33 research outputs found
Post hoc analyses of the impact of previous medication on the efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in a randomized, controlled trial
No full textDavid R Coghill,1 Tobias Banaschewski,2 Michel Lecendreux,3 César Soutullo,4 Alessandro Zuddas,5 Ben Adeyi,6 Shaw Sorooshian7 1Division of Neuroscience, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK; 2Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany; 3Paediatric Sleep Centre and National Reference Centre for Orphan Diseases: Narcolepsy, Idiopathic Hypersomnia and Kleine-Levin Syndrome, Robert-Debré University Hospital, Paris, France; 4Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Unit, Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, University of Navarra Clinic, Pamplona, Spain; 5Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Neuroscience and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy; 6Shire, Wayne, PA, USA; 7Shire, Eysins, Switzerland Background: Following the approval of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) in several European countries for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents with an inadequate response to methylphenidate (MPH) treatment, the aim of the present analysis was to establish the response to LDX in subgroups of patients with different ADHD medication histories. Methods: This was a post hoc subgroup analysis of data from a 7-week, European, double-blind, dose-optimized, Phase III study. Patients aged 6–17 years were randomized 1:1:1 to LDX, placebo, or osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH). OROS-MPH was included as a reference arm rather than as a direct comparator. Efficacy was assessed in patients categorized according to their ADHD medication history using the ADHD Rating Scale IV and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scores. Results: The difference between active drug and placebo in least-squares mean change from baseline to endpoint in ADHD Rating Scale IV total score (95% confidence interval) was similar between the overall study population (n=317; LDX, -18.6 [-21.5, -15.7]; OROS- MPH, -13.0 [-15.9, -10.2]) and treatment-naïve individuals (n=147; LDX, -15.1 [-19.4, -10.9]; OROS-MPH, -12.7 [-16.8, -8.5]) or patients previously treated with any ADHD medication (n=170; LDX, -21.5 [-25.5, -17.6]; OROS-MPH, -14.2 [-18.1, -10.3]). In addition, similar proportions of patients receiving active treatment were categorized as improved based on CGI-I score (CGI-I of 1 or 2) in the overall study population and among treatment-naïve individuals or patients previously treated with any ADHD medication. Conclusion: In these post hoc analyses, the response to LDX treatment, and to the reference treatment OROS-MPH, was similar to that observed for the overall study population in subgroups of patients categorized according to whether or not they had previously received ADHD medication. Keywords: attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, methylphenidate, central nervous system stimulant
Treatment response and remission in a double-blind, randomized, head-to-head study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder
No full textA secondary objective of this head-to-head study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and atomoxetine (ATX) was to assess treatment response rates in children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and an inadequate response to methylphenidate (MPH). The primary efficacy and safety outcomes of the study, SPD489-317 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01106430), have been published previously
Health-related quality of life and functional outcomes from a randomized-withdrawal study of long-term lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
No full textBackground The stimulant prodrug lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is an effective and generally well tolerated treatment for the symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Positive impacts of LDX on health-related quality of life and functional impairment have previously been demonstrated in a 7-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study in children and adolescents in Europe. Maintenance of these broad benefits, as well as symptomatic control, is a key goal of long-term management of ADHD. Objective Secondary objectives of this multinational study in children and adolescents with ADHD were to assess the long-term maintenance of effectiveness of LDX in improving health-related quality of life and reducing functional impairment, as gauged using the Child Health and Illness Profile-Child Edition: Parent Report Form (CHIP-CE: PRF) and the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P), respectively. Methods Patients aged 6–17 years with diagnosed ADHD and a baseline ADHD Rating Scale IV total score of at least 28 were enrolled from the previous European study and from US sites. Patients who completed an open-label LDX treatment period of at least 26 weeks were randomized (1:1) to continue on their optimized dose of LDX or to switch to placebo for a 6-week, double-blind, withdrawal period. Parents completed CHIP-CE: PRF and WFIRS-P questionnaires at weeks 0, 8 and 26 of the open-label period and at weeks 0 and 6 of the randomized-withdrawal period, or at early termination. The endpoint of each period was defined as the last visit with valid data. Effect sizes were the difference (LDX minus placebo) in least-squares (LS)-mean change from baseline to endpoint divided by root-mean-square error. P values were nominal and not adjusted for multiple comparisons. Results The open-label and randomized full analysis sets comprised 262 and 153 (LDX n = 76; placebo n = 77
Health-related quality of life and functional outcomes from a randomized, controlled study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
No full textOptimal management of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) aims not only to ameliorate patients' symptoms, but also to improve health-related quality of life (HRQL) and functioning. A pivotal, 7-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study in children and adolescents in ten European countries demonstrated that the stimulant prodrug lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for symptoms of ADHD
Double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-period, crossover trial to examine the pharmacokinetics of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in healthy older adults
No full textJames Ermer,1 Mary B Haffey,1,† Cynthia Richards,1 Kenneth Lasseter,2 Ben Adeyi,1 Mary Corcoran,1 Beverly Stanton,1 Patrick Martin1 1Shire Development LLC, Wayne, PA, 2Clinical Pharmacology of Miami, Inc., Miami, FL, USA†This author is now deceasedBackground: Pharmacokinetic and safety data on stimulants in older adults are limited. The objective of this study was to characterize the pharmacokinetics of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), a d-amphetamine prodrug, in older adults.Methods: In this two-period crossover trial, healthy adults (n = 47) stratified by age (55–64, 65–74, and ≥ 75 years) and gender received randomized, double-blind, single doses of LDX 50 mg or placebo. Baseline creatinine clearance, d-amphetamine and intact LDX pharmacokinetics, and safety were assessed.Results: Mean (±standard deviation) baseline creatinine clearance in participants aged 55–64, 65–74, and ≥ 75 years was 102.5 ± 26.1, 105.3 ± 23.1, and 94.9 ± 27.3 mL per minute, respectively. In the groups aged 55–64, 65–74, and ≥ 75 years, the mean maximum plasma d-amphetamine concentration in men was 44.2 ± 11.1, 47.7 ± 7.0, and 53.4 ± 19.4 ng/mL, respectively; area under the concentration time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0–inf) was 915.0 ± 164.9, 1123.0 ± 227.0, and 1325.0 ± 464.4 ng • hour/mL; median time to reach peak plasma concentration was 4.5, 3.5, and 5.5 hours; in women, mean maximum plasma d-amphetamine concentration was 51.0 ± 6.7, 50.2 ± 6.8, and 64.3 ± 12.1 ng/mL, AUC0–inf was 1034.5 ± 154.6, 988.4 ± 80.5, and 1347.8 ± 198.9 ng • hour/mL, and median time to reach peak plasma concentration was 3.5, 4.1, and 5.5 hours, respectively. d-Amphetamine clearance was unrelated to baseline creatinine clearance. Five participants aged 55–64 years reported treatment-emergent adverse events (versus one each aged 65–74 and ≥ 75 years), and as did six women (versus one man). No trends in blood pressure or pulse changes were seen with LDX according to age. In participants aged 55–64, 65–74, and ≥ 75 years, the mean change from time-matched baseline pulse ranged from -5.0 to 14.7, -4.3 to 9.5, and -3.0 to 14.7 beats per minute; for systolic blood pressure, from -3.9 to 18.5 mmHg, -2.1 to 14.5 mmHg, and -5.9 to 16.0 mmHg; for diastolic blood pressure from -2.5 to 8.3 mmHg, from -0.8 to 9.4 mmHg, and -0.6 to 9.5 mmHg. Vital sign changes were similar between men and women.Conclusion: Clearance of d-amphetamine decreased with age and was unrelated to creatinine clearance. No trends in pulse or blood pressure changes with LDX were seen according to age. The safety profile of LDX was consistent with prior observations in younger adult study participants.Keywords: lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, older adults, pharmacokinetics, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, d-amphetamin
Integration of Health Systems and Priority Health, Nutrition, and Population Interventions : A Framework for Analysis and Policy Choices
No full textA longstanding debate on health system
organization relates to the benefits of integrating programs
that emphasize specific interventions into mainstream health
systems to increase access and improve health outcomes. This
debate has long been characterized by polarization of views
and ideologies, with protagonists for and against
integration arguing relative merits of each approach.
Recently, the debate has been rekindled due to substantial
rises in externally funded programs for priority health,
nutrition, and population (HNP) interventions and an
increase in international efforts aimed at health system
strengthening. In this paper the author present a conceptual
framework and an analytical approach to define and assess
the nature and extent of integration in relation to critical
health system functions. The framework can also be used to
systematically compare and contrast programs in different
settings to generate meaningful evidence to inform policy.
In this framework, the author defines integration as the
extent, pattern, and rate of adoption and eventual
assimilation of priority health interventions into each of
the critical functions of a health system, which include,
inter alia: (i) governance, (ii) financing, (iii) planning,
(iv) service delivery, (v) monitoring and evaluation, and
(vi) demand generation. The framework and the analytical
approach are intended for evaluative and formative studies
of policies, systems, and programs
Pharmacokinetic Variability of Long-Acting Stimulants in the Treatment of Children and Adults with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
No full textEfficacy and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: sex and age effects and effect size across the day
No full textAbstract Background Efficacy and safety profiles by sex and age (6-9 vs 10-12 years) and magnitude and duration of effect by effect size overall and across the day of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) vs placebo were assessed. Methods This study enrolled children (6-12 years) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in an open-label dose optimization with LDX (30-70 mg/d) followed by a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover phase. Post hoc analyses assessed interaction between sex or age and treatment and assessed effect sizes for Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) and Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP) scales and ADHD Rating Scale IV measures. No corrections for multiple testing were applied on time points and subgroup statistical comparisons. Results 129 participants enrolled; 117 randomized. Both sexes showed improvement on all assessments at postdose time points; females showed less impairment than males for SKAMP and PERMP scores in treatment and placebo groups at nearly all times. Both age groups improved on all assessments at postdose time points. Children 10-12 years had less impairment in SKAMP ratings than those 6-9 years. Treatment-by-sex interactions were observed at time points for SKAMP-D, SKAMP total, and PERMP scores; no consistent pattern across scales or time points was observed. LDX demonstrated significant improvement vs placebo, by effect size, on SKAMP-D from 1.5-13 hours postdose. The overall LS mean (SE) SKAMP-D effect size was -1.73 (0.18). In the dose-optimization phase, common (≥2%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in males were upper abdominal pain, headache, affect lability, initial insomnia, and insomnia; in females were nausea and decreased weight. During the crossover phase for those taking LDX, higher incidence (≥2% greater) was observed in males for upper abdominal pain and insomnia and in females for nausea and headache. Overall incidence of TEAEs in age groups was similar. Conclusion Apparent differences in impairment level between sex and age groups were noted. However, these results support the efficacy of LDX from 1.5 hours to 13 hours postdose in boys and girls with medium to large effect sizes across the day with some variability in TEAE incidence by sex. Trial Registration Number ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00500149.</p
Efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder previously treated with methylphenidate: a post hoc analysis
No full textAbstract Background Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioral psychiatric disorder that afflicts children, with a reported prevalence of 2.4% to 19.8% worldwide. Stimulants (methylphenidate [MPH] and amphetamine) are considered first-line ADHD pharmacotherapy. MPH is a catecholamine reuptake inhibitor, whereas amphetamines have additional presynaptic activity. Although MPH and amphetamine can effectively manage ADHD symptoms in most pediatric patients, many still fail to respond optimally to either. After administration, the prodrug stimulant lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is converted to l-lysine and therapeutically active d-amphetamine in the blood. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of LDX in children with ADHD who remained symptomatic (ie, nonremitters; ADHD Rating Scale IV [ADHD-RS-IV] total score > 18) on MPH therapy prior to enrollment in a 4-week placebo-controlled LDX trial, compared with the overall population. Methods In this post hoc analysis of data from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, forced-dose titration study, we evaluated the clinical efficacy of LDX in children aged 6-12 years with and without prior MPH treatment at screening. ADHD symptoms were assessed using the ADHD-RS-IV scale, Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised short form (CPRS-R), and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale, at screening, baseline, and endpoint. ADHD-RS-IV total and CPRS-R ADHD Index scores were summarized as mean (SD). Clinical response for the subgroup analysis was defined as a ≥ 30% reduction from baseline in ADHD-RS-IV score and a CGI-I score of 1 or 2. Dunnett test was used to compare change from baseline in all groups. Number needed to treat to achieve one clinical responder or one symptomatic remitter was calculated as the reciprocal of the difference in their proportions on active treatment and placebo at endpoint. Results Of 290 randomized participants enrolled, 28 received MPH therapy at screening, of which 26 remained symptomatic (ADHD-RS-IV > 18). ADHD-RS-IV total scores, changes from baseline, clinical responsiveness, and rates of symptomatic remission in this subgroup were comparable to the overall population. The safety and tolerability profiles for LDX were comparable to other stimulants currently available. Conclusion In this analysis, children with significant clinical ADHD symptoms despite MPH treatment improved during treatment with LDX and experienced similar improvements in their symptoms as the overall study population. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00556296</p
Research needs for an improved primary care response to chronic non-communicable diseases in Africa.
No full textWith non-communicable diseases (NCDs) projected to become leading causes of morbidity and mortality in developing countries, research is needed to improve the primary care response, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. This region has a particularly high double burden of communicable diseases and NCDs and the least resources for an effective response. There is a lack of good quality epidemiological data from diverse settings on chronic NCD burden in sub-Saharan Africa, and the approach to primary care of people with chronic NCDs is currently often unstructured. The main primary care research needs are therefore firstly, epidemiological research to document the burden of chronic NCDs, and secondly, health system research to deliver the structured, programmatic, public health approach that has been proposed for the primary care of people with chronic NCDs. Documentation of the burden and trends of chronic NCDs and associated risk factors in different settings and different population groups is needed to enable health system planning for an improved primary care response. Key research issues in implementing the programmatic framework for an improved primary care response are how to (i) integrate screening and prevention within health delivery; (ii) validate the use of standard diagnostic protocols for NCD case-finding among patients presenting to the local health facilities; (iii) improve the procurement and provision of standardised treatment and (iv) develop and implement a data collection system for standardised monitoring and evaluation of patient outcomes. Important research considerations include the following: selection of research sites and the particular NCDs targeted; research methodology; local research capacity; research collaborations; ethical issues; translating research findings into policy and practice and funding. Meeting the research needs for an improved health system response is crucial to deliver effective, affordable and equitable care for the millions of people with chronic NCDs in developing countries in Africa
