Article

Venlafaxine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: an open clinical trial.

Department of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, USA.
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 5.14). 05/1996; 57(5):184-9.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It is becoming commonly recognized that adults suffer from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Since medications used in the past of treat adults with ADHD may be ineffective or poorly tolerated by some patients, it is important to determine if newly available medications can safely ameliorate symptoms of ADHD in adults.
An open clinical trial was undertaken to examine whether venlafaxine was safe and effective in the treatment of adults with ADHD. Ten subjects who met DSM-IV criteria for ADHD were enrolled in this 8-week trial. Individuals were started on 37.5 mg of venlafaxine b.i.d. If moderate ADHD symptoms persisted at the end of Week 4, the dose of venlafaxine was increased to 75 mg b.i.d. Assessments of ADHD symptomatology included the ADHD Rating Scale, Self-Report Version (ARS) and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale.
Nine patients completed the study. At the end of the study, 7 patients were receiving 37.5 mg b.i.d. of venlafaxine. Repeated measures ANOVA demonstrated that treatment with venlafaxine was associated with significant reductions in ADHD symptomatology (p < .02 for the ARS; p < .005 for the CGI). Of the 9 subjects who completed the trial, 7 were considered responders. Venlafaxine was well tolerated, and most patients experienced only mild side effects.
Venlafaxine may be a promising agent for the treatment of ADHD in adults. Controlled clinical trials are needed to further examine this issue.

0 Followers
 · 
155 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Individuals who initiate cannabis use at an early age, when the brain is still developing, might be more vulnerable to lasting neuropsychological deficits than individuals who begin use later in life. We analyzed neuropsychological test results from 122 long-term heavy cannabis users and 87 comparison subjects with minimal cannabis exposure, all of whom had undergone a 28-day period of abstinence from cannabis, monitored by daily or every-other-day observed urine samples. We compared early-onset cannabis users with late-onset users and with controls, using linear regression controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, and attributes of family of origin. The 69 early-onset users (who began smoking before age 17) differed significantly from both the 53 late-onset users (who began smoking at age 17 or later) and from the 87 controls on several measures, most notably verbal IQ (VIQ). Few differences were found between late-onset users and controls on the test battery. However, when we adjusted for VIQ, virtually all differences between early-onset users and controls on test measures ceased to be significant. Early-onset cannabis users exhibit poorer cognitive performance than late-onset users or control subjects, especially in VIQ, but the cause of this difference cannot be determined from our data. The difference may reflect (1). innate differences between groups in cognitive ability, antedating first cannabis use; (2). an actual neurotoxic effect of cannabis on the developing brain; or (3). poorer learning of conventional cognitive skills by young cannabis users who have eschewed academics and diverged from the mainstream culture.
    Drug and Alcohol Dependence 05/2003; 69(3):303-10. DOI:10.1016/S0376-8716(02)00334-4 · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Autism is characterized by social deficits, communication and language impairments, narrow restricted interests, repetitive behaviors, inattention, and hyperactivity. While selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in treating core symptoms of autism, norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). An open, retrospective clinical study with venlafaxine evaluated its effect on core symptoms of autism as well as associated features of ADHD. Ten consecutive subjects meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV), criteria for an autism spectrum disorder were treated with venlafaxine, initiated at 12.5 mg per day and adjusted on a flexible basis. Six of 10 completers were judged to be sustained treatment responders, by scoring 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the Clinical Global Impressions improvement scale. Venlafaxine was effective in low dosages (mean, 24.37 mg/day; range, 6.25 to 50 mg/day) and was well tolerated. Improvement was noted in repetitive behaviors and restricted interests, social deficits, communication and language function, inattention, and hyperactivity. Controlled treatment trials with venlafaxine are warranted in autism spectrum disorders.
    Journal of Child Neurology 03/2000; 15(2):132-5. DOI:10.1177/088307380001500214 · 1.67 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To assess the effect of duloxetine on ADHD in adults. Method: In a 6-week double-blind trial, 30 adults with ADHD received placebo or duloxetine 60 mg daily. The Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS) and the Clinical Global Impression Scales (CGI) were used to assess symptom severity and clinical improvement. The Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) were used to measure the effect on anxiety and depressive symptoms. Results: The Duloxetine group showed lower score on CGI-Severity at Week 6 (3.00 vs. 4.07 for placebo, p < .001), greater improvement on CGI-Improvement (2.89 vs. 4.00 at Week 6, p < .001), and greater decreases on five of eight subscales of the CAARS. There was no treatment group effect on HDRS or HARS scores. Conclusion: Duloxetine may be a therapeutic option for adults with ADHD, but further studies are required to replicate these findings in larger samples. (J. of Att. Dis. 2012; XX(X) 1-XX).
    Journal of Attention Disorders 05/2012; 18(2). DOI:10.1177/1087054712443157 · 2.40 Impact Factor