title: Efficacy and safety of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and atomoxetine in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a head-to-head, randomized, double-blind, phase IIIb study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the prodrug psychostimulant lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and the non-stimulant noradrenergic compound atomoxetine (ATX) in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who had previously responded inadequately to methylphenidate (MPH).
  
  
  METHODS
  This 9-week, head-to-head, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study (SPD489-317; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01106430) enrolled patients (aged 6-17 years) with at least moderately symptomatic ADHD and an inadequate response to previous MPH therapy. Patients were randomized (1:1) to an optimized daily dose of LDX (30, 50 or 70 mg) or ATX (patients <70 kg, 0.5-1.2 mg/kg with total daily dose not to exceed 1.4 mg/kg; patients ≥70 kg, 40, 80 or 100 mg). The primary efficacy outcome was time (days) to first clinical response. Clinical response was defined as a Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved). Secondary efficacy outcomes included the proportion of responders at each study visit and the change from baseline in ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS-IV) and CGI-Severity scores. Tolerability and safety were assessed by monitoring treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), height and weight, vital signs and electrocardiogram parameters. Endpoint was defined as the last post-baseline, on-treatment visit with a valid assessment.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of 267 patients randomized (LDX, n = 133; ATX, n = 134), 200 (74.9%) completed the study. The median time to first clinical response [95% confidence interval (CI)] was significantly shorter for patients receiving LDX [12.0 days (8.0-16.0)] than for those receiving ATX [21.0 days (15.0-23.0)] (p = 0.001). By week 9, 81.7% (95% CI 75.0-88.5) of patients receiving LDX had responded to treatment compared with 63.6% (95% CI 55.4-71.8) of those receiving ATX (p = 0.001). Also by week 9, the difference between LDX and ATX in least-squares mean change from baseline (95% CI) was significant in favour of LDX for the ADHD-RS-IV total score [-6.5 (-9.3 to -3.6); p < 0.001; effect size 0.56], inattentiveness subscale score [-3.4 (-4.9 to -1.8); p < 0.001; effect size 0.53] and the hyperactivity/impulsivity subscale score [-3.2 (-4.6 to -1.7); p < 0.001; effect size 0.53]. TEAEs were reported by 71.9 and 70.9% of patients receiving LDX and ATX, respectively. At endpoint, both treatments were associated with mean (standard deviation) increases in systolic blood pressure [LDX, +0.7 mmHg (9.08); ATX, +0.6 mmHg (7.96)], diastolic blood pressure [LDX, +0.1 mmHg (8.33); ATX, +1.3 mmHg (8.24)] and pulse rate [LDX, +3.6 bpm (10.49); ATX, +3.7 bpm (10.75)], and decreases in weight [LDX, -1.30 kg (1.806); ATX, -0.15 kg (1.434)].
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  LDX was associated with a faster and more robust treatment response than ATX in children and adolescents with at least moderately symptomatic ADHD who had previously responded inadequately to MPH. Both treatments displayed safety profiles consistent with findings from previous clinical trials.
authors: Ralf W
authors: RW
authors: Dittmann
authors: Esther
authors: E
authors: Cardo
authors: Peter
authors: P
authors: Nagy
authors: Colleen S
authors: CS
authors: Anderson
authors: Ralph
authors: R
authors: Bloomfield
authors: Beatriz
authors: B
authors: Caballero
authors: Nicholas
authors: N
authors: Higgins
authors: Paul
authors: P
authors: Hodgkins
authors: Andrew
authors: A
authors: Lyne
authors: Richard
authors: R
authors: Civil
authors: David
authors: D
authors: Coghill
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D018759:Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000069445:Atomoxetine Hydrochloride; D001289:Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000523:psychology; D001794:Blood Pressure / Q000187:drug effects / Q000502:physiology; D002648:Child; D003913:Dextroamphetamine / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D004305:Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D000069478:Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate; D008297:Male; D011437:Propylamines / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D018759:Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors; D011437:Propylamines; D000069445:Atomoxetine Hydrochloride; D000069478:Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate; D003913:Dextroamphetamine
references: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009 May;48(5):511-518
references: 19318988
references: P T. 2009 Dec;34(12):678-94
references: 20140141
references: CNS Drugs. 2012 Mar 1;26(3):245-68
references: 22329564
references: Biol Psychiatry. 2007 Nov 1;62(9):970-6
references: 17631866
references: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2012 Sep;21(9):477-92
references: 22763750
references: Am J Psychiatry. 2008 Jun;165(6):721-30
references: 18281409
references: Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2010 Jun 24;6:317-27
references: 20628632
references: J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2001 Spring;11(1):77-93
references: 11322749
references: Arch Dis Child. 2005 Aug;90(8):801-6
references: 16040876
references: Biometrics. 1995 Sep;51(3):1175-83
references: 7548701
references: Behav Brain Funct. 2010 Jun 24;6:34
references: 20576091
references: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007 Jul;46(7):894-921
references: 17581453
references: Am J Psychiatry. 2007 Jul;164(7):1035-43
references: 17606655
references: Biol Psychiatry. 2003 Jan 15;53(2):112-20
references: 12547466
references: J Atten Disord. 2014 Feb;18(2):105-16
references: 22617861
references: Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2009;5:215-26
references: 19557116
references: Clin Ther. 2007 Mar;29(3):450-63
references: 17577466
references: Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2009 Jun 09;3(1):17
references: 19508731
references: Am J Psychiatry. 2007 Jun;164(6):942-8
references: 17541055
references: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011 Apr;50(4):395-405
references: 21421179
references: Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 1987;334:1-100
references: 2887090
references: J Pediatr. 2006 Jul;149(1):112-9
references: 16860138
references: Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2011 Nov 04;5(1):35
references: 22054243
references: Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2010 Oct;11(15):2549-56
references: 20831361
references: BMC Psychiatry. 2011 Nov 10;11:176
references: 22074258
references: Paediatr Drugs. 2011 Oct 1;13(5):329-36
references: 21888447
references: J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2013 Mar;54(3):227-46
references: 23294014
references: Am J Psychiatry. 2002 Nov;159(11):1896-901
references: 12411225
references: Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2013 Oct;23(10):1208-18
references: 23332456
references: J Clin Psychiatry. 2008 Sep;69(9):1364-73
references: 19012818
references: Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9
references: 19565683
references: Pediatrics. 2001 Nov;108(5):E83
references: 11694667