Methylphenidate for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults: a narrative review.

RATIONALE: Psychostimulants, including methylphenidate (MPH), are the mainstay of pharmacotherapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults. Even though MPH is the most commonly used medication for ADHD these days, there are relatively few resources available that provide comprehensive insight into the pharmacological and clinical features of the compound. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to provide an up-to-date outline of the pharmacology and clinical utility of MPH for ADHD in adult patients. METHODS: While conducting the narrative review, we applied structured search strategies covering the two major online databases (MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials). In addition, we performed handsearching of reference lists of relevant papers. RESULTS: Methylphenidate exhibits multimodal mechanism of action, working primarily as a dopamine and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor. It also protects the dopaminergic system against the ongoing 'wearing off' (by securing a substantial reserve pool of the neurotransmitter, stored in the presynaptic vesicles). In placebo-controlled trials, MPH was shown to be moderately effective both against the core ADHD symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.64), and the accompanying emotion regulation deficits (SMD, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.45). The most common adverse events related to long-term treatment with MPH are decreased appetite (~ 20%), dry mouth (15%), heart palpitations (13%), gastrointestinal infections (~ 10%), and agitation/feeling restless (~ 10%). CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial body of evidence to suggest that MPH is an effective and safe treatment option for adults with ADHD.

A systematic review of how patients value COPD outcomes.

Our objective was to summarise systematically all research evidence related to how patients value outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).We conducted a systematic review (systematic review registration number CRD42015015206) by searching PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL, and included reports that assessed the relative importance of outcomes from COPD patients' perspective. Two authors independently determined the eligibility of studies, abstracted the eligible studies and assessed risk of bias. We narratively summarised eligible studies, meta-analysed utilities for individual outcomes and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach.We included 217 quantitative studies. Investigators most commonly used utility measurements of outcomes (n=136), discrete choice exercises (n=13), probability trade-off (n=4) and forced choice techniques (n=46). Patients rated adverse events as important but on average, less so than symptom relief. Exacerbation and hospitalisation due to exacerbation are the outcomes that COPD patients rate as most important. This systematic review provides a comprehensive registry of related studies.

Risk and surrogate benefit for pediatric Phase I trials in oncology: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric Phase I cancer trials are critical for establishing the safety and dosing of anti-cancer treatments in children. Their implementation, however, must contend with the rarity of many pediatric cancers and limits on allowable risk in minors. The aim of this study is to describe the risk and benefit for pediatric cancer Phase I trials. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Our protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015015961). We systematically searched Embase and PubMed for solid and hematological malignancy Phase I pediatric trials published between 1 January 2004 and 1 March 2015. We included pediatric cancer Phase I studies, defined as "small sample size, non­randomized, dose escalation studies that defined the recommended dose for subsequent study of a new drug in each schedule tested." We measured risk using grade 3, 4, and 5 (fatal) drug-related adverse events (AEs) and benefit using objective response rates. When possible, data were meta-analyzed. We identified 170 studies meeting our eligibility criteria, accounting for 4,604 patients. The pooled overall objective response rate was 10.29% (95% CI 8.33% to 12.25%), and was lower in solid tumors, 3.17% (95% CI 2.62% to 3.72%), compared with hematological malignancies, 27.90% (95% CI 20.53% to 35.27%); p < 0.001. The overall fatal (grade 5) AE rate was 2.09% (95% CI 1.45% to 2.72%). Across the 4,604 evaluated patients, there were 4,675 grade 3 and 4 drug-related AEs, with an average grade 3/4 AE rate per person equal to 1.32. Our study had the following limitations: trials included in our review were heterogeneous (to minimize heterogeneity, we separated types of therapy and cancer types), and we relied on published data only and encountered challenges with the quality of reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that, on the whole, AE and response rates in pediatric Phase I trials are similar to those in adult Phase I trials. Our findings provide an empirical basis for the refinement and review of pediatric Phase I trials, and for communication about their risk and benefit.

Vortioxetine: A review of the pharmacology and clinical profile of the novel antidepressant.

The aim of this paper was to review the up-to-date evidence base on pharmacology and clinical properties of vortioxetine. Vortioxetine is a novel antidepressant, approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). Because vortioxetine exhibits both an antidepressant and anxiolytic effect, it may be effective in treating both depressive and anxiety disorders, such as generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Based on its pharmacodynamics profile and preclinical studies, it is believe that the drug's clinical action is mediated mainly by selective blockade of serotonin reuptake (by inhibiting the serotonin transporter [SERT]) and direct modulation of 5-HT receptors activity (such as 5-HT3, 5-HT7, 5-HT1D and 5-HT1B). In patients with MDD the recommended doses range is 5-20mg/day. Vortioxetine was shown to be more effective than placebo both in MDD and GAD. In terms of side effects, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and dry mouth were most commonly observed in individuals receiving vortioxetine. In direct comparison to duloxetine, vortioxetine is found to have a smaller efficacy but had a lower risk of developing the common antidepressant-induced adverse effects.

Postpartum depression: bipolar or unipolar? Analysis of 434 Polish postpartum women.

Objective: To assess the prevalence of soft bipolar features in a sample of women with postpartum depressive symptoms, as well as to compare the sociodemographic and obstetric characteristics of subjects with bipolar or unipolar postpartum depressive symptomatology. Methods: Four hundred and thirty-four participants were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Postpartum depression (PPD) symptoms were assessed using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), while the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) was used to screen for bipolarity features. Results: Of the 434 participants, 66 (15.2%) scored ≥ 13 points on the EPDS, thus fulfilling the screening criteria, and 103 scored ≥ 7 points on the MDQ. In comparison with non-depressed subjects, the women who scored positively on the EPDS were significantly more likely to exhibit symptoms of bipolar spectrum disorders (38 vs. 21%; chi-square test, p = 0.015). Women with bipolar PPD symptomatology were significantly younger than those exhibiting unipolar PPD symptoms (31.0±4.8 years vs. 28.5±4.1 years; t-test, p = 0.03). The groups did not differ in terms of obstetric characteristics. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that patients with PPD symptomatology may be more likely to exhibit soft bipolarity features as compared with non-depressed women.

Lurasidone: The 2016 update on the pharmacology, efficacy and safety profile.

The aim of this paper was to review the up-to-date evidence base on pharmacology and clinical properties of lurasidone. Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic, approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar depression. Lurasidone exhibits both an antipsychotic and antidepressant action. Based on its pharmacodynamics profile, it is believed that the drug's clinical action is mediated mainly through the D2, 5-HT2A and 5-HT7 receptors inhibition. In patients with schizophrenia the recommended dose range is 40-80mg/day. In bipolar depression broader dosage ranges (20-120mg/day) were found to be effective. In terms of side effects, higher rates of akathisia, parkinsonism and hyperprolactinemia were observed in individuals receiving lurasidone (as compared to patients treated with other atypical antipsychotics). On the other hand, treatment with lurasidone yields relatively lower risk for developing sedation or overweight/obesity.