Switch to Lisdexamfetamine in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit Disorder at a Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic for School-Aged Children: A Danish Cohort Study.

Objectives: This study aimed to examine switch from first-line methylphenidate (MPH) to lisdexamfetamine (LDX) in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This is a retrospective observational study based on systematic review of patient records of all children (7-13 years) diagnosed with ADHD and referred to a Danish specialized outpatient clinic. The study included 394 children switching from MPH to LDX as either second-line or third-line treatment (atomoxetine [ATX] as second-line treatment) during the study period from April 1, 2013, to November 5, 2019. Results: One in five children switched from MPH to LDX at some point during the study period. The most frequent reasons for switching to LDX were adverse effects (AEs; 70.0% for MPH, 68.3% for ATX) and lack of efficiency (52.0% for MPH, 72.7% for ATX). Top five AEs of LDX were decreased appetite (62.4%), insomnia (28.7%), irritability/aggression (26.1%), weight decrease (21.1%), and mood swings (13.9%). MPH and LDX had similar AE profiles, yet most AEs were less frequent after switching to LDX. At the end of the study period, the majority were prescribed LDX as second-line rather than third-line treatment (86.1% in 2019). However, the likelihood of LDX as second-line treatment decreased with the number of psychiatric comorbidities, ADHD symptom severity as assessed by parents, and if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Among children observed for at least 1 year after initiation of LDX, 41.3% continued LDX treatment for a year or longer. LDX continuation was less likely if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Similarly to MPH and ATX, the most frequent reasons for LDX discontinuation were AEs (74.4%) and lack of efficiency (34.7%). Implications: The findings support LDX as an important option in the personalized treatment of children with ADHD and may support prescribers in the clinical decision-making on switching medication.

Memory loss induced by lisdexamfetamine in the rat: A behavioral, electrophysiological, and histopathological Study.

Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) is one of the drugs commonly used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, its neurological side effects, particularly on cognition, are not fully understood. The present study focused on memory in rats treated with four weeks of LDX injection. We compared LDX-treated rats with control ones, using several methods to evaluate the behavioral responses and electrophysiological, molecular, and histological properties in the hippocampus. Our findings demonstrated that subchronic administration of LDX impaired behavioral performance in all memory assessment tests (Y maze, Morris Water Maze, and Shuttle box). Although LDX did not alter population spike (PS) amplitude, it increased the field excitatory postsynaptic potential (fEPSP) slope of evoked potentials of LTP components. Also, in addition to an increase in expression of caspase-3 in the hippocampus, which indicates the susceptibility to apoptosis in LDX-treated rats, the number of microglia and astrocytes went up significantly in the LDX group. Moreover, Sholl's analysis showed an increase in the soma size and total process length in both hippocampal astrocytes and microglia. Overall, because of these destructive effects of LDX on the hippocampus, which is one of the critical memory-related areas of the brain, the findings of this investigation provide evidence to show the disruption of memory-related variables following the LDX. However, more research is needed to clarify it.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Medications and Work Disability and Mental Health Outcomes.

Importance: Individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often have comorbid psychiatric conditions. Relatively little is known about how specific ADHD medications are associated with overall treatment outcomes among these patients. Objective: To investigate the association of the use of specific ADHD medications with hospitalization outcomes and work disability among adolescents and adults with ADHD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide register-based cohort study identified individuals (aged 16-65 years) with ADHD from Swedish nationwide registers of inpatient health care, specialized outpatient health care, sickness absence, and disability pension during the years 2006 to 2021. Data analysis was performed from November 2022 to August 2023. Exposure: Use of specific ADHD medications. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome measure was psychiatric hospitalization, and secondary outcomes were suicide attempt and/or death by suicide, nonpsychiatric hospitalization, and work disability (ie, sickness absence or disability pension). The risk of outcomes between use vs nonuse periods of ADHD medications was compared in a within-individual design, where a person acts as their own control, and was analyzed with stratified Cox models. Results: A total of 221 714 persons with ADHD were included in the study cohort (mean [SD] age, 25.0 [11.2] years; 120 968 male individuals [54.6%]). Methylphenidate was the most commonly used ADHD medication (151 837 individuals [68.5%]), followed by lisdexamphetamine (78 106 individuals [35.2%]) during the follow-up (mean [SD], 7.0 [4.7] years). The following medications were associated with a decreased risk of psychiatric hospitalization: amphetamine (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.90), lisdexamphetamine (aHR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.78-0.82), ADHD drug polytherapy (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88), dexamphetamine (aHR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94), and methylphenidate (aHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92-0.95). No associations were found for modafinil, atomoxetine, clonidine, and guanfacine. Decreased risk of suicidal behavior was associated with the use of dexamphetamine (aHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.89), lisdexamphetamine (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84), and methylphenidate (aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98). None of the medications was associated with increased risk of nonpsychiatric hospitalization; instead, use of amphetamine, lisdexamphetamine, polytherapy, dexamphetamine, methylphenidate, and atomoxetine were associated with decreased risk of nonpsychiatric hospitalization. The results regarding work disability were significant only for the use of atomoxetine (aHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.97), especially among adolescents and young adults aged 16 to 29 years, (aHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.92). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationwide cohort study of adolescents and adults with ADHD, the use of ADHD medication was associated with fewer hospitalizations for both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric morbidity and lower suicidal behavior.

Measuring Objective and Subjective Sleep during Lisdexamfetamine Treatment of Acute Methamphetamine Withdrawal: A Feasibility Study.

INTRODUCTION: Sleep disturbance is common during methamphetamine (MA) use and withdrawal; however, the feasibility of combined subjective-objective measurement of sleep-wake has not been shown in this population. Actigraphy is a well-established, non-invasive measure of sleep-wake cycles with good concordance with polysomnography. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and utility of using actigraphy and sleep diaries to investigate sleep during MA withdrawal. METHODS: We conducted a feasibility and utility study of actigraphy and sleep diaries during a clinical trial of lisdexamfetamine for MA withdrawal. Participants were inpatients for 7 days, wore an actigraph (Philips Actiwatch 2) and completed a modified Consensus Sleep Diary each morning. Participants were interviewed between days 3-5. RESULTS: Ten participants (mean age 37 years, 90% male) were enrolled. No participant removed the device prematurely. Participants interviewed (n = 8) reported that the actigraph was not difficult or distracting to wear or completion of daily sleep diary onerous. Actigraphic average daily sleep duration over 7 days was 568 min, sleep onset latency 22.4 min, wake after sleep onset (WASO) 75.2 min, and sleep efficiency 83.6%. Sleep diaries underreported daily sleep compared with actigraphy (sleep duration was 56 min (p = 0.008) and WASO 47 min (p < 0.001) less). Overall sleep quality was 4.4 on a nine-point Likert scale within the diary. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous actigraphy is feasible to measure sleep-wake in people withdrawing from MA, with low participant burden. We found important differences in self-reported and actigraphic sleep, which need to be explored in more detail.

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.

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.

Assessment of lisdexamfetamine on executive function in rats: A translational cognitive research.

Executive function, including working memory, attention and inhibitory control, is crucial for decision making, thinking and planning. Lisdexamfetamine, the prodrug of d-amphetamine, has been approved for treating attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and binge eating disorder, but whether it improves executive function under non-disease condition, as well as the underlying pharmacokinetic and neurochemical properties, remains unclear. Here, using trial unique non-matching to location task and five-choice serial reaction time task of rats, we found lisdexamfetamine (p.o) enhanced spatial working memory and sustained attention under various cognitive load conditions, while d-amphetamine (i.p) only improved these cognitive performances under certain high cognitive load condition. Additionally, lisdexamfetamine evoked less impulsivity than d-amphetamine, indicating lower adverse effect on inhibitory control. In vivo pharmacokinetics showed lisdexamfetamine produced a relative stable and lasting release of amphetamine base both in plasma and in brain tissue, whereas d-amphetamine injection elicited rapid increase and dramatical decrease in amphetamine base levels. Microdialysis revealed lisdexamfetamine caused lasting release of dopamine within the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), whereas d-amphetamine produced rapid increase followed by decline to dopamine level. Moreover, lisdexamfetamine elicited more obvious efflux of noradrenaline than that of d-amphetamine. The distinct neurochemical profiles may be partly attributed to the different action of two drugs to membranous catecholamine transporters level within mPFC, detecting by Western Blotting. Taken together, due to its certain pharmacokinetic and catecholamine releasing profiles, lisdexamfetamine produced better pharmacological action to improving executive function. Our finding provided valuable evidence on the ideal pharmacokinetic and neurochemical characteristics of amphetamine-type psychostimulants in cognition enhancement.

Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (Vyvanse) toxicosis in a dog.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the presentation, management, and postmortem examination findings in a dog with confirmed lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) toxicosis. CASE SUMMARY: A 3-year-old female neutered mixed breed dog initially presented with neurological signs suspected to be secondary to LDX toxicosis. The dog was treated as typical for amphetamine toxicoses but developed severe respiratory and cardiovascular signs throughout their hospitalization. The progression of the cardiopulmonary signs led to cardiopulmonary arrest, for which CPR was unsuccessful. Postmortem examination exhibited severe hemorrhage throughout multiple organ systems. Toxicology testing confirmed the presence of unaltered LDX and its metabolite, amphetamine. NEW OR UNIQUE INFORMATION PROVIDED: This is the first case report documenting a severe progression of clinical signs and postmortem examination findings in a case of confirmed LDX toxicosis in a dog. Although the patient did not survive treatment, postmortem examination and microscopic evaluation of tissues allowed visualization of the extent of systemic pathophysiology. With prompt treatment, the prognosis of amphetamine toxicosis in dogs is generally considered good; however, this case report demonstrates a severe case in which even prompt and appropriate treatment did not prevent mortality. This suggests a need to establish negative prognostic indicators for which to monitor in cases of amphetamine toxicosis. Finally, this report is also unique in the fact that the LDX toxicosis was confirmed using a toxicological analysis technique not previously described clinically in dogs.

LISDEXAMFETAMINE (VYVANSE) USE ASSOCIATED WITH BRANCH RETINAL ARTERY OCCLUSION.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Branch retinal artery occlusions (BRAO) are primarily associated with the aging population and are rare in young adults. The etiology of BRAO includes embolic or nonembolic sources. Lisdexamfetamine has been associated with vasospastic ischemic events in multiple areas of the body. However, there are currently no reported cases of BRAO associated with lisdexamfetamine use. Here, we present a case that suggests a correlation between lisdexamfetamine use and a nonembolic BRAO in a young adult man. METHODS/RESULTS: A 32-year-old man presented with sudden left eye blurred vision 17 days after beginning lisdexamfetamine. Fundus examination confirmed the BRAO diagnosis. Following evaluation by a retina specialist, vasospasm was considered the most likely cause for the BRAO. Other possible etiologies were unlikely due to diagnostic testing. CONCLUSION: The temporal association between lisdexamfetamine and BRAO symptom onset suggests vasospastic occlusion. Lisdexamfetamine-associated adverse events should be considered as a possible etiology for BRAO.

Neurobiological basis of reinforcement-based decision making in adults with ADHD treated with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate: Preliminary findings and implications for mechanisms influencing clinical improvement.

BACKGROUND: ADHD is often described as a disorder of altered reward sensitivity, yet few studies have examined the extent to which: (i) treatments for ADHD impact reward-related mechanisms; and (ii) changes in the reward system are associated with clinical improvement. This study addresses these issues - examining the extent to which clinical improvement following lisdexamfetamine (LDX) treatment is associated with changes in brain reward system activation. METHODS: Twenty adults (M = 11, 55%, F = 9, 45%), ages 19-52 (M = 33.9, SD = 10.0) with ADHD participated in a randomized cross-over study with lisdexamfetamine (LDX) and placebo (PB). Changes in brain activation were assessed during functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) scans: after receiving 3-5 weeks of treatment with LDX and 3-5 weeks of no drug/PB. fMRI contrasts were derived from the passive-avoidance (PA) learning task, which assessed reward-related learning using computational variables. We analyzed the following conditions: the Choice-Phase, modulated by the expected value (EV; i.e., object-choose and object-reject), and the Feedback-Phase, modulated by the prediction error (PE; i.e., reward and punish). Clinical symptom severity was assessed via interview with the ADHD-Rating Scale (ADHD-RS-IV). To address the primary objective, we performed group-level mass-univariate regression analyses between LDX and PB of percent change of the ADHD-RS total scores and the four contrast images under the Choice- and Feedback-conditions. Significance was set at a whole-brain voxel-wise threshold of p < 0.05 with family-wise error (FWE) correction and an extent (cluster) threshold of 50 contiguous voxels. RESULTS: Improvement in ADHD symptoms with LDX was accompanied by significantly increased activation in a series of brain regions previously implicated in reinforcement processing in the choice and feedback conditions (e.g., left caudate and putamen, right orbitofrontal cortex, left middle frontal, superior frontal, and precentral gyri). CONCLUSIONS: These findings, while preliminary, are the first to show that ADHD symptom improvement with stimulant treatment is associated with increased responsiveness of brain systems engaged in reward processing. Results support the hypothesis that LDX treatment may restore balance to dysfunction (e.g., hypoactivation) within the brain reward circuitry in adults with ADHD. Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01924429.

Lisdexamphetamine versus methylphenidate for paediatric patients with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and type 1 diabetes (LAMAinDiab): protocol for a multicentre, randomised cross-over clinical trial in an outpatient telemedicine-supported setting.

INTRODUCTION: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects 5%-10% of paediatric population and is reportedly more common in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D), exacerbating its clinical course. Proper treatment of ADHD in such patients may thus provide neurological and metabolic benefits. To test this, we designed a non-commercial second phase clinical trial comparing the impact of different pharmacological interventions for ADHD in children with T1D. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, cross-over clinical trial in children and adolescents with ADHD and T1D. The trial will be conducted in four reference paediatric diabetes centres in Poland. Over 36 months, eligible patients with both T1D and ADHD (aged 8-16.5 years, T1D duration >1 year) will be offered participation. Patients' guardians will undergo online once-weekly training sessions behaviour management for 10 weeks. Afterward, children will be randomised to methylphenidate (long-release capsule, doses 18-36-54 mg) versus lisdexamphetamine (LDX, 30-50-70 mg). Pharmacotherapy will continue for 6 months before switching to alternative medication. Throughout the trial, the participants will be evaluated every 3 months by their diabetologist and online psychological assessments. The primary endpoint (ADHD symptom severity, Conners 3.0 questionnaire) will be assessed by a blinded investigator. Secondary endpoints will include HbA1c, continuous glucose monitoring indices and quality-of-life (PedsQL). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is approved by Bioethical Committee at Medical University of Lodz and Polish regulatory agency (RNN/142/22/KE, UR/DBL/D/263/2022). The results will be communicated to the research and clinical community, and Polish agencies responsible for healthcare policy. Patient organisations focused on paediatric T1D will be notified by a consortium member. We hope to use the trial's results to promote collaboration between mental health professionals and diabetes teams, evaluate the economic feasibility of using LDX in patients with both diseases and the long run improve ADHD treatment in children with T1D. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EU Clinical Trials Register (EU-CTR, 2022-001906-24) and NCT05957055.

Amphetamines Improve the Motivation to Invest Effort in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Prevailing frameworks propose that a key feature of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is lower motivation. An important component of motivation is the willingness to engage in cognitively or physically effortful behavior. However, the degree to which effort sensitivity is impaired in ADHD has rarely been tested, and the efficacy of stimulant medication in ameliorating any such impairments is unclear. Here, we tested 20 individuals with ADHD (11 males, 9 females) who were managed with amphetamine-based medication (dexamfetamine, lisdexamfetamine), and 24 controls (8 males, 16 females). Individuals with ADHD were tested over two counterbalanced sessions, ON and OFF their usual amphetamine-based medication. In each session, participants performed an effort-based decision-making task, in which they were required to choose how much cognitive or physical effort they were willing to engage in return for reward. Our results revealed three main findings. First, individuals with ADHD had lower motivation relative to controls to invest effort in both the cognitive and physical domains. Second, amphetamine increased motivation uniformly across both domains. Finally, the net effect of amphetamine treatment was to mostly restore motivation across both domains of effort relative to healthy controls. These data provide clear evidence for a heightened sensitivity to both cognitive and physical effort in ADHD, and reveal the efficacy of amphetamine-based drugs in restoring effort sensitivity to levels similar to controls. These findings confirm the existence of reduced motivational drive in ADHD, and more broadly provide direct causal evidence for a domain-general role of catecholamines in motivating effortful behavior.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT A core feature of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is thought to be a heightened aversion to effort. Surprisingly, however, the degree to which effort sensitivity is impaired in ADHD has rarely been tested. More broadly, the relative efficacy of catecholamines in motivating the investment of cognitive and physical effort is unclear. We tested 20 individuals with ADHD ON and OFF amphetamines, and compared their behavior on an effort-based decision-making task to 24 controls. When tested OFF medication, the ADHD group was less cognitively and physically motivated than controls. However, amphetamines led to a comparable increase in motivation across both domains. This demonstrates the efficacy of catecholamines in facilitating domain-general effort, and highlights the broader potential of such drugs to treat disorders of motivation.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of nivasorexant in adults with binge-eating disorder: A randomized, Phase II proof of concept trial.

OBJECTIVE: This Phase II, placebo-controlled, double-blind study investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of nivasorexant in the treatment of adults with moderate to severe binge-eating disorder (BED). METHODS: Adults meeting the DSM-5 BED criteria were randomized 1:1 to placebo or nivasorexant (100 mg b.i.d.). The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to Week 12 in the number of binge eating (BE) days per week. Exploratory efficacy endpoints included cessation of BE in the last 4 weeks of treatment; and change from baseline to Week 12 in the number of BE episodes/week, the clinician global impression (CGI) of change, the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale modified for BE, and the Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAMD-17). Key safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and adverse events of special interest (i.e., somnolence and fatigue). RESULTS: Sixty-eight participants were randomized to each treatment arm. The change from baseline to Week 12 in the number of BE days/week was the same for placebo (least squares mean [LSM]: -2.93) and nivasorexant (LSM: -2.93), with no difference between the treatment groups (LSM difference = .000 [95% confidence interval (CI): -.69, .69], p = .9992). Furthermore, no differences between treatment groups were observed in the exploratory efficacy endpoints. Nivasorexant was well tolerated; the overall incidence of TEAEs was balanced between treatment groups, and the frequency of somnolence and fatigue in the nivasorexant group were similar to placebo. DISCUSSION: In this proof-of-concept study, 100 mg b.i.d. nivasorexant did not improve BE in adults with moderate to severe BED. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: The results of this Phase II study indicate that nivasorexant was well tolerated in adults with BED, but did not improve binge eating behavior over placebo. Further research is needed to improve our understanding of the role of the orexin-1 receptor in BED.

Epidemiology, Treatment Patterns, Comorbidities, and Concomitant Medication in Patients with ADHD in Sweden: A Registry-Based Study (2018-2021).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate treatment patterns for ADHD in Sweden. METHOD: Observational retrospective study of patients with ADHD from the Swedish National Patient Register and Prescribed Drug Register, 2018 to 2021. Cross-sectional analyses included incidence, prevalence, and psychiatric comorbidities. Longitudinal analyses (newly diagnosed patients) included medication, treatment lines, duration, time-to-treatment initiation, and switching. RESULTS: Of 243,790 patients, 84.5% received an ADHD medication. Psychiatric comorbidities were common, particularly autism among children, and depression in adults. Most frequent first-/second-line treatments were methylphenidate (MPH; 81.6%) and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX; 46.0%), respectively. In the second-line, LDX was most frequently prescribed (46.0%), followed by MPH (34.9%), then atomoxetine (7.7%). Median treatment duration was longest for LDX (10.4 months), followed by amphetamine (9.1 months). CONCLUSION: This nationwide registry study provides real-life insights into the current epidemiology of ADHD and the changing treatment landscape for patients in Sweden.

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.

Complementary and Integrative Medicine and Eating Disorders in Youth: Traditional Yoga, Virtual Reality, Light Therapy, Neurofeedback, Acupuncture, Energy Psychology Techniques, Art Therapies, and Spirituality.

Eating disorders (EDs) are a non-heterogeneous group of illnesses with significant physical and mental comorbidity and mortality associated with maladaptive coping. With the exception of lisdexamfetamine (Vyvanse) for binge eating disorder, no medications have been effective for the core symptoms of ED. ED requires a multimodal approach. Complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) can be helpful as an adjunct. The most promising CIM interventions are traditional yoga, virtual reality, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing, Music Therapy, and biofeedback/neurofeedback.

Risk of Major Malformations in Infants After First-Trimester Exposure to Stimulants: Results From the Massachusetts General Hospital National Pregnancy Registry for Psychiatric Medications.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: The prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adult females is 3% to 4%. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is highly comorbid with other psychiatric disorders such as mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders. For reproductive-aged women, the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with stimulant medications may be considered during pregnancy or breastfeeding, although historically, data are lacking to inform these decisions. The aim of this investigation was to determine the risk of major malformations in infants after first-trimester prescription stimulant exposure in a small but rigorously characterized sample. METHODS/PROCEDURES: The Massachusetts General Hospital National Pregnancy Registry for Psychiatric Medications systematically ascertains information from pregnant females including demographic information, medical and psychiatric history, use of prescription medications, and other information relevant to fetal outcomes. Participants provide verbal informed consent and are interviewed twice during gestation and again at approximately 3 months postpartum. The primary outcome of interest is the presence of a major malformation identified within 6 months after birth. Redacted cases of major malformations are reviewed by a dysmorphologist blinded to medication exposure. FINDINGS/RESULTS: A total of N = 1988 women were eligible for this analysis, including the following exposures: n = 173 to mixed amphetamine salts; n = 40 to lisdexamfetamine; n = 45 to methylphenidate; n = 3 to dexmethylphenidate; and n = 1755 controls. The odds ratio of a major malformation among infants after first-trimester exposure to any stimulant was 0.39 (95% confidence interval, 0.09-1.61) compared with controls. There were no major malformations observed in infants exposed to lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate, or dexmethylphenidate. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: Although preliminary, this analysis from an ongoing pregnancy registry provides reassurance that these stimulants do not appear to have major teratogenic effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01246765 .