Literature DB >> 24004347

Treatment persistence in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a retrospective analysis of patients initiated on lisdexamfetamine vs other medications.

Juliana Setyawan1, Annie Guérin, Paul Hodgkins, Geneviève Gauthier, Martin Cloutier, Eric Wu, M Haim Erder.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment persistence in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) of patients initiated on lisdexamfetamine (LDX) vs other ADHD medications.
METHODS: A large US administrative claims database was used to select ADHD patients who initiated an ADHD medication (index treatment) during/after 2007. Patients were classified, based on age and previous treatment status, as treatment-naïve or previously treated children and adolescents (6-17 years) and treatment-naïve or previously treated adults (18 years and older). Furthermore, patients were classified into seven mutually exclusive treatment groups, based on their index treatment: LDX, atomoxetine (ATX), osmotic-release methylphenidate hydrochloride long-acting (OROS MPH), other methylphenidate/dexmethylphenidate short-acting (MPH SA) and long-acting (MPH LA), and amphetamine/dextroamphetamine short acting (AMPH SA) and long-acting (AMPH LA). Treatment persistence, analyzed through discontinuation (interruption of the index treatment for ≥30 consecutive days), was compared between treatment groups using multivariate Cox proportional hazards. Patients were followed until first treatment discontinuation or up to 12 months after the initiation of the index treatment, whichever occurred first.
RESULTS: Among children and adolescents, LDX patients had a significantly lower discontinuation rate compared to other treatment groups (range hazard ratios [HRs]; 1.04-2.26; all p < 0.05), except when compared to treatment-naïve patients on ATX and OROS MPH, where no statistically significant differences were found and where LDX had a higher risk of discontinuation, respectively. Among adults, LDX patients had a significantly lower discontinuation rate compared to patients in other treatment groups (range HR; 1.14-1.86; all p < 0.05), except for the comparison with AMPH LA patients, where differences were not statistically significant. LIMITATIONS: This study did not control for ADHD severity.
CONCLUSION: LDX-treated patients were associated with higher persistence compared to patients initiated on other ADHD medications, except for the comparisons with OROS MPH and ATX treated patients in treatment-naïve children and adolescents and AMPH LA-treated patients in adults.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24004347     DOI: 10.3111/13696998.2013.839947

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Econ        ISSN: 1369-6998            Impact factor:   2.448


  7 in total

Review 1.  Associations of sleep disturbance with ADHD: implications for treatment.

Authors:  Allan Hvolby
Journal:  Atten Defic Hyperact Disord       Date:  2014-08-17

2.  A Cost-Utility Analysis of Lisdexamfetamine Versus Atomoxetine in the Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Inadequate Response to Methylphenidate.

Authors:  Evelina A Zimovetz; Stephen M Beard; Paul Hodgkins; Matthias Bischof; Josephine A Mauskopf; Juliana Setyawan
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.749

3.  Comparative treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization and costs of atomoxetine and long-acting methylphenidate among children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in Germany.

Authors:  Peter Greven; Vanja Sikirica; Yaozhu J Chen; Tammy G Curtice; Charles Makin
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2016-11-05

4.  Animal model of methylphenidate's long-term memory-enhancing effects.

Authors:  Stephanie A Carmack; Kristin K Howell; Kleou Rasaei; Emilie T Reas; Stephan G Anagnostaras
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 2.460

5.  Treatment outcomes after methylphenidate in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder treated with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate or atomoxetine.

Authors:  Alain Joseph; Martin Cloutier; Annie Guérin; Roy Nitulescu; Vanja Sikirica
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 2.711

Review 6.  Factors affecting treatment adherence to atomoxetine in ADHD: a systematic review.

Authors:  Tamás Treuer; Luis Méndez; William Montgomery; Shenghu Wu
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 2.570

7.  Is adjunctive pharmacotherapy in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder cost-effective in Canada: a cost-effectiveness assessment of guanfacine extended-release as an adjunctive therapy to a long-acting stimulant for the treatment of ADHD.

Authors:  Jean Lachaine; Vanja Sikirica; Karine Mathurin
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2016-01-16       Impact factor: 3.630

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.