed on SH-SY5Y cells using MTT assays. FTIR spectroscopy characterized the extract's functional groups, while biochemical methods and GC-MS identified its phytochemical constituents. A protein-protein interaction network identified ADHD targets, and molecular docking, dynamics, and QM/MM calculations were used to find potential drug candidates from the HE extract. As a result, the HE extract exhibited no cytotoxicity in SH-SY5Y cells across concentrations (0.625 to 10 μg/mL) after 24 h. FTIR spectroscopic analysis detected 13 different functional groups that hold diverse biological importance. Qualitative phytochemical screening revealed the presence of carbohydrates, flavonoids, anthocyanins, tannins, alkaloids, saponins, steroids, and phenolic compounds. GC-MS profiling identified 17 diverse metabolites. Simultaneously, ADHD-related genes and known therapeutic protein targets were integrated into a network, identifying SLC6A4 as a hub target. Molecular docking of HE extract compounds showed myo-inositol's high binding efficiency (-6.53 kcal/mol). Dynamic simulations demonstrated stable interactions, and QM/MM analysis confirmed myo-inositol's ability to transfer electrons, reinforcing its interaction potential. Overall, the HE aqueous extract shows a potent nontoxic profile and contains phytoconstituents like myo-inositol, offering promising therapeutic potential by targeting SLC6A4 for ADHD.

The effects of a four-month skateboarding intervention on motor, cognitive, and symptom levels in children with ADHD

Objectives and methods

This study aimed to investigate whether a four-month skateboarding workshop can positively affect attention-focusing skills and postural control in terms of static and dynamic balance in addition to symptoms of ADHD in school-aged children (N = 58). Kinematic and kinetic movement analysis, attention-focusing tests as well as symptom questionnaires were employed to measure differences caused by the skateboarding intervention. A weekly skateboarding workshop was conducted with children diagnosed with ADHD which intended to encourage children to autonomously engage in physical activity. Group differences were analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model. A partial correlation was used to investigate possible relationships between the variables.

Results

A preceding analysis confirmed that children with ADHD perform statistically significantly inferior in the employed tests of balance and concentration ability than unaffected peers of the same age. The main analysis showed that after the skateboarding intervention, children with ADHD were able to improve cognitive and motor test performances as well as symptom expression significantly. Significant improvements were likewise found in the waitlist control group, these were however less pronounced compared to those of the skateboarding intervention group. The correlation analysis revealed that there is no reciprocal influence between cognitive and motor skills, nor between motor skills and ADHD symptomatology in the present patient group. Possible explanations are discussed.

Conclusion

Skateboarding as a form of movement intervention can be considered an effective method for children with ADHD to deal with their symptoms and deficits. An intervention period of four months has helped children with ADHD discover and embrace an informal sport like skateboarding, thereby finding enjoyment in movement and practice a skill from intrinsic motivation. To retain the benefits, it is advisable to practice a sport on a long-term basis. Thorough conceptualizations to implement this type of therapy await further research.

Safety and effectiveness of methylphenidate ER multi-unit pellet system in ADHD patients: An open label study

Background

Attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder occurring in children and adults. Pharmacotherapy remains the cornerstone of ADHD treatment. Stimulants such as methylphenidate are effective and have been one of the best studied and most frequently used treatment for ADHD. However, different delivery mechanisms and devices may potentially impact patient experience and real-life outcomes.

Aim

This study evaluated the effectiveness of Multiple-Unit Pellet System Delivered Extended-Release Methylphenidate (Contramyl XR) on symptom control and reported outcomes in ADHD patients, in a real-world setting.

Setting

A phase IV, open label, flexible dose, prospective, observational study conducted at six sites covering five provinces of South Africa.

Methods

About 119 participants with ADHD (both newly diagnosed [treatment-naïve] and methylphenidate-treated [switch-over] patients) were enrolled and initiated either on Contramyl XR or switched over from methylphenidate to Contramyl XR. Primary efficacy was assessed by Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale (WFIRS) over 12 weeks.

Results

In all, 117 participants completed the study (treatment-naïve patients: 46% [n = 55] and switch-over patients: 54% [n = 64]). Mean change from baseline in total WFIRS (95% confidence interval) was -17.7 (-21.1, -14.3; p < 0.001) at week 4 and -29.3 (-33.5, -25.2; p < 0.001) at week 12. At week 12, there was significant improvement in WFIRS scores, with treatment satisfaction reported by treatment-naïve patients. Switch-over patients also demonstrated comparable effectiveness.

Conclusion

Contramyl XR was found to be clinically effective either as de novo or as switch therapy. It was well tolerated, and all patients chose to continue with the treatment option.

Contribution

Despite distinct and different delivery mechanism of Contramyl XR, this study provides evidence for using it as an alternate treatment option versus reference methylphenidate, in both treatment-naïve and switch-over ADHD patients. Study participants willingness to continue Contramyl XR therapy post study, further strengthens the confidence on the effectiveness of Contramyl XR in managing ADHD patients.

Comorbid ADHD and schizophrenia and the use of psychostimulants: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Schizophrenia and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are psychiatric disorders that have a profound impact on patients and healthcare systems globally. There is preliminary evidence suggesting a potential association between the two in terms of symptomatology and genetic underpinning. There is a paucity of guidance regarding pharmacological approaches for patients with comorbid ADHD and schizophrenia. There is a concern that psychostimulants may be more harmful than therapeutic. This scoping review protocol aims to systematically review the evidence for potential harm and benefit of psychostimulants among patients with comorbid ADHD and schizophrenia and identify research gaps.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This scoping review will employ a systematic and iterative approach to identify and synthesise the literature on the topic of psychostimulant use among patients with comorbid schizophrenia and ADHD, based on Arksey and O'Malley's framework. A search will be conducted in relevant databases, including MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO and ISI Web of Science. Additionally, grey literature will be sought. The scoping review will involve two independent reviewers screening the search results. The initial screen will be of title and abstract, and the subsequent full-text review will determine eligibility. A descriptive overview of the eligible studies will be provided. This scoping review has been registered at https://osf.io/cmn5s.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

There is a paucity of high-quality evidence available to clinicians when making decisions regarding the prescription of psychostimulants to patients with comorbid schizophrenia and ADHD. To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first scoping review to examine the evidence addressing this clinical scenario. This review, therefore, has the potential to contribute to decision-making processes for this patient group, thereby improving patient outcomes. Furthermore, as this review is designed to identify research gaps, we aim to contribute to the development of a research agenda that will benefit patients, clinicians and healthcare systems. The dissemination strategy will involve open access peer review publication and scientific presentations.

Reevaluating ADHD and its First-Line Treatment: Insights from DSM-5-TR and Modern Approaches

Is Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) a "brain disorder"? Should it be managed regularly with stimulant drugs? This article critically examines the evolving biomedical discourse surrounding these questions through a close inspection of the latest edition of the influential psychiatric manual - the DSM-5-TR - as well as additional authoritative sources (e.g., previous DSM editions, consensus statements, FDA communications). The DSM-5-TR acknowledges that "no biological marker is diagnostic for ADHD" and that "meta-analyses of all neuroimaging studies do not show differences between individuals with ADHD and control subjects." The authors of the DSM-5-TR, therefore, conclude that "until these issues are resolved, no form of neuroimaging can be used for diagnosis of ADHD." These statements, along with biases in the neuroimaging literature and additional empirical evidence presented in the article, challenge popular myths about the neurobiological basis of ADHD. Similarly, common beliefs about the first-line treatment of ADHD with stimulant drugs are being increasingly questioned today. For instance, the DSM-5-TR's section on Stimulant-Related Disorders introduces a new diagnostic entity named: Stimulant-Induced Mild Neurocognitive Disorder. This addition aligns with a recent FDA Drug Safety Communication for "all prescription stimulants," which highlights longstanding concerns regarding the safety of medications prescribed to millions of diagnosed individuals, primarily children. The FDA now mandates that "the Boxed Warning, FDA's most prominent warning, will describe the risks of misuse, abuse, addiction, and overdose," emphasizing that such "misuse and abuse of prescription stimulants can result in overdose and death." In light of these challenges to the biomedical discourse, this article offers a neurodiversity-oriented alternative. Using evolutionary principles and historical context, it argues that most cases of ADHD fall under the DSM's socio-philosophical category of "conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society" (similar to homosexuality, which was removed from the DSM in 1973), and are therefore "not mental disorders".

Methylphenidate and the risk of acute central nervous system oxygen toxicity: a rodent model and observational data in human divers

Introduction

The effects of methylphenidate, a stimulant often prescribed for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), on the development of central nervous system oxygen toxicity (COT) have not been experimentally evaluated.

Methods

The records of all pure-oxygen-rebreather divers evaluated at our institution from 1975-2022 were assessed. Cases of COT were defined as a new onset of tinnitus, tunnel vision, myoclonus, headache, nausea, loss of consciousness, or seizures resolving within 15 minutes from breathing normobaric air, and matched 4:1 with similar controls. Any medications issued to the diver in the preceding three months, including methylphenidate, were recorded. In the animal arm of this study, male mice were exposed to increasing doses of methylphenidate orally, with subsequent exposure to hyperbaric O₂ until clinically evident seizures were recorded.

Results

Seventy-five cases of COT were identified in divers, occurring at a median of 80 (range 2-240) minutes after dive initiation at a median depth of 5 m (2-13). Hypercarbia was documented in 11 (14.7%) cases. Prescription of methylphenidate in the preceding three months was not associated with increased risk (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.16-3.32) of COT. In mice, increasing methylphenidate exposure dose was associated with significantly longer mean COT latency time being 877 s (95% CI 711-1,043) with doses of 0 mg·kg⁻¹; 1,312 s (95% CI 850-1,773) when given 0.75 mg·kg⁻¹; and 1,500 s (95% CI 988-2,012) with 5 mg·kg⁻¹ (F = 4.635, P = 0.014).

Conclusions

Observational human data did not demonstrate an association between methylphenidate and an increased risk of COT. Methylphenidate exposure in mice prolongs COT latency and may have protective effects against COT.

The impact of modified Cognitive-Behavioral Group Therapy in social adjustment functions of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and their parents' stress levels: A nonrandomized clinical trial

This study aims to investigate the potential of a modified Cognitive-Behavioral Group Therapy (CBGT) intervention in promoting social adjustment and reducing their parental stress among children exhibiting symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The research also highlights the mechanisms and advantages of employing modified CBGT to address negative symptoms associated with ADHD in children. The study was conducted at Fuzhou Children's Hospital of Fujian Province, with a total of 20 pairs of parents and children with ADHD participating. The assessment utilized measures including SNAP, Barratt Impulsivity, and Conners to evaluate changes in the children's social adjustment abilities and core/associated ADHD symptoms before and after CBGT intervention. Additionally, the Parental Stress Index was employed to gauge the level of stress experienced by the parents. Consequently, CBGT interventions have shown substantial improvements in children's social adjustment abilities and have proven to be a significant source of stress relief for parents.

Tamoxifen for adults with hepatocellular carcinoma

RATIONALE

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of liver cancer, accounting for 70% to 85% of individuals with primary liver cancer. Tamoxifen has been evaluated in randomised clinical trials in people with hepatocellular cancer. The reported results have been inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of tamoxifen or tamoxifen plus any other anticancer drugs compared with no intervention, placebo, any type of standard care, or alternative treatment in adults with hepatocellular carcinoma, irrespective of sex, administered dose, type of formulation, and duration of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and major trials registries, and handsearched reference lists up to 26 March 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Parallel-group randomised clinical trials including adults (aged 18 years and above) diagnosed with advanced or unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Had we found cross-over trials, we would have included only the first trial phase. We did not consider data from quasi-randomised trials for analysis.

OUTCOMES

Our critical outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Our important outcomes were disease progression, and adverse events considered non-serious.

RISK OF BIAS

We assessed risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool.

SYNTHESIS METHODS

We used standard Cochrane methods and Review Manager. We meta-analysed the outcome data at the longest follow-up. We presented the results of dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous data as mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the random-effects model. We summarised the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

INCLUDED STUDIES

We included 10 trials that randomised 1715 participants with advanced, unresectable, or terminal stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Six were single-centre trials conducted in Hong Kong, Italy, and Spain, while three were conducted as multicentre trials in single countries (France, Italy, and Spain), and one trial was conducted in nine countries in the Asia-Pacific region (Australia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand). The experimental intervention was tamoxifen in all trials. The control interventions were no intervention (three trials), placebo (six trials), and symptomatic treatment (one trial). Co-interventions were best supportive care (three trials) and standard care (one trial). The remaining six trials did not provide this information. The number of participants in the trials ranged from 22 to 496 (median 99), mean age was 63.7 (standard deviation 4.18) years, and mean proportion of men was 74.7% (standard deviation 42%). Follow-up was three months to five years.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

Ten trials evaluated oral tamoxifen at five different dosages (ranging from 20 mg per day to 120 mg per day). All trials investigated one or more of our outcomes. We performed meta-analyses when at least two trials assessed similar types of tamoxifen versus similar control interventions. Eight trials evaluated all-cause mortality at varied follow-up points. Tamoxifen versus the control interventions (i.e. no treatment, placebo, and symptomatic treatment) results in little to no difference in mortality between one and five years (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.06; 8 trials, 1364 participants; low-certainty evidence). In total, 488/682 (71.5%) participants died in the tamoxifen groups versus 487/682 (71.4%) in the control groups. The separate analysis results for one, between two and three, and five years were comparable to the analysis result for all follow-up periods taken together. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tamoxifen versus no treatment on serious adverse events at one-year follow-up (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.06; 1 trial, 36 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A total of 5/20 (25.0%) participants in the tamoxifen group versus 9/16 (56.3%) participants in the control group experienced serious adverse events. One trial measured health-related quality of life at baseline and at nine months' follow-up, using the Spitzer Quality of Life Index. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tamoxifen versus no treatment on health-related quality of life (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.51; 1 trial, 420 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A second trial found no appreciable difference in global health-related quality of life scores. No further data were provided. Tamoxifen versus control interventions (i.e. no treatment, placebo, or symptomatic treatment) results in little to no difference in disease progression between one and five years' follow-up (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.14; 4 trials, 720 participants; low-certainty evidence). A total of 191/358 (53.3%) participants in the tamoxifen group versus 198/362 (54.7%) participants in the control group had progression of hepatocellular carcinoma. Tamoxifen versus control interventions (i.e. no treatment or placebo) may have little to no effect on adverse events considered non-serious during treatment, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.06; 4 trials, 462 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A total of 10/265 (3.8%) participants in the tamoxifen group versus 6/197 (3.0%) participants in the control group had adverse events considered non-serious. We identified no trials with participants diagnosed with early stages of hepatocellular carcinoma. We identified no ongoing trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the low- and very low-certainty evidence, the effects of tamoxifen on all-cause mortality, disease progression, serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, and adverse events considered non-serious in adults with advanced, unresectable, or terminal stage hepatocellular carcinoma when compared with no intervention, placebo, or symptomatic treatment could not be established. Our findings are mostly based on trials at high risk of bias with insufficient power (fewer than 100 participants), and a lack of trial data on clinically important outcomes. Therefore, firm conclusions cannot be drawn. Trials comparing tamoxifen administered with any other anticancer drug versus standard care, usual care, or alternative treatment as control interventions were lacking. Evidence on the benefits and harms of tamoxifen in participants at the early stages of hepatocellular carcinoma was also lacking.

FUNDING

This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding.

REGISTRATION

Protocol available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014869.

Object Recognition Memory Deficits in ADHD: A Meta-analysis

Object recognition memory allows us to identify previously seen objects. This type of declarative memory is a primary process for learning. Despite its crucial role in everyday life, object recognition has received far less attention in ADHD research compared to verbal recognition memory. In addition to the existence of a small number of published studies, the results have been inconsistent, possibly due to the diversity of tasks used to assess recognition memory. In the present meta-analysis, we have collected studies from Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases up to May 2023. We have compiled studies that assessed visual object recognition memory with specific visual recognition tests (sample-match delayed tasks) in children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD. A total of 28 studies with 1619 participants diagnosed with ADHD were included. The studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Quadas-2 tool and for each study, Cohen's d was calculated to estimate the magnitude of the difference in performance between groups. As a main result, we have found a worse recognition memory performance in ADHD participants when compared to their matched controls (overall Cohen's d ~ 0.492). We also observed greater heterogeneity in the magnitude of this deficit among medicated participants compared to non-medicated individuals, as well as a smaller deficit in studies with a higher proportion of female participants. The magnitude of the object recognition memory impairment in ADHD also seems to depend on the assessment method used.

Gene therapy for people with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of liver cancer, accounting for 70% to 85% of individuals with primary liver cancer. Gene therapy, which uses genes to treat or prevent diseases, holds potential for treatment, especially for tumours. Trials on the effects of gene therapy in people with hepatocellular carcinoma have been published or are ongoing.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of gene therapy in people with hepatocellular carcinoma, irrespective of sex, administered dose, and type of formulation.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science. We searched five online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The date of last search was 20 January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We aimed to include randomised clinical trials assessing any type of gene therapy in people diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma, irrespective of year, language of publication, format, or outcomes reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager to prepare the review. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality/overall survival (whatever data were provided), serious adverse events during treatment, and health-related quality of life. The secondary outcomes were proportion of people with disease progression, adverse events considered non-serious, and proportion of people without improvement in liver function tests. We assessed risk of bias of the included trials using RoB 2 and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented the results of time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HR), dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR), and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Our primary analyses were based on intention-to-treat and outcome data at the longest follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six randomised clinical trials with 364 participants. The participants had unresectable (i.e. advanced inoperable) hepatocellular carcinoma. We found no trials assessing the effects of gene therapy in people with operable hepatocellular carcinoma. Four trials were conducted in China, one in several countries (from North America, Asia, and Europe), and one in Egypt. The number of participants in the six trials ranged from 10 to 129 (median 47), median age was 55.2 years, and the mean proportion of males was 72.7%. The follow-up duration ranged from six months to five years. As the trials compared different types of gene therapy and had different controls, we could not perform meta-analyses. Five of the six trials administered co-interventions equally to the experimental and control groups. All trials assessed one or more outcomes of interest in this review. The certainty of evidence was very low in five of the six comparisons and low in the double-dose gene therapy comparison. Below, we reported the results of the primary outcomes only. Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa-Vec) plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone There is uncertainty about whether there may be little to no difference between the effect of Pexa-Vec plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone on overall survival (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.82; 1 trial (censored observation at 20-month follow-up), 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and on serious adverse events (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; 1 trial at 20 months after treatment, 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial reported quality of life narratively as "assessment of quality of life and time to symptomatic progression was confounded by the high patient dropout rate." Adenovirus-thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV-TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation alone There is uncertainty about whether ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation may benefit all-cause mortality at the two-year follow-up (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.76; 1 trial, 45 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events other than mortality or quality of life. Double-dose ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation alone There is uncertainty about whether double-dose ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation may benefit all-cause mortality at five-year follow-up (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73; 1 trial, 86 participants; low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events other than mortality or quality of life. Recombinant human adenovirus-p53 with hydroxycamptothecin (rAd-p53/HCT) versus hydroxycamptothecin alone There is uncertainty about whether there may be little to no difference between the effect of rAd-p53/HCT versus hydroxycamptothecin alone on the overall survival at 12-month follow-up (RR 3.06, 95% CI 0.16 to 60.47; 1 trial, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events or quality of life. rAd-p53/5-Fu (5-fluorouracil) plus transarterial chemoembolisation versus transarterial chemoembolisation alone The trial included 46 participants. We had insufficient data to assess overall survival. The trial did not report serious adverse events or quality of life. E1B-deleted (dl1520) adenovirus versus percutaneous ethanol injection The trial included 10 participants. It did not report data on overall survival, serious adverse events, or health-related quality of life. One trial did not provide any information on sponsorship; one trial received a national research grant, one trial by the Pedersen foundation, and three were industry-funded trials. We found five ongoing randomised clinical trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of gene therapy on the studied outcomes because of high risk of bias and imprecision of outcome results. The trials were underpowered and lacked trial data on clinically important outcomes. There was only one trial per comparison, and we could not perform meta-analyses. Therefore, we do not know if gene therapy may reduce, increase, or have little to no effect on all-cause mortality or overall survival, or serious adverse events in adults with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. The impact of gene therapy on adverse events needs to be investigated further. Evidence on the effect of gene therapy on health-related quality of life is lacking.

Are all ADHD medications created equal? Exploring the differences that enable evening dosing

With more than 30 available stimulant medications, choosing among therapeutic options for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has become increasingly complex and patient specific. All ADHD stimulants owe their action to variants of either amphetamine or methylphenidate, yet formulation and delivery system differences create unique pharmacokinetic and clinical profiles for each medication. A benefit of the diversity within ADHD pharmacotherapy is that it facilitates tailoring treatment to meet patient needs. Historically, there has been a constant among long-acting stimulant options, regardless of formulation, which was morning dosing. The introduction of delayed-release and extended-release methylphenidate (DR/ER-MPH) is the first long-acting stimulant that patients take in the evening, with the clinical effect delayed until awakening in the morning. This paradigm shift has generated questions among clinicians and continued interest in real-world experience and data. This review used available clinical data, real-world evidence, emerging analyses, and clinical experience to evaluate the characteristics of DR/ER-MPH and its clinical utility within the greater context of ADHD medications and to provide clinicians with practical guidance on the use of DR/ER-MPH in children, adolescents, and adults with ADHD.

Practice Pearls for Stimulant Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Youth

Over half of youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have co-occurring psychiatric or medical conditions that present treatment challenges. Stimulants are the most effective pharmacologic treatment of ADHD for preschoolers to adults but questions about safety with co-occurring conditions frequently arise. In addition, stigma surrounding diagnosis and treatment can negatively impact care. This manuscript presents evidence-based practice pearls to guide treatment decisions for youth with ADHD and common coexisting psychiatric and medical conditions. Recommendations address specific stimulant adverse effects (i.e., anxiety, cardiac, growth, mania, psychosis) along with management strategies. Pearls were developed for the most common clinical questions, controversial topics, or therapeutic issues that may not be widely known. The goals of this manuscript are to: 1) provide a detailed resource for interprofessional teams regarding stimulant use in youth with ADHD, 2) improve therapeutic outcomes for youth with ADHD and co-occurring psychiatric and/or medical conditions through evidence-based recommendations, and 3) decrease stigma associated with stimulant use through education.

Micronutrients for ADHD in youth (MADDY) study: comparison of results from RCT and open label extension

BACKGROUND

The Micronutrients for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Youth (MADDY) study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a multinutrient formula for children with ADHD and emotional dysregulation. The post-RCT open-label extension (OLE) compared the effect of treatment duration (8 weeks vs 16 weeks) on ADHD symptoms, height velocity, and adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

Children aged 6-12 years randomized to multinutrients vs. placebo for 8 weeks (RCT), received an 8-week OLE for a total of 16 weeks. Assessments included the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory-5 (CASI-5), Pediatric Adverse Events Rating Scale (PAERS), and anthropometric measures (height and weight).

RESULTS

Of the 126 in the RCT, 103 (81%) continued in the OLE. For those initially assigned to placebo, CGI-I responders increased from 23% in the RCT to 64% in the OLE; those who took multinutrients for 16 weeks increased from 53% (RCT) to 66% responders (OLE). Both groups improved on the CASI-5 composite score and subscales from week 8 to week 16 (all p-values < 0.01). The group taking 16 weeks of multinutrients had marginally greater height growth (2.3 cm) than those with 8 weeks (1.8 cm) (p = 0.07). No difference in AEs between groups was found.

CONCLUSION

The response rate to multinutrients by blinded clinician ratings at 8 weeks was maintained to 16 weeks; the response rate in the group initially assigned to placebo improved significantly with 8 weeks of multinutrients and almost caught up with 16 weeks. Longer time on multinutrients did not result in greater AEs, confirming an acceptable safety profile.

Microwave coagulation for liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Liver metastases (i.e. secondary hepatic malignancies) are significantly more common than primary liver cancer. Long-term survival after radical surgical treatment is approximately 50%. For people in whom resection for cure is not feasible, other treatments must be considered. One treatment option is microwave coagulation utilising electromagnetic waves. It involves placing an electrode into a lesion under ultrasound or computed tomography guidance.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of microwave coagulation versus no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases regardless of the location of the primary tumour.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest date of search was 14 April 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial or harmful effects of microwave coagulation and its comparators in people with liver metastases, irrespective of the location of the primary tumour. We included trials no matter the outcomes reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality at the last follow-up and time to mortality; health-related quality of life (HRQoL); and any adverse events or complications. Our secondary outcomes were: cancer mortality; disease-free survival; failure to clear liver metastases; recurrence of liver metastases; time to progression of liver metastases; and tumour response measures. We used risk ratios (RR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to present the results. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. We used GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Three randomised clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The control interventions differed in the three trials; therefore, meta-analyses were not possible. The trials were at high risk of bias. The certainty of evidence of the assessed outcomes in the three comparisons was very low. Data on our prespecified outcomes were either missing or not reported. Microwave coagulation plus conventional transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) versus conventional TACE alone One trial, conducted in China, randomised 50 participants (mean age 60 years, 76% males) with liver metastases from various primary sites. Authors reported that the follow-up period was at least one month. The trial reported adverse events or complications in the experimental group only and for tumour response measures. There were no dropouts in the trial. The trial did not report on any other outcomes. Microwave ablation versus conventional surgery One trial, conducted in Japan, randomised 40 participants (mean age 61 years, 53% males) with multiple liver metastases of colorectal cancer. Ten participants were excluded after randomisation (six from the experimental and four from the control group); thus, the trial analyses included 30 participants. Follow-up was three years. The reported number of deaths from all causes was 9/14 included participants in the microwave group versus 12/16 included participants in the conventional surgery group. The mean overall survival was 27 months in the microwave ablation and 25 months in the conventional surgery group. The three-year overall survival was 14% with microwave ablation and 23% with conventional surgery, resulting in an HR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.39 to 2.15). The reported frequency of adverse events or complications was comparable between the two groups, except for the required blood transfusion, which was more common in the conventional surgery group. There was no intervention-related mortality. Disease-free survival was 11.3 months in the microwave ablationgroup and 13.3 months in the conventional surgery group. The trial did not report on HRQoL. Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation One trial, conducted in Germany, randomised 50 participants (mean age 62.8 years, 46% males) who were followed for 24 months. Two-year mortality showed an RR of 0.62 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.47). The trial reported that, by two years, 76.9% of participants in the microwave ablationgroup and 62.5% of participants in the radiofrequency ablation group survived (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.73). The trial reported no deaths or major complications during the procedures in either group. There were two minor complications only in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.67). The trial reported technical efficacy in 100% of procedures in both groups. Distant recurrence was reported for 10 participants in the microwave ablation group and nine participants in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.08). No participant in the microwave ablation group demonstrated local progression at 12 months, while that occurred in two participants in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.67). The trial did not report on HRQoL. One trial reported partial support by Medicor (MMS Medicor Medical Supplies GmbH, Kerpen, Germany) for statistical analysis. The remaining two trials did not provide information on funding. We identified four ongoing trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of microwave ablation in addition to conventional TACE compared with conventional TACE alone on adverse events or complications. We do not know if microwave ablation compared with conventional surgery may have little to no effect on all-cause mortality. We do not know the effect of microwave ablation compared with radiofrequency ablation on all-cause mortality and adverse events or complications either. Data on all-cause mortality and time to mortality, HRQoL, adverse events or complications, cancer mortality, disease-free survival, failure to clear liver metastases, recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, and tumour response measures were either insufficient or were lacking. In light of the current inconclusive evidence and the substantial gaps in data, the pursuit of additional good-quality, large randomised clinical trials is not only justified but also essential to elucidate the efficacy and comparative benefits of microwave ablation in relation to various interventions for liver metastases. The current version of the review, in comparison to the previous one, incorporates two new trials in two additional microwave ablation comparisons: 1. in addition to conventional TACE versus conventional TACE alone and 2. versus radiofrequency ablation.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy for adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction

BACKGROUND

The sphincter of Oddi comprises a muscular complex encircling the distal part of the common bile duct and the pancreatic duct regulating the outflow from these ducts. Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction refers to the abnormal opening and closing of the muscular valve, which impairs the circulation of bile and pancreatic juices.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with a placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, administered orally or endoscopically, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.

SEARCH METHODS

We used extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 16 May 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials assessing any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy versus placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults diagnosed with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, irrespective of year, language of publication, format, or outcomes reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods and Review Manager to prepare the review. Our primary outcomes were: proportion of participants without successful treatment; proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events; and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were: all-cause mortality; proportion of participants with one or more non-serious adverse events; length of hospital stay; and proportion of participants without improvement in liver function tests. We used the outcome data at the longest follow-up and the random-effects model for our primary analyses. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using RoB 2 and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We planned to present the results of time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HR). We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included four randomised clinical trials, including 433 participants. Trials were published between 1989 and 2015. The trial participants had sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Two trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Japan. One was a multicentre trial conducted in seven US centres, and the remaining three were single-centre trials. One trial used a two-stage randomisation, resulting in two comparisons. The number of participants in the four trials ranged from 47 to 214 (median 86), with a median age of 45 years, and the mean proportion of males was 49%. The follow-up duration ranged from one year to four years after the end of treatment. All trials assessed one or more outcomes of interest to our review. The trials provided data for the comparisons and outcomes below, in conformity with our review protocol. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.66; 3 trials, 340 participants; follow-up range 1 to 4 years); serious adverse events (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Physical scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -3.84 to 1.84; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Mental scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -4.16 to 2.16; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), and no improvement in liver function test (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.26; 1 trial, 47 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilationmay have little to no effect on serious adverse events (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; 1 trial, 91 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.31; 1 trial, 99 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Funding One trial did not provide any information on sponsorship; one trial was funded by a foundation (the National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NIDDK), and two trials seemed to be funded by the local health institutes or universities where the investigators worked. We did not identify any ongoing randomised clinical trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence from the trials included in this review, we do not know if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy increases, reduces, or makes no difference to the number of people with treatment success; if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation increases, reduces, or makes no difference to serious adverse events; or if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham improves, worsens, or makes no difference to health-related quality of life and liver function tests in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Evidence on the effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with sham, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation,or dual endoscopic sphincterotomyon all-cause mortality, non-serious adverse events, and length of hospital stay is lacking. We found no trials comparing endoscopic sphincterotomy versus a placebo drug or versus any other pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination. All four trials were underpowered and lacked trial data on clinically important outcomes. We lack randomised clinical trials assessing clinically and patient-relevant outcomes to demonstrate the effects of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.

Antibiotics for treatment of leptospirosis

BACKGROUND

Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for the management of leptospirosis. Despite the widespread use of antibiotic treatment for leptospirosis, there seems to be insufficient evidence to determine its effectiveness or to recommend antibiotic use as a standard practice. This updated systematic review evaluated the available evidence regarding the use of antibiotics in treating leptospirosis, building upon a previously published Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotics versus placebo, no intervention, or another antibiotic for the treatment of people with leptospirosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised clinical trials following standard Cochrane procedures. The date of the last search was 27 March 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised clinical trials of various designs that examined the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis. We did not impose any restrictions based on the age, sex, occupation, or comorbidities of the participants involved in the trials. Our search encompassed trials that evaluated antibiotics, regardless of the method of administration, dosage, and schedule, and compared them with placebo or no intervention, or compared different antibiotics. We included trials regardless of the outcomes reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

During the preparation of this review, we adhered to the Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events (nosocomial infection). Our secondary outcomes were quality of life, proportion of people with adverse events considered non-serious, and days of hospitalisation. To assess the risk of bias of the included trials, we used the RoB 2 tool, and for evaluating the certainty of evidence we used GRADEpro GDT software. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD), both accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the random-effects model for all our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. For our primary outcome analyses, we included trial data from the longest follow-up period.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine randomised clinical trials comprising 1019 participants. Seven trials compared two intervention groups and two trials compared three intervention groups. Amongst the trials comparing antibiotics versus placebos, four trials assessed penicillin and one trial assessed doxycycline. In the trials comparing different antibiotics, one trial evaluated doxycycline versus azithromycin, one trial assessed penicillin versus doxycycline versus cefotaxime, and one trial evaluated ceftriaxone versus penicillin. One trial assessed penicillin with chloramphenicol and no intervention. Apart from two trials that recruited military personnel stationed in endemic areas or military personnel returning from training courses in endemic areas, the remaining trials recruited people from the general population presenting to the hospital with fever in an endemic area. The participants' ages in the included trials was 13 to 92 years. The treatment duration was seven days for penicillin, doxycycline, and cephalosporins; five days for chloramphenicol; and three days for azithromycin. The follow-up durations varied across trials, with three trials not specifying their follow-up periods. Three trials were excluded from quantitative synthesis; one reported zero events for a prespecified outcome, and two did not provide data for any prespecified outcomes. Antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.79; I2 = 8%; 3 trials, 367 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin or chloramphenicol versus placebo on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.17; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed serious adverse events. Antibiotics versus another antibiotic The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cephalosporin on all-cause mortality (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.04; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 348 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus doxycycline (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.46; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cefotaxime versus doxycycline on all-cause mortality (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.78; 1 trial, 169 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus doxycycline on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.62; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or versus cefotaxime (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of doxycycline versus cefotaxime on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cefotaxime (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.47; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), versus doxycycline (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.12 to 67.66; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus chloramphenicol on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.67; 1 trial, 52 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Funding Six of the nine trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources and three trials did not mention funding source. Four of the six trials mentioning sources received funds from public or governmental sources or from international charitable sources, and the remaining two, in addition to public or governmental sources, received support in the form of trial drug supply directly from pharmaceutical companies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As the certainty of evidence is very low, we do not know if antibiotics provide little to no effect on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, or adverse events considered non-serious. There is a lack of definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis infection, and the absence of trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes further adds to this limitation.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for leptospirosis

BACKGROUND

Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in particular in travellers and high-risk groups. However, the clinical benefits are unknown, especially when considering possible treatment-associated adverse effects. This review assesses the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in leptospirosis and is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Library (2009, Issue 3).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotic prophylaxis for human leptospirosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and other resources. We searched online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The last date of search was 17 April 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included ⁠⁠randomised clinical trials of any trial design, assessing antibiotics for prevention of leptospirosis, and with no restrictions on age, sex, occupation, or comorbidity of trial participants. We looked for trials assessing antibiotics irrespective of route of administration, dosage, and schedule versus placebo or no intervention. We also included trials assessing antibiotics versus other antibiotics using these criteria, or the same antibiotic but with another dose or schedule.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed Cochrane methodology. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (inclusive of asymptomatic cases), clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation, clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (exclusive of asymptomatic cases), and serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were quality of life and the proportion of people with non-serious adverse events. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using the RoB 2 tool and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD), with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a random-effects model for our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. Our primary outcome analyses included trial data at the longest follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five randomised clinical trials comprising 2593 participants that compared antibiotics (doxycycline, azithromycin, or penicillin) with placebo, or one antibiotic compared with another. Four trials assessed doxycycline with different durations, one trial assessed azithromycin, and one trial assessed penicillin. One trial had three intervention groups: doxycycline, azithromycin, and placebo. Three trials assessed pre-exposure prophylaxis, one trial assessed postexposure prophylaxis, and one did not report this clearly. Four trials recruited residents in endemic areas, and one trial recruited soldiers who experienced limited time exposure. The participants' ages in the included trials were 10 to 80 years. Follow-up ranged from one to three months. Antibiotics versus placebo Doxycycline compared with placebo may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.83; 1 trial, 782 participants; low-certainty evidence). Prophylactic antibiotics may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.26; 5 trials, 2593 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics may result in little to no difference in the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of laboratory confirmation (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.08; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis with laboratory confirmation (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.26; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics compared with placebo may increase non-serious adverse events, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 10.13, 95% CI 2.40 to 42.71; 3 trials, 1909 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One antibiotic versus another antibiotic One trial assessed doxycycline versus azithromycin but did not report mortality. Compared to azithromycin, doxycycline may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.32; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), and on non-serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.48; 1 trial, 137 participants), but the evidence is very uncertain. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. None of the five included trials reported serious adverse events or assessed quality of life. One study is awaiting classification. Funding Four of the five trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources, and the remaining trial did not include this. Three of the four trials that disclosed their supporting sources received the supply of trial drugs directly from the same pharmaceutical company, and the remaining trial received financial support from a governmental source.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo or another antibiotic has little or have no effect on all-cause mortality or leptospirosis infection because the certainty of evidence is low or very low. We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo may increase the overall risk of non-serious adverse events because of very low-certainty evidence. We lack definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for the prophylaxis of leptospirosis infection. We lack trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes.

Alternative Treatments to Pharmacological Therapy in Pediatric Populations With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): A Scoping Review

In recent years, there has been an increase in the prevalence of the diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a cognitive and behavioral disorder in which individuals present with inattention and impulsivity, in the pediatric population. With an increase in diagnoses, there is also increasing concern regarding overdiagnosis and overtreatment with medications for ADHD. The objective of this study was to map out and compile the recent literature pertaining to alternative therapies (e.g., physical activity, diet, mindfulness, and computer-based interventions) for children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD in an attempt to reduce or replace the use of pharmacological therapy. This scoping review searched articles from multiple databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Directory of Open Access Journals, Scopus, and CINAHL). Using search terms "children with ADHD," "alternative treatment," and "cognitive behavioral therapy," articles were identified that were specific to the research question. The inclusion criteria were patients under the age of 18 with a previous diagnosis of ADHD, no other comorbid illnesses, alternative treatments, and was limited to studies published between 2012 and 2022. After removing duplicates, screening for eligibility criteria, and conducting a critical appraisal of the articles, 16 articles were retained for the final review. The main alternative therapeutic domains that emerged were (1) physical activity, (2) diet, (3) mindfulness, (4) computer-based interventions, and (5) miscellaneous interventions. Seven articles assessed the effect of physical activity on executive and cognitive function in children and adolescents with ADHD. Most findings showed improvement with increased physical activity. Two articles explored the effect of diet on the improvement of ADHD symptoms and reported a positive impact. The two articles that evaluated the effects of mindfulness on ADHD symptoms reported a reduction in ADHD symptoms. Two studies evaluated the use of computer-based interventions as an adjunct treatment in children and adolescents with ADHD; improvements in symptoms were reported. One study each evaluated interventions based on music and nerve stimulation. These showed an improvement in attention, memory, and executive function. With the increasing prevalence of ADHD diagnosis in children and adolescents, alternative and/or adjunctive treatments may be a viable and valuable alternative to pharmaceutical interventions. The findings from this review suggest that multiple non-pharmacological interventions effectively reduce symptoms of ADHD in children and adolescents, including diet, exercise, mindfulness, computer-based interventions, music, and nerve stimulation. While there are implications for alternatives to be used in the future, more research is warranted using larger samples with controlled trials.

The Impact of Methylphenidate on Pubertal Maturation and Bone Age in ADHD Children and Adolescents: Results from the ADHD Drugs Use Chronic Effects (ADDUCE) Project

OBJECTIVE

The short-term safety of methylphenidate (MPH) has been widely demonstrated; however the long-term safety is less clear. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of MPH in relation to pubertal maturation and to explore the monitoring of bone age.

METHOD

Participants from ADDUCE, a two-year observational longitudinal study with three parallel cohorts (MPH group, no-MPH group, and a non-ADHD control group), were compared with respect to Tanner staging. An Italian subsample of medicated-ADHD was further assessed by the monitoring of bone age.

RESULTS

The medicated and unmedicated ADHD groups did not differ in Tanner stages indicating no higher risk of sexual maturational delay in the MPH-treated patients. The medicated subsample monitored for bone age showed a slight acceleration of the bone maturation after 24 months, however their predicted adult height remained stable.

CONCLUSION

Our results do not suggest safety concerns on long-term treatment with MPH in relation to pubertal maturation and growth.

Deep neuromuscular blockade in adults undergoing an abdominal laparoscopic procedure

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is the preferred option for many procedures. To properly perform laparoscopic surgery, it is essential that sudden movements and abdominal contractions in patients are prevented, as it limits the surgeon's view. There has been a growing interest in the potential beneficial effect of deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) in laparoscopic surgery. Deep NMB improves the surgical field by preventing abdominal contractions, and it is thought to decrease postoperative pain. However, it is uncertain if deep NMB improves intraoperative safety and thereby improves clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of deep neuromuscular blockade versus no, shallow, or moderate neuromuscular blockade during laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 31 July 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adults undergoing laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures comparing deep NMB to moderate, shallow, or no NMB. We excluded trials that did not report any of the primary or secondary outcomes of our review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality, 2. health-related quality of life, and 3. proportion of participants with serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 4. proportion of participants with non-serious adverse events, 5. readmissions within three months, 6. short-term pain scores, 7. measurements of postoperative recovery, and 8. operating time. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 randomised clinical trials with 3898 participants. Most trials included participants undergoing intraperitoneal oncological resection surgery. We present the Peto fixed-effect model for most dichotomous outcomes as only sparse events were reported. Comparison 1: deep versus moderate NMB Thirty-eight trials compared deep versus moderate NMB. Deep NMB may have no effect on mortality, but the evidence is very uncertain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 115.43; 12 trials, 1390 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life up to four days postoperative (mean difference (MD) 4.53 favouring deep NMB on the Quality of Recovery-40 score, 95% CI 0.96 to 8.09; 5 trials, 440 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; mean difference lower than the mean clinically important difference of 10 points). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB on intraoperatively serious adverse events (deep NMB 38/1150 versus moderate NMB 38/1076; Peto OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.52; 21 trials, 2231 participants; very low-certainty evidence), short-term serious adverse events (up to 60 days) (deep NMB 37/912 versus moderate NMB 42/852; Peto OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.42; 16 trials, 1764 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and short-term non-serious adverse events (Peto OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.35; 11 trials, 1232 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely does not alter the duration of surgery (MD -0.51 minutes, 95% CI -3.35 to 2.32; 34 trials, 3143 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain if deep NMB alters the length of hospital stay (MD -0.22 days, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.06; 19 trials, 2084 participants; low-certainty evidence) or pain scores one hour after surgery (MD -0.31 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.03; 22 trials, 1823 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point) and 24 hours after surgery (MD -0.60 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.15; 16 trials, 1404 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point). Comparison 2: deep versus shallow NMB Three trials compared deep versus shallow NMB. The trials did not report on mortality and health-related quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB compared to shallow NMB on the proportion of serious adverse events (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.57; 2 trials, 158 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison 3: deep versus no NMB One trial compared deep versus no NMB. There was no mortality in this trial, and health-related quality of life was not reported. The proportion of serious adverse events was 0/25 in the deep NMB group and 1/25 in the no NMB group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the effects of deep NMB compared to moderate NMB on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life and duration of surgery compared to moderate NMB, and it may have no effect on the length of hospital stay. Due to the very low-certainty evidence, we do not know what the effect is of deep NMB on non-serious adverse events, pain scores, or readmission rates. Randomised clinical trials with adequate reporting of all adverse events would reduce the current uncertainties. Due to the low number of identified trials and the very low certainty of evidence, we do not know what the effect of deep NMB on serious adverse events is compared to shallow NMB and no NMB. We found no trials evaluating mortality and health-related quality of life.

Structured physical exercise interventions and children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of structured physical exercise (SPE) has been examined in empirical studies to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This review aimed (i) to systematically review and quantify the effects of SPE on ADHD symptomology and executive function (primary outcomes) and on physical health, physical fitness and mental health issues (secondary outcomes) in children/adolescents with ADHD; (ii) to evaluate the study quality and explore moderation of the effects of SPE; and (iii) to summarize the design of SPE interventions.

METHODS

An extensive literature search in the databases of PubMed, Web of Science and EBSCOhost was conducted to identify eligible intervention studies for meta-analysis. A descriptive account of the features of the studies is provided, including assessment of risk/quality (ROB-2/ROBINS-I). Standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with random effects models to compare post-intervention effects.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies were included in the review. The majority of the studies examined the effects of SPE lasting for 3-12 weeks. Assessment of bias/quality indicated half of the included studies as high quality. The meta-analysis (pooled n = 627) revealed that SPE had a positive effect on primary and secondary outcomes, that is, inattention (SMD = -1.79), executive function (SMD = 2.19), physical fitness (SMD = 1.39) and mental health issues (SMD = -0.89). Subgroup analysis showed that long-term practice of SPE, featured/tailored SPE, non-Chinese participants, taking methylphenidate and study with low quality had larger effects.

CONCLUSIONS

There is emerging evidence that SPE is a promising option to enhance symptom management and physical/mental health in children/adolescents with ADHD.

Factors associated with pharmacological treatment in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders: a retrospective study of a series of 77 cases in a single third-level reference Centre in Apulia region

BACKGROUND

The present study analysed data on children and adolescents with a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who were referred to the ADHD reference centre of Scientific Institute IRCCS E. Medea (Brindisi, Italy) for ADHD pharmacotherapy initiation and monitoring overtime. The main aim of the study was to examine differences in pharmacological treatment status (i.e., treatment continuation vs discontinuation) between patients.

METHODS

Seventy-seven children and adolescents (mean age at pharmacotherapy initiation = 9.5, standard deviation = 2.6) with ADHD received drugs treatment for ADHD at the reference center between January, 2013 and May, 2022. Demographic and clinical data were obtained from the Italian Registry for ADHD and medical records. Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) available data were used.

RESULTS

Pharmacological treatment status was examined for patients (n = 63) with at least 12 months of follow-up after the first pharmacological treatment for ADHD. After starting pharmacotherapy treatment, 77.8% (n = 49) patients were still on treatment whereas 22.2% (n = 14) discontinued it. No between group difference were observed in demographic and clinical data except for the intelligence quotient/intellectual disability and rule-breaking behavior (n = 40).

CONCLUSIONS

This study stressed the need of periodical assessments, monitoring difficulties with treatment and/or reasons for poor treatment compliance to provide individualized care.

A meta-analytic review of the impact of ADHD medications on anxiety and depression in children and adolescents

Anxiety and depression are listed as common side effects for medications licensed for treating ADHD in children and adolescents. This meta-analytic review of randomised controlled trials aimed to explore the effect of medications on symptoms of anxiety and depression in children and adolescents with ADHD. A meta-analytic review of ADHD drug trials in children and adolescents was conducted. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted on anxiety and depression outcomes measured by validated psychological scales or side effect rating scales. Only 11% of eligible trials in this review reported anxiety and/or depression as an outcome or side effect, limiting the conclusions of the meta-analyses. Relative to placebo control, no significant effect of medication was found for symptoms of anxiety or depression in randomised controlled trials of ADHD medication in children and adolescents. This review highlights the systemic lack of mental health outcome reporting in child and adolescent ADHD drug trials. The importance of widespread implementation of standardised measurement of mental health outcomes in future trials is discussed.

Tenofovir for children and adults with chronic hepatitis B

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate the benefits and harms of tenofovir versus no intervention or placebo for children and adults with chronic hepatitis B.

Adverse Effects of Stimulant Interventions for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): A Comprehensive Systematic Review

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a fairly common psychiatric disorder among children. It has substantial consequences in terms of quality of life for those experiencing it and their families. In managing ADHD symptoms medication plays an essential role, including stimulants such as methylphenidate being a key component. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised about possible adverse reactions connected to these drugs. Thus, in this systematic review, an extensive analysis was conducted aiming at understanding any negative repercussions specifically from prolonged exposure to these medications among patients diagnosed with ADHD. The methodology entailed adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. While capturing relevant data through a meticulous search in various databases, filtered according to preset inclusion and exclusion criteria, 13 studies were considered for analysis. Conclusions indicate that the administration of stimulant medications can potentially translate into a small rise in blood pressure along with increased heart rate particularly when amphetamines are taken. However, no reports of notable serious cardiovascular events have emerged. In the domain of neuropsychiatry, it appears that long-term usage of methylphenidate generally bears no serious consequences, even though a hike in risk levels related to the occurrence of psychotic episodes was detected among those treated with amphetamines. Several gastrointestinal side effects including decreased appetite and stomach pain were reported, however, findings regarding ocular abnormalities or growth-related effects stood inconclusive. Therefore, based on this data the consensus is that stimulant medications do generate manageable and mild negative outcomes within the ADHD population. It is vital however to highlight the need for careful observation and further scientific inquiry to achieve a better grasp on both immediate as well as long-term implications involved.

The Adverse Effects and Nonmedical Use of Methylphenidate Before and After the Outbreak of COVID-19: Machine Learning Analysis

BACKGROUND

Methylphenidate is an effective first-line treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, many adverse effects of methylphenidate have been recorded from randomized clinical trials and patient-reported outcomes, but it is difficult to determine abuse from them. In the context of COVID-19, it is important to determine how drug use evaluation, as well as misuse of drugs, have been affected by the pandemic. As people share their reasons for using medication, patient sentiments, and the effects of medicine on social networking services (SNSs), the application of machine learning and SNS data can be a method to overcome the limitations. Proper machine learning models could be evaluated to validate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on drug use.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of methylphenidate, this study analyzed the adverse effects and nonmedical use of methylphenidate and evaluated the change in frequency of nonmedical use based on SNS data before and after the outbreak of COVID-19. Moreover, the performance of 4 machine learning models for classifying methylphenidate use based on SNS data was compared.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, SNS data on methylphenidate from Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram from January 2019 to December 2020 were collected. The frequency of adverse effects, nonmedical use, and drug use before and after the COVID-19 pandemic were compared and analyzed. Interrupted time series analysis about the frequency and trends of nonmedical use of methylphenidate was conducted for 24 months from January 2019 to December 2020. Using the labeled training data set and features, the following 4 machine learning models were built using the data, and their performance was evaluated using F-1 scores: naïve Bayes classifier, random forest, support vector machine, and long short-term memory.

RESULTS

This study collected 146,352 data points and detected that 4.3% (6340/146,352) were firsthand experience data. Psychiatric problems (521/1683, 31%) had the highest frequency among the adverse effects. The highest frequency of nonmedical use was for studies or work (741/2016, 36.8%). While the frequency of nonmedical use before and after the outbreak of COVID-19 has been similar (odds ratio [OR] 1.02 95% CI 0.91-1.15), its trend has changed significantly due to the pandemic (95% CI 2.36-22.20). Among the machine learning models, RF had the highest performance of 0.75.

CONCLUSIONS

The trend of nonmedical use of methylphenidate has changed significantly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Among the machine learning models using SNS data to analyze the adverse effects and nonmedical use of methylphenidate, the random forest model had the highest performance.

Fibrin-based haemostatic agents for reducing blood loss in adult liver resection

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is the optimal treatment for selected benign and malignant liver tumours, but it can be associated with significant blood loss. Numerous anaesthetic and surgical techniques have been developed to reduce blood loss and improve perioperative outcomes. One such technique is the application of topical fibrin-based haemostatic agents (FBHAs) to the resection surface. There is no standard practice for FBHA use, and a variety of commercial agents and devices are available, as well as non-FBHAs (e.g. collagen-based agents). The literature is inconclusive on the effectiveness of these methods and on the clinical benefits of their routine use.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of fibrin-based haemostatic agents in reducing intraoperative blood loss in adults undergoing liver resection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group (CHBG) Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science up to 20 January 2023. We also searched online trial registries, checked the reference lists of all primary studies, and contacted the authors of included trials for additional published or unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered for inclusion all randomised clinical trials evaluating FBHAs versus no topical intervention or non-FBHAs, irrespective of publication type, publication status, language of publication, and outcomes reported. Eligible participants could have any liver pathology and be undergoing major or minor liver resections through open or laparoscopic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the literature search and used data extraction forms to collate the results. We expressed dichotomous outcome results as risk ratios (RRs) and continuous outcome results as mean differences (MDs), each with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We used a random-effects model for the main analyses. Our primary outcomes were perioperative mortality, serious adverse events, haemostatic efficacy, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were efficacy as sealant, adverse events considered non-serious, operating time, and length of hospital stay. We assessed the certainty of the evidence with GRADE and presented results in two summary of findings tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 trials (2945 participants) evaluating FBHAs versus no intervention or non-FBHAs; 19 trials with 2642 participants provided data for the meta-analyses. Twelve trials reported commercial funding, one trial reported no financial support, and nine trials provided no information on funding. Below we present the most clinically relevant outcome results, also displayed in our summary of findings table. Fibrin-based haemostatic agents versus no intervention Six trials (1001 participants) compared FBHAs with no intervention. One trial was at low risk of bias in all five domains, and all other trials were at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Two trials were at high risk of bias related to blinding. It is unclear if FBHAs compared with no intervention have an effect on perioperative mortality (RR 2.58, 95% CI 0.89 to 7.44; 4 trials, 782 participants), serious adverse events (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.05; 4 trials, 782 participants), postoperative transfusion (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40; 5 trials, 864 participants), reoperation (RR 2.92, 95% CI 0.58 to 14.61; 2 trials, 612 participants), or postoperative bile leak (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.48; 4 trials, 782 participants), as the certainty of evidence was very low for all these outcomes. Fibrin-based haemostatic agents versus non-fibrin-based haemostatic agents Sixteen trials (1944 participants) compared FBHAs with non-FBHAs. All trials had at least one domain at high or unclear risk of bias. Twelve trials were at high risk of bias related to blinding. It is unclear if FBHAs compared with non-FBHAs have an effect on perioperative mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.72; 11 trials, 1436 participants), postoperative transfusion (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.25; 7 trials, 599 participants), reoperation (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.90; 3 trials, 358 participants), or postoperative bile leak (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.21; 9 trials, 1115 participants), as the certainty of evidence was very low for all these outcomes. FBHAs compared with non-FBHAs may have little or no effect on the risk of serious adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03; 9 trials, 1176 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for the outcomes in both comparisons (FBHAs versus no intervention and FBHAs versus non-FBHAs) was of very low certainty (or low certainty in one instance) and cannot justify the routine use of FBHAs to reduce blood loss in adult liver resection. While the meta-analysis showed a reduced risk of reoperation with FBHAs compared with non-FBHAs, the analysis was confounded by the small number of trials reporting the event and the risk of bias in all these trials. Future trials should focus on the use of FBHAs in people undergoing liver resection who are at particularly high risk of bleeding. Investigators should evaluate clinically meaningful and patient-important outcomes and follow the SPIRIT and CONSORT statements.

Combination treatment of pegylated interferon and tenofovir versus tenofovir for people with chronic hepatitis B

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate the benefits and harms of pegylated interferon combined with tenofovir versus tenofovir monotherapy in adults with chronic hepatitis B.

Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered stents versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in people with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a widely used procedure for management of uncontrolled upper gastrointestinal bleeding and refractory ascites in people with liver cirrhosis. However, nearly half of the people experience shunt dysfunction and recurrent symptoms within one year of the procedure. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered stents are assumed to decrease shunt dysfunction by approximately 20% to 30%.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms associated with the use of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered stents versus bare stents in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs) for managing people with liver cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 28 February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents in TIPS for treatment of people with liver cirrhosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality, 2. procedure-related complications, and 3. health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were 4. upper gastrointestinal bleeding, 5. recurrence of ascites, 6. hepatic encephalopathy, 7. kidney failure, 8. early thrombosis, 9. non-serious adverse events, and 10. shunt dysfunction. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. We analysed outcome data at the maximum follow-up, except for the 'early thrombosis' outcome for which it was within 12 weeks after the TIPS procedure.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four trials with 565 randomised participants (age range: 18 to 75 years; male range: 63.6% to 75.0%). A total of 527 participants provided data for analyses because of losses to follow-up. Two trials were conducted in China; one in France; and one in France, Spain, and Canada. Participants were classified with cirrhosis Child-Pugh class A, B, or C, and for some, the class was not reported. We used intention-to-treat principle (four trials) and per-protocol analysis (one trial) to meta-analyse the data. One trial compared ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of the same diameter and three trials compared ePTFE-covered stents versus stents of different diameters. ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of the same diameter One trial with 258 participants compared 8 mm covered stent versus 8 mm bare stent. Mortality in the covered stent group is possibly lower than in the bare stent group (risk ratio (RR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.92; low-certainty evidence). Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.84), recurrence of ascites (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.87), and shunt dysfunction (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.61) occurred more often in the bare stent group than in the covered stent group (all low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in hepatic encephalopathy between groups (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.61; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report data on procedure-related complications, health-related quality of life, early thrombosis, and segmental liver ischaemia (a non-serious adverse event). ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of different stent diameters Three trials compared ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of different diameters (10.5 (standard deviation (SD) 0.9) mm versus 11.7 (SD 0.8) mm; 8 mm versus 10 mm; and one trial used 10-mm stents that could be dilated from 8 mm to 10 mm). There was no evidence of a difference between the ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents groups in mortality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; 3 trials, 269 participants), procedure-related complications (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.57; 1 trial, 80 participants), upper gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.38; 3 trials, 269 participants), hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.30; 3 trials, 269 participants), and kidney failure (RR 7.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 143.92; 1 trial, 121 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). Recurrence of ascites (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.85; 3 trials, 269 participants; low-certainty evidence), shunt dysfunction (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.92; 3 trials, 269 participants; low-certainty evidence), and early thrombosis (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.82; I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 261 participants; very low-certainty evidence) occurred more often in the bare stents group. There was no evidence of a difference in segmental liver ischaemia (RR 5.25, 95% CI 0.26 to 106.01; 1 trial, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trial presented data on health-related quality of life. Funding One trial did not clearly report funding sources. The remaining three trials declared that they had no funding with vested interests.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the small number of trials with insufficient sample size and events, and study limitations, we assessed the overall certainty of evidence in the predefined outcomes as low or very low. Therefore, we are uncertain which of the two interventions (ePTFE-covered stents or bare stents of the same diameter and ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of different stent diameters) is effective for the evaluated outcomes. None of the four trials reported data on health-related quality of life, and data on complications were either missing or rarely reported. We lack high-quality trials to evaluate the role of ePTFE-covered stents for TIPS for managing people with liver cirrhosis.

An updated safety review of the current drugs for managing ADHD in children

INTRODUCTION

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a highly prevalent condition that causes persistent problems with attention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity and often results in significant impairment when left untreated. Medications for this disorder continue to evolve and provide new treatment options. Ongoing review of related medication safety and tolerability remains an important task for prescribers.

AREAS COVERED

This manuscript provides an updated safety review of medications used to treat ADHD in children and adolescents. PubMed and OneSearch online databases were utilized to search for literature relevant to the topic of ADHD medications and safety. Clinical trials of medications used to treat ADHD, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and articles covering specific safety issues (adverse or unfavorable events) such as cardiovascular effects, seizures, impact on growth, depression, suicidal ideation, substance use disorders, psychosis, and tics are described.

EXPERT OPINION

Available pharmacologic treatments for ADHD have favorable efficacy, safety and tolerability and allow many patients to achieve significant improvement of their symptoms. Despite the availability of multiple stimulant and non-stimulant formulations, some individuals with ADHD may not tolerate available medications or attain satisfactory improvement. To satisfy unmet clinical needs, ADHD pharmaceutical research with stimulant and nonstimulant formulations targeting dopamine, norepinephrine, and novel receptors is ongoing.

Antivirals for prevention of hepatitis B virus mother-to-child transmission in human immunodeficiency virus positive pregnant women co-infected with hepatitis B virus

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-human Immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infection promotes an aggressive disease course of HBV infection. In the only available non-Cochrane systematic review on antiviral therapy during pregnancy for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HBV, none of the women studied had HBV-HIV co-infection but were either HBV- or HIV-seropositive. Treatment of HBV alone may develop HIV-strains that are resistant to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Accordingly, co-treatment of the HIV infection is recommended.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens versus placebo, tenofovir alone, or non-tenofovir-based antiviral regimen either alone or in combination with HBV for the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HBV in HIV-positive pregnant women co-infected with HBV.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS (Bireme), Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science), and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (Web of Science) on 30 January 2023. We manually searched the reference lists of included trials, searched on-line trial registries, and contacted experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies for any further potential trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We aimed to include randomised clinical trials comparing tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens (anti-HIV regimen with lopinavir-ritonavir therapy, or any other antiviral therapy, and two drugs with activity against HBV, specifically, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), plus lamivudine or emtricitabine) with placebo alone, or tenofovir alone, or non-tenofovir-based antiviral regimen (zidovudine, lamivudine, telbivudine, emtricitabine, entecavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, or any other antiviral therapy) either alone or in combination with at least two other antivirals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes included all-cause infant mortality, proportion of infants with serious adverse events, proportion of infants with HBV mother-to-child transmission, all-cause maternal mortality, and proportion of mothers with serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included proportion of infants with adverse events not considered serious, proportion of mothers with detectable HBV DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) (before delivery), maternal hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) to HBe-antibody seroconversion (before delivery) and maternal adverse events not considered serious. We used RevMan Web to carry out analyses and presented results, where feasible, using a random-effects model and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed sensitivity analysis. We assessed risk of bias using predefined domains, assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE, controlled risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis, and presented outcome results in a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

Five completed trials were included, of which four trials contributed data to one or more of the outcomes. They included a total of 533 participants randomised to tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens (196 participants) versus control (337 participants). The control groups received non-tenofovir-based antiviral regimens either as zidovudine alone (three trials) or as a combination of zidovudine, lamivudine and lopinavir-ritonavir (five trials). None of the trials used placebo or tenofovir alone. All trials were at unclear risk of bias. Four trials used intention-to-treat analyses. In the remaining trial, two participants in the intervention group and two in the control group were lost to follow-up. However, the outcomes of these four participants were not described. Tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimen versus control We are very uncertain about the effect of a tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimen versus control on all-cause infant mortality (RR 2.24, 95% CI 0.72 to 6.96; participants = 132; trials = 1; very low-certainty evidence); proportion of infants with serious adverse events (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.43; participants = 132; trials = 1; very low-certainty evidence), and proportion of mothers with serious adverse events (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.32; participants = 262; trials = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No trial reported data on the proportion of infants with HBV mother-to-child transmission and all-cause maternal mortality. We are also very uncertain about the effect of tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens versus control on the proportion of infants with adverse events not considered serious (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.68; participants = 31; trials = 1; very low-certainty evidence), and proportion of mothers with detectable HBV DNA (before delivery) (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.02; participants = 169; trials = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No trial reported data on maternal hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) to HBe-antibody seroconversion (before delivery) and maternal adverse events not considered serious. All trials received support from industry.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We do not know what the effects of tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens are on all-cause infant mortality, proportion of infants with serious adverse events and proportion of mothers with serious adverse events, proportion of infants with adverse events not considered serious, and proportion of mothers with detectable HBV DNA before delivery because the certainty of evidence was very low. Only one or two trials, with insufficient power, contributed data for analyses. We lack randomised clinical trials at low risk of systematic and random errors, and fully reporting all-cause infant mortality, serious adverse events and reporting on clinical and laboratory outcomes, such as infants with HBV mother-to-child transmission, all-cause maternal mortality, maternal hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) to HBe-antibody seroconversion before delivery and maternal adverse events not considered serious.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with or without stem or progenitor cell or growth factors infusion for people with compensated or decompensated advanced chronic liver disease

BACKGROUND

Advanced chronic liver disease is characterised by a long compensated phase followed by a rapidly progressive 'decompensated' phase, which is marked by the development of complications of portal hypertension and liver dysfunction. Advanced chronic liver disease is considered responsible for more than one million deaths annually worldwide. No treatment is available to specifically target fibrosis and cirrhosis; liver transplantation remains the only curative option. Researchers are investigating strategies to restore liver functionality to avoid or slow progression towards end-stage liver disease. Cytokine mobilisation of stem cells from the bone marrow to the liver could improve liver function. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a 175-amino-acid protein currently available for mobilisation of haematopoietic stem cells from the bone marrow. Multiple courses of G-CSF, with or without stem or progenitor cell or growth factors (erythropoietin or growth hormone) infusion, might be associated with accelerated hepatic regeneration, improved liver function, and survival.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of G-CSF with or without stem or progenitor cell or growth factors (erythropoietin or growth hormone) infusion, compared with no intervention or placebo in people with compensated or decompensated advanced chronic liver disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trial registers (October 2022) together with reference-checking and web-searching to identify additional studies. We applied no restrictions on language and document type.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We only included randomised clinical trials comparing G-CSF, independent of the schedule of administration, as a single treatment or combined with stem or progenitor cell infusion, or with other medical co-interventions, with no intervention or placebo, in adults with chronic compensated or decompensated advanced chronic liver disease or acute-on-chronic liver failure. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, outcomes reported, or language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane procedures. All-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life were our primary outcomes, and liver disease-related morbidity, non-serious adverse events, and no improvement of liver function scores were our secondary outcomes. We undertook meta-analyses, based on intention-to-treat, and presented results using risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and I2 statistic values as a marker of heterogeneity. We assessed all outcomes at maximum follow-up. We determined the certainty of evidence using GRADE, evaluated the risk of small-study effects in regression analyses, and conducted subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 trials (1419 participants; sample size ranged from 28 to 259), which lasted between 11 and 57 months. Nineteen trials included only participants with decompensated cirrhosis; in one trial, 30% had compensated cirrhosis. The included trials were conducted in Asia (15), Europe (four), and the USA (one). Not all trials provided data for our outcomes. All trials reported data allowing intention-to-treat analyses. The experimental intervention consisted of G-CSF alone or G-CSF plus any of the following: growth hormone, erythropoietin, N-acetyl cysteine, infusion of CD133-positive haemopoietic stem cells, or infusion of autologous bone marrow mononuclear cells. The control group consisted of no intervention in 15 trials and placebo (normal saline) in five trials. Standard medical therapy (antivirals, alcohol abstinence, nutrition, diuretics, β-blockers, selective intestinal decontamination, pentoxifylline, prednisolone, and other supportive measures depending on the clinical status and requirement) was administered equally to the trial groups. Very low-certainty evidence suggested a decrease in mortality with G-CSF, administered alone or in combination with any of the above, versus placebo (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.72; I2 = 75%; 1419 participants; 20 trials). Very low-certainty evidence suggested no difference in serious adverse events (G-CSF alone or in combination versus placebo: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.61; I2 = 66%; 315 participants; three trials). Eight trials, with 518 participants, reported no serious adverse events. Two trials, with 165 participants, used two components of the quality of life score for assessment, with ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate better quality of life, with a mean increase from baseline of the physical component summary of 20.7 (95% CI 17.4 to 24.0; very low-certainty evidence) and a mean increase from baseline of the mental component summary of 27.8 (95% CI 12.3 to 43.3; very low-certainty evidence). G-CSF, alone or in combination, suggested a beneficial effect on the proportion of participants who developed one or more liver disease-related complications (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.92; I2 = 62%; 195 participants; four trials; very low-certainty evidence). When we analysed the occurrences of single complications, there was no suggestion of a difference between G-CSF, alone or in combination, versus control, in participants in need of liver transplantation (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.85; 692 participants; five trials), in the development of hepatorenal syndrome (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.30; 520 participants; six trials), in the occurrence of variceal bleeding (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.23; 614 participants; eight trials), and in the development of encephalopathy (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.01; 605 participants; seven trials) (very low-certainty evidence). The same comparison suggested that G-CSF reduces the development of infections (including sepsis) (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.84; 583 participants; eight trials) and does not improve liver function scores (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.86; 319 participants; two trials) (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

G-CSF, alone or in combination, seems to decrease mortality in people with decompensated advanced chronic liver disease of whatever aetiology and with or without acute-on-chronic liver failure, but the certainty of evidence is very low because of high risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. The results of trials conducted in Asia and Europe were discrepant; this could not be explained by differences in participant selection, intervention, and outcome measurement. Data on serious adverse events and health-related quality of life were few and inconsistently reported. The evidence is also very uncertain regarding the occurrence of one or more liver disease-related complications. We lack high-quality, global randomised clinical trials assessing the effect of G-CSF on clinically relevant outcomes.

Exercise interventions for adults after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The finding that exercise is inversely related to metabolic syndrome after transplantation is novel and suggests that exercise interventions might provide a means for reducing metabolic syndrome complications in liver transplantation recipients. The use of exercise for increasing the physical activity daily levels by more frequent, higher intensity, and longer duration of training sessions, or the sum of these components may be necessary to counteract the effects of the pretransplant reduced activity, metabolic disturbances, and post-transplant immunosuppression, as well as improve physical function and aerobic capacity following liver transplantation. Regular physical activity has a long-term positive impact on recovery following various surgical procedures including transplantation, giving people the opportunity to return to an active life with their families, in society, and in their professional life. Likewise, specific muscle strength training may attenuate the loss of strength after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of exercise-based interventions in adults after liver transplantation compared to no exercise, sham interventions, or another type of exercise.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 2 September 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials in liver transplantation recipients comparing any type of exercise with no exercise, sham interventions, or another type of exercise.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality; 2. serious adverse events; and 3. health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were 4. a composite of cardiovascular mortality and cardiac disease; 5. aerobic capacity; 6. muscle strength; 7. morbidity; 8. non-serious adverse events; and 9. cardiovascular disease post-transplantation. We assessed risk of bias of the individual trials using RoB 1, described the interventions using the TIDieR checklist, and used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three randomised clinical trials. The trials randomised 241 adults with liver transplantation, of which 199 participants completed the trials. The trials were conducted in the USA, Spain, and Turkey. They compared exercise versus usual care. The duration of the interventions ranged from two to 10 months. One trial reported that 69% of participants who received the exercise intervention were adherent to the exercise prescription. A second trial reported a 94% adherence to the exercise programme, with participants attending 45/48 sessions. The remaining trial reported a 96.8% adherence to the exercise intervention during the hospitalisation period. Two trials received funding; one from the National Center for Research Resources (US) and the other from Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Spain). The remaining trial did not receive funding. All trials were at an overall high risk of bias, derived from high risk of selective reporting bias and attrition bias in two trials. The results on all-cause mortality showed a higher risk of death in the exercise group versus the control group, but these results are very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 3.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 13.37; 2 trials, 165 participants; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). The trials did not report data on serious adverse events excluding mortality or non-serious adverse events. However, all trials reported that there were no adverse effects associated with exercise. We are very uncertain on whether exercise compared with usual care has a beneficial or harmful effect on health-related quality of life assessed using the 36-item Short Form Physical Functioning subscale at the end of the intervention (mean difference (MD) 10.56, 95% CI -0.12 to 21.24; 2 trials, 169 participants; I² = 71%; very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials reported data on composite of cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular disease, and cardiovascular disease post-transplantation. We are very uncertain if there are differences in aerobic capacity in terms of VO2peak at the end of the intervention between groups (MD 0.80, 95% CI -0.80 to 2.39; 3 trials, 199 participants; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if there are differences in muscle strength at end of the intervention between groups (MD 9.91, 95% CI -3.68 to 23.50; 3 trials, 199 participants; I² = 44%; very low-certainty evidence). One trial measured perceived fatigue using the Checklist Individual Strength (CIST). Participants in the exercise group showed a clinically important lower degree of fatigue perception than participants in the control group, with a mean reduction of 40 points in the CIST (95% CI 15.62 to 64.38; 1 trial, 30 participants).  We identified three ongoing studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence in our systematic review, we are very uncertain of the role of exercise training (aerobic, resistance-based exercises, or both) in affecting mortality, health-related quality of life, and physical function (i.e. aerobic capacity and muscle strength) in liver transplant recipients. There were few data on the composite of cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular disease, cardiovascular disease post-transplantation, and adverse event outcomes. We lack larger trials with blinded outcome assessment, designed according to the SPIRIT statement and reported according to the CONSORT statement.

Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a major problem in children and adolescents, characterised by age-inappropriate levels of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity, and is associated with long-term social, academic, and mental health problems. The stimulant medications methylphenidate and amphetamine are the most frequently used treatments for ADHD, but these are not always effective and can be associated with side effects. Clinical and biochemical evidence suggests that deficiencies of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) could be related to ADHD. Research has shown that children and adolescents with ADHD have significantly lower plasma and blood concentrations of PUFA and, in particular, lower levels of omega-3 PUFA. These findings suggest that PUFA supplementation may reduce the attention and behaviour problems associated with ADHD. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane Review. Overall, there was little evidence that PUFA supplementation improved symptoms of ADHD in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of PUFA to other forms of treatment or placebo in treating the symptoms of ADHD in children and adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 13 databases and two trials registers up to October 2021. We also checked the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared PUFA with placebo or PUFA plus alternative therapy (medication, behavioural therapy, or psychotherapy) with the same alternative therapy alone in children and adolescents (aged 18 years and under) diagnosed with ADHD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was severity or improvement of ADHD symptoms. Our secondary outcomes were severity or incidence of behavioural problems; quality of life; severity or incidence of depressive symptoms; severity or incidence of anxiety symptoms; side effects; loss to follow-up; and cost. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 37 trials with more than 2374 participants, of which 24 trials were new to this update. Five trials (seven reports) used a cross-over design, while the remaining 32 trials (52 reports) used a parallel design. Seven trials were conducted in Iran, four each in the USA and Israel, and two each in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Sweden, and the UK. Single studies were conducted in Brazil, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, and Taiwan. Of the 36 trials that compared a PUFA to placebo, 19 used an omega-3 PUFA, six used a combined omega-3/omega-6 supplement, and two used an omega-6 PUFA. The nine remaining trials were included in the comparison of PUFA to placebo, but also had the same co-intervention in the PUFA and placebo groups. Of these, four trials compared a combination of omega-3 PUFA plus methylphenidate to methylphenidate. One trial each compared omega-3 PUFA plus atomoxetine to atomoxetine; omega-3 PUFA plus physical training to physical training; and an omega-3 or omega-6 supplement plus methylphenidate to methylphenidate; and two trials compared omega-3 PUFA plus dietary supplement to dietary supplement. Supplements were given for a period of between two weeks and six months. Although we found low-certainty evidence that PUFA compared to placebo may improve ADHD symptoms in the medium term (risk ratio (RR) 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47 to 2.60; 3 studies, 191 participants), there was high-certainty evidence that PUFA had no effect on parent-rated total ADHD symptoms compared to placebo in the medium term (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.08, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.07; 16 studies, 1166 participants). There was also high-certainty evidence that parent-rated inattention (medium-term: SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.17; 12 studies, 960 participants) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (medium-term: SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.23; 10 studies, 869 participants) scores were no different compared to placebo. There was moderate-certainty evidence that overall side effects likely did not differ between PUFA and placebo groups (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.52; 8 studies, 591 participants). There was also moderate-certainty evidence that medium-term loss to follow-up was likely similar between groups (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.37; 13 studies, 1121 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although we found low-certainty evidence that children and adolescents receiving PUFA may be more likely to improve compared to those receiving placebo, there was high-certainty evidence that PUFA had no effect on total parent-rated ADHD symptoms. There was also high-certainty evidence that inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity did not differ between PUFA and placebo groups. We found moderate-certainty evidence that overall side effects likely did not differ between PUFA and placebo groups. There was also moderate-certainty evidence that follow-up was similar between groups. It is important that future research addresses the current weaknesses in this area, which include small sample sizes, variability of selection criteria, variability of the type and dosage of supplementation, and short follow-up times.

Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed and treated psychiatric disorders in childhood. Typically, children and adolescents with ADHD find it difficult to pay attention and they are hyperactive and impulsive. Methylphenidate is the psychostimulant most often prescribed, but the evidence on benefits and harms is uncertain. This is an update of our comprehensive systematic review on benefits and harms published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two trials registers up to March 2022. In addition, we checked reference lists and requested published and unpublished data from manufacturers of methylphenidate.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention in children and adolescents aged 18 years and younger with a diagnosis of ADHD. The search was not limited by publication year or language, but trial inclusion required that 75% or more of participants had a normal intellectual quotient (IQ > 70). We assessed two primary outcomes, ADHD symptoms and serious adverse events, and three secondary outcomes, adverse events considered non-serious, general behaviour, and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment for each trial. Six review authors including two review authors from the original publication participated in the update in 2022. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Data from parallel-group trials and first-period data from cross-over trials formed the basis of our primary analyses. We undertook separate analyses using end-of-last period data from cross-over trials. We used Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA) to control for type I (5%) and type II (20%) errors, and we assessed and downgraded evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 212 trials (16,302 participants randomised); 55 parallel-group trials (8104 participants randomised), and 156 cross-over trials (8033 participants randomised) as well as one trial with a parallel phase (114 participants randomised) and a cross-over phase (165 participants randomised). The mean age of participants was 9.8 years ranging from 3 to 18 years (two trials from 3 to 21 years). The male-female ratio was 3:1. Most trials were carried out in high-income countries, and 86/212 included trials (41%) were funded or partly funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Methylphenidate treatment duration ranged from 1 to 425 days, with a mean duration of 28.8 days. Trials compared methylphenidate with placebo (200 trials) and with no intervention (12 trials). Only 165/212 trials included usable data on one or more outcomes from 14,271 participants. Of the 212 trials, we assessed 191 at high risk of bias and 21 at low risk of bias. If, however, deblinding of methylphenidate due to typical adverse events is considered, then all 212 trials were at high risk of bias.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.88 to -0.61; I² = 38%; 21 trials; 1728 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to a mean difference (MD) of -10.58 (95% CI -12.58 to -8.72) on the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS; range 0 to 72 points). The minimal clinically relevant difference is considered to be a change of 6.6 points on the ADHD-RS. Methylphenidate may not affect serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.67; I² = 0%; 26 trials, 3673 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The TSA-adjusted intervention effect was RR 0.91 (CI 0.31 to 2.68).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

methylphenidate may cause more adverse events considered non-serious versus placebo or no intervention (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; I² = 72%; 35 trials 5342 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The TSA-adjusted intervention effect was RR 1.22 (CI 1.08 to 1.43). Methylphenidate may improve teacher-rated general behaviour versus placebo (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.33; I² = 68%; 7 trials 792 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but may not affect quality of life (SMD 0.40, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.83; I² = 81%; 4 trials, 608 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The majority of our conclusions from the 2015 version of this review still apply. Our updated meta-analyses suggest that methylphenidate versus placebo or no-intervention may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms and general behaviour in children and adolescents with ADHD. There may be no effects on serious adverse events and quality of life. Methylphenidate may be associated with an increased risk of adverse events considered non-serious, such as sleep problems and decreased appetite. However, the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes is very low and therefore the true magnitude of effects remain unclear. Due to the frequency of non-serious adverse events associated with methylphenidate, the blinding of participants and outcome assessors is particularly challenging. To accommodate this challenge, an active placebo should be sought and utilised. It may be difficult to find such a drug, but identifying a substance that could mimic the easily recognised adverse effects of methylphenidate would avert the unblinding that detrimentally affects current randomised trials. Future systematic reviews should investigate the subgroups of patients with ADHD that may benefit most and least from methylphenidate. This could be done with individual participant data to investigate predictors and modifiers like age, comorbidity, and ADHD subtypes.

Bacterial gut microbiome differences in adults with ADHD and in children with ADHD on psychostimulant medication

Recent evidence suggests that there is a link between neurodevelopmental disorders, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and the gut microbiome. However, most studies to date have had low sample sizes, have not investigated the impact of psychostimulant medication, and have not adjusted for potential confounders, including body mass index, stool consistency and diet. To this end, we conducted the largest, to our knowledge, fecal shotgun metagenomic sequencing study in ADHD, with 147 well-characterized adult and child patients. For a subset of individuals, plasma levels of inflammatory markers and short-chain fatty acids were also measured. In adult ADHD patients (n=84), compared to controls (n=52), we found a significant difference in beta diversity both regarding bacterial strains (taxonomic) and bacterial genes (functional). In children with ADHD (n=63), we found that those on psychostimulant medication (n=33 on medication vs. n=30 not on medication) had (i) significantly different taxonomic beta diversity, (ii) lower functional and taxonomic evenness, (iii) lower abundance of the strain Bacteroides stercoris CL09T03C01 and bacterial genes encoding an enzyme in vitamin B₁₂ synthesis, and (iv) higher plasma levels of vascular inflammatory markers sICAM-1 and sVCAM-1. Our study continues to support a role for the gut microbiome in neurodevelopmental disorders and provides additional insights into the effects of psychostimulant medication. However, additional studies are needed to replicate these findings and examine causal relationships with the disorder.

Transitions between cognitive topographies: contributions of network structure, neuromodulation, and disease

Patterns of neural activity underlie human cognition. Transitions between these patterns are orchestrated by the brain's network architecture. What are the mechanisms linking network structure to cognitively relevant activation patterns? Here we implement principles of network control to investigate how the architecture of the human connectome shapes transitions between 123 experimentally defined cognitive activation maps (cognitive topographies) from the NeuroSynth meta-analytic engine. We also systematically incorporate neurotransmitter receptor density maps (18 receptors and transporters) and disease-related cortical abnormality maps (11 neurodegenerative, psychiatric and neurodevelopmental diseases; N = 17 000 patients, N = 22 000 controls). Integrating large-scale multimodal neuroimaging data from functional MRI, diffusion tractography, cortical morphometry, and positron emission tomography, we simulate how anatomically-guided transitions between cognitive states can be reshaped by pharmacological or pathological perturbation. Our results provide a comprehensive look-up table charting how brain network organisation and chemoarchitecture interact to manifest different cognitive topographies. This computational framework establishes a principled foundation for systematically identifying novel ways to promote selective transitions between desired cognitive topographies.

Safety and Tolerability of Serdexmethylphenidate/Dexmethylphenidate Capsules in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A 12-Month, Open-Label Safety Study

Objective: Serdexmethylphenidate/dexmethylphenidate (SDX/d-MPH) is approved for the treatment of patients aged ≥6 years with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). A pivotal double-blind (DB) study of children aged 6-12 years with ADHD demonstrated efficacy for ADHD with good tolerability. In this study, we assessed the safety and tolerability of daily oral SDX/d-MPH for up to 1 year in children with ADHD. Methods: This was a dose-optimized, open-label safety study with SDX/d-MPH in children aged 6-12 years with ADHD that included subjects who successfully completed the DB study (rollover) and new subjects. The study consisted of a 30-day screening phase, a dose optimization phase for new subjects only, a 360-day treatment phase, and follow-up. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed from the first day of SDX/d-MPH administration to the end of the study. During the treatment phase, ADHD Rating Scale-5 (ADHD-RS-5) and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scale assessments were used to evaluate ADHD severity. Results: Of the 282 subjects enrolled (70 rollover; 212 new), 28 discontinued treatment in the dose optimization phase and 254 entered the treatment phase. By study completion, 127 had discontinued and 155 had completed the study. The treatment-phase safety population included all enrolled subjects who received ≥1 dose of study drug and had ≥1 postdose safety assessment. Of 238 subjects assessed in the treatment-phase safety population, 143 (60.1%) had ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and 36 (15.1%), 95 (39.9%), and 12 (5.0%) had mild, moderate, or severe TEAEs, respectively. The most common TEAEs were decreased appetite (18.5%), upper respiratory tract infection (9.7%), nasopharyngitis (8.0%), decreased weight (7.6%), and irritability (6.7%). There were no clinically meaningful trends in electrocardiograms, cardiac events, or blood pressure events, and none led to discontinuation. Two subjects had eight serious AEs that were unrelated to treatment. There were overall reductions in ADHD symptoms and severity as assessed by ADHD-RS-5 and CGI-S during the treatment phase. Conclusions: In this 1-year study, SDX/d-MPH was found to be safe and well tolerated and comparable with other methylphenidate products, with no unexpected safety findings. SDX/d-MPH also showed sustained efficacy during the 1-year treatment period. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03460652.

Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

METHODS

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/, http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/, www.eudraCT.com, http://centerwatch.com/, The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

DISCUSSION

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.

Psychosis Induced by Methylphenidate in Children and Young Patients With Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders diagnosed in children of this era. ADHD in children and adults is challenging but highly manageable. Children with ADHD cannot focus, are hyperactive, and appear withdrawn. These symptoms make them endure difficulties in learning and create academic challenges. Methylphenidate (MPH) is one of the psychostimulants used as a first-line therapy for ADHD. In this literature review, we have gathered information that describes the evidence of psychotic symptoms in children and young patients with ADHD as a side effect of MPH. We used articles from the National Library of Medicine (PubMed) and Google Scholar to gather the relevant information. Our findings concluded that MPH can increase the risk of psychosis, particularly when taken in high doses. It is still unclear whether the psychotic range of symptoms occurred due to an increased dopamine (DA) level caused by MPH or as a predominant feature of ADHD or if there was another comorbid feature in the history of the patient that led to psychosis. However, a necessary step for every medical practitioner prescribing psychostimulants is that they enlighten the patient and caregiver that this rare but threatening side effect is a possibility.

Interventions for unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a network meta‐analysis

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To establish the existence of differences in effectiveness and safety of intra‐arterial therapies (IATs) such as bland embolisation, conventional transarterial chemoembolisation (cTACE), drug‐eluting bead transarterial chemoembolisation (DEBTACE), yttrium‐90 (Y90), hepatic artery infusion (HAI), external beam radiotherapies (EBRTs), and immunotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy for unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma through pairwise meta‐analysis and network meta‐analysis with subsequent treatment ranking.

Analysis of Daily Sleep Diary Measures From Multilayer Extended-Release Methylphenidate (PRC-063) Studies in Children and Adults With ADHD

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of a once-daily extended-release methylphenidate formulation (PRC-063) versus placebo on sleep, measured via daily electronic diary in two clinical trials in pediatric (6-12 years) and adult (≥18 years) patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHOD

A diary was completed by adult patients or parents/caregivers of pediatric patients during two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled laboratory classroom studies. Following dose optimization of PRC-063, patients were randomized to 1 week of double-blind treatment with PRC-063 or placebo before attending a full-day laboratory classroom session.

RESULTS

In the studies, 148 pediatric patients and 239 adult patients were randomized to either PRC-063 or placebo. When compared with the diaries of placebo patients, the sleep diaries in both pediatric and adult patients showed no statistical difference in total sleep time, efficiency, or latency.

CONCLUSION

PRC-063 did not impact subjective measures of sleep versus placebo in pediatric and adult patients with ADHD.

Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Methylphenidate in the Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review

The treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents can be challenging and involve a combination of pharmacologic and non-pharmacological approaches. Using recent literature, we aim to identify the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and methylphenidate (MPH) in reducing the symptoms and improving the quality of life. The investigators conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Investigators independently conducted a routine search on PubMed and Google Scholar for articles published within the last five years through July 30, 2022. Fourteen studies were identified as generally good quality but with some limitations. The final analysis included 2098 patients with an age range of three to eighteen. Nine studies reporting the efficacy of MPH in children, adolescents, or both had different formulations and doses. Six studies documenting the effectiveness of CBT had varying sessions, duration per therapy, modality of administration, and participants. The diagnostic assessment measures showed that the parent symptom rating was the highest and appeared in 11 studies, reflecting the burden on the family. In addition, a structured-self-rated questionnaire rating appeared in eight studies, and two diagnostic assessment measures, teacher symptom rating and investigators, appeared in six. The studies demonstrated significant reductions in the primary symptoms of ADHD at assessment, which led to improved behavioral and functional status with a reduced impact on family and society. Further trials are needed to understand the benefits of CBT and MPH when combined to reduce psychiatry co-morbidities and improve learning and overall quality of life in the long term.

New insights into precocious puberty and ADHD: a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in children; however, studies delineating the association between ADHD and central precocious puberty are limited. This study aimed to understand whether children with ADHD are at a higher risk of central precocious puberty.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan to investigate the association between ADHD and the incidence of central precocious puberty between 2000-2015. We identified ADHD individuals treated with methylphenidate, atomoxetine or not. The control cohort consisted of individuals without ADHD. The outcome measure was central precocious puberty diagnosis.

RESULTS

Among 290,148 children (mean age: 5.83 years), central precocious puberty incidence was 4.24 and 1.95 per 10⁵ person-years in the ADHD and control groups, respectively. Children with ADHD treated with medication had a higher risk than those without ADHD. However, medication use did not affect the incidence of central precocious puberty among children with ADHD.

CONCLUSION

This study showed an association between ADHD and a higher risk of central precocious puberty. Early referral of children with ADHD to a pediatric endocrinologist for evaluation may facilitate correct diagnoses and early interventions.

IMPACT

ADHD is associated with a higher risk of central precocious puberty. This study provides relevant findings, as it is the first nationwide, population-based cohort study to investigate the association between ADHD and the risk of central precocious puberty with a 15-year follow-up. Early referral of children with ADHD to a pediatric endocrinologist for the evaluation of suspected precocious puberty could facilitate correct diagnosis. Early intervention treatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist might improve final height in children with central precocious puberty.

Liver support systems for adults with acute‐on‐chronic liver failure

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To assess the benefits and harms of liver support systems for adults with acute‐on‐chronic liver failure.

The association between nonpharmacological interventions and quality of life in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a common psychiatric disorder with a worldwide prevalence of about five percent among children and adolescents. This disorder affects most aspects of their lives e.g., academic performance and social relations, and their overall quality of life is reduced compared to healthy peers. The majority of children with ADHD are treated with medication that potentially has an insufficient effect and/or frequently occurring side effects.

OBJECTIVES

To enable nurses and other health care professionals to guide children with ADHD and their families in their choices of treatment, based on the best available literature on the association between nonpharmacological interventions and quality of life.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was performed in the databases CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Seven randomized controlled trials were included in this systematic review. They examined the use of polyunsaturated fatty acids, physical activity, psychoeducation, cognitive therapy, cognitive training, hippotherapy, and behavioral therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The study of behavioral therapy in the form of a sleep intervention detected an improvement in quality of life which was statistically significant compared to the control group.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Children with ADHD and a sleep disorder may gain improvement in their quality of life from a sleep intervention.

Methylphenidate-Induced Menorrhagia in Twin Girls

Objective: Methylphenidate, a psychostimulant agent, is used in first-line psychopharmacological treatment in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Common side effects associated with methylphenidate use in children and adolescents are insomnia, anorexia, headache, and nausea. Thrombocytopenia, nasal bleeding and menstrual bleeding disorders are very rarely reported during methylphenidate use. One of the least expected side effects during methylphenidate usage is menorrhagia. Method : In this article, we report methylphenidate monotherapy-induced menorrhagia in two adolescent identical twins. To our knowledge, this is the first report of menorrhagia associated with methylphenidate use in children and adolescents. Results: In both cases, menorrhagia has started after methylphenidate monotherapy and stopped after discontinuation. Other possible etiologies have excluded with clinical and laboratory evaluations. Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Score was found 7, indicates probable side effect. Conclusion: Menorrhagia is a rare adverse effect of methylphenidate use and clinicians should be aware of this phenomenon.