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.

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.

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.

Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis of Atomoxetine and its Metabolites in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Atomoxetine (ATX) is a non-stimulant used to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and systemic exposure is highly variable due to polymorphic cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) activity. The objective of this study was to characterize the time course of ATX and metabolites (4-hydroxyatomoxetine (4-OH); N-desmethylatomoxetine (NDA); and 2-carboxymethylatomoxetine (2-COOH)) exposure following oral ATX dosing in children with ADHD to support individualized dosing. A nonlinear mixed-effect modeling approach was used to analyze ATX, 4-OH, and NDA plasma and urine, and 2-COOH urine profiles obtained over 24-72 hours from children with ADHD (n = 23) following a single oral ATX dose. Demographics and CYP2D6 activity score (AS) were evaluated as covariates. Simulations were performed to explore the ATX dosing in subjects with various CYP2D6 AS. A simultaneous pharmacokinetic modeling approach was used in which a model for ATX, 4-OH, and NDA in plasma and urine, and 2-COOH in urine was developed. Plasma ATX, 4-OH, and NDA were modeled using two-compartment models with first-order elimination. CYP2D6 AS was a significant determinant of ATX apparent oral clearance (CL/F), fraction metabolized to 4-OH, and systemic exposure of NDA. CL/F of ATX varied almost 7-fold across the CYP2D6 AS groups: AS 2: 20.02 L/hour; AS 1: 19.00 L/hour; AS 0.5: 7.47 L/hour; and AS 0: 3.10 L/hour. The developed model closely captures observed ATX, 4-OH, and NDA plasma and urine, and 2-COOH urine profiles. Application of the model shows the potential for AS-based dosing recommendations for improved individualized dosing.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Tratamiento del trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad en la práctica clínica habitual: Estudio retrospectivo / Treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in clinical practice. A retrospective study

El trastorno por déficit de atención e hiperactividad (TDAH) es un trastorno del neurodesarrollo complejo y heterogéneo, de carácter crónico, de etiología multifactorial, principalmente debida a factores genéticos y ambientales. Realizamos un estudio analítico retrospectivo del tratamiento de niños diagnosticados de TDAH. Se estudió una muestra de 82 niños diagnosticados de TDAH (74.4% niños y 25.6% niñas). El 96.3% de los casos presentaba algún trastorno asociado. El tratamiento farmacológico fue el tratamiento de elección (90.2%). El 46.0% recibía metilfenidato de liberación inmediata, un 51.4% metilfenidato de liberación sostenida y la atomoxetina solo se recetó en un 2.7% de los casos. El 20.3% de la muestra abandonó en algún momento el tratamiento farmacológico. El tratamiento farmacológico fue la opción más utilizada en nuestra muestra, y el metilfenidato de liberación inmediata el fármaco de elección para inicio del tratamiento. Se utilizan poco las alternativas a los estimulantes. No se encontraron diferencias significativas entre el tipo de tratamiento y el subtipo de TDAH o el género, aunque sí en cuanto a la edad de inicio del tratamiento.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a complex and heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorder, of a chronic nature, of multifactorial etiology, mainly due to genetic and environmental factors. We conducted a retrospective analytical study of the t herapeutic management of children diagnosed with ADHD. A sample of 82 children diagnosed with ADHD (74.4% children and 25.6% girls) was studied. 96.3% of the cases presented some associated disorder. Pharmacological treatment was the treatment of choice (90.2%). 46.0% received immediate release methylphenidate, 51.4% sustained release methylphenidate and atomoxetine was only prescribed in 2.7% of patients. 20.3% of the sample abandoned pharmacological treatment at some point. Pharmacological treatment was the most frequent option in our sample, and methylphenidate immediate release the drug of choice for treatment initiation. The alternatives to stimulants are used in very low percentage of the patient. No significant differences were found between the type of treatment regarding the subtype of ADHD or gender, but we found significant difference in relation with the age of onset of treatment.