Assessment of centanafadine in adults with ADHD: a matching adjusted indirect comparison versus methylphenidate hydrochloride extended release (Concerta)
Jeff Schein1, Martin Cloutier2, Marjolaine Gauthier-Loiselle2
1Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Objective:
To compare safety and efficacy of centanafadine versus methylphenidate hydrochloride extended release (ER; Concerta) in adults with ADHD.
Methods:
Without head-to-head trials, anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) of adverse event rates reported across trials and mean change from baseline in Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) score between centanafadine and methylphenidate hydrochloride ER were conducted. Pooled patient-level data from two centanafadine trials (NCT03605680/NCT03605836) and aggregate data from one published methylphenidate hydrochloride ER trial (NCT00937040) were used. Characteristics of individual patients from the centanafadine trials were matched to aggregate baseline characteristics from the methylphenidate hydrochloride ER trial using propensity score weighting. A sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the results to the capping of extreme weights (i.e. >99th percentile).
Results:
Compared with methylphenidate hydrochloride ER, centanafadine was associated with significantly lower risk of dry mouth (risk difference [RD] in percentage points: -11.95), initial insomnia (-11.10), decreased appetite (-8.05), anxiety (-5.39), palpitations (-5.25), and feeling jittery (-4.73) though a significantly smaller reduction in AISRS score (4.16-point). In the sensitivity analysis, the safety results were consistent with the primary analysis but there was no significant difference in efficacy between centanafadine and methylphenidate hydrochloride ER.
Conclusion:
In this MAIC, centanafadine had better safety and possibly lower efficacy than methylphenidate hydrochloride ER. While safety results were robust across analyses, there was no efficacy difference between centanafadine and methylphenidate hydrochloride ER in the sensitivity analysis. Considering its favorable safety profile, centanafadine may be preferred among patients for whom treatment-related adverse events are a concern.
More Related Videos
05:48The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
Published on: June 12, 2020
13:09Using Brain Activation nir-HEG/Q-EEG and Execution Measures CPTs in a ADHD Assessment Protocol
Published on: April 1, 2018
Related Concept Videos
01:30Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Diagnostic Criteria and Symptoms
To diagnose ADHD, symptoms must manifest before age 12 and be evident across multiple settings....
01:28Adrenergic Agonists: Mixed-Action Agents
Ephedrine and pseudoephedrine lack a catecholamine group, making them less susceptible to degradation by metabolic enzymes. They have increased oral bioavailability and lipophilicity, resulting in a longer duration of action. Their response is reduced by...
01:24CNS Stimulants: Cocaine, Amphetamines and Cannabinoids
01:30Cognitive Enhancers: Cholinesterase Inhibitors and NMDA Receptor Antagonists
01:24Parkinson's Disease: Treatment
Parkinson's Disease is primarily a result of the loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta. The cornerstone of...
01:25Adrenergic Agonists: Indirect-Acting Agents
One mechanism involves depleting stored catecholamines by displacing them from synaptic vesicles. These agents, known as "displacers," are transported into vesicles at the expense of noradrenaline. Examples include amphetamine and tyramine, which lack a catechol moiety, resulting in prolonged action, improved oral...