The stimulant methylphenidate (MPH) has been a mainstay of treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for many years. Owing to the short half-life and the issues associated with multiple daily dosing of immediate-release MPH formulations, a new generation of long-acting MPH formulations has emerged. Direct head-to-head studies of these long-acting MPH formulations are important to facilitate an evaluation of their comparative pharmacokinetics and efficacy; however, to date, relatively few head-to-head studies have been performed. The objective of this systematic review was to compare the evidence available from head-to-head studies of long-acting MPH formulations and provide information that can guide treatment selection. A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and PsycINFO in March 2012 using the MeSH terms: attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity/drug therapy; methylphenidate/therapeutic use and All Fields: Concerta; Ritalin LA; OROS and ADHD; Medikinet; Equasym XL and ADHD; long-acting methylphenidate; Diffucaps and ADHD; SODAS and methylphenidate. No filters were applied and no language, publication date or publication status limitations were imposed. Articles were selected if the title indicated a comparison of two or more long-acting MPH preparations in human subjects of any age; non-systematic review articles and unpublished data were not included. Of 15,295 references returned in the literature search and screened by title, 34 articles were identified for inclusion: nine articles from pharmacokinetic studies (nine studies); nine articles from laboratory school studies (six studies); two articles from randomized controlled trials (two studies); three articles from switching studies (two studies) and three articles from one observational study. Emerging head-to-head studies provide important data on the comparative efficacy of the formulations available. At a group level, efficacy across the day generally follows the pharmacokinetic profile of the MPH formulation. No formulation is clearly superior to another; careful consideration of patient needs and subtle differences between formulations is required to optimize treatment. For patients achieving suboptimal symptom control, switching long-acting MPH formulations may be beneficial. When switching formulations, it is usually appropriate to titrate the immediate-release component of the formulation; a limitation of current studies is a focus on total daily dose rather than equivalent immediate-release components. Further studies are necessary to provide guidance in clinical practice, particularly in the treatment of adults and pre-school children and the impact of comorbidities and symptom severity on treatment response.

In the last decades, the conceptualization of schizophrenia has dramatically changed, moving from a neurodegenerative process occurring in early adult life to a neurodevelopmental disorder starting be-fore birth, showing a variety of premorbid and prodromal symptoms and, in relatively few cases, evolving in the full-blown psychotic syndrome. High rates of co-occurring different neurodevelopmental disorders such as Autism spectrum disorder and ADHD, predating the onset of SCZ, and neurobio-logical underpinning with significant similarities, support the notion of a pan-developmental disturbance consisting of impairments in neuromotor, receptive language, social and cognitive development. Con-sidering that many SCZ risk factors may be similar to symptoms of other neurodevelopmental psychi-atric disorders, transition processes from child & adolescent to adult systems of care should include both high risk people as well as subject with other neurodevelopmental psychiatric disorders with different levels of severity. This descriptive mini-review discuss the need of innovative clinical approaches, re-considering specific diagnostic categories, stimulating a careful analysis of risk factors and promoting the appropriate use of new and safer medications.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vortioxetine in adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). After 4 weeks of single-blind lead-in treatment with a Brief Psychosocial Intervention (BPI) plus placebo, patients (aged 12-17 years) with MDD (DSM-5) who did not meet response criteria (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CDRS-R]; total score ≥40 plus 2) were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 8 weeks of BPI plus double-blind treatment with vortioxetine 10 mg, vortioxetine 20 mg, fluoxetine 20 mg, or placebo. The primary endpoint was change from randomization in CDRS-R total score at week 8; the primary comparison was the average effect of 2 vortioxetine doses vs placebo. Of 784 patients enrolled in the lead-in, 616 were randomized. At week 8, the mean change in CDRS-R total score averaged for vortioxetine doses was -18.01 (SE = 0.98) and the mean difference vs placebo was 0.21 (P = .878; not significant). For fluoxetine, the mean change in CDRS-R total score was -21.95 and the mean difference vs placebo was -3.73 (P = .015). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in ≥5% of patients in either vortioxetine arm and at least twice more frequently than placebo were nausea, headache, vomiting, and dizziness. Patients in all groups showed reduction in CDRS-R scores by the end of the study, with no difference between combined doses of vortioxetine and placebo. The primary endpoint was not met, thereby rendering the study negative. The overall favorable safety profile of vortioxetine in an adolescent patient population was consistent with that seen in adults. Active Reference (Fluoxetine) Fixed-Dose Study of Vortioxetine in Paediatric Patients Aged 12 to 17 Years With Major Depressive Disorder (MDD); http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02709746.

SPD489-404 was the first 2-year safety study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. In accordance with advice from the European Medicines Agency, assessment of cognitive function was a predefined safety outcome in SPD489-404.

Zusammenfassung: Ein Expertengremium aus mehreren europäischen Ländern hat sämtliche verfügbaren veröffentlichten und unveröffentlichten Studienergebnisse zum Einsatz von langwirksamen Medikamenten bei ADHS und hyperkinetischer Störung analysiert und auf dieser Grundlage Empfehlungen zur praktischen Anwendung dieser Arzneimittel entwickelt: Auf der Grundlage der Analyse wurde gefolgert: (1) Langwirksame Präparate sollten zugelassen sein und eingesetzt werden; (2) Sie sollen kurzwirksame Arzneimittel (aus Kostengründen und wegen der höheren Flexibilität der Dosierung) nicht vollständig ersetzen. Individuelle Therapieoptionen sind erforderlich. (3) Sowohl ATX als auch Stimulanzien mit retardierter Freisetzung sollten zur Verfügung stehen. Zusätzlich werden ausführliche Empfehlungen gegeben, nach welchen Kriterien ein spezifisches Präparat für den individuellen Patienten ausgewählt werden sollte.