SUR2B/Kir6.1 channel openers correct endothelial dysfunction in chronic heart failure via the miR-1-3p/ET-1 pathway.

The SUR2B/Kir6.1 channel openers iptakalim and natakalim reverse cardiac remodeling and ameliorate endothelial dysfunction by re-establishing the balance between the nitric oxide and endothelin systems. In this study, we investigated the microRNAs (miRs) involved in the molecular mechanisms of SUR2B/Kir6.1 channel opening in chronic heart failure. Both iptakalim and natakalim significantly upregulated the expression of miR-1-3p, suggesting that this miR is closely associated with the therapeutic effects against chronic heart failure. Bioinformatic analysis showed that many of the 183 target genes of miR-1-3p are involved in cardiovascular diseases, suggesting that miR-1-3p plays a vital role in such diseases and vascular remodeling. Target gene prediction showed that miR-1-3p combines with the 3' untranslated region (UTR) of endothelin-1 (ET-1) mRNA. Iptakalim and natakalim upregulated miR-1-3p expression and downregulated ET-1 mRNA expression in vitro. The dual luciferase assay confirmed that there is a complementary binding sequence between miR-1-3p and the 3' UTR 158-165 sequence of ET-1 mRNA. To verify the effect of miR-1-3p on ET-1, lentiviral vectors overexpressing or inhibiting miR-1-3p were constructed for the transduction of rat primary cardiac microvascular endothelial cells. The results showed that natakalim enhanced the miR-1-3p level. miR-1-3p overexpression downregulated the expression of ET-1, whereas miR-1-3p inhibition had the opposite effect. Therefore, we verified that SUR2B/Kir6.1 channel openers could correct endothelial imbalance and ameliorate chronic heart failure through the miR-1-3p/ET-1 pathway in endothelial cells. Our study provides comprehensive insights into the molecular mechanisms behind the SUR2B/Kir6.1 channel's activity against chronic heart failure.

Relationships Between Functional Outcomes and Symptomatic Improvement in Atomoxetine-Treated Adult Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Post Hoc Analysis of an Integrated Database.

BACKGROUND: Atomoxetine treatment is associated with improvements in functional outcomes in patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), although relationships between improvements in these outcomes and reductions in ADHD symptoms have not been comprehensively investigated in adults. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess relationships between functional outcomes and ADHD symptoms (primary objective), and to assess time courses of changes in functional outcomes from baseline to weeks 10 and 24 (secondary objective). METHODS: We analyzed data pooled from seven Eli Lilly-sponsored placebo-controlled trials of atomoxetine in adults with ADHD that had Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scales-Investigator Rated: Screening Version (CAARS-Inv:SV) total scores and functional outcome data at baseline and at week 10. Two trials also had these data at week 24. Patients were included in these pooled analyses if they had a CAARS-Inv:SV total score at baseline and at one or more post-baseline visits at weeks 10 or 24, or had post-baseline scores that would allow missing scores at weeks 10 or 24 to be imputed. To address the primary objective, changes in functional outcomes during treatment with atomoxetine versus placebo were assessed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis, and correlations between score changes in CAARS-Inv:SV total and functional outcomes were assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r) at weeks 10 and 24. The secondary objective was addressed using MMRM. RESULTS: At baseline, patients generally had moderately severe or worse ADHD symptoms (based on CAARS-Inv:SV total scores) and impaired functional outcomes (based on Adult ADHD Quality-of-Life [AAQoL], Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult Version [BRIEF-A], Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS], and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey [SF-36] scores). These baseline characteristics were comparable in the atomoxetine and placebo groups. For atomoxetine versus placebo, statistically significant improvements were detected in AAQoL total and subscores at weeks 10 and 24, and in BRIEF-A Self-Report scores at week 10, but not in BRIEF-A Informant Report or SDS scores at week 10 (no BRIEF-A or SDS data were available at week 24), and not in SF-36 at weeks 10 or 24. All functional improvements were gradual. During treatment with atomoxetine, there were moderate correlations between reductions in CAARS-Inv:SV total scores and increases in AAQoL total and subscores at weeks 10 and 24 (r range -0.58 to -0.39; n = 394-545), and also with reductions in BRIEF-A Self-Report at week 10 (r = 0.49; n = 256). With placebo, moderate correlations were also found between reductions in CAARS-Inv:SV total scores and increases in AAQoL total and subscores at weeks 10 and 24 (r range -0.56 to -0.28; n = 321-542), and with reductions in BRIEF-A Self-Report at week 10 (r = 0.49; n = 271). However, correlations between changes in CAARS-Inv:SV and BRIEF-A Informant at week 10 were low for atomoxetine-treated patients (r = 0.25; n = 65), moderate with placebo (r = 0.42; n = 72), and there were low/no correlations between changes in CAARS-Inv:SV and functional outcome rating scales that are not specific to ADHD; that is, for atomoxetine-treated patients, SDS total r = 0.19 (n = 32 at week 10) and SF-36 r range - 0.20 to -0.01 (n = 51 at week 10, n = 183 at week 24). CONCLUSIONS: Atomoxetine-treated adult patients experienced improvements in functional outcomes (AAQoL and BRIEF-A Self-Report) that correlated with reductions in ADHD symptoms. Although atomoxetine improved both the ADHD symptoms and functional outcomes, the correlation between symptoms and functional outcomes was low to moderate, suggesting that they measure overlapping but different aspects of the disorder. Hence, clinicians should assess not just ADHD symptoms, but also the functional impairments.

A randomized placebo-controlled trial of electroencephalographic (EEG) neurofeedback in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of electroencephalographic (EEG) neurofeedback in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The study started in August 2008 and ended in July 2012 and was conducted at Karakter Child and Adolescent Psychiatry University Centre in Nijmegen, The Netherlands. METHOD: Forty-one children (aged 8-15 years) with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of ADHD were randomly assigned to treatment with either EEG neurofeedback (n = 22) or placebo neurofeedback (n = 19) for 30 sessions, given as 2 sessions per week. The children were stratified by age, electrophysiologic state of arousal, and medication use. Everyone involved in the study, except the neurofeedback therapist and the principal investigator, was blinded to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was severity of ADHD symptoms on the ADHD Rating Scale IV, scored at baseline, during treatment, and at study end. Clinical improvement as measured by the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I) was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: While total ADHD symptoms improved over time in both groups (F1,39 = 26.56, P < .001), there was no significant treatment effect, ie, group × time interaction (F1,39 = 0.36, P = .554); the same was true for clinical improvement as measured by the CGI-I (P = .092). No clinically relevant side effects were observed. Among the children and their parents, guessing treatment assignment was not better than chance level (P = .224 for children, P = .643 for parents). CONCLUSION: EEG neurofeedback was not superior to placebo neurofeedback in improving ADHD symptoms in children with ADHD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00723684.

Influence of simethicone and alverine on stress-induced alterations of colonic permeability and sensitivity in rats: beneficial effect of their association.

OBJECTIVES: Alverine, an antispasmodic agent for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), may be combined with simethicone, a protective agent of the mucosa. Stress is a major factor triggering abdominal pain in IBS and causing hypersensitivity to colonic distension in animals through an increased colonic permeability. The antinociceptive effects of alverine and simethicone, separately or in association, were evaluated on stress-induced colonic hypersensitivity to distension in rats. The influence of simethicone on altered permeability was also tested. METHODS: Groups of 8-10 female adult Wistar rats (200-250 g) housed individually were used. Gut paracellular permeability was evaluated after 2 h of partial restraint stress using oral gavage with 5¹Cr-EDTA and 24 h of urine collection. The number of abdominal cramps during colonic distension was evaluated in animals equipped with electrodes on their abdominal striated muscles. KEY FINDINGS: At 200 mg/kg p.o. twice a day, but not at lower doses, simethicone reduced stress-induced increase of colonic permeability and hypersensitivity to distension. Administered alone at 10 mg/kg p.o., alverine also reduced stress-induced hypersensitivity to distension; lower doses were inactive. However, alverine administered at an inactive dose with simethicone suppressed stress-induced hypersensitivity to distension. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that both simethicone and alverine have visceral antinociceptive effects by two different mechanisms and that simethicone exerts a potentiating effect on the antinociceptive action of alverine.

Cost effectiveness of guanfacine extended-release versus atomoxetine for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: application of a matching-adjusted indirect comparison.

BACKGROUND: About 7% of children and adolescents are diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the US. Patients with ADHD who are intolerant of or do not have an optimal response to stimulants often use non-stimulants as alternative therapies. Guanfacine extended-release (GXR) and atomoxetine (ATX) are the only non-stimulants approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for once-daily use in the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD in the US. ATX has been on the market since 2002 while GXR was recently approved in 2009. To date, there is no comparative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness study comparing the two drugs. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of GXR versus ATX for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents, using the comparative efficacy results from a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). METHODS: The MAIC method was used to compare the efficacy between GXR (target dose and lower doses) and ATX (target dose) in the absence of head-to-head clinical trials. Individual patients in the GXR trials were weighted such that the summary baseline characteristics and the efficacy of the placebo arm of the GXR trials matched exactly with those from published ATX trials. After weighting, the efficacy (i.e. change in the ADHD rating scale, fourth edition [ADHD-RS-IV] total score from baseline) was compared between each GXR dosing group and the ATX group. The results from the MAIC analyses were used to populate a 1-year Markov model that is used to compare the cost effectiveness of GXR versus ATX from a US third-party payer perspective. Effectiveness outcomes for each treatment group were estimated as the proportion of responders, defined as patients with ≥25% reduction in ADHD-RS-IV total score from baseline, and average quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Utilities associated with response/non-response and disutilities due to adverse events were applied in the model. Costs included drug and medical service costs and were inflated to 2011 US dollars ($US). Incremental cost/QALY and incremental cost/responder were estimated. Univariate sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying all model parameters, including costs, utilities, and response rate. RESULTS: The target dose of GXR was 0.12 mg/kg/day. In match-adjusted populations with balanced baseline characteristics, patients receiving GXR at the dose of 0.09-0.12(p = 0.0016) [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED] and 0.075-0.09 mg/kg/day (p = 0.0248) had better efficacy, while those receiving GXR at the dose of 0.046-0.075 mg/kg/day had comparable efficacy (p = 0.0699), compared with patients receiving ATX at the target dose of 1.2 mg/kg/day. In the base case of the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), GXR had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $US10 637/QALY and $US853/responder, compared with ATX (incremental costs: $US74; incremental effectiveness: 0.007 QALYs and 86 responders per 1000 patients treated). Results of all univariate sensitivity analyses showed that the model results were robust to changes in model inputs. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first application of the novel comparative efficacy method of MAIC to a CEA model. The MAIC results indicate that GXR (0.075-0.12 mg/kg/day) was more effective than ATX (1.2 mg/kg/day) in the trial population. The CEA results indicate that GXR is cost effective compared with ATX for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents.

[Update on Current Care guidelines: ADHD (attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, children and adolescents)]. / ADHD (aktiivisuuden ja tarkkaavuuden häiriö, lapset ja nuoret).

The updated Current Care guideline for children and adolescents with ADHD covers both diagnosis and treatment. Psychosocial support is provided when hyperactivity problems arise, even before specific diagnosis. While psychosocial interventions are effective in the treatment of ADHD, the core symptoms are best treated with medication, such as methylphenidate, dexamphetamine, lisdexamphetamine or atomoxetine. Collaboration between families, primary health care services, specialist consultation services and day-care and school professionals is essential within the chain of care.

Inclusion of a spasmolytic in bowel cleansing: a prospective randomized study.

The quality of colon cleansing and the tolerance of patients to the procedure are two major determinants of the quality of a colonoscopy. Many bowel-cleansing regimens are known, but there is no ideal regimen. Alverine citrate (Relaxyl, Spasmonal) is a spasmolytic agent that has been shown to affect responses of mechanoreceptors of the intestine to both mechanical and chemical stimuli. Patients who underwent colonoscopies at four centers were randomly assigned two different bowel-cleansing procedures. The bowel-cleansing methods were oral sodium phosphate (NaP) (Group I) and oral NaP plus alverine citrate (Group II). Patients were randomized into one of these regimens. The quality of colon cleansing was assessed by an endoscopist with an empirical, clinically meaningful 3-point scale. Both groups were similar with respect to age, gender, and pre- and postcolonoscopic diagnosis. In Group I, 76 patients (47 women and 29 men; aged 39.53 ± 7.87 years) and in Group II, 71 patients (41 women and 30 men; aged 39.78 ± 8.27 years) were included in the study. In Groups I and II, 37 (48.7%) and 41 (57.7%) patients had perfect bowel cleansing, respectively. The overall colon cleansing in the group with NaP plus alverine citrate was comparable with that in the NaP group. The tolerability of patients to the colonoscopy in the two groups was also similar. Based on the present data, adding oral alverine citrate to NaP does not increase either the quality of bowel cleansing or the tolerance of patients to the procedure.

A placebo-controlled trial of atomoxetine in marijuana-dependent individuals with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

This study evaluated the effects of atomoxetine on the symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and marijuana use in marijuana-dependent adults. In conjunction with motivational interviewing, participants received either atomoxetine (n = 19) or matching placebo (n = 19) for 12 weeks. Participants randomized to atomoxetine had greater improvement in ADHD on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale than participants treated with placebo. No treatment group differences in self-rated ADHD symptoms, overall Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale scores, or marijuana use outcomes were noted. These results suggest that atomoxetine may improve some ADHD symptoms but does not reduce marijuana use in this population.

Attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder: an update.

Attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neuropsychiatric disorder that impairs social, academic, and occupational functioning in children, adolescents, and adults. In patients with ADHD, neurobiologic research has shown a lack of connectivity in key brain regions, inhibitory control deficits, delayed brain maturation, and noradrenergic and dopaminergic dysfunction in multiple brain regions. The prevalence of this disorder in the United States is 6-9% in youth (i.e., children and adolescents) and 3-5% in adults. Prevalence rates for youth are similar worldwide. Children with ADHD are at greater risk than children without ADHD for substance abuse and delinquency whether or not they receive drug therapy; however, early treatment with psychoeducation as well as drug therapy and/or behavioral intervention may decrease negative outcomes of ADHD, including the rate of conduct disorder and adult antisocial personality disorder. Drug therapy is effective for all age groups, even preschoolers, and for late-onset ADHD in adults. Stimulants, such as methylphenidate and amphetamine, are the most effective therapy and have a good safety profile; although recent concerns of sudden unexplained death, psychiatric adverse effects, and growth effects have prompted the introduction of other therapies. Atomoxetine, a nonstimulant, has no abuse potential, causes less insomnia than stimulants, and poses minimal risk of growth effects. Other drug options include clonidine and guanfacine, but both can cause bradycardia and sedation. Polyunsaturated fatty acids (fish oil), acetyl-L-carnitine, and iron supplements (for youth with low ferritin levels) show promise in improving ADHD symptoms. As long-term studies show that at least 50% of youth are nonadherent with their drug therapy as prescribed over a 1-year period, long-acting formulations (administered once/day) may improve adherence. Comorbid conditions are common in patients with ADHD, but this patient population can be treated effectively with individualized treatment regimens of stimulants, atomoxetine, or bupropion, along with close monitoring.

A randomized clinical comparison of OPTI-FREE EXPRESS and ReNu MultiPLUS multipurpose lens care solutions.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate subjective symptoms and clinical signs of tolerability and comfort in silicone and non-silicone hydrogel contact lens (CL) wearers using two different multipurpose solution (MPS) CL care regimens. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-masked, contralateral, crossover, multicenter (n=9) study. One hundred and eleven subjects were enrolled in the study, and were randomly assigned either silicone hydrogel CLs or non-silicone hydrogel CLs. Before wear, the CLs were randomly conditioned for at least 10 hours in a multipurpose disinfection solution (MPDS) preserved with either: Regimen 1-polyquaternium-1 0.001% and myristamidopropyl dimethylamine 0.0005% (POLYQUAD and ALDOX, respectively; OPTIFREE EXPRESS MPDS, Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA); or Regimen 2-multipurpose solution preserved with polyhexamethylene biguanide 0.0001% (PHMB, ReNu MultiPLUS MPS, Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY, USA). The study had two in-office visits, 1 week apart. Subjects wore assigned CLs for approximately 4 hours at each visit. At each visit, subjects' eyes were examined before CL insertion and at 2 hours and 4 hours after insertion. Corneal staining type and area, conjunctival staining, conjunctival injection, subjective symptoms (tolerability), and comfort were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred and five subjects (210 eyes) completed the study. The total corneal staining score of area and type were statistically significantly less in Regimen 1 than in Regimen 2 (P<0.000001). The area of conjunctival staining was statistically significantly less in Regimen 1 than in Regimen 2 (P=0.03). No clinically significant hyperemia was observed for either regimen. Both tolerability (P=0.02) and patient preference (P=0.05) were in favor of Regimen 1. CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant clinical differences were evident between the two CL care regimens when used with silicone and non-silicone hydrogel CLs. OPTI-FREE EXPRESS MPDS users showed less corneal and conjunctival staining and reported greater comfort and tolerability to the CL/solution combination than ReNu MultiPLUS MPS users.

Dopamine vs noradrenaline: inverted-U effects and ADHD theories.

The aim of the present study was to review the dopamine theory of attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), in light of recent use of noradrenergic therapies. A historical review of pharmacological theories of ADHD was conducted, including inverted-U, spatial working memory and neural circuit aspects. Pharmacological advances, including animal and human studies of dopaminergic and noradrenergic mechanisms at the prefrontal cortex (PFC), indicate that alpha-2A adrenoreceptor stimulation results in increased dendritic firing during delay periods for preferred directions, while moderate levels of D1 receptor stimulation result in reduction of delay-related firing to non-preferred directions, allowing representational control in the PFC. Recent studies of the COMT val/met gene and stimulant medication response may help explain variation in inverted-U responses in individuals. Further studies utilizing delay-related firing paradigms should be useful in the investigation of attentional syndromes, and responses to newer pharmacological treatments.

Atomoxetine increases histamine release and improves learning deficits in an animal model of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: the spontaneously hypertensive rat.

Substantial development in the pharmacological treatment for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been made recently including approval of new non-stimulant agents targeting noradrenergic, histaminergic and dopaminergic systems. Among such, atomoxetine has been widely used, although its mechanism of action is poorly understood. It is known that central nervous system histamine is closely associated with cognition and it was recently shown that both atomoxetine and methylphenidate enhance cortical histamine release in rats. To that end, the aim of our study was to investigate the effect of atomoxetine (2 mg/kg, intraperitoneally) on histamine release using the microdialysis technique in the spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR), a suitable genetic model for ADHD. Our data confirmed that atomoxetine increases extracellular levels of histamine in the prefrontal cortex, a brain region that is implicated in the pathophysiology of ADHD. Given the tie between histamine neurotransmission and treatment of cognitive dysfunction, we also assessed the effects of atomoxetine on learning and memory as measured by the Morris water maze in SHR. The results indicated that atomoxetine significantly ameliorated performance in the Morris water maze, consistent with its histamine-enhancing profile. In conclusion, the current study provides further support for the notion that the therapeutic effect of atomoxetine could involve activation of histamine neurotransmission within the prefrontal cortex.

Atomoxetine for treatment of marijuana dependence: a report on the efficacy and high incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events in a pilot study.

Marijuana users consistently demonstrate impairments in attention, executive function and response inhibition, which resemble deficits seen in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We hypothesized that targeting the cognitive deficits associated with chronic marijuana use through ADHD medications may help identify a therapeutic agent for marijuana dependence. Thirteen subjects participated in an 11-week open label study to determine the feasibility, safety and tolerability of atomoxetine for individuals seeking treatment for marijuana dependence. The Time-Line Follow-Back measured marijuana use 90 days prior to study entry (p-TLFB) and weekly during the study (s-TLFB) along with weekly qualitative urine drug screen (UDS). For the eight subjects who completed the trial, the TLFB data showed a trend toward reduction in use with an increase in percent days abstinent (p=0.06). Analysis of weekly UDSs did not confirm the TLFB trend with 94% of all possible UDSs positive for THC through out the study. Marijuana dependent subjects taking atomoxetine experienced an inordinate number of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events. Overall, 10 of 13 subjects (77%) experienced a mild to moderate GI adverse event defined as nausea, vomiting, dyspepsia, and loose stools. Atomoxetine is of limited utility in the treatment of cannabis dependence and is associated with clinically significant GI adverse events.

[Atomoxetine (Strattera), an alternative in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children]. / L'atomoxétine (Strattera), une alternative thérapeutique dans le trouble déficit de l'attention/hyperactivité de l'enfant (TDAH).

INTRODUCTION: Atomoxetine (Strattera) is the first non-stimulant drug to be approved for the treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children 6 years of age and adolescents. Atomoxetine is a highly specific inhibitor of the presynaptic norepinephrine transporter, with minimal affinity for other transporters or other neurotransmitter receptors. The target dose is 1.2 mg/kg, in a once- or twice-daily oral administration. CLINICAL DATA: Six randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials have demonstrated that atomoxetine was more effective than placebo for the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD. All these trials have shown a consistent improvement in the ADHD rating scale (ADHD-RS) from baseline in the patients treated with atomoxetine, compared with that of the placebo group. The improvement of ADHD symptoms was confirmed by the other secondary efficacy measures (the Clinical Global Impression, CGI, the Conners ADHD rating scale/parent, teacher). The duration of action of atomoxetine on ADHD symptoms extended throughout the waking hours, and the drug effects persisted up to the next morning with a single morning dose. Significant improvements were also observed with atomoxetine compared to placebo, in several aspects of the quality of life measurement (social and family functioning), and the child's self-esteem. In addition, in patients who responded favourably to initial treatment, atomoxetine was shown to be superior to placebo in maintaining a long term-response, up to 18 months. Atomoxetine was effective and safe, both in young children and adolescents with ADHD. Preliminary data also support the potential efficacy of atomoxetine in managing patients with ADHD and comorbid conditions, such as tic disorders, oppositional-defiant and conduct disorders. DISCUSSION: As of June 2004, over 3,000 children and adolescents have been enrolled in clinical trials of atomoxetine, with about 1,200 of them treated for more than 1 year and about 400 of them treated for more than 2 years. Atomoxetine was well tolerated in most individuals, the two more common adverse events reported were gastro-intestinal disorders and decreased appetite. These side effects were generally noted to be transient. No significant changes in weight and height gain was reported over the long-term follow-up. There was no evidence of symptoms rebound and no evidence of an acute discontinuation syndrome when discontinuing treatment. In addition, given the mechanism of action of atomoxetine in the central nervous system, and lack of subjective, physiological and psychomotor effects reported in experimental conditions, it is unlikely that atomoxetine would have abuse potential. CONCLUSION: Results from clinical trials demonstrated that atomoxetine is effective and well tolerated for the acute and long-term treatment of children and adolescents suffering from ADHD. Atomoxetine should be considered as a new interesting pharmacological option in the treatment of ADHD in association with non pharmacological therapeutic interventions.

Health care costs of adults treated for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder who received alternative drug therapies.

BACKGROUND: Many therapies exist for treating adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), also referred to as attention-deficit disorder (ADD), but there is no research regarding cost differences associated with initiating alternative ADD/ADHD drug therapies in adults. OBJECTIVE: To compare from the perspective of a large self-insured employer the risk-adjusted direct health care costs associated with 3 alternative drug therapies for ADD in newly treated patients: extended-release methylphenidate (osmotic release oral system-MPH), mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS-XR), or atomoxetine. METHODS: We analyzed data from a US claims database of 5 million beneficiaries from 31 large self-insured employers (1999-2004). Analysis was restricted to adults aged 18 to 64 years with at least 1 diagnosis of ADD/ADHD (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 314.0x--attention deficit disorder; 314.00--attention deficit disorder without hyperactivity; or 314.01--attention-deficit disorder with hyperactivity) and at least 1 pharmacy claim for OROS-MPH, MAS-XR, or atomoxetine identified using National Drug Codes. In preliminary analysis, we calculated the duration of index ADHD drug therapy as time from index therapy initiation to a minimum 60-day gap. Because the median duration of index ADHD drug therapy was found to be approximately 90 days, the primary measures were total direct medical plus drug costs and medical-only costs computed over 6 months following therapy initiation. Adults were required to have continuous eligibility 6 months before and 6 months after their latest drug therapy initiation and no ADHD therapy during the previous 6 months. Cost was measured as the payment amount made by the health plan to the provider rather than billed charges, and it excluded patient copayments and deductibles. Medical costs included costs incurred for all-cause inpatient and outpatient/other services. Costs were adjusted for inflation to 2004 U.S. dollars using the consumer price index for medical care. T tests were used for descriptive cost comparisons. Generalized linear models (GLMs) were used to compare costs of adults receiving alternative therapies, adjusting for demographic characteristics, substance abuse, depression, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: Of the 4,569 patients who received 1 of these 3 drug therapies for ADHD, 31.8% received OROS-MPH for a median duration of 99 days of therapy, 34.0% received MAS-XR for a median 128 days, and 34.2% received atomoxetine for a median 86 days. In the 6-month follow-up period, the mean (standard deviation) total medical and drug costs were $2,008 ($3,231) for OROS-MPH, $2,169 ($4,828) for MAS-XR, and $2,540 ($4,269) for atomoxetine-treated adults. The GLM for patient characteristics suggested that 6-month, risk-adjusted mean medical costs, excluding drug costs, for adults treated with OROS-MPH were $142 less (10.4%, $1,220 vs. $1,362) compared with MAS-XR (P =0.022) and $132 less (9.8%, $1,220 vs. $1,352) compared with atomoxetine (P =0.033); risk-adjusted mean medical costs were not significantly different between MAS-XR and atomoxetine. The GLM comparison of risk-adjusted total direct costs, including drug cost, was on average $156 less (8.0%, $1,782 vs. $1,938) for OROS-MPH compared with MAS-XR (P = 0.017) and $226 less (11.3%, $1,782 vs. $2,008) compared with atomoxetine (P <0.001); the risk-adjusted total direct costs were not significantly different between MAS-XR and atomoxetine. Two high-cost outliers (greater than 99.96th percentile, 1 each for OROS-MPH and atomoxetine) accounted for $47 (30%) of the $156 cost difference between OROS-MPH and MAS-XR and $11 (5%) of the $226 cost difference between OROS-MPH and atomoxetine, and the medical diagnoses for the highest-cost claims for these 2 outlier patients were unrelated to ADHD. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for patient characteristics including substance abuse, depression, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index, adults treated with OROS-MPH had, on average, slightly lower medical and total medical and drug costs than those treated with MAS-XR or atomoxetine over the 6-month period after drug therapy initiation. Approximately 30% of the cost difference compared with MAS-XR was attributable to 1 high-cost outlier with medical diagnoses for the highest-cost claim that were unrelated to ADHD.

Management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is both a challenging and a rewarding experience. Diagnosis is difficult because of the complexities of presentation and lack of biological markers. However, personalized management improves the individual's quality of life and also benefits the family and society as a whole.

[My child is so restless]. / Wenn Kinder ständig stören: Erziehungsfehler oder Krankheit?

Hyperkinetic or attention deficit hyperactivity disorders (ADHD) are characterized by three symptoms: attention deficit, hyperactivity and impulsiveness. For some patients, intensive, continuous counselling or behaviour therapy leads to adequate success. If this is not effective, drug treatment using stimulants such as methylphenidate or the selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor atomoxetine is indicated.