The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement: 208 Evidence-based conclusions about the disorder.

BACKGROUND: Misconceptions about ADHD stigmatize affected people, reduce credibility of providers, and prevent/delay treatment. To challenge misconceptions, we curated findings with strong evidence base. METHODS: We reviewed studies with more than 2000 participants or meta-analyses from five or more studies or 2000 or more participants. We excluded meta-analyses that did not assess publication bias, except for meta-analyses of prevalence. For network meta-analyses we required comparison adjusted funnel plots. We excluded treatment studies with waiting-list or treatment as usual controls. From this literature, we extracted evidence-based assertions about the disorder. RESULTS: We generated 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD. The status of the included statements as empirically supported is approved by 80 authors from 27 countries and 6 continents. The contents of the manuscript are endorsed by 366 people who have read this document and agree with its contents. CONCLUSIONS: Many findings in ADHD are supported by meta-analysis. These allow for firm statements about the nature, course, outcome causes, and treatments for disorders that are useful for reducing misconceptions and stigma.

Differences in Adverse Event Reporting Rates of Therapeutic Failure Between Two Once-daily Extended-release Methylphenidate Medications in Canada: Analysis of Spontaneous Adverse Event Reporting Databases.

PURPOSE: Our study evaluated adverse events of therapeutic failure (and specifically reduced duration of action) with the use of a branded product, Osmotic Release Oral System (OROS) methylphenidate, which is approved for the treatment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and a generic product (methylphenidate, methylphenidate ER-C), which was approved for marketing in Canada based on bioequivalence to OROS methylphenidate. This study was initiated following reports that some US-marketed generic methylphenidate ER products had substantially higher reporting rates of therapeutic failure than did the referenced brands. METHODS: Through methodology similar to that used by the US Food and Drug Administration to investigate the issue with the US-marketed generic, reporting rates were calculated from cases of therapeutic failure identified in the Canadian Vigilance Adverse Reaction Online database for a 1-year period beginning 8 months after each product launch. Corresponding population exposure was estimated from the number of tablets dispensed. An in-depth analysis of narratives of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) with the use of the generic product was conducted in duplicate by 2 physicians to assess causality and to characterize the potential safety risk and clinical pattern of therapeutic failure. Similar secondary analyses were conducted on the US-marketed products. FINDINGS: Reporting rates of therapeutic failure with the use of methylphenidate ER-C (generic) and OROS methylphenidate (brand name) were 411.5 and 37.5 cases per 100,000 patient-years, respectively (reporting rate ratio, 10.99; 95% CI, 5.93-22.21). In-depth analysis of narratives of 230 ICSRs of therapeutic failure with the Canadian-marketed generic determined that all ICSRs were either probably (60 [26%]) or possibly (170 [74%]) causally related to methylphenidate ER-C. Clinical symptoms suggestive of overdose were present in 31 reports of loss of efficacy (13.5%) and occurred primarily in the morning, and premature loss of efficacy (shorter duration of action) was described in 98 cases (42.6%) and occurred primarily in the afternoon. Impacts on social functioning, such as disruption in work or school performance or adverse social behaviors, were found in 51 cases (22.2%). IMPLICATIONS: The ~10-fold higher reporting rate of therapeutic failure with the generic product relative to its reference product in the present Canadian study resembles findings with US-marketed generic products. While these results should be interpreted with caution due to the limitations of spontaneous adverse event reporting, which may confound comparisons across products, similar findings nonetheless led the US Food and Drug Administration to declare in 2014 that 2 methylphenidate ER generic products in the United States were neither bioequivalent nor interchangeable with OROS methylphenidate-their reference product. Our results indicate a potential safety issue with the Canadian-marketed generic and suggest a need for further investigation by Health Canada.

Medication Persistence, Duration of Treatment, and Treatment-switching Patterns Among Canadian Patients Taking Once-daily Extended-release Methylphenidate Medications for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Population-based Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare medication use patterns of a long-acting extended-release methylphenidate (Osmotic Release Oral System [OROS(®)] methylphenidate, CONCERTA(®)) and Teva-methylphenidate (methylphenidate ER-C), a generic drug determined by the Canadian regulatory authority, Health Canada, to be bioequivalent to OROS(®) methylphenidate. METHODS: We established an OROS(®) methylphenidate-experienced and new-user population cohort to compare medication use patterns, including medication persistence, duration of therapy, and treatment-switching patterns. Multivariable log-binomial regression was used to adjust for confounders of the associations with persistence. FINDINGS: In the OROS(®) methylphenidate-experienced cohort (n = 21,940), OROS(®) methylphenidate was associated with a 70% higher rate of medication persistence at 12 months relative to methylphenidate ER-C (adjusted relative risk = 1.70; 95% CI, 1.64-1.77). In the new-user cohort (n = 20,410), OROS(®) methylphenidate had a 58% higher rate of medication persistence relative to methylphenidate ER-C (adjusted relative risk = 1.58; 95% CI, 1.51-1.65). Median duration of therapy was significantly longer in patients taking OROS(®) methylphenidate compared with those taking methylphenidate ER-C, and treatment-switching occurred significantly more frequently in patients taking methylphenidate ER-C compared with those taking OROS(®) methylphenidate. IMPLICATIONS: Significant differences were observed in how the medications were used by patients in the real-world setting. Because the data sources were administrative databases, it was not possible to control for all potentially important confounding variables. Although differences in medication persistence may not directly reflect differences in treatment efficacy, the findings are important because these products are used interchangeably in a number of Canadian provinces.

The effect of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate on body weight, metabolic parameters, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptomatology in adults with bipolar I/II disorder.

OBJECTIVES: We primarily sought to determine the effect of adjunctive lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) on anthropometric and metabolic parameters. Our secondary aim was to evaluate the effect of LDX on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptom severity in adults with bipolar I/II disorder. METHODS: Forty-five stable adults (i.e., non-rapid cycling, absence of clinically significant hypo/manic symptoms) with bipolar I/II disorder and comorbid ADHD were enrolled in a phase IV, 4-week, flexible dose, open-label study of adjunctive LDX. All subjects were initiated at 30 mg/day of adjunctive LDX for the first week with flexible dosing (i.e., 30-70 mg/day) between weeks 2 and 4. RESULTS: Of the 45 subjects enrolled, 40 received adjunctive LDX (mean dose = 60 ± 10 mg/day). A statistically significant decrease from baseline to endpoint was evident in weight (p < 0.001), body mass index (p < 0.001), fasting total cholesterol (p = 0.011), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (p = 0.044), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (p = 0.015) but not triglycerides, or blood glucose. Significant reductions were also observed in leptin (p = 0.047), but not in ghrelin, adiponectin, or resistin levels. Diastolic blood pressure and pulse increased significantly over time but on average remained within the normal range (p < 0.001). There was a significant reduction from baseline to endpoint in the total score of the ADHD Self-Report Scale. Significant improvement from baseline to endpoint was also observed in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score as well as the Clinical Global Impression Severity and Improvement score. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term adjunctive LDX treatment was well tolerated by this sample of adults with stable bipolar I/II disorder. Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate offered beneficial effects on body weight, body mass index and several metabolic parameters. In addition to demonstrating short-term (i.e., 4 weeks) safety and tolerability, beneficial effects of LDX were also observed in mitigating depressive and ADHD symptom severity.