Acamprosate: A Review of Its Use in Alcohol Dependence

Promising immunomodulators for management of substance and alcohol use disorders

INTRODUCTION

The neuroimmune system has emerged as a novel target for the treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs), with immunomodulation producing encouraging therapeutic benefits in both preclinical and clinical settings.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we describe the mechanism of action and immune response to methamphetamine, opioids, cocaine, and alcohol. We then discuss off-label use of immunomodulators as adjunctive therapeutics in the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, demonstrating their potential efficacy in affective and behavioral disorders. We then discuss in detail the mechanism of action and recent findings regarding the use of ibudilast, minocycline, probenecid, dexmedetomidine, pioglitazone, and cannabidiol to treat (SUDs). These immunomodulators are currently being investigated in clinical trials described herein, specifically for their potential to decrease substance use, withdrawal severity, central and peripheral inflammation, comorbid neuropsychiatric disorder symptomology, as well as their ability to improve cognitive outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

We argue that although mixed, findings from recent preclinical and clinical studies underscore the potential benefit of immunomodulation in the treatment of the behavioral, cognitive, and inflammatory processes that underlie compulsive substance use.

Fenofibrate Decreases Ethanol-Induced Neuroinflammation and Oxidative Stress and Reduces Alcohol Relapse in Rats by a PPAR-α-Dependent Mechanism

High ethanol consumption triggers neuroinflammation, implicated in sustaining chronic alcohol use. This inflammation boosts glutamate, prompting dopamine release in reward centers, driving prolonged drinking and relapse. Fibrate drugs, activating peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPAR-α), counteract neuroinflammation in other contexts, prompting investigation into their impact on ethanol-induced inflammation. Here, we studied, in UChB drinker rats, whether the administration of fenofibrate in the withdrawal stage after chronic ethanol consumption reduces voluntary intake when alcohol is offered again to the animals (relapse-type drinking). Furthermore, we determined if fenofibrate was able to decrease ethanol-induced neuroinflammation and oxidative stress in the brain. Animals treated with fenofibrate decreased alcohol consumption by 80% during post-abstinence relapse. Furthermore, fenofibrate decreased the expression of the proinflammatory cytokines tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukins IL-1β and IL-6, and of an oxidative stress-induced gene (heme oxygenase-1), in the hippocampus, nucleus accumbens, and prefrontal cortex. Animals treated with fenofibrate showed an increase M2-type microglia (with anti-inflammatory proprieties) and a decrease in phagocytic microglia in the hippocampus. A PPAR-α antagonist (GW6471) abrogated the effects of fenofibrate, indicating that they are dependent on PPAR-α activation. These findings highlight the potential of fenofibrate, an FDA-approved dyslipidemia medication, as a supplementary approach to alleviating relapse severity in individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD) during withdrawal.

Substance Use Disorders and Medication-Assisted Therapies: Current Practices and Implications for Nursing

In the United States, the opioid epidemic and COVID-19-related substance use have exacerbated the overall incidence of substance use disorders (SUDs). Medication-assisted therapy (MAT), or cognitive and behavioral therapy that combines medications that reduce substance use or acute withdrawal symptoms, has dramatically improved outcomes for SUD patients, including preventing mortality. With recent US Congressional funding for MAT, patients presenting for acute care on MAT-related medications will continue to increase. Nurses should be aware of these medications' mechanism of action, typical side effects, and implications on treating acute pain to optimize their care.

Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Harmful alcohol use is defined as unhealthy alcohol use that results in adverse physical, psychological, social, or societal consequences and is among the leading risk factors for disease, disability and premature mortality globally. The burden of harmful alcohol use is increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and there remains a large unmet need for indicated prevention and treatment interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in these settings. Evidence regarding which interventions are effective and feasible for addressing harmful and other patterns of unhealthy alcohol use in LMICs is limited, which contributes to this gap in services.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial and pharmacologic treatment and indicated prevention interventions compared with control conditions (wait list, placebo, no treatment, standard care, or active control condition) aimed at reducing harmful alcohol use in LMICs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indexed in the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group (CDAG) Specialized Register, the Cochrane Clinical Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) through 12 December 2021. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Web of Science, and Opengrey database to identify unpublished or ongoing studies. We searched the reference lists of included studies and relevant review articles for eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs comparing an indicated prevention or treatment intervention (pharmacologic or psychosocial) versus a control condition for people with harmful alcohol use in LMICs were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 66 RCTs with 17,626 participants. Sixty-two of these trials contributed to the meta-analysis. Sixty-three studies were conducted in middle-income countries (MICs), and the remaining three studies were conducted in low-income countries (LICs). Twenty-five trials exclusively enrolled participants with alcohol use disorder. The remaining 51 trials enrolled participants with harmful alcohol use, some of which included both cases of alcohol use disorder and people reporting hazardous alcohol use patterns that did not meet criteria for disorder. Fifty-two RCTs assessed the efficacy of psychosocial interventions; 27 were brief interventions primarily based on motivational interviewing and were compared to brief advice, information, or assessment only. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to brief interventions given the high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Studies reporting continuous outcomes: Tau² = 0.15, Q =139.64, df =16, P<.001, I² = 89%, 3913 participants, 17 trials, very low certainty; Studies reporting dichotomous outcomes: Tau²=0.18, Q=58.26, df=3, P<.001, I² =95%, 1349 participants, 4 trials, very low certainty). The other types of psychosocial interventions included a range of therapeutic approaches such as behavioral risk reduction, cognitive-behavioral therapy, contingency management, rational emotive therapy, and relapse prevention. These interventions were most commonly compared to usual care involving varying combinations of psychoeducation, counseling, and pharmacotherapy. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to psychosocial treatments due to high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 1.15; Q = 444.32, df = 11, P<.001; I²=98%, 2106 participants, 12 trials, very low certainty). Eight trials compared combined pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions with placebo, psychosocial intervention alone, or another pharmacologic treatment. The active pharmacologic study conditions included disulfiram, naltrexone, ondansetron, or topiramate. The psychosocial components of these interventions included counseling, encouragement to attend Alcoholics Anonymous, motivational interviewing, brief cognitive-behavioral therapy, or other psychotherapy (not specified). Analysis of studies comparing a combined pharmacologic and psychosocial intervention to psychosocial intervention alone found that the combined approach may be associated with a greater reduction in harmful alcohol use (standardized mean difference (standardized mean difference (SMD))=-0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.61 to -0.24; 475 participants; 4 trials; low certainty). Four trials compared pharmacologic intervention alone with placebo and three with another pharmacotherapy. Drugs assessed were: acamprosate, amitriptyline, baclofen disulfiram, gabapentin, mirtazapine, and naltrexone. None of these trials evaluated the primary clinical outcome of interest, harmful alcohol use.   Thirty-one trials reported rates of retention in the intervention. Meta-analyses revealed that rates of retention between study conditions did not differ in any of the comparisons (pharmacologic risk ratio (RR) = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.44, 247 participants, 3 trials, low certainty; pharmacologic in addition to psychosocial intervention: RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.40, 363 participants, 3 trials, moderate certainty). Due to high levels of heterogeneity, we did not calculate pooled estimates comparing retention in brief (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.00; Q = 172.59, df = 11, P<.001; I2 = 94%; 5380 participants; 12 trials, very low certainty) or other psychosocial interventions (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.01; Q = 34.07, df = 8, P<.001; I2 = 77%; 1664 participants; 9 trials, very low certainty). Two pharmacologic trials and three combined pharmacologic and psychosocial trials reported on side effects. These studies found more side effects attributable to amitriptyline relative to mirtazapine, naltrexone and topiramate relative to placebo, yet no differences in side effects between placebo and either acamprosate or ondansetron. Across all intervention types there was substantial risk of bias. Primary threats to validity included lack of blinding and differential/high rates of attrition.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In LMICs there is low-certainty evidence supporting the efficacy of combined psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use relative to psychosocial interventions alone. There is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of pharmacologic or psychosocial interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use largely due to the substantial heterogeneity in outcomes, comparisons, and interventions that precluded pooling of these data in meta-analyses. The majority of studies are brief interventions, primarily among men, and using measures that have not been validated in the target population. Confidence in these results is reduced by the risk of bias and significant heterogeneity among studies as well as the heterogeneity of results on different outcome measures within studies. More evidence on the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions, specific types of psychosocial interventions are needed to increase the certainty of these results.

The effects of acamprosate on maternal and neonatal outcomes in a mouse model of alcohol use disorders

BACKGROUND

Despite the teratogenic effects of alcohol, little is known about the safety of pharmacotherapies such as acamprosate for the treatment of alcohol use disorders in pregnancy. The aims of this study were to investigate, in a mouse model, the effects of maternally administered acamprosate on maternal and neonatal health, offspring neurodevelopment and behaviour, as well as examine whether acamprosate reduces the neurological harm associated with alcohol consumption in pregnancy.

METHODS

Dams were randomly allocated to one of four treatment groups: (i) control (water), (ii) acamprosate (1.6 g/L), (iii) alcohol (5% v/v) or (iv) acamprosate and alcohol (1.6 g/L; 5% v/v ethanol) and exposed from 2-weeks pre-pregnancy until postpartum day 7. Gestational outcomes including litter size and sex ratio were assessed, in addition to early-life markers of neurodevelopment. At 8 weeks of age, motor coordination, anxiety, locomotion, and memory of the adult offspring were also examined.

RESULTS

Exposure to acamprosate did not affect maternal and birth outcomes (mating success, gestational weight gain, litter size, sex ratio), neonatal outcomes (head and body length, postnatal weight) or neurodevelopmental markers (righting reflex and negative geotaxis). Acamprosate exposure did not affect offspring motor control, locomotion or anxiety, however the effects on short-term memory remain uncertain. Prenatal alcohol exposed offspring exhibited various alterations, such as lower postnatal weight, smaller head (p = 0.04) and body lengths (p = 0.046) at postnatal day 70 (males only), increased negative geotaxis speed (p = 0.03), an increased time spent in the inner zone of the open field (p = 0.02). Acamprosate mitigated the effects of alcohol for negative geotaxis at postnatal day 7 (p = 0.01) and female offspring weight at postnatal day 70 (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we show that prenatal acamprosate exposure was not associated with poor maternal or neonatal health outcomes or impaired neurodevelopment and behaviour. However, acamprosate's effects on short-term memory remain uncertain. We present preliminary evidence to suggest acamprosate displayed some neuroprotective effects against damage caused by in utero alcohol exposure.

Medications for the Treatment of Alcohol Dependence-Current State of Knowledge and Future Perspectives from a Public Health Perspective

No single effective therapy for alcohol abuse has been found, despite it being a serious sociological and economic problem for hundreds of years. It seems difficult to find a single drug as a panacea for the alcohol problem due to the complexity of the pathophysiology of alcohol dependence. The purpose of this narrative review is to review existing and potentially future pharmaceuticals for the treatment of alcohol dependence in the most affordable way possible. Psychotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for alcoholism, while few drugs approved by legislators are available in the augmentation of this treatment, such as acamprosate, disulfiram, and naltrexone, approved by the FDA, and nalmefene by the EMA. There are recent reports in the literature on the possibility of using baclofen, topiramate, varenicline, and gabapentin in the treatment of alcohol dependence. Moreover, the results of recent clinical trials using psychoactive substances such as psilocybin and MDMA appear to be a breakthrough in the modern treatment of alcohol abuse. Despite this initial optimism, a lot of scientific effort is still needed before new pharmacological methods supporting the treatment of alcohol dependence syndrome will be widely available.

Perspectives on the pharmacological management of alcohol use disorder: Are the approved medications effective?

INTRODUCTION

In the last decades, many medications have been tested for the treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD). Among them, disulfiram, acamprosate, naltrexone, nalmefene, sodium oxybate and baclofen have been approved in different countries, with different specific indications. Topiramate is not approved for the treatment of AUD, however, it is suggested as a therapeutic option by the American Psychiatric Association for patients who do not tolerate or respond to approved therapies.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative review we have analyzed the main studies available in literature, investigating the efficacy and safety of these medications, distinguishing whether they were oriented towards abstinence or not. Randomized controlled studies, analyzing larger populations for longer periods were the main focus of our analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The medications currently available for the treatment of AUD are quite effective, yet further progress can still be achieved through the personalized strategies. Also, these medications are still markedly underutilized in clinical practice and many patients do not have access to specialized treatment.

Relapse prevention for alcohol use disorders: combined acamprosate and cue exposure therapy as aftercare

AIMS

Many patients with alcohol use disorders are challenged by cravings leading to repeated relapses. Both cue exposure therapy (CET) and acamprosate target alcohol cravings and are often combined (CET + acamprosate). The main aim of this study was to investigate whether aftercare treatment consisting of CET combined with acamprosate is equivalent to (A) CET as monotherapy, (B) aftercare as usual (AAU) as monotherapy or (C) AAU combined with acamprosate.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive either CET with urge-specific coping skills (USCS) as aftercare or AAU. Acamprosate prescription data were extracted from patient case records. Alcohol consumption, cravings, and USCS were assessed at pre-aftercare, post-aftercare, and 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, patients increased their alcohol consumption during and following aftercare treatment, thereby relapsing despite any treatment. However, CET + acamprosate achieved greater abstinence compared to AAU + acamprosate at follow-up (p=.047). CET + acamprosate also reduced number of drinking days (p=.020) and number of days with excessive drinking (p=.020) at post-aftercare, when compared to AAU monotherapy. CET monotherapy increased sensible drinking at post-aftercare compared to AAU monotherapy (p=.045) and AAU + acamprosate (p=.047). Only CET monotherapy showed improvement in cravings, when compared to AAU at follow-up (mean urge level: p=.032; peak urge level: p=.014).

CONCLUSION

The study showed that CET both as monotherapy and combined with acamprosate was superior to AAU monotherapy and AAU + acamprosate in reducing alcohol consumption. Only CET + acamprosate was capable of reducing alcohol consumption in the longer term, indicating that anti-craving medication may not impede CET from exerting an effect on alcohol consumption. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02298751 (24/11-2014).

Treating Alcohol Use Disorder in Patients with Alcohol-Associated Liver Disease: Controversies in Pharmacological Therapy

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is one of the main causes of global death and disability. The liver represents the main target of alcohol damage, and alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) represents the first cause of liver cirrhosis in Western countries. Alcohol abstinence is the main goal of treatment in AUD patients with ALD, as treatments for ALD are less effective when drinking continues. Moreover, the persistence of alcohol consumption is associated with higher mortality, increased need for liver transplantation, and graft loss. The most effective treatment for AUD is the combination of psychosocial interventions, pharmacological therapy, and medical management. However, the effectiveness of these treatments in patients with ALD is doubtful even because AUD patients with ALD are usually excluded from pharmacological trials due to concerns on liver safety. This narrative review will discuss the treatment options for AUD-ALD patients focusing on controversies in pharmacological therapy.

Closing the brain-heart loop: Towards more holistic models of addiction and addiction recovery

Much research seeks to articulate the brain structures and pathways implicated in addiction and addiction recovery. Prominent neurobiological models emphasize the interplay between cortical and limbic brain regions as a main driver of addictive processes, but largely do not take into consideration sensory and visceral information streams that link context and state to the brain and behavior. Yet these brain-body information streams would seem to be necessary elements of a comprehensive model of addiction. As a starting point, we describe the overlap between one current model of addiction circuitry and the neural network that not only regulates cardiovascular system activity but also receives feedback from peripheral cardiovascular processes through the baroreflex loop. We highlight the need for neurobiological, molecular, and behavioral studies of neural and peripheral cardiovascular signal integration during the experience of internal states and environmental contexts that drive alcohol and other drug use behaviors. We end with a call for systematic, mechanistic research on the promising, yet largely unexamined benefits to addiction treatment of neuroscience-informed, adjunctive interventions that target the malleability of the cardiovascular system to alter brain processes.

Alcohol-Related Liver Disease in the Covid-19 Era: Position Paper of the Italian Society on Alcohol (SIA)

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), firstly reported in China last November 2019, became a global pandemic. It has been shown that periods of isolation may induce a spike in alcohol use disorder (AUD). In addition, alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) is the most common consequence of excessive alcohol consumption worldwide. Moreover, liver impairment has also been reported as a common manifestation of COVID-19.

AIMS

The aim of our position paper was to consider some critical issues regarding the management of ALD in patients with AUD in the era of COVID-19.

METHODS

A panel of experts of the Italian Society of Alcohology (SIA) met via "conference calls" during the lockdown period to draft the SIA's criteria for the management of ALD in patients with COVID-19 as follows: (a) liver injury in patients with ALD and COVID-19 infection; (b) toxicity to the liver of the drugs currently tested to treat COVID-19 and the pharmacological interaction between medications used to treat AUD and to treat COVID-19; (c) reorganization of the management of compensated and decompensated ALD and liver transplantation in the COVID-19 era.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly carried us toward a new governance scenario of AUD and ALD which necessarily requires an in-depth review of the management of these diseases with a new safe approach (management of out-patients and in-patients following new rules of safety, telemedicine, telehealth, call meetings with clinicians, nurses, patients, and caregivers) without losing the therapeutic efficacy of multidisciplinary treatment.

Neurobiological mechanisms of control in alcohol use disorder - moving towards mechanism-based non-invasive brain stimulation treatments

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is characterized by excessive habitual drinking and loss of control over alcohol intake despite negative consequences. Both of these aspects foster uncontrolled drinking and high relapse rates in AUD patients. Yet, common interventions mostly focus on the phenomenological level, and prioritize the reduction of craving and withdrawal symptoms. Our review provides a mechanistic understanding of AUD and suggests alternative therapeutic approaches targeting the mechanisms underlying dysfunctional alcohol-related behaviours. Specifically, we explain how repeated drinking fosters the development of rigid drinking habits and is associated with diminished cognitive control. These behavioural and cognitive effects are then functionally related to the neurobiochemical effects of alcohol abuse. We further explain how alterations in fronto-striatal network activity may constitute the neurobiological correlates of these alcohol-related dysfunctions. Finally, we discuss limitations in current pharmacological AUD therapies and suggest non-invasive brain stimulation (like TMS and tDCS interventions) as a potential addition/alternative for modulating the activation of both cortical and subcortical areas to help re-establish the functional balance between controlled and automatic behaviour.

Fenofibrate (a PPAR-α Agonist) Administered During Ethanol Withdrawal Reverts Ethanol-Induced Astrogliosis and Restores the Levels of Glutamate Transporter in Ethanol-Administered Adolescent Rats

High-ethanol intake induces a neuroinflammatory response, which has been proposed as responsible for the maintenance of chronic ethanol consumption. Neuroinflammation decreases glutamate transporter (GLT-1) expression, increasing levels of glutamate that trigger dopamine release at the corticolimbic reward areas, driving long-term drinking behavior. The activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα) by fibrates inhibits neuroinflammation, in models other than ethanol consumption. However, the effect of fibrates on ethanol-induced neuroinflammation has not yet been studied. We previously reported that the administration of fenofibrate to ethanol-drinking rats decreased ethanol consumption. Here, we studied whether fenofibrate effects are related to a decrease in ethanol-induced neuroinflammation and to the normalization of the levels of GLT-1. Rats were administered ethanol on alternate days for 4 weeks (2 g/kg/day). After ethanol withdrawal, fenofibrate was administered for 14 days (50 mg/kg/day) and the levels of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), phosphorylated NF-κB-inhibitory protein (pIκBα) and GLT-1, were quantified in the prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, and hypothalamus. Ethanol treatment increased the levels of GFAP in the hippocampus and hypothalamus, indicating a clear astrocytic activation. Similarly, ethanol increased the levels of pIκBα in the three areas. The administration of fenofibrate decreased the expression of GFAP and pIκBα in the three areas. These results indicate that fenofibrate reverts both astrogliosis and NF-κB activation. Finally, ethanol decreased GLT-1 expression in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. Fenofibrate normalized the levels of GLT-1 in both areas, suggesting that its effect in reducing ethanol consumption could be due to the normalization of glutamatergic tone.

Determination of acamprosate in human plasma by UPLC-MS/MS: Application to therapeutic drug monitoring

Acamprosate is a medication used to treat alcohol dependence. Therapeutic drug monitoring is important in drugs for the treatment of substance-related disorders. Therefore, in this study, a new selective, very simple and rapid ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometer method was developed for the therapeutic drug monitoring of acamprosate. The developed method allows the determination of acamprosate in human plasma. The method was validated in terms of selectivity and linearity, which was in the range of 100-1,200 ng/ml for acamprosate. Intra-assay and inter-assay accuracy and precision were within the acceptable limits of the Eueopean Medicines Agency guideline. The lower limit of quantitation was 100 ng/ml for acamprosate. The developed method was successfully applied for therapeutic drug monitoring in patient plasma samples.

Pharmacotherapeutic management of co-morbid alcohol and opioid use

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD) are two highly prevalent substance-related disorders worldwide. Co-use of the substances is also quite prevalent, yet there are no pharmacological treatment approaches specifically designed to treat co-morbid OUD and AUD. Here, the authors critically summarize OUD, AUD and opioid/alcohol co-use and their current pharmacotherapies for treatment. They also review the mechanisms of action of opioids and alcohol within the brain reward circuitry and discuss potential combined mechanisms of action and resulting neuroadaptations. Pharmacotherapies that aim to treat AUD or OUD that may be beneficial in the treatment of co-use are also highlighted. Preclinical models assessing alcohol and opioid co-use remain sparse. Lasting neuroadaptations in brain reward circuits caused by co-use of alcohol and opioids remains largely understudied. In order to fully understand the neurobiological underpinnings of alcohol and opioid co-use and develop efficacious pharmacotherapies, the preclinical field must expand its current experimental paradigms of 'single drug' use to encompass polysubstance use. Such studies will provide insights on the neural alterations induced by opioid and alcohol co-use, and may help develop novel pharmacotherapies for individuals with co-occurring alcohol and opioid use disorders.

Survey of Addiction Specialists' Use of Medications to Treat Alcohol Use Disorder

OBJECTIVES

Several medications have been shown to be safe and effective for treating alcohol use disorder (AUD); however, these medications are prescribed infrequently. We conducted a survey of the demographics, practice characteristics, and self-perceived knowledge, experience, and opinions of addiction specialists on the use of AUD medications and how to increase their use.

METHODS

We sent a 19-question survey to members of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) and the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP).

RESULTS

We received a total of 395 responses from ASAM members and 194 responses from AAAP members. One hundred of the respondents were members of both organizations. The large majority of respondents (92.6%) were prescribers, and 81.6% were non-trainee physicians. The two most frequently used medications for treating AUD were oral naltrexone (27%) and long-acting naltrexone (18%). Respondents were significantly more confident in the strength of the research findings and evidence for the efficacy and safety of naltrexone than other AUD medications (p < 0.001 ). Respondents identified additional education to current providers about existing medications as the most important potential intervention to increase the use of AUD medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with a survey published in 2001, in 2018 the proportion of respondents who reported using naltrexone more than doubled and addiction specialists were more confident in their use of AUD medications, rating their efficacy and safety more highly. Consistent with findings from other recent studies, providing more education to practitioners about existing AUD medications may be the most effective way to increase their use.

Sulfated Non-Saccharide Glycosaminoglycan Mimetics as Novel Drug Discovery Platform for Various Pathologies

Glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) are very complex, natural anionic polysaccharides. They are polymers of repeating disaccharide units of uronic acid and hexosamine residues. Owing to their template-free, spatiotemporally-controlled, and enzyme-mediated biosyntheses, GAGs possess enormous polydispersity, heterogeneity, and structural diversity which often translate into multiple biological roles. It is well documented that GAGs contribute to physiological and pathological processes by binding to proteins including serine proteases, serpins, chemokines, growth factors, and microbial proteins. Despite advances in the GAG field, the GAG-protein interface remains largely unexploited by drug discovery programs. Thus, Non-Saccharide Glycosaminoglycan Mimetics (NSGMs) have been rationally developed as a novel class of sulfated molecules that modulate GAG-protein interface to promote various biological outcomes of substantial benefit to human health. In this review, we describe the chemical, biochemical, and pharmacological aspects of recently reported NSGMs and highlight their therapeutic potentials as structurally and mechanistically novel anti-coagulants, anti-cancer agents, anti-emphysema agents, and anti-viral agents. We also describe the challenges that complicate their advancement and describe ongoing efforts to overcome these challenges with the aim of advancing the novel platform of NSGMs to clinical use.

Targeting liver aldehyde dehydrogenase-2 prevents heavy but not moderate alcohol drinking

Aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 (ALDH2), a key enzyme for detoxification the ethanol metabolite acetaldehyde, is recognized as a promising therapeutic target to treat alcohol use disorders (AUDs). Disulfiram, a potent ALDH2 inhibitor, is an approved drug for the treatment of AUD but has clinical limitations due to its side effects. This study aims to elucidate the relative contribution of different organs in acetaldehyde clearance through ALDH2 by using global- (Aldh2 ^-/-) and tissue-specific Aldh2-deficient mice, and to examine whether liver-specific ALDH2 inhibition can prevent alcohol-seeking behavior. Aldh2 ^-/- mice showed markedly higher acetaldehyde concentrations than wild-type (WT) mice after acute ethanol gavage. Acetaldehyde levels in hepatocyte-specific Aldh2 knockout (Aldh2 ^Hep-/-) mice were significantly higher than those in WT mice post gavage, but did not reach the levels observed in Aldh2 ^-/- mice. Energy expenditure and motility were dramatically dampened in Aldh2 ^-/- mice, but moderately decreased in Aldh2 ^Hep-/- mice compared to controls. In the 2-bottle paradigm and the drinking-in-the-dark model, Aldh2 ^-/- mice drank negligible volumes from ethanol-containing bottles, whereas Aldh2 ^Hep-/- mice showed reduced alcohol preference at high but not low alcohol concentrations. Glial cell- or neuron-specific Aldh2 deficiency did not affect voluntary alcohol consumption. Finally, specific liver Aldh2 knockdown via injection of shAldh2 markedly decreased alcohol preference. In conclusion, although the liver is the major organ responsible for acetaldehyde metabolism, a cumulative effect of ALDH2 from other organs likely also contributes to systemic acetaldehyde clearance. Liver-targeted ALDH2 inhibition can decrease heavy drinking without affecting moderate drinking, providing molecular basis for hepatic ALDH2 targeting/editing for the treatment of AUD.

The Use of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Test Pharmacotherapies for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Systematic Review

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a chronic relapsing condition that represents a significant public health concern. Pharmacological treatment development for AUD is a top research priority, and many studies are being conducted to evaluate potential AUD treatments. Understanding the brain circuitry impacted by addiction is crucial for the development of efficacious pharmacological interventions. These neuroadaptations can be probed noninvasively using functional magnetic resonance neuroimaging (fMRI). fMRI may be an effective tool to identify biomarkers for AUD pharmacotherapies, evaluating changes associated with pharmacological treatment. Thus, the present qualitative review of the literature focuses on the role of fMRI as a tool for medication development for AUD. The aim of this review was to assemble research across a range of fMRI paradigms to study the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments of adult AUD. First, we present a qualitative review of fMRI AUD pharmacotherapy studies, differentiating studies based on their dosing regimen. Second, we provide recommendations for the field to improve the use of fMRI as a biomarker for AUD pharmacotherapy.

Impact of Substance Use Disorder Pharmacotherapy on Executive Function: A Narrative Review

Substance use disorders are chronic, relapsing, and harmful conditions characterized by executive dysfunction. While there are currently no approved pharmacotherapy options for stimulant and cannabis use disorders, there are several evidence-based options available to help reduce symptoms during detoxification and aid long-term cessation for those with tobacco, alcohol and opioid use disorders. While these medication options have shown clinical efficacy, less is known regarding their potential to enhance executive function. This narrative review aims to provide a brief overview of research that has investigated whether commonly used pharmacotherapies for these substance use disorders (nicotine, bupropion, varenicline, disulfiram, acamprosate, nalmefene, naltrexone, methadone, buprenorphine, and lofexidine) effect three core executive function components (working memory, inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility). While pharmacotherapy-induced enhancement of executive function may improve cessation outcomes in dependent populations, there are limited and inconsistent findings regarding the effects of these medications on executive function. We discuss possible reasons for the mixed findings and suggest some future avenues of work that may enhance the understanding of addiction pharmacotherapy and cognitive training interventions and lead to improved patient outcomes.

[Diagnosis, differential diagnosis and therapy of substance use disorders in general hospital (general section)]

Substance use disorders are becoming an increasingly significant problem in general hospitals and hence play a key role in consultation- and liaison psychiatry. Diverse psychotropic effects of various substances mimic psychiatric disorders. An alcohol intoxication can present depressive or manic symptoms, a cannabis delirium can present as a psychosis while stimulants use can suggest the diagnosis of an anxiety disorder. Obtaining dual diagnoses by identifying substance-induced and non-substance-induced psychopathologies is clinically challenging.The aim of this article is to systematically describe the psychopathology, pathophysiology and therapeutic options of substance-use disorders particularly relevant for consultation and liaison psychiatry.

Medications for alcohol use disorders: An overview

Patients who suffer from alcohol use disorders (AUDs) usually go through various socio-behavioral and pathophysiological changes that take place in the brain and other organs. Recently, consumption of unhealthy food and excess alcohol along with a sedentary lifestyle has become a norm in both developed and developing countries. Despite the beneficial effects of moderate alcohol consumption, chronic and/or excessive alcohol intake is reported to negatively affect the brain, liver and other organs, resulting in cell death, organ damage/failure and death. The most effective therapy for alcoholism and alcohol related comorbidities is alcohol abstinence, however, chronic alcoholic patients cannot stop drinking alcohol. Therefore, targeted therapies are urgently needed to treat such populations. Patients who suffer from alcoholism and/or alcohol abuse experience harmful effects and changes that occur in the brain and other organs. Upon stopping alcohol consumption, alcoholic patients experience acute withdrawal symptoms followed by a protracted abstinence syndrome resulting in the risk of relapse to heavy drinking. For the past few decades, several drugs have been available for the treatment of AUDs. These drugs include medications to reduce or stop severe alcohol withdrawal symptoms during alcohol detoxification as well as recovery medications to reduce alcohol craving and support abstinence. However, there is no drug that completely antagonizes the adverse effects of excessive amounts of alcohol. This review summarizes the drugs which are available and approved by the FDA and their mechanisms of action as well as the medications that are under various phases of preclinical and clinical trials. In addition, the repurposing of the FDA approved drugs, such as anticonvulsants, antipsychotics, antidepressants and other medications, to prevent alcoholism and treat AUDs and their potential target mechanisms are summarized.

Drug-drug interactions in the treatment for alcohol use disorders: A comprehensive review

Drug interactions are one of the most common causes of side effects in polypharmacy. Alcoholics are a category of patients at high risk of pharmacological interactions, due to the presence of comorbidities, the concomitant intake of several medications and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interferences of ethanol. However, the data available on this issue are limited. These reasons often frighten clinicians when prescribing appropriate pharmacological therapies for alcohol use disorder (AUD), where less than 15% of patients receive an appropriate treatment in the most severe forms. The data available in literature regarding the relevant drug-drug interactions of the medications currently approved in United States and in some European countries for the treatment of AUD (benzodiazepines, acamprosate, baclofen, disulfiram, nalmefene, naltrexone and sodium oxybate) are reviewed here. The class of benzodiazepines and disulfiram are involved in numerous pharmacological interactions, while they are not conspicuous for acamprosate. The other drugs are relatively safe for pharmacological interactions, excluding the opioid withdrawal syndrome caused by the combination of nalmefene or naltrexone with an opiate medication. The information obtained is designed to help clinicians in understanding and managing the pharmacological interactions in AUDs, especially in patients under multi-drug treatment, in order to reduce the risk of a negative interaction and to improve the treatment outcomes.

Acute effect of Ethanol and Taurine on frontal cortex absolute beta power before and after exercise

Ethanol (ET) is a substance that modulates the Central Nervous System (CNS). Frequently, ET intake occurs combined with energy drinks, which contain taurine (TA), an important amino acid found in the body (i.e brain and muscles). Although TA administration has been used in the improvement of physical performance, the impact of TA, ET and exercise remains unknown. This study aimed to analyze the acute effect of 6g of Taurine (TA), 0.6 mL∙kg^-1 of Ethanol (ET), and Taurine combined with Ethanol (TA+ET) ingestion on the electrocortical activity before and after a moderate intensity exercise in 9 subjects, 5 women (counterbalanced experimental design). In each of the 4 treatments (Placebo—PL, TA, ET and TA+ET), electroencephalography (EEG) tests were conducted in order to analyze changes in absolute beta power (ABP) in the frontal lobe in 3 moments: baseline (before ingestion), peak (before exercise) and post-exercise. In the PL treatment, the frontal areas showed decrease in ABP after exercise. However, in the ET+TA treatment, ABP values were greater after exercise, except for Fp1. The ET treatment had no effect on the Superior Frontal Gyrus area (F3, Fz and F4) and ABP decreased after exercise in Fp1 and Fp2. In the TA treatment, ABP increased after exercise, while it decreased at the peak moment in most of the frontal regions, except for Fp1, F3 and Fz. We concluded that after a moderate intensity exercise, a decrease in cortical activity occurs in placebo treatment. Moreover, we found a inhibitory effect of TA on cortical activity before exercise and a increased in cortical activity after exercise. A small ET dose is not enough to alter ABP in all regions of the frontal cortex and, in combination with TA, it showed an increase in the frontal cortex activity at the post-exercise moment.

Alcohol addiction - the safety of available approved treatment options

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol Use Disorders (AUD) is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. At present disulfiram, naltrexone and acamprosate are approved for the treatment of AUD in U.S. and Europe. Nalmefene is approved in Europe and sodium oxybate is approved in Italy and Austria only. Baclofen received a 'temporary recommendation for use' in France.

AREAS COVERED

The safety of the above mentioned medications on liver, digestive system, kidney function, nervous system, pregnancy and lactation and their possible side effects are described and discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Mechanism of action and metabolism of these drugs as well as patients' clinical characteristics can affect the safety of treatment. All approved medications are valid tools for the treatment of AUD in patients without advanced liver disease. For some drugs, attention should be paid to patients with renal failure and medications may be used with caution, adjusting the dosage according to kidney function. In patients with AUD and advanced liver disease, at present only baclofen has been formally tested in randomized controlled trials showing its safety in this population.

Don't stress about CRF: assessing the translational failures of CRF1antagonists

BACKGROUND

Dr. Athina Markou sought treatments for a common neural substrate shared by depression and drug dependence. Antagonists of corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) receptors, a target of interest to her, have not reached the clinic despite strong preclinical rationale and sustained translational efforts.

METHODS

We explore potential causes for the failure of CRF1 antagonists and review recent findings concerning CRF-CRF1 systems in psychopathology.

RESULTS

Potential causes for negative outcomes include (1) poor safety and efficacy of initial drug candidates due to bad pharmacokinetic and physicochemical properties, (2) specificity problems with preclinical screens, (3) the acute nature of screens vs. late-presenting patients, (4) positive preclinical results limited to certain models and conditions with dynamic CRF-CRF1 activation not homologous to tested patients, (5) repeated CRF1 activation-induced plasticity that reduces the importance of ongoing CRF1 agonist stimulation, and (6) therapeutic silencing which may need to address CRF2 receptor or CRF-binding protein molecules, constitutive CRF1 activity, or molecules that influence agonist-independent activity or to target structural regions other than the allosteric site bound by all drug candidates. We describe potential markers of activation towards individualized treatment, human genetic, and functional data that still implicate CRF1 systems in emotional disturbance, sex differences, and suggestive clinical findings for CRF1 antagonists in food craving and CRF-driven HPA-axis overactivation.

CONCLUSION

The therapeutic scope of selective CRF1 antagonists now appears narrower than had been hoped. Yet, much remains to be learned about CRF's role in the neurobiology of dysphoria and addiction and the potential for novel anti-CRF therapies therein.

Review article: pharmacotherapy for alcohol dependence - the why, the what and the wherefore

BACKGROUND

The development of alcohol dependence is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. For the majority of affected people the most appropriate goal, in terms of drinking behaviour, is abstinence from alcohol. Psychosocial intervention is the mainstay of the treatment but adjuvant pharmacotherapy is also available and its use recommended.

AIM

To provide an updated analysis of current and potential pharmacotherapeutic options for the management of alcohol dependence. In addition, factors predictive of therapeutic outcome, including compliance and pharmacogenetics, and the current barriers to treatment, including doctors' unwillingness to prescribe these agents, will be explored.

METHODS

Relevant papers were selected for review following extensive, language- and date-unrestricted, electronic and manual searches of the literature.

RESULTS

Acamprosate and naltrexone have a substantial evidence base for overall efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness while the risks associated with the use of disulfiram are well-known and can be minimised with appropriate patient selection and supervision. Acamprosate can be used safely in patients with liver disease and in those with comorbid mental health issues and co-occurring drug-related problems. A number of other agents are being investigated for potential use for this indication including: baclofen, topiramate and metadoxine.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacotherapy for alcohol dependence has been shown to be moderately efficacious with few safety concerns, but it is substantially underutilised. Concerted efforts must be made to remove the barriers to treatment in order to optimise the management of people with this condition.