Faculty Bibliography

In a double-blind randomised controlled trial by Asherson et al., involving prisoners with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the rates of response to osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-methylphenidate) and placebo were very similar (~50%). I critically discuss this trial against other international literature, highlighting the key issues in the field in terms of clinical practice and research.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) substantially contributes to the burden of mental disorders. Improved awareness and changes in diagnostic criteria of ASD may have influenced the diagnostic rates of ASD. However, while data on trends in diagnostic rates in some individual countries have been published, updated estimates of diagnostic rate trends and ASD-related disability at the global level are lacking. Here, we used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study data to address this gap, focusing on changes in prevalence, incidence, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) of ASD across the world. From 1990 to 2019, overall age-standardized estimates remained stable globally. Both prevalence and DALYs increased in countries with high socio-demographic index (SDI). However, the age-standardized incidence decreased in some low SDI countries, indicating a need to improve awareness. The male/female ratio decreased between 1990 and 2019, possibly accounted for by increasing clinical attention to ASD in females. Our results suggest that ASD detection in low SDI countries is suboptimal, and that ASD prevention/treatment in countries with high SDI should be improved, considering the increasing prevalence of the disorder. Additionally, growing attention is being paid to ASD diagnosis in females, who might have been left behind by ASD epidemiologic and clinical research previously. ASD burden estimates are underestimated as GBD does not account for mortality in ASD.

Accumulating evidence suggests a higher risk for cardiovascular diseases among individuals with mental disorders, but very little is known about the risk for overall and specific groups of cardiovascular diseases in people with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). To fill this knowledge gap, we investigated the prospective associations between ADHD and a wide range of cardiovascular diseases in adults. In a nationwide population-based cohort study, we identified 5,389,519 adults born between 1941 and 1983, without pre-existing cardiovascular diseases, from Swedish registers. The study period was from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2013. Incident cardiovascular disease events were identified according to ICD codes. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression model, with ADHD as a time-varying exposure. After an average 11.80 years of follow-up, 38.05% of individuals with ADHD versus 23.57% of those without ADHD had at least one diagnosis of cardiovascular disease (p<0.0001). ADHD was significantly associated with increased risk of any cardiovascular disease (HR=2.05, 95% CI: 1.98-2.13) after adjusting for sex and year of birth. Further adjustments for education level, birth country, type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, dyslipidemia, sleep problems and heavy smoking attenuated the association, which however remained significant (HR=1.84, 95% CI: 1.77-1.91). Further adjustment for psychiatric comorbidities attenuated but could not fully explain the association (HR=1.65, 95% CI: 1.59-1.71). The strongest associations were found for cardiac arrest (HR=2.28, 95% CI: 1.81-2.87), hemorrhagic stroke (HR=2.16, 95% CI: 1.68-2.77), and peripheral vascular disease/arteriosclerosis (HR=2.05, 95% CI: 1.76-2.38). Stronger associations were observed in males and younger adults, while comparable associations were found among individuals with or without psychotropic medications and family history of cardiovascular diseases. These data suggest that ADHD is an independent risk factor for a wide range of cardiovascular diseases. They highlight the importance of carefully monitoring cardiovascular health and developing age-appropriate and individualized strategies to reduce the cardiovascular risk in individuals with ADHD.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Pharmacotherapy is an important component of the multimodal treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Cardiovascular safety of medications for ADHD is of concern from a clinical and public health standpoint. We aim to conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the effects of available medications for ADHD on blood pressure (diastolic and systolic), heart rate and ECG parameters over the short-term and long-term treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS/METHODS:Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines for protocols and NMAs will be followed. We will include parallel group or cross-over randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in patients with a primary diagnosis of ADHD (no age limits). We will search an extensive number of electronic databases (including MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO, OpenGrey, Web of Science) from their inception and contact study authors/drug manufacturers to gather relevant unpublished information. No language restrictions will be applied. The main outcomes (assessed at 12 weeks, 26 weeks and 52 weeks) will be: (1) change in diastolic and systolic blood pressure (mm Hg); (2) change in heart rate, measured in beats/min; (3) change in any available ECG parameters. We will conduct random effects of NMA using standardised mean differences with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes and ORs with 95% CIs for dichotomous outcomes. We will use the Cochrane risk of bias tool-version 2 to assess the risk of bias of included RCTs and the Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis tool to evaluate the confidence of evidence contributing to each network estimate. Sensitivity analyses will investigate effects at different dose regimens. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION/BACKGROUND:No institutional review board approval will be necessary. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be presented at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER/UNASSIGNED:CRD42021295352.

OBJECTIVE:People with mood disorders have increased risk of comorbid medical diseases versus the general population. It is paramount to identify interventions to improve physical health in this population. METHODS:Umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on pharmacological/non-pharmacological interventions for physical health outcomes/intolerability-related discontinuation in mood disorders (any age). RESULTS:Ninety-seven meta-analyses were included. Among youths, against placebo, in depression, antidepressants/antipsychotics had higher discontinuation rates; in bipolar depression, olanzapine+fluoxetine worsened total cholesterol (TC)/triglycerides/weight gain (WG) (large ES). In adults with bipolar disorder, olanzapine worsened HbA1c/TC/WG (moderate/large ES); asenapine increased fasting glucose (small ES); quetiapine/cariprazine/risperidone induced WG (small/moderate ES). In bipolar depression, lurasidone was metabolically neutral. In depression, psychological interventions improved physical health-related quality of life (PHQoL) (small ES), fasting glucose/HbA1c (medium/large ES); SSRIs improved fasting glucose/HbA1c, readmission for coronary disease, pain (small ES); quetiapine/aripiprazole/olanzapine induced WG (small to large ES). Exercise improved cardiorespiratory fitness (moderate ES). In the elderly, fluoxetine yielded more detrimental cardiovascular effects than sertraline/escitalopram (large ES); antidepressants were neutral on exercise tolerance and PHQoL. In mixed age groups, in bipolar disorder aripiprazole was metabolically neutral; in depression, SSRIs lowered blood pressure versus placebo and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (small ES); brexpiprazole augmentation caused WG and was less tolerated (small ES); exercise improved PHQoL (moderate ES). CONCLUSIONS:Some interventions (psychological therapies, exercise and SSRIs) improve certain physical health outcomes in mood disorders, few are neutral, but various pharmacological interventions are associated with negative effects. Evidence from this umbrella review has limitations, should consider evidence from other disorders and should be integrated with recent evidence from individual RCTs, and observational evidence. Effective treatments with either beneficial or physically neutral profiles should be prioritized.

OBJECTIVE:Our objective is to explore the change in the severity of ADHD, ODD and anxiety during a two-month lockdown among children in France and the moderating role of behavioural regulation. METHOD:In 235 children with ADHD, the symptom severity of ADHD, ODD and anxiety was investigated one and two months after the beginning of lockdown, and one month after its end. Behavioural regulation skills were estimated with the Behaviour Regulation Index. RESULTS:ADHD, ODD and anxiety scores were increasing or decreasing depending on BRI. CONCLUSION:Baseline behavioural regulation skills may act as a moderating factor for the persistence of ADHD, ODD and anxiety symptoms related to the lockdown.

Numerous risk factors for mental disorders have been identified. However, we do not know how many disorders we could prevent and to what extent by modifying these risk factors. This study quantifies the Population Attributable Fraction (PAF) of potentially modifiable risk factors for mental disorders. We conducted a PRISMA 2020-compliant (Protocol: https://osf.io/hk2ag ) meta-umbrella systematic review (Web of Science/PubMed/Cochrane Central Register of Reviews/Ovid/PsycINFO, until 05/12/2021) of umbrella reviews reporting associations between potentially modifiable risk factors and ICD/DSM mental disorders, restricted to highly convincing (class I) and convincing (class II) evidence from prospective cohorts. The primary outcome was the global meta-analytical PAF, complemented by sensitivity analyses across different settings, the meta-analytical Generalised Impact Fraction (GIF), and study quality assessment (AMSTAR). Seven umbrella reviews (including 295 meta-analyses and 547 associations) identified 28 class I-II risk associations (23 risk factors; AMSTAR: 45.0% high-, 35.0% medium-, 20.0% low quality). The largest global PAFs not confounded by indication were 37.84% (95% CI = 26.77-48.40%) for childhood adversities and schizophrenia spectrum disorders, 24.76% (95% CI = 13.98-36.49%) for tobacco smoking and opioid use disorders, 17.88% (95% CI = not available) for job strain and depression, 14.60% (95% CI = 9.46-20.52%) for insufficient physical activity and Alzheimer's disease, 13.40% (95% CI = 7.75-20.15%) for childhood sexual abuse and depressive disorders, 12.37% (95% CI = 5.37-25.34%) for clinical high-risk state for psychosis and any non-organic psychotic disorders, 10.00% (95% CI = 5.62-15.95%) for three metabolic factors and depression, 9.73% (95% CI = 4.50-17.30%) for cannabis use and schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and 9.30% (95% CI = 7.36-11.38%) for maternal pre-pregnancy obesity and ADHD. The GIFs confirmed the preventive capacity for these factors. Addressing several potentially modifiable risk factors, particularly childhood adversities, can reduce the global population-level incidence of mental disorders.

BACKGROUND:The degree of efficacy, safety, quality, and certainty of meta-analytic evidence of biological non-pharmacological treatments in mental disorders is unclear. METHODS:We conducted an umbrella review (PubMed/Cochrane Library/PsycINFO-04-Jul-2021, PROSPERO/CRD42020158827) for meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on deep brain stimulation (DBS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), electro-convulsive therapy (ECT), and others. Co-primary outcomes were standardized mean differences (SMD) of disease-specific symptoms, and acceptability (for all-cause discontinuation). Evidence was assessed with AMSTAR/AMSTAR-Content/GRADE. RESULTS:We selected 102 meta-analyses. Effective interventions compared to sham were in depressive disorders: ECT (SMD=0.91/GRADE=moderate), TMS (SMD=0.51/GRADE=moderate), tDCS (SMD=0.46/GRADE=low), DBS (SMD=0.42/GRADE=very low), light therapy (SMD=0.41/GRADE=low); schizophrenia: ECT (SMD=0.88/GRADE=moderate), tDCS (SMD=0.45/GRADE=very low), TMS (prefrontal theta-burst, SMD=0.58/GRADE=low; left-temporoparietal, SMD=0.42/GRADE=low); substance use disorder: TMS (high frequency-dorsolateral-prefrontal-deep (SMD=1.16/GRADE=moderate), high frequency-left dorsolateral-prefrontal (SMD=0.77/GRADE=very low); OCD: DBS (SMD=0.89/GRADE=moderate), TMS (SMD=0.64/GRADE=very low); PTSD: TMS (SMD=0.46/GRADE=moderate); generalized anxiety disorder: TMS (SMD=0.68/GRADE=low); ADHD: tDCS (SMD=0.23/GRADE=moderate); autism: tDCS (SMD=0.97/GRADE=very low). No significant differences for acceptability emerged. Median AMSTAR/AMSTAR-Content was 8/2 (suggesting high-quality meta-analyses/low-quality RCTs), GRADE low. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Despite limited certainty, biological non-pharmacological interventions are effective and safe for numerous mental conditions. Results inform future research, and guidelines. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:None.

OBJECTIVE:This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the accuracies of a broad range of screening tools for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents, and to compare the diagnostic accuracy of tools between population-based and clinical/high-risk samples, and across reporters. METHOD:MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched up until February 20, 2020, with no language restrictions. Studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of a screening tool against a diagnosis of ADHD in children and adolescents <18 years of age were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses were undertaken to provide pooled estimates of the area under the curve (AUC), and sensitivity and specificity of groups of measures. RESULTS:A total of 75 studies published between 1985 and 2021 reporting on 41 screening tools that were grouped into 4 categories (Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment [ASEBA], DSM-IV symptom scales, SDQ, and Other Scales) were retained. The pooled AUC for studies using a combined ADHD symptoms score was 0.82 (95% CI = 0.78-0.86), although this varied considerably across reporters (0.67-0.92) and populations (CI = 0.60-0.95). None of the measures met minimal standards for acceptable sensitivity (0.8) and specificity (0.8). CONCLUSION:Most tools have excellent overall diagnostic accuracy as indicated by the AUC. However, a single measure completed by a single reporter is unlikely to have sufficient sensitivity and specificity for clinical use or population screening.