A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of centanafadine versus lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and atomoxetine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: long-term safety and efficacy.

Aim: To compare long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of centanafadine versus lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (lisdexamfetamine), methylphenidate hydrochloride (methylphenidate) and atomoxetine hydrochloride (atomoxetine), respectively, in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs). Patients & methods: Patient-level data from a centanafadine trial (NCT03605849) and published aggregate data from a lisdexamfetamine trial (NCT00337285), a methylphenidate trial (NCT00326300) and an atomoxetine trial (NCT00190736) were used. Patient characteristics were matched in each comparison using propensity score weighting. Study outcomes were assessed up to 52 weeks and included safety (rates of adverse events [AEs]) and efficacy (mean change from baseline in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale [AISRS] or ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] score). Results: In all comparisons of matched populations, risks of AEs were statistically significantly lower with centanafadine or non-different between centanafadine and comparator; the largest differences in AE rates included upper respiratory tract infection (risk difference in percentage points: 18.75), insomnia (12.47) and dry mouth (12.33) versus lisdexamfetamine; decreased appetite (20.25), headache (18.53) and insomnia (12.65) versus methylphenidate; and nausea (26.18), dry mouth (25.07) and fatigue (13.95) versus atomoxetine (all p < 0.05). Centanafadine had a smaller reduction in the AISRS/ADHD-RS score versus lisdexamfetamine (6.15-point difference; p < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score versus methylphenidate (1.75-point difference; p = 0.13) and versus atomoxetine (1.60-point difference; p = 0.21). Conclusion: At up to 52 weeks, centanafadine showed significantly lower incidence of several AEs than lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and atomoxetine; efficacy was lower than lisdexamfetamine and non-different from methylphenidate and atomoxetine.

Proteomic analysis of Alzheimer's disease cerebrospinal fluid reveals alterations associated with APOE ε4 and atomoxetine treatment.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is currently defined by the aggregation of amyloid-ß (Aß) and tau proteins in the brain. Although biofluid biomarkers are available to measure Aß and tau pathology, few markers are available to measure the complex pathophysiology that is associated with these two cardinal neuropathologies. Here, we characterized the proteomic landscape of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) changes associated with Aß and tau pathology in 300 individuals using two different proteomic technologies-tandem mass tag mass spectrometry and SomaScan. Integration of both data types allowed for generation of a robust protein coexpression network consisting of 34 modules derived from 5242 protein measurements, including disease-relevant modules associated with autophagy, ubiquitination, endocytosis, and glycolysis. Three modules strongly associated with the apolipoprotein E ε4 (APOE ε4) AD risk genotype mapped to oxidant detoxification, mitogen-associated protein kinase signaling, neddylation, and mitochondrial biology and overlapped with a previously described lipoprotein module in serum. Alterations of all three modules in blood were associated with dementia more than 20 years before diagnosis. Analysis of CSF samples from an AD phase 2 clinical trial of atomoxetine (ATX) demonstrated that abnormal elevations in the glycolysis CSF module-the network module most strongly correlated to cognitive function-were reduced by ATX treatment. Clustering of individuals based on their CSF proteomic profiles revealed heterogeneity of pathological changes not fully reflected by Aß and tau.

Assessment of centanafadine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, atomoxetine hydrochloride, and viloxazine extended-release.

BACKGROUND: Head-to-head trials comparing centanafadine, an investigational therapy for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with other treatment options are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare safety and efficacy outcomes of centanafadine sustained-release vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine hydrochloride (atomoxetine), and viloxazine extended-release (viloxazine ER), respectively, using matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). METHODS: This MAIC included patient-level data pooled from 2 centanafadine trials (NCT03605680 and NCT03605836) and published aggregate data from comparable trials of 3 comparators-lisdexamfetamine (NCT00334880), atomoxetine (NCT00190736), and viloxazine ER (NCT04016779)-in adult patients with ADHD. Propensity score weighting was used to match characteristics of individual patients from the centanafadine trials to aggregate baseline characteristics from the respective comparator trials. Safety outcomes were rates of adverse events for which information was available in the centanafadine and respective comparator trials. Efficacy outcome was mean change from baseline in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) score (ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] was used as proxy in the comparison with lisdexamfetamine). Anchored indirect comparisons were conducted across matched populations of the centanafadine and respective comparator trials. RESULTS: After matching, baseline characteristics in the centanafadine trials were the same as those in the respective comparator trials. Compared with lisdexamfetamine, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of lack of appetite (risk difference [RD] in percentage points: 23.42), dry mouth (19.27), insomnia (15.35), anxiety (5.21), nausea (4.90), feeling jittery (3.70), and diarrhea (3.47) (all P < 0.05) but a smaller reduction in the AISRS/ADHD-RS score (6.58-point difference; P < 0.05). Compared with atomoxetine, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of nausea (RD in percentage points: 18.64), dry mouth (17.44), fatigue (9.21), erectile dysfunction (6.76), lack of appetite (6.71), and urinary hesitation (5.84) (all P < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score. Compared with viloxazine ER, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of fatigue (RD in percentage points: 11.07), insomnia (10.67), nausea (7.57), and constipation (4.63) (all P < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score. CONCLUSIONS: In an anchored MAIC, centanafadine showed a significantly better short-term safety profile than lisdexamfetamine, atomoxetine, and viloxazine ER; efficacy was lower than with lisdexamfetamine and comparable (ie, nondifferent) with atomoxetine and viloxazine ER. This MAIC provides important insights on the relative safety and efficacy of common treatment options to help inform treatment decisions in adults with ADHD. Safety assessment was limited to rates of adverse events reported in both trials of a given comparison. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03605680, NCT03605836, NCT00334880, NCT00190736, and NCT04016779.

Current nonstimulant medications for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Stimulants, including methylphenidate and amphetamines, are the first-line pharmacological treatment of ADHD in adults. However, in patients who do not respond or poorly tolerate stimulants, non-stimulant medications are usually recommended. AREAS COVERED: The authors provide a narrative review of the literature on non-stimulant treatments for adult ADHD, including controlled and observational clinical studies conducted on adult samples. Atomoxetine has been extensively studied and showed significant efficacy in treating adult ADHD. Issues related to dosing, treatment duration, safety, and use in the case of psychiatric comorbidity are summarized. Among other compounds indicated for ADHD in adults, antidepressants sharing at least a noradrenergic or dopaminergic component, including tricyclic compounds, bupropion, and viloxazine, have shown demonstratable efficacy. Evidence is also available for antihypertensives, particularly guanfacine, as well as memantine, metadoxine, and mood stabilizers, while negative findings have emerged for galantamine, antipsychotics, and cannabinoids. EXPERT OPINION: While according to clinical guidelines, atomoxetine may serve as the only second-line option in adults with ADHD, several other nonstimulant compounds may be effectively used in order to personalize treatment based on comorbid conditions and ADHD features. Nevertheless, further research is needed to identify and test more personalized treatment strategies for adults with ADHD.

Medications for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder associated with increased risk of developing glaucoma.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) therapies including atomoxetine, methylphenidate, and amphetamines are some of the most prescribed medications in North America. Due to their sympathomimetic action, these drugs are contraindicated in patients with a history of angle closure glaucoma (ACG). This study aims to determine the risk of ACG and open angle glaucoma (OAG) among users of these treatments. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study with a case control analysis using the PharMetrics Plus Database (IQVIA, USA). We created a cohort of new users of atomoxetine, methylphenidate, and amphetamines and they were followed to the first diagnosis of (1) ACG or OAG; or (2) end of follow up. For each case, four age-matched controls were selected. A conditional logistic regression model was used to adjust for confounders and to calculate adjusted incidence-rate-ratios (aIRRs). RESULTS: A total of 240,257 new users of the ADHD medications were identified. The mean age was 45.0 ± 19.4 years and 55% of the cohort was female. Regular users of atomoxetine and amphetamines had a higher aIRR for developing ACG compared with non-users (aIRR = 2.55 95% CI [1.20-5.43] and 2.27 95% CI [1.42-3.63], respectively); while users of methylphenidate had a higher aIRR for developing OAG (aIRR = 1.23 95% CI [1.05-1.59]). CONCLUSIONS: Use of amphetamines and atomoxetine had a higher risk for ACG, while use of methylphenidate was associated with a higher risk for OAG. Given the prevalence of ADHD medication use (medically and recreationally), our current data on their associated risk of glaucoma have profound public health implications.

Dispensing of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder medications for adults in Aotearoa New Zealand.

AIM: To report dispensing trends for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Aotearoa New Zealand, focussing on adults in order to highlight increasing demand for ADHD treatment by adults and to prompt discussion. METHOD: Demographic and dispensing data for ADHD were obtained from the Pharmaceutical Collection between the years 2006 and 2022. This was stratified according to child (<18 years) and adult (≥18 years) populations. Population dispensing rates for methylphenidate and atomoxetine were calculated. Key findings are reported to reveal demographic and dispensing trends for medication treated ADHD in Aotearoa New Zealand. RESULTS: More males are dispensed ADHD medication than females, although this is less evident for adults (54.8% male). Maori adults are dispensed ADHD medication at a lower rate (10.1%) than Maori children (22.9%). There was a 10-fold increase in dispensing of ADHD medication for adults compared to a three-fold increase for children over the study period. New dispensing for adults doubled between 2011 and 2022. CONCLUSION: Medication treatment for adult ADHD is increasing in Aotearoa New Zealand and includes treatment for persisting childhood ADHD and new diagnoses made in adulthood. Despite increases, dispensing rates for ADHD remain lower than prevalence estimates, suggesting a significant treatment gap. Addressing the treatment gap for ADHD may reduce negative effects of ADHD, but wider social influences should also be considered.

Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibition, an Emergent Treatment for Neurogenic Orthostatic Hypotension.

The NET (norepinephrine transporter) is situated in the prejunctional plasma membrane of noradrenergic neurons. It is responsible for >90% of the norepinephrine uptake that is released in the autonomic neuroeffector junction. Inhibitors of this cell membrane transporter, known as norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (NRIs), are commercially available for the treatment of depression and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. These agents increase norepinephrine levels, potentiating its action in preganglionic and postganglionic adrenergic neurons, the latter through activation of α-1 adrenoreceptors. Previous studies found that patients with neurogenic orthostatic hypotension can improve standing blood pressure and reduce symptoms of neurogenic orthostatic hypotension after a single administration of the selective NRI atomoxetine. This effect was primarily observed in patients with impaired central autonomic pathways with otherwise normal postganglionic sympathetic fibers, known as multiple system atrophy. Likewise, patients with normal or high norepinephrine levels may benefit from NRIs. The long-term efficacy of NRIs for the treatment of neurogenic orthostatic hypotension-related symptoms is currently under investigation. In summary, an in-depth understanding of the pathophysiology of neurogenic orthostatic hypotension resulted in the discovery of a new therapeutic pathway targeted by NRI.

Switch to Lisdexamfetamine in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit Disorder at a Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic for School-Aged Children: A Danish Cohort Study.

Objectives: This study aimed to examine switch from first-line methylphenidate (MPH) to lisdexamfetamine (LDX) in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This is a retrospective observational study based on systematic review of patient records of all children (7-13 years) diagnosed with ADHD and referred to a Danish specialized outpatient clinic. The study included 394 children switching from MPH to LDX as either second-line or third-line treatment (atomoxetine [ATX] as second-line treatment) during the study period from April 1, 2013, to November 5, 2019. Results: One in five children switched from MPH to LDX at some point during the study period. The most frequent reasons for switching to LDX were adverse effects (AEs; 70.0% for MPH, 68.3% for ATX) and lack of efficiency (52.0% for MPH, 72.7% for ATX). Top five AEs of LDX were decreased appetite (62.4%), insomnia (28.7%), irritability/aggression (26.1%), weight decrease (21.1%), and mood swings (13.9%). MPH and LDX had similar AE profiles, yet most AEs were less frequent after switching to LDX. At the end of the study period, the majority were prescribed LDX as second-line rather than third-line treatment (86.1% in 2019). However, the likelihood of LDX as second-line treatment decreased with the number of psychiatric comorbidities, ADHD symptom severity as assessed by parents, and if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Among children observed for at least 1 year after initiation of LDX, 41.3% continued LDX treatment for a year or longer. LDX continuation was less likely if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Similarly to MPH and ATX, the most frequent reasons for LDX discontinuation were AEs (74.4%) and lack of efficiency (34.7%). Implications: The findings support LDX as an important option in the personalized treatment of children with ADHD and may support prescribers in the clinical decision-making on switching medication.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Interventions for Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder.

Objectives: Disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD) is a relatively new diagnosis that comprises severe, nonepisodic irritability and recurrent outbursts of emotional instability in adolescents. This meta-analysis examined the efficacy of the available pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for DMDD. Methods: Literature searches were conducted in July 2023. To determine relevant articles, 330 abstracts were reviewed, and 39 articles were identified for full review. A random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis, and a subgroup analysis was performed to assess the effects of study design and intervention type. Results: Eleven studies were reviewed, including six pharmacological and five nonpharmacological. Despite high heterogeneity in effects (I2 = 85%), we showed statistically significant improvements in irritability symptoms following intervention. We showed statistically significant enhancements in symptoms of irritability following the intervention. The subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with randomized controlled trials (RCTs), open trials showed significant improvements in irritability. In addition, drug intervention significantly improved irritability compared to nondrug interventions. Atomoxetine (ATX), optimized stimulants, and stimulants combined with other drugs and behavioral therapy effectively improved irritability. Conclusions: With research indicating potential benefits for irritability from a combination of pharmacological interventions and therapy, including ATX, stimulants in conjunction with antipsychotic or antidepressant medications, and cognitive-behavioral techniques such as Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Children. Future large-scale RCTs are essential to further explore and refine these treatment approaches, especially focusing on the efficacy of combining pharmacological with effective nonpharmacological to improve irritability and overall outcomes in this population.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in pregnancy and the postpartum period.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is a childhood-onset neurodevelopmental disorder that frequently persists into adulthood with 3% of adult women having a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Many women are diagnosed and treated during their reproductive years, which leads to management implications during pregnancy and the postpartum period. We know from clinical practice that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms frequently become challenging to manage during the perinatal period and require additional support and attention. There is often uncertainty among healthcare providers about the management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the perinatal period, particularly the safety of pharmacotherapy for the developing fetus. This guideline is focused on best practices in managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the perinatal period. We recommend (1) mitigating the risks associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder that worsen during the perinatal period via individualized treatment planning; (2) providing psychoeducation, self-management strategies or coaching, and psychotherapies; and, for those with moderate or severe attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, (3) considering pharmacotherapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, which largely has reassuring safety data. Specifically, providers should work collaboratively with patients and their support networks to balance the risks of perinatal attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder medication with the risks of inadequately treated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder during pregnancy. The risks and impacts of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in pregnancy can be successfully managed through preconception counselling and appropriate perinatal planning, management, and support.

Recent updates on treatment patterns in patients with treated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders from a nationwide real-world database in South Korea.

The prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is steadily increasing across Korea. We analyzed ADHD patients with ADHD medications (Rx) characteristics and treatment patterns compared to patients without Rx and identified the differences between pediatric-/adult- and active-/transient-patients with Rx. Using a nationwide claims dataset from 2020 to 2021, we conducted a prevalence-based cross-sectional study and analyzed the recent patients' characteristics and patterns among ADHD patients. Among 132 017 ADHD patients with Rx, differences from 20 312 without Rx across all characteristics except sex. We found significant differences in characteristics and treatment patterns between pediatric-/adult- and active-/transient-patients with Rx. Age-specific sex ratios notably diverged in pediatric patients (61.2%), but remained similar in adults, revealing significant psychiatric comorbidities differences. Active-patients peaked at 6-11 years (41.4%), while transient-patients at 18-30 years (36.1%). Predominantly, methylphenidate (89.7%), atomoxetine (27.8%), and clonidine (2.8%) were prescribed, with 85% experiencing treatment changes within methylphenidate formulations. In pediatric patients, extended-release methylphenidate was preferred (56.1%), adults favored oral delivery system methylphenidate (71.5%), and active-patients had higher treatment rates than transient-patients across all patterns, with low monotherapy rates. This study provides epidemiologic insights into recent characteristics and treatment patterns of ADHD patients with Rx in Korea, providing valuable evidence for identifying those actively receiving ADHD treatment in future healthcare policy decisions.

Pharmacological treatment for obstructive sleep apnea: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Summarize the evidence on drug therapies for obstructive sleep apnea. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on February 17th, 2023. A search strategy retrieved randomized clinical trials comparing the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) in pharmacotherapies. Studies were selected and data was extracted by two authors independently. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. RevMan 5.4. was used for data synthesis. RESULTS: 4930 articles were obtained, 68 met inclusion criteria, and 29 studies (involving 11 drugs) were combined in a meta-analysis. Atomoxetine plus oxybutynin vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -7.71 (-10.59, -4.83) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 50 %, overall effect: Z = 5.25, p < 0.001]. Donepezil vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -8.56 (-15.78, -1.33) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 21 %, overall effect: Z = 2.32, p = 0.02]. Sodium oxybate vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -5.50 (-9.28, -1.73) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 32 %, overall effect: Z = 2.86, p = 0.004]. Trazodone vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -12.75 (-21.30, -4.19) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 0 %, overall effect: Z = 2.92, p = 0.003]. CONCLUSION: The combination of noradrenergic and antimuscarinic drugs shows promising results. Identifying endotypes may be the key to future drug therapies for obstructive sleep apnea. Moreover, studies with longer follow-up assessing the safety and sustained effects of these treatments are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022362639.

Combination pharmacological therapy targeting multiple mechanisms of sleep apnoea: a randomised controlled cross-over trial.

RATIONALE: Acetazolamide and atomoxetine-plus-oxybutynin ('AtoOxy') can improve obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) by stabilising ventilatory control and improving dilator muscle responsiveness respectively. Given the different pathophysiological mechanisms targeted by each intervention, we tested whether AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide would be more efficacious than AtoOxy alone. METHODS: In a multicentre randomised crossover trial, 19 patients with moderate-to-severe OSA received AtoOxy (80/5 mg), acetazolamide (500 mg), combined AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide or placebo at bedtime for three nights (half doses on first night) with a 4-day washout between conditions. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and night 3 of each treatment period. Mixed model analysis compared the reduction in Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index (AHI) from baseline between AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide and AtoOxy (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included hypoxic burden and arousal index. RESULTS: Although AtoOxy lowered AHI by 49 (33, 62)%baseline (estimate (95% CI)) vs placebo, and acetazolamide lowered AHI by+34 (14, 50)%baseline vs placebo, AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide was not superior to AtoOxy alone (difference: -2 (-18, 11)%baseline, primary outcome p=0.8). Likewise, the hypoxic burden was lowered with AtoOxy (+58 (37, 71)%baseline) and acetazolamide (+37 (5, 58)%baseline), but no added benefit versus AtoOxy occurred when combined (difference: -13 (-5, 39)%baseline). Arousal index was also modestly reduced with each intervention (11%baseline-16%baseline). Mechanistic analyses revealed that similar traits (ie, higher baseline compensation, lower loop gain) were associated with both AtoOxy and acetazolamide efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: While AtoOxy halved AHI, and acetazolamide lowered AHI by a third, the combination of these leading experimental interventions provided no greater efficacy than AtoOxy alone. Failure of acetazolamide to further increase efficacy suggests overlapping physiological mechanisms. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03892772.

Comparing Pharmacotherapies for ADHD in Adults: Evidence From Outcome-Focused Analysis of Food and Drug Administration Drug Label Registration Trials.

OBJECTIVE: We appraised whether FDA registration trials for ADHD pharmacotherapy in adults provides comparable information to inform treatment expectations. METHOD: Comparison of ADHD outcome measure patterns in ADHD pharmacotherapy FDA drug label source studies. RESULTS: Among stimulants, from fixed-dose titration data, amphetamine agents had numerically higher placebo-corrected symptom improvement and symptom effect sizes than methylphenidate agents. Symptom effect sizes were lower in the flexible dosing registration studies of atomoxetine and viloxazine. Varying responder definitions were analyzable, based on ≥30% symptom improvement and/or CGI-I improvement of "much" or "very much improved." Number of exposures needed to create these responses were lower for stimulants than for viloxazine. CONCLUSION: Heterogeneity in the design and analysis of FDA drug label source trials restricts implications for clinical practice. Research conducted using replicated designs, direct comparison of available treatments, and outcome analyses that generalize to clinical care could better inform clinical decision making.

The Modulatory Effects of Atomoxetine on Aberrant Connectivity During Attentional Processing in Cocaine Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Cocaine use disorder is associated with cognitive deficits that reflect dysfunctional processing across neural systems. Because there are currently no approved medications, treatment centers provide behavioral interventions that have only short-term efficacy. This suggests that behavioral interventions are not sufficient by themselves to lead to the maintenance of abstinence in patients with cocaine use disorder. Self-control, which includes the regulation of attention, is critical for dealing with many daily challenges that would benefit from medication interventions that can ameliorate cognitive neural disturbances. METHODS: To address this important clinical gap, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design study in patients with cocaine use disorder (n = 23) and healthy control participants (n = 28). We assessed the modulatory effects of acute atomoxetine (40 mg) on attention and conflict monitoring and their associated neural activation and connectivity correlates during performance on the Eriksen flanker task. The Eriksen flanker task examines basic attentional processing using congruent stimuli and the effects of conflict monitoring and response inhibition using incongruent stimuli, the latter of which necessitates the executive control of attention. RESULTS: We found that atomoxetine improved task accuracy only in the cocaine group but modulated connectivity within distinct brain networks in both groups during congruent trials. During incongruent trials, the cocaine group showed increased task-related activation in the right inferior frontal and anterior cingulate gyri, as well as greater network connectivity than the control group across treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the current study support a modulatory effect of acute atomoxetine on attention and associated connectivity in cocaine use disorder.

Droxidopa or Atomoxetine for Refractory Hypotension in Critically Ill Cardiothoracic Surgery Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of droxidopa or atomoxetine on intravenous (IV) vasoactive agent discontinuation in cardiothoracic intensive care unit (ICU) patients with hypotension refractory to midodrine. DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary- and quaternary-care university teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Included patients who received at least 4 consecutive doses of droxidopa or atomoxetine and remained on concurrent midodrine. Patients were excluded if they received study medication before admission, had clinical deterioration after study medication initiation requiring additional vasoactives/escalation of IV vasoactive dosage for at least 12 hours, had a diagnosis of hepatorenal syndrome, were prisoners, or were pregnant. INTERVENTIONS: Droxidopa, atomoxetine, or both. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary endpoint was time to discontinuation of IV vasoactive agents after initiation of study medication, analyzed using a Kaplan-Meier estimate with the Wilcoxon method, censoring death within 24 hours of the last dose of study medication. No adjustment for repetitive analyses was made, as the analysis was hypothesis-generating. Of the 72 charts reviewed, 45 patients met inclusion criteria (18 atomoxetine, 17 droxidopa, and 10 both). There were no differences in median time to discontinuation of IV vasoactive agents (21.9 days v 8.0 days v 13.9 days, respectively; p = 0.259) or ICU or hospital length of stay between groups. A higher percentage of patients who survived to hospital discharge received both study medications or droxidopa alone (90% v 76.5%) than atomoxetine alone (44.4%, p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Droxidopa and atomoxetine are oral vasoactive agents with potential mechanisms to facilitate IV vasopressor weaning for patients in the ICU with hypotension refractory to midodrine, but further prospective research is needed.

The effects of atomoxetine and trazodone combination on obstructive sleep apnea and sleep microstructure: A double-blind randomized clinical trial study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: we aimed to compare the effects of atomoxetine and trazodone (A-T) in combination with placebo in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). METHODS: This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover trial study was conducted in adults with OSA referred to a Sleep Clinic. Participants with eligibility criteria were recruited. Patients were studied on two separate nights with one-week intervals, once treated with trazodone (50 mg) and atomoxetine (80 mg) combination and then with a placebo and the following polysomnography tests. RESULTS: A total of 18 patients with OSA completed the study protocol, 9(50%) were male, the mean age was 47.5 years (SD = 9.8) and the mean Body mass index of participants was 28.4 kg/m2 (SD = 3.4). Compared with the placebo, the A-T combination resulted in significant differences in AHI (28.3(A-T) vs. 42.7 (placebo), p = 0.025), duration of the REM stage (1.3%TST (A-T) vs. 13.1%TST (placebo), p = 0.001), and the number of REM cycles (0.8 (A-T) vs. 4.7 (placebo), p = 0.001), number of apneas (38.3 (A-T) vs. 79.3 (placebo), p = 0.011), number of obstructive apneas (37.2 (A-T) vs. 75.2 (placebo), p = 0.011), oxygen desaturation index (29.5 (A-T) vs. 42.3 (placebo), p = 0.022) and number of respiratory arousals (43.2 (A-T) vs. 68.5 (placebo), p = 0.048). This decrement effect did not change among those with a low-arousal phenotype of OSA. CONCLUSIONS: The A-T combination significantly improved respiratory events' indices compared with placebo in patients with OSA. This combination is recommended to be assessed in a large trial. It could be an alternative for those who do not adhere to the standard available treatments for OSA.

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.