-
Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford,... Mar 2009Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often persists into adulthood. Stimulant drugs, including methylphenidate, have showed efficacy in trials for ADHD in... (Review)
Review
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often persists into adulthood. Stimulant drugs, including methylphenidate, have showed efficacy in trials for ADHD in adults. Adult psychiatrists are likely to encounter increasing numbers of adult patients who may benefit from methylphenidate. A systematic review of the literature was made to examine the evidence on the safety of methylphenidate, when used therapeutically in adults. Twenty-six placebo-controlled trials were found, in which 811 adults received methylphenidate for ADHD and other conditions. In the short term, methylphenidate was well tolerated and no serious side effects were observed. There is little information on the long-term safety of methylphenidate in adults, although the number of serious adverse effects reported to regulatory authorities has, so far, been low. Methylphenidate is associated with a modest rise in blood pressure and heart rate. Surveys of stimulant use in US universities show that misuse of prescribed medication, for recreation or to enhance study, is fairly common although the level of harm that arises from this practice is unclear.
Topics: Adult; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Methylphenidate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 18515459
DOI: 10.1177/0269881108089809 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Nov 2015Is methylphenidate beneficial or harmful for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents? (Review)
Review
Methylphenidate for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: Cochrane systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomised clinical trials.
STUDY QUESTION
Is methylphenidate beneficial or harmful for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents?
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched up to February 2015 for parallel and crossover randomised clinical trials comparing methylphenidate with placebo or no intervention in children and adolescents with ADHD. Meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses (TSA) were conducted. Quality was assessed using GRADE. Teachers, parents, and observers rated ADHD symptoms and general behaviour.
STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS
The analyses included 38 parallel group trials (n=5111, median treatment duration 49 days) and 147 crossover trials (n=7134, 14 days). The average age across all studies was 9.7 years. The analysis suggested a beneficial effect of methylphenidate on teacher rated symptoms in 19 parallel group trials (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.77, n=1698), corresponding to a mean difference of -9.6 points on the ADHD rating scale. There was no evidence that methylphenidate was associated with an increase in serious adverse events (risk ratio 0.98, nine trials, n=1532; TSA adjusted intervention effect RR 0.91). Methylphenidate was associated with an increased risk of non-serious adverse events (1.29, 21 trials, n=3132; TSA adjusted RR 1.29). Teacher rated general behaviour seemed to improve with methylphenidate (SMD -0.87, five trials, n=668) A change of 7 points on the child health questionnaire (CHQ) has been deemed a minimal clinically relevant difference. The change reported in a meta-analysis of three trials corresponds to a mean difference of 8.0 points on the CHQ (range 0-100 points), which suggests that methylphenidate may improve parent reported quality of life (SMD 0.61, three trials, n=514). 96.8% of trials were considered high risk of bias trials according to the Cochrane guidelines. All outcomes were assessed very low quality according to GRADE.
WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS
The results suggest that among children and adolescents with a diagnosis of ADHD, methylphenidate may improve teacher reported symptoms of ADHD and general behaviour and parent reported quality of life. However, given the risk of bias in the included studies, and the very low quality of outcomes, the magnitude of the effects is uncertain. Methylphenidate is associated with an increased risk of non-serious but not serious adverse events.
FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING
Region Zealand Research Foundation and Copenhagen Trial Unit. Competing interests are given in the full paper on bmj.com. Full data are available in the version of this review published in The Cochrane Library.
Topics: Adolescent; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Child; Cross-Over Studies; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Methylphenidate; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26608309
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h5203 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Sep 2021Globally, depression impacts nearly 300 million people, and roughly half do not achieve remission with standard first-line therapies. For such individuals, augmentation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Globally, depression impacts nearly 300 million people, and roughly half do not achieve remission with standard first-line therapies. For such individuals, augmentation strategies are often helpful at reducing the severity of depression. While there are many potential adjunctive medication choices, psychostimulants are among the more controversial options.
OBJECTIVES
The present review sought to clarify the comparative efficacy and safety of different stimulant-like medications to treat depression.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) using psychostimulant medications to treat adults with depression. Outcomes were pooled using rate ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes (e.g., response, adverse events) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes (e.g., change in depression scores).
RESULTS
We identified 37 eligible studies (ranging from 1958 to 2016). We assessed nine psychostimulants: methylphenidate (n=14), dextroamphetamine (n=9), modafinil (n=6), lisdexamphetamine (n=3), methylamphetamine (n=3), pemoline (n=2), atomoxetine (n=1), desipramine (n=1), and imipramine (n=1). Overall, psychostimulants demonstrated efficacy for depression, reduced fatigue and sleepiness, and appeared well-tolerated. However, there was inconsistent evidence across particular psychostimulants. For example, the only psychostimulant which demonstrated efficacy for depression-in terms of both symptom severity and response rates-was methylphenidate.
CONCLUSIONS
While our review suggests that some psychostimulants-particularly methylphenidate-appear well-tolerated and demonstrate some efficacy for depression, as well as fatigue and sleepiness, the strength of evidence in our estimates was low to very low for most agents given the small sample sizes, few RCTs, and imprecision in most estimates. A lack of consistent evidence precludes a definitive hierarchy of treatments and points to a need for additional, high-quality RCTs.
Topics: Adult; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Depression; Fatigue; Humans; Methylphenidate; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 34144366
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.05.119 -
Child: Care, Health and Development Jan 2024The efficacy of structured physical exercise (SPE) has been examined in empirical studies to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This review aimed (i)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The efficacy of structured physical exercise (SPE) has been examined in empirical studies to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This review aimed (i) to systematically review and quantify the effects of SPE on ADHD symptomology and executive function (primary outcomes) and on physical health, physical fitness and mental health issues (secondary outcomes) in children/adolescents with ADHD; (ii) to evaluate the study quality and explore moderation of the effects of SPE; and (iii) to summarize the design of SPE interventions.
METHODS
An extensive literature search in the databases of PubMed, Web of Science and EBSCOhost was conducted to identify eligible intervention studies for meta-analysis. A descriptive account of the features of the studies is provided, including assessment of risk/quality (ROB-2/ROBINS-I). Standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with random effects models to compare post-intervention effects.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies were included in the review. The majority of the studies examined the effects of SPE lasting for 3-12 weeks. Assessment of bias/quality indicated half of the included studies as high quality. The meta-analysis (pooled n = 627) revealed that SPE had a positive effect on primary and secondary outcomes, that is, inattention (SMD = -1.79), executive function (SMD = 2.19), physical fitness (SMD = 1.39) and mental health issues (SMD = -0.89). Subgroup analysis showed that long-term practice of SPE, featured/tailored SPE, non-Chinese participants, taking methylphenidate and study with low quality had larger effects.
CONCLUSIONS
There is emerging evidence that SPE is a promising option to enhance symptom management and physical/mental health in children/adolescents with ADHD.
Topics: Child; Adolescent; Humans; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Methylphenidate; Exercise; Exercise Therapy
PubMed: 37433667
DOI: 10.1111/cch.13150 -
Current Medical Research and Opinion Aug 2014Systematically review and synthesize the clinical evidence of treatments for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by indirectly comparing established... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Systematically review and synthesize the clinical evidence of treatments for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by indirectly comparing established treatments in the UK with a drug recently approved in Europe (lisdexamfetamine [LDX]).
POPULATION
children and adolescents.
SETTING
Europe. Comparators: methylphenidate (MPH), atomoxetine (ATX), and dexamphetamine (DEX). Electronic databases and relevant conference proceedings were searched for randomized, controlled clinical trials evaluating efficacy and safety of at least one of the comparators and LDX. Quality assessments for each included trial were performed using criteria recommended by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Network meta-analysis methods for dichotomous outcomes were employed to evaluate treatment efficacy.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Response, as defined by either a reduction from baseline of at least 25% in the ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] total score or, separately, as assessed on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement [CGI-I] scale, and safety (all-cause withdrawals and withdrawal due to adverse events).
RESULTS
The systematic review found 32 trials for the meta-analysis, including data on LDX, ATX, and different formulations of MPH. No trials for DEX meeting the inclusion criteria were found. Sufficient data were identified for each outcome: ADHD-RS, 16 trials; CGI-I, 20 trials; all-cause withdrawals, 28 trials; and withdrawals due to adverse events, 27 trials. The relative probability of treatment response for CGI-I (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for ATX versus LDX was 0.65 (0.53-0.78); for long-acting MPH versus LDX, 0.82 (0.69-0.97); for intermediate release MPH versus LDX, 0.51 (0.40-0.65); and for short-acting MPH versus LDX, 0.62 (0.51-0.76). The relative probabilities of ADHD-RS treatment response also favored LDX.
CONCLUSIONS
For the treatment of ADHD, the synthesis of efficacy data showed statistically significant better probabilities of response with LDX than for formulations of MPH or ATX. The analysis of safety data proved inconclusive due to low event rates. These results may be limited by the studies included, which only investigated the short-term efficacy of medications in patients without comorbid disorders.
Topics: Adolescent; Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors; Atomoxetine Hydrochloride; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Child; Dextroamphetamine; Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors; Europe; Humans; Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate; Methylphenidate; Models, Statistical; Propylamines; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24627974
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2014.904772 -
Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Ke Za Zhi =... May 2011To assess and compare the effectiveness and safety of methylphenidate immediate-release tablets (IR-MPH), methylphenidate controlled release tablets (OROS-MPH) and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess and compare the effectiveness and safety of methylphenidate immediate-release tablets (IR-MPH), methylphenidate controlled release tablets (OROS-MPH) and atomoxetine (AHC) for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Chinese children.
METHODS
Randomized or clinical controlled trials on the effectiveness and safety of IR-MPH, OROS-MPH and AHC for ADHD were searched in electronic databases of CNKI, VIP, CBMDISC online, PubMed, Embase and MEDLINE. Two reviewers independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the included literatures.
RESULTS
Eight trials were finally included. IR-MPH, OROS-MPH and AHC were effective for ADHD. OROS-MPH was superior to IR-MPH in the improvement of peer relationship, CGI-I score, mother satisfaction and psychosomatic problems. There were no significant differences in the effectiveness between the AHC and IR-MPH groups. The adverse events related to the therapy with IR-MPH, OROS-MPH or AHC were mild and the incidence rates of adverse events were not significantly different among the three groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The effectiveness of OROS-MPH for the treatment of ADHD is probably superior to IR-MPH, and the effectiveness between AHC and IR-MPH is similar. The three drugs demonstrate the safety and well tolerance.
Topics: Atomoxetine Hydrochloride; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Delayed-Action Preparations; Humans; Methylphenidate; Propylamines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tablets
PubMed: 21575338
DOI: No ID Found -
Brain Sciences Jul 2023Apathy, a frequent neuropsychiatric symptom in aging neurocognitive disorders, has been associated with cognitive decline and functional disability. Therefore, timely... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Apathy, a frequent neuropsychiatric symptom in aging neurocognitive disorders, has been associated with cognitive decline and functional disability. Therefore, timely provision of pharmacological interventions for apathy is greatly needed.
DESIGN
A systematical literature review of existing studies was conducted up to 30 May 2023 in several databases (PubMed, PsychInfo, Cochrane, Google Scholar, etc.) that included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses assessing pharmacological treatments for apathy in aging neurocognitive disorders. The quality of the studies was appraised.
RESULTS
In patients with Alzheimer's Disease (AD), donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, methylphenidate, and gingko biloba were proven efficacious for apathy, while rivastigmine, cognitive enhancer IRL752 and piribedil were found to be beneficial in patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) and agomelatine in patients with Frontotemporal Dementia (FD). The extensive proportion of RCTs in which apathy was used as a secondary outcome measure, along with the considerable methodological heterogeneity, did not allow the evaluation of group effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Pharmacological interventions for apathy in aging neurocognitive disorders are complex and under-investigated. The continuation of systematic research efforts and the provision of individualized treatment for patients suffering from these disorders is vital.
PubMed: 37508993
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13071061 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Jul 2024Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is associated with executive function deficits that are improved with medications. However, meta-analyses of stimulant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is associated with executive function deficits that are improved with medications. However, meta-analyses of stimulant effects on cognition have mostly tested single-dose effects, and there is no meta-analysis of non-stimulant effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis tested the clinically more relevant longer-term effects of Methylphenidate (20 studies; minimum 1 week) and Atomoxetine (8 studies; minimum 3 weeks) on reaction time, attention, inhibition, and working memory, searching papers on PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, and PsycINFO. The meta-analysis of 18 studies in 1667 subjects showed that methylphenidate was superior to placebo in all cognitive domains with small to medium effect sizes (Hedges g of 0.34-0.59). The meta-analysis of atomoxetine included 7 studies in 829 subjects and showed no effects in working memory, but superior effects in the other domains with medium to large effect sizes (Hedge's g of 0.36-0.64). Meta-regression analysis showed no drug differences on cognitive effects. The meta-analyses show for the first time that chronic Methylphenidate and Atomoxetine have comparable effects of improving executive functions in people with ADHD.
Topics: Humans; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Executive Function; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Methylphenidate; Atomoxetine Hydrochloride; Memory, Short-Term
PubMed: 38718988
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105703 -
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care Sep 2023Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a very common symptom in patients with cancer, and one of the five areas of highest priority in cancer research. There is currently no... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a very common symptom in patients with cancer, and one of the five areas of highest priority in cancer research. There is currently no consensus on pharmacologic interventions for treating CRF. The aim of this systematic review is to provide more clarity on which pharmacologic interventions may be most promising, for future clinical trials. The network meta-analysis provides the ability to compare multiple agents when no direct head-to-head trials of all agents have been performed.
METHODS
Medline (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up until 5 March 2021. Studies were included if they reported on a pharmacologic intervention for CRF. Standardised mean differences and corresponding 95% CIs were computed using a random-effects maximum-likelihood model.
RESULTS
This review reports on 18 studies and 2604 patients, the most comprehensive review of pharmacologic interventions for CRF at the time of this publication. Methylphenidate, modafinil and paroxetine were superior to placebo. Methylphenidate and modafinil were equivalent to one another. Paroxetine was superior to modafinil.
CONCLUSION
Paroxetine should be further studied in future trials. As well, more safety data are needed on pharmacologic interventions.
Topics: Humans; Modafinil; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Paroxetine; Network Meta-Analysis; Methylphenidate; Fatigue; Neoplasms
PubMed: 34593386
DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003244 -
Minerva Anestesiologica Oct 2023Shivering is a common side effect after general anesthesia. Risk factors are hypothermia, young age and postoperative pain. Severe complications of shivering are rare... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Shivering is a common side effect after general anesthesia. Risk factors are hypothermia, young age and postoperative pain. Severe complications of shivering are rare but can occur due to increased oxygen consumption. Previous systematic reviews are outdated and have summarized the evidence on the topic using only pairwise comparisons. The objective of this manuscript was a quantitative synthesis of evidence on pharmacological interventions to treat postanesthetic shivering.
EVIDENCE ACQUSITION
Systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis using the R package netmeta. Endpoints were the risk ratio (RR) of persistent shivering at one, five and 10 minutes after treatment with saline/placebo as the comparator. Data were retrieved from Medline, Embase, Central and Web of Science up to January 2022. Eligibility criteria were: randomized, controlled, and blinded trials comparing pharmacological interventions to treat shivering after general anesthesia. Studies on shivering during or after any type of regional anesthesia were excluded as well as sedated patients after cardiac surgery.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Thirty-two trials were eligible for data synthesis, including 28 pharmacological interventions. The largest network included 1431 patients. The network geometry was two-centered with most comparisons linked to saline/placebo or pethidine. The best interventions were after one minute: doxapram 2 mg/kg, tramadol 2 mg/kg and nefopam 10 mg, after 5 minutes: tramadol 2 mg/kg, nefopam 10 mg and clonidine 150 µg and after 10 minutes: nefopam 10 mg, methylphenidate 20 mg and tramadol 1 mg/kg, all reaching statistical significance. Pethidine 25 mg and clonidine 75 µg also performed well and with statistical significance in all networks.
CONCLUSIONS
Nefopam, tramadol, pethidine and clonidine are the most effective treatments to stop postanesthetic shivering. The efficacy of doxapram is uncertain since different doses showed contradictory effects and the evidence for methylphenidate is based on a single comparison in only one network. Furthermore, both lack data on side effects. Further studies are needed to clarify the efficacy of dexmedetomidine to treat postanesthetic shivering.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Shivering; Nefopam; Clonidine; Tramadol; Network Meta-Analysis; Doxapram; Meperidine; Methylphenidate
PubMed: 37458681
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.23.17410-4