Faculty Bibliography

Commented on the article 'What Does the MTA Study Tell Us About Effective Psychosocial Treatment for ADHD?' by Greene and Ablon (this issue). In this article, these authors note that the Multimodal Treatment Study (MTA) did not focus on or provide information about how to match treatment to the needs of the individual child. They contend that cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT), which was not included in the MTA, can facilitate treatment tailoring if delivered appropriately. The authors offer several suggestions regarding how CBT can be structured to meet the needs of each child. This commentary points out that the MTA included psychosocial treatments with established rather than potential efficacy. Systematic studies are needed to determine whether the suggestions offered by Greene and Ablon have clinical utility. Matching treatment to the needs of individual patients remains the overarching goal of those interested in idiographic approaches to treatment. However, efforts to inform on treatment tailoring involve complex design and needs assessment methodologies. Several suggestions are offered regarding the technology of treatment tailoring. These include the use of goal attainment scaling to identify and evaluate individualized outcome measures and the use of hybrid efficacy-effectiveness designs to assess the impact of treatment preference on outcome

Discusses challenges involved in the collection of safety information on psychotropic medications when administered to children and adolescents, and suggests methods for improving existing approaches. Current methods for collecting and assessing safety data during pediatric psychopharmacological trials are critiqued and possible alternatives are reviewed. It is concluded that methods used for collecting and assessing drug safety data remain less sophisticated than efficacy evaluations. Multisite trials, although demonstrating statistical power to detect placebo/active drug differences, remain too small to detect infrequent but serious drug-related adverse events. Other active surveillance approaches, such as long-duration follow-up studies and clinical epidemiological studies, using case-control, cohort designs, or trend analysis of population-based treatment data must be used. (PsycIN

Impulsivity is a primary symptom of the combined type of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD). The Stop Signal Paradigm is premised upon a primary deficit in inhibitory control in AD/HD, whereas the Delay Aversion Hypothesis, by contrast, conceptualizes impulsivity in AD/HD, not as an inability to inhibit a response, but rather as a choice to avoid delay. This study compared the ecological validity of the Stop Signal Task (SST) and Choice-Delay Task (C-DT) measure of delay aversion, with respect to their relative utility in discriminating AD/HD children from normal control participants, and their correlations with classroom observations and with ratings of impulsivity and other core AD/HD symptoms on the Conners and SNAP-IV checklists. The tasks exhibited modest discriminant validity when used individually and excellent discriminant validity when used in combination. The C-DT correlated with teacher ratings of impulsivity, hyperactivity, and conduct problems, and with observations of gross motor activity, physical aggression, and an AD/HD composite score. The SST correlated with the observations only. These results suggest that delay aversion is associated with a broad range of AD/HD characteristics whereas inhibitory failure seems to tap a more discrete dimension of executive control

In 1992, the National Institute of Mental Health and 6 teams of investigators began a multisite clinical trial, the Multimodal Treatment of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA) study. Five hundred seventy-nine children were randomly assigned to either routine community care (CC) or one of three study-delivered treatments, all lasting 14 months. The three MTA treatments-monthly medication management (usually methylphenidate) following weekly titration (MedMgt), intensive behavioral treatment (Beh), and the combination (Comb)-were designed to reflect known best practices within each treatment approach. Children were assessed at four time points in multiple outcome. Results indicated that Comb and MedMgt interventions were substantially superior to Beh and CC interventions for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms. For other functioning domains (social skills, academics, parent-child relations, oppositional behavior, anxiety/depression), results suggested slight advantages of Comb over single treatments (MedMgt, Beh) and community care. High quality medication treatment characterized by careful yet adequate dosing, three times daily methylphenidate administration, monthly follow-up visits, and communication with schools conveyed substantial benefits to those children that received it. In contrast to the overall study findings that showed the largest benefits for high quality medication management (regardless of whether given in the MedMgt or Comb group), secondary analyses revealed that Comb had a significant incremental effect over MedMgt (with a small effect size for this comparison) when categorical indicators of excellent response and when composite outcome measures were used. In addition, children with parent-defined comorbid anxiety disorders, particularly those with overlapping disruptive disorder comorbidities, showed preferential benefits to the Beh and Comb interventions. Parental attitudes and disciplinary practices appeared to mediate improved response to the Beh and Comb interventions

OBJECTIVE: To examine ratings and objective measures of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms to assess whether ADHD children with and without comorbid conditions have equally high levels of core symptoms and whether symptom profiles differ as a function of comorbidity and gender. METHOD: Four hundred ninety-eight children from the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA) were divided into comorbid groups based on the parent Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children and assessed via parents' and teachers' Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham (SNAP) ratings and a continuous performance test (CPT). Comorbidity and gender effects were examined using analyses of covariance controlled for age and site. RESULTS: CPT inattention, impulsivity, and dyscontrol errors were high in all ADHD groups. Children with ADHD + oppositional defiant or conduct disorder were rated as more impulsive than inattentive, while children with ADHD + anxiety disorders (ANX) were relatively more inattentive than impulsive. Girls were less impaired than boys on most ratings and several CPT indices, particularly impulsivity, and girls with ADHD + ANX made fewer CPT impulsivity errors than girls with ADHD-only. CONCLUSIONS: Children with ADHD have high levels of core symptoms as measured by rating scales and CPT, irrespective of comorbidity. However, there are important differences in symptomatology as a function of comorbidity and gender

OBJECTIVES: To examine the trajectory of methylphenidate (MPH) dosage over time, following a controlled titration, and to ascertain how accurately the titration was able to predict effective long-term treatment in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: Using the 14-month-treatment database of the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA), the outcome of the initial placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized daily switch titration of MPH was compared with the subsequent maintenance pharmacotherapy. Children received monthly monitoring visits and, when needed, medication adjustments. RESULTS: Of the 198 children for whom MPH was the optimal treatment at titration (mean +/- SD dose: 30.5 +/- 14.2 mg/day), 88% were still taking MPH at the end of maintenance (mean dose 34.4 +/- 13.3 mg/day). Titration-determined dose and end-of-maintenance dose were significantly correlated (r = 0.52-0.68). Children receiving combined pharmacotherapy and behavioral treatment ended maintenance on a lower dose (31.1 +/- 11.7 mg/day) than did children receiving pharmacotherapy only (38.1 +/- 14.2 mg/day). Of the 230 children for whom titration identified an optimal treatment, 17% continued both the assigned medication and dosage throughout maintenance. The mean number of pharmacological changes per child was 2.8 +/- 1.8 (SD), and time to first change was 4.7 months +/- 0.3 (SE). CONCLUSIONS: For most children, initial titration found a dose of MPH in the general range of the effective maintenance dose, but did not prevent the need for subsequent maintenance adjustments. For optimal pharmacological treatment of ADHD, both careful initial titration and ongoing medication management are needed

OBJECTIVE: Results of the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA) were analyzed to determine whether a double-blind, placebo-controlled methylphenidate (MPH) titration trial identified the best MPH dose for each child with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: Children with ADHD assigned to MTA medication treatment groups (n = 289) underwent a controlled 28-day titration protocol that administered different MPH doses (placebo, low, middle, and high) on successive days. RESULTS: A repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed main effects for MPH dose with greater effects on teacher ratings of impairment and deportment (F3 = 100.6, n = 223, p = .0001; effect sizes 0.8-1.3) than on parent ratings of similar endpoints (F3 = 55.61, n = 253, p = .00001; effect sizes 0.4-0.6). Dose did not interact with period, dose order, comorbid diagnosis, site, or treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: The MTA titration protocol validated the efficacy of weekend MPH dosing and established a total daily dose limit of 35 mg of MPH for children weighing less than 25 kg. It replicated previously reported MPH response rates (77%), distribution of best doses (10-50 mg/day) across subjects, effect sizes on impairment and deportment, as well as dose-related adverse events

OBJECTIVES: To develop a categorical outcome measure related to clinical decisions and to perform secondary analyses to supplement the primary analyses of the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA). METHOD: End-of-treatment status was summarized by averaging the parent and teacher ratings of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder symptoms on the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham, version IV (SNAP-IV) scale, and low symptom-severity ('Just a Little') on this continuous measure was set as a clinical cutoff to form a categorical outcome measure reflecting successful treatment. Three orthogonal comparisons of the treatment groups (combined treatment [Comb], medication management [MedMgt], behavioral treatment [Beh], and community comparison [CC]) evaluated hypotheses about the MTA medication algorithm ('Comb + MedMgt versus Beh + CC'), multimodality superiority ('Comb versus MedMgt'), and psychosocial substitution ('Beh versus CC'). RESULTS: The summary of SNAP-IV ratings across sources and domains increased the precision of measurement by 30%. The secondary analyses of group differences in success rates (Comb = 68%; MedMgt = 56%; Beh = 34%; CC = 25%) confirmed the large effect of the MTA medication algorithm and a smaller effect of multimodality superiority, which was now statistically significant (p < .05). The psychosocial substitution effect remained negligible and nonsignificant. CONCLUSION: These secondary analyses confirm the primary findings and clarify clinical decisions about the choice between multimodal and unimodal treatment with medication

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a post hoc investigation of the utility of a single composite measure of treatment outcome for the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA) at 14 months postbaseline. BACKGROUND: Examination of multiple measures one at a time in the main MTA intent-to-treat outcome analyses failed to detect a statistically significant advantage of combined treatment (Comb) over medication management (MedMgt). A measure that increases power and precision using a single outcome score may be a useful alternative to multiple outcome measures. METHOD: Factor analysis of baseline scores yielded two 'source factors' (parent and teacher) and one 'instrument factor' (parent-child interactions). A composite score was created from the average of standardized parent and teacher measures. RESULTS: The composite was internally consistent (alpha = .83), reliable (test-retest over 3 months = 0.86), and correlated 0.61 with clinician global judgments. In an intent-to-treat analysis, Comb was statistically significantly better than all other treatments, with effect sizes ranging from small (0.28) versus MedMgt, to moderately large (0.70) versus a community comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: A composite of ADHD variables may be an important tool in future treatment trials with ADHD and may avoid some of the statistical limitations of multiple measures

OBJECTIVES: Previous research has been inconclusive whether attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), when comorbid with disruptive disorders (oppositional defiant disorder [ODD] or conduct disorder [CD]), with the internalizing disorders (anxiety and/or depression), or with both, should constitute separate clinical entities. Determination of the clinical significance of potential ADHD + internalizing disorder or ADHD + ODD/CD syndromes could yield better diagnostic decision-making, treatment planning, and treatment outcomes. METHOD: Drawing upon cross-sectional and longitudinal information from 579 children (aged 7-9.9 years) with ADHD participating in the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA), investigators applied validational criteria to compare ADHD subjects with and without comorbid internalizing disorders and ODD/CD. RESULTS: Substantial evidence of main effects of internalizing and externalizing comorbid disorders was found. Moderate evidence of interactions of parent-reported anxiety and ODD/CD status were noted on response to treatment, indicating that children with ADHD and anxiety disorders (but no ODD/CD) were likely to respond equally well to the MTA behavioral and medication treatments. Children with ADHD-only or ADHD with ODD/CD (but without anxiety disorders) responded best to MTA medication treatments (with or without behavioral treatments), while children with multiple comorbid disorders (anxiety and ODD/CD) responded optimally to combined (medication and behavioral) treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that three clinical profiles, ADHD co-occurring with internalizing disorders (principally parent-reported anxiety disorders) absent any concurrent disruptive disorder (ADHD + ANX), ADHD co-occurring with ODD/CD but no anxiety (ADHD + ODD/CD), and ADHD with both anxiety and ODD/CD (ADHD + ANX + ODD/CD) may be sufficiently distinct to warrant classification as ADHD subtypes different from 'pure' ADHD with neither comorbidity. Future clinical, etiological, and genetics research should explore the merits of these three ADHD classification options