Evaluating ADHD medication trial representativeness: a Swedish population-based study comparing hypothetically trial-eligible and trial-ineligible individuals

IF 30.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Lancet Psychiatry Pub Date : 2025-01-06 DOI:10.1016/s2215-0366(24)00396-1
Miguel Garcia-Argibay, Zheng Chang, Isabell Brikell, Ralf Kuja-Halkola, Brian M D'Onofrio, Paul Lichtenstein, Jeffrey H Newcorn, Stephen V Faraone, Henrik Larsson, Samuele Cortese
{"title":"Evaluating ADHD medication trial representativeness: a Swedish population-based study comparing hypothetically trial-eligible and trial-ineligible individuals","authors":"Miguel Garcia-Argibay, Zheng Chang, Isabell Brikell, Ralf Kuja-Halkola, Brian M D'Onofrio, Paul Lichtenstein, Jeffrey H Newcorn, Stephen V Faraone, Henrik Larsson, Samuele Cortese","doi":"10.1016/s2215-0366(24)00396-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background</h3>Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ADHD medications often use strict eligibility criteria, potentially limiting generalisability to patients in real-world clinical settings. We aimed to identify the proportion of individuals with ADHD who would be ineligible for medication RCTs and evaluate differences in treatment patterns and clinical and functional outcomes between RCT-eligible and RCT-ineligible individuals.<h3>Methods</h3>We used multiple Swedish national registries to identify individuals with ADHD, aged at least 4 years at the age of diagnosis, initiating pharmacological treatment between Jan 1, 2007, and Dec 31, 2019, with follow-up up to Dec 31, 2020. Hypothetical RCT ineligibility was established using exclusion criteria from the international MED-ADHD dataset, including 164 RCTs of ADHD medications. Cox models evaluated differences in medication switching and discontinuation within 1 year between eligible and ineligible individuals. Quasi-Poisson models compared eligible and ineligible individuals on rates of psychiatric hospitalisations, injuries or accidents, and substance use disorder within 1 year of initiating ADHD medications. People with lived experience of ADHD were not involved in the research and writing process.<h3>Findings</h3>Of 189 699 individuals included in the study cohort (112 153 men and boys [59%] and 77 546 women and girls [41%]; mean age 21·52 years [SD 12·83; range 4–68]) initiating ADHD medication, 53% (76 477 [74%] of 103 023 adults [aged &gt;17 years], 12 658 [35%] of 35 681 adolescents [aged 13–17 years], and 10 643 [21%] of 50 995 children [aged &lt;13 years]) would have been ineligible for RCT participation. Ethnicity data were not available. Ineligible individuals had a higher likelihood of treatment switching (hazard ratio 1·14, 95% CI 1·12–1·16) and a decreased likelihood of medication discontinuation (0·96, 0·94–0·98) compared with eligible individuals. Individuals ineligible for RCTs had significantly higher rates of psychiatric hospitalisations (ncidence rate ratio 9·68, 95% CI 9·57–9·78) and specialist care visits related to substance use disorder (14·78, 14·64–14·91), depression (6·00, 5·94–6·06), and anxiety (11·63, 11·56–11·69).<h3>Interpretation</h3>Individuals ineligible for ADHD medication trials face higher risks of adverse outcomes. This study provides the first empirical evidence for the limited generalisability of ADHD RCTs to real-world clinical populations, by applying eligibility criteria extracted from a comprehensive dataset of RCTs to a large real-world cohort. Triangulating evidence from RCTs and real-world studies is crucial to inform rigorous evidence-based treatment guidelines.<h3>Funding</h3>National Institute of Healthcare and Research, European Union's Horizon 2020, and Swedish Research Council.","PeriodicalId":48784,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Psychiatry","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":30.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(24)00396-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ADHD medications often use strict eligibility criteria, potentially limiting generalisability to patients in real-world clinical settings. We aimed to identify the proportion of individuals with ADHD who would be ineligible for medication RCTs and evaluate differences in treatment patterns and clinical and functional outcomes between RCT-eligible and RCT-ineligible individuals.

Methods

We used multiple Swedish national registries to identify individuals with ADHD, aged at least 4 years at the age of diagnosis, initiating pharmacological treatment between Jan 1, 2007, and Dec 31, 2019, with follow-up up to Dec 31, 2020. Hypothetical RCT ineligibility was established using exclusion criteria from the international MED-ADHD dataset, including 164 RCTs of ADHD medications. Cox models evaluated differences in medication switching and discontinuation within 1 year between eligible and ineligible individuals. Quasi-Poisson models compared eligible and ineligible individuals on rates of psychiatric hospitalisations, injuries or accidents, and substance use disorder within 1 year of initiating ADHD medications. People with lived experience of ADHD were not involved in the research and writing process.

Findings

Of 189 699 individuals included in the study cohort (112 153 men and boys [59%] and 77 546 women and girls [41%]; mean age 21·52 years [SD 12·83; range 4–68]) initiating ADHD medication, 53% (76 477 [74%] of 103 023 adults [aged >17 years], 12 658 [35%] of 35 681 adolescents [aged 13–17 years], and 10 643 [21%] of 50 995 children [aged <13 years]) would have been ineligible for RCT participation. Ethnicity data were not available. Ineligible individuals had a higher likelihood of treatment switching (hazard ratio 1·14, 95% CI 1·12–1·16) and a decreased likelihood of medication discontinuation (0·96, 0·94–0·98) compared with eligible individuals. Individuals ineligible for RCTs had significantly higher rates of psychiatric hospitalisations (ncidence rate ratio 9·68, 95% CI 9·57–9·78) and specialist care visits related to substance use disorder (14·78, 14·64–14·91), depression (6·00, 5·94–6·06), and anxiety (11·63, 11·56–11·69).

Interpretation

Individuals ineligible for ADHD medication trials face higher risks of adverse outcomes. This study provides the first empirical evidence for the limited generalisability of ADHD RCTs to real-world clinical populations, by applying eligibility criteria extracted from a comprehensive dataset of RCTs to a large real-world cohort. Triangulating evidence from RCTs and real-world studies is crucial to inform rigorous evidence-based treatment guidelines.

Funding

National Institute of Healthcare and Research, European Union's Horizon 2020, and Swedish Research Council.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Lancet Psychiatry
Lancet Psychiatry PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
58.30
自引率
0.90%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Lancet Psychiatry is a globally renowned and trusted resource for groundbreaking research in the field of psychiatry. We specialize in publishing original studies that contribute to transforming and shedding light on important aspects of psychiatric practice. Our comprehensive coverage extends to diverse topics including psychopharmacology, psychotherapy, and psychosocial approaches that address psychiatric disorders throughout the lifespan. We aim to channel innovative treatments and examine the biological research that forms the foundation of such advancements. Our journal also explores novel service delivery methods and promotes fresh perspectives on mental illness, emphasizing the significant contributions of social psychiatry.
期刊最新文献
Time to report estimands in randomised controlled trials Evaluating ADHD medication trial representativeness: a Swedish population-based study comparing hypothetically trial-eligible and trial-ineligible individuals Who gets counted in ADHD clinical trials? Applying the EU regulatory framework for the clinical use of psychedelics. The global epidemiology and health burden of the autism spectrum: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1