MyMedR

Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Combination of transcranial direct current stimulation and methylphenidate in subacute stroke

Wang QM, Cui H, Han SJ, Black-Schaffer R, Volz MS, Lee YT, et al.

Neurosci Lett, 2014 May 21;569:6-11.
PMID: 24631567 DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2014.03.011

Noninvasive transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and methylphenidate (MP) are associated with motor recovery after stroke. Based on the potentially complementary mechanisms of these interventions, we examined whether there is an interactive effect between MP and tDCS. In this preliminary study, we randomized subacute stroke subjects to receive tDCS alone, MP alone or combination of tDCS and MP. A blinded rater measured safety, hand function, and cortical excitability before and after treatment. None of the treatments caused any major or severe adverse effects or induced significant differences in cortical excitability. Analysis of variance of gain score, as measured by Purdue pegboard test, showed a significant between-group difference (F(2,6)=12.167, p=0.008). Post hoc analysis showed that the combination treatment effected greater Purdue pegboard gain scores than tDCS alone (p=0.017) or MP alone (p=0.01). Our preliminary data with nine subjects shows an interesting dissociation between motor function improvement and lack of motor corticospinal plasticity changes as indexed by transcranial magnetic stimulation in subacute stroke subjects.

Matched MeSH terms: Methylphenidate/therapeutic use*
The Use of Methylphenidate for Physical and Psychological Symptoms in Cancer Patients: A Review

Andrew BN, Guan NC, Jaafar NRN

Curr Drug Targets, 2018;19(8):877-887.
PMID: 28322161 DOI: 10.2174/1389450118666170317162603

BACKGROUND: One of the goals of cancer treatment is symptoms management especially at the end stage. The common symptoms in cancer include pain, fatigue, depression and cognitive dysfunction. The available treatment options for symptom management are limited. Methylphenidate, a psychostimulant, may be of benefit for these patients. In this report, we review the use of methylphenidate for symptoms control in cancer patients.
METHOD: Electronic literature search on PubMed was conducted using the following keywords: methylphenidate, cancer, carcinoma, oncology, oncological and tumour. We identified forty two relevant studies and publications on the use of methylphenidate in cancer patients to be included in this review.
RESULTS: Methylphenidate was found to have some evidence in reducing opioid-induced sedation, improving cognitive symptoms and reduction of fatigue in cancer patients. Nevertheless, the results were inconsistent due to variations in the study populations, study design and outcome measures, among others. There was minimal evidence on its use in treating depression. Otherwise, methylphenidate was generally well-tolerated by patients.
CONCLUSION: This review potentially supports the use of methylphenidate for opioid-induced sedation, cognitive decline and fatigue in cancer patients. Further placebo-controlled trials would help in strengthening the evidence for this treatment.

Matched MeSH terms: Methylphenidate/therapeutic use*
Rapid response to methylphenidate as an add-on therapy to mirtazapine in the treatment of major depressive disorder in terminally ill cancer patients: a four-week, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study

Ng CG, Boks MP, Roes KC, Zainal NZ, Sulaiman AH, Tan SB, et al.

Eur Neuropsychopharmacol, 2014 Apr;24(4):491-8.
PMID: 24503279 DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2014.01.016

This is a 4 week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to examine the effects of methylphenidate as add-on therapy to mirtazapine compared to placebo for treatment of depression in terminally ill cancer patients. It involved 88 terminally ill cancer patients from University of Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. They were randomized and treated with either methylphenidate or placebo as add on to mirtazapine. The change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score from baseline to day 3 was analyzed by linear regression. Changes of MADRS and Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S) over 28 days were analyzed using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM). Secondary analysis of MADRS response rates, defined as 50% or more reduction from baseline score. A significantly larger reduction of Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score in the methylphenidate group was observed from day 3 (B=4.14; 95% CI=1.83-6.45). Response rate (defined as 50% or more reduction from baseline MADRS score) in the methylphenidate treated group was superior from day 14. Improvement in Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S) was greater in the methylphenidate treated group from day 3 until day 28. The drop-out rates were 52.3% in the methylphenidate group and 59.1% in the placebo group (relative risk=0.86, 95%CI=0.54-1.37) due to cancer progression. Nervous system adverse events were more common in methylphenidate treated subjects (20.5% vs 9.1%, p=0.13). In conclusions, methylphenidate as add on therapy to mirtazapine demonstrated an earlier antidepressant response in terminally ill cancer patients, although at an increased risk of the nervous system side effects.

Matched MeSH terms: Methylphenidate/therapeutic use*

Filters

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links