A Signature of Attention-Elicited Electrocortical Activity Distinguishes Response From Non-Response to the Non-Stimulant Atomoxetine in Children and Adolescents With ADHD
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online May, 2019
A Signature of Attention-Elicited Electrocortical Activity Distinguishes Response From Non-Response to the Non-Stimulant Atomoxetine in Children and Adolescents With ADHD
Objective: Atomoxetine has several characteristics that make it an attractive alternative to stimulants for treating ADHD, but there are currently no tests identifying individuals for whom the medication should be a first-line option. Method: Within the ADHD Controlled Trial Investigation Of a Non-stimulant (ACTION) study, we examined neuro-cortical activity in 52 youth with ADHD. Baseline event-related potentials (ERP) were compared between those who subsequently responded to 6 weeks of atomoxetine versus those who did not. Results: Responders were distinguished by significantly lower auditory oddball N2 amplitudes than both non-responders and typically developing controls, particularly in the right frontocentral region (p = .002, Cohen’s d = 1.1). Leave-one-out cross validation determined that N2 amplitude in this region was able to accurately predict non-responders with a specificity of 80.8%. There were no P3 differences between responders and non-responders. Conclusion: The N2 amplitude is a biomarker that may have utility in predicting response to atomoxetine for youth with ADHD.
AdlerL. A.SpencerT. J.MiltonD. R.MooreR. J.MichelsonD. (2005). Long-term, open-label study of the safety and efficacy of atomoxetine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: An interim analysis. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66, 294-299. doi:10.4088/jcp.v66n0304
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author. doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890423349
4.
Aston-JonesG.CohenJ. D. (2005). An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 28, 403-450. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.28.061604.135709
5.
BanaschewskiT.RoessnerV.DittmannR. W.SantoshP. J.RothenbergerA. (2004). Non–stimulant medications in the treatment of ADHD. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13, i102-i116. doi:10.1007/s00787-004-1010-x
6.
BarryR. J.JohnstoneS. J.ClarkeA. R. (2003). A review of electrophysiology in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: II. Event-related potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology, 114, 184-198. doi:10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00363-2
7.
BerridgeC. W.WaterhouseB. D. (2003). The locus coeruleus–noradrenergic system: Modulation of behavioral state and state-dependent cognitive processes. Brain Research Reviews, 42(1), 33-84. doi:10.1016/s0165-0173(03)00143-7
8.
BiedermanJ.HeiligensteinJ. H.FariesD. E.GalilN.DittmannR.EmslieG. J.. . . SchuhK. J. (2002). Efficacy of atomoxetine versus placebo in school-age girls with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics, 110(6), e75-e75. doi:10.1542/peds.110.6.e75
9.
BuitelaarJ. K.DanckaertsM.GillbergC.ZuddasA.BeckerK.BouvardM.. . . MichelsonD. (2004). A prospective, multicenter, open-label assessment of atomoxetine in non-North American children and adolescents with ADHD. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13, 249-257. doi:10.1007/s00787-004-0401-3
10.
BusheC. J.SavillN. C. (2014). Systematic review of atomoxetine data in childhood and adolescent attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder 2009–2011: Focus on clinical efficacy and safety. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 28, 204-211. doi:10.1177/0269881113478475
11.
ClemowD. B.BusheC. J. (2015). Atomoxetine in patients with ADHD: A clinical and pharmacological review of the onset, trajectory, duration of response and implications for patients. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 29, 1221-1230. doi:10.1177/0269881115602489
12.
ClemowD. B.MasonO. W.SarkisE. H.RuffD. D.BermanB. D.DonnellyC. L.. . . AraujoA. B. (2015). Atomoxetine monotherapy compared with combination therapy for the treatment of ADHD: A retrospective chart review study. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 15, 1353-1366. doi:10.1586/14737175.2015.1102060
13.
DonchinE.ColesM. G. (1988). Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 357-427. doi:10.1017/s0140525x00058027
14.
FaraoneS. V.BiedermanJ.MickE. (2006). The age-dependent decline of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis of follow-up studies. Psychological Medicine, 36, 159-165. doi:10.1017/s003329170500471x
15.
Garnock-JonesK. P.KeatingG. M. (2009). Atomoxetine. Pediatric Drugs, 11, 203-226. doi:10.2165/00148581-200911030-00005
16.
GordonE.BarnettK. J.CooperN. J.TranN.WilliamsL. M. (2008). An “integrative neuroscience” platform: Application to profiles of negativity and positivity bias. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 7, 345-366. doi:10.1142/s0219635208001927
17.
GrattonG.ColesM. G.DonchinE. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology, 55, 468-484. doi:10.1016/0013-4694(83)90135-9
18.
HammernessP.McCarthyK.MancusoE.GendronC.GellerD. (2009). Atomoxetine for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: A review. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 5, 215-226. doi:10.2147/ndt.s3896
19.
HermensD. F.CooperN. J.ClarkC. R.DebrotaD.ClarkeS. D.WilliamsL. M. (2007). An integrative approach to determine the best behavioral and biological markers of methylphenidate. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 6, 105-140. doi:10.1142/s0219635207001441
20.
JonkmanL. M.KemnerC.VerbatenM. N.KoelegaH. S.CamffermanG.vd GaagR. J.. . . van EngelandH. (1997). Event-related potentials and performance of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: Children and normal controls in auditory and visual selective attention tasks. Biological Psychiatry, 41, 595-611. doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(96)00073-x
21.
KaplanS.HeiligensteinJ.WestS.BusnerJ.HarderD.DittmannR.. . . WernickeJ. F. (2004). Efficacy and safety of atomoxetine in childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid oppositional defiant disorder. Journal of Attention Disorders, 8, 45-52. doi:10.1177/108705470400800202
22.
KelseyD. K.SumnerC. R.CasatC. D.CouryD. L.QuintanaH.SaylorK. E.. . . AllenA. J. (2004). Once-daily atomoxetine treatment for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, including an assessment of evening and morning behavior: A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Pediatrics, 114(1), e1-e8. doi:10.1542/peds.114.1.e1
23.
KratochvilC. J.VaughanB. S.HarringtonM. J.BurkeW. J. (2003). Atomoxetine: A selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 4, 1165-1174. doi:10.1517/eoph.4.7.1165.21068
24.
KutcherS.AmanM.BrooksS. J.BuitelaarJ.van DaalenE.FegertJ.. . . KusumakarV. (2004). International consensus statement on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and disruptive behaviour disorders (DBDs): Clinical implications and treatment practice suggestions. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 14(1), 11-28. doi:10.1016/s0924-977x(03)00045-2
25.
LavricA.PizzagalliD. A.ForstmeierS. (2004). When “go” and “nogo” are equally frequent: ERP components and cortical tomography. European Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 2483-2488. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2004.03683.x
26.
LuckS. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique., Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
27.
MichelsonD.FariesD.WernickeJ.KelseyD.KendrickK.SalleeF. R.SpencerT. (2001). Atomoxetine in the treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-response study. Pediatrics, 108(5), e83-e83. doi:10.1542/peds.108.5.e83
28.
NäätänenR.PictonT. W. (1986). N2 and automatic versus controlled processes. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology Supplement, 38, 169-186.
29.
NewcornJ. H.SuttonV. K.WeissM. D.SumnerC. R. (2009). Clinical responses to atomoxetine in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: The Integrated Data Exploratory Analysis (IDEA) study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 48, 511-518. doi:10.1097/chi.0b013e31819c55b2
30.
NieuwenhuisS.YeungN.Van Den WildenbergW.RidderinkhofK. R. (2003). Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: Effects of response conflict and trial type frequency. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 3(1), 17-26. doi:10.3758/cabn.3.1.17
31.
PatelS. H.AzzamP. N. (2005). Characterization of N200 and P300: Selected studies of the event-related potential. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 2, 147-154. doi:10.7150/ijms.2.147
32.
PolanczykG.de LimaM. S.HortaB. L.BiedermanJ.RohdeL. A. (2007). The worldwide prevalence of ADHD: A systematic review and metaregression analysis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 942-948. doi:10.1176/ajp.2007.164.6.942
33.
PolichJ. (2007). Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118, 2128-2148. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2007.04.019
34.
PolichJ.CriadoJ. R. (2006). Neuropsychology and neuropharmacology of P3a and P3b. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 60, 172-185. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.12.012
35.
SangalJ. M.SangalR. B. (2004). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Cognitive evoked potential (P300) topography predicts treatment response to methylphenidate. Clinical Neurophysiology, 115, 188-193.
SangalR. B.SangalJ. M. (2006a). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Use of cognitive evoked potential (P300) to predict treatment response. Clinical Neurophysiology, 117, 1996-2006. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2006.06.004
39.
SangalR. B.SangalJ. M. (2006b). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Using P300 topography to choose optimal treatment. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 6, 1429-1437. doi:10.1586/14737175.6.10.1429
40.
SilvermanW. K.SaavedraL. M.PinaA. A. (2001). Test-retest reliability of anxiety symptoms and diagnoses with the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-IV: Child and parent versions. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 937-944. doi:10.1097/00004583-200108000-00016
41.
SpencerT.BiedermanJ.WilensT.PrinceJ.HatchM.JonesJ.. . . SeidmanL. (1998). Effectiveness and tolerability of atomoxetine in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 693-695. doi:10.1176/ajp.155.5.693
42.
SpencerT.HeiligensteinJ. H.BiedermanJ.FariesD. E.KratochvilC. J.PotterW. Z. (2002). Results from 2 proof-of-concept, placebo-controlled studies of atomoxetine in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 63, 1140-1147. doi:10.4088/jcp.v63n1209
43.
SunoharaG. A.VorosJ. G.MaloneM. A.TaylorM. J. (1997). Effects of methylphenidate in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A comparison of event-related potentials between medication responders and non-responders. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 27(1), 9-14. doi:10.1016/s0167-8760(97)00746-0
44.
SwansonC. J.PerryK. W.Koch-KruegerS.KatnerJ.SvenssonK. A.BymasterF. P. (2006). Effect of the attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder drug atomoxetine on extracellular concentrations of norepinephrine and dopamine in several brain regions of the rat. Neuropharmacology, 50, 755-760. doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2005.11.022
45.
TsaiM. L.HungK. L.LuH. H. (2012). Auditory event-related potentials in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics and Neonatology, 53, 118-124. doi:10.1016/j.pedneo.2012.01.009
46.
TsangT. W.KohnM. R.HermensD. F.ClarkeS. D.ClarkC. R.EfronD.. . . WilliamsL. M. (2011). A randomized controlled trial investigation of a non-stimulant in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ACTION): Rationale and design. Trials, 12(1), 77. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-12-77
47.
TuretskyB. I.FeinG. (2002). [alpha] 2-Noradrenergic effects on ERP and behavioral indices of auditory information processing. Psychophysiology, 39, 147-157. doi:10.1111/1469-8986.3920147
48.
van VeenV.CarterC. S. (2002). The timing of action-monitoring processes in the anterior cingulate cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 593-602. doi:10.1162/08989290260045837
49.
WarrenC. M.TanakaJ. W.HolroydC. B. (2011). What can topology changes in the oddball N2 reveal about underlying processes?NeuroReport, 22, 870-874. doi:10.1097/wnr.0b013e32834bbe1f
50.
WilliamsL. M.HermensD. F.PalmerD.KohnM.ClarkeS.KeageH.. . . GordonE. (2008). Misinterpreting emotional expressions in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Evidence for a neural marker and stimulant effects. Biological Psychiatry, 63, 917-926. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.11.022
51.
WilliamsL. M.HermensD. F.TheinT.ClarkC. R.CooperN. J.ClarkeS. D.. . . KohnM. R. (2010). Using brain-based cognitive measures to support clinical decisions in ADHD. Pediatric Neurology, 42, 118-126. doi:10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2009.08.010
52.
WilliamsL. M.SimmsE.ClarkC. R.PaulR. H.RoweD.GordonE. (2005). The test-retest reliability of a standardized neurocognitive and neurophysiological test battery: “neuromarker.”International Journal of Neuroscience, 115, 1605-1630. doi:10.1080/00207450590958475
53.
YamamuroK.OtaT.IidaJ.NakanishiY.MatsuuraH.UrataniM.. . . KishimotoT. (2016). Event-related potentials reflect the efficacy of pharmaceutical treatments in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Psychiatry Research, 242, 288-294. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2016.05.061
54.
ZhangS.FariesD. E.VowlesM.MichelsonD. (2005). ADHD rating scale IV: Psychometric properties from a multinational study as clinician-administered instrument. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 14, 186-201. doi:10.1002/mpr.7
