Search

Bipolar depression in youth has a negative effect on numerous domains, including physical and emotional well-being, school and family functioning, friendships, and academic success. Early treatment is crucial, yet diagnosis is difficult. The standard of treatment often requires life-long psychopharmacological management, and most treatments increase risk of adverse effects. Pediatric patients who have at least 1 parent with bipolar disorder are considered to be at higher risk for also developing bipolar depression, although there is currently no clear evidence of efficacious pharmacotherapy for these patients.

Objective: Aggression with impulsivity and reactivity (AIR) may distinguish a subset of youth from those with attention problems, rule-breaking behavior, or mood disorders, potentially with differential treatment response. Yet, DSM-5 and ICD-10 do not include an AIR diagnosis. Thus, we empirically grouped youths into profiles based on AIR, manic, depressive, rule-breaking, and self-harm behaviors; examined which profiles replicated across three samples; and characterized profile sets on demographic and clinical features.Method: After harmonizing data from three samples (n = 679, n = 392, n = 634), Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) assigned youth to profiles based on caregiver-reported measures of AIR, manic, depressive, rule-breaking, and self-harm behaviors. Profiles from each sample were grouped into sets based on profile similarity. Analyses tested differences in diagnoses, sex, and race, age, functioning, and mood severity.Results: Eight-profile solutions fit best. Seven profiles replicated across samples: high AIR and self-harm, lower depressive and manic scores; high AIR, manic symptoms, and self-harm; high depression symptoms; three smaller sets with high manic and depressive symptoms and moderate AIR; and two high rates of bipolar diagnoses and family bipolar history. Two sets were high on both AIR and mood symptoms, were the most impaired, and had the highest comorbidity.Conclusions: Analyses support an empirical definition of AIR, separate from mood disorders. Profile sets distinguished by level of AIR and mood symptoms differed in demographic and diagnostic characteristics as well as functioning. Importantly, a set emerged with high AIR but low mood indicators and with high rates of ADHD and ODD, but not mood disorder.

OBJECTIVES: Three Phase 3 trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of SPN-812 in pediatric subjects with ADHD. Here, we report the results of a fourth trial. METHODS: Eligible adolescent subjects (N = 297) were randomized to SPN-812 (400- or 600-mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline (CFB) at end of study (EOS) in the ADHD Rating Scale-5 (ADHD-RS-5) Total score. Statistical analyses included sequential testing for multiple treatment comparisons. Key secondary endpoints included: Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) score at EOS and CFB at EOS in the Conners 3–Parent Short Form (Conners 3–PS) Composite T-score and Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale–Parent (WFIRS–P) Total average score. RESULTS: The CFB at EOS ADHD-RS-5 Total score (least square [LS] means ± SE) for 400-mg/day, 600-mg/day SPN-812, and placebo was −18.3 ± 1.36, −16.7 ± 1.39, and –13.2 ± 1.38, respectively. The difference vs. placebo was statistically significant only for the 400-mg/day SPN-812 treatment group (600 mg/day: p = 0.0712; 400 mg/day: p = 0.0082). Neither dose could be considered superior to placebo due to the use of statistical method of sequential testing. Significant improvements were observed on a number of secondary endpoints. SPN-812 was well tolerated at both doses, with

Objective: To establish the validity and reliability of a provisional 30-item impulsive aggression (IA) diary in children (ages 6–12 years, inclusive) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: The provisional 30-item IA diary was administered for 14 days to parents of children with ADHD and IA symptoms (n = 103). Key inclusion criteria: confirmed ADHD diagnosis; signs of IA as measured by a Retrospective-Modified Overt Aggression Scale (R-MOAS) score ≥20 and an Aggression Questionnaire score of −2 to −5. Analyses included inter-item correlations, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), item response theory (IRT) modeling, internal consistency, test–retest reliability (TRT), concurrent validity (estimated by correlation between the IA diary and the R-MOAS/Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form), and known-groups methods. Results: The prevalence rates of 15 (50.0%) items were found to be too low (

Objective To examine development of bipolar spectrum disorders (BPSD) and other disorders in prospectively followed children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Method In the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study, 531 of 685 children age 6-12 (most selected for scores > 12 on General Behavior Inventory 10-item Mania scale) had ADHD, 112 with BPSD, and 419 without. With annual assessments for 8 years, retention averaged 6.2 years. Chi-square analyses compared rate of new BPSD and other comorbidity between those with versus without baseline ADHD and between retained versus resolved ADHD diagnosis. Cox regression tested factors influencing speed of BPSD onset. Results Of 419 with baseline ADHD but not BPSD, 52 (12.4%) developed BPSD, compared with 16 of 110 (14.5%) without either baseline diagnosis. Those who developed BPSD had more nonmood comorbidity over the follow-up than those who did not develop BPSD (p = .0001). Of 170 who still had ADHD at eight-year follow-up (and not baseline BPSD), 26 (15.3%) had developed BPSD, compared with 16 of 186 (8.6%) who had ADHD without BPSD at baseline but lost the ADHD diagnosis (χ2 = 3.82, p = .051). There was no statistical difference in whether ADHD persisted or not across new BPSD subtypes (χ2 = 1.62, p = .446). Of those who developed BPSD, speed of onset was not significantly related to baseline ADHD (p = .566), baseline anxiety (p = .121), baseline depression (p = .185), baseline disruptive behavior disorder (p = .184), age (B = -.11 p = .092), maternal mania (p = .389), or paternal mania (B = .73, p = .056). Those who started with both diagnoses had more severe symptoms/impairment than those with later developed BPSD and reported having ADHD first. Conclusions In a cohort selected for symptoms of mania at age 6-12, baseline ADHD was not a significant prospective risk factor for developing BPSD. However, persistence of ADHD may marginally mediate risk of BPSD, and early comorbidity of both diagnoses increases severity/impairment.

Objectives: The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate changes in adiposity, carotid intima media thickness (CIMT), and hepatic fat content measured via magnetic resonance imaging-estimated hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF) in antipsychotic (AP)-treated youth versus nonpsychiatric (NP) participants during participation in a 16-week behavioral weight loss (BWL) intervention. Subjects/Methods: Overweight/obese AP-treated youth (n = 26) were randomized 2:1 to weekly treatment versus recommended care (RC) over 16 weeks. NP controls (n = 21) were assigned to weekly treatment. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-measured adiposity, CIMT, and PDFF were measured at baseline and 16 weeks. Analyses assessed group differences in the effect of BWL on adiposity, CIMT, and PDFF. Results: BWL was well tolerated in both AP-treated and NP groups. DEXA-measured fat decreased significantly in the NP group (F[1,16] = 11.81, p = 0.003), with modest improvements in adiposity and hepatic fat in the AP-treated group, while an increase in adiposity was observed in the RC group. Significant differences in endpoint DEXA total fat (F[2,34] = 4.81, p = 0.01) and PDFF (F[2,30] = 3.60, p = 0.04) occurred across treatment groups, explained by larger improvements in NP versus RC youth in DEXA total fat (p = 0.03) and PDFF (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Intensive, family-based BWL treatment can improve whole-body adiposity and liver fat in obese youth, with decreases or attenuation of additional fat gain observed in AP-treated youth.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a rational, data-driven definition of impulsive/reactive aggression and establish distinctions between impulsive/reactive aggression and other common childhood problems. METHOD: Secondary analyses of data from Assessing Bipolar: A Community Academic Blend (ABACAB; N=636 ages 5-18; Youngstrom et al., 2005), Stanley Medical Research Institute (N=392 ages 5-17; Findling et al., 2005), and the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS; N=679 ages 6-12) studies, which recruited youths seeking outpatient mental health services in academic medical centers and community clinics. Following Jensen et al.’s (2007) procedure, three judges independently rated items from several widely-used scales in terms of assessing impulsive/reactive aggression. Principal components analyses (PCA) modeled structure of the selected items supplemented by items related to mood symptoms, rule-breaking behavior, and hyperactivity/impulsivity to better define the boundaries between impulsive/reactive aggression and other common childhood symptoms. RESULTS: In the rational item selection process, there was good agreement among the three experts who rated items as characterizing impulsive/reactive aggression or not. PCA favored five dimension solutions in all three samples. Across all samples, PCA resulted in rule-breaking behavior, aggression-impulsive/reactive (AIR), mania, and depression dimensions; there was an additional hyperactive/impulsive dimension in the LAMS sample and a self-harm dimension in ABACAB and Stanley samples. The dimensions demonstrated good internal consistency; criterion validity coefficients also showed consistency across samples. CONCLUSIONS: This study is a step toward developing an empirically-derived nosology of impulsive aggression/AIR. Findings support the validity of the AIR construct, which can be distinguished from manic and depressive symptoms as well as rule-breaking behavior.

Introduction: The standard of treatment of pediatric bipolar disorder (BPD) often requires life-long psychopharmacological management. Several pharmacological agents are approved by the US FDA for the treatment of pediatric BPD. However, each medication may cause adverse events (AEs). Provider awareness of AE profiles of common pharmacologic agents would serve to better inform patients and families in evaluating and selecting between treatment options. Areas covered: This review focuses on medications that, in our clinical experience, are commonly prescribed for youth with BPD and were evaluated in prospective clinical trials for the treatment of pediatric BPD. This paper highlights acute and long-term AEs described in these studies. Expert opinion: Most medications increase risk of AEs in youth with BPD. Treatment with lithium may lead to thyrotropin elevations, but generally does not cause significant weight gain. Divalproex may lead to weight gain; however, this finding was not consistent in comparison studies with lithium. Olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, and asenapine are associated with metabolic abnormalities and weight gain. Studies of ziprasidone, aripiprazole and lurasidone do not suggest significant metabolic AEs. More studies are needed to assess efficacy and safety of medications in managing pediatric BPD. Special focus on long-term maintenance trials is required to further identify long-term AEs in this population.

A randomized, 13-weeks, placebo-controlled double-blind study in 125 subjects aged 2–17.5 years with Autism Spectrum Disorder or Smith-Magenis syndrome and insomnia demonstrated efficacy and safety of easily-swallowed prolonged-release melatonin mini-tablets (PedPRM; 2–5 mg) in improving sleep duration and onset. Treatment effects on child behavior and caregiver’s quality of life were evaluated. PedPRM treatment resulted in significant improvement in externalizing but not internalizing behavior (Strengths and Difficulties questionnaire; SDQ) compared to placebo (p = 0.021) with clinically-relevant improvements in 53.7% of PedPRM-treated versus 27.6% of placebo-treated subjects (p = 0.008). Caregivers’ quality of life also improved with PedPRM versus placebo (p = 0.010) and correlated with the change in total SDQ (p = 0.0005). PedPRM alleviates insomnia-related difficulties, particularly externalizing behavior in the children, subsequently improving caregivers’ quality of life.

Objectives: We examined the association of parent training (PT)-related factors with therapeutic success in the Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study. Our aims were (1) to evaluate demographic and clinical characteristics as predictors of parent attendance and engagement in PT and (2) to examine the associations of parent attendance and engagement in PT with study-targeted child behavior outcomes (i.e., attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD] and disruptive behavior symptoms). TOSCA was a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of placebo versus risperidone when added to PT and psychostimulant for childhood ADHD with severe aggression. Methods: Data for 167 parents and children 6–12 years old with ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) or conduct disorder, and severe physical aggression were examined. Analyses used generalized linear models. Results: Most parents (72%) attended seven or more of nine sessions. The average parental engagement, that is, the percentage of PT elements fully achieved across participants and sessions, was 85%. The average therapist rating of goal completion was 92%. Parents of non-white and/or Hispanic children (p = 0.01) and children with lower intelligence quotient (p = 0.02) had lower PT attendance; parents with lower family incomes (p = 0.01) were less engaged. Attendance and engagement predicted better scores on the primary child behavior outcomes of disruptive behavior (Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form Disruptive Behavior Total) and ADHD and ODD symptoms, adjusting for baseline severity. Conclusions: When the clinical picture is sufficiently severe to warrant prescribing an atypical antipsychotic, PT is feasible for families of children with ADHD and co-occurring severe aggression. The promotion of attendance and engagement in PT is important to enhance clinical outcomes among this challenging population. Methods for overcoming barriers to participation in PT deserve vigorous investigation, particularly for those with low family income, non-white race, Hispanic ethnicity, or when children have lower cognitive level.

Objective: A recent double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study demonstrated 3-month efficacy and safety of a novel pediatric-appropriate prolonged-release melatonin (PedPRM) for insomnia in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and neurogenetic disorders (NGD) with/without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder comorbidity. Long-term efficacy and safety of PedPRM treatment was studied. Methods: A prospective, open-label efficacy and safety follow-up of nightly 2, 5, or 10 mg PedPRM in subjects who completed the 13-week double-blind trial (51 PedPRM; 44 placebo). Measures included caregiver-reported Sleep and Nap Diary, Composite Sleep Disturbance Index (CSDI), caregiver's Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and quality of life (WHO-5 Well-Being Index). Results: Ninety-five subjects (74.7% males; mean [standard deviation] age, 9 [4.24]; range, 2–17.5 years) received PedPRM (2/5 mg) according to the double-blind phase dose, for 39 weeks with optional dose adjustment (2, 5, or 10 mg/day) after the first 13 weeks. After 52 weeks of continuous treatment (PedPRM-randomized group) subjects slept (mean [SE]) 62.08 (21.5) minutes longer (p = 0.007); fell asleep 48.6 (10.2) minutes faster (p 50% decrease; p = 0.001); and better sleep quality (p

The use of atypical antipsychotic medications in pediatric patients has become more prevalent in recent years. The purpose of this review is to provide a clinically relevant update of recent selected key publications regarding the use of atypical antipsychotics in this population.Studies reviewed included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled medication trials conducted within the past 5 years. A PubMed search was conducted for each of the 11 second-generation antipsychotic medications currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the United States: clozapine, risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, ziprasidone, paliperidone, asenapine, iloperidone, lurasidone, and cariprazine. Trials published in English with subjects 18 years of age and younger were included in this review. Additional studies, chosen for their significance to clinical practice, were also included at the discretion of the authors.This review demonstrates that more empiric data are available regarding both the acute efficacy and, to a lesser extent, the longer-term efficacy and tolerability for several of the considered antipsychotic medications. The clinical conditions for which these medications have been studied include schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, Tourette's disorder, and autism spectrum disorder. They have also been used as an adjunctive treatment for disruptive behavior disorders with aggression, which have not responded to treatment with stimulants.Evidence regarding the efficacy and tolerability of antipsychotic medications for mental health disorders in children and adolescents has expanded exponentially in recent years. However, more information is needed so that evidence-based comparisons between medications can be made. In the future, data enabling the selection of medications based upon individual patient characteristics could potentially lead to greater efficacy and efficiency in treating what are frequently debilitating medical conditions. Maladaptive aggression in children, often treated with antipsychotics, is one such area in which there is a dearth of actual information available to the clinician. It is to be hoped that additional, longer-term studies of these medications will further inform evidence-based practice in clinical settings.

Purpose SPN-812 (viloxazine extended-release) is under investigation for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents. This Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of SPN-812 200 and 400 mg once daily in children 6–11 years of age with ADHD. Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive SPN-812 200 mg, SPN-812 400 mg, or placebo, once daily for 8 weeks (including ≤3 weeks titration period). The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline (CFB) in ADHD Rating Scale (RS)-5 Total score at end of study (EOS). Key secondary endpoints included Clinical Global Impression–Improvement (CGI-I) score at EOS, CFB in Conners 3–Parent Short Form (PS) composite T-score at EOS, and CFB in Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale–Parent (WFIRS-P) Total average score at EOS. Findings A total of 313 patients were enrolled, with 301 in the intent-to-treat population (194 boys, 107 girls; mean age [SD], 8.4 [1.7] years). At EOS, the CFBs in ADHD-RS-5 Total score and CGI-I score were significantly improved with both 200- and 400-mg/d SPN-812 versus placebo (ADHD-RS-5, P = 0.0038 and 0.0063, respectively; CGI-I, P = 0.0028 and 0.0099). At EOS, the CFB in Conners 3-PS composite T-score was significantly improved with 200- (P = 0.0064), but not 400-mg/d (P = 0.0917), SPN-812 compared to placebo. No significant difference between the groups was found in WFIRS-P Total average score. The rate of discontinuations due to adverse events in both SPN-812 treatment groups combined was Implications SPN-812 200 and 400 mg once daily was associated with improvements in ADHD symptoms in school-aged children and was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03247543. (Clin Ther. 2021; 43:XXX–XXX) © 2021 Elsevier Inc.

To evaluate the acute efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) vs placebo (PBO) in preschool-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).This phase 3, double-blind, fixed-dose study randomly assigned children (aged 4-5 years) with ADHD to 6 weeks of LDX (5, 10, 20, 30 mg) or PBO. The prespecified primary (change from baseline at week 6 in ADHD Rating Scale IV, Preschool version, total score [ADHD-RS-IV-PS-TS]) and key secondary (Clinical Global Impression-Improvement [CGI-I] score at week 6) efficacy endpoints were assessed using linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures. Safety and tolerability assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and changes in pulse and blood pressure (BP).The study comprised 199 participants randomly asigned 5:5:5:5:6 to receive 5, 10, 20, 30 mg LDX or PBO, respectively. Least squares (LS) mean (95% CI) treatment difference at week 6 between pooled LDX (10, 20, 30 mg) and PBO was statistically significant for ADHD-RS-IV-PS-TS change (-5.9 [-11.01, -0.78], p = .0242; effect size [ES], -0.43). CGI-I scores improved (ie, 1-2 on CGI-I) in 41.7% for pooled LDX and 24.3% for PBO (p = .0857). The LS mean (95% CI) treatment difference between pooled LDX and PBO for CGI-I score at week 6 was -0.6 (-1.03, -0.16; p = .0074; ES, -0.52). Frequency of TEAEs was 46.6% across all 4 LDX doses vs 42.2% with PBO; the most frequent TEAEs were decreased appetite (13.7% vs 8.9%, respectively) and irritability (9.6% vs 0%). Discontinuations because of TEAEs were 5.5% for all LDX doses and 4.4% for PBO. Mean ± SD pulse/BP changes from baseline at week 6/early termination were numerically greater with LDX vs PBO (pulse beats/min: 2.7 ± 10.79 vs 1.2 ± 9.90; systolic BP, mm Hg: 1.0 ± 7.51 vs 0.3 ± 6.06; diastolic BP, mm Hg: 1.7 ± 5.90 vs 0.0 ± 6.88).In children aged 4 to 5 years with ADHD, LDX was more efficacious than PBO in reducing symptoms. The observed ES for change in ADHD-RS-IV-PS-TS appears to be smaller in magnitude than has been reported for studies of LDX conducted in older children and adolescents. LDX was generally well tolerated, and no new safety signals were identified.Safety and Efficacy Study in Preschool Children Aged 4-5 Years With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; http://www.gov; NCT03260205.

Youth with mental illness have higher levels of obesity than children in the general population. Both regular physical activity and limited screen time have been recommended to reduce and prevent childhood obesity. This study examines accelerometer-based moderate–vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and screen time among youth with overweight/obesity issues who are receiving mental health care. This study looked at a 12-month weight management randomized clinical trial for overweight/obese youth aged 8–18 years who are receiving mental health services. At baseline, MVPA was assessed using accelerometers, and screen time was self-reported. Among 100 youth, 43% were female, 44% were Black, and 48% were

Objective To test differential prospective prediction of growth in externalizing behavior, including oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and substance use disorders, by earlier hyperactive-impulsive (HI) vs inattentive (IN) symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Method Participants in the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) Study (N = 685 at study entry), including 458 boys and 227 girls ages 6–12, completed full parent report and self-report assessments every year for 8 years on the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children. Three sets of analyses were conducted. First, hierarchal regression (block entry) was used to test independent associations between HI symptoms and later externalizing outcomes, controlling for IN symptoms, and IN symptoms and later externalizing outcomes, controlling for HI symptoms. Second, logistic regression was used to test progression of DSM externalizing disorders. Third, tests of mediation were used to assess potentiation of externalizing progression through environmental risk mediators (eg, family environment, neighborhood violence). Results Consistent with hypotheses derived from trait impulsivity theories of externalizing behavior, HI symptoms of ADHD were associated independently with long-term externalizing outcomes, whereas IN symptoms were not. Between months 48 and 96, ADHD-HI/combined symptom subtype diagnoses predicted later oppositional defiant disorder diagnoses, oppositional defiant disorder diagnoses predicted later conduct disorder diagnoses, and conduct disorder diagnoses predicted later substance use disorder diagnoses. Evidence for environmental risk mediation (eg, parental monitoring, neighborhood violence) was also found. Conclusion Findings support trait impulsivity models of externalizing progression, whereby ADHD-HI/combined symptoms subtypes predispose to increasingly severe externalizing behaviors, which are magnified in contexts of environmental risk.

Background There is a paucity of studies on treatment of childhood-onset bipolar disorder and its associated comorbidities, which leads to a wide diversity of opinion on choice and sequencing of treatment options. Methods From December 2018 to January 2019, a graphic depiction of medications and weekly ratings of symptoms of mania, depression, anxiety, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and oppositional behavior that parents had rated on their 9-year-old child over a period of several years was sent to experts in child and adult bipolar disorder. These responding medical doctors (MDs, 8 child and 18 adult psychiatrists) rated a comprehensive list of medications that they would choose (and with what priority) to treat the child's now improved mood (mania and depression) but continued mild to moderate symptoms of anxiety, ADHD, and oppositional behavior. Results In the whole group, the drugs most highly endorsed were lamotrigine: 69%, lithium: 62%, lurasidone: 62%, quetiapine: 54%, aripiprazole: 46%, and valproate: 42%. Among the antidepressants, 38% endorsed a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, 12% a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, and 27% bupropion. Of the child MDs, 75% suggested increasing the 1-mg dose of risperidone, while few adult MDs suggested this. Conversely, 56% of the adult MDs suggested using valproate, while only 1 child MD did so. There was little consensus on how to manage ADHD symptoms unresponsive to methylphenidate 36 mg/d. How these treatment options were sequenced also varied widely. Conclusions There was wide variation in suggestions on to how to treat persistent symptoms of anxiety, ADHD, and oppositional behavior in a child whose mania and depression had been brought under good control. We surmise that this great diversity in recommendations among experts in child and adult bipolar disorder stems at least partially from inadequate literature on treatment and that a new emphasis on funding and conducting studies on efficacy and effectiveness is needed.

Objective: The purpose of the present study was to characterize prescription stimulant non-medical use (NMU) in adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 years seeking treatment for substance use disorder (SUD) with the Comprehensive Health Assessment Tool for Teens (CHAT™). Method: Adolescents being evaluated for SUD treatment between Q1 2010 and Q3 2017 ( n = 20,189) completed the CHAT™. Results: About 4.3% of the sample ( N = 867) of adolescents in SUD treatment reported past 30-day prescription stimulant NMU. Compared to those without past 30-day prescription stimulant NMU, more reported a lifetime diagnosis of learning disorder or ADHD, more took medication for emotional, behavioral, or learning disorders, received past-month inpatient treatment, or were currently not enrolled in school. Prescription stimulants were most often taken orally for NMU, however, approximately half reported using alternate routes of administration, the most prominent of which was intranasal use. Conclusion: About 4.3% of adolescents in SUD treatment evaluation reported past 30-day prescription stimulant NMU. Greater percentages of lifetime learning disorder, medication use, past-month inpatient treatment, school unenrollment, and overall substance misuse were associated with prescription stimulant NMU, as were alternate routes of administration. These data reveal an ongoing, persistent level of past-30-day NMU of prescription stimulants among adolescents being evaluated for SUD treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Describe hospitalization rates in children with elevated symptoms of mania and determine predictors of psychiatric hospitalizations during 96 month follow-up. METHODS: Eligible 6–12.9 year olds and their parents visiting 9 outpatient mental health clinics were invited to be screened with the Parent General Behavior Inventory 10-item Mania Scale. Of 605 children with elevated symptoms of mania eligible for follow-up, 538 (88.9%) had ≥1 of 16 possible follow-up interviews and are examined herein. RESULTS: Multivariate Cox regression indicated only four factors predicted hospitalizations: parental mental health problems (HR=1.80; 95% CI=1.21, 2.69); hospitalization prior to study entry (HR=3.03; 95% CI=1.80, 4.43); continuous outpatient mental health service use (HR=3.73; 95% CI=2.40, 5.50); and low parental assessment of how well treatment matched child’s needs (HR=3.97; 95% CI=2.50, 6.31). CONCLUSIONS. Parental perspectives on mental health services should be gathered routinely, as they can signal treatment failures.

Background The affective go/no-go (AGN) task has been used to assess affective biases in attention set-shifting and deficits in inhibitory control of emotional information among depressed youth, but results have been inconsistent. We aimed to test AGN robustness and clarify temporal relationships between depressive symptoms and affective processing in youth. Methods We evaluated AGN performance twice (Time 1 N = 306; Time 2 N = 238) in relation to current, previous, and future depression in the same children/adolescents with depression and those without diagnoses who participated in the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study. Mixed repeated ANCOVAs were powered to detect small-medium group by valence interactions in response latency and errors. Supplemental regression analyses examined depressive symptoms as a continuous variable in relation to AGN performance. Results No clear pattern emerged, mirroring the broader AGN literature. In primary analyses, group by valence interactions were only observed at one AGN administration; none replicated across administrations. Similarly, in regression analyses depressive symptoms had no relation to affective processing biases/deficits at AGN Time 1, though some relationships were detected between symptoms and AGN Time 2. Limitations Relatively few youth met criteria for a depressive disorder, though analyses were appropriately powered and supplemental analyses examined depressive symptoms continuously. Comparison groups were not healthy controls at recruitment but were free from any Axis I disorder at AGN administration. Conclusions Given the inconsistency of AGN findings, attention should be focused on tasks that provide more sensitive, robust measures of emotional information processing in depressed youth.

Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety of SPN-810 (extended-release molindone) in a Phase-2b, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study of children (6–12 years) with ADHD and persistent impulsive aggression (IA). Method: After lead-in, children were randomized to (a) placebo ( N = 31); (b) low-dose ( N = 29, 12/18 mg/day); (c) medium-dose ( N = 30, 24/36 mg/day); and (4) high-dose ( N = 31, 36/54 mg/day) groups. Treatment included ~2.5-week titration, 3-week maintenance, and 1-week tapering/conversion, alongside existing monotherapy (stimulants/nonstimulants) and behavioral therapy. The primary endpoint was change in Retrospective-Modified Overt Aggression Scale (R-MOAS) score at end of study, with safety monitored. Results: A total of 95 (78.5%) children completed the study. Aggression (R-MOAS) improved with low and medium doses (low dose: p = .031; medium dose: p = .024; high dose: p = .740). The most common adverse events were headache (10.0%), sedation (8.9%), and increased appetite (7.8%). Conclusion: These results suggest SPN-810 may be effective in reducing residual IA behaviors in children with ADHD. Research is still needed to support the benefit–risk profile of SPN-810 in pediatric populations.

The limitations of current US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medications for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) set the need for the development of novel, effective, and tolerable medications to treat this disorder. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether treatment with SPN-812 (viloxazine extended-release) significantly reduces symptoms of ADHD in children.This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-week trial to assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily 100- and 200-mg SPN-812 in the treatment of ADHD in male and female children 6-11 years of age. Inclusion criteria required subjects to have a confirmed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, ADHD diagnosis, an ADHD-Rating Scale-5 (ADHD-RS-5) score ≥28, a Clinical Global Impression-Severity score ≥4, and for subjects to be free of ADHD medication ≥1 week before randomization. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline (CFB) at end of study (EOS) in ADHD-RS-5 Total score. Key secondary endpoints included Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scores at EOS and CFB at EOS in the Conners 3-Parent Short Form (Conners 3-PS) Composite T-score and the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent (WFIRS-P) Total average score. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), laboratory tests, vital signs, physical examinations, ECGs, and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. The primary efficacy endpoint was analyzed by using a mixed model for repeated measures; all secondary measures were analyzed by using an ANCOVA model.A total of 477 subjects were randomized to treatment (intent-to-treat population, n = 460). The majority of subjects were male (63%) and either White (51.3%) or African American (43.7%). The demographic and baseline characteristics between the groups were similar. Statistically significant improvements in ADHD-RS-5 Total score were observed in both the 100- and 200-mg/day SPN-812 treatment groups compared to placebo at week 1 of treatment (P = 0.0004 and P = 0.0244, respectively), which was maintained through EOS (P = 0.0004 and P 0.0001). Significant improvements were also observed at EOS in the CGI-I scale (P = 0.0020 and P 0.0001), Conners 3-PS Composite T-score (P = 0.0003 and P = 0.0002), and WFIRS-P Total average score (P = 0.0019 and P = 0.0002) versus placebo. Treatment-related AEs reported in ≥5% of subjects included somnolence, decreased appetite, and headache. The discontinuation rate due to AEs was5%.SPN-812 significantly reduced ADHD symptoms in children and was well tolerated. SPN-812 may prove to be an effective treatment for children with ADHD. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03247530.

Disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD) was introduced in DSM-5 to distinguish a subset of chronically irritable youth who may be incorrectly diagnosed and/or treated for pediatric bipolar disorder (BPD). This study characterized the rate of new treatment episodes and treated prevalence of BPD and DMDD from a longitudinal electronic health record database and examined the impact of DMDD on prescription trends.A retrospective cohort study using 2008-2018 Optum electronic health record data was conducted. Youth aged 10 to 18 years with ≥ 183 days of database enrollment before the study cohort entry were included. Annual new treatment episode rates per 1,000 patient-years and treated prevalence (%) were estimated. Prescriptions for medications, concomitant diagnoses, and acute mental health service use for 2016-2018 were evaluated.There were 7,677 youths with DMDD and 6,480 youths with BPD identified. Mean age (13-15 years) and ethnicity were similar for both groups. A rise in new treatment episode rates (0.87-1.75 per 1,000 patient-years, p .0001) and treated prevalence (0.08%-0.35%, p .0001) of DMDD diagnoses (2016-2018) following diagnosis inception was paralleled by decreasing new treatment episode rates (1.22-1.14 per 1,000 patient-years, p .01) and treated prevalence (0.42%-0.36%, p .0001) of BPD diagnoses (2015-2018). More youth in the DMDD group were prescribed medications compared with the BPD group (81.9% vs 69.4%), including antipsychotics (58.9% vs 51.0%). Higher proportions of youth with DMDD vs youth with BPD had disruptive behavior disorders (eg, 35.9% vs 20.5% had oppositional defiant disorder), and required inpatient hospitalization related to their mental health disorder (45.0% vs 33.0%).Diagnosis of DMDD has had rapid uptake in clinical practice but is associated with increased antipsychotic and polypharmacy prescriptions and higher rates of comorbidity and inpatient hospitalization in youth with a DMDD diagnosis compared with a BPD diagnosis.

Impulsive aggressive (IA, or impulsive aggression) behavior describes an aggregate set of maladaptive, aggressive behaviors occurring across multiple neuropsychiatric disorders. IA is reactive, eruptive, sudden, and unplanned; it provides information about the severity, but not the nature, of its associated primary disorder. IA in children and adolescents is of serious clinical concern for patients, families, and physicians, given the detrimental impact pediatric IA can have on development. Currently, the ability to properly identify, monitor, and treat IA behavior across clinical populations is hindered by two major roadblocks: (1) the lack of an assessment tool designed for and sensitive to the set of behaviors comprising IA, and (2) the absence of a treatment indicated for IA symptomatology. In this review, we discuss the clinical gaps in the approach to monitoring and treating IA behavior, and highlight emerging solutions that may improve clinical outcomes in patients with IA.

Summary Background Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common paediatric neurodevelopmental disorder with substantial effect on families and society. Alternatives to traditional care, including novel digital therapeutics, have shown promise to remediate cognitive deficits associated with this disorder and may address barriers to standard therapies, such as pharmacological interventions and behavioural therapy. AKL-T01 is an investigational digital therapeutic designed to target attention and cognitive control delivered through a video game-like interface via at-home play for 25 min per day, 5 days per week for 4 weeks. This study aimed to assess whether AKL-T01 improved attentional performance in paediatric patients with ADHD. Methods The Software Treatment for Actively Reducing Severity of ADHD (STARS-ADHD) was a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, controlled trial of paediatric patients (aged 8–12 years, without disorder-related medications) with confirmed ADHD and Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA) Attention Performance Index (API) scores of −1·8 and below done by 20 research institutions in the USA. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to AKL-T01 or a digital control intervention. The primary outcome was mean change in TOVA API from pre-intervention to post-intervention. Safety, tolerability, and compliance were also assessed. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02674633 and is completed. Findings Between July 15, 2016, and Nov 30, 2017, 857 patients were evaluated and 348 were randomly assigned to receive AKL-T01 or control. Among patients who received AKL-T01 (n=180 [52%]; mean [SD] age, 9·7 [1·3] years) or control (n=168 [48%]; mean [SD] age, 9·6 [1·3] years), the non-parametric estimate of the population median change from baseline TOVA API was 0·88 (95% CI 0·24–1·49; p=0·0060). The mean (SD) change from baseline on the TOVA API was 0·93 (3·15) in the AKL-T01 group and 0·03 (3·16) in the control group. There were no serious adverse events or discontinuations. Treatment-related adverse events were mild and included frustration (5 [3%] of 180) and headache (3 [2%] of 180). Patient compliance was a mean of 83 (83%) of 100 expected sessions played (SD, 29·2 sessions). Interpretation Although future research is needed for this digital intervention, this study provides evidence that AKL-T01 might be used to improve objectively measured inattention in paediatric patients with ADHD, while presenting minimal adverse events. Funding Sponsored by Akili Interactive Labs.

ObjectiveTo review pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies for treating sleep disturbances in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and to develop recommendations for addressing sleep disturbance in this population.MethodsThe guideline panel followed the American Academy of Neurology 2011 guideline development process, as amended. The systematic review included studies through December 2017. Recommendations were based on evidence, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences.Major recommendations (Level B)For children and adolescents with ASD and sleep disturbance, clinicians should assess for medications and coexisting conditions that could contribute to the sleep disturbance and should address identified issues. Clinicians should counsel parents regarding strategies for improved sleep habits with behavioral strategies as a first-line treatment approach for sleep disturbance either alone or in combination with pharmacologic or nutraceutical approaches. Clinicians should offer melatonin if behavioral strategies have not been helpful and contributing coexisting conditions and use of concomitant medications have been addressed, starting with a low dose. Clinicians should recommend using pharmaceutical-grade melatonin if available. Clinicians should counsel children, adolescents, and parents regarding potential adverse effects of melatonin use and the lack of long-term safety data. Clinicians should counsel that there is currently no evidence to support the routine use of weighted blankets or specialized mattress technology for improving disrupted sleep. If asked about weighted blankets, clinicians should counsel that the trial reported no serious adverse events with blanket use and that blankets could be a reasonable nonpharmacologic approach for some individuals.

Objective: Study goals were to (1) provide a rationale for developing a composite primary outcome score that includes symptom severity for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and emotional dysregulation, plus symptom-induced impairment; (2) demonstrate weighting methods to calculate the composite score using a sample of children diagnosed with ADHD and aggression; and (3) identify the optimal weighting method most sensitive to change, as measured by effect sizes. Methods: We conducted secondary data analyses from the previously conducted Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study. Children aged 6-12 years were recruited through academic medical centers or community referrals. The composite primary outcome comprised the ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, disruptive mood dysregulation disorder, and peer conflict subscales from the Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory (CASI), a DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual)-referenced rating scale of symptom severity and symptom-induced impairment. Five weighting methods were tested based on input from senior statisticians. Results: The composite score demonstrated a larger (Cohen's d) effect size than the individual CASI subscales, irrespective of the weighting method (10%-55% larger). Across all weighting methods, effect sizes were similar and substantial: approximately a two-standard deviation symptom reduction (range: -1.97 to -2.04), highest for equal item and equal subscale weighting, was demonstrated, from baseline to week 9, among all TOSCA participants. The composite score showed a medium positive correlation with the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scores, 0.46-0.47 for all weighting methods. Conclusions: A composite score that included severity and impairment ratings of ADHD and emotional dysregulation demonstrated a more robust pre-post change than individual subscales. This composite may be a more useful indicator of clinically relevant improvement in heterogeneous samples with ADHD than single subscales, avoiding some of the statistical limitations associated with multiple comparisons. Among the five similar weighting methods, the two best appear to be the equal item and equal subscale weighting methods.

We aimed to identify markers of future affective lability in youth at bipolar disorder risk from the Pittsburgh Bipolar Offspring Study (BIOS) (n = 41, age = 14, SD = 2.30), and validate these predictors in an independent sample from the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms study (LAMS) (n = 55, age = 13.7, SD = 1.9). We included factors of mixed/mania, irritability, and anxiety/depression (29 months post MRI scan) in regularized regression models. Clinical and demographic variables, along with neural activity during reward and emotion processing and gray matter structure in all cortical regions at baseline, were used to predict future affective lability factor scores, using regularized regression. Future affective lability factor scores were predicted in both samples by unique combinations of baseline neural structure, function, and clinical characteristics. Lower bilateral parietal cortical thickness, greater left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex thickness, lower right transverse temporal cortex thickness, greater self-reported depression, mania severity, and age at scan predicted greater future mixed/mania factor score. Lower bilateral parietal cortical thickness, greater right entorhinal cortical thickness, greater right fusiform gyral activity during emotional face processing, diagnosis of major depressive disorder, and greater self-reported depression severity predicted greater irritability factor score. Greater self-reported depression severity predicted greater anxiety/depression factor score. Elucidating unique clinical and neural predictors of future-specific affective lability factors is a step toward identifying objective markers of bipolar disorder risk, to provide neural targets to better guide and monitor early interventions in bipolar disorder at-risk youth.

Objective Risk calculators (RC) to predict clinical outcomes are gaining interest. An RC to estimate risk of bipolar spectrum disorders (BPSD) could help reduce the duration of undiagnosed BPSD and improve outcomes. Our objective was to adapt an RC previously validated in the Pittsburgh Bipolar Offspring Study (BIOS) sample to achieve adequate predictive ability in both familial high-risk and clinical high-risk youths. Method Participants (aged 6−12 years at baseline) from the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study (N = 473) were evaluated semi-annually. Evaluations included a Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders (K-SADS) interview. After testing an RC that closely approximated the original, we made modifications to improve model prediction. Models were trained in the BIOS data, which included biennial K-SADS assessments, and tested in LAMS. The final model was then trained in LAMS participants, including family history of BPSD as a predictor, and tested in the familial high-risk sample. Results Over follow-up, 65 youths newly met criteria for BPSD. The original RC identified youths who developed BPSD only moderately well (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.67). Eliminating predictors other than the K-SADS screening items for mania and depression improved accuracy (AUC = 0.73) and generalizability. The model trained in LAMS, including family history as a predictor, performed well in the BIOS sample (AUC = 0.74). Conclusion The clinical circumstances under which the assessment of symptoms occurs affects RC accuracy; focusing on symptoms related to the onset of BPSD improved generalizability. Validation of the RC under clinically realistic circumstances will be an important next step.

Awareness of the prevalence and impact of bipolar disorder in pediatric patients has grown in recent years. Youths with this disorder are at risk for poor long-term outcomes, but with careful screening, clinicians may be able to detect early signs or subthreshold symptoms and provide a timely diagnosis and effective treatment. Although several pharmacologic options are available for patients aged 10 years and up, they differ in their safety and tolerability profiles. Clinicians should select the agent that best balances benefit and risk-at the lowest efficacious dose-and provide careful monitoring for adverse events throughout treatment.

Background Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a serious illness in children and adolescents. Vilazodone is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor approved for MDD in adults. This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of vilazodone in adolescent patients, ages 12–17 years, with MDD (NCT01878292). Methods This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, fixed-dose study was conducted at 56 study centers in the United States and was 10 weeks in duration (a 1-week screening period, an 8-week double-blind treatment period, and a 1-week double-blind down-taper period). Outpatients with an MDD diagnosis based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria were included in the study. Clinical inclusion criteria required a Children’s Depression Rating Scale–Revised (CDRS-R) total score of ≥ 40 and Clinical Global Impressions–Severity (CGI-S) score of ≥ 4. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with placebo (n = 174), vilazodone 15 mg/day (n = 175), or vilazodone 30 mg/day (n = 180). The primary and secondary efficacy parameters were change from baseline to week 8 in CDRS-R total score and CGI-S score, respectively. Safety parameters included adverse events (AEs); clinical laboratory, vital sign, and electrocardiogram parameters; and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Results Approximately 86% of patients completed double-blind treatment. There was no statistically significant difference between vilazodone 15 mg/day or 30 mg/day and placebo in change from baseline in CDRS-R score. Change in CGI-S score was not significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were nausea, upper abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, nasopharyngitis, headache, and dizziness. Reports of suicidal ideation (placebo, 33.3%; vilazodone 15 mg/day, 36.0%; vilazodone 30 mg/day, 31.1%) and suicidal behavior (placebo, 1.8%; vilazodone 15 mg/day, 1.1%; vilazodone 30 mg/day, 1.1%) were similar between treatment groups. There were no deaths in the study. Conclusions The efficacy of vilazodone for the treatment of MDD in adolescent patients could not be confirmed in this study. Vilazodone was generally safe and well tolerated, with treatment-emergent AEs similar to those in adult patients. Clinical Trial Registration NCT01878292. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40272-018-0290-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the diagnostic efficiency of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Thought Problems subscale and the rationally derived DSM-oriented Psychotic Symptoms Scale (DOPSS) to identify clinically concerning psychosis in a multi-site sample of youths seeking outpatient mental health services (N = 694). METHOD: We operationally defined clinically concerning psychosis as the presence of clinically significant hallucinations or delusions, assessed by the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS) psychosis items. RESULTS: Both the Thought Problems and DOPSS scores showed significant areas under the curve (AUCs=.65 and .70, respectively), but the briefer DOPSS showed statistically significantly better diagnostic efficiency for any clinically concerning psychosis, but the difference was small enough that it would not be clinically meaningful. The optimal psychosis screening cut-off score (maximizing sensitivity and specificity) was 68.5+ [corresponding diagnostic likelihood ratio (DiLR)=1.59] for the Thought Problems subscale and 1.67+ (DiLR=1.97) for the DOPSS. CONCLUSIONS: Both the CBCL Thought Problems and DOPSS are clinically useful for identifying psychotic symptoms in children, and although the DOPSS showed statistically better discriminating power, the difference was small so we would not necessarily recommend the DOPSS over standard scoring.

Background The DSM-5 separates the diagnostic criteria for mood and behavioral disorders. Both types of disorders share neurocognitive deficits of executive function and reading difficulties in childhood. Children with dyslexia also have executive function deficits, revealing a role of executive function circuitry in reading. The aim of the current study is to determine whether there is a significant relationship of functional connectivity within the fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular cognitive control networks to reading measures for children with mood disorders, behavioral disorders, dyslexia, and healthy controls (HC). Method Behavioral reading measures of phonological awareness, decoding, and orthography were collected. Resting state fMRI data were collected, preprocessed, and then analyzed for functional connectivity. Differences in the reading measures were tested for significance among the groups. Global efficiency (GE) measures were also tested for correlation with reading measures in 40 children with various disorders and 17 HCs. Results Significant differences were found between the four groups on all reading measures. Relative to HCs and children with mood disorders or behavior disorders, children with dyslexia as a primary diagnosis scored significantly lower on all three reading measures. Children with mood disorders scored significantly lower than controls on a test of phonological awareness. Phonological awareness deficits correlated with reduced resting state functional connectivity MRI (rsfcMRI) in the cingulo-opercular network for children with dyslexia. A significant difference was also found in fronto-parietal global efficiency in children with mood disorders relative to the other three groups. We also found a significant difference in cingulo-opercular global efficiency in children with mood disorders relative to the Dyslexia and Control groups. However, none of these differences correlate significantly with reading measures. Conclusions/significance Reading difficulties involve abnormalities in different cognitive control networks in children with dyslexia compared to children with mood disorders. Findings of the current study suggest increased functional connectivity of one cognitive control network may compensate for reduced functional connectivity in the other network in children with mood disorders. These findings provide guidance to clinical professionals for design of interventions tailored for children suffering from reading difficulties originating from different pathologies., Highlights • Significant differences were found between children with mood vs those with behavioral disorders and children with dyslexia • Phonological awareness correlated with reduced connectivity in both the fronto-parietal and the cingulo-opercular networks in dyslexia • Differences in fronto-parietal global efficiency in children with mood disorders vs the other three groups

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.

Objective: To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine versus placebo in the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: Outpatient children (7–11 years) and adolescents (12–17 years) who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD and had screening and baseline Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total scores >40 were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of treatment with placebo, low exposure desvenlafaxine (20, 30, or 35 mg/day based on baseline weight), or higher exposure desvenlafaxine (25, 35, or 50 mg/day based on baseline weight). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in CDRS-R total score at week 8, analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. Secondary efficacy assessments included Clinical Global Impressions-Severity and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scales. Safety assessments included adverse events and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Results: The safety population included 363 patients (children, n = 109; adolescents, n = 254). No statistical separation from placebo was observed for either desvenlafaxine group for CDRS-R total score or for any secondary efficacy endpoint. At week 8, adjusted mean (standard error) changes from baseline in CDRS-R total score for the desvenlafaxine low exposure, desvenlafaxine high exposure, and placebo groups were −23.7 (1.1), −24.4 (1.1), and −22.9 (1.1), respectively. The incidence of adverse events was similar among groups. Conclusion: Low and high exposure desvenlafaxine groups did not demonstrate efficacy for the treatment of MDD in children and adolescents in this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Desvenlafaxine (20–50 mg/day) was generally safe and well tolerated with no new safety signals identified in pediatric patients with MDD in this study.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–oriented Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory (CASI-4R) Psychotic Symptoms scale was tested using receiver operati...

Reliability of clinical diagnoses is often low. There are many algorithms that could improve diagnostic accuracy, and statistical learning is becoming popular. Using pediatric bipolar disorder as a clinically challenging example, we evaluated a series of increasingly complex models ranging from simple screening to a supervised LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operation) regression in a large ( N = 550) academic clinic sample. We then externally validated models in a community clinic ( N = 511) with the same candidate predictors and semistructured interview diagnoses, providing high methodological consistency; the clinics also had substantially different demography and referral patterns. Models performed well according to internal validation metrics. Complex models degraded rapidly when externally validated. Naive Bayesian and logistic models concentrating on predictors identified in prior meta-analyses tied or bettered LASSO models when externally validated. Implementing these methods would improve clinical diagnostic performance. Statistical learning research should continue to invest in high-quality indicators and diagnoses to supervise model training.

Bipolar disorder is a debilitating illness that often leads to functional impairment when untreated. Monotherapy with mood stabilizers is preferable, although combination therapy may be necessary in refractory cases. Most studies focus on the use of lithium, anticonvulsants, and second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute manic or depressive phases, as well as maintaining adequate response after the episode. More research is needed in the area of psychopharmacology of pediatric bipolar disorder to bridge the gap between clinical needs and the available data.

To determine if acute treatment with aripiprazole (APZ) would be superior to treatment with placebo in reducing dysfunctional symptoms of elevated mood and/or irritability in symptomatic children and adolescents at familial high risk for bipolar disorder (BPD) whose mood episodes occur spontaneously. These are patients we have previously referred to as suffering from "cyclotaxia."This was single-site, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient clinical trial in which youths aged 5-17 years who met diagnostic criteria for either cyclothymic disorder (CYC) or BPD not otherwise specified (BP-NOS) were randomly assigned to receive either APZ or placebo. Eligible participants had at least one parent with BPD, another first- or second-degree relative afflicted with a mood disorder, and also had not responded to psychotherapy. Treatment with APZ was initiated at a dose of approximately 0.1 mg/kg/day and could be increased by approximately 0.05 mg/kg/day at each study visit. Patients were seen weekly for 4 weeks and then every other week thereafter for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was mean change from baseline on Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score.A total of 59 patients (30 APZ, 29 placebo) aged 11.8 (SD = 2.7) years were randomized and returned for at least one postbaseline assessment. The mean total daily doses of active APZ and placebo were 7.1 mg (SD = 3.7) and 7.4 mg (SD = 4.2), respectively. At the 12-week time point, APZ was superior to placebo on the primary outcome measure (p 0.005). Most adverse events were mild and transient in nature. There was a significant difference in weight gain from baseline between patients who received APZ (2.3 kg [SD = 3.3]) and those who received placebo (0.7 kg [SD = 1.8]).This double-blind trial found that APZ was significantly more efficacious than placebo in reducing symptoms of mania in children and adolescents with cyclotaxia.

Asenapine, administered as a twice-daily (BID) sublingual tablet, is approved in the US as monotherapy for the acute treatment of manic and mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder in children and adolescents aged 10–17 years based on the positive results of one 3-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study; the recommended dose is 2.5–10 mg BID. Although asenapine has been studied in pediatric patients with schizophrenia, it is not approved for this indication. Asenapine is not approved for pediatric use in bipolar I disorder or schizophrenia in other major markets. To inform clinicians treating psychiatric disorders in pediatric patients, we have summarized the neuropharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical trial experience, and clinical use of asenapine in pediatric patients. After rapid absorption through the oral mucosa, the pharmacokinetic profile of asenapine in pediatric patients is similar to that which is observed in adult patients, indicating that the recommended adult dosage does not need to be adjusted for pediatric use. Intake of food and water should be avoided for 10 min after administration. In clinical trials, asenapine was generally safe and well tolerated in pediatric patients with bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia. Serious adverse effects were generally related to worsening of the underlying psychiatric disorder. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in both indications were sedation and somnolence. Like some other second-generation antipsychotic agents, weight gain and changes in some metabolic parameters were noted; oral effects (e.g., oral hypoesthesia, dysgeusia, paresthesia) related to sublingual administration did not typically result in treatment discontinuation and were generally transient. Extrapyramidal symptom TEAEs occurred in ≥5% of asenapine-treated patients in the acute and long-term studies in bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia.

Objectives: The objective of this presentation is to test the efficacy and safety of 2 doses of suramin vs placebo in children aged 4 to 17 years with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The hypotheses are that at least 1 of 2 suramin doses would show improvement in the Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) Core score and that treatment would be safe and tolerable. Methods: Fifty-two boys were enrolled in 3 treatment arms: 10 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg, and placebo dosed at baseline, at weeks 4 and 8. Subjects were diagnosed by DSM-5 criteria and severity measured by the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule. The main efficacy analyses were ABC Core (subscales 2, 3, and 5) and Clinical Global Impression–Improvement (CGI-I) scale. Question 1 was assessed using intent-to-treat sample change scores from baseline to endpoint using ANOVA. Although the study was not designed for formal statistical comparison, ABC Core and CGI-I were tested at a family-wise Type I level of 0.05 using Dunnett’s p value for multiple comparisons. The study was approved by the South Africa Health Products Regulatory Authority and each site’s IRB. Results: The study was conducted at 6 sites in South Africa. The sample was multiracial with a mean age of approximately 8 years and a range of 4 to 15 years. There was a wide variability in the severity of ASD symptoms at baseline. Forty-four subjects completed the study, and there were 8 early withdrawals (COVID-19: 5;serious adverse event [SAE]: 1;other reason: 2). The 10 mg arm showed a sustained benefit across time points. The ABC Core modeling mean ± standard error (SE) of 10 mg showed a greater numeric improvement (–12.5 ± 3.18) vs placebo (–8.9 ± 2.86) (nonsignificant) at Week 14. The 20 mg arm did not show improvement vs placebo at Week 14. In exploratory analyses, the 10 mg arm showed greater differences from placebo in ABC Core in younger and less severe subjects. CGI-I modeled mean ± SE changes from baseline were 2.8 ± 0.30 (p = 0.016) in the 10 mg arm and 2.0 ± 0.28 (p = 0.65) in the 20 mg arm vs 1.7 ± 0.27 in the placebo. Suramin was generally safe and well tolerated over 14 weeks. There was 1 SAE, status epilepticus, in a subject (20-mg arm) with multiple risk factors for seizure;it resolved without sequelae. Conclusions: This dose-ranging proof-of-concept study showed some positive results from a treatment with a novel mechanism of action. Limitations include the small sample size and exploratory analyses that require confirmation in a larger study. Suramin was safe and tolerable over 14 weeks.

Purpose of review Bipolar disorder is a chronic and disabling condition that often presents in adolescence and leads to significant functional impairment, especially in the areas of emotional, cognitive, and social development. Pharmacotherapy is a vital component of the complex treatment of this disorder.The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the available data on the management of bipolar disorder and the most common comorbid conditions in youth. Recent findings Several medications such as lithium and second-generation antipsychotics (risperidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, and asenapine) are currently approved by the FDA for the management of acute mixed or manic phases of pediatric bipolar disorder. Very limited data are available on continuation treatment and management of depressive phases of bipolar disorder. There is some evidence that supports the use of a combination of an antipsychotic with lithium or an anticonvulsant for treatment of resistant cases. Summary Monotherapy with an atypical antipsychotic or lithium is the preferable initial treatment of acute manic or mixed episodes. The available evidence supports the use of an olanzapine/fluoxetine combination for the treatment of bipolar depression, which has also been approved by the FDA for this purpose. Additional studies are needed to evaluate safety and efficacy of psychopharmacological interventions, especially focusing on treatment of the depressive and maintenance phases of bipolar disorder.

Objectives Over the past two decades, there has been tremendous growth in research regarding bipolar disorder (BD) among children and adolescents (ie, pediatric BD [PBD]). The primary purpose of this article is to distill the extant literature, dispel myths or exaggerated assertions in the field, and disseminate clinically relevant findings. Methods An international group of experts completed a selective review of the literature, emphasizing areas of consensus, identifying limitations and gaps in the literature, and highlighting future directions to mitigate these gaps. Results Substantial, and increasingly international, research has accumulated regarding the phenomenology, differential diagnosis, course, treatment, and neurobiology of PBD. Prior division around the role of irritability and of screening tools in diagnosis has largely abated. Gold-standard pharmacologic trials inform treatment of manic/mixed episodes, whereas fewer data address bipolar depression and maintenance/continuation treatment. Adjunctive psychosocial treatment provides a forum for psychoeducation and targets primarily depressive symptoms. Numerous neurocognitive and neuroimaging studies, and increasing peripheral biomarker studies, largely converge with prior findings from adults with BD. Conclusions As data have accumulated and controversy has dissipated, the field has moved past existential questions about PBD toward defining and pursuing pressing clinical and scientific priorities that remain. The overall body of evidence supports the position that perceptions about marked international (US vs elsewhere) and developmental (pediatric vs adult) differences have been overstated, although additional research on these topics is warranted. Traction toward improved outcomes will be supported by continued emphasis on pathophysiology and novel therapeutics.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in acutely symptomatic adolescent patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Patients aged 13–17 years were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind, fixed-dose lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day) or placebo. Primary and key secondary efficacy measures were change from baseline to week 6 in the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score, respectively, using mixed model for repeated measurement (MMRM) analysis. The proportion of patients achieving treatment response at endpoint, based on ≥20% reduction in PANSS total score, was analyzed using a logistic regression model. Results: Least-squares (LS) mean change in PANSS total score from baseline to week 6 was −18.6 with lurasidone 40 mg/day (N = 108; p

Background Changes in neural circuitry function may be associated with longitudinal changes in psychiatric symptom severity. Identification of these relationships may aid in elucidating the neural basis of psychiatric symptom evolution over time. We aimed to distinguish these relationships using data from the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms cohort. Methods Forty-one youth completed two study visits (interscan mean = 21.3 months). Elastic net regression (multiple-response Gaussian family) identified emotional regulation neural circuitry that changed in association with changes in depression, mania, anxiety, affect lability, and positive mood and energy dysregulation, accounting for clinical and demographic variables. Results Nonzero coefficients between change in the previously mentioned symptom measures and change in activity over the interscan interval were identified in right amygdala and left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex. Differing patterns of neural activity change were associated with changes in each of the previously mentioned symptoms over time. Specifically, from scan 1 to scan 2, worsening affective lability and depression severity were associated with increased right amygdala and left ventrolateral prefrontal cortical activity. Worsening anxiety and positive mood and energy dysregulation were associated with decreased right amygdala and increased left ventrolateral prefrontal cortical activity. Worsening mania was associated with increased right amygdala and decreased left ventrolateral prefrontal cortical activity. These changes in neural activity between scans accounted for 13.6% of the variance; that is, 25% of the total explained variance (39.6%) in these measures. Conclusions Distinct neural mechanisms underlie changes in different mood and anxiety symptoms over time.