Suppr超能文献

随机、双盲、安慰剂对照急性对照试验:右苯丙胺和哌甲酯缓释剂治疗青少年注意缺陷多动障碍。

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Acute Comparator Trials of Lisdexamfetamine and Extended-Release Methylphenidate in Adolescents With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave Levy Place, Box 1230, New York, NY, 10029-6574, USA.

Vadaskert Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Hospital and Outpatient Clinic, Budapest, Hungary.

出版信息

CNS Drugs. 2017 Nov;31(11):999-1014. doi: 10.1007/s40263-017-0468-2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Psychostimulants are considered first-line pharmacotherapy for youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but questions remain regarding the comparative efficacy of amphetamine- and methylphenidate-based agents.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to describe two acute randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, head-to-head studies of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) in adolescents with ADHD.

METHODS

Adolescents (13-17 years) diagnosed with ADHD according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria were enrolled in an 8-week flexible-dose study [LDX 30-70 mg/day (n = 186 randomized); OROS-MPH 18-72 mg/day (n = 185 randomized); placebo (n = 93 randomized)] or a 6-week forced-dose study [LDX 70 mg/day (n = 219 randomized); OROS-MPH 72 mg/day (n = 220 randomized); placebo (n = 110 randomized)]. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score changes from baseline (primary endpoint) at week 8 (flexible-dose study) or week 6 (forced-dose study) were assessed with mixed-effects models for repeated measures. Secondary endpoints included improvement on the dichotomized Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I; key secondary endpoint) and changes from baseline on the ADHD-RS-IV subscales. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and vital signs.

RESULTS

Least squares (LS) mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) ADHD-RS-IV total score changes from baseline to end of treatment were -17.0 ± 1.03 with placebo, -25.4 ± 0.74 with LDX, and -22.1 ± 0.73 with OROS-MPH in the forced-dose study and -13.4 ± 1.19 with placebo, -25.6 ± 0.82 with LDX, and -23.5 ± 0.80 with OROS-MPH in the flexible-dose study. LS mean ± SEM treatment difference for the change from baseline significantly favored LDX over OROS-MPH in the forced-dose [-3.4 ± 1.04, p = 0.0013, effect size (ES) -0.33] but not the flexible-dose (-2.1 ± 1.15, p = 0.0717, ES -0.20) study. The percentage of improved participants on the dichotomized CGI-I at end of treatment was significantly greater with LDX than with OROS-MPH in the forced-dose study (81.4 vs. 71.3%, p = 0.0188) but not the flexible-dose study (LDX 83.1%, OROS-MPH 81.0%, p = 0.6165). The LS mean ± SEM treatment differences for change from baseline on the ADHD-RS-IV hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattentiveness subscales nominally favored LDX in the forced-dose study (hyperactivity/impulsivity subscale -1.3 ± 0.49, nominal p = 0.0081, ES -0.27; inattentiveness subscale -2.0 ± 0.63, nominal p = 0.0013, ES -0.33), but there were no significant differences between active treatments in the flexible-dose study. In both studies, LDX and OROS-MPH were superior to placebo for all efficacy-related endpoints (all nominal p < 0.0001; ES range -0.43 to -1.16). The overall frequency of TEAEs for LDX and OROS-MPH, respectively, were 66.5 and 58.9% in the forced-dose study and 83.2 and 82.1% in the flexible-dose study. TEAEs occurring in ≥ 5% of participants that were also reported at two or more times the rate of placebo were decreased appetite, decreased weight, insomnia, initial insomnia, dry mouth, and nasopharyngitis (LDX and OROS-MPH), irritability and dizziness (LDX only), and increased heart rate (OROS-MPH only) in the forced-dose study and decreased appetite, decreased weight, insomnia, and dizziness (LDX and OROS-MPH) and dry mouth and upper abdominal pain (LDX only) in the flexible-dose study. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) increases from baseline in vital signs (systolic and diastolic blood pressure, pulse) were observed in the forced-dose study [LDX 1.6 ± 9.65 and 3.3 ± 8.11 mmHg, 6.7 ± 12.78 beats per minute (bpm); OROS-MPH 2.6 ± 10.15 and 3.3 ± 9.13 mmHg, 7.6 ± 12.47 bpm] and the flexible-dose study (LDX 2.4 ± 9.46 and 2.8 ± 8.41 mmHg, 4.7 ± 11.82 bpm; OROS-MPH 0.4 ± 9.90 and 2.2 ± 8.64 mmHg, 6.0 ± 10.52 bpm) at the last on-treatment assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

LDX was superior to OROS-MPH in adolescents with ADHD in the forced-dose but not the flexible-dose study. Safety and tolerability for both medications was consistent with previous studies. These findings underscore the robust acute efficacy of both psychostimulant classes in treating adolescents with ADHD. CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV REGISTRY NUMBERS

NCT01552915 and NCT01552902.

摘要

背景

在患有注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)的青少年中,精神兴奋剂被认为是一线药物治疗选择,但关于基于安非他命和哌醋甲酯的药物的相对疗效仍存在疑问。

目的

我们的目的是描述两种针对青少年 ADHD 的 lisdexamfetamine dimesylate(LDX)和盐酸哌甲酯控释口服溶液(OROS-MPH)的急性随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、头对头研究。

方法

根据《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第四版修订版(DSM-IV-TR)标准诊断为 ADHD 的青少年(13-17 岁)被纳入一项为期 8 周的灵活剂量研究[LDX 30-70mg/天(n=186 名随机分组);OROS-MPH 18-72mg/天(n=185 名随机分组);安慰剂(n=93 名随机分组)]或一项为期 6 周的强制剂量研究[LDX 70mg/天(n=219 名随机分组);OROS-MPH 72mg/天(n=220 名随机分组);安慰剂(n=110 名随机分组)]。在第 8 周(灵活剂量研究)或第 6 周(强制剂量研究)时,采用重复测量混合效应模型评估注意力缺陷多动障碍评定量表 IV(ADHD-RS-IV)总分从基线的变化(主要终点)。次要终点包括离散的临床总体印象-改善量表(CGI-I;关键次要终点)和 ADHD-RS-IV 子量表从基线的变化。安全性评估包括治疗出现的不良事件(TEAEs)和生命体征。

结果

LS 均数±标准误(SEM)在强制剂量研究中,安慰剂、LDX 和 OROS-MPH 的 ADHD-RS-IV 总分从基线到治疗结束时的变化分别为-17.0±1.03、-25.4±0.74 和-22.1±0.73,在灵活剂量研究中分别为-13.4±1.19、-25.6±0.82 和-23.5±0.80。LS 均数±SEM 治疗差异表明,在强制剂量研究中,LDX 优于 OROS-MPH[-3.4±1.04,p=0.0013,效应量(ES)-0.33],但在灵活剂量研究中差异无统计学意义[-2.1±1.15,p=0.0717,ES-0.20]。在强制剂量研究中,结束时使用离散 CGI-I 改善的参与者百分比,LDX 明显高于 OROS-MPH(81.4% vs. 71.3%,p=0.0188),但在灵活剂量研究中差异无统计学意义(LDX 83.1%,OROS-MPH 81.0%,p=0.6165)。在强制剂量研究中,LS 均数±SEM 治疗差异在 ADHD-RS-IV 多动/冲动和注意力不集中子量表上名义上有利于 LDX(多动/冲动子量表-1.3±0.49,名义 p=0.0081,ES-0.27;注意力不集中子量表-2.0±0.63,名义 p=0.0013,ES-0.33),但在灵活剂量研究中,两组治疗间无显著差异。在两项研究中,LDX 和 OROS-MPH 均优于安慰剂,所有疗效相关终点均有统计学意义(所有 p<0.0001;ES 范围为-0.43 至-1.16)。在强制剂量研究中,LDX 和 OROS-MPH 的 TEAEs 总频率分别为 66.5%和 58.9%,在灵活剂量研究中分别为 83.2%和 82.1%。在强制剂量研究中,发生率≥5%且报告频率为安慰剂两倍以上的 TEAEs 为食欲减退、体重减轻、失眠、初始失眠、口干和鼻咽炎(LDX 和 OROS-MPH)、易怒和头晕(仅 LDX)以及心动过速(仅 OROS-MPH),在灵活剂量研究中为食欲减退、体重减轻、失眠和头晕(LDX 和 OROS-MPH)以及口干和上腹痛(仅 LDX)。在强制剂量研究中,生命体征(收缩压和舒张压、脉搏)的平均标准差(SD)从基线增加[LDX 1.6±9.65 和 3.3±8.11mmHg,6.7±12.78bpm;OROS-MPH 2.6±10.15 和 3.3±9.13mmHg,7.6±12.47bpm],在灵活剂量研究中也观察到[LDX 2.4±9.46 和 2.8±8.41mmHg,4.7±11.82bpm;OROS-MPH 0.4±9.90 和 2.2±8.64mmHg,6.0±10.52bpm]。

结论

在青少年 ADHD 患者中,LDX 在强制剂量研究中优于 OROS-MPH,但在灵活剂量研究中无显著差异。两种药物的安全性和耐受性与之前的研究一致。这些发现强调了两种精神兴奋剂类药物在治疗青少年 ADHD 方面的急性疗效。临床试验。

NCT01552915 和 NCT01552902。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5bb/5730627/9e02f3c33b59/40263_2017_468_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验