Repeated exposure of adolescent rats to oral methylphenidate does not induce behavioral sensitization or cross-sensitization to nicotine

Several lines of evidence indicate that the use of stimulant drugs, including methylphenidate (MPD), increases tobacco smoking. This has raised concerns that MPD use during adolescence could facilitate nicotine abuse. Preclinical studies have shown that repeated treatment with an addictive drug produces sensitization to that drug and usually cross-sensitization to other drugs. Behavioral sensitization has been implicated in the development of drug addiction. We examined whether repeated oral MPD administration during adolescence could induce behavioral sensitization to MPD and long-lasting cross-sensitization to nicotine. Adolescent male Wistar rats were treated orally with 10 mg/kg MPD or saline (SAL) from postnatal day (PND) 27 to 33. To evaluate behavioral sensitization to MPD in adolescent rats (PND 39), the SAL pretreated group was subdivided into two groups that received intragastric SAL (1.0 mL/kg) or MPD (10 mg/kg); MPD pretreated rats received MPD (10 mg/kg). Cross-sensitization was evaluated on PND 39 or PND 70 (adulthood). To this end, SAL- and MPD-pretreated groups received subcutaneous injections of SAL (1.0 mL/kg) or nicotine (0.4 mg/kg). All groups had 8 animals. Immediately after injections, locomotor activity was determined. The locomotor response to MPD challenge of MPD-pretreated rats was not significantly different from that of the SAL-pretreated group. Moreover, the locomotor response of MPD-pretreated rats to nicotine challenge was not significantly different from that of the SAL-pretreated group. This lack of sensitization and cross-sensitization suggests that MPD treatment during adolescence does not induce short- or long-term neuroadaptation in rats that could increase sensitivity to MPD or nicotine.

Cost-effectiveness of dexamphetamine and methylphenidate for the treatment of childhood attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Objective: To analyze from a health sector perspective the cost-effectiveness of dexamphetamine (DEX) and methylphenidate (MPH) interventions to treat childhood attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), compared to current practice. Method: Children eligible for the interventions are those aged between 4 and 17 years in 2000, who had ADHD and were seeking care for emotional or behavioural problems, but were not receiving stimulant medication. To determine health benefit, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed for DEX and MPH, and the effect sizes were translated into utility values. An assessment on second stage filter criteria ('equity', 'strength of evidence', 'feasibility' and 'acceptability to stakeholders') is also undertaken to incorporate additional factors that impact on resource allocation decisions. Simulation modelling techniques are used to present a 95% uncertainty interval (UI) around the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), which is calculated in cost (in A$) per DALY averted. Results: The ICER for DEX is A$4100/DALY saved (95% UI: negative to A$14 000) and for MPH is A$15 000/DALY saved (95% UI: A$9100-22 000). DEX is more costly than MPH for the government, but much less costly for the patient. Conclusions: MPH and DEX are cost-effective interventions for childhood ADHD. DEX is more cost-effective than MPH, although if MPH were listed at a lower price on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme it would become more cost-effective. Increased uptake of stimulants for ADHD would require policy change. However, the medication of children and wider availability of stimulants may concern parents and the community.

Association between dopamine transporter (DATI) genotype, left-sided inattention, and an enhanced response to methylphenidate in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

A polymorphism of the dopamine transporter gene (DAT1, 10-repeat) is associated with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and has been linked to an enhanced response to methylphenidate (MPH). One aspect of the attention deficit in ADHD includes a subtle inattention to left space, resembling that seen after right cerebral hemisphere damage. Since left-sided inattention in ADHD may resolve when treated with MPH, we asked whether left-sided inattention in ADHD was related to DAT1 genotype and the therapeutic efficacy of MPH. A total of 43 ADHD children and their parents were genotyped for the DAT1 30 variable number of tandem repeats polymorphism. The children performed the Landmark Test, a well-validated measure yielding a spatial attentional asymmetry index ( leftward to rightward attentional bias). Parents rated their child's response to MPH retrospectively using a three-point scale ( no, mediocre or very good response). Additionally, parents used a symptom checklist to rate behavior while on and off medication. A within-family control design determined whether asymmetry indices predicted biased transmission of 10-repeat parental DAT1 alleles and/or response to MPH. It was found that left-sided inattention predicted transmission of the 10-repeat allele from parents to probands and was associated with the severity of ADHD symptomatology. Children rated as achieving a very good response to MPH displayed left-sided inattention, while those rated as achieving a poorer response did not. Our results suggest a subgroup of children with ADHD for whom the 10-repeat DAT1 allele is associated with left-sided inattention. MPH may be most efficacious in this group because it ameliorates a DAT1-mediated hypodopaminergic state.

Do Phenotypic Characteristics, Parental Psychopathology, Family Functioning, and Environmental Stressors Have a Role in the Response to Methylphenidate in Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder? A Naturalistic Study From a Developing Country

Little is known about the effect of clinical characteristics, parental psychopathology, family functioning, and environmental stressors in the response to methylphenidate in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) followed up in a naturalistic setting. Data from cultures outside the United States are extremely scarce. This is a longitudinal study using a nonrandom assignment, quasi-experimental design. One hundred twenty-five children with ADHD were treated with methylphenidate according to standard clinical procedures, and followed up for 6 months. The severity of ADHD symptoms was assessed by the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham rating scale. In the final multivariate model, ADHD combined subtype (P < 0.001) and comorbidity with oppositional defiant disorder (P = 0.03) were both predictors of a worse clinical response. In addition, the levels of maternal ADHD symptoms were also associated with worse prognosis (P < 0.001). In the context of several adverse psychosocial factors assessed, only undesired pregnancy was associated with poorer response to methylphenidate in the final comprehensive-model (P = 0.02). Our study provides evidence for the involvement of clinical characteristics, maternal psychopathology, and environmental stressors in the response to methylphenidate. Clinicians may consider adjuvant strategies when negative predictors are present to increase the chances of success with methylphenidate treatment.

Nitric oxide modulation of methylphenidate-induced disruption of prepulse inhibition in Swiss mice

Drugs that facilitate dopaminergic neurotransmission induce cognitive and attentional deficits which include inability to filter sensory input measured by prepulse inhibition (PPI) Methylphenidate, an amphetamine analog is used in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder Given that nitric oxide (NO) modulates dopamine effect our aim is to analyze the nitric oxide synthase (NOS) and soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) inhibitors effect on PPI disruption induced by methylphenidate The inhibitors effects were compared to those produced by haloperidol and clozapine Male Swiss mice received a first I p. Injection (one hour before testing), of either saline, or N(G) nitro L-arginine (10, 40 or 90 mg/kg) or 7-Nitroindazole (3, 10, 30 or 60 mg/kg). or oxadiazolo-quinoxalin (5 or 10 mg/kg). or haloperidol (1 mg/kg), or clozapine (5 mg/kg) Thirty min later mice received the second injection of either saline or methylphenidate (20 or 30 mg/kg) or amphetamine (5 or 10 mg/kg). One group of mice received intracerebroventricular 7-Nitroindazole (50 or 100 nM) followed by systemic administration of saline or methylphenidate (30 mg/kg) The results revealed a methylphenidate dose-dependent disruption of PPI comparable to amphetamine. The effect was prevented by either nitric oxide synthase or guanilate cyclase inhibitors or clozapine or haloperidol In conclusion, methylphenidate induced a dose-dependent PPI disruption in Swiss mice modulated by dopamine and NO/sGC. The results corroborate the hypothesis of dopamine and NO interacting to modulate sensorimotor gating through central nervous system. It may be useful to understand methylphenidate and other psychostimulants effects (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V All rights reserved

Prescription, dispensation and marketing patterns of methylphenidate

OBJECTIVE To analyze the patterns and legal requirements of methylphenidate consumption. METHODS We conducted a cross-sectional study of the data from prescription notification forms and balance lists of drugs sales – psychoactive and others – subject to special control in the fifth largest city of Brazil, in 2006. We determined the defined and prescribed daily doses, the average prescription and dispensation periods, and the regional sales distribution in the municipality. In addition, we estimated the costs of drug acquisition and analyzed the individual drug consumption profile using the Lorenz curve. RESULTS The balance lists data covered all notified sales of the drug while data from prescription notification forms covered 50.6% of the pharmacies that sold it, including those with the highest sales volumes. Total methylphenidate consumption was 0.37 DDD/1,000 inhabitants/day. Sales were concentrated in more developed areas, and regular-release tablets were the most commonly prescribed pharmaceutical formulation. In some regions of the city, approximately 20.0% of the prescriptions and dispensation exceeded 30 mg/day and 30 days of treatment. CONCLUSIONS Methylphenidate was widely consumed in the municipality and mainly in the most developed areas. Of note, the consumption of formulations with the higher abuse risk was the most predominant. Both its prescription and dispensation contrasted with current pharmacotherapeutic recommendations and legal requirements. Therefore, the commercialization of methylphenidate should be monitored more closely, and its use in the treatment of behavioral changes of psychological disorders needs to be discussed in detail, in line with the concepts of the quality use of medicines.

Methylphenidate use in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

A Brazilian Health Technology Assessment Bulletin (BRATS) article regarding scientific evidence of the efficacy and safety of methylphenidate for treating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has caused much controversy about its methods. Considering the relevance of BRATS for public health in Brazil, we critically reviewed this article by remaking the BRATS search and discussing its methods and results. Two questions were answered: did BRATS include all references available in the literature? Do the conclusions reflect the reviewed articles? The results indicate that BRATS did not include all the references from the literature on this subject and also that the proposed conclusions are different from the results of the articles chosen by the BRATS authors themselves. The articles selected by the BRATS authors showed that using methylphenidate is safe and effective. However, the BRATS final conclusion does not reflect the aforementioned and should not be used to support decisions on the use of methylphenidate.

Response to methylphenidate by adult and pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: the Spanish multicenter DIHANA study.

BACKGROUND The purpose of this multicenter Spanish study was to evaluate the response to immediate-release methylphenidate by children and adults diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), as well as to obtain information on current therapy patterns and safety characteristics. METHODS This multicenter, observational, retrospective, noninterventional study included 730 patients aged 4-65 years with a diagnosis of ADHD. Information was obtained based on a review of medical records for the years 2002-2006 in sequential order. RESULTS The ADHD predominantly inattentive subtype affected 29.7% of patients, ADHD predominantly hyperactive-impulsive was found in 5.2%, and the combined subtype in 65.1%. Overall, a significant lower Clinical Global Impression (CGI) score and mean number of DSM-IV TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition, Text Revision) symptoms by subtype were found after one year of treatment with immediate-release methylphenidate; CGI decreased from 4.51 to 1.69, symptoms of inattention from 7.90 to 4.34, symptoms of hyperactivity from 6.73 to 3.39, and combined subtype symptoms from 14.62 to 7.7. Satisfaction with immediate-release methylphenidate after one year was evaluated as "very satisfied" or "satisfied" by 86.90% of the sample; 25.75% of all patients reported at least one adverse effect. At the end of the study, 41.47% of all the patients treated with immediate-release methylphenidate were still receiving it, with a mean time of 3.80 years on therapy. CONCLUSION Good efficacy and safety results were found for immediate-release methylphenidate in patients with ADHD.

Prevalence of methylphenidate prescription among school-aged children in a Swiss population: increase in the number of prescriptions in the Swiss Canton of Vaud, from 2002 to 2005, and changes in patient demographics.

OBJECTIVE: Methylphenidate is prescribed for children and adolescents to treat ADHD. As in many Western countries, the increase in methylphenidate consumption is a public concern in Switzerland. The article discusses the authors' assessment of prescription prevalence in 2002 and 2005 for school-aged children in the canton of Vaud. METHOD: Pharmacy prescription information is available from the regional public health authority. Descriptive analyses are conducted on an anonymized database of the years 2002 and 2005. Data for each year are compared to assess trends in methylphenidate prescription prevalence. RESULTS: The findings show an increase from 0.74% to 1.02% in the number of prescriptions for 5- to 14-year-old children, particularly in prescriptions for girls. Data also show important geographical differences in prescription. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of methylphenidate prescription is lower in Switzerland than other Western countries, particularly the United States. However, some aspects of prevalence are similar, including the increase per year, demographics, and geographic characteristics.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of methylphenidate and MDMA administered alone or in combination.

Methylphenidate and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, 'ecstasy') are widely misused psychoactive drugs. Methylphenidate increases brain dopamine and norepinephrine levels by blocking the presynaptic reuptake transporters. MDMA releases serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine through the same transporters. Pharmacodynamic interactions of methylphenidate and MDMA are likely. This study compared the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic effects of methylphenidate and MDMA administered alone or in combination in healthy subjects using a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design. Methylphenidate did not enhance the psychotropic effects of MDMA, although it produced psychostimulant effects on its own. The haemodynamic and adverse effects of co-administration of methylphenidate and MDMA were significantly higher compared with MDMA or methylphenidate alone. Methylphenidate did not change the pharmacokinetics of MDMA and vice versa. Methylphenidate and MDMA shared some subjective amphetamine-type effects; however, 125 mg of MDMA increased positive mood more than 60 mg of methylphenidate, and methylphenidate enhanced activity and concentration more than MDMA. Methylphenidate and MDMA differentially altered facial emotion recognition. Methylphenidate enhanced the recognition of sad and fearful faces, whereas MDMA reduced the recognition of negative emotions. Additionally, the present study found acute pharmacodynamic tolerance to MDMA but not methylphenidate. In conclusion, the combined use of methylphenidate and MDMA does not produce more psychoactive effects compared with either drug alone, but potentially enhances cardiovascular and adverse effects. The findings may be of clinical importance for assessing the risks of combined psychostimulant misuse. Trial registration identification number: NCT01465685 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01465685).

A randomized crossover clinical study showing that methylphenidate-SODAS improves attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in adolescents with substance use disorder

Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of a long-acting formulation of methylphenidate (MPH-SODAS) on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in an outpatient sample of adolescents with ADHD and substance use disorders (SUD). Secondary goals were to evaluate the tolerability and impact on drug use of MPH-SODAS. This was a 6-week, single-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study assessing efficacy of escalated doses of MPH-SODAS on ADHD symptoms in 16 adolescents with ADHD/SUD. Participants were randomly allocated to either group A (weeks 1-3 on MPH-SODAS, weeks 4-6 on placebo) or group B (reverse order). The primary outcome measures were the Swanson, Nolan and Pelham Scale, version IV (SNAP-IV) and the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI). We also evaluated the adverse effects of MPH-SODAS using the Barkley Side Effect Rating Scale and subject reports of drug use during the study. The sample consisted of marijuana (N = 16; 100%) and cocaine users (N = 7; 43.8%). Subjects had a significantly greater reduction in SNAP-IV and CGI scores (P < 0.001 for all analyses) during MPH-SODAS treatment compared to placebo. No significant effects for period or sequence were found in analyses with the SNAP-IV and CGI scales. There was no significant effect on drug use. MPH-SODAS was well tolerated but was associated with more severe appetite reduction than placebo (P < 0.001). MPH-SODAS was more effective than placebo in reducing ADHD symptoms in a non-abstinent outpatient sample of adolescents with comorbid SUD. Randomized clinical trials, with larger samples and SUD intervention, are recommended.

Repeated exposure of adolescent rats to oral methylphenidate does not induce behavioral sensitization or cross-sensitization to nicotine

Several lines of evidence indicate that the use of stimulant drugs, including methylphenidate (MPD), increases tobacco smoking. This has raised concerns that MPD use during adolescence could facilitate nicotine abuse. Preclinical studies have shown that repeated treatment with an addictive drug produces sensitization to that drug and usually cross-sensitization to other drugs. Behavioral sensitization has been implicated in the development of drug addiction. We examined whether repeated oral MPD administration during adolescence could induce behavioral sensitization to MPD and long-lasting cross-sensitization to nicotine. Adolescent male Wistar rats were treated orally with 10 mg/kg MPD or saline (SAL) from postnatal day (PND) 27 to 33. To evaluate behavioral sensitization to MPD in adolescent rats (PND 39), the SAL pretreated group was subdivided into two groups that received intragastric SAL (1.0 mL/kg) or MPD (10 mg/kg); MPD pretreated rats received MPD (10 mg/kg). Cross-sensitization was evaluated on PND 39 or PND 70 (adulthood). To this end, SAL- and MPD-pretreated groups received subcutaneous injections of SAL (1.0 mL/kg) or nicotine (0.4 mg/kg). All groups had 8 animals. Immediately after injections, locomotor activity was determined. The locomotor response to MPD challenge of MPD-pretreated rats was not significantly different from that of the SAL-pretreated group. Moreover, the locomotor response of MPD-pretreated rats to nicotine challenge was not significantly different from that of the SAL-pretreated group. This lack of sensitization and cross-sensitization suggests that MPD treatment during adolescence does not induce short- or long-term neuroadaptation in rats that could increase sensitivity to MPD or nicotine.

Examining discourses on the ethics and public understanding of cognitive enhancement with methylphenidate

L’émergence de l’utilisation du méthylphénidate (MPH; Ritalin) par des étudiants universitaires afin d’améliorer leur concentration et leurs performances universitaires suscite l’intérêt du public et soulève d’importants débats éthiques auprès des spécialistes. Les différentes perspectives sur l’amélioration des performances cognitives représentent une dimension importante des défis sociaux et éthiques autour d’un tel phénomène et méritent d’être élucidées. Ce mémoire vise à examiner les discours présents dans les reportages internationaux de presse populaire, les discours en bioéthique et en en santé publique sur le thème de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate. Cette recherche a permis d’identifier et d’analyser des « lacunes » dans les perspectives éthiques, sociales et scientifiques de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive d’individus en santé. Une analyse systématique du contenu des discours sur l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive a identifié des paradigmes divergents employés pour décrire l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate et discuter ses conséquences éthiques. Les paradigmes « choix de mode de vie », « abus de médicament » et « amélioration de la cognition » sont présents dans les discours de la presse populaire, de la bioéthique et de la santé publique respectivement. Parmi les principales différences entre ces paradigmes, on retrouve : la description de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques pour l’amélioration des performances, les risques et bénéfices qui y sont associés, la discussion d’enjeux éthiques et sociaux et des stratégies de prévention et les défis associés à l’augmentation de la prévalence de ce phénomène. La divergence de ces paradigmes reflète le pluralisme des perceptions de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques Nos résultats suggèrent la nécessité de débats autour de l’amélioration neuropharmacologique afin de poursuivre l’identification des enjeux et de développer des approches de santé publique cohérentes.