Emily MacDonald Fredericks1, Scott H Kollins. 1. Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan Health System, 1924 Taubman Center, P.O. Box 0318 Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-0318, USA.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Methylphenidate (MPH) is widely used in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and is associated with positive clinical effects across a wide range of domains. Despite the clinical effectiveness of MPH, concern has arisen with respect to its abuse potential. OBJECTIVES: To assess MPH preference in adults diagnosed with ADHD using a choice procedure and to evaluate the relationship among drug preference, therapeutic efficacy, and abuse potential in a clinical sample. METHODS:Participants were ten volunteers (ages 18-22 years) with ADHD who were receiving MPH treatment. Preference was assessed using a double-blind choice procedure with four sampling sessions wherein subjects received either placebo or MPH and eight choice sessions when they chose either capsule or no capsules. RESULTS: Overall, MPH was chosen significantly more often than placebo (chi2=52.5; P<0.001) and participants were equally separated into groups of those who chose MPH reliably (MPH choosers) and those who did not (MPH non-choosers). MPH decreased ADHD symptoms and resulted in lower ratings of stimulant effects among MPH choosers. MPH choosers also reported higher levels of baseline ADHD symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher preference of MPH than placebo in this clinical sample, other measures of abuse potential were not elevated, and MPH choosers were more symptomatic than non-choosers. As such, MPH preference in ADHD populations likely reflects therapeutic efficacy rather than abuse potential. Future work should examine MPH choice in diagnosed and non-diagnosed populations to further explore the role of clinical efficacy in the preference of this stimulant drug.
RCT Entities:
RATIONALE: Methylphenidate (MPH) is widely used in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and is associated with positive clinical effects across a wide range of domains. Despite the clinical effectiveness of MPH, concern has arisen with respect to its abuse potential. OBJECTIVES: To assess MPH preference in adults diagnosed with ADHD using a choice procedure and to evaluate the relationship among drug preference, therapeutic efficacy, and abuse potential in a clinical sample. METHODS:Participants were ten volunteers (ages 18-22 years) with ADHD who were receiving MPH treatment. Preference was assessed using a double-blind choice procedure with four sampling sessions wherein subjects received either placebo or MPH and eight choice sessions when they chose either capsule or no capsules. RESULTS: Overall, MPH was chosen significantly more often than placebo (chi2=52.5; P<0.001) and participants were equally separated into groups of those who chose MPH reliably (MPH choosers) and those who did not (MPH non-choosers). MPH decreased ADHD symptoms and resulted in lower ratings of stimulant effects among MPH choosers. MPH choosers also reported higher levels of baseline ADHD symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher preference of MPH than placebo in this clinical sample, other measures of abuse potential were not elevated, and MPH choosers were more symptomatic than non-choosers. As such, MPH preference in ADHD populations likely reflects therapeutic efficacy rather than abuse potential. Future work should examine MPH choice in diagnosed and non-diagnosed populations to further explore the role of clinical efficacy in the preference of this stimulant drug.
Authors: Julie A Marusich; William Travis McCuddy; Joshua S Beckmann; Cassandra D Gipson; Michael T Bardo Journal: Behav Pharmacol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 2.293
Authors: Theresa M Winhusen; Daniel F Lewis; Paula D Riggs; Robert D Davies; Lenard A Adler; Susan Sonne; Eugene C Somoza Journal: J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 2.576
Authors: Scott H Kollins; Joseph English; Rachel Robinson; Matt Hallyburton; Allan K Chrisman Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2008-12-23 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Catherine A Martin; Greg Guenthner; Christopher Bingcang; Mary Kay Rayens; Thomas H Kelly Journal: J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 2.576