July 8, 2021

High Dropout Rate in Six-Year Cohort Study of Medication Treatment for ADHD

Few studies have examined the safety and tolerability of ADHD medications (stimulants and atomoxetine) extending beyond six months, and none beyond a few years. A pair of Swedish neuroscientists at Uppsala University Hospital set out to explore longer-term outcomes. They conducted a six-year prospective study of 112 adults diagnosed with ADHD who were being treated with ADHD medications (primarily MPH, but also dexamphetamine and atomoxetine).


They found that at the end of that period, roughly half were still on medication, and half had discontinued treatment. There were no significant differences between the two groups in age, sex, ADHD severity, or comorbidity. The average ADHD score for the entire cohort declined to vary significantly, from a mean of 37 to a mean of 26, with less than one in a thousand odds of that being due to chance. There was also no sign of drug tolerance or a need to increase the dosage over time.
All 55 adults who discontinued treatment had taken MPH for at least part of the time. Eleven had also been treated with dexamphetamine(DEX) and 15 with atomoxetine (ATX). The average time on treatment was just under two years. Almost a third quit MPH because they perceived no beneficial effect. Since they were on average taking higher doses at discontinuation than initiation, that is unlikely to have been due to suboptimal dosage. Almost another third was discontinued for various adverse mental effects, including hyperactivity, elation, depressive moods, aggression, insomnia, fatigue, and lethargy. Another one in eleven quit when they lost contact with the prescribing physician. In the case of ATX, almost half quit because of what they perceived as adverse mental effects.


Among the 57 adults who remained on medication, four out of five reported a strong beneficial effect. Only two reported minimal or no effect. Compared with the group that discontinued, the group that remained on medication was far more likely to agree with the statements, "My quality of life has improved," and "My level of functioning has improved." Yet, as the authors caution, it is possible "that the subjects' subjective ratings contained a placebo-related mechanism in those who are compliant with the medication and pursue treatment over time." The authors reported that there were no significant differences in ADHD scores or ADHD severity between the group that quit and the group that remained on medication, even though, on average, the group that quit had been off medication for four years at follow-up.


We cannot explain why the patients who quit treatment showed similar levels of ADHD symptoms to those who continued treatment.  It is possible that some patients remit symptoms over time and do not require sustained treatment.  But we must keep in mind that there was a wide range of outcomes in both groups. Future work needs to find predictors of those who will do well after treatment withdrawal and those who do not.


Any decision on whether to maintain a course of medication should always weigh expected gains against adverse side effects. Short of hard evidence of continuing efficacy beyond two years, adverse events gain in relative importance. With that in mind, it is worth noting that this study reports that among those who remained on MPH, many reported side effects. More than a quarter complained of decreased appetite, one in four of dry mouth, one in five of anxiousness and increased heart rate, one in six of decreased sexual desire, one in nine of depressed mood, and one in eleven of insomnia.


This study breaks important ground in looking at the long-term effects of medication. It reaffirms findings elsewhere of the efficacy of ADHD medications. But contrary to the authors' conclusion, the data they present suggests the possibility that permanently medicating ADHD patients may not be more efficacious than discontinuation beyond a certain point, especially when balanced against adverse side effects.
But this is just one study with a relatively small sample size. This suggests a need for additional studies with larger sample sizes to pursue these questions with greater statistical reliability.

Dan Edvinsson and Lisa Ekselius, "Long-Term Tolerability and safety of Pharmacological Treatment of Adult Attention-Deficit/hyperactivity disorder," Journal of clinical psychopharmacology, vol. 38, no. 4(2018).

Related posts

No items found.

Updates on ADHD and Vitamin D

The Background on ADHD and Vitamin D

In a blog published in the early days of The ADHD Evidence Project, we discussed an Iranian study examining the association between Vitamin D levels and ADHD in children. The meta-analysis combined 13 studies for a total of 10,344 participants. The researchers found that youth with ADHD had "modest but significant" lower serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D compared to those without ADHD.

They also identified four prospective studies that compared maternal vitamin D levels with the subsequent development of ADHD symptoms in their children. Two of these used maternal serum levels, and two used umbilical cord serum levels. Together, these studies found that low maternal vitamin D levels were associated with a 40% higher risk of ADHD in their children. 

Ultimately, the researchers noted that this result "should be considered with caution" because it was heavily dependent on one of the prospective studies included in the analysis. We concluded our blog by pointing out that further research, including more longitudinal studies, is needed before clinicians should start recommending vitamin D supplementation to ADHD patients. 

Further Research: 

Since publishing that initial blog, several more studies have been published about this association. 

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Disorders (CANMAT) convened an international task force involving 31 leading academics and clinicians from 15 countries between 2019 and 2021. Their goal was to provide a definitive, evidence-based report to assist clinicians in making decisions around the recommendation of nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals for major psychiatric disorders.

For ADHD, the guidelines found only weak support for micronutrients and vitamin D in treatment. Overall, the task force concluded that nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals currently offer very limited evidence‑based benefit for ADHD management.

Another study published in 2023 systematically assessed the results of previously published studies to examine the associations between maternal vitamin D levels, measured as circulating 25(OH)D levels in pregnancy or at birth, and later offspring psychiatric outcomes. This study found a clear association between maternal vitamin D deficiency and subsequent offspring ADHD. They concluded, “Future studies with larger sample sizes, longer follow-up periods, and prenatal vitamin D assessed at multiple time points are needed.”  To that, I will add that studies of this issue should use genetically informed designs to avoid confounding.

Conclusion:

Taking into account the updated research on the topic, there does seem to be an association between low prenatal vitamin D levels and the risk of subsequent offspring ADHD, but it is too soon to say it is a causal relationship due to the possibility of confounding. There is no high-quality evidence, however, that supplementing with vitamin D will significantly reduce symptoms in current ADHD patients. 

July 28, 2025

What Metabolites Tell Us About ADHD — And What This Means for Diet and Treatment

New research has uncovered important links between certain blood metabolites and ADHD by using a genetic method called Mendelian randomization. This approach leverages natural genetic differences to help identify which metabolites might actually cause changes in ADHD risk, offering stronger clues than traditional observational studies.

Key Metabolic Pathways Involved:

The study found 42 plasma metabolites with a causal relationship to ADHD. Most fall into two major groups:

  • Amino acid metabolites from protein metabolism, including those related to tyrosine, methionine, cysteine, and taurine.

  • Fatty acids, especially long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) like DHA and EPA, important for brain function.

What Does This Mean for Diet and ADHD?

Since many metabolites come from dietary sources like proteins and fats this supports the idea that diet could influence metabolic pathways involved in ADHD. However, because the study focused on genetic influences on metabolite levels, it doesn’t directly prove that dietary changes will have the same effects.

Notable Metabolites:

  • 3-Methoxytyramine sulfate (MTS): linked to dopamine metabolism, higher genetic levels of MTS were associated with a lower risk of ADHD. Dopamine plays a crucial role in attention and behavior.

  • DHA and EPA: Omega-3 fatty acids abundant in the brain; higher levels were linked to reduced ADHD risk, supporting existing research on omega-3 supplements.

  • N-acetylneuraminate: Involved in brain development and immune function, with higher levels linked to increased ADHD risk, though more research is needed to understand this.

Five metabolites showed bidirectional links with ADHD, meaning genetic risk for ADHD also affects their levels which suggests a complex interaction between brain function and metabolism.

Twelve ADHD-related metabolites are targets of existing drugs or supplements, including:

  • Acetylcysteine: an antioxidant used in various treatments.

  • DHA supplements: widely used to support brain and heart health.

What This Study Doesn’t Show

While these findings highlight biological pathways, they don’t prove that changing diet will directly alter ADHD symptoms. Metabolite levels are shaped by genetics plus environment, lifestyle, and health factors, which require further study.

Conclusion: 

This research provides stronger evidence of metabolic pathways involved in ADHD and points to new possibilities for diagnosis and treatment. Future work could explore how diet or drugs might safely adjust these metabolites to help manage ADHD.

While this study strengthens the link between amino acid and fatty acid metabolism and ADHD risk, suggesting that diet could play a role, ultimately more research is still needed before experts could use this research to give specific nutritional advice.

July 21, 2025

Network Meta-analysis Explores Long-term Efficacy of Nonpharmacological Treatments for Improving Inhibitory Control in Children and Adolescents with ADHD

Background Info:

Executive functions include inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility. Inhibitory control is the ability to suppress distractions and focus on goals, which is the main deficit in ADHD. 

Children and adolescents with ADHD often have off-task, unrelated thoughts and are easily distracted, limiting their sustained attention. This makes it difficult for them to focus on tasks and leads to impulsive behaviors that affect their daily life, academics, and social interactions. Improving inhibitory control in ADHD children and adolescents is essential. 

Stimulant medications are commonly used to treat ADHD. However, side effects like insomnia, loss of appetite, and headaches may make parents hesitant to use these medications for their children. 

Non-pharmacological treatments like cognitive training, behavior therapy, and physical exercise have gained attention for their lack of side effects. Research shows that some non-pharmacological methods can improve cognitive outcomes significantly, underscoring their potential in treating ADHD. 

Study:

A Chinese research team identified four key gaps in current research on non-pharmacological treatments for inhibitory control in children with ADHD: 

  • Existing meta-analyses seldom differentiate between short-term and long-term interventions.  
  • Most studies focus primarily on short-term effects and neglect evaluation of maintenance effects through follow-up assessments.  
  • New treatment methods, such as meditation and board games, have not been systematically assessed in meta-analyses for their impact on inhibitory control in children and adolescents with ADHD, leaving their effectiveness uncertain.  
  • Traditional meta-analysis does not tell us which intervention is most effective. Without this comparative analysis, it is difficult to rank efficacy. 

The team therefore performed a network meta-analysis of long-term randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess and rank the effectiveness of various non-pharmacological treatments on inhibitory control in children and adolescents with ADHD. 

The team included only RCTs relying on professional diagnoses of ADHD, excluding those based only on parent and teacher rating scales.  

The included studies measured inhibitory control using objective neurocognitive tasks, such as the Stroop test and the Go/No-Go test, to reduce potential subjective bias. Studies relying on parent- or teacher-reported questionnaires were excluded. 

Controls either received no intervention or placebo, such as watching running videos and attending history classes. 

Meta-analysis of 16 studies combining 546 participants found large short-term effect size improvements in inhibitory control from physical exercise. But the two studies with a total of 110 participants that performed a follow-up test reported only a small-to-medium effect size improvement. 

For cognitive training, a meta-analysis of fifteen studies totaling 674 participants reported a medium effect size of short-term improvement in inhibitory control. The ten studies with 563 participants that performed a follow-up test found only a small effect size improvement since treatment initiation. 

For behavioral therapy, meta-analysis of six studies encompassing 244 individuals likewise found a medium effect size short-term improvement in inhibitory control. In this case, however two studies combining 91 participants that performed a follow-up test reported that the medium effect size improvement was maintained. 

For neurofeedback, meta-analysis of seven studies encompassing 186 individuals found a small-to-medium effect size short-term improvement in inhibitory control. The only study that performed a follow-up test reported a small effect size improvement since treatment initiation. 

The two studies with a combined 44 individuals exploring board games found no significant improvement in inhibitory control. Likewise, the two studies combining 32 participants that explored meditation found no significant improvement in inhibitory control. 

There was no indication of publication bias. 

Conclusion:

The team concluded, “Existing evidence shows that physical exercise, behavior therapy, cognitive training, and neurofeedback can effectively improve the inhibitory control of children and adolescents with ADHD. However, meditation, EMG feedback, and board games did not significantly affect inhibitory control. Physical exercise has the best effect among all non-pharmacological treatments, but its impact will be weakened after intervention. Behavior therapy and cognitive training had a slightly lower effect, but they have a better maintenance effect.” 

Ultimately, the study results suggest that non-drug treatments can help children and teens with ADHD improve their ability to control their actions and stay focused. Some methods, like physical exercise, work well at first but may fade once the activity stops. Other methods, like behavioral therapy and cognitive training, may take a little longer to show results but can last longer and make a bigger difference over time. Ultimately, and most importantly, because this work did not study the symptoms of ADHD or its real-world impairments, it provides no reason to change current treatment practices for ADHD.

July 16, 2025