A Randomized, Phase 3, Double-Blind, Crossover Comparison of Multilayer, Extended-Release Methylphenidate (PRC-063), and Lisdexamfetamine in the Driving Performance of Young Adults With ADHD.

OBJECTIVE: To compare PRC-063 (multilayer-release methylphenidate) and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) on the driving performance of young adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study. METHOD: Following up to 21 days of each treatment in each treatment course (PRC-063/LDX or LDX/PRC-063), subjects completed a 15-hour driving simulator laboratory assessment. The primary outcome measure was the Tactical Driving Quotient (TDQ) and the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale was a secondary outcome measure. RESULTS: Forty-four subjects completed the study. PRC-063 and LDX had equivalent effects on driving performance through a 15-hour time period (least square mean difference -0.3 [standard error 1.08], 95% confidence interval [-2.4, 1.8], p = .793). Consistent improvement in CGI-I was observed. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for each treatment sequence. CONCLUSIONS: PRC-063 and LDX had comparable effects on driving performance, from 1 through 15 hours, the last time point measured.

Can exposure to lisdexamfetamine dimesylate from juvenile period to peripubertal compromise male reproductive parameters in adult rats?

Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) is a d-amphetamine prodrug used to treat attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, a common neurodevelopmental disorder in children and adolescents. Due to its action mediated by elevated levels of catecholamines, mainly dopamine and noradrenaline, which influence hormonal regulation and directly affect the gonads, this drug may potentially disrupt reproductive performance. This study evaluated the effects of exposure to LDX from the juvenile to peripubertal period (critical stages of development) on systemic and reproductive toxicity parameters in male rats. Male Wistar rats (23 days old) were treated with 0; 5.2; 8.6 or 12.1 mg/kg/day of LDX from post-natal day (PND) 23 to 53, by gavage. LDX treatment led to reduced daily food and water consumption, as well as a decrease in social behaviors. The day of preputial separation remained unaltered, although the treated animals exhibited reduced weight. At PND 54, the treated animals presented signs of systemic toxicity, evidenced by a reduction in body weight gain, increase in the relative weight of the liver, spleen, and seminal gland, reduction in erythrocyte and leukocyte counts, reduced total protein levels, and disruptions in oxidative parameters. In adulthood, there was an increase in immobile sperm, reduced sperm count, morphometric changes in the testis, and altered oxidative parameters, without compromising male sexual behavior and fertility. These findings showed that LDX-treatment during the juvenile and peripubertal periods induced immediate systemic toxicity and adversely influenced reproductive function in adult life, indicating that caution is necessary when prescribing this drug during the peripubertal phase.

Drug-Induced Hepatitis in an Adolescent During Concomitant Use of Azithromycin and Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate.

This case report describes a 14-year-old male with signs and symptoms of drug-induced hepatotoxicity after receiving azithromycin and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate. The patient was admitted to the hospital and a liver biopsy revealed findings suggestive of drug-induced hepatitis. In this patient, it is unclear whether 1 agent individually or a combination of azithromycin and lisdexamfetamine was the cause of hepatitis. Although hepatotoxicity has been reported with azithromycin and other macrolide antibiotics in adults, such a condition has yet to be reported in pediatrics. In light of this report, providers should be aware of a potentially rare reaction of acute hepatitis when combining azithromycin and lisdexamfetamine in pediatric patients.

Adverse Effects of Stimulant Interventions for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): A Comprehensive Systematic Review.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a fairly common psychiatric disorder among children. It has substantial consequences in terms of quality of life for those experiencing it and their families. In managing ADHD symptoms medication plays an essential role, including stimulants such as methylphenidate being a key component. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised about possible adverse reactions connected to these drugs. Thus, in this systematic review, an extensive analysis was conducted aiming at understanding any negative repercussions specifically from prolonged exposure to these medications among patients diagnosed with ADHD. The methodology entailed adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. While capturing relevant data through a meticulous search in various databases, filtered according to preset inclusion and exclusion criteria, 13 studies were considered for analysis. Conclusions indicate that the administration of stimulant medications can potentially translate into a small rise in blood pressure along with increased heart rate particularly when amphetamines are taken. However, no reports of notable serious cardiovascular events have emerged. In the domain of neuropsychiatry, it appears that long-term usage of methylphenidate generally bears no serious consequences, even though a hike in risk levels related to the occurrence of psychotic episodes was detected among those treated with amphetamines. Several gastrointestinal side effects including decreased appetite and stomach pain were reported, however, findings regarding ocular abnormalities or growth-related effects stood inconclusive. Therefore, based on this data the consensus is that stimulant medications do generate manageable and mild negative outcomes within the ADHD population. It is vital however to highlight the need for careful observation and further scientific inquiry to achieve a better grasp on both immediate as well as long-term implications involved.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of lisdexamfetamine versus methylphenidate for patients under 18 with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in Iran.

BACKGROUND: Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) and Methylphenidate (MPH) are stimulant agents that have been shown to provide significant benefits in the management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in patients. AIM: This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness and the budget impact of LDX compared to MPH as the first-line treatment for ADHD. METHODS: A one-year cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was conducted to compare the effects of LDX and MPH in reducing disease symptoms and patient costs and improving quality of life (QoL) from a social perspective. Clinical data were obtained using the EQ-5D questionnaire. In contrast, economic data were sourced from the official website of the Iranian Food and Drug Association (FDA), the national book of tariffs, and specific questionnaires designed to evaluate patients' direct and indirect costs. 197 patients were included in the study, including individuals who sought psychiatric evaluation at a hospital in Mashhad and those who obtained ADHD medications from governmental pharmacies. The cost-effectiveness of the study medicine was assessed using the decision tree method, and the results were presented as the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). Deterministic Sensitivity Analysis (DSA) and Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Additionally, a Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) was conducted over five years, considering three different scenarios, to evaluate the financial implications of incorporating LDX into the national pharmaceutical system. RESULTS: The ICER for LDX therapy compared to MPH was estimated at USD 264.28 (with an incremental cost of USD 54.9, incremental effectiveness of 0.208, and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) gained of 0.765). The PSA indicated a 0.994% probability of LDX being cost-effective, considering a threshold of USD 2450 per QALY. Furthermore, the DSA revealed that the acquisition cost of LDX influenced the model's sensitivity. The BIA demonstrated that incorporating LDX into Iran's healthcare system would result in a financial burden of approximately $368,566 in the first year, representing an additional cost of $11,154 compared to the non-availability of this medicine and the use of previous medications. It is projected that by 2027, the financial burden of treating ADHD with LDX will reach approximately USD 443,879 over five years, amounting to an increase of $71,154 compared to the absence of this medicine. CONCLUSION: From a social perspective, the inclusion of LDX in the treatment regimen for ADHD is associated with higher costs and an increased financial burden. However, based on our analysis, LDX appears to be a cost-effective choice for managing ADHD in Iran when compared to MPH.

Development of Child-Friendly Lisdexamfetamine Chewable Tablets Using Ion Exchange Resin as a Taste-Masking Carrier Based on the Concept of Quality by Design (QbD).

Taste masking is critical to improving the compliance of pediatric oral dosage forms. However, it is challenging for extremely bitter lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) with a long half-life and given in large dose. The present study aims to develop an immediate-release, taste-masked lisdexamfetamine chewable tablet. Lisdexamfetamine-resin complexes (LRCs) were prepared using the batch method. The molecular mechanism of taste masking was explored by PXRD, PLM, STA, and FT-IR. The results showed that taste masking was attributed to the ionic interaction between drug and the resin. The ion exchange process conformed to first-order kinetics. The rate-limiting step of drug release was the diffusion of ions inside the particles, and the concentration of H+ was the key factor for immediate release. The masking efficiency of the prepared LRCs in saliva exceeded 96%, and the drug could be completely released within 15 min in aqueous HCl (pH 1.2). Furthermore, the SeDeM expert system was used for the first time to comprehensively study the powder properties of LRCs and to quickly visualize their defects (compressibility, lubricity/stability, and lubricity/dosage). The selection of excipients was targeted rather than traditional screening, thus obtaining a robust chewable tablet formulation suitable for direct compression. Finally, the difference between chewable tablets containing LRCs and chewable tablets containing lisdexamfetamine dimesylate was compared by in vitro dissolution test, electronic tongue, and disintegration test. In conclusion, an immediate-released, child-friendly lisdexamfetamine chewable tablets without bitterness was successfully developed by the QbD approach, using the SeDeM system, which may help in further development of chewable tablets.

Real-World Efficacy and Safety of Extended-Release Methylphenidate (PRC-063) in the Treatment of ADHD in Pediatric and Adult Subjects: Results of a Phase IV Multicenter Comparison With Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the real-world efficacy, safety, and functional outcomes of PRC-063 (multilayer-release methylphenidate) versus lisdexamfetamine (LDX) in ADHD subjects in a phase IV, open-label study. METHOD: The primary endpoint was the change in the ADHD-DSM-5 Rating Scale (ADHD-5-RS) total score from baseline to Month 4. Secondary endpoints included a non-inferiority comparison between PRC-063 and LDX and measures of functioning and evening behavior. RESULTS: One hundred forty-three pediatric and 112 adult subjects were enrolled. Mean ADHD-5-RS scores (standard deviation) were reduced in pediatric (-16.6 [10.4]) and adult (-14.8 [10.6]) subjects treated with PRC-063 (p < .001). PRC-063 was non-inferior to LDX in the pediatric population but not in the adult population. Significant improvements were demonstrated in quality of life and functionality. Both medications were well-tolerated; more adverse events led to study discontinuation in pediatric subjects treated with LDX versus PRC-063. CONCLUSION: PRC-063 and LDX significantly improved ADHD symptomatology and functioning and were well-tolerated.

Secondary outcomes and qualitative findings of an open-label feasibility trial of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate for adults with bulimia nervosa.

BACKGROUND: There is emerging evidence that stimulants warrant further investigation as a treatment for bulimia nervosa (BN) including a recent open-label feasibility trial examining the use of lisdexamfetamine dimestylate (LDX) for BN. The current report presents the secondary outcomes and qualitative interview results from that feasibility trial. These outcomes explore several purported mechanisms that may explain how stimulants affect symptoms of BN: appetite, impulsivity, obsessive and compulsive symptoms, eating disorder psychopathology/impairment and reward-based decision-making. METHODS: Twenty-three participants with BN received LDX for eight weeks. Questionnaires assessing appetite, impulsivity, obsessive and compulsive symptoms, eating disorder psychopathology and impairment were administered at baseline and post-treatment. Participants also completed a two-step reinforcement learning task to assess their decision-making. Semi-structured interviews took place at baseline, week 5, and follow-up. RESULTS: Reductions in hunger, food-related impulsivity, obsessive and compulsive features, eating disorder psychopathology and impairment were found. However, reward learning, as far as it is assessed by the task, did not seem to contribute to the effect of LDX on BN symptoms. Qualitative analysis suggested four themes: (1) reprieve from the eating disorder, (2) improvement in function and quality of life, (3) renewed hope for recovery, and (4) ability to normalize eating. CONCLUSIONS: This report suggests several potential mechanisms by which LDX may reduce symptoms of binging and purging in those with BN. Importantly, due to the open-label design, we are unable to attribute findings to the medication. Instead, our results should be interpreted as hypothesis generating to inform future studies such as adequately powered randomized controlled trials. Trial registration NCT03397446.

Recent research suggests that stimulant medications could be a potential treatment for bulimia nervosa (BN). Participants in this study took lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) for 8 weeks while their eating disorder symptoms and medical status were carefully monitored. As part of this study, twenty-three participants with BN completed several interviews, questionnaires and computer tasks at the start and end of treatment which were delivered to help researchers learn more about the how LDX impacts people with BN. Scores on questionnaires measuring different aspects of the eating disorder improved over time. Participants' performance on the computer task which measures a type of decision making did not change during treatment. Interviews exploring participants' experience taking LDX found four common themes: reprieve from the eating disorder, improvement in function and quality of life, renewed hope for recovery, and ability to normalize eating. This report suggests several potential ways LDX may reduce symptoms of binging and purging in those with BN. Importantly, due to the size and type of study, we cannot conclude that changes observed were a direct result of the medication. Instead, our results should be used to form new questions that can be explored by larger studies with controlled designs.

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias / Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and comorbid substance use

La evidencia actual confirma la alta comorbilidad entre el trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) y trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS). Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales que se han evaluado en pacientes con TDAH y TUS, y ofrece recomendaciones mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de alcohol, la atomoxetina es recomendable para reducir los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil) y el craving de alcohol (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cannabis, la atomoxetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de cannabis (recomendación débil). 3) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cocaína, el metilfenidato no es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH o para reducir el uso de cocaína (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de nicotina, es recomendable el metilfenidato para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil). Los psicoestimulantes, como metilfenidato o lisdexanfetamina, no son recomendables para reducir el uso de nicotina (recomendación débil). 5) Respecto de los pacientes con TDAH y cualquier TUS, el uso de los psicoestimulantes es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte).(AU)

Substantial evidence has confirmed the high comorbidity between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and a substance use disorder (SUD). This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions conducted in ADHD and SUDs, and provides clinical recommendations using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with ADHD and alcohol use, atomoxetine is recommended to reduce ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation) and alcohol craving (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with ADHD and cannabis use disorder, atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with ADHD and cocaine use disorder, methylphenidate is not recommended to improve ADHD symptoms or to reduce cocaine use (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with ADHD and comorbid nicotine use disorder, methylphenidate is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation). Psychoestimulants, such as methylphenidate or lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, are not recommended to reduce nicotine use (weak recommendation). 5) Regarding patients with ADHD and any SUD, the use of psychostimulants is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation).(AU)

Single Dose Comparative Bioavailability Study of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate as Oral Solution Versus Reference Hard Capsules in Healthy Volunteers.

Lisdexamfetamine is an inactive prodrug of dexamfetamine that is used for the second-line treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and moderate to severe binge eating disorder (BED). Once in the blood, the prodrug is hydrolyzed in erythrocyte cytosol, thus releasing the active dexamfetamine. We here present a fully validated HPLC-MS/MS analytical method for simultaneous determination of lisdexamfetamine and dexamfetamine in human plasma and the first published comparative bioavailability study of lisdexamfetamine including a GMP finished product formulated as oral solution. The Test (T)/Reference (R) ratios for the geometric means (%) of the primary pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters and their corresponding two-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were contained within the predefined regulatory limits of 80.00-125.00% for both lisdexamfetamine and dexamfetamine. While for the lisdexamfetamine prodrug, PK results for the two formulations were slightly different due to the distinct dissolution state at administration, the PK parameters calculated for dexamfetamine were almost identical. A potential explanation of this phenomenon, already described in literature, is that biotransformation of lisdexamfetamine by red blood cells (rather than its release within the gastrointestinal tract) is the process controlling the rate of dexamfetamine delivery.

A Long-Term, Open-Label Safety and Tolerability Study of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate in Children Aged 4-5 Years with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Objective: To evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) in preschool-aged children (4-5 years of age inclusive) diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This phase 3 open-label study (ClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT02466386) enrolled children aged 4-5 years meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for a primary ADHD diagnosis and having baseline ADHD Rating Scale-IV Preschool version total scores (ADHD-RS-IV-PS-TS) ≥24 for girls or ≥28 for boys and baseline Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scores ≥4. Participants were directly enrolled or enrolled after completing one of two antecedent short-term LDX studies. Over 52 weeks of treatment, participants received once-daily dose-optimized LDX (5-30 mg). Safety and tolerability assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and vital sign changes. Clinical outcomes included ADHD-RS-IV-PS-TS changes from baseline. Results: Among 113 participants in the safety set, optimized LDX dose was 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 mg in 1 (0.9%), 12 (10.6%), 21 (18.6%), 26 (23.0%), and 53 (46.9%) participants, respectively. Of the safety set, 69 participants (61.1%) completed the study. TEAEs were reported in 76.1% of participants; no serious TEAEs were reported. Only one type of TEAE was reported in >10% of participants (decreased appetite, 15.9%). Mean ± standard deviation (SD) changes in vital signs and body weight from baseline to week 52/or early termination (ET; n = 101) were 1.9 ± 7.73 mmHg for systolic blood pressure, 3.1 ± 7.58 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure, 4.7 ± 11.00 bpm for pulse, and 0.6 ± 1.38 kg for body weight. Over the course of the study, mean ± SD change in ADHD-RS-IV-PS-TS from baseline to week 52/ET was -24.2 ± 13.34 (n = 87). Conclusions: In this long-term 52-week study of children aged 4-5 years with ADHD, dose-optimized LDX (5-30 mg) was well tolerated and associated with reductions from baseline in ADHD symptoms.

Impulsivity and Its Relationship With Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Treatment in Binge Eating Disorder.

High trait impulsivity is thought to contribute to the sense of loss of control over eating and impulses to binge eat experienced by those with binge eating disorder (BED). Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), a drug approved for treatment of moderate to severe BED, has been shown to decrease impulsive features of BED. However, the relationship between LDX-related reductions of binge eating (BE) episodes and impulsivity has not yet been explored. Forty-one adults aged 18-40years with moderate to severe BED completed questionnaires and tasks assessing impulsivity at baseline and after 8weeks of 50-70mg of LDX. Twenty age-matched healthy controls were also assessed at two timepoints for normative comparison. Data were analysed using linear mixed models. BED participants exhibited increased self-reported motor, non-planning, cognitive and food-related impulsivity relative to controls but no differences in objective task-based measures of impulsivity. Food-related and non-planning impulsivity was significantly reduced by LDX, but not to normative levels. Individuals with higher baseline levels of motor and non-planning impulsivity, and loss of control over eating scores experienced the greatest reduction in BE frequency after 8weeks of LDX. Further, there were significant associations between the degree to which subjective loss of control over eating, non-planning impulsivity and BE frequency reduced after 8weeks of LDX. These data suggest that specific subjective measures of impulsivity may be able to predict who will have the greatest benefit from LDX treatment and that reductions in BE frequency may be moderated by concurrent reductions in non-planning impulsivity.

Lisdexamfetamine and binge-eating disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the preclinical and clinical data with a focus on mechanism of drug action in treating the disorder.

Binge-Eating Disorder (BED) is the most common eating disorder in the United States. Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) was approved in 2015 by the FDA for treatment of BED and is the only drug approved for treating the disorder. There has been no systematic evaluation of the published clinical and preclinical evidence for efficacy of LDX in treating BED and the mechanisms responsible for the therapeutic action of the drug. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using PRISMA guidelines. Fourteen clinical and seven preclinical articles were included. There is consistent evidence from clinical studies that LDX is an effective treatment for BED and that the drug reduces the BED symptoms and body weight of patients with the disorder. There is also consistent evidence from preclinical studies that LDX reduces food intake but no consistent evidence for a preferential reduction of palatable food consumption by the drug in rodents. The evidence on mechanism of action is more limited and suggests LDX may reduce binge eating by a combination of effects on appetite/satiety, reward, and cognitive processes, including attention and impulsivity/inhibition, that are mediated by catecholamine and serotonin mechanisms in the brain. There is an urgent need for adequately powered, placebo-controlled, behavioural and neuroimaging studies with LDX (recruiting patients and/or individuals with subclinical BED symptoms) to further investigate the mechanism of action of the drug in treating BED. An improved understanding of the behavioural and neurochemical mechanisms of action of LDX could lead to the development of improved drug therapies to treat BED.

Influence of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate on Early Ejaculation-Results from a Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Among male sexual dysfunctions, erectile dysfunction and early ejaculation have the highest prevalence rates. Here, we tested the influence of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (Vyas®) on early ejaculation. To this end, we performed a double-blind randomized clinical trial among males with early ejaculation. METHODS: A total of 46 males with early ejaculation (mean age: 35.23 years) and in stable marital relationships with regular weekly penile-vaginal intercourse were randomly assigned either to the lisdexamfetamine dimesylate condition (30 mg) or to the placebo condition. Compounds were taken about six hours before intended penile-vaginal intercourse. At baseline and four weeks later at the end of the study, participants completed a series of self-rating questionnaires covering early ejaculation. Female partners also rated participants' early ejaculation profile. RESULTS: Compared to the placebo condition, dimensions of early ejaculation improved over time in the lisdexamfetamine condition, though improvements were also observed in the placebo condition. CONCLUSIONS: Among male adults in stable marital relationships with regular weekly penile-vaginal intercourse, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate improved dimensions of early ejaculation. Given that improvements were also observed in the placebo condition, psychological factors such as increased attention to early ejaculation and favorable expectations of the compound should be considered.

A feasibility study evaluating lisdexamfetamine dimesylate for the treatment of adults with bulimia nervosa.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the feasibility, safety, and potential efficacy of lisdexamfetamine (LDX) as a treatment for adults with bulimia nervosa (BN). METHOD: An open-label 8-week feasibility study was conducted in participants with BN. Enrollment rate, dropout rate, safety outcomes, and eating disorder symptom change were examined. RESULTS: Eighteen of 23 participants completed the study per protocol. There was no participant-initiated dropout due to adverse drug reactions and no severe and unexpected adverse drug reactions. An average increase in heart rate of 12.1 beats/min was observed. There was a mean weight reduction of 2.1 kg and one participant was withdrawn for clinically significant weight loss. In the intent-to-treat sample, there were reductions in objective binge episodes and compensatory behaviors from Baseline to Post/End-of-Treatment (mean difference = -29.83, 95% confidence interval: -43.38 to -16.27; and mean difference = -33.78, 95% confidence interval: -48.74 to -18.82, respectively). DISCUSSION: Results of this study indicate that a randomized controlled trial would be feasible with close monitoring of certain safety parameters (especially over a longer time period as long-term safety is unknown). However, the results should not be used as evidence for clinicians to prescribe LDX to individuals with BN before its efficacy and safety are properly tested. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03397446.

Population pharmacokinetic and exposure-response analyses of d-amphetamine after administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in Japanese pediatric ADHD patients.

Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, a prodrug of d-amphetamine, has been approved for treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The purposes of this study were constructing a population pharmacokinetic model of d-amphetamine after dosing of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and assessing influential factors on the pharmacokinetics of d-amphetamine in Japanese pediatric patients with ADHD. Additionally, the exposure-response relationship was evaluated for Japanese pediatric patients with ADHD using a clinical rating scale, the ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD RS-IV, efficacy endpoint) total score as a response index. A total of 1365 points of plasma d-amphetamine concentrations from pediatric patients (6-17 years) with ADHD in clinical studies conducted in Japan and the US were employed for the population pharmacokinetic analysis. The plasma concentrations of d-amphetamine in pediatric patients with ADHD were well described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and lag time. The effects of body weight and ethnicity (Japanese or non-Japanese) on apparent total body clearance and the effect of body weight on apparent volume of distribution were incorporated into the final model. No clear exposure-dependent reduction was evident from the ADHD RS-IV total score, whereas the reductions were greater for the lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment groups compared with the placebo group regardless of exposure to d-amphetamine.

Review of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate is a stimulant prodrug with low abuse and diversion potential that is used in treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children, adolescents and adults. This current literature review article aims to examine safety and efficacy of LDX in children and adolescents for the treatment of ADHD based on currently available data. METHODS: Relevant English language articles were identified through computerized searches of the MEDLINE database (PubMed and EMBASE) and clinical trials registry up to January 2020 using the following search terms: lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, pro-drug stimulant, attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorders, ADHD, safety, efficacy, children, adolescents, Vyvanse. Forty-two articles were reviewed, 34 of which were included into this review, selected by the limit "clinical trials". This article represents the pharmacological profile, efficacy and safety data of LDX for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. RESULTS: The collection of studies reviewed identified that LDX was both safe and efficacious in the treatment of ADHD. The most commonly exhibited side effects were appetite suppression, weight loss, headache and insomnia. In comparison to placebo, LDX significantly improved ADHD symptoms and overall quality of life in children and adolescents. In comparison to atomoxetine, LDX showed statistically significant improvements in inattention, impulsivity, and activities of daily living. In comparison to OROS-MPH and placebo, LDX and OROS-MPH showed improvements with the CGI-I score, and ADHD-RS-IV, however, LDX was superior. CONCLUSION: Patients have seen statistically significant improvements in their ADHD symptomatology in the classroom environment, health related quality of life, and their overall behavior in comparison to placebo, atomoxetine, and OROS-MPH. However, clinical judgment should be utilized when prescribing LDX due to patient specific needs and the side effect profile.

Trastorno por déficit de atención con o sin hiperactividad aislado en consulta de Neuropediatría. Serie de casos / Isolated attention deficit disorder with/without hyperactivity in clinical practice. Series of cases

El trastorno por déficit de atención e hiperactividad afecta al 5 % de los niños en edad escolar. Se presenta una serie de 82 niños con este trastorno no asociado a enfermedades neurológicas ni a discapacidad intelectual o trastorno del espectro autista, atendidos durante un período de 8 meses en Neuropediatría: 57 casos de tipo combinado, 23 de tipo inatento y 2 de predominio hiperactivo. Tiempo medio de seguimiento: 7 ± 2,8 años (rango: 4-14,6). Compartían seguimiento con Psiquiatría 16 pacientes. Nunca recibieron tratamiento por decisión parental 12 pacientes. De los 70 que recibieron, en 20, hubo demora en el inicio del tratamiento. Tiempo medio de demora: 20 meses ± 1,6 años (rango: 1 mes y 6 años). Tiempo medio de tratamiento: 44 meses ± 2,6 años (rango: 1 mes y 10,5 años). El 90 % de los pacientes (63) que iniciaron tratamiento continuaban tomándolo en la última revisión

Attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity has a high prevalence affecting 5 % of school-age children. We present a case series of 82 children with said disorder not associated with neurological diseases or intellectual disability or autism spectrum disorder, treated during a period of 8 months in a neuropediatrics clinic: 57 cases of combined type, 23 of inattentive type and 2 of overactive predominance. Average follow-up time: 7 ± 2.8 years (range: 4-14.6); 16 patients shared follow-up with Psychiatry; 12 patients never received treatment by parental decision. Of the 70 who received it, in 20 there was a delay in the start of treatment. Average delay time: 20 months ± 1.6 years (range: 1 month and 6 years). Average treatment time: 44 months ± 2.6 years (range: 1 month and 10.5 years); 90 % of the patients (63) who started treatment were under treatment at the last control

[Isolated attention deficit disorder with/without hyperactivity in clinical practice. Series of cases]. / Trastorno por déficit de atención con o sin hiperactividad aislado en consulta de Neuropediatría. Serie de casos.

Attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity has a high prevalence affecting 5 % of school-age children. We present a case series of 82 children with said disorder not associated with neurological diseases or intellectual disability or autism spectrum disorder, treated during a period of 8 months in a neuropediatrics clinic: 57 cases of combined type, 23 of inattentive type and 2 of overactive predominance. Average follow-up time: 7 ± 2.8 years (range: 4-14.6); 16 patients shared follow-up with Psychiatry; 12 patients never received treatment by parental decision. Of the 70 who received it, in 20 there was a delay in the start of treatment. Average delay time: 20 months ±1.6 years (range: 1 month and 6 years). Average treatment time: 44 months ± 2.6 years (range: 1 month and 10.5 years); 90 % of the patients (63) who started treatment were under treatment at the last control.

El trastorno por déficit de atención e hiperactividad afecta al 5 % de los niños en edad escolar. Se presenta una serie de 82 niños con este trastorno no asociado a enfermedades neurológicas ni a discapacidad intelectual o trastorno del espectro autista, atendidos durante un período de 8 meses en Neuropediatría: 57 casos de tipo combinado, 23 de tipo inatento y 2 de predominio hiperactivo. Tiempo medio de seguimiento: 7 ± 2,8 años (rango: 4-14,6). Compartían seguimiento con Psiquiatría 16 pacientes. Nunca recibieron tratamiento por decisión parental 12 pacientes. De los 70 que recibieron, en 20, hubo demora en el inicio del tratamiento. Tiempo medio de demora: 20 meses ± 1,6 años (rango: 1 mes y 6 años). Tiempo medio de tratamiento: 44 meses ± 2,6 años (rango: 1 mes y 10,5 años). El 90 % de los pacientes (63) que iniciaron tratamiento continuaban tomándolo en la última revisión.

Patterns of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Use in Children, Adolescents, and Adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Europe.

Objectives: Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is approved in some European countries for the second-line treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents when response to previous methylphenidate (MPH) treatment is considered clinically inadequate, and as a first-line treatment in adults. Limited evidence exists on the real-world use of LDX across Europe. This retrospective study evaluated LDX drug utilization patterns from eight European countries for up to 5 years. Methods: Data were collected from national registries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden), electronic medical records (Germany, Spain, United Kingdom), and prescription databases (Switzerland) in eight European countries. Patients were included if they were prescribed LDX at least once since the LDX launch date in each country. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and LDX prescription data included patient age and gender, a recorded diagnosis of ADHD, the number of prescriptions per participant, previous MPH prescription recorded, average daily dose, treatment persistence, discontinuation, and switching of medications. Results: Overall, information for 59,292 patients (437,272 LDX prescriptions) was analyzed. Most patients were male (58.1%-84.3%) and fewer than 1% were under 6 years of age. Extensive use of LDX in adults was observed in four countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden), including countries where LDX was not approved for this age group. Most patients had a recorded diagnosis of ADHD (61.9%-95.4%). The mean number of prescriptions per patient ranged from 5.4 to 10.0. At least 79.6% of patients with ADHD had a recorded previous MPH prescription. Mean duration of LDX exposure ranged from 233.1 to 410.8 days. The average daily dose of LDX was ≤70 mg/day for most patients (79.4%-99.7%). The 5-year discontinuation rate ranged from 22.8% to 70.6% and was below 40% for most countries. The proportion of patients switching from LDX to other medications was ≤33.8. Conclusions: This study provides the first long-term, real-world information related to LDX use by children, adolescents, and adults in Europe in the 5 years since its first launch in the region. Most LDX prescriptions fulfilled label requirements regarding a recorded diagnosis of ADHD before treatment initiation, previous MPH use, and an average daily dose of ≤70 mg/day. LDX was largely prescribed within the indicated age range, although adult use of LDX was high in some countries where LDX is not approved for this population.