Balovaptan vs Placebo for Social Communication in Childhood Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are no approved medications for the core symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), socialization and communication difficulties. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of balovaptan, an oral selective vasopressin 1a receptor antagonist, compared with placebo in children and adolescents with ASD. Design, Setting, and Participants: The aV1ation study was a randomized, double-blind, 24-week, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial. Between November 22, 2016, and September 3, 2019, individuals were screened and randomly assigned to treatment groups. The primary efficacy analysis population comprised participants taking age-adjusted balovaptan equivalent to a 10-mg adult dose and participants from the concurrently randomized placebo group. This multicenter trial took place across 41 sites in the US. Participants were aged 5 to 17 years with diagnosed ASD and an IQ of 70 or greater. Data were analyzed from April 8 to November 16, 2020. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to daily 4-mg or 10-mg adult-equivalent balovaptan or placebo, until the 4-mg group was discontinued. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was change from baseline on the Vineland-II two-domain composite (2DC; socialization and communication domains) score at week 24. Results: Between November 2016 and September 2019, a total of 599 individuals were screened and 339 participants were randomly assigned to receive 4-mg balovaptan adult-equivalent dose (91 [26.8%]), 10-mg balovaptan adult-equivalent dose (126 [37.2%]), or placebo (122 [36.0%]). Primary analysis included 86 participants assigned to receive 10-mg balovaptan adult-equivalent dose and 81 assigned to receive placebo (mean [SD] age, 12.1 [3.4] years; 139 male participants [83.2%]). No statistically significant differences were observed between the balovaptan and placebo groups in change from baseline on the Vineland-II 2DC score at week 24 (difference in adjusted least-squares mean, -0.16; 90% CI, -2.56 to 2.23; P = .91). No improvements for balovaptan vs placebo were observed at week 24 for any secondary end points. Balovaptan was well tolerated with no emerging safety concerns. Similar proportions of participants reported adverse events (balovaptan, 66 of 86 [76.7%] vs placebo, 61 of 81 [75.3%]) and serious adverse events (balovaptan, 1 of 86 [1.2%] vs placebo, 4 of 81 [4.9%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, balovaptan did not demonstrate efficacy in improvement of socialization and communication in this population with pediatric ASD. Balovaptan was well tolerated in children 5 years or older. Further development of robust, sensitive, and objective outcome measures may help to improve future studies in the assessment of therapies targeting communication and socialization in pediatric ASD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02901431.

Large multicenter randomized trials in autism: key insights gained from the balovaptan clinical development program.

BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a common and heterogeneous neurodevelopmental condition that is characterized by the core symptoms of social communication difficulties and restricted and repetitive behaviors. At present, there is an unmet medical need for therapies to ameliorate these core symptoms in order to improve quality of life of autistic individuals. However, several challenges are currently faced by the ASD community relating to the development of pharmacotherapies, namely in the conduct of clinical trials. Balovaptan is a V1a receptor antagonist that has been investigated to improve social communication difficulties in individuals with ASD. In this viewpoint, we draw upon our recent first-hand experiences of the balovaptan clinical development program to describe current challenges of ASD trials. DISCUSSION POINTS: The balovaptan trials were conducted in a wide age range of individuals with ASD with the added complexities associated with international trials. When summarizing all three randomized trials of balovaptan, a placebo response was observed across several outcome measures. Placebo response was predicted by greater baseline symptom severity, online recruitment of participants, and less experienced or non-academic trial sites. We also highlight challenges relating to selection of outcome measures in ASD, the impact of baseline characteristics, and the role of expectation bias in influencing trial results. CONCLUSION: Taken together, the balovaptan clinical development program has advanced our understanding of the key challenges facing ASD treatment research. The insights gained can be used to inform and improve the design of future clinical trials with the collective aim of developing efficacious therapies to support individuals with ASD.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of SHP465 Mixed Amphetamine Salts After Administration of Multiple Daily Doses in Children Aged 4-5 Years with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Given the limited treatment options for younger children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a clinical study for SHP465 treatment was warranted. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of SHP465 mixed amphetamine salts (MAS) 6.25 mg after multiple once-daily doses in children aged 4-5 years with ADHD. METHODS: In this open-label multicenter study, SHP465 MAS 6.25 mg once daily was administered for 28 days to children aged 4-5 years with ADHD; baseline ADHD Rating Scale-5 total score ≥ 28 (boys) or ≥ 24 (girls) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale score ≥ 4. Blood samples were collected in the pharmacokinetic-rich group predose on day 1 week 1 and day 7 week 4 (predose, postdose at 2, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24, and 48 hours); and in the pharmacokinetic-sparse group predose on day 1 weeks 1, 2, and 3 and 24 hours postdose on day 7 week 4 . Key pharmacokinetic parameters included maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax), plasma trough drug concentration, time to Cmax during a dosing interval (tmax), area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to time of last collected sample, area under the concentration-time curve over the dosing interval (24 h) at steady state (AUCtau,ss), first-order rate constant associated with the terminal phase of elimination, terminal half-life (t1/2), total clearance of drug from plasma after oral administration, and apparent volume of distribution at steady state. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events and vital signs. RESULTS: Mean ± standard deviation age and body mass index of 24 participants (66.7% male) were 4.8 ± 0.41 years and 17.2 ± 3.18 kg/m2, respectively. The most common ADHD was the combined presentation (91.7%); ratings were 50% markedly ill and 45.8% moderately ill on the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale. Plasma d-amphetamine and l-amphetamine steady state was attained by predose on treatment day 8, consistent with the half-life. Peak steady-state plasma concentration (median tmax) for both d-amphetamine and l-amphetamine occurred at 7.92 h postdose on day 7 week 4 and thereafter declined monoexponentially, with a geometric mean t1/2 of 10.4 and 12.3 h for d-amphetamine and l-amphetamine, respectively. For both d-amphetamine and l-amphetamine, Cmax and AUCtau,ss were comparable between children aged 4 years (n = 3) and children aged 5 years (n = 8) regardless of sex. In total, 14 treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 45.8% (11/24) of participants. Five treatment-emergent adverse events, reported for four (16.7%) participants, were considered treatment related; affect lability occurred in two (8.3%) participants, and insomnia, accidental overdose, and increased blood pressure each occurred in one (4.2%) participant. CONCLUSIONS: In children aged 4-5 years with ADHD, following multiple once-daily administrations of SHP465 MAS 6.25 mg, the pharmacokinetic profile of plasma d-amphetamine and l-amphetamine was generally consistent among participants. Between-individual variability of plasma d-amphetamine and l-amphetamine steady-state exposure was low to moderate. SHP465 MAS was generally well tolerated in this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03327402 (31 October, 2017).

Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Medication Plus Customized Adherence Enhancement in Poor Adherence Patients With Bipolar Disorder.

Objective: People with bipolar disorder (BD) often have difficulty with medication adherence. This pilot trial combined a behavioral customized adherence enhancement (CAE) approach with long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic medication and assessed effects on adherence, BD symptoms, and functional status.Methods: This 6-month prospective, uncontrolled trial of the intervention (CAE with LAI) in 30 poorly adherent individuals with BD assessed adherence using the Tablets Routine Questionnaire (TRQ) and symptoms using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI). Functioning was assessed via the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). Assessments were conducted at screening, baseline, week 12, and week 24 (6 months). The LAI was aripiprazole once monthly. The study was conducted between April 2018 and May 2020.Results: The mean age of the sample was 49.5 years (SD = 9.3), and 56.7% were Black. Nine individuals (30%) terminated the study prematurely, 1 due to side effects (tremor). The mean LAI dose was 314.3 mg (SD = 96.4). The proportion of missed medications in the past week (mean TRQ) from screen to 24 weeks significantly improved from 50.1% (SD 24.8) to 16.9% (SD = 27.0) (P < .001), and past month TRQ improved from 40.6% (SD = 23.8) to 19.2% (SD = 24.0) (a trend for significance, P = .0599). TRQ change from baseline to 24 weeks was not significant. There were significant improvements on the BPRS (P < .001), MADRS (P = .01), YMRS (P < .001), CGI (P < .001), SOFAS (P < .001), and GAF (P < .001).Conclusion: A personalized intervention to address adherence barriers combined with LAI can improve recovery outcomes in high-risk individuals with BD.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03408873.

Interventions to standardise hospital care at presentation, admission or discharge or to reduce unnecessary admissions or readmissions for patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic respiratory disease that may be punctuated by episodes of worsening symptoms, called exacerbations. Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) are detrimental to clinical outcomes, reduce patient quality of life and often result in hospitalisation and cost for the health system. Improved diagnosis and management of COPD may reduce the incidence of hospitalisation and death among this population. This scoping review aims to identify improvement interventions designed to standardise the hospital care of patients with AECOPD at presentation, admission and discharge, and/or aim to reduce unnecessary admissions/readmissions. METHODS: The review followed a published protocol based on methodology set out by Arksey and O'Malley and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Electronic database searches for peer-reviewed primary evidence were conducted in Web of Science, EMBASE (Elsevier) and PubMed. Abstract, full-text screening and data extraction were completed independently by a panel of expert reviewers. Data on type of intervention, implementation supports and clinical outcomes were extracted. Findings were grouped by theme and are presented descriptively. RESULTS: 21 articles met the inclusion criteria. Eight implemented a clinical intervention bundle at admission and/or discharge; six used a multidisciplinary care pathway; five used coordinated case management and two ran a health coaching intervention with patients. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that when executed reliably, improvement initiatives are associated with positive outcomes, such as reduction in length of stay, readmissions or use of health resources. Most of the studies reported an improvement in staff compliance with the initiatives and in the patient's understanding of their disease. Implementation supports varied and included quality improvement methodology, multidisciplinary team engagement, staff education and development of written or in-person delivery of patient information. Consideration of the implementation strategy and methods of support will be necessary to enhance the likelihood of success in any future intervention.

Lithium for the Maintenance Treatment of Bipolar I Disorder: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Discontinuation Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the role of lithium in the maintenance treatment of pediatric patients with bipolar I disorder (BP-I). METHOD: Participants aged 7 to 17 years who presented with a manic or mixed episode received 24 weeks of lithium treatment in one of two multiphase studies, the Collaborative Lithium Trials (CoLT 1 and CoLT 2). Responders were randomized to continue lithium or to be cross-titrated to placebo for up to 28 weeks. The primary outcome measure was relative risk of study discontinuation for any reason. RESULTS: A Cox regression analysis found that those who continued treatment with lithium (n = 17) had a lower hazard ratio compared to those who received placebo (n = 14) (p = .015)]. The vast majority of discontinuations were due to mood symptom exacerbations, with most of these occurring in the placebo-treated group. Discontinuation for other reasons occurred at similarly low rates across both group. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity, and only one study participant was discontinued from the trial owing to a serious adverse event (aggression). There was no statistically significant difference with respect to weight gain in participants receiving lithium compared to those receiving placebo. CONCLUSION: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Discontinuation Trial builds support for the role of lithium as a maintenance treatment in pediatric patients with bipolar disorder and for the safety and tolerability of 28 weeks of maintenance lithium treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Lithium for the Treatment of Pediatric Mania; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00442039 (CoLT 1). Safety and Efficacy Study of Lithium for the Treatment of Pediatric Mania; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT01166425 (CoLT 2).

A 6-Month Open-Label Extension Study of Vortioxetine in Pediatric Patients with Depressive or Anxiety Disorders.

OBJECTIVES: In this 6-month open-label extension (OLE) of NCT01491035 (a 14-day, open-label, pharmacokinetic/safety lead-in study), the long-term safety and tolerability of vortioxetine (5-20 mg/day) were investigated in children and adolescents with a DSM-IV-TR™ diagnosis of depressive or anxiety disorder in the United States or Germany. The study also was designed to provide data to inform dose selection and titration in future pediatric studies with vortioxetine. METHODS: Safety evaluations included spontaneously reported adverse events (AEs), the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), and the Pediatric Adverse Events Rating Scale (PAERS; clinician administered). Clinical effectiveness was determined by Clinical Global Impressions. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was permitted, including concomitant use of stimulant medication (US sites only). RESULTS: Of the 47 patients who completed the lead-in period, 41 continued into the OLE. Most patients (n = 39 [95%]) continued their previous dose regimen. Twenty-one patients (51%) withdrew during the OLE; the most common primary reasons were administrative [n = 8], AEs [n = 4], and lack of efficacy [n = 3]. Thirty-five patients (85%) had ≥1 AE, 86% of which were mild or moderate in severity. Five patients (12%) reported a severe AE, none of which was considered related to study medication. The most common AEs (≥10%) were headache (27%), nausea (20%), dysmenorrhea (females; 19%), and vomiting (15%), with no relationship between AE intensity and age or dose. Five patients reported instances of suicidal ideation during the OLE, one of whom also reported this during the lead-in period. Two patients had nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior; one had a nonfatal suicide attempt. Throughout the study, there was a decrease over time in the incidence and intensity of AEs collected using the PAERS. Effectiveness assessment indicated a trend toward improvement based on numeric results. CONCLUSION: This OLE confirms the findings from the lead-in study, which concluded that a dosing strategy of 5-20 mg/day is safe, well tolerated, and suitable for future clinical studies of vortioxetine in pediatric patients.

A Double-Blind and Placebo-Controlled Trial of Aripiprazole in Symptomatic Youths at Genetic High Risk for Bipolar Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if acute treatment with aripiprazole (APZ) would be superior to treatment with placebo in reducing dysfunctional symptoms of elevated mood and/or irritability in symptomatic children and adolescents at familial high risk for bipolar disorder (BPD) whose mood episodes occur spontaneously. These are patients we have previously referred to as suffering from "cyclotaxia." METHODS: This was single-site, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient clinical trial in which youths aged 5-17 years who met diagnostic criteria for either cyclothymic disorder (CYC) or BPD not otherwise specified (BP-NOS) were randomly assigned to receive either APZ or placebo. Eligible participants had at least one parent with BPD, another first- or second-degree relative afflicted with a mood disorder, and also had not responded to psychotherapy. Treatment with APZ was initiated at a dose of approximately 0.1 mg/kg/day and could be increased by approximately 0.05 mg/kg/day at each study visit. Patients were seen weekly for 4 weeks and then every other week thereafter for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was mean change from baseline on Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients (30 APZ, 29 placebo) aged 11.8 (SD = 2.7) years were randomized and returned for at least one postbaseline assessment. The mean total daily doses of active APZ and placebo were 7.1 mg (SD = 3.7) and 7.4 mg (SD = 4.2), respectively. At the 12-week time point, APZ was superior to placebo on the primary outcome measure (p < 0.005). Most adverse events were mild and transient in nature. There was a significant difference in weight gain from baseline between patients who received APZ (2.3 kg [SD = 3.3]) and those who received placebo (0.7 kg [SD = 1.8]). CONCLUSION: This double-blind trial found that APZ was significantly more efficacious than placebo in reducing symptoms of mania in children and adolescents with cyclotaxia.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Vortioxetine in Pediatric Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) and tolerability of single and multiple doses of vortioxetine in children and adolescents with a depressive or anxiety disorder and to provide supportive information for appropriate dosing regimens for pediatric clinical trials. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, multinational, multisite, multiple-dose trial enrolled 48 patients (children and adolescents; 1:1 ratio) divided into 8 cohorts (4 adolescent and 4 child), with each cohort including 6 patients. The cohorts in each age group were assigned to receive one of four dosing regimens: vortioxetine 5, 10, 15, or 20 mg q.d. for 14 days. The total treatment period lasted 14-20 days with patients in the higher dose cohorts uptitrated over 2-6 days. Plasma samples for PK analysis were obtained on the first and last days of dosing. RESULTS: Among children and adolescents, respectively, 62% and 92% had depression and 58% and 33% had anxiety disorder. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was present in 50% of children and 38% of adolescents. After 14 days q.d. at the target dose, the PK of vortioxetine concentrations was generally proportional to the dose in both age groups. Exposure, as assessed by maximum plasma concentrations and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours, was 30%-40% lower in adolescents than in children. There was no significant relationship between sex, height, or ADHD diagnosis and PK parameters. Most adverse events were mild in severity and consistent with those seen in adults. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the dosages of vortioxetine evaluated (5-20 mg q.d.; approved for treatment in adults) and the uptitration schedule used are appropriate for pediatric efficacy and safety trials.

The Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression Study: 12 Weeks of Extended, Blinded Treatment in Clinical Responders.

OBJECTIVES: Previous "Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression" (TOSCA) reports demonstrated that many children with severe physical aggression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) responded well to two randomized treatments (parent training [PT]+stimulant+placebo = Basic vs. PT+stimulant+risperidone = Augmented) for 9 weeks. An important clinical question is whether these favorable outcomes are maintained over longer times. METHODS: Clinical responders to the 9-week trial (n = 103/168), defined as Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-Improvement of much/very much improved plus substantial reduction in parent ratings of disruptiveness, were followed another 12 weeks (21 weeks total) while remaining on blinded treatment. Outcome measures included Clinical Global Impressions scale, Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form (NCBRF), other parent/teacher-rated scales, laboratory tests, clinician ratings of abnormal movement, and other adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Parent ratings of problem behavior showed minimal worsening of behavior from end of the 9-week acute trial (expected from regression to the mean after selecting best responders), but outcomes at Extension endpoint were meaningfully improved compared with acute study baseline. As expected, outcomes for Basic and Augmented treatment did not differ among these children selected for good clinical response. During Extension, more Augmented subjects had elevated prolactin; there were no clinically confirmed cases of tardive dyskinesia. Delayed sleep onset was the most frequent Basic AE. We also conducted a last-observation-carried-forward analysis, which included both nonresponders and responders. We found that, at the end of Extension, Augmented subjects had more improvement than Basic subjects on the NCBRF Positive Social subscale (p = 0.005; d = 0.44), the Antisocial Behavior Scale Reactive Aggression subscale (p = 0.03; d = 0.36), and marginally so on the Disruptive Behavior Total subscale (p = 0.058; d = 0.29, the primary outcome). CONCLUSIONS: The medium-term outcomes were good for the participants in both treatment groups, perhaps because they were selected for good response. When nonresponders were included in ITT analyses, there was some indication that Augmented surpassed Basic treatment.

Risperidone Added to Psychostimulant in Children with Severe Aggression and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Lack of Effect on Attention and Short-Term Memory.

OBJECTIVE: Professionals have periodically expressed concern that atypical antipsychotics may cause cognitive blunting in treated patients. In this study, we report data from a double-blind, randomized, controlled study of stimulant plus placebo versus combined stimulant and risperidone to evaluate the effects of the atypical antipsychotic on attention and short-term memory. METHODS: A total of 165 (n = 83 combined treatment; n = 82 stimulant plus placebo) children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and severe physical aggression, aged 6-12 years, were evaluated with Conners' Continuous Performance Test (CPT-II) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III (WISC) Digit Span subscale at baseline, after 3 weeks of stimulant-only treatment, and after six additional weeks of randomized treatment (stimulant+placebo vs. stimulant+risperidone). RESULTS: At 3 weeks, improvement on CPT-II performance (Commissions and Reaction Time Standard Error; p < 0.001) and on Digit Span memory performance (p < 0.006) was noted for the full sample. At study week 9, no difference in CPT-II or Digit Span performance was observed between the randomized groups (ps = 0.41 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to other studies, we found no deleterious effects on attention and short-term memory associated with short-term use of risperidone. NCT00796302.

Factor Validity of a Proactive and Reactive Aggression Rating Scale.

Aggressive behaviors can be classified into proactive and reactive functions, though there is disagreement about whether these are distinct constructs. Data suggest that proactive and reactive aggression have different etiologies, correlates, and response to treatment. Several rating scales are available to characterize aggressive behavior as proactive or reactive; one commonly used scale was originally developed for teacher ratings, referred to here as the Antisocial Behavior Scale (ABS). However, no data are available on the psychometric properties of the ABS for parent ratings. This study examined the factor structure and convergent/divergent validity of the parent-rated ABS among 168 children aged 6-12 years with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, a disruptive behavior disorder, and severe aggression enrolled in a randomized clinical trial. Multidimensional item response theory was used to confirm the original factor structure. The proactive and reactive factors were distinct but moderately correlated; the algorithm items exhibited acceptable fit on the original factors. The non-algorithm items caused theoretical problems and model misfit. Convergent and divergent validity of the scale was explored between the ABS and other parent-report measures. Proactive and reactive aggression showed differential correlates consistent with expectations for externalizing symptoms. The subscales were correlated weakly or not at all with most non-externalizing symptoms, with some exceptions. Thus, the original factor structure was supported and we found preliminary evidence for the validity of the scale, though the results suggest that the constructs measured by the ABS may not be totally distinct from general behavior problems in this clinical sample.

Lithium in the Acute Treatment of Bipolar I Disorder: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Lithium is a benchmark treatment for bipolar disorder in adults. Definitive studies of lithium in pediatric bipolar I disorder (BP-I) are lacking. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of pediatric participants (ages 7-17 years) with BP-I/manic or mixed episodes compared lithium (n = 53) versus placebo (n = 28) for up to 8 weeks. The a priori primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to the end of study (week 8/ET) in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score, based on last-observation-carried-forward analysis. RESULTS: The change in YMRS score was significantly larger in lithium-treated participants (5.51 [95% confidence interval: 0.51 to 10.50]) after adjustment for baseline YMRS score, age group, weight group, gender, and study site (P = .03). Overall Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scores favored lithium (n = 25; 47% very much/much improved) compared with placebo (n = 6; 21% very much/much improved) at week 8/ET (P = .03). A statistically significant increase in thyrotropin concentration was seen with lithium (3.0 ± 3.1 mIU/L) compared with placebo (-0.1 ± 0.9 mIU/L; P < .001). There was no statistically significant between-group difference with respect to weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Lithium was superior to placebo in reducing manic symptoms in pediatric patients treated for BP-I in this clinical trial. Lithium was generally well tolerated in this patient population and was not associated with weight gain, distinguishing it from other agents commonly used to treat youth with bipolar disorder.

Comorbid symptomatology moderates response to risperidone, stimulant, and parent training in children with severe aggression, disruptive behavior disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we evaluated parent and child characteristics as predictors and moderators of response in the four-site Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study. METHODS: A total of 168 children with severe aggression, disruptive behavior disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were enrolled in a 9-week trial of basic treatment (n=84, stimulant+parent training+placebo) versus augmented treatment (n=84, stimulant+parent training+risperidone). In the initial report, augmented treatment surpassed basic treatment in reducing the primary outcome of disruptive behavior (D-Total) scores. In the current study, we evaluated parent (income, education, family functioning, employment) and child variables (intelligence quotient [IQ], aggression type, comorbid symptomatology) as predictors or moderators, using linear mixed models and the MacArthur guidelines. RESULTS: Higher scores on ADHD symptom severity and callous/unemotional traits predicted better outcome on D-Total regardless of treatment assignment. Two moderators of D-Total were found: Higher anger/irritability symptoms and lower mania scores were associated with faster response, although not better overall effect at endpoint, in the augmented but not the basic group. Several variables moderated response on secondary outcomes (ADHD severity and prosocial behavior), and were characterized by faster response, although not better outcome, in the augmented but not in the basic group. Maternal education moderated outcome on the measure of positive social behavior; children of mothers with less education benefited more from augmented treatment relative to basic than those with more education. CONCLUSION: Although these findings require validation, they tentatively suggest that augmented treatment works equally well across the entire sample. Nevertheless, certain child characteristics may be useful indicators for the speed of response to augmented treatment.

Comorbid anxiety and social avoidance in treatment of severe childhood aggression: response to adding risperidone to stimulant and parent training; mediation of disruptive symptom response.

OBJECTIVE: In the four-site Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study, addition of risperidone to stimulant and parent training moderately improved parent-rated disruptive behavior disorder (DBD) symptoms. This secondary study explores outcomes other than DBD and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as measured by the Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory-4R (CASI-4R). METHODS: A total of 168 children ages 6-12 with severe aggression (physical harm), DBD, and ADHD were randomized to parent training plus stimulant plus placebo (basic treatment) or parent training plus stimulant plus risperidone (augmented treatment) for 9 weeks. All received only parent training plus stimulant for the first 3 weeks, then those with room for improvement received a second drug (placebo or risperidone) for 6 weeks. CASI-4R category item means at baseline and week 9 were entered into linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures to evaluate group differences in changes. Mediation of the primary DBD outcome was explored. RESULTS: Parent ratings were nonsignificant with small/negligible effects, but teacher ratings (n=46 with complete data) showed significant augmented treatment advantage for symptoms of anxiety (p=0.013, d=0.71), schizophrenia spectrum (p=0.017, d=0.45), and impairment in these domains (p=0.02, d=0.26), all remaining significant after false discovery rate correction for multiple tests. Improvement in teacher-rated anxiety significantly (p=0.001) mediated the effect of risperidone augmentation on the primary outcome, the Disruptive-total of the parent-rated Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of risperidone to parent training plus stimulant improves not only parent-rated DBD as previously reported, but also teacher-rated anxiety-social avoidance. Improvement in anxiety mediates improvement in DBD, suggesting anxiety-driven fight-or-flight disruptive behavior with aggression, with implications for potential treatment strategies. Clinicians should attend to possible anxiety in children presenting with aggression and DBD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (The TOSCA Study). NCT00796302. clinicaltrials.gov.

Participant satisfaction in a study of stimulant, parent training, and risperidone in children with severe physical aggression.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the satisfaction of families who participated in the Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study. METHODS: TOSCA was a randomized clinical trial of psychostimulant plus parent training plus placebo (basic treatment) versus psychostimulant plus parent training plus risperidone (augmented treatment) for children with severe physical aggression, disruptive behavior disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Parents completed a standardized Parent Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ). RESULTS: Of the 168 families randomized, 150 (89.3%) provided consumer satisfaction data. When they were asked if they would join the study again if they had the option to repeat, 136 (91%) said "yes," 11 (7%) said "maybe," and one (<1%) said "no." When asked if they would recommend the study to other parents with children having similar problems, 147 (98%) said "yes" and 3 (2%) said "maybe." Between 71% (rating one aspect of the Parent Training) and 96% (regarding the diagnostic interview) endorsed study procedures using the most positive response option. Asked if there were certain aspects of the study that they especially liked, 64 (43%) spontaneously reported parent training. Treatment assignment (basic vs. augmented) and responder status were not associated with reported satisfaction. However, responder status was strongly associated with parent confidence in managing present (p<0.001) and future (p<0.005) problem behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate high levels of satisfaction with TOSCA study involvement and, taken together with previous pediatric psychopharmacology social validity studies, suggest high levels of support for the research experience. These findings may inform research bioethics and may have implications for deliberations of institutional review boards. TRIAL REGISTRY: Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (The TOSCA Study), NCT00796302, clinicaltrials.gov .

Risperidone added to parent training and stimulant medication: effects on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and peer aggression.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to expand on our prior research into the relative efficacy of combining parent training, stimulant medication, and placebo (Basic therapy) versus parent training, stimulant, and risperidone (Augmented therapy) by examining treatment effects for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and conduct disorder (CD) symptoms and peer aggression, symptom-induced impairment, and informant discrepancy. METHOD: Children (6-12 years of age; N = 168) with severe physical aggression, ADHD, and co-occurring ODD/CD received an open trial of parent training and stimulant medication for 3 weeks. Participants failing to show optimal clinical response were randomly assigned to Basic or Augmented therapy for an additional 6 weeks. RESULTS: Compared with Basic therapy, children receiving Augmented therapy experienced greater reduction in parent-rated ODD severity (p = .002, Cohen's d = 0.27) and peer aggression (p = .02, Cohen's d = 0.32) but not ADHD or CD symptoms. Fewer children receiving Augmented (16%) than Basic (40%) therapy were rated by their parents as impaired by ODD symptoms at week 9/endpoint (p = .008). Teacher ratings indicated greater reduction in ADHD severity (p = .02, Cohen's d = 0.61) with Augmented therapy, but not for ODD or CD symptoms or peer aggression. Although both interventions were associated with marked symptom reduction, a relatively large percentage of children were rated as impaired for at least 1 targeted disorder at week 9/endpoint by parents (Basic 47%; Augmented 27%) and teachers (Basic 48%; Augmented 38%). CONCLUSION: Augmented therapy was superior to Basic therapy in reducing severity of ADHD and ODD symptoms, peer aggression, and symptom-induced impairment, but clinical improvement was generally context specific, and effect sizes ranged from small to moderate. Clinical trial registration information-Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (The TOSCA Study); http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00796302.

What does risperidone add to parent training and stimulant for severe aggression in child attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder?

OBJECTIVE: Although combination pharmacotherapy is common in child and adolescent psychiatry, there has been little research evaluating it. The value of adding risperidone to concurrent psychostimulant and parent training (PT) in behavior management for children with severe aggression was tested. METHOD: One hundred sixty-eight children 6 to 12 years old (mean age 8.89 ± 2.01 years) with severe physical aggression were randomized to a 9-week trial of PT, stimulant (STIM), and placebo (Basic treatment; n = 84) or PT, STIM, and risperidone (Augmented treatment; n = 84). All had diagnoses of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and oppositional-defiant disorder (n = 124) or conduct disorder (n = 44). Children received psychostimulant (usually Osmotic Release Oral System methylphenidate) for 3 weeks, titrated for optimal effect, while parents received PT. If there was room for improvement at the end of week 3, placebo or risperidone was added. Assessments included parent ratings on the Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form (Disruptive-Total subscale was the primary outcome) and Antisocial Behavior Scale; blinded clinicians rated change on the Clinical Global Impressions scale. RESULTS: Compared with Basic treatment (PT + STIM [44.8 ± 14.6 mg/day] + placebo [1.88 mg/day ± 0.72]), Augmented treatment (PT + STIM [46.1 ± 16.8 mg/day] + risperidone [1.65 mg/day ± 0.75]) showed statistically significant improvement on the Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form Disruptive-Total subscale (treatment-by-time interaction, p = .0016), the Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form Social Competence subscale (p = .0049), and Antisocial Behavior Scale Reactive Aggression subscale (p = .01). Clinical Global Impressions scores were substantially improved for the 2 groups but did not discriminate between treatments (Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement score ≤2, 70% for Basic treatment versus 79% for Augmented treatment). Prolactin elevations and gastrointestinal upset occurred more with Augmented treatment; other adverse events differed modestly from Basic treatment; weight gain in the Augmented treatment group was minor. CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone provided moderate but variable improvement in aggressive and other seriously disruptive child behaviors when added to PT and optimized stimulant treatment. Clinical trial registration information-Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (The TOSCA Study), URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov, unique identifier: NCT00796302.

Post-acute effectiveness of lithium in pediatric bipolar I disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the long-term effectiveness of lithium for the treatment of pediatric bipolar disorder within the context of combination mood stabilizer therapy for refractory mania and pharmacological treatment of comorbid psychiatric conditions. METHODS: Outpatients, ages 7-17 years, meeting American Psychiatric Association, diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV) diagnostic criteria for bipolar disorder I (BP-I) (manic or mixed) who demonstrated at least a partial response to 8 weeks of open-label treatment with lithium (phase I) were eligible to receive open-label lithium for an additional 16 weeks (phase II). Up to two adjunctive medications could be prescribed to patients experiencing residual symptoms of mania or comorbid psychiatric conditions, following a standardized algorithm. RESULTS: Forty-one patients received continued open-label long-term treatment with lithium for a mean of 14.9 (3.0) weeks during phase II. The mean weight-adjusted total daily dose at end of phase II was 27.8 (6.7) mg/kg/day, with an average lithium concentration of 1.0 (0.3) mEq/L. Twenty-five of the 41 patients (60.9%) were prescribed adjunctive psychotropic medications for residual symptoms. The most frequent indications for adjunctive medications were refractory mania (n=13; 31.7%) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n=15; 36.6%). At the end of this phase 28 (68.3%) patients met a priori criteria for response (≥50% reduction from phase I baseline in young mania rating scale [YMRS] summary score and a clinical global impressions-improvement [CGI-I] score of 1 or 2), with 22 (53.7%) considered to be in remission (YMRS summary score≤12 and CGI-severity score of 1 or 2). These data suggest that patients who initially responded to lithium maintained mood stabilization during continuation treatment, but partial responders did not experience further improvement during Phase II, despite the opportunity to receive adjunctive medications. The most commonly reported (≥20%) adverse events associated with lithium treatment were vomiting, headache, abdominal pain, and tremor. CONCLUSIONS: Lithium may be a safe and effective longer-term treatment for patients with pediatric bipolar disorder who respond to acute treatment with lithium. Partial responders to acute lithium did not appear to experience substantial symptom improvement during the continuation phase, despite the possibility that adjunctive medications could be prescribed.

Age differences in the phenomenology of pediatric bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this study was to explore whether age differences in the phenomenology of bipolar disorders from 4 to 17 years of age exist. METHODS: Outcome measures included questionnaires pertaining to mood symptoms, psychosocial functioning, and family history of psychiatric illness. Phenomenology was examined in two diagnostic groups: syndromal bipolar disorder (bipolar I or II) and subsyndromal bipolar disorder (bipolar disorder not otherwise specified or cyclothymia) and across six age cohorts: 4-6, 7-8, 9-10, 11-13, and 14-17 years. Analyses examined linear and non-linear age effects on clinician-rated measures of mood and psychosocial functioning. RESULTS: Participants were 535 outpatients (339 males) ages 4-17 years. The proportion diagnosed with comorbid ADHD was significantly lower in the oldest age group. Age groups showed significant moderate decreases in motor activity, aggression, and irritability with age. Many symptoms of depression showed significant increases with age. BP I cases showed much higher manic symptoms, and BP I and BP II cases indicated slightly to moderately higher depressive symptoms, compared to subsyndromal cases. These patterns held after adjusting for comorbid ADHD, and age did not interact with syndrome status. There were also age differences in total scores for measures of mood symptoms and psychosocial functioning. LIMITATIONS: Mood ratings were completed based on the same interview that informed the research diagnoses. Also, mood episode at time of interview was not captured. CONCLUSIONS: These findings affirm the existence of bipolar disorder from pre-school children through adolescence, with a similar clinical presentation across a wide developmental age span.