Search

Background: It has been hypothesized that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and substance use disorders (SUDs) share common neurobiological features. When abnormalities in the mesolimbic reward system are characteristic of children with ADHD, it is unclear whether youth at particularly elevated risk for SUD may exhibit any further disturbances. The objective of this pilot study is to examine possible neurobiological differences among youth with different levels of SUD risk before exposure to any abusable substances. Methods: We recruited 47 drug-naive children aged 8-13 divided into (1) Low Risk (LR)-ADHD only (n = 16); (2) High Risk (HR)-ADHD+familial SUD (n = 17); and (3) healthy controls (HC, n = 14) who underwent one functional magnetic resonance imaging scan while performing a hybrid task. We used the omnibus analysis of covariance model to assess for group differences in brain activation in regions linked to the brain reward and behavioral control systems. Results: Behavioral analysis showed significant Cue and Flanker main effects, but no significant main effect for Group. Whole-brain analysis showed significant differences in widely distributed networks related to both reward processing and behavioral control. Region of interest (ROI) activations showed that the HR group had the highest activation in the right putamen during both expected rewards and unexpected nonreward outcomes and in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) during unexpected nonreward outcomes, while LR and HC youth showed similarly low activation during these contrasts. Furthermore, the LR and HR groups showed lower activation than HC in the right ACC and the right caudate during flanker contrasts. Conclusions: These are the first preliminary results to demonstrate that the magnitude of activation during reward notification differs as a function of reward outcome in youth at high versus LR for SUD, such that youth at LR for SUD exhibit the highest activation for positive rewards, whereas those at HR for SUD exhibit the highest activation during negative rewards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unofficially dubbed a "3rd generation" antipsychotic, in part due to partial agonist activity at D2 receptors, aripiprazole has more FDA-approved pediatric indications than any other atypical antipsychotic, and is the second most commonly prescribed antipsychotic in U.S. children and adolescents (Cohen et al. [6]). In the late 1990s and early 2000s, prescriptions of atypical antipsychotics to children increased by nearly sixfold (Olfson et al. [19]). In ongoing study by the CAMESA group, Kara and Penner examine pre- and postguideline monitoring in children with neurodevelopmental disorders - a population likely to be prescribed antipsychotic medications, and uniquely vulnerable to their metabolic effects. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: Aggression is a common, yet complex, behavioral complaint, and a frequent indication for referral to child and adolescent psychiatrist treatment. This article reviews the evidence supporting pharmacotherapy of aggression in youth, with a primary focus on impulsive aggression (the primary indication for this intervention). Relevant diagnostic considerations and consensus guidelines are discussed.Methods: Articles examining the role of medications in the treatment of aggression in youth with pathological aggression were identified using PubMed and MEDLINE® databases over the past 15 years (2000-2015); selected articles published prior to 2000 and deemed to be of high relevance were searched and also included. Search terms included: Aggression, aggressive, disruptive behavior, conduct, youth, children, and adolescents. Cited references were also searched for relevant articles.Results: There are a number of evidence-based medication treatments for aggression, which are generally best considered in the context of differential diagnosis and ongoing evidence-based psychosocial interventions. Impulsive aggression is generally considered the type of aggression most amenable to medication, but other aggression subtypes may also possibly respond to treatment. Medication classes with positive evidence include the psychostimulants and α-2 agonists (in the presence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD] and/or disruptive behavior disorders), mood stabilizing agents, and atypical antipsychotics. Published guidelines recommend systematic and adequate trials of medications in sequential order, to optimize response and minimize polypharmacy. Guidelines for safety monitoring are available for many of the medications used for aggression in youth, and are also discussed.Conclusions: Aggression in children carries a high risk of poor outcomes, and, therefore, a better understanding of treatment options is a high priority. The available literature points to the importance of identifying the underlying disorder, when possible, and using this information to guide treatment selection. Future studies are needed to better inform the treatment of aggression across disorders, and the treatment of different aggression subtypes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is our great pleasure to share this special issue of the I Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology i focused on youth substance use. The resulting special issue includes papers spanning commentary, comprehensive reviews, and reports on novel investigations from both experimental studies and big data analyses. Lintz et al. report findings on academic outcomes among youth engaged in a school-based substance use treatment program. [Extracted from the article]