Dataset Information

Treatment Patterns, Health Care Resource Utilization, and Health Care Cost Associated with Atypical Antipsychotics or Guanfacine Extended Release in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Quebec, Canada.

ABSTRACT: Objective: To assess treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, and health care costs associated with use of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) or the nonstimulant guanfacine extended release (GXR) after stimulant therapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In Canada, GXR is approved as a monotherapy for children and adolescents with ADHD or as an adjunct to stimulants, and AAPs are commonly used off-label as an adjunct to stimulants. Methods: Health care claims data (January 1, 2007 to March 31, 2016) from Quebec's provincial health plan were assessed for individuals with ADHD, 6-17 years of age, who received ?1 stimulant followed by a first AAP or GXR prescription (index medication), without a diagnosis for which AAPs are indicated. Results: Overall, 1327 individuals were included (AAPs, 1098; GXR, 229). Rates of discontinuation, augmentation, or switching of the index medication did not differ between AAPs and GXR during the first follow-up year. Discontinuation rates were significantly lower with GXR than with AAPs during the second year (22.0% vs. 35.9%; p?=?0.03). GXR and AAPs resulted in similar increases in total health care cost. In GXR users, the increase in prescription drug cost after 6 months was higher than in AAP users, whereas the increase in overall medical cost was higher with AAPs than GXR, owing to more psychiatric department visits. Conclusions: In children and adolescents with ADHD who used AAPs or GXR after stimulants, secondary treatment changes were similar with both treatments after 1 year, but discontinuation rates were significantly lower with GXR than with AAPs in the second year. The greater increase in prescription cost with GXR was balanced by a greater increase in overall medical costs with AAPs, resulting in no overall difference in total health care cost between the two treatments.

SUBMITTER: Lachaine J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6885769 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Treatment Patterns, Health Care Resource Utilization, and Health Care Cost Associated with Atypical Antipsychotics or Guanfacine Extended Release in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Quebec, Canada.

Lachaine Jean J Ben Amor Leila L Pringsheim Tamara T Burns James J van Stralen Judy J

Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology 20190917 10

Objective: To assess treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, and health care costs associated with use of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) or the nonstimulant guanfacine extended release (GXR) after stimulant therapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In Canada, GXR is approved as a monotherapy for children and adolescents with ADHD or as an adjunct to stimulants, and AAPs are commonly used off-label as an adjunct to stimulants. Methods: ...[more]

PMID: 31433205

Similar Datasets

Project description:Guanfacine extended release (GXR) and atomoxetine (ATX) are nonstimulant treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). As nonstimulant treatments are often used after stimulants in ADHD, GXR was assessed relative to prior stimulant treatment in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), in which ATX was included as a reference arm, and in the open-label phase of a randomized-withdrawal study (RWS). Participants were 6-17 years old with ADHD Rating Scale version IV (ADHD-RS-IV) scores ≥32 and Clinical Global Impressions - Severity scores ≥4. RCT participants received dose-optimized GXR (1-7 mg/day), ATX (10-100 mg/day), or placebo for 10-13 weeks. RWS participants received dose-optimized GXR (1-7 mg/day) for 13 weeks. Participants' last stimulant medication prior to enrolment, and reasons for stopping this medication, were collected at baseline. Change from baseline ADHD-RS-IV score and the proportion of responders were assessed by prior stimulant exposure. Of 163 RCT and 296 RWS participants who had previously received stimulant treatment, 142 and 224, respectively, had received methylphenidate (MPH); due to the low number of participants and the heterogeneity of non-MPH treatments, we only report data for prior MPH treatment. The most frequent reasons for stopping MPH were lack of effectiveness or side effects. Placebo-adjusted ADHD-RS-IV changes from baseline were significant in participants receiving GXR (prior MPH, -9.8, P<0.001, effect size [ES] 0.85; stimulant-naïve, -7.6, P<0.001, ES 0.65). In ATX-treated participants, significant placebo-adjusted differences were seen in stimulant-naïve (-5.0, P=0.022, ES 0.43) but not prior MPH-treated (-1.8, P>0.05, ES 0.15) participants. More participants met responder criteria with GXR versus placebo, regardless of prior treatment. GXR response was unaffected by prior stimulant treatment; ATX produced improvement only in stimulant-naïve participants relative to placebo. These findings may be relevant to clinical decision-making regarding sequencing of ADHD treatments.

Project description:ObjectiveBecause models of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) therapeutics emphasize benefits of both enhanced dopaminergic and noradrenergic signaling, strategies to enhance D1 and α2A agonism may yield enhanced clinical and cognitive responses. This study tested the hypothesis that combined effects of a dopamine and noradrenergic agonist, d-methylphenidate extended-release (DMPH) with guanfacine (GUAN), an α2A receptor agonist, would be clinically superior to either monotherapy and would have equal tolerability.MethodAn 8-week, double-blind, 3-arm, comparative trial randomized 7- to 14-year-olds with DSM-IV ADHD to GUAN (1-3 mg/day), DMPH (5-20 mg/day), or a combination (COMB) with fixed-flexible dosing. Outcome measures were the ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale. Data on adverse events and safety measures were obtained.ResultsA total of 207 participants were randomized and received drug. Analyses showed significant treatment group main effects for ADHD-RS-IV ADHD total (p = .0001) and inattentive symptoms (p = .0001). COMB demonstrated small but consistently greater reductions in ADHD-RS-IV Inattentive subscale scores versus monotherapies (DMPH: p = .05; f(2) = .02; and GUAN: p = .02; f(2) = .02), and was associated with a greater positive response rate by CGI-I (p = .01). No serious cardiovascular events occurred. Sedation, somnolence, lethargy, and fatigue were greater in both guanfacine groups. All treatments were well tolerated.ConclusionCOMB showed consistent evidence of clinical benefits over monotherapies, possibly reflecting advantages of greater combined dopaminergic and α2A agonism. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate, and COMB treatment showed no differences in safety or tolerability.Clinical trial registration informationSingle Versus Combination Medication Treatment for Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Project1); http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00429273.

Project description:ObjectivePsychostimulants are partially effective in reducing cognitive dysfunction associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Cognitive effects of guanfacine, an alternative treatment, are poorly understood. Given its distinct action on α2A receptors, guanfacine may have different or complementary effects relative to stimulants. This study tested stimulant and guanfacine monotherapies relative to combined treatment on cognitive functions important in ADHD.MethodChildren with ADHD (n = 182; aged 7-14 years) completed an 8-week, double blind, randomized, controlled trial with 3 arms: d-methylphenidate (DMPH), guanfacine (GUAN), or combination treatment with DMPH and GUAN (COMB). A nonclinical comparison group (n = 93) had baseline testing, and a subset was retested 8 weeks later (n = 38). Analyses examined treatment effects in 4 cognitive domains (working memory, response inhibition, reaction time, and reaction time variability) constructed from 20 variables.ResultsThe ADHD group showed impaired working memory relative to the nonclinical comparison group (effect size = -0.53 SD unit). The treatments differed in effects on working memory but not other cognitive domains. Combination treatment improved working memory more than GUAN but was not significantly better than DMPH alone. Treatment did not fully normalize the initial deficit in ADHD relative to the comparison group.ConclusionCombined treatment with DMPH and GUAN yielded greater improvements in working memory than placebo or GUAN alone, but the combined treatment was not superior to DMPH alone and did not extend to other cognitive domains. Although GUAN may be a useful add-on treatment to psychostimulants, additional strategies appear to be necessary to achieve normalization of cognitive function in ADHD.Clinical trial registration informationSingle Versus Combination Medication Treatment for Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00429273.

Project description:No head-to-head clinical trials have been published comparing guanfacine extended release (GXR) and atomoxetine (ATX): two nonstimulants approved for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, other study designs or methods could be used to indirectly compare these two medications. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) is a recent methodology that utilizes individual patient data (IPD) from clinical trials for one treatment and published aggregate data from another treatment to estimate the relative efficacy of both, providing rapid, reliable comparative efficacy results.The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of GXR and ATX for the treatment of ADHD using MAIC.A systematic literature search was conducted to identify ATX and GXR trials published through December 2012. Studies were selected for MAIC analyses on the basis of having comparable trial characteristics and study designs. Summary data from selected ATX trials and IPD from selected GXR trials were used. MAIC methodology ensured comparable populations: target doses for the 'base case' comparison were selected on the basis of maximum effective dosage ranges from the US FDA-approved product labels (GXR 0.09-0.12 mg/kg/day, ATX 1.2 mg/kg/day for children and adolescents weighing ?70 kg). Individuals from GXR trials were selected if they matched inclusion/exclusion criteria from selected ATX trials; selected GXR IPD were then re-weighted to match the published ATX trial mean baseline characteristics and placebo outcomes. Sensitivity analyses were conducted, examining different dosage ranges and repeating the analysis in a larger number of trials, allowing for larger and more heterogeneous trial populations.The primary outcome measure was change in ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score.Using MAIC in the base case comparison, significantly greater reductions in mean (standard error; SE) ADHD-RS-IV total scores from baseline to end of study were observed in patients treated with GXR relative to ATX [-7.0 (2.2); p < 0.01]. Significantly greater reductions for GXR over ATX were also demonstrated for hyperactivity/impulsivity [-3.8 (1.2); p < 0.01] and inattention [-3.2 (1.3); p < 0.05] subscales of the ADHD-RS-IV. Similar results were observed in MAIC sensitivity analyses evaluating other dosage ranges and using more heterogeneous trial populations (e.g., larger randomized sample, broader subject weight range, additional trials). Mean (SE) decreases in ADHD-RS-IV total scores were greater for GXR relative to ATX when including IPD for those administered GXR at lower than target dosage (0.075-0.090 mg/kg/day) compared with ATX at target dosage (1.2 mg/kg/day), with a relative improvement of -6.0 (2.7) (p < 0.05). Reductions in ADHD-RS-IV total scores were also greater for GXR in another MAIC examining GXR at target dosage (0.09-0.12 mg/kg/day) and a broader range of ATX dosages (including three additional trials evaluating ATX ?1.2 mg/kg/day); relative improvement for GXR versus ATX administered at target dosage or higher was -7.6 (1.4) (p < 0.01).After adjusting for difference in baseline trial characteristics using MAIC, GXR appears to be more efficacious than ATX for the treatment of ADHD. Results were consistent in a variety of dosage range comparisons and within increasingly heterogeneous trial populations.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study evaluated clinical outcomes in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treated with the α2-adrenoceptor agonist guanfacine extended-release (GXR) in routine Canadian clinical practice.MethodsThis retrospective chart review focused on patients with ADHD aged 6-17 years initiating treatment with GXR as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy. Patients were followed for up to 12 months after GXR initiation and, if they had received prior ADHD pharmacotherapy, for 12 months before GXR initiation. The primary outcome was change in ADHD symptoms and functionality based on physician assessments, classified as improvement, no change, or worsening relative to the time of GXR initiation. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated. Clinical outcomes were also analyzed post hoc according to whether GXR treatment was received as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, and by select psychiatric comorbidities. Exploratory analyses were conducted in patients who had received prior ADHD pharmacotherapy to evaluate clinical outcomes after initiating GXR.ResultsImprovements in ADHD symptoms were reported for 232/330 (70.3%) patients. Functional improvements in school performance and home life were reported for 213/330 (64.5%) and 209/330 (63.3%) patients, respectively. The most frequent TEAEs (≥ 5%) were somnolence, headache, insomnia, presyncope, and decreased appetite. Improvements in ADHD symptoms were observed when GXR was received as either monotherapy (35/60 [58.3%]) or adjunctive therapy (197/270 [73.0%]). Improvements in ADHD symptoms and functionality were observed in the majority of patients with select psychiatric comorbidities. Among patients who had experienced worsening of symptoms with prior ADHD pharmacotherapy, 44/54 (81.5%) experienced symptom improvement, 33/44 (75.0%) who had previously experienced worsening of school performance improved, and 34/48 (70.8%) who had previously experienced worsening of home life improved.ConclusionIn Canadian routine clinical practice, most children and adolescents with ADHD treated with GXR experienced improvements in ADHD symptoms and in functionality both at school and at home.

Dataset Information

Treatment Patterns, Health Care Resource Utilization, and Health Care Cost Associated with Atypical Antipsychotics or Guanfacine Extended Release in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Quebec, Canada.

Publications

Treatment Patterns, Health Care Resource Utilization, and Health Care Cost Associated with Atypical Antipsychotics or Guanfacine Extended Release in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Quebec, Canada.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets