23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents - assessment of adverse events in non-randomised studies

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder in childhood. The psychostimulant methylphenidate is the most frequently used medication to treat it. Several studies have investigated the benefits of methylphenidate, showing possible favourable effects on ADHD symptoms, but the true magnitude of the effect is unknown. Concerning adverse events associated with the treatment, our systematic review of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrated no increase in serious adverse events, but a high proportion of participants suffered a range of non‐serious adverse events. To assess the adverse events associated with methylphenidate treatment for children and adolescents with ADHD in non‐randomised studies. In January 2016, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, 12 other databases and two trials registers. We also checked reference lists and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies to identify additional studies. We included non‐randomised study designs. These comprised comparative and non‐comparative cohort studies, patient‐control studies, patient reports/series and cross‐sectional studies of methylphenidate administered at any dosage or formulation. We also included methylphenidate groups from RCTs assessing methylphenidate versus other interventions for ADHD as well as data from follow‐up periods in RCTs. Participants had to have an ADHD diagnosis (from the 3rd to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or the 9th or 10th edition of the International Classification of Diseases , with or without comorbid diagnoses. We required that at least 75% of participants had a normal intellectual capacity (intelligence quotient of more than 70 points) and were aged below 20 years. We excluded studies that used another ADHD drug as a co‐intervention. Fourteen review authors selected studies independently. Two review authors assessed risk of bias independently using the ROBINS‐I tool for assessing r isk o f b ias i n n on‐randomised s tudies of i nterventions. All review authors extracted data. We defined serious adverse events according to the International Committee of Harmonization as any lethal, life‐threatening or life‐changing event. We considered all other adverse events to be non‐serious adverse events and conducted meta‐analyses of data from comparative studies. We calculated meta‐analytic estimates of prevalence from non‐comparative cohorts studies and synthesised data from patient reports/series qualitatively. We investigated heterogeneity by conducting subgroup analyses, and we also conducted sensitivity analyses. We included a total of 260 studies: 7 comparative cohort studies, 6 of which compared 968 patients who were exposed to methylphenidate to 166 controls, and 1 which assessed 1224 patients that were exposed or not exposed to methylphenidate during different time periods; 4 patient‐control studies (53,192 exposed to methylphenidate and 19,906 controls); 177 non‐comparative cohort studies (2,207,751 participants); 2 cross‐sectional studies (96 participants) and 70 patient reports/series (206 participants). Participants' ages ranged from 3 years to 20 years. Risk of bias in the included comparative studies ranged from moderate to critical, with most studies showing critical risk of bias. We evaluated all non‐comparative studies at critical risk of bias. The GRADE quality rating of the evidence was very low. Primary outcomes In the comparative studies, methylphenidate increased the risk ratio (RR) of serious adverse events (RR 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 1.57; 2 studies, 72,005 participants); any psychotic disorder (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.57; 1 study, 71,771 participants); and arrhythmia (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.48 to 1.74; 1 study, 1224 participants) compared to no intervention. In the non‐comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate experiencing any serious adverse event was 1.20% (95% CI 0.70% to 2.00%; 50 studies, 162,422 participants). Withdrawal from methylphenidate due to any serious adverse events occurred in 1.20% (95% CI 0.60% to 2.30%; 7 studies, 1173 participants) and adverse events of unknown severity led to withdrawal in 7.30% of participants (95% CI 5.30% to 10.0%; 22 studies, 3708 participants). Secondary outcomes In the comparative studies, methylphenidate, compared to no intervention, increased the RR of insomnia and sleep problems (RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.24 to 5.34; 3 studies, 425 participants) and decreased appetite (RR 15.06, 95% CI 2.12 to 106.83; 1 study, 335 participants). With non‐comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate with any non‐serious adverse events was 51.2% (95% CI 41.2% to 61.1%; 49 studies, 13,978 participants). These included difficulty falling asleep, 17.9% (95% CI 14.7% to 21.6%; 82 studies, 11,507 participants); headache, 14.4% (95% CI 11.3% to 18.3%; 90 studies, 13,469 participants); abdominal pain, 10.7% (95% CI 8.60% to 13.3%; 79 studies, 11,750 participants); and decreased appetite, 31.1% (95% CI 26.5% to 36.2%; 84 studies, 11,594 participants). Withdrawal of methylphenidate due to non‐serious adverse events occurred in 6.20% (95% CI 4.80% to 7.90%; 37 studies, 7142 participants), and 16.2% were withdrawn for unknown reasons (95% CI 13.0% to 19.9%; 57 studies, 8340 participants). Our findings suggest that methylphenidate may be associated with a number of serious adverse events as well as a large number of non‐serious adverse events in children and adolescents, which often lead to withdrawal of methylphenidate. Our certainty in the evidence is very low, and accordingly, it is not possible to accurately estimate the actual risk of adverse events. It might be higher than reported here. Given the possible association between methylphenidate and the adverse events identified, it may be important to identify people who are most susceptible to adverse events. To do this we must undertake large‐scale, high‐quality RCTs, along with studies aimed at identifying responders and non‐responders. Review question Is methylphenidate administration associated with harmful effects in children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)? Background ADHD is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood and is associated with impaired functioning and negative outcomes for development. Individuals diagnosed with ADHD are often hyperactive and impulsive. Methylphenidate, a psychostimulant, is the drug most often prescribed for children and adolescents with ADHD. Study characteristics We searched for available research up to January 2016 and found 260 studies with different designs. We included a number of non‐randomised designs (where investigators did not assign participants to a certain treatment): – 7 comparative cohort studies (a group of people followed over time; six studies compared 968 patients who were taking methylphenidate to 166 controls who were not taking methylphenidate; and 1 study included 1224 patients that were taking or not taking methylphenidate during different time periods); – 4 patient‐control studies (comparing two groups of people: 53,192 were taking methylphenidate, and 19,906 were not); – 177 non‐comparative cohort studies (2,207,751 participants) with no control group (i.e. who were not taking methylphenidate); – 2 cross‐sectional studies (96 participants were taking methylphenidate at a single time point); and – 70 patient reports/series (206 participants were taking methylphenidate). We also included methylphenidate groups from randomised clinical trials (RCTs; experiments in which participants are randomly put into independent groups that compare different treatments). All RCTs assessed methylphenidate versus other interventions for ADHD and follow‐up periods from RCTs. We only used the data from the intervention arm with methylphenidate. In all the included non‐comparative cohort studies, 2,207,751 participants were taking methylphenidate. Participants' ages ranged from 3 years to 20 years. Key results The findings suggest that methylphenidate administration might lead to serious adverse (harmful) events, including death, cardiac problems, and psychotic disorders. About 1 in 100 patients treated with methylphenidate seemed to suffer a serious adverse event. Withdrawal from methylphenidate due to serious adverse events occurred in about 1.2 out of 100 patients treated with methylphenidate. Withdrawal from methylphenidate due to any adverse events occurred in about 7.3 out of 100 patients treated with methylphenidate. We also noted a large proportion of non‐serious adverse events. More than half the patients exposed to methylphenidate seemed to suffer one or more adverse events. Withdrawal from methylphenidate due to non‐serious adverse events occurred in about 6.2 out of 100 patients exposed to methylphenidate. Withdrawal of methylphenidate for unknown reasons was 16.2 out of 100 patients exposed to methylphenidate. Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence and hence the certainty or reliability of the evidence for the comparative studies is very low. The reliability of the evidence for the non‐comparative studies is low due to weaknesses in study design. Accordingly, it is not possible to accurately estimate the risks of adverse events in children and adolescents prescribed methylphenidate. Conclusions Methyphenidiate might be associated with a number of serious adverse events. Methylphenidate produces a large number of other non‐serious harmful effects in children and adolescents with ADHD. We suggest that clinicians and parents are alert to the importance of monitoring adverse events in a systematic, meticulous manner. If methylphenidate is to continue to have a place in ADHD treatment in the future, we need to identify subgroups of patients in whom the benefits of methylphenidate outweigh the harms. Just as we need to be able to identify who is likely to benefit from treatment, we also need to be able to identify those who are most at risk of experiencing adverse events. In order to do this, we need to undertake large‐scale, high‐quality RCTs along with other studies aimed at identifying those who respond and those who do not respond to treatment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references543

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          ADHD prevalence estimates across three decades: an updated systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

          Previous studies have identified significant variability in attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) prevalence estimates worldwide, largely explained by methodological procedures. However, increasing rates of ADHD diagnosis and treatment throughout the past few decades have fuelled concerns about whether the true prevalence of the disorder has increased over time. We updated the two most comprehensive systematic reviews on ADHD prevalence available in the literature. Meta-regression analyses were conducted to test the effect of year of study in the context of both methodological variables that determined variability in ADHD prevalence (diagnostic criteria, impairment criterion and source of information), and the geographical location of studies. We identified 154 original studies and included 135 in the multivariate analysis. Methodological procedures investigated were significantly associated with heterogeneity of studies. Geographical location and year of study were not associated with variability in ADHD prevalence estimates. Confirming previous findings, variability in ADHD prevalence estimates is mostly explained by methodological characteristics of the studies. In the past three decades, there has been no evidence to suggest an increase in the number of children in the community who meet criteria for ADHD when standardized diagnostic procedures are followed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The CARE Guidelines: Consensus-based Clinical Case Reporting Guideline Development

            Background: A case report is a narrative that describes, for medical, scientific, or educational purposes, a medical problem experienced by one or more patients. Case reports written without guidance from reporting standards are insufficiently rigorous to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. Primary Objective: Develop, disseminate, and implement systematic reporting guidelines for case reports. Methods: We used a three-phase consensus process consisting of (1) premeeting literature review and interviews to generate items for the reporting guidelines, (2) a face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the reporting guidelines, and (3) postmeeting feedback, review, and pilot testing, followed by finalization of the case report guidelines. Results: This consensus process involved 27 participants and resulted in a 13-item checklist—a reporting guideline for case reports. The primary items of the checklist are title, key words, abstract, introduction, patient information, clinical findings, timeline, diagnostic assessment, therapeutic interventions, follow-up and outcomes, discussion, patient perspective, and informed consent. Conclusions: We believe the implementation of the CARE (CAse REport) guidelines by medical journals will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports will inform clinical study design, provide early signals of effectiveness and harms, and improve healthcare delivery.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

              This practice parameter describes the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) based on the current scientific evidence and clinical consensus of experts in the field. This parameter discusses the clinical evaluation for ADHD, comorbid conditions associated with ADHD, research on the etiology of the disorder, and psychopharmacological and psychosocial interventions for ADHD.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
                Wiley
                14651858
                May 09 2018
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Region Zealand; Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Department; Birkevaenget 3 Roskilde Denmark 4300
                [2 ]Region Zealand Psychiatry; Psychiatric Research Unit; Slagelse Denmark
                [3 ]University of Southern Denmark; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Health Science; Campusvej 55 Odense Denmark 5230
                [4 ]Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul; Department of Psychiatry; Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2350-2201A Porto Alegre RS Brazil 90035-003
                [5 ]Clinical Studies Sweden - Forum South; Clinical Study Support; Lund Sweden
                [6 ]Psychiatric Centre North Zealand; The Capital Region of Denmark Denmark
                [7 ]Herlev University Hospital; Pediatric Department; Capital Region Herlev Denmark
                [8 ]Sydney NSW Australia
                [9 ]Department of Health; Directorate for Health Information and Research; 95 G'Mangia Hill G'Mangia Malta PTA 1313
                [10 ]Whittington Health; Islington Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service; 580 Holloway Road London London UK N7 6LB
                [11 ]Christian Medical College; Cochrane South Asia, Prof. BV Moses Centre for Evidence-Informed Health Care and Health Policy; Carman Block II Floor CMC Campus, Bagayam Vellore India 632002
                [12 ]Aalborg University; Department of Health Science and Technology; Niels Jernes Vej 14 Aalborg Denmark 9220
                [13 ]Havemann Law Firm; Copenhagen Denmark
                [14 ]Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Department 7812, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital; Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group; Blegdamsvej 9 Copenhagen Denmark DK-2100
                [15 ]Copenhagen University Hospital; Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research; Copenhagen Denmark
                Article
                10.1002/14651858.CD012069.pub2
                6494554
                29744873
                c74d9fe4-c8f1-4638-8b62-590caa8e2520
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article