↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Lisdexamfetamine Compared with D-Amphetamine in Healthy Subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Lisdexamfetamine Compared with D-Amphetamine in Healthy Subjects
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2017.00617
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick C. Dolder, Petra Strajhar, Patrick Vizeli, Felix Hammann, Alex Odermatt, Matthias E. Liechti

Abstract

Rationale: Lisdexamfetamine is a prodrug of D-amphetamine used for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Lisdexamfetamine is thought to have a prolonged pharmacokinetic profile compared with oral D-amphetamine, possibly associated with lower drug liking and a lower risk of oral misuse. However, differences in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of lisdexamfetamine and D-amphetamine have not been directly compared. Methods: Equimolar doses of D-amphetamine (40 mg) and lisdexamfetamine (100 mg), and placebo were administered in 24 healthy subjects in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study. Plasma concentrations of amphetamine, subjective effects, and vital signs were repeatedly assessed. The pharmacokinetic parameters were determined using compartmental modeling. Results: The increase in plasma concentrations of amphetamine had a 0.6 ± 0.6 h (mean ± SD) longer lag time and reached peak levels 1.1 ± 1.5 h later after lisdexamfetamine administration compared with D-amphetamine administration, but no differences in maximal concentrations or total exposure (AUC) were found between the two treatments. Consistent with the pharmacokinetics, the subjective and cardiovascular stimulant effects of lisdexamfetamine also occurred later compared with D-amphetamine. However, no differences in peak ratings of potentially abuse-related subjective drug effects (e.g., drug liking, drug high, stimulation, happy, well-being, and self-confidence) were observed after lisdexamfetamine administration compared with D-amphetamine administration. Lisdexamfetamine and D-amphetamine also produced similar peak increases in mean arterial blood pressure, heart rate, body temperature, pupil size, and adverse effects. Conclusion: The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of lisdexamfetamine are similar to D-amphetamine administered 1h later. Lisdexamfetamine is likely associated with a similar risk of oral abuse as D-amphetamine. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02668926).

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Master 11 12%
Researcher 10 11%
Other 6 7%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 30 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 15%
Psychology 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 35 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2024.
All research outputs
#2,445,977
of 26,383,519 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#1,069
of 20,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,554
of 328,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#14
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,383,519 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,395 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.