Controlled stimulant treatment of ADHD and comorbid Tourette's syndrome: effects of stimulant and dose

Pharmacotherapy for ADHD in children and adolescents: A summary and overview of different European guidelines

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by a persistent pattern of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. It is the most common neurodevelopmental disorder presenting to pediatric services, and pediatricians are often involved in the early assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of children with ADHD. The treatment of ADHD typically involves a multimodal approach that encompasses a combination of psychoeducation, parent/teacher training, psychosocial/psychotherapeutic interventions, and pharmacotherapy. Concerning pharmacotherapy, guidelines vary in drug choice and sequencing, with psychostimulants, such as methylphenidate and (lis)dexamfetamine, generally being the favored initial treatment. Alternatives include atomoxetine and guanfacine. Pharmacotherapy has been proven effective, but close follow-up focusing on physical growth, cardiovascular monitoring, and the surveillance of potential side effects including tics, mood fluctuations, and psychotic symptoms, is essential. This paper presents an overview of current pharmacological treatment options for ADHD and explores disparities in treatment guidelines across different European countries.   Conclusion: Pharmacological treatment options for ADHD in children and adolescents are effective and generally well-tolerated. Pharmacotherapy for ADHD is always part of a multimodal approach. While there is a considerable consensus among European guidelines on pharmacotherapy for ADHD, notable differences exist, particularly concerning the selection and sequencing of various medications. What is Known: • There is a significant base of evidence for pharmacological treatment for ADHD in children and adolescents. • Pediatricians are often involved in assessment, diagnosis and management of children with ADHD. What is New: • Our overview of different European guidelines reveals significant agreement in the context of pharmacotherapy for ADHD in children and adolescents. • Discrepancies exist primarily in terms of selection and sequencing of different medications.

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.

Viloxazine, a Non-stimulant Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitor, for the Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A 3 Year Update

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most common neurodevelopmental disorder in childhood. Current treatment options for ADHD include pharmacological treatment (stimulants, non-stimulants, anti-depressants, anti-psychotics), psychological treatment (behavioral therapy with or without parent training, cognitive training, neurofeedback), and complementary and alternative therapies (vitamin supplementation, exercise). Central nervous system (CNS) stimulants are the primary pharmacological therapy used in treatment; however, these stimulant drugs carry a high potential for abuse and severe psychological/physical dependence. Viloxazine, a non-stimulant medication without evidence of drug dependence, is a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor that has historically been prescribed as an anti-depressant medication. The extended-release (ER) form was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in April 2021 for the treatment of ADHD in pediatric patients aged 6-17 years. Phase 2 and 3 randomized control trials have demonstrated significant efficacy of viloxazine in improving ADHD symptoms versus placebo. Related to its long-standing use as an antidepressant, the safety profile and pharmacokinetics of viloxazine are well understood. Viloxazine appears to be a suitable alternative to current standard-of-care pharmacotherapy for ADHD, but the further investigation remains to be done in comparing its efficacy to that of current treatments.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Comorbid Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Tourette and Tic Disorders

A complete and comprehensive medical and psychiatric evaluation is necessary to delineate tic symptoms from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and to prioritize the most problematic symptoms for intervention. Stimulants are the recommended first-line pharmacotherapy to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in patients with tic disorders. Comprehensive behavioral intervention for tics is an effective behavioral therapy that is generally considered the first-line treatment of persistent tic disorders. α-Agonists can be added to stimulants if tics increase or be used as monotherapy to target attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and tics. Atomoxetine is also an excellent option to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and tics.

Stimulant Induced Movement Disorders in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Stimulants, such as amphetamine and methylphenidate, are one of the most effective treatment modalities for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and may cause various movement disorders. This review discusses various movement disorders related to stimulant use in the treatment of ADHD. We reviewed the current knowledge on various movement disorders that may be related to the therapeutic use of stimulants in patients with ADHD. Recent findings suggest that the use of stimulants and the onset/aggravation of tics are more likely to be coincidental. In rare cases, stimulants may cause stereotypies, chorea, and dyskinesia, in addition to tics. Some epidemiological studies have suggested that stimulants used for the treatment of ADHD may cause Parkinson’s disease (PD) after adulthood. However, there is still a lack of evidence that the use of stimulants in patients with ADHD may cause PD, and related studies are only in the early stages. As stimulants are one of the most commonly used medications in children and adolescents, close observations and studies are necessary to assess the effects of stimulants on various movement disorders, including tic disorders and Parkinson’s disease.

Methylphenidate and TBI in ADHD and co-occurring epilepsy and mental disorders: a self-controlled case series study

It is suggested that medication for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) links to lower risk of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Little is known about whether the beneficial effect of methylphenidate is persistent in individuals with other comorbid mental disorders and epilepsy. We identified 90,634 participants who were less than 18 years old and diagnosed with ADHD from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2013. Cox proportional hazards models with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval were conducted to compare the risks of TBI event between groups of ADHD-only and ADHD with co-occurring other mental disorders. Within-individual comparisons using a self-controlled case series study design were conducted using conditional Poisson regression models with relative incidence (RR) and 95% CI to examine the effect of methylphenidate on TBI with adjustment for medication of psychotropics and anticonvulsants. For children and adolescents with ADHD, we found comorbid mental disorders and epilepsy increase the risk of TBI, with HRs ranged from 1.21 to 1.75. For the effect of MPH, we found reduced risks for TBI in ADHD (RR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.70-0.98). Similar results were found among individuals with co-occurring oppositional defiant disorders or conduct disorder, MDD, tic disorders and epilepsy. Methylphenidate treatment was linked to lower risk for TBI in patients with ADHD and the inverse association was persistent among those with other comorbid mental disorders and epilepsy.

Efficacy and Safety of Medication for Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents with Common Comorbidities: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Comorbid psychiatric conditions in children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) occur frequently, complicate management, and are associated with substantial burden on patients and caregivers. Very few systematic reviews have assessed the efficacy and safety of medications for ADHD in children and adolescents with comorbidities. Of those that were conducted, most focused on a particular comorbidity or medication. In this systematic literature review, we summarize the efficacy and safety of treatments for children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid autism spectrum disorders, oppositional defiant disorder, Tourette’s disorder and other tic disorders, generalized anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov (to October 2019) for studies of patients (aged < 18 years) with an ADHD diagnosis and the specified comorbidities treated with amphetamines, methylphenidate and derivatives, atomoxetine (ATX), and guanfacine extended-release (GXR). For efficacy, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or meta-analyses of RCTs were eligible for inclusion; for safety, all study types were eligible. The primary efficacy outcome measure was ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score.

Results

Of 2177 publications/trials retrieved, 69 were included in this systematic literature review (5 meta-analyses, 37 placebo-controlled RCTs, 16 cohort studies, 11 case reports). A systematic narrative synthesis is provided because insufficient data were retrieved to combine ADHD-RS-IV total scores or effect sizes. Effect sizes for ADHD-RS-IV total scores were available for ten RCTs and ranged from 0.46 to 1.0 for ATX and from 0.92 to 2.0 for GXR across comorbidities. The numbers and types of adverse events in children with comorbidities were consistent with those in children without comorbidities, but treatment should be individualized to ensure children can tolerate the lowest effective dose.

Conclusion

Limited information is available from placebo-controlled RCTs on the efficacy (by ADHD-RS-IV) or safety of medication in children with ADHD and psychiatric comorbidities. Further studies are required to support evidence-based drug selection for these populations.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40120-021-00249-0.

A Comprehensive Review of Tic Disorders in Children

Tics are characterized by sudden, rapid, recurrent, nonrhythmic movement or vocalization, and are the most common movement disorders in children. Their onset is usually in childhood and tics often will diminish within one year. However, some of the tics can persist and cause various problems such as social embarrassment, physical discomfort, or emotional impairments, which could interfere with daily activities and school performance. Furthermore, tic disorders are frequently associated with comorbid neuropsychiatric symptoms, which can become more problematic than tic symptoms. Unfortunately, misunderstanding and misconceptions of tic disorders still exist among the general population. Understanding tic disorders and their comorbidities is important to deliver appropriate care to patients with tics. Several studies have been conducted to elucidate the clinical course, epidemiology, and pathophysiology of tics, but they are still not well understood. This article aims to provide an overview about tics and tic disorders, and recent findings on tic disorders including history, definition, diagnosis, epidemiology, etiology, diagnostic approach, comorbidities, treatment and management, and differential diagnosis.

Drug and Non-drug Treatment of Tourette Syndrome

Background:

Tourette Syndrome (TS) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by multiple repetitive motor and vocal tics. In most patients, its clinical course has a waxing and waning nature and most patients, usually children, will benefit from tolerant environmental and psychoeducation. Patients with more complicated tics, in particular, those with significant comorbidities will require drug therapy.

Objective:

The present paper is a mini-review of the current therapeutic arsenal for TS with reference to drug and non-drug management approach.

Methods:

A systematic survey of medical literature regarding the treatment decision making and the reported clinical trials or accumulating experience with different medications or other therapeutic modalities which were proven beneficial over the years.

Results:

Reviewing the literature indicates that dopamine antagonists, such as haloperidol and pimozoide, are the most reliable agents in terms of treatment response. Due to numerous adverse effects, newer atypical anti-psychotic drugs have been shown effective. Other widely accepted medications include alpha-2 adrenergic agonists, benzamides, dopamine depleting agents, benzodiazepines and dopamine depleting agents. In more selective and intractable cases botulinum toxin, dopamine agonists and cannabinoids should be also considered. Non-pharmacologic therapies reported beneficial effects, which include on the one hand, non-invasive behavioral techniques, such as comprehensive behavior therapy for tics. While on the other hand, in cases with particular protracted pharmaco-resistant tics electric stimulation techniques, such as deep brain stimulation, have been shown to be successful.

Conclusion:

Currently, there are numerous multifarious options for treatment of tics and other comorbid symptoms of TS. Nevertheless, treatment options and decision-making algorithms are still a clinical challenge.

Area Covered:

A step by step decision-making and various drugs and non-pharmacologic modalities appropriate for the management of TS.

Individualizing the dosage of Methylphenidate in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common childhood mental health disorders. Stimulant drugs as the most commonly used treatment and first-line therapy for ADHD have side effects. One of the newest approaches to select the best choices and optimize dosages of medications is personalized medicine.

METHODS

This historical cohort study was carried out on the data taken from the period of 2008 to 2015. Eligible subjects were included in the study randomly. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models to personalize the dosage of Methylphenidate (MPH) in ADHD. The patients' heterogeneity was considered using subject-specific random effects, which are treated as the realizations of a stochastic process. To recommend a personalized dosage for a new patient, a two-step procedure was proposed. In the first step, we obtained estimates for population parameters. In the second step, the dosage of the drug for a new patient was updated at each follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 221 children enrolled in the study, 169 (76.5%) were male and 52 (23.5%) were females. The overall mean age at the beginning of the study is 82.5 (± 26.5) months. In multivariable mixed logit model, three variables (severity of ADHD, time duration receiving MPH, and dosage of MPH) had a significant relationship with improvement. Based on this model the personalized dosage of MPH was obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

To determine the dosage of MPH for a new patient, the more the severity of baseline is, the more of an initial dose is required. To recommend the dose in the next times, first, the estimation of random coefficient should be updated. The optimum dose increased when the severity of ADHD increased. Also, the results show that the optimum dose of MPH as one proceeds through the period of treatment will decreased.

Comprehensive systematic review summary: Treatment of tics in people with Tourette syndrome and chronic tic disorders

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the efficacy of treatments for tics and the risks associated with their use.

METHODS

This project followed the methodologies outlined in the 2011 edition of the American Academy of Neurology's guideline development process manual. We included systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials on the treatment of tics that included at least 20 participants (10 participants if a crossover trial), except for neurostimulation trials, for which no minimum sample size was required. To obtain additional information on drug safety, we included cohort studies or case series that specifically evaluated adverse drug effects in individuals with tics.

RESULTS

There was high confidence that the Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics was more likely than psychoeducation and supportive therapy to reduce tics. There was moderate confidence that haloperidol, risperidone, aripiprazole, tiapride, clonidine, onabotulinumtoxinA injections, 5-ling granule, Ningdong granule, and deep brain stimulation of the globus pallidus were probably more likely than placebo to reduce tics. There was low confidence that pimozide, ziprasidone, metoclopramide, guanfacine, topiramate, and tetrahydrocannabinol were possibly more likely than placebo to reduce tics. Evidence of harm associated with various treatments was also demonstrated, including weight gain, drug-induced movement disorders, elevated prolactin levels, sedation, and effects on heart rate, blood pressure, and ECGs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence to support the efficacy of various medical, behavioral, and neurostimulation interventions for the treatment of tics. Both the efficacy and harms associated with interventions must be considered in making treatment recommendations.

Dopaminergic Disturbances in Tourette Syndrome: An Integrative Account

Tourette syndrome (TS) is thought to involve dopaminergic disturbances, but the nature of those disturbances remains controversial. Existing hypotheses suggest that TS involves 1) supersensitive dopamine receptors, 2) overactive dopamine transporters that cause low tonic but high phasic dopamine, 3) presynaptic dysfunction in dopamine neurons, or 4) dopaminergic hyperinnervation. We review evidence that contradicts the first two hypotheses; we also note that the last two hypotheses have traditionally been considered too narrowly, explaining only small subsets of findings. We review all studies that have used positron emission tomography and single-photon emission computerized tomography to investigate the dopaminergic system in TS. The seemingly diverse findings from those studies have typically been interpreted as pointing to distinct mechanisms, as evidenced by the various hypotheses concerning the nature of dopaminergic disturbances in TS. We show, however, that the hyperinnervation hypothesis provides a simple, parsimonious explanation for all such seemingly diverse findings. Dopaminergic hyperinnervation likely causes increased tonic and phasic dopamine. We have previously shown, using a computational model of the role of dopamine in basal ganglia, that increased tonic dopamine and increased phasic dopamine likely increase the propensities to express and learn tics, respectively. There is therefore a plausible mechanistic link between dopaminergic hyperinnervation and TS via increased tonic and phasic dopamine. To further bolster this argument, we review evidence showing that all medications that are effective for TS reduce signaling by tonic dopamine, phasic dopamine, or both.

Pharmacological treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children with comorbid tic disorders

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 4, 2011.Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most prevalent of the comorbid psychiatric disorders that complicate tic disorders. Medications commonly used to treat ADHD symptoms include stimulants such as methylphenidate and amphetamine; non-stimulants, such as atomoxetine; tricyclic antidepressants; and alpha agonists. Alpha agonists are also used as a treatment for tics. Due to the impact of ADHD symptoms on the child with tic disorder, treatment of ADHD is often of greater priority than the medical management of tics. However, for many decades, clinicians have been reluctant to use stimulants to treat children with ADHD and tics for fear of worsening their tics.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of pharmacological treatments for ADHD in children with comorbid tic disorders on symptoms of ADHD and tics.

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and 12 other databases. We also searched two trial registers and contacted experts in the field for any ongoing or unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized, double-blind, controlled trials of any pharmacological treatment for ADHD used specifically in children with comorbid tic disorders. We included both parallel-group and cross-over study designs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures of Cochrane, in that two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data using standardized forms, assessed risk of bias, and graded the overall quality of the evidence by using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight randomized controlled trials (four of which were cross-over trials) with 510 participants (443 boys, 67 girls) in this review. Participants in these studies were children with both ADHD and a chronic tic disorder. All studies took place in the USA and ranged from three to 22 weeks in duration. Five of the eight studies were funded by charitable organizations or government agencies, or both. One study was funded by the drug manufacturer. The other two studies did not specify the source of funding. Risk of bias of included studies was low for blinding; low or unclear for random sequence generation, allocation concealment, and attrition bias; and low or high for selective outcome reporting. We were unable to combine any of the studies in a meta-analysis due to important clinical heterogeneity and unit-of-analysis issues.Several of the trials assessed multiple agents. Medications assessed included methylphenidate, clonidine, desipramine, dextroamphetamine, guanfacine, atomoxetine, and deprenyl. There was low-quality evidence for methylphenidate, atomoxetine, and clonidine, and very low-quality evidence for desipramine, dextroamphetamine, guanfacine and deprenyl in the treatment of ADHD in children with tics. All studies, with the exception of a study using deprenyl, reported improvement in symptoms of ADHD. Tic symptoms also improved in children treated with guanfacine, desipramine, methylphenidate, clonidine, and a combination of methylphenidate and clonidine. In one study, tics limited further dosage increases of methylphenidate. High-dose dextroamphetamine appeared to worsen tics in one study, although the length of this study was limited to three weeks. There was appetite suppression or weight loss in association with methylphenidate, dextroamphetamine, atomoxetine, and desipramine. There was insomnia associated with methylphenidate and dextroamphetamine, and sedation associated with clonidine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Following an updated search of potentially relevant studies, we found no new studies that matched our inclusion criteria and thus our conclusions have not changed.Methylphenidate, clonidine, guanfacine, desipramine, and atomoxetine appear to reduce ADHD symptoms in children with tics though the quality of the available evidence was low to very low. Although stimulants have not been shown to worsen tics in most people with tic disorders, they may, nonetheless, exacerbate tics in individual cases. In these instances, treatment with alpha agonists or atomoxetine may be an alternative. Although there is evidence that desipramine may improve tics and ADHD in children, safety concerns will likely continue to limit its use in this population.

Pharmacotherapies to tics: a systematic review

The efficacy of all pharmacotherapies for patients suffering from tics were unclear. Literatures were searched from Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases. The primary efficacy outcome scale was defined as the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS). Overall estimates of pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for each outcome measure. A total of 53 trials were included. Meta-analysis suggested that alpha-2 adrenergic agonist agents and atypical antipsychotic agents were effective in improving tics, which included the maximum number of trials. Typical antipsychotic agents were associated with severer side-effects than alpha-2 adrenergic agonist agents. Besides, Traditional Chinese Medicine showed positive effects in YGTSS (NingDong Granule: WMD=-7.100, 95% CI, -10.430- -3.770; 5-Ling Granule: WMD=-11.300, 95% CI, -14.208- -8.392), while glutamate modulators (D-serine, N-Acetylcysteine and riluzole) might not be working. In summary, alpha-2 adrenergic agonist agents were associated with the optimal weigh between efficacy and safety. However, the significant factor of limited trials and sample sizes discounted these findings. Further better studies are necessary to ascertain them.

Psychiatric Treatment and Management of Psychiatric Comorbidities of Movement Disorders

Pediatric movement disorders may present with psychiatric symptoms at many points during the course of the disease. For the relatively common pediatric movement disorder, Tourette syndrome, psychiatric comorbidities are well-described and treatment is well-studied. Managing these comorbidities may be more effective than improving the movements themselves. For more uncommon movement disorders, such as juvenile-onset Huntington disease, treatment of psychiatric comorbidities is not well-characterized, and best-practice recommendations are not available. For the least common movement disorders, such as childhood neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation, psychiatric features may be nonspecific so that underlying diagnosis may be apparent only after recognition of other symptoms. However, psychiatric medication, psychotherapy, and psychosocial support for these disorders may prove helpful to many children and adolescents.

Current issues in child and adolescent psychopharmacology. Part 2: Anxiety and obsessive—compulsive disorders, autism, Tourette's and schizophrenia

This paper reviews the evidence base supporting the use of pharmacological treatments for child and adolescent psychiatric disorders. Recent advances in knowledge are highlighted, with some of the controversies. New evidence supports a role for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the treatment of anxiety disorders and obsessive–compulsive disorder. Educational and behavioural approaches remain the mainstay of treatment for children and adolescents with autism, but there is evidence that adjunctive medication may be effective. Atypical antipsychotics have been investigated in the treatment of Tourette syndrome and early-onset schizophrenia. Many questions remain unanswered and further research is needed in all areas of paediatric psychopharmacology.

Clinical Management of Pediatric Acute-Onset Neuropsychiatric Syndrome: Part I-Psychiatric and Behavioral Interventions

OBJECTIVE

This article outlines the consensus guidelines for symptomatic treatment for children with Pediatric Acute-Onset Neuropsychiatric Syndrome (PANS) and Pediatric Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Syndrome Associated with Streptococcal Infection (PANDAS).

METHODS

Extant literature on behavioral, psychotherapeutic, and psychopharmacologic treatments for PANS and PANDAS was reviewed. Members of the PANS Research Consortium pooled their clinical experiences to find agreement on treatment of PANS and PANDAS symptoms.

RESULTS

Current guidelines result from consensus among the Consortium members.

CONCLUSION

While underlying infectious and inflammatory processes in PANS and PANDAS patients are treated, psychiatric and behavioral symptoms need simultaneous treatment to decrease suffering and improve adherence to therapeutic intervention. Psychological, behavioral, and psychopharmacologic interventions tailored to each child's presentation can provide symptom improvement and improve functioning during both the acute and chronic stages of illness. In general, typical evidence-based interventions are appropriate for the varied symptoms of PANS and PANDAS. Individual differences in expected response to psychotropic medication may require marked reduction of initial treatment dose. Antimicrobials and immunomodulatory therapies may be indicated, as discussed in Parts 2 and 3 of this guideline series.

An update on the safety of psychostimulants for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

INTRODUCTION

Methylphenidate is the first-line pharmacological treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Although methylphenidate has a well-established evidence base for treating ADHD, its long-term benefits are unclear. Areas covered: Physical adverse effects, psychiatric adverse events and brain development Expert opinion: Some physical adverse events have been described (e.g. sleep disturbances, growth reduction, loss of appetite), although most are of transient nature. Psychiatric adverse events seem more related to the diagnosis ADHD itself, and not stimulant treatment. Concluding, short-to-mid-term use (i.e., up to 2 years) stimulants are relatively safe, but much less is known about longer-term efficacy and safety of these drugs.

Tics in the Pediatric Population: Pragmatic Management

BACKGROUND

Primary tic disorders, notably Tourette syndrome, are very common movement disorders in childhood. However, the management of such patients still poses great therapeutic challenges to medical professionals.

METHODS

Based on a synthesis of the available guidelines published in Europe, Canada, and the United States, coupled with more recent therapeutic developments, the authors provide a pragmatic guide to aid clinicians in deciding when and how to treat patients who have primary tic disorders.

RESULTS

After a systematic assessment of tics and common neuropsychiatric comorbidities (primarily attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder [ADHD] and obsessive-compulsive disorder [OCD]), the first step in treatment is a comprehensive psychoeducation of patients and families that addresses the protean phenomenology of tics and associated behaviors, coping mechanisms, prognosis, and treatment options. When more active intervention beyond watchful monitoring is indicated, hierarchical evaluation of treatment targets (i.e., tics vs. comorbid behavioral symptoms) is crucial. Behavioral treatments for tics are restricted to older children and are not readily available to all centers, mainly due to the paucity of well-trained therapists. Pharmacological treatments, such as antipsychotics for tics, stimulants and atomoxetine for ADHD, and α2A-agonists for children with tics plus ADHD, represent widely available and effective treatment options, but safety monitoring must be provided. Combined polypharmacological and behavioral/pharmacological approaches, as well as neuromodulation strategies, remain under-investigated in this population of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of children with tics and Tourette syndrome is multifaceted. Multidisciplinary teams with expertise in neurology, psychiatry, psychology, and pediatrics may be helpful to address the complex needs of these children.

Clinical effectiveness and patient perspectives of different treatment strategies for tics in children and adolescents with Tourette syndrome: a systematic review and qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Tourette syndrome (TS) is a neurodevelopmental condition characterised by chronic motor and vocal tics affecting up to 1% of school-age children and young people and is associated with significant distress and psychosocial impairment.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of the benefits and risks of pharmacological, behavioural and physical interventions for tics in children and young people with TS (part 1) and to explore the experience of treatment and services from the perspective of young people with TS and their parents (part 2).

DATA SOURCES

For the systematic reviews (parts 1 and 2), mainstream bibliographic databases, The Cochrane Library, education, social care and grey literature databases were searched using subject headings and text words for tic* and Tourette* from database inception to January 2013.

REVIEW/RESEARCH METHODS

For part 1, randomised controlled trials and controlled before-and-after studies of pharmacological, behavioural or physical interventions in children or young people (aged < 18 years) with TS or chronic tic disorder were included. Mixed studies and studies in adults were considered as supporting evidence. Risk of bias associated with each study was evaluated using the Cochrane tool. When there was sufficient data, random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize the evidence and the quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. For part 2, qualitative studies and survey literature conducted in populations of children/young people with TS or their carers or in health professionals with experience of treating TS were included in the qualitative review. Results were synthesized narratively. In addition, a national parent/carer survey was conducted via the Tourettes Action website. Participants included parents of children and young people with TS aged under 18 years. Participants (young people with TS aged 10-17 years) for the in-depth interviews were recruited via a national survey and specialist Tourettes clinics in the UK.

RESULTS

For part 1, 70 studies were included in the quantitative systematic review. The evidence suggested that for treating tics in children and young people with TS, antipsychotic drugs [standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.08 to -0.41; n = 75] and noradrenergic agents [clonidine (Dixarit(®), Boehringer Ingelheim) and guanfacine: SMD -0.72, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.40; n = 164] are effective in the short term. There was little difference among antipsychotics in terms of benefits, but adverse effect profiles do differ. Habit reversal training (HRT)/comprehensive behavioural intervention for tics (CBIT) was also shown to be effective (SMD -0.64, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.29; n = 133). For part 2, 295 parents/carers of children and young people with TS contributed useable survey data. Forty young people with TS participated in in-depth interviews. Four studies were in the qualitative review. Key themes were difficulties in accessing specialist care and behavioural interventions, delay in diagnosis, importance of anxiety and emotional symptoms, lack of provision of information to schools and inadequate information regarding medication and adverse effects.

LIMITATIONS

The number and quality of clinical trials is low and this downgrades the strength of the evidence and conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotics, noradrenergic agents and HRT/CBIT are effective in reducing tics in children and young people with TS. The balance of benefits and harms favours the most commonly used medications: risperidone (Risperdal(®), Janssen), clonidine and aripiprazole (Abilify(®), Otsuka). Larger and better-conducted trials addressing important clinical uncertainties are required. Further research is needed into widening access to behavioural interventions through use of technology including mobile applications ('apps') and video consultation.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002059.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Practitioner Review: Treatments for Tourette syndrome in children and young people - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Tourette syndrome (TS) and chronic tic disorder (CTD) affect 1-2% of children and young people, but the most effective treatment is unclear. To establish the current evidence base, we conducted a systematic review of interventions for children and young people.

METHODS

Databases were searched from inception to 1 October 2014 for placebo-controlled trials of pharmacological, behavioural, physical or alternative interventions for tics in children and young people with TS or CTD. Certainty in the evidence was assessed with the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Forty trials were included [pharmacological (32), behavioural (5), physical (2), dietary (1)]. For tics/global score there was evidence favouring the intervention from four trials of α2-adrenergic receptor agonists [clonidine and guanfacine, standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.71; 95% CI -1.03, -0.40; N = 164] and two trials of habit reversal training (HRT)/comprehensive behavioural intervention (CBIT) (SMD = -0.64; 95% CI -0.99, -0.29; N = 133). Certainty in the effect estimates was moderate. A post hoc analysis combining oral clonidine/guanfacine trials with a clonidine patch trial continued to demonstrate benefit (SMD = -0.54; 95% CI -0.92, -0.16), but statistical heterogeneity was high. Evidence from four trials suggested that antipsychotic drugs improved tic scores (SMD = -0.74; 95% CI -1.08, -0.40; N = 76), but certainty in the effect estimate was low. The evidence for other interventions was categorised as low or very low quality, or showed no conclusive benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

When medication is considered appropriate for the treatment of tics, the balance of clinical benefits to harm favours α2-adrenergic receptor agonists (clonidine and guanfacine) as first-line agents. Antipsychotics are likely to be useful but carry the risk of harm and so should be reserved for when α2-adrenergic receptor agonists are either ineffective or poorly tolerated. There is evidence that HRT/CBIT is effective, but there is no evidence for HRT/CBIT alone relative to combining medication and HRT/CBIT. There is currently no evidence to suggest that the physical and dietary interventions reviewed are sufficiently effective and safe to be considered as treatments.

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 with ADHD find it difficult to pay attention, they are hyperactive and impulsive.Methylphenidate is the drug most often prescribed to treat children and adolescents with ADHD but, despite its widespread use, this is the first comprehensive systematic review of its benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2015 we searched six databases (CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Conference Proceedings Citations Index), and two trials registers. We checked for additional trials in the reference lists of relevant reviews and included trials. We contacted the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture methylphenidate to request published and unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention in children and adolescents aged 18 years and younger with a diagnosis of ADHD. At least 75% of participants needed to have an intellectual quotient of at least 70 (i.e. normal intellectual functioning). Outcomes assessed included ADHD symptoms, serious adverse events, non-serious adverse events, general behaviour and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Seventeen review authors participated in data extraction and risk of bias assessment, and two review authors independently performed all tasks. We used standard methodological procedures expected within Cochrane. Data from parallel-group trials and first period data from cross-over trials formed the basis of our primary analyses; separate analyses were undertaken using post-cross-over data from cross-over trials. We used Trial Sequential Analyses to control for type I (5%) and type II (20%) errors, and we assessed and downgraded evidence according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for high risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness, heterogeneity and publication bias.

MAIN RESULTS

The studies.We included 38 parallel-group trials (5111 participants randomised) and 147 cross-over trials (7134 participants randomised). Participants included individuals of both sexes, at a boys-to-girls ratio of 5:1, and participants' ages ranged from 3 to 18 years across most studies (in two studies ages ranged from 3 to 21 years). The average age across all studies was 9.7 years. Most participants were from high-income countries.The duration of methylphenidate treatment ranged from 1 to 425 days, with an average duration of 75 days. Methylphenidate was compared to placebo (175 trials) or no intervention (10 trials). Risk of Bias.All 185 trials were assessed to be at high risk of bias. Primary outcomes. Methylphenidate may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.90 to -0.64; 19 trials, 1698 participants; very low-quality evidence). This corresponds to a mean difference (MD) of -9.6 points (95% CI -13.75 to -6.38) on the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS; range 0 to 72 points; DuPaul 1991a). A change of 6.6 points on the ADHD-RS is considered clinically to represent the minimal relevant difference. There was no evidence that methylphenidate was associated with an increase in serious (e.g. life threatening) adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.22; 9 trials, 1532 participants; very low-quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis-adjusted intervention effect was RR 0.91 (CI 0.02 to 33.2).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Among those prescribed methylphenidate, 526 per 1000 (range 448 to 615) experienced non-serious adverse events, compared with 408 per 1000 in the control group. This equates to a 29% increase in the overall risk of any non-serious adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.51; 21 trials, 3132 participants; very low-quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis-adjusted intervention effect was RR 1.29 (CI 1.06 to 1.56). The most common non-serious adverse events were sleep problems and decreased appetite. Children in the methylphenidate group were at 60% greater risk for trouble sleeping/sleep problems (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.23; 13 trials, 2416 participants), and 266% greater risk for decreased appetite (RR 3.66, 95% CI 2.56 to 5.23; 16 trials, 2962 participants) than children in the control group.Teacher-rated general behaviour seemed to improve with methylphenidate (SMD -0.87, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.71; 5 trials, 668 participants; very low-quality evidence).A change of seven points on the Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ; range 0 to 100 points; Landgraf 1998) has been deemed a minimal clinically relevant difference. The change reported in a meta-analysis of three trials corresponds to a MD of 8.0 points (95% CI 5.49 to 10.46) on the CHQ, which suggests that methylphenidate may improve parent-reported quality of life (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.80; 3 trials, 514 participants; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of meta-analyses suggest that methylphenidate may improve teacher-reported ADHD symptoms, teacher-reported general behaviour, and parent-reported quality of life among children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD. However, the low quality of the underpinning evidence means that we cannot be certain of the magnitude of the effects. Within the short follow-up periods typical of the included trials, there is some evidence that methylphenidate is associated with increased risk of non-serious adverse events, such as sleep problems and decreased appetite, but no evidence that it increases risk of serious adverse events.Better designed trials are needed to assess the benefits of methylphenidate. Given the frequency of non-serious adverse events associated with methylphenidate, the particular difficulties for blinding of participants and outcome assessors point to the advantage of large, 'nocebo tablet' controlled trials. These use a placebo-like substance that causes adverse events in the control arm that are comparable to those associated with methylphenidate. However, for ethical reasons, such trials should first be conducted with adults, who can give their informed consent.Future trials should publish depersonalised individual participant data and report all outcomes, including adverse events. This will enable researchers conducting systematic reviews to assess differences between intervention effects according to age, sex, comorbidity, type of ADHD and dose. Finally, the findings highlight the urgent need for large RCTs of non-pharmacological treatments.

Meta-Analysis: Risk of Tics Associated With Psychostimulant Use in Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

Clinical practice currently restricts the use of psychostimulant medications in children with tics or a family history of tics for fear that tics will develop or worsen as a side effect of treatment. Our goal was to conduct a meta-analysis to examine the risk of new onset or worsening of tics as an adverse event of psychostimulants in randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

METHOD

We conducted a PubMed search to identify all double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy of psychostimulant medications in the treatment of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We used a fixed effects meta-analysis with risk ratio of new onset or worsening tics in children treated with psychostimulants compared to placebo. We used stratified subgroup analysis and meta-regression to examine the effects of stimulant type, dose, duration of treatment, recorder of side effect data, trial design, and mean age of participants on the measured risk of tics.

RESULTS

We identified 22 studies involving 2,385 children with ADHD for inclusion in our meta-analysis. New onset tics or worsening of tic symptoms were commonly reported in the psychostimulant (event rate = 5.7%, 95% CI = 3.7%-8.6%) and placebo groups (event rate = 6.5%, 95% CI = 4.4%-9.5%). The risk of new onset or worsening of tics associated with psychostimulant treatment was similar to that observed with placebo (risk ratio = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.78-1.27, z = -0.05, p = .962). Type of psychostimulant, dose, duration of treatment, recorder, and participant age did not affect risk of new onset or worsening of tics. Crossover studies were associated with a significantly greater measured risk of tics with psychostimulant use compared to parallel group trials.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis of controlled trials does not support an association between new onset or worsening of tics and psychostimulant use. Clinicians may want to consider rechallenging children who report new onset or worsening of tics with psychostimulant use, as these symptoms are much more likely to be coincidental rather than caused by psychostimulants.

Adverse reactions of Methylphenidate in children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder: Report from a referral center

Objective:

The aim of the current study was to determine various aspects of methylphenidate adverse reactions in children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Iran.

Methods:

During the 6 months period, all children under methylphenidate treatment alone or along with other agents attending a university-affiliated psychology clinic were screened regarding all subjective and objective adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of methylphenidate. Causality and seriousness of detected ADRs were assessed by relevant World Health Organization definitions. The Schumock and Thornton questionnaire was used to determine preventability of ADRs.

Findings:

Seventy-one patients including 25 girls and 46 boys with ADHD under methylphenidate treatment were enrolled within the study period. All (100%) ADHD children under methylphenidate treatment developed at least one ADR. Anorexia (74.3%), irritability (57.1%), and insomnia (47.2%) were the most frequent methylphenidate-related adverse reactions. Except for one, all other detected ADRs were determined to be mild. In addition, no ADR was considered to be preventable and serious.

Conclusion:

Our data suggested that although methylphenidate related adverse reactions were common in children with ADHD, but they were mainly mild and nonserious.

Wake-promoting pharmacotherapy for psychiatric disorders

Medications promoting wakefulness are currently used in psychopharmacology in different contexts and with different objectives. In particular, they may be used for the treatment of syndromes that primarily show significant impairment in alertness/wakefulness (e.g., excessive sleepiness and other sleep disorders) as well as for the symptomatic treatment of different neuropsychiatric disorders that, in turn, are not exclusively characterized by sleep-wake disturbances (like mood disorders, for instance). In addition, several psychotropic compounds, including some antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and anxiolytics have well-established sedating side effects that may go beyond the therapeutic target and require the symptomatic use of wake-promoting agents. Even though such a clinical scenario reflects millions of individuals affected (alterations of wakefulness have a prevalence rate of 20-43% in the general population), relatively few pharmacotherapies are available, mainly including compounds with psychostimulating effects, such as methylphenidate, modafinil, and armodafinil and some amphetaminic agents. In light of their side effects and potential for abuse, such compounds have received FDA approval only for a limited number of psychiatric disorders. Nonetheless, their clinical application has recently become more widespread, including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, narcolepsy, treatment-resistant depression, bipolar disorder, shift work sleep disorder, schizophrenia, and addictions. Wake-promoting agents have different mechanisms of action, peculiar clinical strengths and specific limitations, with novel drugs in the field under extensive investigation. The present review is aimed to provide an updated overview of the aforementioned compounds as well as investigational drugs in the field, in terms of mechanism of action, indications and use in clinical practice.

Dopaminergic activity in Tourette syndrome and obsessive-compulsive disorder

Tourette syndrome (TS) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) both are neuropsychiatric disorders associated with abnormalities in dopamine neurotransmission. Aims of this study were to quantify striatal D2/3 receptor availability in TS and OCD, and to examine dopamine release and symptom severity changes in both disorders following amphetamine challenge. Changes in [(11)C]raclopride binding potential (BP(ND)) were assessed using positron emission tomography before and after administration of d-amphetamine (0.3 mg kg(-1)) in 12 TS patients without comorbid OCD, 12 OCD patients without comorbid tics, and 12 healthy controls. Main outcome measures were baseline striatal D2/3 receptor BP(ND) and change in BP(ND) following amphetamine as a measure of dopamine release. Voxel-based analysis revealed significantly decreased baseline [(11)C]raclopride BP(ND) in bilateral putamen of both patient groups vs. healthy controls, differences being more pronounced in the TS than in the OCD group. Changes in BP(ND) following amphetamine were not significantly different between groups. Following amphetamine administration, tic severity increased in the TS group, which correlated with BP(ND) changes in right ventral striatum. Symptom severity in the OCD group did not change significantly following amphetamine challenge and was not associated with changes in BP(ND). This study provides evidence for decreased striatal D2/3 receptor availability in TS and OCD, presumably reflecting higher endogenous dopamine levels in both disorders. In addition, it provides the first direct evidence that ventral striatal dopamine release is related to the pathophysiology of tics.

Tourette Syndrome and comorbid ADHD: current pharmacological treatment options

BACKGROUND

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is the most common co-morbid condition encountered in people with tics and Tourette Syndrome (TS). The co-occurrence of TS and ADHD is associated with a higher psychopathological, social and academic impairment and the management may represent a challenge for the clinicians.

AIM

To review recent advances in management of patients with tic, Tourette Syndrome and comorbid Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

METHODS

We searched peer reviewed and original medical publications (PUBMED 1990-2012) and included randomized, double-blind, controlled trials related to pharmacological treatment for tic and TS used in children and adolescents with comorbid ADHD. "Tourette Syndrome" or "Tic" and "ADHD", were cross referenced with the words "pharmacological treatment", "α-agonist", "psychostimulants", "selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor", "antipsychotics".

RESULTS

Three classes of drugs are currently used in the treatment of TS and comorbid ADHD: α-agonists (clonidine and guanfacine), stimulants (amphetamine enantiomers, methylphenidate enantiomers or slow release preparation), and selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (atomoxetine). It has been recently suggested that in a few selected cases partial dopamine agonists (aripiprazole) could be useful.

CONCLUSION

Level A of evidence supported the use of noradrenergic agents (clonidine). Reuptake inhibitors (atomoxetine) and stimulants (methylphenidate) could be, also used for the treatment of TS and comorbid ADHD. Taking into account the risk-benefit profile, clonidine could be used as the first line treatment. However only few studies meet rigorous quality criteria in terms of study design and methodology; most trials have low statistical power due to small sample size or short duration. Treatment should be "symptom targeted" and personalized for each patient.

Tic disorders and Tourette's syndrome

Diagnostic categories of tic disorders include both transient and chronic tic disorders and Tourette's disorder. Changes for this group of disorders proposed for the forthcoming DSM-5 system include: (1) The term "stereotyped" will be eliminated in the definition of tics and the new definition will be applied consistently across all entities of tic disorders; (2) the diagnosis "Transient Tic Disorder" will change its name to "Provisional Tic Disorder"; (3) introduction of two new categories in individuals whose tics are triggered by illicit drugs or by a medical condition; (4) specification of chronic tic disorders into those with motor tics or with vocal tics only; (5) specification of the absence of a period longer than 3 months without tics will disappear for Tourette's Disorder. This overview discusses a number of implications resulting from these diagnostic modifications of the diagnostic classifications for use in the clinics. European guidelines for "Tourette's syndrome and other Tic disorders" were published in 2011 in the ECAP by the "European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome". The guidelines emphasize the complexity of these neuropsychiatric disorders that require interdisciplinary cooperation between medical professionals, but also patients, parents and teachers for planning of treatment. The main conclusion derived from the guideline for pharmacological treatment is the urgent need for rigorous studies that address the effectiveness of anti-tic medications. The guidelines also emphasize the importance of facilitating the dissemination of several behavioral treatment approaches, such as "Exposure Response Prevention", yet the most well documented being "Habit Reversal Training".

A randomized, double-blind, crossover comparison of MK-0929 and placebo in the treatment of adults with ADHD

OBJECTIVE

Preclinical models, receptor localization, and genetic linkage data support the role of D4 receptors in the etiology of ADHD. This proof-of-concept study was designed to evaluate MK-0929, a selective D4 receptor antagonist as treatment for adult ADHD.

METHOD

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study was conducted in adults with primary ADHD. The primary end point was changed from baseline in total score on the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale following a 4-week treatment regimen. Additional measures included Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Brown Attention Deficit Disorder Scale and D4 genotype analysis.

RESULTS

No statistically significant treatment differences were found between MK-0929 and placebo in any of the primary or secondary assessments.

CONCLUSION

Results from this study suggest that blockade of the D4 receptor alone is not efficacious in the treatment of adult ADHD.

[The medical treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with amphetamines in children and adolescents]

INTRODUCTION

Psychostimulants (methylphenidate and amphetamines) are the drugs of first choice in the pharmacological treatment of children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

OBJECTIVE

We summarize the pharmacological characteristics of amphetamines and compare them with methylphenidate, special emphasis being given to a comparison of effects and side effects of the two substances. Finally, we analyze the abuse and addiction risks.

METHODS

Publications were chosen based on a Medline analysis for controlled studies and meta-analyses published between 1980 and 2011; keywords were amphetamine, amphetamine salts, lisdexamphetamine, controlled studies, and metaanalyses.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Amphetamines generally exhibit some pharmacologic similarities with methylphenidate. However, besides inhibiting dopamine reuptake amphetamines also cause the release of monoamines. Moreover, plasma half-life is significantly prolonged. The clinical efficacy and tolerability of amphetamines is comparable to methylphenidate. Amphetamines can therefore be used if the individual response to methylphenidate or tolerability is insufficient before switching to a nonstimulant substance, thus improving the total response rate to psychostimulant treatment. Because of the high abuse potential of amphetamines, especially in adults, the prodrug lisdexamphetamine (Vyvanse) could become an effective treatment alternative. Available study data suggest a combination of high clinical effect size with a beneficial pharmacokinetic profile and a reduced abuse risk.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to methylphenidate, amphetamines serve as important complements in the psychostimulant treatment of ADHD. Future studies should focus on a differential comparison of the two substances with regard to their effects on different core symptom constellations and the presence of various comorbidities.

Pharmacological treatment for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children with comorbid tic disorders

BACKGROUND

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is the most prevalent of the comorbid psychiatric disorders that complicate tic disorders. Medications commonly used to treat ADHD symptoms include the stimulants methylphenidate and amphetamine; nonstimulants, such as atomoxetine; tricyclic antidepressants; and alpha agonists. Due to the impact of ADHD symptoms on the child with tic disorder, treatment of ADHD is often of greater priority than the medical management of tics. However, for many decades clinicians have been reluctant to use stimulants to treat children with ADHD and tics for fear of worsening their tics. 

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological treatments for ADHD on ADHD symptoms and tic severity in children with ADHD and comorbid tic disorders. 

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to July 2009), EMBASE (1980 to July 2009), CINAHL (1982 to July 2009), PsycINFO (1806 to July Week 4 2009) and BIOSIS Previews (1985 to July 2009). Dissertation Abstracts (searched via Dissertaation Express), and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials were searched (30 July 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized, double-blind, controlled trials of any pharmacological treatment for ADHD used specifically in children with comorbid tic disorders. We included both parallel group and cross-over study designs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data using standardized forms.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of eight randomized controlled studies in the review but were unable to combine any of these in meta-analysis. Several of the trials assessed multiple agents. Medications assessed included methylphenidate, clonidine, desipramine, dextroamphetamine, guanfacine, atomoxetine, and deprenyl. All treatments, with the exception of deprenyl, were efficacious in treating symptoms of ADHD. Tic symptoms improved in children treated with guanfacine, desipramine, methylphenidate, clonidine, and the combination of methylphenidate and clonidine. Fear of worsening tics limited dose increases of methylphenidate in one study. High dose dextroamphetamine appeared to worsen tics in one study, although the length of this study was limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Methylphenidate, clonidine, guanfacine, desipramine and atomoxetine appear to reduce ADHD symptoms in children with tics. Although stimulants have not been shown to worsen tics in most people with tic disorders, they may nonetheless exacerbate tics in individual cases. In these instances, treatment with alpha agonists or atomoxetine may be an alternative. Although there is evidence that desipramine is effective for both tics and ADHD in children, safety concerns will likely continue to limit its use in this population.   

European clinical guidelines for Tourette syndrome and other tic disorders. Part II: pharmacological treatment

To develop a European guideline on pharmacologic treatment of Tourette syndrome (TS) the available literature was thoroughly screened and extensively discussed by a working group of the European Society for the Study of Tourette syndrome (ESSTS). Although there are many more studies on pharmacotherapy of TS than on behavioral treatment options, only a limited number of studies meets rigorous quality criteria. Therefore, we have devised a two-stage approach. First, we present the highest level of evidence by reporting the findings of existing Cochrane reviews in this field. Subsequently, we provide the first comprehensive overview of all reports on pharmacological treatment options for TS through a MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE search for all studies that document the effect of pharmacological treatment of TS and other tic disorders between 1970 and November 2010. We present a summary of the current consensus on pharmacological treatment options for TS in Europe to guide the clinician in daily practice. This summary is, however, rather a status quo of a clinically helpful but merely low evidence guideline, mainly driven by expert experience and opinion, since rigorous experimental studies are scarce.

Safety of stimulant treatment in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: part II

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most common childhood psychiatric disorder and in at least 50% of cases persists into adulthood. Treatment of ADHD with stimulants is one of the oldest and most effective pharmacological treatments in psychiatry. Yet, there continues to be controversy over the safety of stimulant medications in the treatment of ADHD.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

This paper is a continuation of an earlier paper that reviewed the safety profile of newer stimulant agents, especially in relation to special populations. This part II reviews, through essentially an organ-system approach, the various clinical concerns that have been raised over the safety of stimulant medications. This includes neuropsychiatric, cardiovascular effects on growth and development, and a number of other less common concerns.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

A thorough review of safety concerns in stimulants that emphasizes clinical information, case reports, open series or controlled trials relating to stimulant use in the treatment of ADHD.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

While many safety concerns have been raised in the use of stimulants, the vast majority of treatment complications are either quickly reversible or easily manageable with appropriate clinical care. The negative consequences of untreated ADHD clearly outweigh the risks of the stimulant medicines when used in an appropriate and careful manner.

Understanding attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder from childhood to adulthood

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is among the most common neurobehavioral disorders requiring treatment in children and adolescents. The disorder is often chronic, with prominent symptoms and impairment spanning into adulthood. It is often associated with co-occurring disorders, including disruptive, mood, anxiety, and substance abuse disorders. The diagnosis of ADHD is clinically established by review of symptoms and impairment. The biological underpinning of the disorder is supported by genetic, neuroimaging, neurochemistry, and neuropsychological data. All aspects of an individual's life need to be considered in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD. Multimodal treatment includes educational, family, and individual support. Psychotherapy alone and in combination with medication is helpful for treating patients with ADHD and comorbid disorders. Pharmacotherapy, including stimulants, noradrenergic agents, α-agonists, and antidepressants, plays a fundamental role in the long-term management of ADHD.

An overview of the treatment of Tourette's disorder and tics

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review the efficacy of various treatments for Tourette's disorder (TD) and tics.

METHOD

This study is a historical review of the treatment modalities prior to the advent of neuroleptics. A review of double-blind and placebo-controlled clinical trials and open studies on the use of neuroleptics and selected reports was also carried out.

RESULTS

The literature review reveals that the treatment of TD and tics has evolved from an early history of marginally effective approaches to the advent of neuroleptics, which started a new era in TD and tic treatment, with a significantly broader range of effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Although progress has been made, the literature review nevertheless reveals a great deal of confusion as related to the clinical heterogeneity of TD and tics, differences in populations, medication-dose combinations, and outcomes. However, a role for a limited number of pharmacologic agents, combined with psychosocial approaches, has been identified. There is a need for studies in larger, diagnostically homogenous samples and for the use of more sophisticated methodology, to identify intelligible models that would allow the development of more effective treatment approaches.

Tic disorders: some key issues for DSM-V

This study provides a focused review of issues that are relevant to the nosology of the tic disorders and presents preliminary recommendations to be considered for DSM-V. The recommended changes are designed to clarify and simplify the diagnostic criteria, reduce the use of the residual category, tic disorder not otherwise specified, and are not intended to alter substantially clinical practice or the continuity of past and future research. Specific recommendations include: (1) a more precise definition of motor and vocal tics; (2) simplification of the duration criterion for the tic disorders; (3) revising the term "transient tic disorder" for those with tic symptoms of less than 12-month duration; (4) establishing new tic disorder categories for those with substance induced tic disorder and tic disorder due to a general medical condition; and (5) including a motor tic only and vocal tic only specifier for the chronic motor or vocal tic disorder category.

[Algorithms for the medical treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder with specific co-morbidities]

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a challenge for diagnostic and therapeutic effort due to a number of co-morbidities, e.g., depression, anxiety disorders, Tourette Syndrome and impulsive aggression that can be a complication or a result of the core symptoms or evolve parallel to the basic disorder. The therapeutic strategies incorporate a multimodal access with a combination of psychosocial, psychotherapeutic and medical measures. The combination of various medical substances for an effective treatment of these co-morbidities, especially Serotonin-Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) and atypical neuroleptics with psychostimulants has substantially reduced the occurrence of the main symptoms of the disorder in many cases and thus can also lead to a decrease in the occurrence of co-morbidities. Where this strategy fails to suffice, it is recommended to consider medical treatment strategies in combination with other substances that alternatively or in combination with psychostimulants increasingly positively influence co-morbid symptoms.

OBJECTIVE AND METHOD

Based on a Medline literature search we report the results of combined medical approaches for an effective medical treatment of the ADHD core symptoms accompanied by serious co-morbid symptoms. Hereby we focused on the above cited disorders. Combined treatment options that include psychostimulants are considered in particular. Moreover, recommendations for medical treatment strategies oriented to the clinical cardinal symptoms are presented in the form of algorithms. Evidence-based literature and practical experience are critically reviewed.

RESULTS

In most cases it will be sufficient to begin the treatment with a psychostimulant because co-morbid symptoms also will be significantly reduced. However, if the latter are in the foreground of the clinical picture, antidepressants or neuroleptics are to be considered as primary or equivalent treatment options.

CONCLUSIONS

Since in Germany most of the substances discussed are not licensed for use in paediatric treatment, proofs of efficacy in children are lacking. One also must reckon with the frequent occurrence of side effects. Finally, little data exist on treatments that include the use of psychostimulants.

Glutamatergic modulatory therapy for Tourette syndrome

Tourette syndrome (TS) is a neuropsychiatric disorder characterized by the presence of chronic, fluctuating motor and vocal (phonic) tics. The disorder is commonly associated with a variety of comorbidities including obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), school problems, anxiety, and depression. Therapeutically, if tics are causing psychosocial or physical problems, symptomatic medications are often prescribed, typically alpha-adrenergic agonists or dopamine antagonists. Recognizing that therapy is often ineffective and frequently associated with unacceptable side-effects, there is an ongoing effort to identify new tic-suppressing therapies. Several lines of evidence are presented that support the use of glutamate modulators in TS including glutamate's major role in cortico-striatal-thalamo-cortical circuits (CSTC), the recognized extensive interaction between glutamate and dopamine systems, results of familial genetic studies, and data from neurochemical analyses of postmortem brain samples. Since insufficient data is available to determine whether TS is definitively associated with a hyper- or hypo-glutamatergic state, potential treatment options using either glutamate antagonists or agonists are reviewed. Data from studies using these agents in the treatment of OCD are presented. If validated, modulation of the glutamate system could provide a valuable new pharmacological approach in the treatment of tics associated with Tourette syndrome.