ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2024
Assessment of centanafadine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, atomoxetine hydrochloride, and viloxazine extended-release.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Efficacy and Safety of Once-Daily Atomoxetine Hydrochloride in Adults With ADHD Over an Extended Period of Time (6 Months); With a Brief Evaluation of Executive Cognition
A Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Forced Dose Titration, Safety and Efficacy Study of NRP104 in Adults With Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group Trial Evaluating the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Centanafadine Sustained-release Tablets in Adults With Attention-deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group Trial Evaluating the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Centanafadine Sustained-release Tablets in Adults With Attention-deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter, Parallel-Group Flexible-Dose Study of the Efficacy and Safety of SPN-812 in Adults With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of centanafadine versus lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and atomoxetine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: long-term safety and efficacy.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2024Trial
- Structural basis for pharmacotherapeutic action of triple reuptake inhibitors.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Treatment Preferences of Physicians Treating Adult Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in the United States and Canada: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Neurology and therapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHead-to-head trials comparing centanafadine, an investigational therapy for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with other treatment options are lacking.
objectiveTo compare safety and efficacy outcomes of centanafadine sustained-release vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine hydrochloride (atomoxetine), and viloxazine extended-release (viloxazine ER), respectively, using matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC).
methodsThis MAIC included patient-level data pooled from 2 centanafadine trials (NCT03605680 and NCT03605836) and published aggregate data from comparable trials of 3 comparators-lisdexamfetamine (NCT00334880), atomoxetine (NCT00190736), and viloxazine ER (NCT04016779)-in adult patients with ADHD. Propensity score weighting was used to match characteristics of individual patients from the centanafadine trials to aggregate baseline characteristics from the respective comparator trials. Safety outcomes were rates of adverse events for which information was available in the centanafadine and respective comparator trials. Efficacy outcome was mean change from baseline in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) score (ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] was used as proxy in the comparison with lisdexamfetamine). Anchored indirect comparisons were conducted across matched populations of the centanafadine and respective comparator trials.
resultsAfter matching, baseline characteristics in the centanafadine trials were the same as those in the respective comparator trials. Compared with lisdexamfetamine, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of lack of appetite (risk difference [RD] in percentage points: 23.42), dry mouth (19.27), insomnia (15.35), anxiety (5.21), nausea (4.90), feeling jittery (3.70), and diarrhea (3.47) (all
conclusionsIn an anchored MAIC, centanafadine showed a significantly better short-term safety profile than lisdexamfetamine, atomoxetine, and viloxazine ER; efficacy was lower than with lisdexamfetamine and comparable (ie, nondifferent) with atomoxetine and viloxazine ER. This MAIC provides important insights on the relative safety and efficacy of common treatment options to help inform treatment decisions in adults with ADHD. Safety assessment was limited to rates of adverse events reported in both trials of a given comparison. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03605680, NCT03605836, NCT00334880, NCT00190736, and NCT04016779.
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.