Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is a prodrug of dextroamphetamine, which has been widely recommended for the treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). There are still no data in the literature relating the possible toxic effects of LDX in the kidney. Therefore, the present study aims to evaluate the effects of LDX exposure on morphological, oxidative stress, cell death and inflammation parameters in the kidneys of male pubertal Wistar rats, since the kidneys are organs related to the excretion of most drugs. For this, twenty male Wistar rats were distributed randomly into two experimental groups: LDX group-received 11,3 mg/kg/day of LDX; and Control group-received tap water. Animals were treated by gavage from postnatal day (PND) 25 to 65. At PND 66, plasma was collected to the biochemical dosage, and the kidneys were collected for determinations of the inflammatory profile, oxidative status, cell death, and for histochemical, and morphometric analyses. Our results show that there was an increase in the number of cells marked for cell death, and a reduction of proximal and distal convoluted tubules mean diameter in the group that received LDX. In addition, our results also showed an increase in MPO and NAG activity, indicating an inflammatory response. The oxidative status showed that the antioxidant system is working undisrupted and avoiding oxidative stress. Therefore, LDX-exposition in male rats during the peripubertal period causes renal changes in pubertal age involving inflammatory mechanisms, antioxidant activity and apoptosis process.

UNASSIGNED: Head-to-head trials comparing centanafadine, an investigational therapy for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with other treatment options are lacking.
UNASSIGNED: To compare safety and efficacy outcomes of centanafadine sustained-release vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine hydrochloride (atomoxetine), and viloxazine extended-release (viloxazine ER), respectively, using matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC).
UNASSIGNED: This MAIC included patient-level data pooled from 2 centanafadine trials (NCT03605680 and NCT03605836) and published aggregate data from comparable trials of 3 comparators-lisdexamfetamine (NCT00334880), atomoxetine (NCT00190736), and viloxazine ER (NCT04016779)-in adult patients with ADHD. Propensity score weighting was used to match characteristics of individual patients from the centanafadine trials to aggregate baseline characteristics from the respective comparator trials. Safety outcomes were rates of adverse events for which information was available in the centanafadine and respective comparator trials. Efficacy outcome was mean change from baseline in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) score (ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] was used as proxy in the comparison with lisdexamfetamine). Anchored indirect comparisons were conducted across matched populations of the centanafadine and respective comparator trials.
UNASSIGNED: After matching, baseline characteristics in the centanafadine trials were the same as those in the respective comparator trials. Compared with lisdexamfetamine, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of lack of appetite (risk difference [RD] in percentage points: 23.42), dry mouth (19.27), insomnia (15.35), anxiety (5.21), nausea (4.90), feeling jittery (3.70), and diarrhea (3.47) (all P < 0.05) but a smaller reduction in the AISRS/ADHD-RS score (6.58-point difference; P < 0.05). Compared with atomoxetine, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of nausea (RD in percentage points: 18.64), dry mouth (17.44), fatigue (9.21), erectile dysfunction (6.76), lack of appetite (6.71), and urinary hesitation (5.84) (all P < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score. Compared with viloxazine ER, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of fatigue (RD in percentage points: 11.07), insomnia (10.67), nausea (7.57), and constipation (4.63) (all P < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score.
UNASSIGNED: In an anchored MAIC, centanafadine showed a significantly better short-term safety profile than lisdexamfetamine, atomoxetine, and viloxazine ER; efficacy was lower than with lisdexamfetamine and comparable (ie, nondifferent) with atomoxetine and viloxazine ER. This MAIC provides important insights on the relative safety and efficacy of common treatment options to help inform treatment decisions in adults with ADHD. Safety assessment was limited to rates of adverse events reported in both trials of a given comparison.
UNASSIGNED: NCT03605680, NCT03605836, NCT00334880, NCT00190736, and NCT04016779.

Objectives: This study aimed to examine switch from first-line methylphenidate (MPH) to lisdexamfetamine (LDX) in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This is a retrospective observational study based on systematic review of patient records of all children (7-13 years) diagnosed with ADHD and referred to a Danish specialized outpatient clinic. The study included 394 children switching from MPH to LDX as either second-line or third-line treatment (atomoxetine [ATX] as second-line treatment) during the study period from April 1, 2013, to November 5, 2019. Results: One in five children switched from MPH to LDX at some point during the study period. The most frequent reasons for switching to LDX were adverse effects (AEs; 70.0% for MPH, 68.3% for ATX) and lack of efficiency (52.0% for MPH, 72.7% for ATX). Top five AEs of LDX were decreased appetite (62.4%), insomnia (28.7%), irritability/aggression (26.1%), weight decrease (21.1%), and mood swings (13.9%). MPH and LDX had similar AE profiles, yet most AEs were less frequent after switching to LDX. At the end of the study period, the majority were prescribed LDX as second-line rather than third-line treatment (86.1% in 2019). However, the likelihood of LDX as second-line treatment decreased with the number of psychiatric comorbidities, ADHD symptom severity as assessed by parents, and if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Among children observed for at least 1 year after initiation of LDX, 41.3% continued LDX treatment for a year or longer. LDX continuation was less likely if AEs were a reason for MPH discontinuation. Similarly to MPH and ATX, the most frequent reasons for LDX discontinuation were AEs (74.4%) and lack of efficiency (34.7%). Implications: The findings support LDX as an important option in the personalized treatment of children with ADHD and may support prescribers in the clinical decision-making on switching medication.

UNASSIGNED: Individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often have comorbid psychiatric conditions. Relatively little is known about how specific ADHD medications are associated with overall treatment outcomes among these patients.
UNASSIGNED: To investigate the association of the use of specific ADHD medications with hospitalization outcomes and work disability among adolescents and adults with ADHD.
UNASSIGNED: This nationwide register-based cohort study identified individuals (aged 16-65 years) with ADHD from Swedish nationwide registers of inpatient health care, specialized outpatient health care, sickness absence, and disability pension during the years 2006 to 2021. Data analysis was performed from November 2022 to August 2023.
UNASSIGNED: Use of specific ADHD medications.
UNASSIGNED: The main outcome measure was psychiatric hospitalization, and secondary outcomes were suicide attempt and/or death by suicide, nonpsychiatric hospitalization, and work disability (ie, sickness absence or disability pension). The risk of outcomes between use vs nonuse periods of ADHD medications was compared in a within-individual design, where a person acts as their own control, and was analyzed with stratified Cox models.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 221 714 persons with ADHD were included in the study cohort (mean [SD] age, 25.0 [11.2] years; 120 968 male individuals [54.6%]). Methylphenidate was the most commonly used ADHD medication (151 837 individuals [68.5%]), followed by lisdexamphetamine (78 106 individuals [35.2%]) during the follow-up (mean [SD], 7.0 [4.7] years). The following medications were associated with a decreased risk of psychiatric hospitalization: amphetamine (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.90), lisdexamphetamine (aHR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.78-0.82), ADHD drug polytherapy (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88), dexamphetamine (aHR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94), and methylphenidate (aHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92-0.95). No associations were found for modafinil, atomoxetine, clonidine, and guanfacine. Decreased risk of suicidal behavior was associated with the use of dexamphetamine (aHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.89), lisdexamphetamine (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84), and methylphenidate (aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98). None of the medications was associated with increased risk of nonpsychiatric hospitalization; instead, use of amphetamine, lisdexamphetamine, polytherapy, dexamphetamine, methylphenidate, and atomoxetine were associated with decreased risk of nonpsychiatric hospitalization. The results regarding work disability were significant only for the use of atomoxetine (aHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.97), especially among adolescents and young adults aged 16 to 29 years, (aHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.92).
UNASSIGNED: In this nationwide cohort study of adolescents and adults with ADHD, the use of ADHD medication was associated with fewer hospitalizations for both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric morbidity and lower suicidal behavior.

Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) is one of the drugs commonly used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, its neurological side effects, particularly on cognition, are not fully understood. The present study focused on memory in rats treated with four weeks of LDX injection. We compared LDX-treated rats with control ones, using several methods to evaluate the behavioral responses and electrophysiological, molecular, and histological properties in the hippocampus. Our findings demonstrated that subchronic administration of LDX impaired behavioral performance in all memory assessment tests (Y maze, Morris Water Maze, and Shuttle box). Although LDX did not alter population spike (PS) amplitude, it increased the field excitatory postsynaptic potential (fEPSP) slope of evoked potentials of LTP components. Also, in addition to an increase in expression of caspase-3 in the hippocampus, which indicates the susceptibility to apoptosis in LDX-treated rats, the number of microglia and astrocytes went up significantly in the LDX group. Moreover, Sholl\'s analysis showed an increase in the soma size and total process length in both hippocampal astrocytes and microglia. Overall, because of these destructive effects of LDX on the hippocampus, which is one of the critical memory-related areas of the brain, the findings of this investigation provide evidence to show the disruption of memory-related variables following the LDX. However, more research is needed to clarify it.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is common during methamphetamine (MA) use and withdrawal; however, the feasibility of combined subjective-objective measurement of sleep-wake has not been shown in this population. Actigraphy is a well-established, non-invasive measure of sleep-wake cycles with good concordance with polysomnography. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and utility of using actigraphy and sleep diaries to investigate sleep during MA withdrawal.
METHODS: We conducted a feasibility and utility study of actigraphy and sleep diaries during a clinical trial of lisdexamfetamine for MA withdrawal. Participants were inpatients for 7 days, wore an actigraph (Philips Actiwatch 2) and completed a modified Consensus Sleep Diary each morning. Participants were interviewed between days 3-5.
RESULTS: Ten participants (mean age 37 years, 90% male) were enrolled. No participant removed the device prematurely. Participants interviewed (n = 8) reported that the actigraph was not difficult or distracting to wear or completion of daily sleep diary onerous. Actigraphic average daily sleep duration over 7 days was 568 min, sleep onset latency 22.4 min, wake after sleep onset (WASO) 75.2 min, and sleep efficiency 83.6%. Sleep diaries underreported daily sleep compared with actigraphy (sleep duration was 56 min (p = 0.008) and WASO 47 min (p < 0.001) less). Overall sleep quality was 4.4 on a nine-point Likert scale within the diary.
CONCLUSIONS: Continuous actigraphy is feasible to measure sleep-wake in people withdrawing from MA, with low participant burden. We found important differences in self-reported and actigraphic sleep, which need to be explored in more detail.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the presentation, management, and postmortem examination findings in a dog with confirmed lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) toxicosis.
METHODS: A 3-year-old female neutered mixed breed dog initially presented with neurological signs suspected to be secondary to LDX toxicosis. The dog was treated as typical for amphetamine toxicoses but developed severe respiratory and cardiovascular signs throughout their hospitalization. The progression of the cardiopulmonary signs led to cardiopulmonary arrest, for which CPR was unsuccessful. Postmortem examination exhibited severe hemorrhage throughout multiple organ systems. Toxicology testing confirmed the presence of unaltered LDX and its metabolite, amphetamine.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first case report documenting a severe progression of clinical signs and postmortem examination findings in a case of confirmed LDX toxicosis in a dog. Although the patient did not survive treatment, postmortem examination and microscopic evaluation of tissues allowed visualization of the extent of systemic pathophysiology. With prompt treatment, the prognosis of amphetamine toxicosis in dogs is generally considered good; however, this case report demonstrates a severe case in which even prompt and appropriate treatment did not prevent mortality. This suggests a need to establish negative prognostic indicators for which to monitor in cases of amphetamine toxicosis. Finally, this report is also unique in the fact that the LDX toxicosis was confirmed using a toxicological analysis technique not previously described clinically in dogs.

UNASSIGNED: To compare PRC-063 (multilayer-release methylphenidate) and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) on the driving performance of young adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study.
UNASSIGNED: Following up to 21 days of each treatment in each treatment course (PRC-063/LDX or LDX/PRC-063), subjects completed a 15-hour driving simulator laboratory assessment. The primary outcome measure was the Tactical Driving Quotient (TDQ) and the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale was a secondary outcome measure.
UNASSIGNED: Forty-four subjects completed the study. PRC-063 and LDX had equivalent effects on driving performance through a 15-hour time period (least square mean difference -0.3 [standard error 1.08], 95% confidence interval [-2.4, 1.8], p = .793). Consistent improvement in CGI-I was observed. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for each treatment sequence.
UNASSIGNED: PRC-063 and LDX had comparable effects on driving performance, from 1 through 15 hours, the last time point measured.

Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) is a d-amphetamine prodrug used to treat attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, a common neurodevelopmental disorder in children and adolescents. Due to its action mediated by elevated levels of catecholamines, mainly dopamine and noradrenaline, which influence hormonal regulation and directly affect the gonads, this drug may potentially disrupt reproductive performance. This study evaluated the effects of exposure to LDX from the juvenile to peripubertal period (critical stages of development) on systemic and reproductive toxicity parameters in male rats. Male Wistar rats (23 days old) were treated with 0; 5.2; 8.6 or 12.1 mg/kg/day of LDX from post-natal day (PND) 23 to 53, by gavage. LDX treatment led to reduced daily food and water consumption, as well as a decrease in social behaviors. The day of preputial separation remained unaltered, although the treated animals exhibited reduced weight. At PND 54, the treated animals presented signs of systemic toxicity, evidenced by a reduction in body weight gain, increase in the relative weight of the liver, spleen, and seminal gland, reduction in erythrocyte and leukocyte counts, reduced total protein levels, and disruptions in oxidative parameters. In adulthood, there was an increase in immobile sperm, reduced sperm count, morphometric changes in the testis, and altered oxidative parameters, without compromising male sexual behavior and fertility. These findings showed that LDX-treatment during the juvenile and peripubertal periods induced immediate systemic toxicity and adversely influenced reproductive function in adult life, indicating that caution is necessary when prescribing this drug during the peripubertal phase.

Executive function, including working memory, attention and inhibitory control, is crucial for decision making, thinking and planning. Lisdexamfetamine, the prodrug of d-amphetamine, has been approved for treating attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and binge eating disorder, but whether it improves executive function under non-disease condition, as well as the underlying pharmacokinetic and neurochemical properties, remains unclear. Here, using trial unique non-matching to location task and five-choice serial reaction time task of rats, we found lisdexamfetamine (p.o) enhanced spatial working memory and sustained attention under various cognitive load conditions, while d-amphetamine (i.p) only improved these cognitive performances under certain high cognitive load condition. Additionally, lisdexamfetamine evoked less impulsivity than d-amphetamine, indicating lower adverse effect on inhibitory control. In vivo pharmacokinetics showed lisdexamfetamine produced a relative stable and lasting release of amphetamine base both in plasma and in brain tissue, whereas d-amphetamine injection elicited rapid increase and dramatical decrease in amphetamine base levels. Microdialysis revealed lisdexamfetamine caused lasting release of dopamine within the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), whereas d-amphetamine produced rapid increase followed by decline to dopamine level. Moreover, lisdexamfetamine elicited more obvious efflux of noradrenaline than that of d-amphetamine. The distinct neurochemical profiles may be partly attributed to the different action of two drugs to membranous catecholamine transporters level within mPFC, detecting by Western Blotting. Taken together, due to its certain pharmacokinetic and catecholamine releasing profiles, lisdexamfetamine produced better pharmacological action to improving executive function. Our finding provided valuable evidence on the ideal pharmacokinetic and neurochemical characteristics of amphetamine-type psychostimulants in cognition enhancement.