Scott H. Kollins

Evaluating Dopamine Reward Pathway in ADHD: Clinical Implications

CONTEXT Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)--characterized by symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity--is the most prevalent childhood psychiatric disorder that frequently persists into adulthood, and there is increasing evidence of reward-motivation deficits in this disorder. OBJECTIVE To evaluate biological bases that might underlie a reward/motivation deficit by imaging key components of the brain dopamine reward pathway (mesoaccumbens). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We used positron emission tomography to measure dopamine synaptic markers (transporters and D(2)/D(3) receptors) in 53 nonmedicated adults with ADHD and 44 healthy controls between 2001-2009 at Brookhaven National Laboratory. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES We measured specific binding of positron emission tomographic radioligands for dopamine transporters (DAT) using [(11)C]cocaine and for D(2)/D(3) receptors using [(11)C]raclopride, quantified as binding potential (distribution volume ratio -1). RESULTS For both ligands, statistical parametric mapping showed that specific binding was lower in ADHD than in controls (threshold for significance set at P < .005) in regions of the dopamine reward pathway in the left side of the brain. Region-of-interest analyses corroborated these findings. The mean (95% confidence interval [CI] of mean difference) for DAT in the nucleus accumbens for controls was 0.71 vs 0.63 for those with ADHD (95% CI, 0.03-0.13, P = .004) and in the midbrain for controls was 0.16 vs 0.09 for those with ADHD (95% CI, 0.03-0.12; P < or = .001); for D(2)/D(3) receptors, the mean accumbens for controls was 2.85 vs 2.68 for those with ADHD (95% CI, 0.06-0.30, P = .004); and in the midbrain, it was for controls 0.28 vs 0.18 for those with ADHD (95% CI, 0.02-0.17, P = .01). The analysis also corroborated differences in the left caudate: the mean DAT for controls was 0.66 vs 0.53 for those with ADHD (95% CI, 0.04-0.22; P = .003) and the mean D(2)/D(3) for controls was 2.80 vs 2.47 for those with ADHD (95% CI, 0.10-0.56; P = .005) and differences in D(2)/D(3) in the hypothalamic region, with controls having a mean of 0.12 vs 0.05 for those with ADHD (95% CI, 0.02-0.12; P = .004). Ratings of attention correlated with D(2)/D(3) in the accumbens (r = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.52; P = .001), midbrain (r = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.14-0.52; P = .001), caudate (r = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11-0.50; P = .003), and hypothalamic (r = 0.31; CI, 0.10-0.49; P = .003) regions and with DAT in the midbrain (r = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.53; P < or = .001). CONCLUSION A reduction in dopamine synaptic markers associated with symptoms of inattention was shown in the dopamine reward pathway of participants with ADHD.

Assessing the abuse potential of methylphenidate in nonhuman and human subjects A review

Methylphenidate (MPH) is widely used for the treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children, adolescents, and adults. Methylphenidate is clearly effective for the treatment of ADHD, but there is controversy as to whether it has significant abuse potential like other psychostimulants (e.g., D-amphetamine and cocaine). In general, the drug is believed to be abused at rates much lower than those for other stimulants. The present review examines studies that investigated the behavioral pharmacological profile of methylphenidate and discusses how results from these studies address its abuse liability. Using MEDLINE search terms methylphenidate, drug discrimination, reinforcement, self-administration, subjective effects, subject-rated effects, abuse potential, and abuse liability, along with a review of the references from identified articles, 60 studies were located in which the reinforcing, discriminative-stimulus, or subjective effects of methylphenidate were directly assessed in nonhumans or humans. Forty-eight (80.0%) of the studies reviewed indicate that methylphenidate either functions in a manner similar to D-amphetamine or cocaine (e.g., functions as a reinforcer, substitutes fully in drug discrimination experiments), or produces a pattern of subjective effects suggestive of abuse potential. The results are discussed as they pertain to factors that may account for the apparent discrepancy in abuse rates between methylphenidate and other stimulants, including characterization of actual abuse rates, defining abuse and misuse, pharmacokinetic factors, and validity of abuse liability assays.

Motivation deficit in ADHD is associated with dysfunction of the dopamine reward pathway

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is typically characterized as a disorder of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity but there is increasing evidence of deficits in motivation. Using positron emission tomography (PET), we showed decreased function in the brain dopamine reward pathway in adults with ADHD, which, we hypothesized, could underlie the motivation deficits in this disorder. To evaluate this hypothesis, we performed secondary analyses to assess the correlation between the PET measures of dopamine D2/D3 receptor and dopamine transporter availability (obtained with [11C]raclopride and [11C]cocaine, respectively) in the dopamine reward pathway (midbrain and nucleus accumbens) and a surrogate measure of trait motivation (assessed using the Achievement scale on the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire or MPQ) in 45 ADHD participants and 41 controls. The Achievement scale was lower in ADHD participants than in controls (11±5 vs 14±3, P<0.001) and was significantly correlated with D2/D3 receptors (accumbens: r=0.39, P<0.008; midbrain: r=0.41, P<0.005) and transporters (accumbens: r=0.35, P<0.02) in ADHD participants, but not in controls. ADHD participants also had lower values in the Constraint factor and higher values in the Negative Emotionality factor of the MPQ but did not differ in the Positive Emotionality factor—and none of these were correlated with the dopamine measures. In ADHD participants, scores in the Achievement scale were also negatively correlated with symptoms of inattention (CAARS A, E and SWAN I). These findings provide evidence that disruption of the dopamine reward pathway is associated with motivation deficits in ADHD adults, which may contribute to attention deficits and supports the use of therapeutic interventions to enhance motivation in ADHD.

Self-Regulation of Emotion, Functional Impairment, and Comorbidity Among Children With AD/HD

Objective: This study investigated the role of self-regulation of emotion in relation to functional impairment and comorbidity among children with and without AD/HD. Method: A total of 358 probands and their siblings participated in the study, with 74% of the sample participants affected by AD/HD. Parent-rated levels of emotional lability served as a marker for self-regulation of emotion. Results: Nearly half of the children affected by AD/HD displayed significantly elevated levels of emotional lability versus 15% of those without this disorder. Children with AD/HD also displayed significantly higher rates of functional impairment, comorbidity, and treatment service utilization. Emotional lability partially mediated the association between AD/HD status and these outcomes. Conclusion: Findings lent support to the notion that deficits in the self-regulation of emotion are evident in a substantial number of children with AD/HD and that these deficits play an important role in determining functional impairment and comorbidity outcomes.

ADHD and Smoking: From Genes to Brain to Behavior

Attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and tobacco smoking are among the most common and costly psychiatric and behavioral problems. The rates of co‐occurrence of these two common problems are larger than expected by chance. Despite progress in identifying the neural and genetic substrates of each, the mechanisms underlying the high rates of comorbidity between ADHD and smoking remain largely unknown. We propose that ADHD and smoking involve dysregulation of dopaminergic and nicotinic‐acetylcholinergic circuits and that these aberrations are likely to arise, at least in part, from genetic variations. This review describes an integrative model of the ADHD–smoking comorbidity, with an emphasis on shared neuropharmacological mechanisms. We first describe the prevalence of smoking among ADHD patients. We then describe how ADHD influences stages of smoking behavior (e.g., initiation, maintenance, and relapse). We review common potential genetic substrates of ADHD and smoking, focusing on genes that regulate monoaminergic neurotransmission. We review the behavioral and neuropharmacological bases of smoking and ADHD, focusing on the modulatory roles of nicotine on attention and behavioral control. Finally, we discuss the implications of this model for prevention and clinical outcomes.

A Laboratory School Comparison of Mixed Amphetamine Salts Extended Release (Adderall XR®) and Atomoxetine (Strattera®) in School-Aged Children With Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR; Adderall XR®) and atomoxetine (Strattera®) were compared in children 6 to 12 years old with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) combined or hyperactive/impulsive type in a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group, forced-dose-escalation laboratory school study. Primary efficacy measure was the SKAMP (Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham) behavioral rating scale. Changes in mean SKAMP deportment scores from baseline were significantly greater for MAS XR (n = 102) than for atomoxetine (n = 101) overall (-0.56 and -0.13, respectively; p < .0001) and at each week (p < .001). Adverse events were similar for both treatment groups. The extended time course of action and greater therapeutic efficacy of MAS XR suggests that it is more effective than atomoxetine in children with ADHD.

ADHD, substance use disorders, and psychostimulant treatment: current literature and treatment guidelines.

Objective: This review explores the relationship between ADHD and substance use disorder (SUD), factors that determine the abuse potential of psychostimulants, and strategies for identifying and treating at-risk ADHD patients. Method: This study uses a Medline review of literature. Results: Psychostimulants, such as methylphenidate and amphetamines, are effective first-line pharmacotherapy for ADHD and when used appropriately in individuals with ADHD do not appear to be frequently abused by patients. Diversion and misuse of prescription stimulants are growing concerns, especially among young adults and college students. Short-acting psychostimulant formulations may have higher potential for abuse, misuse, and diversion, but more data are needed to substantiate this observation. Nonstimulant treatments for ADHD may be considered for patients at particularly high risk for substance use, misuse, or diversion of stimulants. Conclusion: In treating patients with ADHD and comorbid substance use, psychostimulants may be a useful pharmacologic alternative. However, the risks of such treatment with high-risk populations must be considered alongside potential benefits. (J. of Att. Dis. 2008; 12(2) 115-125)

The Preschool Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Treatment Study (PATS) 6-Year Follow-Up

OBJECTIVE To describe the clinical course of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptom severity and diagnosis from ages 3 to 5 up to 9 to 12 years during a 6-year follow-up after the original Preschool ADHD Treatment Study (PATS). METHOD A total of 207 participants (75% male) from the original PATS, assessed at baseline (mean age, 4.4 years, when all met criteria for ADHD) and 3 months later (before medication treatment), were re-evaluated in three follow-up assessment visits (year 3, mean age 7.4 years; year 4, 8.3 years; and year 6, 10.4 years). Parents and teachers rated symptom severity, and clinicians established psychiatric diagnoses. Analyses examined longitudinal changes in symptom severity and ADHD diagnosis. RESULTS Parent- and teacher-rated symptom severity decreased from baseline to year 3 but remained relatively stable and in the moderate-to-severe clinical range through year 6. Girls showed generally steeper decreases in symptom T-scores. At year 6, 89% (160/180) of remaining participants met ADHD symptom and impairment diagnostic criteria. Comorbidity of oppositional defiant disorder and/or conduct disorder was associated with a 30% higher risk of having an ADHD diagnosis at year 6 in the multiple logistic model. Medication status during follow-up, on versus off, did not predict symptom severity change from year 3 to year 6 after adjustment for other variables. CONCLUSIONS ADHD in preschoolers is a relatively stable diagnosis over a 6-year period. The course is generally chronic, with high symptom severity and impairment, in very young children with moderate-to-severe ADHD, despite treatment with medication. Development of more effective ADHD intervention strategies is needed for this age group.

Discriminative-stimulus and participant-rated effects of methylphenidate, bupropion, and triazolam in d-amphetamine-trained humans.

The discriminative-stimulus and participate-rated effects of a range of doses of d-amphetamine (2.5-20 mg), methylphenidate (5-40 mg), bupropion (50-400 mg), and triazolam (0.0625-0.5 mg) were tested in 5 humans trained to discriminate between oral d-amphetamine (20 mg) and placebo. d-Amphetamine and methylphenidate generally dose dependently increased drug-appropriate responding. Bupropion and triazolam on average occasioned less than or equal to 40% drug-appropriate responding. d-Amphetamine, methylphenidate, and bupropion produced stimulant-like participant-rated effects, while triazolam produced sedative-like effects. These results further demonstrate that the acute behavioral effects of d-amphetamine and methylphenidate overlap extensively in humans, which is concordant with preclinical studies. Bupropion produced some d-amphetamine-like, participant-rated drug effects but did not occasion significant levels of d-amphetamine-appropriate responding. These findings are concordant with previous findings of a dissociation between the discriminative-stimulus and participant-rated effects of drugs.

A 13-hour laboratory school study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

AbstractBackgroundLisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is indicated for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children 6 to 12 years of age and in adults. In a previous laboratory school study, LDX demonstrated efficacy 2 hours postdose with duration of efficacy through 12 hours. The current study further characterizes the time course of effect of LDX.MethodsChildren aged 6 to 12 years with ADHD were enrolled in a laboratory school study. The multicenter study consisted of open-label, dose-optimization of LDX (30, 50, 70 mg/d, 4 weeks) followed by a randomized, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover phase (1 week each). Efficacy measures included the SKAMP (deportment [primary] and attention [secondary]) and PERMP (attempted/correct) scales (secondary) measured at predose and at 1.5, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12, and 13 hours postdose. Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), physical examination, vital signs, and ECGs.ResultsA total of 117 subjects were randomized and 111 completed the study. Compared with placebo, LDX demonstrated significantly greater efficacy at each postdose time point (1.5 hours to 13.0 hours), as measured by SKAMP deportment and attention scales and PERMP (P < .005). The most common treatment-emergent AEs during dose optimization were decreased appetite (47%), insomnia (27%), headache (17%), irritability (16%), upper abdominal pain (16%), and affect lability (10%), which were less frequent in the crossover phase (6%, 4%, 5%, 1%, 2%, and 0% respectively).ConclusionIn school-aged children (6 to 12 years) with ADHD, efficacy of LDX was maintained from the first time point (1.5 hours) up to the last time point assessed (13.0 hours). LDX was generally well tolerated, resulting in typical stimulant AEs.Trial registrationOfficial Title: A Phase IIIb, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center, Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Optimization, Cross-Over, Analog Classroom Study to Assess the Time of Onset of Vyvanse (Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate) in Pediatric Subjects Aged 6–12 With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00500149 http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00500149