On-Task 
 with The A.D.D. & Family Support Centre

INSIDE THIS ISSUE
Recent Research Comparing Adderall and Ritalin

Ron Weinstein, Director
August 1999 Volume 3, Issue 3

 

 
The A.D.D. &
Family Support Centre
 

Specialists in
  • Attention Deficit Disorders
  • Learning Problems
  • Emotional Difficulties
  • Behavioral/Impulse Disorders
  • Special Education Laws 
  • Disability Rights (ADA)
  • Alcohol & Substance Abuse 
              Children

  •           Adolescents
              Adults
    Services Provided
  • Stress/Anger Management
  • Support Groups
  • Workplace Accommodations
  • Workshops & Training
  • Advocacy

In 1996, when the medication Adderall was finally approved for use in treating AD/HD, many of my clients were interested in trying this "new" medication. It was supposed to be a smoother, longer lasting medication which would reduce the need for multiple doses throughout the day. 
This was great news for me since I felt that Ritalin’s short action created too many peaks and valleys to be effective for many individuals. Dexedrine was better, but the sensation of the medication "kicking in" was not something I wanted my clients to experience. After all, this is not a drug!
The only information available about Adderall at that time was in the PDR (Physicians Desk Reference), from materials available from Shire-Richwood Pharmaceuticals (the manufacturer) and from anecdotal clinical evidence.

Most of my clients found Adderall much more effective than either Ritalin or Dexedrine. It WAS smoother, it WAS longer lasting, and, for the most part, its action was such that most individuals were not aware of its "kicking in"!
It was more effective than either Ritalin or Dexedrine using measures of performance as determined by setting objectives and meeting goals. 
 
This brief newsletter includes information on the recently published research that compared the effectiveness of Adderall and Ritalin.

                             
PAGE 2 The A.D.D. Centre

A Comparison of Ritalin and Adderall: Efficacy and Time-course in Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
PEDIATRICS Vol. 103 No. 4,  April 1999

William E. Pelham, PhD*, Helen R. Aronoff, MD, Jill K. Midlam, MA*, et al.
The Departments of Psychology and Psychiatry, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.

ABSTRACT

Objective. Very little research has focused on the efficacy of Adderall (Shire-Richwood Inc, Florence, KY) in the treatment of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD), and no studies have compared it with standardized doses of Ritalin (Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ). It is thought that Adderall has a longer half-life than Ritalin and might minimize the loss of efficacy that occurs 4 or 5 hours after Ritalin ingestion. We compared two doses of Ritalin and Adderall in the treatment of AD/HD in children in an acute study and assessed the medications' time courses. 

DESIGN: Within-subject, double-blind, placebo- controlled, crossover design lasting  6 weeks. As in our previous work, medication changes occurred on a daily basis in random order over days.

SETTING:

Eight-week, weekday (9 hours daily) summer treatment program at the State University of New York at Buffalo, using an intensive behavioral treatment program including a point system and parent training. (continued on page 2).

PARTICIPANTS:
Twenty-five children (21 boys and 4 girls) diagnosed as AD/HD using standardized structured interview and rating scales, mean age 9.6 years, 88% Caucasian, of average intelligence, with no medical conditions that would preclude a trial of stimulant medication. Thirteen were comorbid for oppositional-defiant disorder and another 8 for conduct disorder.

INTERVENTIONS

Children received 10 mg of Ritalin, 17.5 mg of Ritalin, 7.5 mg of Adderall, 12.5 mg of Adderall, or placebo, twice a day (7:45 AM and 12:15 PM), in random order with conditions changing daily for 24 days.


OUTCOME MEASURES:

Daily rates of behaviors in recreational and classroom settings, and standardized ratings from counselors, teachers, and parents, were averaged across days within condition within child and compared. Within-subject relative sizes of the medication effects were computed by taking the placebo-minus-drug mean difference divided by the placebo standard deviation for each child, and were compared hourly between first daily ingestion (7:45 AM) and 5:00 PM to assess the time course of the two drugs. Measures were taken at 12:00 PM (recess rule violations) and at 5:00 PM (parent behavior ratings) to determine whether Adderall was still effective at times when the effects of Ritalin should have worn off.
Parent ratings were also made for evening behavior to assess possible rebound, and side effects ratings were obtained from parents, counselors, and teachers. Parents, counselors, and teachers also rated their perceptions of medication status and whether they recommended the continued use of the medication given that day. Finally, a clinical team made recommendations for treatment taking into account each child's individual response.


RESULTS:

Both drugs were routinely superior to placebo and produced dramatic improvements in rates of negative behavior, academic productivity, and staff/parent ratings of behavior. The doses of Adderall that were assessed produced greater improvement than did the assessed doses of Ritalin, particularly the lower dose of Ritalin, on numerous but not all measures. This result suggests that the doses of Adderall used were functionally more potent than those for Ritalin. Adderall was generally superior to the low dose of Ritalin when the effects of Ritalin were wearing off at midday and late afternoon and/or early evening. 
 
The lower dose of Adderall produced effects comparable to those of the higher dose of Ritalin. Both drugs produced low and comparable levels of clinically significant side effects. Staff recommendations for continued medication favored Adderall three to one. Almost 25% of the study participants were judged to be nonresponders by the clinical team, presumably because of their large beneficial response to the concurrent behavioral intervention and minimal incremental benefit from medication.

CONCLUSIONS:
 
This is the first investigation to assess comparable doses of Adderall and Ritalin directly. Results showed that Adderall is at least as effective as Ritalin in improving acutely the behavior and academic productivity of children with AD/HD. These results show clearly that Adderall should be added to the armamentarium of effective treatment for AD/HD, particularly for children in whom the effects of Ritalin dissipate rapidly and a longer acting medication is desired. 
 
Measures taken at times of the day when Ritalin is expected to have worn off4 to 5 hours after ingestion generally showed that Adderall was more effective than Ritalin at these times. The 7.5-mg twice-a-day dose of Adderall and the 17.5-mg twice-a-day dose of Ritalin produced equivalent behavioral changes. This indicates that a 5-mg dose of Adderall (or slightly less) is equivalent to a 10-mg dose of Ritalin, indicating that Adderall is twice as potent; this potency ratio is similar to the well-known 1:2 ratio between d-amphetamine and methylphenidate. A higher dose of Adderall did not produce incremental improvement beyond that of the 7.5-mg dose, and parents were less likely to desire the continuation of the higher Adderall dose than the other medication conditions. Three-quarters of the responders to medication were recommended the lower rather than higher of the doses assessed. 
 
These findings are similar to our previous reports that there is a diminishing incremental value with stimulant medications beyond low to moderate doses, particularly when a behavioral intervention is concurrently implemented. 
Time-course results indicated that the afternoon dose of medication seemed to have a larger effect than the morning dose, raising the possibility that afternoon doses of stimulant medication may be able to be reduced relative to the morning dose without a corresponding reduction in efficacy. Although this practice is commonly used with some cases in clinical settings, it is almost never used in empirical investigations and no studies have systematically investigated the practice. Our results suggest that systematic studies of a reduced midday dose are indicated. Further studies of dose equivalence and dose-response, including mg/kg dosing rather than absolute dosing, are necessary to firmly establish the Adderall / Ritalin dosing ratio and guidelines for clinical practice. Studies comparing Adderall to d-amphetamine should be conducted to determine whether the compound is superior to d-amphetamine alone. 
 
Further examinations of time-course are necessary to determine the length of action of Adderall for example, whether a single morning dose will be sufficient to provide coverage throughout the school day. 
Page 3 The A.D.D. Centre


Analog classroom assessment of Adderall in children with ADHD.
J Am Acad Child Adoles. Psychiatry 1998 May; 37(5): 519-26
Swanson JM, Wigal S, et al.

Child Develop. Center, University of California, Irvine 92612

OBJECTIVE:

This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover study of 30 children with attention-deficit /hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD) that evaluated the time course effects of four doses of Adderall (5, 10, 15, and 20 mg), an inactive control (placebo), and a positive control (clinical dose of methylphenidate).

METHOD:
For each treatment condition, a capsule was administered in the morning and assessments were performed in an analog classroom setting every 1.5 hours across the day. Subjective (teacher ratings of deportment and attention) and objective (scores on math tests) measures were obtained for each classroom session, and these measures were used to evaluate time-response and dose response effects of Adderall.

RESULTS:
For doses of Adderall greater than 5 mg, significant time course effects were observed. Rapid improvements on teacher ratings and math performance were observed by 1.5 hours after administration, and these effects dissipated by the end of the day. The specific pattern of time course effects depended on dose: the time of peak effects and the duration of action increased with dose of Adderall.

CONCLUSIONS:
This documentation of efficacy in a controlled study supports the addition of Adderall to the armamentarium of psychotropic medications for the treatment of AD/HD. The differences in time-response patterns of Adderall and methylphenidate may help tailor treatment to meet specific clinical needs of different children with AD/HD.
 

REMEMBER Medication is one part of the treatment for AD/HD. It must be combined with behavior mod., counseling and skills training.

From Clinical Psychiatry News
Adderall Seems Equal to Ritalin  (Joel B. Finkelstein)
© 1999 International Medical News Group.

WASHINGTON -- Adderall offered similar efficacy to Ritalin for treating children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder with less frequent dosing, in a prospective, nonrandomized study. Of 53 children with AD/HD treated with amphetamine mixed salts (Adderall), 61% had significant improvement on the Clinical Global Impression scale, Dr. Stephen Grcevich reported in a poster presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association. Of 74 children with AD/HD receiving methylphenidate (Ritalin), 71% had similar improvement. Mean improvement on the Clinical Global Impression scale was 5.5 points in the Adderall group and 6.7 points in the Ritalin group. Adderall could be taken two or fewer times a day in 89% of patients, allowing almost half to avoid in-school dosing. Ritalin could be taken two or fewer times a day in only 25% of patients, allowing only 12% to avoid school dosing, said Dr. Grcevich of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. Patients on Adderall were also more likely to stay with their original dosing regimen. Nine percent of patients switched during the first 6 months on Adderall, compared with 39% on Ritalin. The study was supported by funding from Shire Richwood, the makers of Adderall. 

BACK TO ADDCENTRE INDEX