NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Medical Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder—An Update
Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 189
Investigators: Edwin Williamson, MD, Nila A Sathe, MA, MLIS, Jeffrey C Andrews, MD, Shanthi Krishnaswami, MPH, MBBS, Melissa L McPheeters, PhD, MPH, Christopher Fonnesbeck, PhD, Kevin Sanders, MD, Amy Weitlauf, PhD, and Zachary Warren, PhD.
Author Information and AffiliationsStructured Abstract
Objectives:
To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of medical interventions (defined broadly as interventions involving the administration of external substances to the body or use of external nonbehavioral procedures to treat symptoms of autism spectrum disorder [ASD]) for children with ASD.
Data sources:
We searched MEDLINE®, Embase®, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO® from January 2010 through September 2016.
Review methods:
We included comparative studies of medical interventions that included at least 10 children with ASD. Two investigators independently screened studies and rated risk of bias. We extracted and summarized data qualitatively given significant heterogeneity. We also assessed strength of the evidence (SOE) and considered cumulative data from eligible studies included in our 2011 review of medical therapies and newly published studies.
Results:
The 76 unique comparative studies (including 12 comparative studies addressed in the 2011 review) meeting our criteria included 72 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 2 nonrandomized trials, and 2 retrospective cohort studies. Thirty-nine studies had low, 29 had moderate, and 8 had high risk of bias. Populations, treatment approaches, and outcomes assessed varied across studies. Relative to placebo, seven studies addressing risperidone or aripiprazole reported statistically significant improvements in challenging behavior in the short term (<6 months) but also clinically significant harms. Longer term effectiveness was reported in uncontrolled extensions. Three studies comparing risperidone and aripiprazole reported few significant differences in effects on weight gain between agents. RCTs addressing methylphenidate (n=2), atomoxetine (n=2), and guanfacine (n=1) reported significant improvements in hyperactivity, with frequent harms. Omega-3 fatty acids (4 RCTs) were not associated with changes in challenging behavior. N-acetylcysteine and tetrahydrobiopterin were not associated with improvements in social skills and symptom severity, respectively. Despite the number of RCTs with low or moderate risk of bias addressing nutritional supplements or specialized diets, evidence is insufficient for all clinical efficacy and harms outcomes because few, small studies addressed each diet or supplement. Similarly, although 14 RCTs with low or moderate risk of bias compared risperidone plus an adjunct medication with risperidone plus placebo, few addressed the same adjunct agents. Studies of hyperbaric oxygen therapy versus sham treatment using differing protocols reported conflicting results. Fourteen studies addressed other interventions, most evaluated in only one study, and typically reported some positive treatment effects on sleep, ASD symptoms, or language.
Conclusions:
Risperidone and aripiprazole ameliorated challenging behaviors in the short term, but with clinically significant side effects (high SOE). Methylphenidate and atomoxetine were also associated with improvements in hyperactivity in small short-term RCTs (low SOE), with improvements maintained over 6 months for atomoxetine (low SOE for longer term effects). Methylphenidate was associated with clinically significant harms (low SOE), while atomoxetine was associated with clinically moderate harms (low SOE). Omega-3 fatty acid supplementation, N-acetylcysteine, and tetrahydrobiopterin failed to show benefits (low SOE). Evidence for other interventions and outcomes studied was insufficient. While the conduct of studies has improved considerably over time (i.e., growing number of RCTs and use of standardized measures), data on longer term (≥6 months) results and harms of most interventions are lacking. Similarly, more research is needed to understand characteristics of the child or treatment that modify outcomes, whether effectiveness of interventions generalizes across different settings such as the home or school, and how components of interventions may drive effects.
Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Key Informants
- Technical Expert Panel
- Peer Reviewers
- Executive Summary
- Introduction
- Methods
- Results
- Results of Literature Searches for Key Questions
- KQ1. Benefits and Harms of Medical Treatments
- KQ2. Modifiers of Treatment Outcomes
- KQ3. Time to Effect of Interventions
- KQ4. Evidence that Effects Measured at the End of Treatment Predict Long-Term Functional Outcomes
- KQ5. Effectiveness Across Environments or Contexts
- KQ6. Drivers of Treatment Outcomes
- Discussion
- State of the Literature
- Summary of Key Findings and Strength of the Evidence
- Findings in Relation to What Is Already Known
- Applicability
- Implications for Clinical and Policy Decisionmaking
- Limitations of the Comparative Effectiveness Review Process
- Limitations of the Evidence Base
- Research Gaps and Areas for Future Research
- Conclusions
- References
- Acronyms and Abbreviations
- Appendix A. Search Strategies
- Appendix B. Screening and Risk of Bias Assessment Forms
- Appendix C. Excluded Studies
- Appendix D. Risk of Bias Ratings
- Appendix E. Applicability Summary Tables
- Appendix F. Detailed Tables of Findings
Suggested citation:
Williamson E, Sathe NA, Andrews JC, Krishnaswami S, McPheeters ML, Fonnesbeck C, Sanders K, Weitlauf A, Warren Z. Medical Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder—An Update. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 189. (Prepared by the Vanderbilt Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2015-00003-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 17-EHC009-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; May 2017. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm. doi: https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER189.
This report is based on research conducted by the Vanderbilt Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2015-00003-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.
The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.
AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.
This report may periodically be assessed for the currency of conclusions. If an assessment is done, the resulting surveillance report describing the methodology and findings will be found on the Effective Health Care Program Web site at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov. Search on the title of the report.
- 1
5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; www
.ahrq.gov
- NLM CatalogRelated NLM Catalog Entries
- Review Interventions Targeting Sensory Challenges in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder—An Update[ 2017]Review Interventions Targeting Sensory Challenges in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder—An UpdateWeitlauf AS, Sathe NA, McPheeters ML, Warren Z. 2017 May
- Review Nutritional and Dietary Interventions for Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review.[Pediatrics. 2017]Review Nutritional and Dietary Interventions for Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review.Sathe N, Andrews JC, McPheeters ML, Warren ZE. Pediatrics. 2017 Jun; 139(6).
- Review Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: Behavioral Interventions Update[ 2014]Review Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: Behavioral Interventions UpdateWeitlauf AS, McPheeters ML, Peters B, Sathe N, Travis R, Aiello R, Williamson E, Veenstra-VanderWeele J, Krishnaswami S, Jerome R, et al. 2014 Aug
- Review Treatments for Ankyloglossia and Ankyloglossia With Concomitant Lip-Tie[ 2015]Review Treatments for Ankyloglossia and Ankyloglossia With Concomitant Lip-TieFrancis DO, Chinnadurai S, Morad A, Epstein RA, Kohanim S, Krishnaswami S, Sathe NA, McPheeters ML. 2015 May
- Review Tonsillectomy for Obstructive Sleep-Disordered Breathing or Recurrent Throat Infection in Children[ 2017]Review Tonsillectomy for Obstructive Sleep-Disordered Breathing or Recurrent Throat Infection in ChildrenFrancis DO, Chinnadurai S, Sathe NA, Morad A, Jordan AK, Krishnaswami S, Fonnesbeck C, McPheeters ML. 2017 Jan
- Medical Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder—An UpdateMedical Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder—An Update
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...