学龄儿童精神科门诊改用利司他敏治疗注意力缺陷障碍:丹麦队列研究

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1089/cap.2023.0077
Nanna Roed Søndergaard, Karen Busk Nørøxe, Anders Helles Carlsen, Stine Helene Randing, Pernille Warrer, Per Hove Thomsen, Loa Clausen
{"title":"学龄儿童精神科门诊改用利司他敏治疗注意力缺陷障碍:丹麦队列研究","authors":"Nanna Roed Søndergaard, Karen Busk Nørøxe, Anders Helles Carlsen, Stine Helene Randing, Pernille Warrer, Per Hove Thomsen, Loa Clausen","doi":"10.1089/cap.2023.0077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: This study aimed to examine switch from first-line methylphenidate (MPH) to lisdexamfetamine (LDX) in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This is a retrospective observational study based on systematic review of patient records of all children (7–13 years) diagnosed with ADHD and referred to a Danish specialized outpatient clinic. The study included 394 children switching from MPH to LDX as either second-line or third-line treatment (atomoxetine [ATX] as second-line treatment) during the study period from April 1, 2013, to November 5, 2019. Results: One in five children switched from MPH to LDX at some point during the study period. The most frequent reasons for switching to LDX were adverse effects (AEs; 70.0% for MPH, 68.3% for ATX) and lack of efficiency (52.0% for MPH, 72.7% for ATX). Top five AEs of LDX were decreased appetite (62.4%), insomnia (28.7%), irritability/aggression (26.1%), weight decrease (21.1%), and mood swings (13.9%). MPH and LDX had similar AE profiles, yet most AEs were less frequent after switching to LDX. At the end of the study period, the majority were prescribed LDX as second-line rather than third-line treatment (86.1% in 2019). However, the likelihood of LDX as second-line treatment decreased with the number of psychiatric comorbidities, ADHD symptom severity as assessed by parents, and if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Among children observed for at least 1 year after initiation of LDX, 41.3% continued LDX treatment for a year or longer. LDX continuation was less likely if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Similarly to MPH and ATX, the most frequent reasons for LDX discontinuation were AEs (74.4%) and lack of efficiency (34.7%). Implications: The findings support LDX as an important option in the personalized treatment of children with ADHD and may support prescribers in the clinical decision-making on switching medication.","PeriodicalId":15277,"journal":{"name":"Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Switch to Lisdexamfetamine in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit Disorder at a Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic for School-Aged Children: A Danish Cohort Study\",\"authors\":\"Nanna Roed Søndergaard, Karen Busk Nørøxe, Anders Helles Carlsen, Stine Helene Randing, Pernille Warrer, Per Hove Thomsen, Loa Clausen\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/cap.2023.0077\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: This study aimed to examine switch from first-line methylphenidate (MPH) to lisdexamfetamine (LDX) in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This is a retrospective observational study based on systematic review of patient records of all children (7–13 years) diagnosed with ADHD and referred to a Danish specialized outpatient clinic. The study included 394 children switching from MPH to LDX as either second-line or third-line treatment (atomoxetine [ATX] as second-line treatment) during the study period from April 1, 2013, to November 5, 2019. Results: One in five children switched from MPH to LDX at some point during the study period. The most frequent reasons for switching to LDX were adverse effects (AEs; 70.0% for MPH, 68.3% for ATX) and lack of efficiency (52.0% for MPH, 72.7% for ATX). Top five AEs of LDX were decreased appetite (62.4%), insomnia (28.7%), irritability/aggression (26.1%), weight decrease (21.1%), and mood swings (13.9%). MPH and LDX had similar AE profiles, yet most AEs were less frequent after switching to LDX. At the end of the study period, the majority were prescribed LDX as second-line rather than third-line treatment (86.1% in 2019). However, the likelihood of LDX as second-line treatment decreased with the number of psychiatric comorbidities, ADHD symptom severity as assessed by parents, and if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Among children observed for at least 1 year after initiation of LDX, 41.3% continued LDX treatment for a year or longer. LDX continuation was less likely if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Similarly to MPH and ATX, the most frequent reasons for LDX discontinuation were AEs (74.4%) and lack of efficiency (34.7%). Implications: The findings support LDX as an important option in the personalized treatment of children with ADHD and may support prescribers in the clinical decision-making on switching medication.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/cap.2023.0077\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/cap.2023.0077","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

研究目的本研究旨在考察学龄期注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)儿童从一线药物哌醋甲酯(MPH)转用利司他敏(LDX)的情况。研究方法这是一项回顾性观察研究,基于对所有被诊断为多动症并转诊至丹麦一家专科门诊的儿童(7-13 岁)的病历进行的系统性回顾。研究纳入了2013年4月1日至2019年11月5日期间从MPH转为LDX作为二线或三线治疗(阿托西汀[ATX]作为二线治疗)的394名儿童。研究结果每五名儿童中就有一人在研究期间的某个阶段从MPH转为LDX。转用LDX的最常见原因是不良反应(AEs;MPH为70.0%,ATX为68.3%)和缺乏效率(MPH为52.0%,ATX为72.7%)。LDX的前五种AE为食欲下降(62.4%)、失眠(28.7%)、易怒/攻击性(26.1%)、体重下降(21.1%)和情绪波动(13.9%)。MPH和LDX的AE情况相似,但改用LDX后,大多数AE的发生率降低。在研究期结束时,大多数人将 LDX 作为二线治疗而非三线治疗处方(2019 年为 86.1%)。不过,LDX作为二线治疗的可能性随着精神疾病合并症的数量、家长评估的多动症症状严重程度以及AE是否是停用MPH的原因而降低。在开始接受 LDX 治疗至少 1 年的儿童中,41.3% 的儿童继续接受 LDX 治疗 1 年或更长时间。如果AE是停用MPH的原因,则继续LDX治疗的可能性较小。与 MPH 和 ATX 类似,LDX 最常见的停药原因是 AE(74.4%)和缺乏效率(34.7%)。影响:研究结果支持将 LDX 作为多动症儿童个性化治疗的一个重要选择,并可帮助处方者在临床决策中做出换药决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Switch to Lisdexamfetamine in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit Disorder at a Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic for School-Aged Children: A Danish Cohort Study
Objectives: This study aimed to examine switch from first-line methylphenidate (MPH) to lisdexamfetamine (LDX) in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This is a retrospective observational study based on systematic review of patient records of all children (7–13 years) diagnosed with ADHD and referred to a Danish specialized outpatient clinic. The study included 394 children switching from MPH to LDX as either second-line or third-line treatment (atomoxetine [ATX] as second-line treatment) during the study period from April 1, 2013, to November 5, 2019. Results: One in five children switched from MPH to LDX at some point during the study period. The most frequent reasons for switching to LDX were adverse effects (AEs; 70.0% for MPH, 68.3% for ATX) and lack of efficiency (52.0% for MPH, 72.7% for ATX). Top five AEs of LDX were decreased appetite (62.4%), insomnia (28.7%), irritability/aggression (26.1%), weight decrease (21.1%), and mood swings (13.9%). MPH and LDX had similar AE profiles, yet most AEs were less frequent after switching to LDX. At the end of the study period, the majority were prescribed LDX as second-line rather than third-line treatment (86.1% in 2019). However, the likelihood of LDX as second-line treatment decreased with the number of psychiatric comorbidities, ADHD symptom severity as assessed by parents, and if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Among children observed for at least 1 year after initiation of LDX, 41.3% continued LDX treatment for a year or longer. LDX continuation was less likely if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Similarly to MPH and ATX, the most frequent reasons for LDX discontinuation were AEs (74.4%) and lack of efficiency (34.7%). Implications: The findings support LDX as an important option in the personalized treatment of children with ADHD and may support prescribers in the clinical decision-making on switching medication.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.30%
发文量
61
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology (JCAP) is the premier peer-reviewed journal covering the clinical aspects of treating this patient population with psychotropic medications including side effects and interactions, standard doses, and research on new and existing medications. The Journal includes information on related areas of medical sciences such as advances in developmental pharmacokinetics, developmental neuroscience, metabolism, nutrition, molecular genetics, and more. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology coverage includes: New drugs and treatment strategies including the use of psycho-stimulants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, mood stabilizers, and atypical antipsychotics New developments in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, autism spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, eating disorders, along with other disorders Reports of common and rare Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) including: hyperprolactinemia, galactorrhea, weight gain/loss, metabolic syndrome, dyslipidemia, switching phenomena, sudden death, and the potential increase of suicide. Outcomes research.
期刊最新文献
Letter: Mirtazapine-Associated Hyperkinetic Movements in a 17-Year-Old with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Chronic Catatonia: A Case Report. From the Editor-in-Chief's Desk: Gratitude for Mentors and Colleagues. Deprescribing Antidepressants in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review of Discontinuation Approaches, Cross-Titration, and Withdrawal Symptoms. Naltrexone Treatment for Multiple Substance Use Disorders in an Adolescent Boy. Use of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Medication in Youth at Winnebago Mental Health Institute: A Clinical Pathway.
×
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