Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39671144›Full record

Trial reportCNS drugs2025

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial on the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Modified-Release Methylphenidate (MPH-MR) in Chinese Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

Yi Zheng, Huaqing Liu, Xiuxia Wang, Haibo Li, Michaela Ruhmann, Anke Mayer, Oliver Dangel, Richard Ammer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in CNS drugs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Yi ZhengBeijing Anding Hospital of Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Huaqing LiuBeijing Huilongguan Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xiuxia WangThe second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Haibo LiThe first Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China.
Michaela RuhmannMEDICE Arzneimittel Pütter GmbH & Co. KG, Iserlohn, Germany.
Anke MayerMEDICE Arzneimittel Pütter GmbH & Co. KG, Iserlohn, Germany.
Oliver DangelMEDICE Arzneimittel Pütter GmbH & Co. KG, Iserlohn, Germany.
Richard AmmerMEDICE Arzneimittel Pütter GmbH & Co. KG, Iserlohn, Germany. r.ammer@medice.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe efficacy and safety of modified-release methylphenidate (MPH-MR) in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been shown in both pediatric and adult Caucasian patients. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of MPH-MR in Chinese children and adolescents with ADHD.

methodsMICCA was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 19 sites in China from September 2018 to July 2021. The study enrolled children and adolescents aged 6 to < 18 years with a primary diagnosis of ADHD according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). Patients were randomized 1:1 to once-daily MPH-MR (10-60 mg) or placebo. The study included an up-titration phase of up to 5 weeks and a dose maintenance phase of 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score from baseline to the end of the maintenance phase (EoM). Secondary endpoints included the change from baseline to EoM in Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P) total score, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scores at EoM. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and vital signs.

resultsA total of 221 patients were randomized (MPH-MR: n = 110; placebo: n = 111). The change in the ADHD-RS-IV total score from baseline to EoM was significantly greater for MPH-MR versus placebo, with a least squares (LS) mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) treatment difference of - 4.6 (- 6.92, - 2.30) (p < 0.001). The mean (95% CI) treatment difference for the WFIRS-P total score change from baseline to EoM also significantly favored MPH-MR over placebo (- 6.46 [- 10.57, - 2.34]; p = 0.002). The CGI-I score at EoM was significantly lower in the MPH-MR group compared to the placebo group (2.2 vs 2.5; p = 0.002). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported for 74 (67.3%) patients in the MPH-MR group and 55 (49.1%) patients in the placebo group. Most TEAEs were mild to moderate in severity. The most common TEAEs for MPH-MR were decreased appetite, nausea and upper respiratory tract infection. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation/study withdrawal were reported in 4 (3.6%) patients in the MPH-MR group and 1 (0.9%) patient in the placebo group. No clinically relevant changes in vital signs were observed during the study.

conclusionsModified-release methylphenidate was superior to placebo in improving ADHD symptoms and functioning in Chinese pediatric patients with ADHD. Modified-release methylphenidate had a good safety and tolerability profile. Trial Registration http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/ Identifier: CTR20180056 (registered on 21 May 2018).

Indexed as

Attention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityCentral Nervous System StimulantsMethylphenidateAdolescentChildChinaDelayed-Action PreparationsDouble-Blind MethodEast Asian PeopleFemaleHumansMaleTreatment OutcomeCentral Nervous System StimulantsDelayed-Action PreparationsMethylphenidate

Identifiers

PMID39671144
PMCPMC11850499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.