Original Research

Safety and effectiveness of methylphenidate ER multi-unit pellet system in ADHD patients: An open label study

Renata Schoeman, Evelyn Y. Lai, Anne-Marie Nel, Mashra Gani, Muhammed A. Fulat, Akbar A. Mahomed
South African Journal of Psychiatry | Vol 30 | a2267 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v30i0.2267 | © 2024 Renata Schoeman, Evelyn Y. Lai, Anne-Marie Nel, Mashra Gani, Muhammed A. Fulat, Akbar A. Mahomed | This work is licensed under CC Attribution 4.0
Submitted: 20 February 2024 | Published: 14 November 2024

About the author(s)

Renata Schoeman, Stellenbosch Business School, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
Evelyn Y. Lai, Department of Medical Affairs, Mylan (Pty) Ltd, Johannesburg, South Africa
Anne-Marie Nel, Robert Broom Medical Centre, Krugersdorp, South Africa
Mashra Gani, Smartmed CTC, Port Elizabeth, South Africa
Muhammed A. Fulat, Clinical Trial Systems, Pretoria, South Africa
Akbar A. Mahomed, Zinakekele Medical Centre, Mpumalanga, South Africa

Abstract

Background: Attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder occurring in children and adults. Pharmacotherapy remains the cornerstone of ADHD treatment. Stimulants such as methylphenidate are effective and have been one of the best studied and most frequently used treatment for ADHD. However, different delivery mechanisms and devices may potentially impact patient experience and real-life outcomes.

Aim: This study evaluated the effectiveness of Multiple-Unit Pellet System Delivered Extended-Release Methylphenidate (Contramyl XR) on symptom control and reported outcomes in ADHD patients, in a real-world setting.

Setting: A phase IV, open label, flexible dose, prospective, observational study conducted at six sites covering five provinces of South Africa.

Methods: About 119 participants with ADHD (both newly diagnosed [treatment-naïve] and methylphenidate-treated [switch-over] patients) were enrolled and initiated either on Contramyl XR or switched over from methylphenidate to Contramyl XR. Primary efficacy was assessed by Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale (WFIRS) over 12 weeks.

Results: In all, 117 participants completed the study (treatment-naïve patients: 46% [n = 55] and switch-over patients: 54% [n = 64]). Mean change from baseline in total WFIRS (95% confidence interval) was –17.7 (–21.1, –14.3; p < 0.001) at week 4 and –29.3 (–33.5, –25.2; p < 0.001) at week 12. At week 12, there was significant improvement in WFIRS scores, with treatment satisfaction reported by treatment-naïve patients. Switch-over patients also demonstrated comparable effectiveness.

Conclusion: Contramyl XR was found to be clinically effective either as de novo or as switch therapy. It was well tolerated, and all patients chose to continue with the treatment option.

Contribution: Despite distinct and different delivery mechanism of Contramyl XR, this study provides evidence for using it as an alternate treatment option versus reference methylphenidate, in both treatment-naïve and switch-over ADHD patients. Study participants willingness to continue Contramyl XR therapy post study, further strengthens the confidence on the effectiveness of Contramyl XR in managing ADHD patients.


Keywords

attention deficit hyperactive disorder; Contramyl XR; effectiveness; methylphenidate; multiple-unit pellet system; treatment experienced; treatment naïve; Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale.

Sustainable Development Goal

Goal 3: Good health and well-being

Metrics

Total abstract views: 309
Total article views: 209


Crossref Citations

No related citations found.