Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended-release in Japanese adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Exploratory post hoc subgroup analyses of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Previously, we reported on the efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended-release (GXR) in Japanese adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. In this exploratory post hoc analysis, we assessed the efficacy and/or safety of GXR in the following subgroups: ADHD-combined (ADHD-C) and ADHD-predominantly inattentive (ADHD-I) subtypes, age (≥31, <31 years), sex (male, female), and body weight (≥50, <50 kg).

Methods

The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the Japanese version of the investigator-rated ADHD-Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) with adult prompts (total scores) at week 10.

Results

The efficacy analysis population included 200 patients (GXR, 100; placebo, 100). ADHD-RS-IV total score effect sizes (GXR vs placebo) were similar across all subgroups (total population: 0.52, ADHD-C: 0.51, ADHD-I: 0.52, ≥31 years: 0.61, <31 years: 0.47, male: 0.50, female: 0.57). There were no major differences in the incidence/types of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) across the subgroups. The incidence of significant TEAEs (34.3%, 10.6%) and TEAEs leading to discontinuation (34.3%, 12.1%) were approximately three times higher in females than males, respectively. The incidence of TEAEs in patients weighing <50 kg and ≥50 kg was 100% and 73.6% during dose optimization and 40% and 24.4% during the maintenance period, respectively.

Conclusion

Findings from this post hoc analysis in adults with ADHD support the efficacy and safety of GXR regardless of ADHD subtype, age, or sex and suggest that careful monitoring for TEAEs and GXR dose optimization is considered for all patients, as needed.

SUBMITTER: Naya N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8182954 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended-release in Japanese adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Exploratory post hoc subgroup analyses of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Naya Noriyuki N Sakai Chika C Okutsu Daiki D Kiguchi Ryo R Fujiwara Masakazu M Tsuji Toshinaga T Iwanami Akira A

Neuropsychopharmacology reports 20201210 1

<h4>Aim</h4>Previously, we reported on the efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended-release (GXR) in Japanese adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. In this exploratory post hoc analysis, we assessed the efficacy and/or safety of GXR in the following subgroups: ADHD-combined (ADHD-C) and ADHD-predominantly inattentive (ADHD-I) subtypes, age (≥31, <31 years), sex (male, female), and body weight (≥50, <50 kg ...[more]

PMID: 33305542

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:ObjectiveThe combination of d-methylphenidate and guanfacine (an α-2A agonist) has emerged as a potential alternative to either monotherapy in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but it is unclear what predicts response to these treatments. This study is the first to investigate pretreatment clinical and electroencephalography (EEG) profiles as predictors of treatment outcome in children randomized to these different medications.MethodA total of 181 children with ADHD (aged 7-14 years; 123 boys) completed an 8-week randomized, double-blind, comparative study with d-methylphenidate, guanfacine, or combined treatments. Pretreatment assessments included ratings on ADHD, anxiety, and oppositional behavior. EEG activity from cortical sources localized within midfrontal and midoccipital regions was measured during a spatial working memory task with encoding, maintenance, and retrieval phases. Analyses tested whether pretreatment clinical and EEG measures predicted treatment-related change in ADHD severity.ResultsHigher pretreatment hyperactivity-impulsivity and oppositional symptoms and lower anxiety predicted greater ADHD improvements across all medication groups. Pretreatment event-related midfrontal beta power predicted treatment outcome with combined and monotherapy treatments, albeit in different directions. Weaker beta modulations predicted improvements with combined treatment, whereas stronger modulation during encoding and retrieval predicted improvements with d-methylphenidate and guanfacine, respectively. A multivariate model including EEG and clinical measures explained twice as much variance in ADHD improvement with guanfacine and combined treatment (R2= 0.34-0.41) as clinical measures alone (R2 = 0.14-.21).ConclusionWe identified treatment-specific and shared predictors of response to different pharmacotherapies in children with ADHD. If replicated, these findings would suggest that aggregating information from clinical and brain measures may aid personalized treatment decisions in ADHD.Clinical trial registration informationSingle Versus Combination Medication Treatment for Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; https://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00429273.

Project description:ObjectiveThe combination of d-methylphenidate and guanfacine (an α-2A adrenergic agonist) may be an effective alternative to either agent as monotherapy in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study investigated the neural mechanisms underlying medication effects using cortical source analysis of electroencephalography (EEG) data.MethodA total of 172 children with ADHD (aged 7-14; 118 boys) completed an 8-week randomized, double-blind, comparative study with 3 treatment arms: d-methylphenidate, guanfacine, or their combination. EEG modulations of brain oscillations at baseline and end point were measured during a spatial working memory task from cortical sources localized within the anterior cingulate (midfrontal) and primary visual cortex (midoccipital), based on previously reported ADHD and control differences. Linear mixed models examined treatment effects on EEG and performance measures.ResultsCombined treatment decreased midoccipital EEG power across most frequency bands and task phases. Several midoccipital EEG measures also showed significantly greater changes with combined treatment than with monotherapies. D-methylphenidate significantly increased midoccipital theta during retrieval, while guanfacine produced only trend-level reductions in midoccipital alpha during maintenance and retrieval. Task accuracy improved with combined treatment, was unchanged with d-methylphenidate, and worsened with guanfacine. Treatment-related changes in midoccipital power correlated with improvement in ADHD severity.ConclusionThese findings show that combined treatment ameliorates midoccipital neural activity associated with treatment-related behavioral improvements and previously implicated in visuo-attentional deficits in ADHD. Both monotherapies had limited effects on EEG measures, with guanfacine further showing detrimental effects on performance. The identified midoccipital EEG profile may aid future treatment monitoring for children with ADHD.Clinical trial registration informationSingle Versus Combination Medication Treatment for Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Project1); https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00429273.Diversity & inclusion statementWe worked to ensure race, ethnic, and/or other types of diversity in the recruitment of human participants. We worked to ensure sex and gender balance in the recruitment of human participants. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our reference list. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended-release in Japanese adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Exploratory post hoc subgroup analyses of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Efficacy and safety of guanfacine extended-release in Japanese adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Exploratory post hoc subgroup analyses of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets