Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background and objective SHP465 mixed amphetamine salts extended release is a once-daily, single-entity, mixed amphetamine salts capsule product for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. The objective of this study was to evaluate amphetamine pharmacokinetics following SHP465 mixed amphetamine salts under three administration conditions. Methods Healthy adults ( n  = 16) enrolled in an open-label, randomized, three-period crossover study with three single-dose 50-mg SHP465 mixed amphetamine salts treatments (fasting ≥ 10 h before administration [reference]; high-fat meal consumption 30 min before administration; sprinkling capsule contents on applesauce) separated by ≥ 7-day washouts. Blood samples for evaluating d - and l -amphetamine pharmacokinetics were collected pre-dose and up to 60 h post-dose. Assessments included maximum plasma concentration, time to maximum plasma concentration, and area under the plasma concentration–time curve from 0 to infinity. Exponentiated least-squares mean ratios with 90% confidence intervals for test treatments relative to the reference treatment were calculated, with the absence of an effect indicated by the 90% confidence intervals falling within the 80–125% range. Results Least-squares mean (90% confidence interval) ratios for maximum plasma concentration and area under the plasma concentration–time curve from 0 to infinity indicated neither consuming a high-fat meal ( d -amphetamine: 85.33 [80.44, 90.50] and 91.11 [86.69, 95.75], respectively; l -amphetamine: 85.22 [80.18, 90.59] and 88.74 [83.89, 93.87]) nor sprinkling the capsule contents on applesauce ( d -amphetamine: 95.76 [90.28, 101.57] and 95.77 [91.13, 100.65]; l -amphetamine: 96.90 [91.16, 103.00] and 94.78 [89.60, 100.26]) altered amphetamine exposure. Consuming a high-fat meal prolonged median time to maximum plasma concentration for d - and l -amphetamine by 5.0 and 4.5 h, respectively, relative to reference treatment. Conclusions These findings demonstrate SHP465 mixed amphetamine salts capsules can be swallowed whole with or without food or the capsule contents can be sprinkled on applesauce.

Guanfacine extended release (GXR) and atomoxetine (ATX) are nonstimulant treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). As nonstimulant treatments are often used after stimulants in ADHD, GXR was assessed relative to prior stimulant treatment in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), in which ATX was included as a reference arm, and in the open-label phase of a randomized-withdrawal study (RWS). Participants were 6-17 years old with ADHD Rating Scale version IV (ADHD-RS-IV) scores ≥32 and Clinical Global Impressions - Severity scores ≥4. RCT participants received dose-optimized GXR (1-7 mg/day), ATX (10-100 mg/day), or placebo for 10-13 weeks. RWS participants received dose-optimized GXR (1-7 mg/day) for 13 weeks. Participants' last stimulant medication prior to enrolment, and reasons for stopping this medication, were collected at baseline. Change from baseline ADHD-RS-IV score and the proportion of responders were assessed by prior stimulant exposure. Of 163 RCT and 296 RWS participants who had previously received stimulant treatment, 142 and 224, respectively, had received methylphenidate (MPH); due to the low number of participants and the heterogeneity of non-MPH treatments, we only report data for prior MPH treatment. The most frequent reasons for stopping MPH were lack of effectiveness or side effects. Placebo-adjusted ADHD-RS-IV changes from baseline were significant in participants receiving GXR (prior MPH, -9.8, P<0.001, effect size [ES] 0.85; stimulant-naïve, -7.6, P<0.001, ES 0.65). In ATX-treated participants, significant placebo-adjusted differences were seen in stimulant-naïve (-5.0, P=0.022, ES 0.43) but not prior MPH-treated (-1.8, P>0.05, ES 0.15) participants. More participants met responder criteria with GXR versus placebo, regardless of prior treatment. GXR response was unaffected by prior stimulant treatment; ATX produced improvement only in stimulant-naïve participants relative to placebo. These findings may be relevant to clinical decision-making regarding sequencing of ADHD treatments.

We investigated the frequency and neurocognitive correlates of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and traits of this disorder (ADHD/Traits) after childhood stroke and orthopedic diagnosis in medical controls. Twenty-nine children with focal stroke lesions and individually matched children with clubfoot or scoliosis were studied with standardized psychiatric, intellectual, academic, adaptive, executive, and motivation function assessments. Lifetime ADHD/Traits were significantly more common in stroke participants with no prestroke ADHD than in orthopedic controls (16/28 vs. 7/29; Fisher's Exact p < .02). Lifetime ADHD/Traits in the orthopedic controls occurred exclusively in males with clubfoot (7/13; 54%). Participants with current ADHD/Traits functioned significantly worse (p < .005) than participants without current ADHD/Traits on all outcome measures. Within the stroke group, current ADHD/Traits was associated with significantly lower verbal IQ and arithmetic achievement (p < .04), more nonperseverative errors (p < .005), and lower motivation (p < .004). A principal components analysis of selected outcome variables significantly associated with current ADHD/Traits revealed “impaired neurocognition” and “inattention-apathy” factors. The latter factor was a more consistent predictor of current ADHD/Traits in regression analyses. These findings suggest that inattention and apathy are core features of ADHD/Traits after childhood stroke. This association may provide clues towards the understanding of mechanisms underlying the syndrome. (JINS, 2003, 9, 815–829.)

Background SPD489-404 was the first 2-year safety study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. In accordance with advice from the European Medicines Agency, assessment of cognitive function was a predefined safety outcome in SPD489-404. Objective The objective of this study was to assess cognitive function over 2 years in study SPD489-404, using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). Methods Participants aged 6–17 years received dose-optimised open-label lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (30, 50 or 70 mg/day) for 104 weeks. Cognition was assessed using four CANTAB tasks; Delayed Matching to Sample (DMS), Spatial Working Memory (SWM), Stop Signal Task (SST) and Reaction Time (RTI). Key and additional variables were pre-specified for each CANTAB task; groupwise mean percentage changes in key variables from baseline of > 5% were considered potentially clinically significant. Results All 314 enrolled participants received lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and were included in the safety population, and 191 (60.8%) completed the study. No potentially clinically significant deteriorations from baseline were observed in any key CANTAB variable over the 2 years of the study. Based on predefined thresholds, potentially clinically significant improvements from baseline were observed at 6 months (DMS median reaction time, mean per cent change, − 6.6%; SWM total between-search errors, − 22.8%; SST stop signal reaction time, –18.9%), and at the last on-treatment assessment (DMS median reaction time, − 6.5%; SWM total between-search errors, − 32.6%; SST stop signal reaction time, − 25.7%). Conclusions Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment for 2 years was not associated with deterioration of cognitive function in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Although improvements in some cognitive measures were observed, lack of a control group makes interpretation of the findings difficult. Further studies of the impact of stimulants on cognition are required. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01328756.

Objectives: In a previous pivotal study of children and adolescents (aged 6–17 years) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dose-optimized SHP465 mixed amphetamine salts (MAS) extended-release (12.5–25 mg once daily) was superior to placebo in reducing ADHD symptoms. This study evaluated the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of 6.25 mg SHP465 MAS once daily (one-half the lowest approved dose for adolescents and adults) versus placebo in children aged 6–12 years with ADHD. Methods: Children (aged 6–12 years) with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth edition—defined ADHD; baseline ADHD-Rating Scale, Fifth Edition, Child, Home Version total scores (ADHD-RS-5-HV-TS) ≥28; and baseline Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scores ≥4 were eligible. Participants received 6.25 mg SHP465 MAS once daily or placebo for 4 weeks. The primary (ADHD-RS-5-HV-TS change from baseline at week 4) and key secondary (Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement [CGI-I] score at week 4) efficacy end points were assessed using linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures. Safety and tolerability assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and vital sign changes. Results: Of 89 randomized participants, 83 completed the study (placebo, n = 41; SHP465 MAS, n = 42). At week 4, the least squares mean (95% confidence interval) treatment differences (SHP465 MAS-placebo) were not statistically significant for ADHD-RS-5-HV-TS change (−1.9 [−6.8 to 3.1], p = 0.451; effect size [ES] = 0.17) or CGI-I score (−0.1 [−0.5 to 0.3], nominal p = 0.597; ES = 0.12). The percentage of participants reporting TEAEs was 16.3% with placebo and 24.4% with SHP465 MAS. The most frequently reported TEAEs (placebo; SHP465 MAS) were headache (7.0%; 4.4%) and decreased appetite (4.7%; 2.2%). Minimal increases in blood pressure were observed with SHP465 MAS at the final on-treatment assessment. Conclusions: SHP465 MAS 6.25 mg once daily (one-half the lowest dose approved for adolescents and adults) was well tolerated in children aged 6–12 years but was not superior to placebo in reducing ADHD symptoms, suggesting that this dose of SHP465 MAS was subtherapeutic in this age group. The Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03325881.

Several recent phase 3 clinical trials of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications have used the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P). Here, we assess WFIRS-P response in individual patients in two pivotal trials of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and guanfacine extended release (GXR). We also analysed pooled WFIRS-P data from seven phase 3 studies of ADHD medications to shed light on factors associated with baseline functional impairment. The proportion of patients with a change in WFIRS-P score that exceeded the minimal important difference (MID) criteria for response was greater for LDX than placebo in the Family, Learning and School, and Risky Activities domains, and was greater for GXR than placebo in the Social Activities, Learning and School, and Family domains. Responders had significantly worse baseline scores in all WFIRS-P domains (all p < 0.001) than non-responders. In the pooled analyses, baseline WFIRS-P scores in all domains were significantly worse in participants with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) than in those without ODD. Having combined type or hyperactive-impulsive type ADHD, being enrolled into a study in Europe, being male and being younger also had modest negative effects on baseline WFIRS-P scores. The present analysis of WFIRS-P response shows that previously reported group-level improvements in WFIRS-P functional impairment score translated into clinically relevant improvements in many individual participants. Functional impairment is a diverse and subjective construct that is influenced by multiple factors. Optimal management of individuals with ADHD should involve monitoring improvements in functioning and quality of life, as well as symptomatic improvement.

Data are reported from SPD503-318, a phase 3, open-label, safety study of guanfacine extended release (GXR) in European children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Participants received dose-optimized GXR (1–7 mg/day) for up to 2 years. Of 215 enrolled participants, 214 were included in the safety population and 133 completed the study. Participants’ mean age was 11.7 years and 73.8% were male. Overall, 177 participants (82.7%) experienced a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). TEAEs reported in at least 10% of participants were somnolence (36.0%), headache (28.5%), fatigue (20.1%), and nasopharyngitis (11.7%). Serious TEAEs were reported in 4.7% of participants and TEAEs leading to discontinuation were reported in 3.3% of participants. There were no deaths. Mean z-scores for BMI were stable throughout the study. The incidence of sedative TEAEs (somnolence, sedation, and hypersomnia) peaked during week 3 and decreased thereafter. Small changes from baseline to the final assessment in mean supine pulse [− 5.5 bpm (standard deviation, 12.98)] and blood pressure [systolic, 0.6 mmHg (9.32); diastolic, 0.2 mmHg (9.17)] were reported. ADHD symptoms initially decreased and remained significantly lower than baseline at study endpoint. At the final assessment, the mean change in ADHD-RS-IV total score from baseline was − 19.8 (standard error of mean, 0.84; nominal p < 0.0001). In conclusion, GXR was well tolerated and more than 60% of participants completed the 2-year study.

Objectives: In two studies of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), SHP465 mixed amphetamine salts (MAS) extended-release significantly reduced ADHD-Rating Scale, 4th Edition total score (ADHD-RS-IV-TS) versus placebo (PBO). This report describes post hoc analyses of SHP465 MAS treatment response and remission rates from those studies. Methods: Adults with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision–defined ADHD were randomized to SHP465 MAS (12.5–75 mg) or PBO in a 7-week dose-optimization study and to SHP465 MAS (25, 50, or 75 mg) or PBO in a 6-week fixed-dose study. Response was examined using three definitions (definition 1: ≥30% ADHD-RS-IV-TS reduction + Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement [CGI-I] rating of 1 or 2; definition 2: ≥50% ADHD-RS-IV-TS reduction + CGI-I rating of 1 or 2; definition 3: ADHD-RS-IV-TS ≤18). Remission was defined as ADHD-RS-IV-TS ≤12. The Kaplan–Meier analyses assessed time to response or remission. Results: The intent-to-treat populations included 136 SHP465 MAS and 132 PBO participants in the dose-optimization study and 302 SHP465 MAS and 103 PBO participants in the fixed-dose study. Percentages of participants meeting response criteria (SHP465 MAS vs. PBO) at the final treatment week in the dose-optimization and fixed-dose studies, respectively, were 66.0% versus 31.6% and 72.7% versus 28.3% (definition 1); 47.9% versus 27.6% and 60.6% versus 16.7% (definition 2); and 54.3% versus 30.3% and 52.6% versus 18.3% (definition 3). The remission criterion (SHP465 MAS vs. PBO) at the final treatment week was met by 37.2% versus 19.7% of participants in the dose-optimization study and 39.7% versus 10.0% of participants in the fixed-dose study. Times to response and remission favored SHP465 MAS over PBO in both studies (all nominal log-rank p < 0.0001). Conclusion: These post hoc analyses indicate that SHP465 MAS was associated with greater response and remission rates than PBO in adults with ADHD, with times to response and remission also nominally favoring SHP465 MAS.

Objectives: Describe the safety and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and provide data on clinical effects for efficacy-related endpoints and pharmacokinetics in preschool-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This phase 2, multicenter, open-label, dose-optimization study (ClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT02402166) was conducted at seven U.S. sites between April 15, 2015, and June 30, 2016. Children (4–5 years of age) meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria for ADHD and having ADHD Rating Scale-IV Preschool version (ADHD-RS-IV-PS) total scores ≥28 (boys) or ≥24 (girls) were eligible. Open-label LDX (8-week duration) was initiated at 5 mg and titrated to 30 mg until achieving an optimal dose. Assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital sign changes, ADHD-RS-IV-PS total score changes, and pharmacokinetic evaluations. Results: Among 24 participants, the most frequently reported TEAE was decreased appetite (8/24; 33%). At week 8/early termination, mean (standard deviation) systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse changes from baseline were −1.1 (7.31) and 1.5 (6.93) mmHg and −0.8 (12.75) bpm, respectively. The mean (95% confidence interval) change from baseline ADHD-RS-IV-PS total score at the final on-treatment assessment was −26.1 (−32.2 to −20.0). Pharmacokinetic parameters of d-amphetamine, a major active metabolite of LDX, were characterized: d-amphetamine exposure increased with LDX dose; mean t max and t 1/2, respectively, ranged from 4.00 to 4.23 hours and 7.18 to 8.46 hours. Conclusions: In preschool-aged children with ADHD, LDX was generally well tolerated and reduced ADHD symptoms, consistent with observations in children 6–17 years of age. Based on these findings, a starting LDX dose as low as 5 mg in phase 3 studies in preschool-aged children is supported.