Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25038977›Full record

Trial reportCNS drugs2014

Treatment response and remission in a double-blind, randomized, head-to-head study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Ralf W Dittmann, Esther Cardo, Peter Nagy, Colleen S Anderson, Ben Adeyi, Beatriz Caballero, Paul Hodgkins, Richard Civil, David R Coghill

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in CNS drugs, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01106430 (A Phase 3b, Double-blind, Randomised, Active-controlled, Parallel Group Study to Assess the Time to Response of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate to Atomoxetine Hydrochloride in Children and Adolescents Aged 6-17 Years With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01106430 phase3completednot on this map

A Phase 3b, Double-blind, Randomised, Active-controlled, Parallel Group Study to Assess the Time to Response of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate to Atomoxetine Hydrochloride in Children and Adolescents Aged 6-17 Years With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Who Have Had an Inadequate Response to Methylphenidate Therapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorShireRan2010 to 2012Enrolled267ConditionsAttention-Deficit/Hyperactivity DisorderArmsLisdexamfetamine Dimesylate, Atomoxetine Hydrochloride
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. A critical appraisal of atomoxetine in the management of ADHD.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2016
    Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ralf W DittmannPaediatric Psychopharmacology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Central Institute of Mental Health, University of Heidelberg, PO Box 12 21 20, 68072, Mannheim, Germany, ralf.dittmann@zi-mannheim.de.
Esther Cardo
Peter Nagy
Colleen S Anderson
Ben Adeyi
Beatriz Caballero
Paul Hodgkins
Richard Civil
David R Coghill

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesA secondary objective of this head-to-head study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and atomoxetine (ATX) was to assess treatment response rates in children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and an inadequate response to methylphenidate (MPH). The primary efficacy and safety outcomes of the study, SPD489-317 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01106430), have been published previously.

methodsIn this 9-week, double-blind, active-controlled study, patients aged 6-17 years with a previous inadequate response to MPH were randomized (1:1) to dose-optimized LDX (30, 50 or 70 mg/day) or ATX (patients <70 kg: 0.5-1.2 mg/kg/day, not to exceed 1.4 mg/kg/day; patients ≥70 kg: 40, 80 or 100 mg/day). Treatment response was a secondary efficacy outcome and was predefined as a reduction from baseline in ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score of at least 25, 30 or 50 %. Sustained response was predefined as a reduction from baseline in ADHD-RS-IV total score (≥25, ≥30 or ≥50 %) or a Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-Improvement (CGI-I) score of 1 or 2 throughout weeks 4-9. CGI-Severity (CGI-S) scores were also assessed, as an indicator of remission.

resultsA total of 267 patients were enrolled (LDX, n = 133; ATX, n = 134) and 200 completed the study (LDX, n = 99; ATX, n = 101). By week 9, significantly (p < 0.01) greater proportions of patients receiving LDX than ATX met the response criteria of a reduction from baseline in ADHD-RS-IV total score of at least 25 % (90.5 vs. 76.7 %), 30 % (88.1 vs. 73.7 %) or 50 % (73.0 vs. 50.4 %). Sustained response rates were also significantly (p < 0.05) higher among LDX-treated patients (ADHD-RS-IV ≥25, 66.1 %; ADHD-RS-IV ≥30, 61.4 %; ADHD-RS-IV ≥50, 41.7 %; CGI-I, 52.0 %) than among ATX-treated individuals (ADHD-RS-IV ≥25, 51.1 %; ADHD-RS-IV ≥30, 47.4 %; ADHD-RS-IV ≥50, 23.7 %; CGI-I, 39.3 %). Finally, by week 9, 60.7 % of patients receiving LDX and 46.3 % of those receiving ATX had a CGI-S score of 1 (normal, not at all ill) or 2 (borderline mentally ill), and greater proportions of patients in the LDX group than the ATX group experienced a reduction from baseline of at least one CGI-S category.

conclusionsBoth LDX and ATX treatment were associated with high levels of treatment response in children and adolescents with ADHD and a previous inadequate response to MPH. However, within the parameters of the study, LDX was associated with significantly higher treatment response rates than ATX across all response criteria examined. In addition, higher proportions of patients in the LDX group than the ATX group had a CGI-S score of 1 or 2 by week 9, indicating remission of symptoms. Both treatments were generally well tolerated, with safety profiles consistent with those observed in previous studies.

Indexed as

AdolescentAtomoxetine HydrochlorideAttention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityChildDextroamphetamineDouble-Blind MethodDrug Administration ScheduleHumansLisdexamfetamine DimesylatePropylaminesRemission InductionSeverity of Illness IndexTreatment OutcomeAtomoxetine HydrochlorideDextroamphetamineLisdexamfetamine DimesylatePropylamines

Identifiers

PMID25038977
PMCPMC4221603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.