Exploring the Impact of Once-Daily OROS® Methylphenidate (MPH) on Symptoms and Quality of Life in Children and Adolescents with ADHD Transitioning from Immediate-Release MPH

Hyperactive and impulsive behaviors of LMTK1 knockout mice

Lemur tail kinase 1 (LMTK1), previously called Apoptosis-Associated Tyrosine Kinase (AATYK), remains an uncharacterized Ser/Thr protein kinase that is predominantly expressed in the brain. It is recently reported that LMTK1A, an isoform of LMTK1, binds to recycling endosomes through its palmitoylation and regulates endosomal trafficking by suppressing the activity of Rab11 small GTPase. In neurons, knockdown or knockout of LMTK1 results in longer axons, greater branching of dendrites and increased number of spines, suggesting that LMTK1 plays a role in neuronal circuit formation. However, its in vivo function remained to be investigated. Here, we examined the brain structures and behaviors of LMTK1 knockout (KO) mice. LMTK1 was expressed in most neurons throughout the brain. The overall brain structure appeared to be normal in LMTK1 KO mice, but the numbers of synapses were increased. LMTK1 KO mice had a slight impairment in memory formation and exhibited distinct psychiatric behaviors such as hyperactivity, impulsiveness and high motor coordination without social interaction deficits. Some of these abnormal behaviors represent core features of attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD), suggesting the possible involvement of LMTK1 in the pathogenesis of ADHD.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): progress and controversy in diagnosis and treatment

Knowledge about attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is rapidly accumulating. Recent advances in diagnosis, genetics, neuroimaging, drug and non-drug treatments are considered, and the results are related to the critical attack on the ADHD diagnosis, which argues it a medicalising social construct, unhelpfully sustaining power relationships. The advances reviewed suggest that, while this attack can be conclusively dismissed as wrong and misleading, the phenomenological definition of ADHD is no longer sufficient for construct validity, though continues to be valuable as a guide for clinicians. The humanising and individualising concerns underlying the attack on the diagnosis could usefully be redirected to improving effective measurement of patient outcomes.

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

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder in childhood. The psychostimulant methylphenidate is the most frequently used medication to treat it. Several studies have investigated the benefits of methylphenidate, showing possible favourable effects on ADHD symptoms, but the true magnitude of the effect is unknown. Concerning adverse events associated with the treatment, our systematic review of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrated no increase in serious adverse events, but a high proportion of participants suffered a range of non-serious adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the adverse events associated with methylphenidate treatment for children and adolescents with ADHD in non-randomised studies.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2016, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, 12 other databases and two trials registers. We also checked reference lists and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included non-randomised study designs. These comprised comparative and non-comparative cohort studies, patient-control studies, patient reports/series and cross-sectional studies of methylphenidate administered at any dosage or formulation. We also included methylphenidate groups from RCTs assessing methylphenidate versus other interventions for ADHD as well as data from follow-up periods in RCTs. Participants had to have an ADHD diagnosis (from the 3rd to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or the 9th or 10th edition of theInternational Classification of Diseases, with or without comorbid diagnoses. We required that at least 75% of participants had a normal intellectual capacity (intelligence quotient of more than 70 points) and were aged below 20 years. We excluded studies that used another ADHD drug as a co-intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Fourteen review authors selected studies independently. Two review authors assessed risk of bias independently using the ROBINS-I tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. All review authors extracted data. We defined serious adverse events according to the International Committee of Harmonization as any lethal, life-threatening or life-changing event. We considered all other adverse events to be non-serious adverse events and conducted meta-analyses of data from comparative studies. We calculated meta-analytic estimates of prevalence from non-comparative cohorts studies and synthesised data from patient reports/series qualitatively. We investigated heterogeneity by conducting subgroup analyses, and we also conducted sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 260 studies: 7 comparative cohort studies, 6 of which compared 968 patients who were exposed to methylphenidate to 166 controls, and 1 which assessed 1224 patients that were exposed or not exposed to methylphenidate during different time periods; 4 patient-control studies (53,192 exposed to methylphenidate and 19,906 controls); 177 non-comparative cohort studies (2,207,751 participants); 2 cross-sectional studies (96 participants) and 70 patient reports/series (206 participants). Participants' ages ranged from 3 years to 20 years. Risk of bias in the included comparative studies ranged from moderate to critical, with most studies showing critical risk of bias. We evaluated all non-comparative studies at critical risk of bias. The GRADE quality rating of the evidence was very low.Primary outcomesIn the comparative studies, methylphenidate increased the risk ratio (RR) of serious adverse events (RR 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 1.57; 2 studies, 72,005 participants); any psychotic disorder (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.57; 1 study, 71,771 participants); and arrhythmia (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.48 to 1.74; 1 study, 1224 participants) compared to no intervention.In the non-comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate experiencing any serious adverse event was 1.20% (95% CI 0.70% to 2.00%; 50 studies, 162,422 participants). Withdrawal from methylphenidate due to any serious adverse events occurred in 1.20% (95% CI 0.60% to 2.30%; 7 studies, 1173 participants) and adverse events of unknown severity led to withdrawal in 7.30% of participants (95% CI 5.30% to 10.0%; 22 studies, 3708 participants).Secondary outcomesIn the comparative studies, methylphenidate, compared to no intervention, increased the RR of insomnia and sleep problems (RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.24 to 5.34; 3 studies, 425 participants) and decreased appetite (RR 15.06, 95% CI 2.12 to 106.83; 1 study, 335 participants).With non-comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate with any non-serious adverse events was 51.2% (95% CI 41.2% to 61.1%; 49 studies, 13,978 participants). These included difficulty falling asleep, 17.9% (95% CI 14.7% to 21.6%; 82 studies, 11,507 participants); headache, 14.4% (95% CI 11.3% to 18.3%; 90 studies, 13,469 participants); abdominal pain, 10.7% (95% CI 8.60% to 13.3%; 79 studies, 11,750 participants); and decreased appetite, 31.1% (95% CI 26.5% to 36.2%; 84 studies, 11,594 participants). Withdrawal of methylphenidate due to non-serious adverse events occurred in 6.20% (95% CI 4.80% to 7.90%; 37 studies, 7142 participants), and 16.2% were withdrawn for unknown reasons (95% CI 13.0% to 19.9%; 57 studies, 8340 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that methylphenidate may be associated with a number of serious adverse events as well as a large number of non-serious adverse events in children and adolescents, which often lead to withdrawal of methylphenidate. Our certainty in the evidence is very low, and accordingly, it is not possible to accurately estimate the actual risk of adverse events. It might be higher than reported here.Given the possible association between methylphenidate and the adverse events identified, it may be important to identify people who are most susceptible to adverse events. To do this we must undertake large-scale, high-quality RCTs, along with studies aimed at identifying responders and non-responders.

Social adjustment and family function after drug switch from IR-methylphenidate to OROS-methylphenidate in patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

PURPOSE

This prospective, single-arm, open-label, 8-week, multicenter study investigated the effectiveness of switching from immediate-release methylphenidate (IR-MPH) to osmotic controlled-release methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) in patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Overall, 296 patients with ADHD (mean age: 9.5 years) already on IR-MPH treatment were enrolled. Upon enrollment, a flexible dose of OROS-MPH was administered, replacing IR-MPH. Patients were assessed at baseline and weeks 2, 4, and 8 using the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham version IV scale (SNAP-IV) and the Clinical Global Impression for ADHD symptoms. The Social Adjustment Inventory for Children and Adolescents assessed social functions, and the Chinese Health Questionnaire (CHQ) and Family Adaptation, Partnership, Growth, Affection, and Resolve evaluated parental and family functions.

RESULTS

Switching from IR-MPH to OROS-MPH yielded significant improvements in all ADHD symptoms, as rated by parents, teachers (SNAP-IV), and study investigators (Clinical Global Impression). CHQ scores and all Social Adjustment Inventory for Children and Adolescents subscores except spare time scores improved significantly. Patients with poor IR-MPH adherence had greater improvements in teacher-rated SNAP-IV and mothers' mental health (CHQ) after switching.

CONCLUSION

Switching from IR-MPH to OROS-MPH improved patients' behavioral ADHD symptoms and social adjustment, and mental health of patients' mothers. This was most evident in patients who previously exhibited poor IR-MPH adherence.

Brinp1(-/-) mice exhibit autism-like behaviour, altered memory, hyperactivity and increased parvalbumin-positive cortical interneuron density

BACKGROUND

BMP/RA-inducible neural-specific protein 1 (Brinp1) is highly conserved in vertebrates, and continuously expressed in the neocortex, hippocampus, olfactory bulb and cerebellum from mid-embryonic development through to adulthood.

METHODS

Brinp1 knock-out (Brinp1(-/-)) mice were generated by Cre-recombinase-mediated removal of the third exon of Brinp1. Knock-out mice were characterised by behavioural phenotyping, immunohistochemistry and expression analysis of the developing and adult brain.

RESULTS

Absence of Brinp1 during development results in a behavioural phenotype resembling autism spectrum disorder (ASD), in which knock-out mice show reduced sociability and changes in vocalisation capacity. In addition, Brinp1(-/-) mice exhibit hyper-locomotor activity, have impaired short-term memory, and exhibit poor reproductive success. Brinp1(-/-) mice show increased density of parvalbumin-expressing interneurons in the adult mouse brain. Brinp1(-/-) mice do not show signs of altered neural precursor proliferation or increased apoptosis during late embryonic brain development. The expression of the related neuronal migration genes Astn1 and Astn2 is increased in the brains of Brinp1(-/-) mice, suggesting that they may ameliorate the effects of Brinp1 loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Brinp1 plays an important role in normal brain development and function by influencing neuronal distribution within the cortex. The increased cortical PV-positive interneuron density and altered behaviour of Brinp1(-/-) mice resemble features of a subset of human neurological disorders; namely autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and the hyperactivity aspect of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Remission Rate and Functional Outcomes During a 6-Month Treatment With Osmotic-Release Oral-System Methylphenidate in Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Many definitions have been used to evaluate remission in patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in different studies resulting with varied remission rates. This open-label, multicenter study investigated the remission rate in Chinese children (n = 239; aged 6-16 years) with a diagnosis of ADHD (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition), treated with osmotic-release oral-system methylphenidate at doses of 18, 36, and 54 mg, once daily. Two definitions of remission were used: (1) (primary end point): average scores of SNAP-IV (Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham, Fourth Edition) items of 1 or less (0-3 rating scale for each item) according to the subtype of ADHD (inattentive [1-9], hyperactive-impulsive [10-18], and combined type [1-18]), and (2) total score of SNAP-IV items 1 to 18 of 18 or less, at week 8. The study consisted of screening/baseline, titration/open-label treatment (8 weeks), and extended observation (up to 24 weeks) phases. Secondary efficacy assessments were Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (clinical efficacy), Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function Scale (BRIEF; executive function behaviors), and Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale (social function). Validity of remission was assessed by comparing the function measures (BRIEF and Weiss's) between patients who achieved remission and those who did not. At week 8, 69.3% (151/218) of patients achieved remission by definition 1, and 73.2% (161/220) by definition 2. At weeks 8 and 24, the remission group had significantly lower BRIEF, Weiss's, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scores (P < 0.001 for all) compared with the nonremission group. Overall, treatment with osmotic-release oral-system methylphenidate was well tolerated, with increased remission rates in children with ADHD.

A review of OROS methylphenidate (Concerta(®)) in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioural disorder with onset during childhood. It affects a child's development, both at home and at school, and impacts on social, emotional and cognitive functioning, in both the home and the school environment. Untreated ADHD is very often associated with poor academic achievement, low occupational status, increased risk of substance abuse and delinquency. Current practice guidelines recommend a multimodal approach in the treatment of ADHD, which includes educational, behavioural and mental health interventions, and pharmacological management. Stimulant medications, including methylphenidate (MPH) and amphetamine products, are recommended as first-line pharmacotherapy in the treatment of ADHD. The choice of stimulant is influenced by several factors; the most influential factor is the duration of action. Long-acting medication provides benefits long after school and work. It also increases the likelihood of once-daily dosing, thereby eliminating the need for mid-day dosing, making the treatment more private, avoiding stigma and improving adherence to medication. MPH is the most widely used psychotropic medication in child psychiatry. It was first developed for use in children as an oral, immediate-release formulation and more recently as various extended-release formulations. These latter formulations include the 12 h preparation Concerta(®) (osmotic-release oral system [OROS] MPH), which utilizes an osmotic pump system, designed to overcome the difficulties of multiple daily dosing. Since it received approval from the US Food and Drug Administration in August 2000, OROS MPH has been quickly and widely accepted as one of the preferred treatments for ADHD because of its once-daily dosing. This paper reviews the data in support of long-acting OROS MPH in children, adolescents and adults, both in ADHD and in association with its comorbidities.

Improved functionality, health related quality of life and decreased burden of disease in patients with ADHD treated with OROS® MPH: is treatment response different between children and adolescents?

BACKGROUND

To compare clinical and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between children and adolescents with ADHD treated with OROS® MPH, using data from two large similarly-designed multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-arm, non-interventional studies.

METHODS

Pooled analysis (42603ATT4037, 42603 - ATT - 4001) including patients (6 to 18 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of ADHD. Patients were treated with OROS® MPH for 12 weeks; ADHD symptoms, functioning, HRQoL, safety and tolerability parameters were assessed.

RESULTS

822 patients (583 children [6-12 years], 239 adolescents [13-18 years]) were included in the pooled analysis. Mean daily OROS® MPH starting doses in the child and adolescent subgroups were 29.0 ± 11.7 and 37.6 ± 15.6 mg, respectively (p < 0.001). At study end (week 12), the overall mean daily dose was 35.5 ± 14.0 mg, with children and adolescents receiving 32.8 ± 12.7 and 42.0 ± 15.1 mg/day, respectively (p < 0.001). Significant (p < 0.0001: overall population, children, adolescents) symptomatic, functional and HRQoL improvements were observed from baseline to study end using the Conners' Parents Rating Scale (overall: 29.2 ± 10.7 [baseline] to 19.3 ± 11.3 [endpoint]), Children's Global Assessment Scale (overall: 58.5 ± 14.5 [baseline] to 69.6 ± 16.1 [endpoint]), and ILC-LQ0-28. At week 12, between-age group differences were seen in the individual ILC-LQ0-28 parameters: school performance (p = 0.001 [parents' assessment], p = 0.032 [childrens' assessment]), global QoL (p = 0.012 [parents']) and interests and hobbies (p = 0.023 [childrens']). Treating physician's planned continued use of OROS® MPH in 76.9%, 86.0% and 79.3% of children, adolescents and the total population, respectively, at study end (p = 0.029 between-age subgroups). 195 of 822 patients (23.7%) experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event; most commonly reported AEs in the total group (≥4%) were insomnia (7.2%), anorexia (4.3%) and involuntary muscle contractions (4.1%). No clinically relevant changes in body weight or vital signs were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically relevant differences between children and adolescents with ADHD are present. Adolescents appeared to have a lower health related quality of life and functioning compared to children at baseline, however, they were able to reach comparable ratings at endpoint for most items. Similarly, burden of disease decreased in patients and their carers. OROS MPH was generally safe and well tolerated.