Bupropion XL in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A randomized, placebo-controlled study
Abstract
Background Data remain limited on treatment strategies for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of an extended-release, once-daily formulation of bupropion (XL) in the treatment of adults with ADHD.Methods This multisite, placebo-controlled, 8-week prospective trial evaluated 162 adult patients diagnosed with ADHD (combined and inattentive types). Subjects were treated with up to 450 mg/day of bupropion XL. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of ADHD responders (defined as at least a 30% reduction in the investigator-rated ADHD Rating Scale score) at week 8 (last observation carried forward [LOCF]).Results Bupropion XL responders (53%) exceeded placebo responders (31%) (p =.004 at week 8) with a significantly greater proportion of bupropion XL responders as early as week 2 (p = .01). Treatment effect size calculated for the ADHD Rating Scale total score was .6. Bupropion XL appeared to provide sustained benefit throughout the day compared with placebo (morning p =.033, afternoon p =.004, evening p = .024). Bupropion XL was safe and well tolerated, with no serious or unexpected adverse events and a low rate of drug-related study discontinuation (5%).Conclusions The results from this multisite study indicate that bupropion XL is an effective and well-tolerated nonstimulant treatment for adult ADHD.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Long acting bupropion, modafinil and guanfacine have all been investigated in ADHD.
“Other choices comprise medications like long acting bupropion, modafinil and guanfacine, that have all been investigated in ADHD [262,298-300].”
From European consensus statement on diagnosis and treatment of adult ADHD: The European Network Adult ADHD (2010) · cites this paper as [262]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 83 · Cited by 193
- Authors
- Wilens, T. E., Haight, B. R., Horrigan, J. P., Hudziak, J. J., Rosenthal, N. E., Connor, D. F., Hampton, K. D., Richard, N. E., & Modell, J. G.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
- University of Vermont (US)
- University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
- Venue
- Biological Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-04
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 793-801
- ISSN
- 0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2093587140
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 83
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 12.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
- Keywords
- attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, adult ADHD, sustained-release formulation, ADHD Rating Scale, treatment efficacy, drug safety and tolerability
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Demography, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Drug Evaluation, Humans, Placebos, Prospective Studies, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Time Factors, Bupropion, Treatment Outcome, Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review