ArticleExpert opinion on pharmacotherapy2014
Evaluation of a head-to-head study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and atomoxetine: evaluation of Dittmann RW, Cardo E, Nagy P, et al. Efficacy and safety of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and atomoxetine in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a head-to-head, randomised, double-blind, Phase IIIb study. CNS Drugs 2013;27:1081-1092. doi: 10.1007/s40263-013-0104-8 ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01106430.
Article in Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Effectiveness of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate in Children and Adolescents with ADHD in Japan: An Interim Analysis of Post-Marketing Surveillance.Advances in therapy · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Here, we evaluate a report of a head-to-head study of the prodrug stimulant lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and the non-stimulant atomoxetine hydrochloride (ATX) in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). An inadequate response to previous methylphenidate (MPH) treatment was a notable inclusion criterion. The primary efficacy outcome of a more rapid clinical response to LDX than to ATX was predictable from the known properties of the two drugs. However, secondary efficacy outcomes indicated that LDX was significantly more effective than ATX in relieving investigator-rated symptoms of ADHD, with an effect size of 0.56. Safety and tolerability profiles were consistent with the known properties of LDX and ATX. Despite some issues with the study design, the conclusion that LDX is more effective than ATX over the short term appears robust. In addition, the magnitude of improvement with both treatments indicated that previous MPH treatment is not a factor affecting the potential for patients to benefit from LDX or ATX. The results may help to inform clinical practice in Europe, where LDX is approved for treating children and adolescents with ADHD and a previous inadequate response to MPH, and in other regions where generic MPH formulations are typically the first-line therapeutic option.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.