Search

Objectives: In this 6-month open-label extension (OLE) of NCT01491035 (a 14-day, open-label, pharmacokinetic/safety lead-in study), the long-term safety and tolerability of vortioxetine (5-20 mg/day) were investigated in children and adolescents with a DSM-IV-TR™ diagnosis of depressive or anxiety disorder in the United States or Germany. The study also was designed to provide data to inform dose selection and titration in future pediatric studies with vortioxetine.Methods: Safety evaluations included spontaneously reported adverse events (AEs), the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), and the Pediatric Adverse Events Rating Scale (PAERS; clinician administered). Clinical effectiveness was determined by Clinical Global Impressions. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was permitted, including concomitant use of stimulant medication (US sites only).Results: Of the 47 patients who completed the lead-in period, 41 continued into the OLE. Most patients (n = 39 [95%]) continued their previous dose regimen. Twenty-one patients (51%) withdrew during the OLE; the most common primary reasons were administrative [n = 8], AEs [n = 4], and lack of efficacy [n = 3]. Thirty-five patients (85%) had ≥1 AE, 86% of which were mild or moderate in severity. Five patients (12%) reported a severe AE, none of which was considered related to study medication. The most common AEs (≥10%) were headache (27%), nausea (20%), dysmenorrhea (females; 19%), and vomiting (15%), with no relationship between AE intensity and age or dose. Five patients reported instances of suicidal ideation during the OLE, one of whom also reported this during the lead-in period. Two patients had nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior; one had a nonfatal suicide attempt. Throughout the study, there was a decrease over time in the incidence and intensity of AEs collected using the PAERS. Effectiveness assessment indicated a trend toward improvement based on numeric results.Conclusion: This OLE confirms the findings from the lead-in study, which concluded that a dosing strategy of 5-20 mg/day is safe, well tolerated, and suitable for future clinical studies of vortioxetine in pediatric patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The goal of these analyses was to describe the 12-month prevalence of mental health services retention for youths ages six to 12 years and identify predictors of treatment retention. Data were from the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms study.Methods: In a longitudinal cohort study, 416 children and their parents completed measures of mental health services use and parents' perception of the services and participated in semistructured psychodiagnostic interviews during a baseline and 12-month assessment. Logistic regression analyses examined the effects on 12-month treatment retention of demographic and clinical variables and parents' perception of how well their children's treatment matched their needs.Results: Sixty-nine percent of youths (N=289) continued to use services at 12 months. After the analyses controlled for other demographic and clinical factors, white race (p<.001) and greater functional impairment (p=.024) were associated with treatment retention; greater perceived treatment match at baseline significantly predicted retention above and beyond the effects of sociodemographic and clinical variables (p=.001).Conclusions: Parents' perceptions about appropriateness of treatment, white race, and functional impairment predicted 12-month treatment retention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate asenapine versus placebo in 403 patients aged 10 to 17 years with bipolar I disorder currently in manic or mixed episodes.Method: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, international trial, patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to placebo, asenapine 2.5, 5, or 10 mg b.i.d. (twice daily). Primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in Young-Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score at day 21. Analyses of patients with/without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and with/without stimulant use were performed.Results: The mean difference in asenapine versus placebo in YMRS was -3.2 (p = .0008), -5.3 (p < .001), and -6.2 (p < .001) for asenapine 2.5, 5, and 10 mg b.i.d., respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events with an incidence ≥5% and at least twice placebo were somnolence, sedation, hypoesthesia oral, paresthesia oral, and increased appetite. The asenapine groups had a higher incidence of ≥7% weight gain (range, 8.0%-12.0%) versus placebo (1.1%; p < .05). The mean change from baseline in fasting insulin was larger for patients treated with asenapine than those with placebo (asenapine 2.5 mg b.i.d.: 73.375 pmol/L; asenapine 5 mg b.i.d.: 114.042 pmol/L; asenapine 10 mg b.i.d.: 59.846 pmol/L; placebo: 3.690 pmol/L). The mean changes from baseline for lipid parameters and glucose were also larger in asenapine groups than in the placebo group. No safety differences were observed with respect to ADHD and stimulant use.Conclusion: All asenapine doses versus placebo were superior based on change in YMRS at day 21. Asenapine was generally well tolerated in patients aged 10 to 17 years with bipolar I disorder in manic or mixed states. Increases in weight and fasting insulin were associated with asenapine. Clinical trial registration information-Efficacy and Safety of Asenapine Treatment for Pediatric Bipolar Disorder; http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01244815. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Lithium is a benchmark treatment for bipolar disorder in adults. Definitive studies of lithium in pediatric bipolar I disorder (BP-I) are lacking. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of pediatric participants (ages 7-17 years) with BP-I/manic or mixed episodes compared lithium [n - 53) versus placebo (n = 28) for up to 8 weeks. The a priori primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to the end of study (week 8/ET) in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score, based on last-observation-carried-forward analysis. RESULTS: The change in YMRS score was significantly larger in lithium-treated participants (5.51 [95% confidence interval: 0.51 to 10.50]) after adjustment for baseline YMRS score, age group, weight group, gender, and study site [P = .03). Overall Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scores favored lithium [n = 25; 47% very much/much improved) compared with placebo {n = 6; 21% very much/much improved) at week 8/ET [P = .03). A statistically significant increase in thyrotropin concentration was seen with lithium (3.0 ± 3.1 mlU/L) compared with placebo (-0.1 ± 0.9 mlU/L; P < .001). There was no statistically significant between-group difference with respect to weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Lithium was superior to placebo in reducing manic symptoms in pediatric patients treated for BP-I in this clinical trial. Lithium was generally well tolerated in this patient population and was not associated with weight gain, distinguishing it from other agents commonly used to treat youth with bipolar disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors reflect on the effects of the U.S. Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the practice of psychiatry. It mentions the ACA policies that are of particular importance to mental health care. An effect of ACA on the practice of psychiatry is the improvement of mental health care through its reinforced care delivery systems. It explains how the ACA could also hurt psychiatric care particularly in caring for the chronically mentally ill due to the absence of some services in the legislation.

The article discusses a study which assessed the long-term efficacy of aripiprazole in children with bipolar disorder. Aripiprazole is an atypical antipsychotic, approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of manic or mixed episodes with bipolar I disorder. The results indicate that aripiprazole may be superior to placebo in the long-term treatment of pediatric patients.

The article discusses a study on the safety and tolerability of the drug aripiprazole for irritability in pediatric patients with autistic disorder conducted in the U.S. The study found that 86.7% of the patients experienced adverse events including weight gain, vomiting and nasopharyngitis. It showed that aripiprazole was safe and well tolerated when used in the long-term. The results stress the need for proactive monitoring of weight during long-term treatment.

Arnold LE, Demeter C, Mount K, Frazier TW, Youngstrom EA, Fristad M, Birmaher B, Findling RL, Horwitz SM, Kowatch R, Axelson DA. Pediatric bipolar spectrum disorder and ADHD: comparison and comorbidity in the LAMS clinical sample. Bipolar Disord 2011: 13: 509-521. © 2011 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Objective: To compare attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar spectrum disorders (BPSDs), and comorbidity in the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study. Methods: Children ages 6-12 were recruited at first visit to clinics associated with four universities. A BPSD diagnosis required that the patient exhibit episodes. Four hypotheses were tested: (i) children with BPSD + ADHD would have a younger age of mood symptom onset than those with BPSD but no ADHD; (ii) children with BPSD + ADHD would have more severe ADHD and BPSD symptoms than those with only one disorder; (iii) global functioning would be more impaired in children with ADHD + BPSD than in children with either diagnosis alone; and (iv) the ADHD + BPSD group would have more additional diagnoses. Results: Of 707 children, 421 had ADHD alone, 45 had BPSD alone, 117 had both ADHD and BPSD, and 124 had neither. Comorbidity (16.5%) was slightly less than expected by chance (17.5%). Age of mood symptom onset was not different between the BPSD + ADHD group and the BPSD-alone group. Symptom severity increased and global functioning decreased with comorbidity. Comorbidity with other disorders was highest for the ADHD + BPSD group, but higher for the ADHD-alone than the BPSD-alone group. Children with BPSD were four times as likely to be hospitalized (22%) as children with ADHD alone. Conclusions: The high rate of BPSD in ADHD reported by some authors may be better explained as a high rate of both disorders in child outpatient settings rather than ADHD being a risk factor for BPSD. Co-occurrence of the two disorders is associated with poorer global functioning, greater symptom severity, and more additional comorbidity than for either single disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study in the U.S., which is aimed to provide an initial description of the effectiveness and pharmacokinetics of quetiapine in aggressive children with conduct disorder. The researchers conducted an eight-week clinical trial among patients ages 6-12 years. Preliminary data suggests that aggressive children with conduct disorder may benefit from quetiapine.

Presents a study which examined whether risperidone is superior to placebo in the treatment of youths with conduct disorder in the United States. Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of risperidone in children suffering from a primary diagnosis of conduct disorder; Methodology of the study; Discussion of the results; Conclusions.

Calabrese JR, Keck PE Jr, Bowden CL, Ketter TA, Sachs G, Findling RL, Sajatovic M. A US perspective of the CANMAT bipolar guidelines.Bipolar Disord 2005: 7 (Suppl. 3): 70–72.© Blackwell Munksgaard, 2005 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of lamotrigine versus placebo in 10- to 17-year-olds with bipolar I disorder (BP-I) who were receiving conventional bipolar disorder treatment.Method: In this randomized withdrawal trial, patients with BP-I of at least moderate severity received lamotrigine during an ≤18-week open-label phase. Patients who maintained a stable lamotrigine dose for ≥2 weeks and Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar Severity of Illness (CGI-BP[S]) score of ≤3 for ≥6 consecutive weeks were randomized to double-blind lamotrigine or placebo for ≤36 weeks.Results: Of 301 patients enrolled, 298 comprised the open-label intention-to-treat population, with 173 (58%) randomized. Of these patients, 41 (24%) completed the study. In the open-label phase, the mean (SD) baseline CGI-BP(S) rating was 4.4 (0.57), and the mean (standard error [SE]) time to stabilization was 101 (1.6) days. During the randomized phase, mean (SE) time to occurrence of a bipolar event (TOBE) for lamotrigine versus placebo (primary endpoint) was 155 (14.7) versus 50 (3.8), 163 (12.2) versus 120 (12.2), and 136 (15.4) versus 107 (13.8) days for the 3 index mood states (depressed, manic/hypomanic, mixed). The primary stratified log-rank analysis of TOBE was not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63; p = .072); however, the prespecified Cox regression analysis favored lamotrigine (p = .047). In 13- to 17-year-olds, log-rank analysis of TOBE significantly favored lamotrigine (HR = 0.46; p = .015), but not in 10- to 12-year-olds (HR = 0.93; p = .877). Dermatologic events were reported in 4% (open-label phase) and 2% (randomized phase) of patients receiving lamotrigine. Suicidality-related adverse events were reported in 7% (open-label phase) and 7% (randomized phase) of patients receiving lamotrigine.Conclusion: Although the primary analysis failed to detect a benefit of add-on lamotrigine for BP-I in 10- to 17-year-olds, lamotrigine may be effective in a subset of older adolescents. Clinical trial registration information-Lamictal as Add-on Treatment for Bipolar I Disorder in Pediatric Patients; http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00723450. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study examined the role of lithium in the maintenance treatment of pediatric patients with bipolar I disorder (BP-I)., Method: Participants aged 7 to 17 years who presented with a manic or mixed episode received 24 weeks of lithium treatment in one of two multiphase studies, the Collaborative Lithium Trials (CoLT 1 and CoLT 2). Responders were randomized to continue lithium or to be cross-titrated to placebo for up to 28 weeks. The primary outcome measure was relative risk of study discontinuation for any reason., Results: A Cox regression analysis found that those who continued treatment with lithium (n = 17) had a lower hazard ratio compared to those who received placebo (n = 14) (p = .015)]. The vast majority of discontinuations were due to mood symptom exacerbations, with most of these occurring in the placebo-treated group. Discontinuation for other reasons occurred at similarly low rates across both group. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity, and only one study participant was discontinued from the trial owing to a serious adverse event (aggression). There was no statistically significant difference with respect to weight gain in participants receiving lithium compared to those receiving placebo., Conclusion: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Discontinuation Trial builds support for the role of lithium as a maintenance treatment in pediatric patients with bipolar disorder and for the safety and tolerability of 28 weeks of maintenance lithium treatment., Clinical Trial Registration Information: Lithium for the Treatment of Pediatric Mania; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00442039 (CoLT 1). Safety and Efficacy Study of Lithium for the Treatment of Pediatric Mania; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT01166425 (CoLT 2)., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sublingually administered asenapine was approved in March 2015 by the United States Food and Drug Administration for patients aged 10-17 years with an acute manic or mixed episode associated with bipolar I disorder (BP-1). This is the first long-term safety and tolerability study of asenapine in this population., Methods: Following the 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients aged 10-17 years with an acute manic or mixed episode associated with BP-1, patients could enroll in this flexible-dose (2.5-10 mg twice daily) open-label extension (OLE) study for an additional 50 weeks, conducted from August 2011 to September 2014 in the United States and Russia. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed and predefined TEAEs of interest reported in addition to metabolic and anthropometric parameters. The Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Clinical Global Impressions scale in bipolar illness (CGI-BP) were used to assess effectiveness., Results: A total of 321 patients (lead-in study treatment: placebo, n = 80; asenapine, n = 241) were included; 267 (83.2 %) reported one or more TEAE and 181 (56.4 %) discontinued early, 48 (15.0 %) due to TEAEs. Of the predefined TEAEs of interest, combined somnolence/sedation/hypersomnia occurred most frequently (42.4 %) followed by oral hypoesthesia/dysgeusia (7.5 %). In total, 109 (34.8 %) patients experienced clinically significant weight gain (≥7 % increase). No clinically meaningful changes were noted for laboratory parameters measured. Eighteen patients met the criteria for new-onset metabolic syndrome (MBS) post-baseline during the extension study, whereas 10 patients who met MBS criteria at baseline did not meet MBS criteria at endpoint. A total of 12 patients met MBS at baseline and endpoint. Mean change in YMRS total score from OLE baseline was -9.2 points at week 50, and change in CGI-BP severity overall score was similar among all treatment groups (those who initially received asenapine and those who initially received placebo). After 26 weeks of treatment in the OLE, 79.2 % of patients were classified as YMRS 50 % responders relative to acute trial baseline., Conclusions: Asenapine was generally well tolerated in pediatric patients with BP-1 during ≤50 weeks of open-label treatment; among predefined TEAEs of interest, the combination of somnolence/sedation/hypersomnia was the most common. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01349907., Competing Interests: Compliance with Ethical Standards Funding The study was designed by Merck & Co., Inc., which had direct oversight or participation in every stage of the study. Funding for medical writing services was provided by Allergan, Inc. Disclosure of potential conflict of interest Findling: receives or has received research support, acted as a consultant and/or served on a speaker’s bureau for Alcobra, American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, American Physician Institute, American Psychiatric Press, AstraZeneca, Bracket, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CogCubed, Cognition Group, Coronado Biosciences, Dana Foundation, Elsevier, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Guilford Press, Johns Hopkins University Press, Johnson and Johnson, Jubilant Clinsys, KemPharm, Lilly, Lundbeck, Merck, NIH, Neurim, Novartis, Noven, Otsuka, Oxford University Press, Pfizer, Physicians Postgraduate Press, Purdue, Rhodes Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Sage, Shire, Sunovion, Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Transcept Pharmaceuticals, Tris Pharma, Validus, and WebMD. Landbloom, Mackle, Snow-Adami: employees of Merck & Co., may own stock or have stock options. Wu, Durgam: employees of Allergan, may own stock or have stock options. Chang: receives or has received research support, or has acted as a consultant for GlaxoSmithKline, Actavis, Lilly, Sunovion, Janssen, and Merck. Research involving human participants All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Research on bipolar spectrum disorders (BPSD) in adolescence has burgeoned in the last decade, but continued work is needed to identify endophenotypic markers associated with illness onset and course. The present study examined reward dysregulation--measured via the behavioral activation system (BAS)--as one putative marker of BPSD in adolescence. A diverse group of 425 outpatient adolescents between 11 and 17 years of age (52 % male) completed the Behavioral Inhibition and Activation Scale (BIS-BAS) scale to measure reward dysregulation. Semi-structured interviews determined diagnoses and severity of mood symptoms. Parent-reported BAS was associated with increased symptoms of mania, and parent and adolescent-reported BAS were associated with symptoms of depression. Parent-reported BIS scores were associated with increased symptoms of mania. Results held independent of diagnostic status. Furthermore, parent BIS/BAS reports were stronger predictors for manic symptoms compared to adolescent-reports. Results extend work in adults with BPSD, suggesting a transdiagnostic association between reward dysregulation and mood symptom severity in adolescence.

Objective:   To evaluate the long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of aripiprazole in pediatric subjects with bipolar I disorder., Methods:   A randomized, double-blind, 30-week, placebo-controlled study of aripiprazole (10 or 30 mg/day) in youths (10-17 years) with bipolar I disorder (manic or mixed) ± psychotic features (n = 296) was performed. After four weeks, acute treatment completers continued receiving ≤26 weeks of double-blind treatment (n = 210). The primary outcome was Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score change., Results:   Of the 210 subjects who entered the 26-week extension phase, 32.4% completed the study (45.3% for aripiprazole 10 mg/day, 31.0% for aripiprazole 30 mg/day, and 18.8% for placebo). Both aripiprazole doses demonstrated significantly (p < 0.001) greater improvements in YMRS total score at endpoint compared with placebo in protocol-specified last observation carried forward analyses, but not in observed case or mixed-model repeated measures at week 30. Overall time to all-cause discontinuation was longer for aripiprazole 10 mg/day (15.6 weeks) and aripiprazole 30 mg/day (9.5 weeks) compared with placebo (5.3 weeks; both p < 0.05 versus placebo). Both aripiprazole doses were significantly superior to placebo regarding response rates, Children's Global Assessment of Functioning and Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar severity of overall and mania scores at endpoint in all analyses. Commonly reported adverse events included headache, somnolence, and extrapyramidal disorder., Conclusions:   Aripiprazole 10 mg/day and 30 mg/day were superior to placebo and generally well tolerated in pediatric subjects with bipolar I disorder up to 30 weeks. Despite the benefits of treatment, completion rates were low in all treatment arms., (© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of quetiapine monotherapy in children and adolescents with mania associated with bipolar I disorder., Method: Patients aged 10 to 17 years, with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of a manic episode associated with bipolar I disorder and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score ≥ 20 were randomized to 3 weeks of quetiapine (400 or 600 mg/d) or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was change in YMRS total score. The study was conducted at 34 centers in the United States between August 2004 and July 2006., Results: The intent-to-treat population included 277 patients. Least squares mean change in YMRS score from baseline to end point by mixed-model, repeated-measures analysis was -14.25, -15.60, and -9.04 for quetiapine 400 mg/d, quetiapine 600 mg/d, and placebo, respectively (P < .001, each quetiapine dose vs placebo). Significant improvement in YMRS score versus placebo was first observed at day 4 (P = .015) with quetiapine 400 mg/d and day 7 (P < .001) with quetiapine 600 mg/d. Mean changes in body weight at day 21 (observed cases) were 1.7 kg for both quetiapine doses and 0.4 kg for placebo. Numerically larger mean increases in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides were observed with quetiapine than placebo. Adverse events associated with quetiapine were mostly mild to moderate in intensity., Conclusions: In this 3-week study, quetiapine was significantly more effective than placebo in improving manic symptoms in youth with mania associated with bipolar disorder. Treatment was generally well tolerated and adverse events were broadly consistent with the known profile of quetiapine in adults with bipolar disorder., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00090311., (© Copyright 2013 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To examine the proposed disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD) diagnosis in a child psychiatric outpatient population. Evaluation of DMDD included 4 domains: clinical phenomenology, delimitation from other diagnoses, longitudinal stability, and association with parental psychiatric disorders., Method: Data were obtained from 706 children aged 6-12 years who participated in the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study (sample was accrued from November 2005 to November 2008). DSM-IV criteria were used, and assessments, which included diagnostic, symptomatic, and functional measures, were performed at intake and at 12 and 24 months of follow-up. For the current post hoc analyses, a retrospective diagnosis of DMDD was constructed using items from the K-SADS-PL-W, a version of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children, which resulted in criteria closely matching the proposed DSM-5 criteria for DMDD., Results: At intake, 26% of participants met the operational DMDD criteria. DMDD+ vs DMDD- participants had higher rates of oppositional defiant disorder (relative risk [RR] = 3.9, P < .0001) and conduct disorder (RR = 4.5, P < .0001). On multivariate analysis, DMDD+ participants had higher rates of and more severe symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder (rate and symptom severity P values < .0001) and conduct disorder (rate, P < .0001; symptom severity, P = .01), but did not differ in the rates of mood, anxiety, or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders or in severity of inattentive, hyperactive, manic, depressive, or anxiety symptoms. Most of the participants with oppositional defiant disorder (58%) or conduct disorder (61%) met DMDD criteria, but those who were DMDD+ vs DMDD- did not differ in diagnostic comorbidity, symptom severity, or functional impairment. Over 2-year follow-up, 40% of the LAMS sample met DMDD criteria at least once, but 52% of these participants met criteria at only 1 assessment. DMDD was not associated with new onset of mood or anxiety disorders or with parental psychiatric history., Conclusions: In this clinical sample, DMDD could not be delimited from oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder, had limited diagnostic stability, and was not associated with current, future-onset, or parental history of mood or anxiety disorders. These findings raise concerns about the diagnostic utility of DMDD in clinical populations., (© Copyright 2012 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the validity of proposed DSM-5 criteria for autism spectrum disorder (ASD)., Method: We analyzed symptoms from 14,744 siblings (8,911 ASD and 5,863 non-ASD) included in a national registry, the Interactive Autism Network. Youth 2 through 18 years of age were included if at least one child in the family was diagnosed with ASD. Caregivers reported symptoms using the Social Responsiveness Scale and the Social Communication Questionnaire. The structure of autism symptoms was examined using latent variable models that included categories, dimensions, or hybrid models specifying categories and subdimensions. Diagnostic efficiency statistics evaluated the proposed DSM-5 algorithm in identifying ASD., Results: A hybrid model that included both a category (ASD versus non-ASD) and two symptom dimensions (social communication/interaction and restricted/repetitive behaviors) was more parsimonious than all other models and replicated across measures and subsamples. Empirical classifications from this hybrid model closely mirrored clinical ASD diagnoses (90% overlap), implying a broad ASD category distinct from non-ASD. DSM-5 criteria had superior specificity relative to DSM-IV-TR criteria (0.97 versus 0.86); however sensitivity was lower (0.81 versus 0.95). Relaxing DSM-5 criteria by requiring one less symptom criterion increased sensitivity (0.93 versus 0.81), with minimal reduction in specificity (0.95 versus 0.97)., Conclusions: Results supported the validity of proposed DSM-5 criteria for ASD as provided in Phase I Field Trials criteria. Increased specificity of DSM-5 relative to DSM-IV-TR may reduce false positive diagnoses, a particularly relevant consideration for low base rate clinical settings. Phase II testing of DSM-5 should consider a relaxed algorithm, without which as many as 12% of ASD-affected individuals, particularly females, will be missed. Relaxed DSM-5 criteria may improve identification of ASD, decreasing societal costs through appropriate early diagnosis and maximizing intervention resources., (Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) efficacy and safety versus placebo in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)., Method: Adolescents (13 through 17) with at least moderately symptomatic ADHD (ADHD Rating Scale IV: Clinician Version [ADHD-RS-IV] score ≥28) were randomized to placebo or LDX (30, 50, or 70 mg/d) in a 4-week, forced-dose titration, double-blind study. Primary and secondary efficacy measures were the ADHD-RS-IV, Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I), and Youth QOL-Research Version (YQOL-R). Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, laboratory findings, physical examinations, and ECG., Results: Overall, 314 participants were randomized; 309 were in efficacy analyses and 49 withdrew (11 due to TEAEs). Least squares mean (SE) change from baseline at endpoint in ADHD-RS-IV total scores were -18.3 (1.25), -21.1 (1.28), -20.7 (1.25) for 30, 50, and 70 mg/d LDX, respectively; -12.8 (1.25) for placebo (p ≤ .0056 versus placebo for each). Differences in ADHD-RS-IV total scores favored all LDX doses versus placebo at all weeks (p ≤ .0076). On the CGI-I, 69.1% of participants were rated very much/much improved at endpoint with LDX all doses versus placebo (39.5%) (p < .0001). YQOL-R changes at endpoint scores for LDX groups versus placebo were not significant. Commonly reported LDX (all doses combined) TEAEs (≥5%) were decreased appetite, headache, insomnia, decreased weight, and irritability. Small mean increases in pulse and blood pressure and no clinically meaningful trends in ECG changes were noted with LDX., Conclusions: LDX at all doses was effective versus placebo in treating adolescent ADHD and demonstrated a safety profile consistent with previous LDX studies. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY INFORMATION: Efficacy and Safety of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate (LDX) in Adolescents With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD); http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00735371., (Copyright © 2011 American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Outpatient interviews to collect criminal history data were conducted with 55 women and 77 men who had the dual diagnosis of rapid-cycling bipolar disorder with co-morbid substance abuse disorders (DD-RCBD), to ascertain gender-related similarities and differences. Fifty-three percent of women and 79 percent of men reported that they had been charged with a crime, and nearly half of those charged had been incarcerated. Men with DD-RCBD were more likely to have committed a felony and had a trend of committing more misdemeanors. Although women with DD-RCBD were less likely to have a criminal history than their male counterparts, they were far more likely to have a criminal history than were women in the general population. Implications from this pilot study include the need for earlier identification of bipolar disorder and for the increased availability of psychiatric and substance abuse services within correctional facilities.

Objective: To improve the methods for long-term assessment of drug-associated side effects and advance knowledge of the safety profile of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents., Method: A multidisciplinary, interactive workshop was hosted by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the Research Units on Pediatric Psychopharmacology network. Participants were experts in child and adolescent psychiatry, psychopharmacology, pharmacoepidemiology, and statistics from academia, the pharmaceutical industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the NIMH. Evaluation of drug safety was examined from five perspectives: research design and methods, industry, regulatory requirements, bioethics, and practice settings. For each of these areas, special emphasis was placed on identifying barriers and generating solutions., Results: A major obstacle is the lack of standardization of the methods used for collecting safety data. The limitations of both randomized clinical trials and passive postmarketing surveillance in assessing long-term safety were recognized. The need to consider alternative approaches, such as registries and trend analysis of population-based databases, was highlighted. Recommendations were proposed together with possible approaches to implementation., Conclusions: A concerted effort by academic researchers, industry, FDA, practitioners, and NIMH is needed to standardize methods and lay the foundations for systematic research on the long-term safety of psychotropic medications in children.