-
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews May 2021Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders worldwide, and in the majority of patients persists into... (Review)
Review
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders worldwide, and in the majority of patients persists into adulthood. However, it remains unclear how maternal ADHD could affect pregnancy and birth as well as early mother-(father)-child interaction. There are several studies investigating the effect of depressed or anxious parents on parent-child-interactions in early infancy, but data about the influence of parental ADHD is lacking although it is a common mental disorder in parents. Additionally, the prescription of stimulant and other ADHD medication for adult ADHD patients is rising due to improved diagnostic procedures and a greater awareness of this disorder in adulthood among psychiatrists and psychologists. However, this leads to increased numbers of treated ADHD women that wish to have children or experience unplanned pregnancies while taking stimulant medication. In our systematic review we aimed at analysing the current evidence for the association of maternal ADHD with pregnancy and birth outcomes, pregnancy risks and health behaviour in pregnancy, as well as the association of parental ADHD with early parent-child interaction and early child development in the first 3 years. Furthermore, we reviewed recent evidence on the risks of stimulant and non-stimulant treatment for ADHD in pregnancy and lactation.
Topics: Adult; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Child; Female; Humans; Methylphenidate; Parent-Child Relations; Parents; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy
PubMed: 33516734
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.01.002 -
Annals of the American Thoracic Society May 2021Many patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) experience excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), which can negatively affect daily functioning, cognition, mood, and other... (Review)
Review
Many patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) experience excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), which can negatively affect daily functioning, cognition, mood, and other aspects of well-being. Although EDS can be reduced with primary OSA treatment, such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, a significant proportion of patients continue to experience EDS despite receiving optimized therapy for OSA. This article reviews the pathophysiology and clinical evaluation and management of EDS in patients with OSA. The mechanisms underlying EDS in CPAP-treated patients remain unclear. Experimental risk factors include chronic intermittent hypoxia and sleep fragmentation, which lead to oxidative injury and changes in neurons and brain circuit connectedness involving noradrenergic and dopaminergic neurotransmission in wake-promoting regions of the brain. In addition, neuroimaging studies have shown alterations in the brain's white matter and gray matter in patients with OSA and EDS. Clinical management of EDS begins with ruling out other potential causes of EDS and evaluating its severity. Tools to evaluate EDS include objective and self-reported assessments of sleepiness, as well as cognitive assessments. Patients who experience residual EDS despite primary OSA therapy may benefit from wake-promoting pharmacotherapy. Agents that inhibit reuptake of dopamine or of dopamine and norepinephrine (modafinil/armodafinil and solriamfetol, respectively) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing EDS and improving quality of life in patients with OSA. Additional research is needed on the effects of wake-promoting treatments on cognition in these patients and to identify individual or disorder-specific responses.
Topics: Continuous Positive Airway Pressure; Disorders of Excessive Somnolence; Humans; Modafinil; Quality of Life; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive
PubMed: 33621163
DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202006-696FR -
PloS One 2020Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 3% of adults globally. Many pharmacologic treatments options exist, yet the comparative benefits... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 3% of adults globally. Many pharmacologic treatments options exist, yet the comparative benefits and harms of individual treatments are largely unknown. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the relative effects of individual pharmacologic treatments for adults with ADHD.
METHODS
We searched English-language published and grey literature sources for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving pharmacologic treatment of ADHD in adults (December 2018). The primary outcome was clinical response; secondary outcomes were quality of life, executive function, driving behaviour, withdrawals due to adverse events, treatment discontinuation, serious adverse events, hospitalization, cardiovascular adverse events, and emergency department visits. Data were pooled via pair-wise meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed by use of Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by use of the GRADE framework.
RESULTS
Eighty-one unique trials that reported at least one outcome of interest were included, most of which were at high or unclear risk of at least one important source of bias. Notably, only 5 RCTs were deemed at overall low risk of bias. Included pharmacotherapies were methylphenidate, atomoxetine, dexamfetamine, lisdexamfetamine, guanfacine, bupropion, mixed amphetamine salts, and modafinil. As a class, ADHD pharmacotherapy improved patient- and clinician-reported clinical response compared with placebo (range: 4 to 15 RCTs per outcome); however, these findings were not conserved when the analyses were restricted to studies at low risk of bias, and the certainty of the finding is very low. There were few differences among individual medications, although atomoxetine was associated with improved patient-reported clinical response and quality of life compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of serious adverse events or treatment discontinuation between ADHD pharmacotherapies and placebo; however, the proportion of participants who withdrew due to adverse events was significantly higher among participants who received any ADHD pharmacotherapy. Few RCTs reported on the occurrence of adverse events over a long treatment duration.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, despite a class effect of improving clinical response relative to placebo, there were few differences among the individual ADHD pharmacotherapies, and most studies were at risk of at least one important source of bias. Furthermore, the certainty of the evidence was very low to low for all outcomes, and there was limited reporting of long-term adverse events. As such, the choice between ADHD pharmacotherapies may depend on individual patient considerations, and future studies should assess the long-term effects of individual pharmacotherapies on patient-important outcomes, including quality of life, in robust blinded RCTs.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO no. CRD 42015026049.
Topics: Adult; Amphetamine; Atomoxetine Hydrochloride; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Bayes Theorem; Bupropion; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Dextroamphetamine; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Guanfacine; Humans; Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate; Male; Methylphenidate; Modafinil; Network Meta-Analysis; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33085721
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240584 -
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy Apr 2023Cognitive impairment is a core feature of bipolar disorder (BD) that impedes recovery by preventing the return to optimal socio-occupational functioning and reducing... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Cognitive impairment is a core feature of bipolar disorder (BD) that impedes recovery by preventing the return to optimal socio-occupational functioning and reducing quality of life. Presently, there are no efficacious treatments for cognitive impairment in BD, but many pharmacological interventions are being considered as they have the potential to target the underlying pathophysiology of the disorder.
AREAS COVERED
This review summarizes the available evidence for pharmacological interventions for cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder. We searched PubMed, MedLine, and PsycInfo from inception to December 1 2022. Traditional treatments, such as lithium, anticonvulsants (lamotrigine), antipsychotics (aripiprazole, asenapine, cariprazine, lurasidone, and olanzapine), antidepressants (vortioxetine, fluoxetine, and tianeptine) and psychostimulants (modafinil), and emerging interventions, such as acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (galantamine and donepezil), dopamine agonists (pramipexole), erythropoietin, glucocorticoid receptor antagonists (mifepristone), immune modulators (infliximab, minocycline and doxycycline), ketamine, metabolic agents (insulin, metformin, and liraglutide), probiotic supplements, and are discussed.
EXPERT OPINION
The investigation of interventions for cognitive impairment in BD is a relatively under-researched area. In the past, methodological pitfalls in BD cognition trials have also been a critical limiting factor. Expanding on the existing literature and identifying novel pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for cognitive impairment in BD should be a priority.
Topics: Humans; Bipolar Disorder; Acetylcholinesterase; Quality of Life; Antipsychotic Agents; Anticonvulsants; Cognitive Dysfunction
PubMed: 36946229
DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2023.2194488 -
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 2022Bipolar disorder (BD) is a chronic mental illness impacting 1-2% of the population worldwide and causing high rates of functional impairment. Patients with BD spend most... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Bipolar disorder (BD) is a chronic mental illness impacting 1-2% of the population worldwide and causing high rates of functional impairment. Patients with BD spend most of their time in depressive episodes and up to one-third of patients do not respond to adequate doses of medications. Although no consensus exists for definition of treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD), failure of symptoms improvement despite an adequate trial of two therapeutic agents is a common theme of TRBD. In this paper, we review the evidence base of therapeutic interventions, challenges, and potential future directions for TRBD.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search for randomized controlled trials on PubMed for the treatment of TRBD and ongoing trials for the treatment of TRBD/bipolar depression on clinicaltrials.gov.
RESULTS
Several therapeutic agents have been investigated for TRBD. Adjunctive pramipexole and modafinil have data supporting short-term efficacy in TRBD, along with limited data for racemic intravenous ketamine. Celecoxib augmentation of escitalopram and treatment with metformin in patients with insulin resistance showed promising results. Right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy displayed statistically significant response rate and improvement, but not remission compared to pharmacotherapy. Trials for transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have failed to show a significant difference from sham treatment in TRBD.
FUTURE TRENDS
Pharmacological treatments with novel mechanisms of actions like brexpiprazole and vortioxetine are being investigated following successes in unipolar depression. Modified TMS protocols such as accelerated TMS are under investigation. Innovative approaches like psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy, interleukin-2, fecal microbiota transplantation and multipotent stromal cells are being studied.
CONCLUSION
Evidence on current treatment modalities for TRBD is limited with low efficacy. More research is needed for successful treatment of TRBD. Effective therapies and innovative approaches to treatment are being investigated and could show promise.
PubMed: 36561896
DOI: 10.2147/NDT.S273503 -
Brain Sciences Nov 2022cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving efficacy of pharmacotherapies tested for cocaine use disorder, in the context of randomized-controlled clinical trials.
OBJECTIVES
we assessed the databases of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO, without date restrictions up to August 2022, to identify relevant studies.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS
we included double-blinded randomized-controlled trials investigating pharmacotherapies for cocaine craving and/or cocaine use disorder whose outcomes included cocaine craving.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Two authors screened studies' titles and abstracts for inclusion, and both read all the included studies. We systematically gathered information on the following aspects of each study: title; author(s); year of publication; sample size; mean age; sample characteristics; study set-ting; whether participants were treatment-seeking; study design; craving measures; study interventions; drop-out rates; and other relevant outcomes.
RESULTS
Overall, we appraised 130 clinical trials, including 8137 participants. We further considered the drugs from the studies that scored equal to or greater than six points in the quality assessment. There was a correlation between craving and cocaine use outcomes (self-reports, timeline follow-back or urinary benzoylecgonine) in the vast majority of studies. In the short-term treatment, acute phenylalanine-tyrosine depletion, clonidine, fenfluramine, meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (m-CPP) and mecamylamine presented promising effects. In the long term, amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone presented promising anti-craving effects. Unfortunately, the highly tested medications were not successful in most of the trials, as follows: propranolol in the short term; amantadine, aripiprazole, bromocriptine, citicoline, ketamine, modafinil, olanzapine, topiramate in the long term. The remaining 52 medications had no positive anti-craving outcomes.
LIMITATIONS
Our review was limited by high heterogeneity of craving assessments across the studies and by a great range of pharmacotherapies. Further, the majority of the studies considered abstinence and retention in treatment as the main outcomes, whereas craving was a secondary outcome and some of the studies evaluated patients with cocaine use disorder with comorbidities such as opioid or alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity. Lastly, most of the studies also included non-pharmacological treatments, such as counseling or psychotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a direct association between craving and cocaine use, underscoring craving as an important treatment target for promoting abstinence among persons with cocaine use disorder. Clonidine, fenfluramine and m-CPP showed to be promising medications for cocaine craving in the short-term treatment, and amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone in the long-term treatment.
PubMed: 36421870
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12111546 -
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy Oct 2021To describe the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic neurostimulants after neurological injuries such as ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI),... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To describe the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic neurostimulants after neurological injuries such as ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI), critically evaluate the available literature, and make recommendations regarding which neurostimulants should be considered for use in clinical practice.
DATA SOURCES
A literature search of PubMed was performed (1953 to October 2020) to identify relevant articles. Search terms included the following: "neurostimulant, neurorehabilitation" AND "traumatic brain injury, cerebrovascular accident, or stroke." This review is limited to prospective studies and observational trials.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Relevant English-language studies conducted in humans were considered.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Cognitive and motor deficits caused by stroke and TBI account for high rates of long-term disability. Although not well-established, pharmacologic agents, broadly characterized as neurostimulants, may be prescribed after brain injury to treat these deficits. When prescribing these medications, it is imperative to be aware of the supporting evidence in order to accurately gauge the risk-benefit profile of each agent.
RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
The following presents a literature review critically evaluating clinical studies that investigate neurostimulant use after brain injury. The intent of this review is to serve as an evidence-based guide for clinicians.
CONCLUSIONS
The pharmacologic agent with the most supporting literature is amantadine used for cognitive improvement after TBI. Other neurostimulants with positive, despite more limited, evidence include methylphenidate, modafinil, levodopa, and citalopram. Caution is warranted with other neurostimulants given higher rates of adverse effects or lack of benefit observed in clinical trials.
Topics: Brain Injuries; Humans; Modafinil; Prospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Stroke
PubMed: 33435717
DOI: 10.1177/1060028020983607 -
International Journal of Stroke :... Oct 2023
Topics: Humans; Stroke; Fatigue; Quality of Life
PubMed: 37898830
DOI: 10.1177/17474930231207695