Types of adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): baseline characteristics, initial response, and long-term response to treatment with methylphenidate.

Much recent research describes the importance of emotional symptoms in ADHD. While there is no accepted system for including emotionality in diagnosing ADHD, the Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale (WRAADDS) provides a tool to facilitate this. It assesses a range of adult ADHD symptoms which load on two factors: inattentive and emotional dysregulation. The consistently high inattentive factor was used to define significant elevation on the more variable emotional dysregulation factor (which contains four WRAADDS domains: hyperactivity/restlessness, temper, affective lability, and emotional over-reactivity) allowing the definition of two ADHD diagnostic types. We compared these two types on a broad range of adult subject characteristics, including response to methylphenidate (MPH) treatment assessed during two clinical trials. Marked impairment in three of the four emotional domains reflected a symptom severity level equivalent to that of the inattentive factor. 59 % met this threshold, defining them as ADHD emotion dysregulation presentation, as opposed to 41 % with ADHD inattentive presentation. Cluster analysis validated these groups by generating similar clusters with 85 % agreement regarding membership. ADHD emotional dysregulation presentation subjects showed more childhood ADHD symptoms, adult symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder, and evidence of personality disorder. Both types showed similar improvement during the double-blind MPH arm of the trials and during a 6-month open-label phase. Based on the presence of symptoms of emotional dysregulation, ADHD in adults can be conceptualized as two types. Impairment and comorbidity in adults with ADHD are largely concentrated in ADHD emotional dysregulation presentation patients.

Psychometric properties of the Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale.

The Wender-Reimherr adult attention deficit disorder scale (WRAADDS; Wender, 1995) is a clinician-rated scale based on the Utah Criteria for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults. It assesses ADHD symptom severity across 7 domains: attention difficulties, hyperactivity/restlessness, temper, affective lability, emotional over-reactivity, disorganization, and impulsivity. The normative sample consisted of 120 males and females ages 20-49 with no personal or family history of ADHD. Patients with ADHD met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., text rev.; DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) criteria, included males and females ages 20-60, and came from 5 clinical trials. Measures of reliability (test-retest r = .96; interrater r = .75) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.78) were acceptable. The WRAADDS correlated with the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS; Conners, Erhardt, & Sparrow, 1999) total scores (r = .501, p < .001). WRAADDS hyperactivity + impulsivity correlated with the CAARS hyperactivity/impulsivity (r = .601, p < .001), and WRAADDS attention + disorganization correlated with the CAARS inattention (r = .430, p < .001). Discriminate validity (adults with vs. without ADHD) was significant for all domains (p < .001). Factor analysis yielded a 2-factor solution accounting for 58% of the variance, one containing the emotional dimensions and the second containing attention and disorganization. Hyperactivity/restlessness and impulsivity were split between both factors. Changes in response to treatment for the WRAADDS and CAARS were highly correlated (p < .001). These psychometric data support continued use of the WRAADDS in adults with ADHD.

A randomized, double-blind, crossover comparison of MK-0929 and placebo in the treatment of adults with ADHD.

OBJECTIVE: Preclinical models, receptor localization, and genetic linkage data support the role of D4 receptors in the etiology of ADHD. This proof-of-concept study was designed to evaluate MK-0929, a selective D4 receptor antagonist as treatment for adult ADHD. METHOD: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study was conducted in adults with primary ADHD. The primary end point was changed from baseline in total score on the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale following a 4-week treatment regimen. Additional measures included Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Brown Attention Deficit Disorder Scale and D4 genotype analysis. RESULTS: No statistically significant treatment differences were found between MK-0929 and placebo in any of the primary or secondary assessments. CONCLUSION: Results from this study suggest that blockade of the D4 receptor alone is not efficacious in the treatment of adult ADHD.

Long-term open-label response to atomoxetine in adult ADHD: influence of sex, emotional dysregulation, and double-blind response to atomoxetine.

A three-year open-label study of atomoxetine in adults with ADHD followed two multicenter, double-blind trials. In the double-blind trials, female gender and higher levels of emotional symptoms were associated with better outcome. Following a 4-week placebo washout period, 384 (of 536) subjects continued into the open-label study. 61% of subjects entering this open-label study remained after 6 months at an average dose of 100 mg/day. Subjects who had previously responded to double-blind atomoxetine achieved maximum response after 8 weeks of open-label medication, but others continued to improve for 36 weeks. Women improved more (7.7 ± 6.4) than men (6.1 ± 6.4) on the Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale (WRAADDS) (P = .007) and the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (P = .03). Subjects with emotional dysregulation improved more than others on the WRAADDS (P = .001). Responders ultimately improved approximately 60% in attentional, hyperactive/impulsive, and emotional symptoms. Thirty-nine percent of atomoxetine double-blind non-responders became responders during open-label treatment.

Safety and tolerability of once versus twice daily atomoxetine in adults with ADHD.

BACKGROUND: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a disorder characterized by hyperactivity, impulsiveness, and inattention that affects 4% of adults. Atomoxetine hydrochloride is an FDA-approved treatment for adult ADHD, but no studies have clarified whether there are advantages to once versus twice daily dosing. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter study compared safety and tolerability of 80 mg atomoxetine QD versus 40 mg atomoxetine BID in 218 adults with ADHD. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), laboratory values, vital signs, weight, electrocardiograms, scores on the Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale, and efficacy (using the Conners' ADHD Rating Scale-Investigator Rated: Screening Version) were assessed. RESULTS: The overall incidence for any one TEAE was low. There was no significant treatment group difference in likelihood of patients experiencing >/=1 of the four most commonly observed TEAEs (dry mouth, insomnia, nausea, and erectile dysfunction). Frequency of nausea was significantly lower in the 40 mg BID group (16.4%) than the 80 mg QD group (32.4%; p = .007). There were no unexpected safety results. Although both QD and BID treatments were efficacious, the reduction in scores was greater for BID treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Data indicate both dosing strategies are safe, well tolerated, and efficacious in the treatment of adult ADHD. Changes in dosing strategy are unlikely to be accompanied by safety risks, implying that there is room for prescribers to use discretion and to base dosing strategies on individual factors.

Atomoxetine and adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: the effects of comorbidity.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if measures of broad clinical psychopathology or neuropsychological performance could aid in the prediction of therapeutic response to the highly selective norepinephrine transporter inhibitor, atomoxetine, among adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: We analyzed data from 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel design studies of adult patients (Study I, N = 280; Study II, N = 256) with DSM-IV-defined ADHD who were recruited by referral and advertising. Subjects were randomly assigned to 10 weeks of treatment with atomoxetine or placebo and were assessed with Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS), the General Well-Being Schedule (GWB), the Sheehan Disability Scale, the Stroop Color-Word Test (SCWT), and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) before and after treatment. RESULTS: Therapeutic improvement on atomoxetine as evidenced by reduced CAARS scores was reliably predicted by the presence of a lifetime comorbid diagnosis of depression or post-traumatic stress disorder at baseline, while improvement on subscales of the GWB and Sheehan Disability Scale were predicted by these and other SCID endorsements, such as alcohol and substance use, as well as demographics such as age and gender. In light of the exploratory nature of this work and the many comparisons that were examined in the corresponding regression models, these findings should be regarded as tentative pending replication and extension in another dataset. CONCLUSION: From these findings, we conclude that the variable responsiveness of individuals to atomoxetine cannot be largely accounted for by differences in broad-spectrum psychopathology or neuropsychological indicators of attentional capacity.

Training raters to assess adult ADHD: reliability of ratings.

The standardization of ADHD ratings in adults is important given their differing symptom presentation. The authors investigated the agreement and reliability of rater standardization in a large-scale trial of atomoxetine in adults with ADHD. Training of 91 raters for the investigator-administered ADHD Rating Scale (ADHDRS-IV-Inv) occurred prior to initiation of a large, 31-site atomoxetine trial. Agreement between raters on total scores was established in two ways: (a) by Kappa coefficient (rater agreement for each item with the percentage of raters that had identical item-by-item scores) and (b) intraclass correlation coefficients (reliability). For the ADHDRS-IV-Inv, rater agreement was moderate, and reliability, as measured by Cronbach's alpha, was substantial. The data indicate that clinicians can be trained to reliably evaluate ADHD in adults using the ADHDRS-IV-Inv.