Treatment of cocaine dependent treatment seekers with adult ADHD: double-blind comparison of methylphenidate and placebo

Extended-Release Mixed Amphetamine Salts for Comorbid Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Cannabis Use Disorder: A Pilot, Randomized Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine if treatment of co-occurring adult ADHD and Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD) with extended-release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-ER) would be effective at improving ADHD symptoms and promoting abstinence.

METHOD

A 12-week randomized, double-blind, two-arm pilot feasibility trial of adults with comorbid ADHD and CUD (n = 28) comparing MAS-ER (80 mg) to placebo. Main outcomes: ADHD: ≥30% symptom reduction, measured by the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS). CUD: Abstinence during last 2 observed weeks of maintenance phase.

RESULTS

Overall, medication was well-tolerated. There was no significant difference in ADHD symptom reduction (MAS-ER: 83.3%; placebo: 71.4%; p = .65) or cannabis abstinence (MAS-ER: 15.4%; placebo: 0%; p = .27). MAS-ER group showed a significant decrease in weekly cannabis use days over time compared to placebo (p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

MAS-ER was generally well-tolerated. The small sample size precluded a determination of MAS-ER's superiority reducing ADHD symptoms or promoting abstinence. Notably, MAS-ER significantly reduced weekly days of use over time.

Methylphenidate as a treatment option for substance use disorder: a transdiagnostic perspective

A transition in viewing mental disorders from conditions defined as a set of unique characteristics to one of the quantitative variations on a collection of dimensions allows overlap between disorders. The overlap can be utilized to extend to treatment approaches. Here, we consider the overlap between attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and substance use disorder to probe the suitability to use methylphenidate as a treatment for substance use disorder. Both disorders are characterized by maladaptive goal-directed behavior, impaired cognitive control, hyperactive phasic dopaminergic neurotransmission in the striatum, prefrontal hypoactivation, and reduced frontal cortex gray matter volume/density. In addition, methylphenidate has been shown to improve cognitive control and normalize associated brain activation in substance use disorder patients and clinical trials have found methylphenidate to improve clinical outcomes. Despite the theoretical basis and promising, but preliminary, outcomes, many questions remain unanswered. Most prominent is whether all patients who are addicted to different substances may equally profit from methylphenidate treatment.

Concomitant Drug Use among Opioid-Dependent Patients with and without Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Does Methylphenidate Merit a Trial?

INTRODUCTION

Concomitant drug use is common among opioid-dependent patients in maintenance therapy. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a common comorbidity among opioid users, is associated with a higher risk of concomitant drug use. Earlier studies showed that methylphenidate (MPH) can reduce cocaine consumption among patients with ADHD. The use of MPH as an agonist-replacement or maintenance therapy in cocaine-dependent patients without ADHD is also common in Switzerland, despite a lack of supporting evidence. The aim of this study was to assess concomitant cocaine, amphetamine, MDMA, MPH, and heroin use among patients in opioid maintenance therapy either with or without comorbid ADHD. We expected stimulant consumption to be higher in patients with cocaine dependence and comorbid ADHD and that use of MPH would not lead to a reduction in cocaine consumption in patients without ADHD. We therefore evaluated correlations between use of MPH and cocaine consumption and between MPH consumption and cocaine craving within the two groups.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 94 opioid-dependent patients in maintenance therapy in an outpatient department of the Psychiatric Hospital of Zurich. The patients were divided into two groups based on comorbid ADHD; a group with ADHD (N = 27) and a group without ADHD (N = 67). Drug use was assessed using 3-month hair analysis.

RESULTS

We did not find significant differences in the number of patients using cocaine, amphetamine, MDMA, or heroin between groups with or without ADHD. With respect to cocaine use, 85.2 percent of patients in the ADHD group and 73.1 percent in the non-ADHD group were users. The non-ADHD group showed a significant positive correlation between the concentration of MPH and cocaine in hair samples (p < 0.05), and a positive correlation between cocaine craving and the concentration of MPH in hair samples (p = 0.065). These two trends were not evident in the ADHD group.

CONCLUSION

Among patients without ADHD, use of MPH correlates with higher cocaine consumption and craving. Conversely, no significant correlation was found between MPH and cocaine use in patients with ADHD. Our study adds to the evidence that MPH confers negative effects in cocaine users without ADHD and should thus have no place in the treatment of these patients.

Challenges of Treating ADHD with Comorbid Substance Use Disorder: Considerations for the Clinician

Adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often present psychiatric comorbidities and, in particular, substance use disorder (SUD). ADHD-SUD comorbidity is characterized by greater severity of both disorders, earlier age of onset, higher likelihood of polydrug-abuse and suicidal behaviors, more hospitalizations, and lower treatment adherence. At the present stage, research focused on the pharmacological management of ADHD with comorbid SUD in both adolescents and adults is still lacking. Furthermore, while the short-term effects of stimulants are well studied, less is known about the chronic effects of these drugs on dopamine signaling. Current available evidence is consistent in reporting that high doses of stimulant medications in ADHD-SUD subjects have a mild to moderate efficacy on ADHD symptoms. Some data suggest that pharmacological treatment with stimulants may be beneficial for both ADHD symptoms and comorbid cocaine or amphetamine use. However, in the long run, stimulant medications may have a potential risk for misuse. For the absence of potential misuse, atomoxetine is often recommended for ADHD with comorbid cocaine or amphetamine use disorder. However, its efficacy in reducing addictive behavior is not demonstrated. In subjects with other subtypes of SUD, both atomoxetine and stimulant drugs seem to have scarce impact on addictive behavior, despite the improvement in ADHD symptomatology. In this population, ADHD treatment should be combined with SUD-specific strategies.

The predictive value of brief measures of externalizing behavior and internalizing problems in young people receiving substance use treatment: A secondary analysis

BACKGROUND

Identifying people at risk of poor outcomes following treatment for substance use disorders is important for developing tailored services. The aim of this study was to test whether a brief measure of internalizing and externalizing behavior could identify young adults at high risk of psychiatric care episodes and criminal offending up to four years after enrolment in treatment for substance use disorder.

METHODS

Clients aged 15-25 years from a randomized multicenter study were included (N = 457). At baseline, all completed the YouthMap12 screener, a measure of internalizing symptoms (IP6) and externalizing problems (EP6). We used accelerated failure time regression to assess time to psychiatric care and criminal offending, adjusting for baseline occurrence, gender, age, treatment group, and uptake area. Youden's J was used to assess optimal cut-points for risk of events.

RESULTS

The IP6 was associated with shorter time to psychiatric care following treatment enrolment (beta = -0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.94 to -0.48; adjusted beta = -0.45, 95% CI = -0.66 to -0.25). The EP6 was associated with shorter time to criminal offending, coefficient = -0.32, 95% CI = -0.44 to -0.19; adjusted coefficient = -0.18, 95% CI = -0.30 to -0.06). Optimal cut-points were two or more for the IP6 and three or more for the EP6.

CONCLUSIONS

The IP6 and the EP6, two simple and easily administered instruments, can identify young adults who are at an increased risk of future criminal offending or in need of psychiatric care. The findings lend support to using the 12-item YouthMap, as it identifies relevant risks, is compatible with local service delivery needs, and is theoretically and empirically supported.

Pharmacological Treatments for Cocaine Craving: What Is the Way Forward? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving efficacy of pharmacotherapies tested for cocaine use disorder, in the context of randomized-controlled clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

we assessed the databases of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO, without date restrictions up to August 2022, to identify relevant studies.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS

we included double-blinded randomized-controlled trials investigating pharmacotherapies for cocaine craving and/or cocaine use disorder whose outcomes included cocaine craving.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Two authors screened studies' titles and abstracts for inclusion, and both read all the included studies. We systematically gathered information on the following aspects of each study: title; author(s); year of publication; sample size; mean age; sample characteristics; study set-ting; whether participants were treatment-seeking; study design; craving measures; study interventions; drop-out rates; and other relevant outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, we appraised 130 clinical trials, including 8137 participants. We further considered the drugs from the studies that scored equal to or greater than six points in the quality assessment. There was a correlation between craving and cocaine use outcomes (self-reports, timeline follow-back or urinary benzoylecgonine) in the vast majority of studies. In the short-term treatment, acute phenylalanine-tyrosine depletion, clonidine, fenfluramine, meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (m-CPP) and mecamylamine presented promising effects. In the long term, amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone presented promising anti-craving effects. Unfortunately, the highly tested medications were not successful in most of the trials, as follows: propranolol in the short term; amantadine, aripiprazole, bromocriptine, citicoline, ketamine, modafinil, olanzapine, topiramate in the long term. The remaining 52 medications had no positive anti-craving outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

Our review was limited by high heterogeneity of craving assessments across the studies and by a great range of pharmacotherapies. Further, the majority of the studies considered abstinence and retention in treatment as the main outcomes, whereas craving was a secondary outcome and some of the studies evaluated patients with cocaine use disorder with comorbidities such as opioid or alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity. Lastly, most of the studies also included non-pharmacological treatments, such as counseling or psychotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a direct association between craving and cocaine use, underscoring craving as an important treatment target for promoting abstinence among persons with cocaine use disorder. Clonidine, fenfluramine and m-CPP showed to be promising medications for cocaine craving in the short-term treatment, and amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone in the long-term treatment.

Association of Opioid and Stimulant Use Disorder Diagnoses With Fatal and Nonfatal Overdose Among People With a History of Incarceration

IMPORTANCE

Studies have suggested a rise in opioid- and stimulant-involved overdoses in recent years in North America. This risk may be acute for individuals who have had contact with the criminal justice system, who are particularly vulnerable to overdose risk.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of opioid and/or stimulant use disorder diagnoses with overdose (fatal and nonfatal) among people with histories of incarceration.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this cohort study, population-based health and corrections data were retrieved from the British Columbia Provincial Overdose Cohort, which contains a 20% random sample of residents of British Columbia. The analysis included all people in the 20% random sample who had a history of incarceration between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2014. Outcomes were derived from 5-years of follow-up data (January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019). Statistical analysis took place from January 2022 to June 2022.

EXPOSURES

Substance use disorder diagnosis type (ie, opioid use disorder, stimulant use disorder, both, or neither), sociodemographic, health, and incarceration characteristics.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Hazard ratios (HRs) are reported from an Andersen-Gill model for recurrent nonfatal overdose events and from a Fine and Gray competing risk model for fatal overdose events.

RESULTS

The study identified 6816 people (5980 male [87.7%]; 2820 aged <30 years [41.4%]) with histories of incarceration. Of these, 293 (4.3%) had opioid use disorder only, 395 (6.8%) had stimulant use disorder only, and 281 (4.1%) had both diagnoses. During follow-up, 1655 people experienced 4026 overdoses including 3781 (93.9%) nonfatal overdoses, and 245 (6.1%) fatal overdoses. In adjusted analyses, the hazard of both fatal (HR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.48-3.86) and nonfatal (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.94-3.11) overdose was highest in the group with both opioid and stimulant use disorder diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study of people with a history of incarceration found an elevated hazard of fatal and nonfatal overdose among people with both opioid and stimulant use disorder diagnoses. This study suggests an urgent need to address the service needs of individuals who have had contact with the criminal justice system and who co-use opioids and stimulants.

Cocaine Use Disorder (CUD): Current Clinical Perspectives

Cocaine use disorder (CUD) is a devastating disorder, impacting both individuals and society. Individuals with CUD face many barriers in accessing treatment for CUD, and most individuals with CUD never receive treatment. In this review, we provide an overview of CUD, including risk factors for CUD, common co-occurring disorders, acute and chronic effects of cocaine use, and currently available pharmacological and behavioral treatments. There are no FDA-approved pharmacological treatments for CUD. Future studies with larger sample sizes and testing treatment combinations are warranted. However, individuals with CUD and co-occurring disorders (eg, a mood or anxiety disorder) may benefit from medication treatments. There are behavioral interventions that have demonstrated efficacy in treating CUD – contingency management (CM) and cognitive-behavioral therapy for substance use disorders (CBT-SUD) in particular – however many barriers remain in delivering these treatments to patients. Following the discussion of current treatments, we highlight some promising emerging treatments, as well as offer a framework that can be used in building a treatment plan for individuals with CUD.

Helpful or Harmful? The Therapeutic Potential of Medications with Varying Degrees of Abuse Liability in the Treatment of Substance Use Disorders

Purpose of Review

This review summarizes recent clinical trial research on pharmacological treatments for substance use disorders, with a specific focus on agents with potential abuse liability.

Recent Findings

Pharmacological treatments for substance use disorders may include gabapentinoids, baclofen, modafinil, ketamine, cannabinoids, gamma-hydroxybutyrate, and psychedelics. Gabapentinoids may decrease negative subjective effects of withdrawal in alcohol and cannabis use disorders. Cannabinoids similarly appear to decrease use and withdrawal symptoms in cannabis use disorder, while research shows stimulant medications may reduce cravings and increase abstinence in cocaine use disorder. Ketamine and psychedelics may help treat multiple substance use disorders. Ketamine may reduce withdrawal symptoms, promote abstinence, and diminish cravings in alcohol and cocaine use disorders and psychedelics may promote remission, decrease use, and reduce cravings in alcohol and opioid use disorders.

Summary

Regardless of current regulatory approval statuses and potentials for abuse, multiple agents should not be dismissed prematurely as possible treatments for substance use disorders. However, further clinical research is needed before effective implementation can begin in practice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40429-022-00432-9.

Analysis of Stimulant Prescriptions and Drug-Related Poisoning Risk Among Persons Receiving Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

IMPORTANCE

Stimulant medication use is common among individuals receiving buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). Associations between prescription stimulant use and treatment outcomes in this population have been understudied.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether use of prescription stimulants was associated with (1) drug-related poisoning and (2) buprenorphine treatment retention.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective, recurrent-event cohort study with a case-crossover design used a secondary analysis of administrative claims data from IBM MarketScan Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid databases from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2016. Primary analyses were conducted from March 1 through August 31, 2021. Individuals aged 12 to 64 years with an OUD diagnosis and prescribed buprenorphine who experienced at least 1 drug-related poisoning were included in the analysis. Unit of observation was the person-day.

EXPOSURES

Days of active stimulant prescriptions.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were drug-related poisoning and buprenorphine treatment retention. Drug-related poisonings were defined using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, codes; treatment retention was defined by continuous treatment claims until a 45-day gap was observed.

RESULTS

There were 13 778 567 person-days of observation time among 22 946 individuals (mean [SD] age, 32.8 [11.8] years; 50.3% men) who experienced a drug-related poisoning. Stimulant treatment days were associated with 19% increased odds of drug-related poisoning (odds ratio [OR], 1.19 [95% CI, 1.06-1.34]) compared with nontreatment days; buprenorphine treatment days were associated with 38% decreased odds of poisoning (OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.59-0.65]). There were no significant interaction effects between use of stimulants and buprenorphine. Stimulant treatment days were associated with decreased odds of attrition from buprenorphine treatment (OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.59-0.70]), indicating that stimulants were associated with 36% longer mean exposure to buprenorphine and its concomitant protection.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among persons with OUD, use of prescription stimulants was associated with a modest increase in per-day risk of drug-related poisoning, but this risk was offset by the association between stimulant use and improved retention to buprenorphine treatment, which is associated with protection against overdose.

Extended-release methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a psychiatric diagnosis increasingly used in adults. The recommended first-line pharmacological treatment is central nervous system (CNS) stimulants, such as methylphenidate, but uncertainty remains about its benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of extended-release formulations of methylphenidate in adults diagnosed with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases and four clinical trial registries up to February 2021. We searched 12 drug regulatory databases for clinical trial data up to 13 May 2020. In addition, we cross-referenced all available trial identifiers, handsearched reference lists, searched pharmaceutical company databases, and contacted trial authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trials comparing extended-release methylphenidate formulations at any dose versus placebo and other ADHD medications in adults diagnosed with ADHD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data. We assessed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs), and rating scales and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs). We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess risks of bias, and GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We meta-analysed the data using a random-effects model. We assessed three design characteristics that may impair the trial results' 'generalisability'; exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidity; responder selection based on previous experience with CNS stimulants; and risk of withdrawal effects. Our prespecified primary outcomes were functional outcomes, self-rated ADHD symptoms, and serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes included quality of life, ADHD symptoms rated by investigators and by peers such as family members, cardiovascular variables, severe psychiatric adverse events, and other adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 trials (5066 participants), of which 21 reported outcome data for this review. We also identified one ongoing study. We included documents from six drug regulatory agencies covering eight trials. Twenty-one trials had an outpatient setting and three were conducted in prisons. They were primarily conducted in North America and Europe. The median participant age was 36 years. Twelve trials (76% of participants) were industry-sponsored, four (14% of participants) were publicly funded with industry involvement, seven (10% of participants) were publicly funded, and one had unclear funding. The median trial duration was eight weeks. One trial was rated at overall unclear risk of bias and 20 trials were rated at overall high risk of bias, primarily due to unclear blinding of participants and investigators, attrition bias, and selective outcome reporting. All trials were impaired in at least one of the three design characteristics related to 'generalisability'; for example, they excluded participants with psychiatric comorbidity such as depression or anxiety, or included participants only with a previous positive response to methylphenidate, or similar drugs. This may limit the trials' usefulness for clinical practice, as they may overestimate the benefits and underestimate the harms. Extended-release methylphenidate versus placebo (up to 26 weeks) For the primary outcomes, we found very low-certainty evidence that methylphenidate had no effect on 'days missed at work' at 13-week follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.15 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.11 to 1.81; 1 trial, 409 participants) or serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.43, CI 95% CI 0.85 to 2.43; 14 trials, 4078 participants), whereas methylphenidate improved self-rated ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.30; 16 trials, 3799 participants). For secondary outcomes, we found very low-certainty evidence that methylphenidate improved self-rated quality of life (small effect; SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05; 6 trials, 1888 participants), investigator-rated ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.36; 18 trials, 4183 participants), ADHD symptoms rated by peers such as family members (small-to-moderate effect; SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.14; 3 trials, 1005 participants), and increased the risk of experiencing any adverse event (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.37; 14 trials, 4214 participants). We rated the certainty of the evidence as 'very low' for all outcomes, primarily due to high risk of bias and 'indirectness of the evidence'. One trial (419 participants) had follow-up at 52 weeks and two trials (314 participants) included active comparators, hence long-term and comparative evidence is limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low-certainty evidence that extended-release methylphenidate compared to placebo improved ADHD symptoms (small-to-moderate effects) measured on rating scales reported by participants, investigators, and peers such as family members. Methylphenidate had no effect on 'days missed at work' or serious adverse events, the effect on quality of life was small, and it increased the risk of several adverse effects. We rated the certainty of the evidence as 'very low' for all outcomes, due to high risk of bias, short trial durations, and limitations to the generalisability of the results. The benefits and harms of extended-release methylphenidate therefore remain uncertain.

Comparison of Treatments for Cocaine Use Disorder Among Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

In the US and the United Kingdom, cocaine use is the second leading cause of illicit drug overdose death. Psychosocial treatments for cocaine use disorder are limited, and no pharmacotherapy is approved for use in the US or Europe.

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatments for active cocaine use among adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for clinical trials published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

This meta-analysis was registered on Covidence.org (study 8731) on December 31, 2015. Clinical trials were included if they (1) had the term cocaine in the article title; (2) were published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017; (3) were written in English; (4) enrolled outpatients 18 years or older with active cocaine use at baseline; and (5) reported treatment group size, treatment duration, retention rates, and urinalysis results for the presence of cocaine metabolites. A study was excluded if (1) more than 25% of participants were not active cocaine users or more than 80% of participants had negative test results for the presence of cocaine metabolites at baseline and (2) it reported only pooled urinalysis results indicating the presence of multiple substances and did not report the specific proportion of positive test results for cocaine metabolites. Multiple reviewers reached criteria consensus. Of 831 records screened, 157 studies (18.9%) met selection criteria and were included in the analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Search results were imported from PubMed XML into Covidence.org then Microsoft Excel. Data extraction was completed in 2 iterations to ensure fidelity. Analyses included a multilevel random-effects model, a multilevel mixed-effects meta-regression model, and sensitivity analyses. Treatments were clustered into 11 categories (psychotherapy, contingency management programs, placebo, opioids, psychostimulants, anticonvulsants, dopamine agonists, antidepressants, antipsychotics, miscellaneous medications, and other therapies). Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations. The significance threshold for all analyses was P = .05. Data were analyzed using the metafor and mice packages in R software, version 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Data were analyzed from January 1, 2018, to February 28, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the intention-to-treat logarithm of the odds ratio (OR) of having a negative urinalysis result for the presence of cocaine metabolites at the end of each treatment period compared with baseline. The hypothesis, which was formulated after data collection, was that no treatment category would have a significant association with objective reductions in cocaine use.

RESULTS

A total of 157 studies comprising 402 treatment groups and 15 842 participants were included. Excluding other therapies, the largest treatment groups across all studies were psychotherapy (mean [SD] number of participants, 40.04 [36.88]) and contingency management programs (mean [SD] number of participants, 37.51 [25.51]). Only contingency management programs were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of having a negative test result for the presence of cocaine (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.62-2.80), and this association remained significant in all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis, contingency management programs were associated with reductions in cocaine use among adults. Research efforts and policies that align with this treatment modality may benefit those who actively use cocaine and attenuate societal burdens.

Pharmacotherapeutic strategies for treating cocaine use disorder-what do we have to offer?

BACKGROUND

Cocaine use contines to be a significant public health problem world-wide. However, despite substantial research efforts, no pharmacotherapies are approved for the treatment of cocaine use disorder (CUD).

ARGUMENT

Studies have identified positive signals for a range of medications for treating CUD. These include long-acting amphetamine formulations, modafinil, topiramate, doxazosin and combined topiramate and mixed amphetamine salts extended-release (MAS-ER). However, valid conclusions about a medication's clinical efficacy require nuanced approaches that take into account behavioural phenotypes of the target population (frequency of use, co-abuse of cocaine and other substances, genetic subgroups, psychiatric comorbidity), variables related to the medication (dose, short-/long-acting formulations, titration speed, medication adherence) and other factors that may affect treatment outcomes. Meta-analyses frequently do not account for these co-varying factors, which contributes to a somewhat nihilistic view on pharmacotherapeutic options for CUD. In addition, the predominant focus on abstinence, which is difficult for most patients to achieve, may overshadow more nuanced therapeutic signals.

CONCLUSION

While there is an emphasis on finding new medications with novel mechanisms of action for treating CUD, currently available medications deserve further investigation based on the existing literature. Evaluating refined metrics of treatment success in well-defined subgroups of patients, and further exploring combination therapies and their synergy with behavioural/psychosocial interventions, are promising avenues to establishing effective therapies for CUD.

Cabergoline in Treatment of Methamphetamine-Dependent Patients and Its Effect on Serum Level of Glial Cell-Derived Neurotrophic Factor: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Methamphetamine use disorder is an important public health problem, especially in the younger generation, and associated with various psychiatric, cognitive, social, economic, and legal issues. Cabergoline, a drug with dopaminergic properties and long half-life, has been considered for the treatment of stimulant dependence. The systemic use of cabergoline has been shown to increase glial cell-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) expression.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we investigated the effects of cabergoline on the serum level of GDNF and its effect on abstaining from methamphetamine in individuals treated for methamphetamine use disorder.

METHOD

Sixty male subjects with methamphetamine use disorder were randomly assigned to 2 groups receiving cabergoline and placebo, respectively. During a 12-week follow-up, we compared the serum level of GDNF, urine test results for methamphetamine use, and depression scale between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

We found that serum GDNF was lower in subjects who used methamphetamine than healthy subjects (p < 0.0001). However, the serum level of GDNF was not associated with cabergoline use. The rising number of cases testing positive in the placebo group showed a trend resulting in no significant difference between cases testing positive and negative (p = 0.585) at the end of week 12. In the verum group, however, the significantly high number of cases who tested negative - sober - for substances observed in early stages (weeks 7-8) continued to remain significantly higher till the end of the study (p = 0.043), resembling an association between treatment with cabergoline and remaining sober. Although reduced during treatment, recovery from depression was not associated with cabergoline treatment.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study confirmed the effect of cabergoline in reducing methamphetamine use. However, a serum level of the GDNF increase, as seen in animal studies, was not associated with cabergoline treatment of human subjects. This study was registered at the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (TRN:IRCT2015050422077N1, October 06, 2015, https://en.irct.ir/trial/19134).

Acute methylphenidate administration reduces cocaine-cue attentional bias

Mechanistic research on behavioral processes underlying substance use disorder might help identify novel targets for interventions development. Drug-related attentional bias and response inhibition deficits have received a great deal of consideration in substance use research, broadly, and cocaine use research, specifically. Studies investigating pharmacological mechanisms that may ameliorate, or further impair, these behaviors relevant to cocaine use are relatively lacking. This study evaluated the impact of acute administration of methylphenidate, a dopamine-favoring reuptake inhibitor, on both gaze-related cocaine-cue-attentional bias and cocaine-cue related disruptions in response inhibition among individuals with cocaine use disorder. Participants (N = 12; 33% female) completed a within-subject, outpatient, acute dosing study. Two sessions were completed in which methylphenidate (60 mg) or placebo were administered followed by completion of an attentional bias task using eye-tracking technology and neutral-cue and cocaine-cue response inhibition tasks. Subjective and physiological effects were also recorded. Significant cocaine cue attentional bias and response inhibition failures were observed during placebo administration. Acute methylphenidate administration reduced cocaine-cue attentional bias as measured by cocaine-cue gaze fixations (d_z = 1.04; Bayes Factor = 12.37). No statistically significant effects of methylphenidate were observed on response inhibition (Bayes Factors = 0.17-1.04). Methylphenidate produced prototypical subjective and physiological effects. Although the small sample should be considered, these findings indicate acute manipulation of dopaminergic activity reduced cue-related attentional allocation related to cocaine use disorder. Future research evaluating alternative dopaminergic agents and applications within a clinical setting are needed to determine the clinical significance of targeting this neurobehavioral mechanism.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Treatment of Substance Use Disorder in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Treating substance use disorder (SUD) in patients with co-occurring attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and SUD may lower medical, psychiatric, and social complications. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to investigate the clinical benefits of pharmacological interventions to treat SUD in patients with ADHD.

METHODS

Articles were searched on Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EBSCO, Google Scholar, Embase, Web of Science, and Ovid MEDLINE from 1971 to 2020. Data for SUD treatment as primary study endpoints and ADHD symptoms management as secondary outcomes were synthesized using random-effects model meta-analysis. Studies (N = 17) were included. The principal measure of effect size was the standardized mean difference (SMD). PROSPERO registration: CRD42020171646.

RESULTS

The pooled effect of pharmacological interventions compared with placebo was small for the reduction in substance use (SMD = 0.405, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.252, 0.557], P < .001), abstinence (SMD = 0.328, 95% CI: [0.149, 0.507], P < .001), craving (SMD = 0.274, 95% CI: [0.103, 0.446], P = .002), and the reduction in the frequency of ADHD symptoms (SMD = 0.420, 95% CI: [0.259, 0.582], P < .001). The pooled effect was moderate for the management of withdrawal symptoms (SMD = 0.577, 95% CI: [0.389, 0.764], P = .001]) and the decrease in the severity of ADHD symptoms (SMD = 0.533, 95% CI: [0.393, 0.672], P < .001).

CONCLUSION AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

The magnitude of benefits for pharmacological interventions varies. Despite some limitations, it was positive. This meta-analysis is the first to appraise the benefits of medications to treat SUD in ADHD. It is the groundwork for treatment and risk mitigation. (Am J Addict 2020;00:00-00).

Pharmacologic treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 3% of adults globally. Many pharmacologic treatments options exist, yet the comparative benefits and harms of individual treatments are largely unknown. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the relative effects of individual pharmacologic treatments for adults with ADHD.

Methods

We searched English-language published and grey literature sources for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving pharmacologic treatment of ADHD in adults (December 2018). The primary outcome was clinical response; secondary outcomes were quality of life, executive function, driving behaviour, withdrawals due to adverse events, treatment discontinuation, serious adverse events, hospitalization, cardiovascular adverse events, and emergency department visits. Data were pooled via pair-wise meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed by use of Cochrane’s Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by use of the GRADE framework.

Results

Eighty-one unique trials that reported at least one outcome of interest were included, most of which were at high or unclear risk of at least one important source of bias. Notably, only 5 RCTs were deemed at overall low risk of bias. Included pharmacotherapies were methylphenidate, atomoxetine, dexamfetamine, lisdexamfetamine, guanfacine, bupropion, mixed amphetamine salts, and modafinil. As a class, ADHD pharmacotherapy improved patient- and clinician-reported clinical response compared with placebo (range: 4 to 15 RCTs per outcome); however, these findings were not conserved when the analyses were restricted to studies at low risk of bias, and the certainty of the finding is very low. There were few differences among individual medications, although atomoxetine was associated with improved patient-reported clinical response and quality of life compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of serious adverse events or treatment discontinuation between ADHD pharmacotherapies and placebo; however, the proportion of participants who withdrew due to adverse events was significantly higher among participants who received any ADHD pharmacotherapy. Few RCTs reported on the occurrence of adverse events over a long treatment duration.

Conclusions

Overall, despite a class effect of improving clinical response relative to placebo, there were few differences among the individual ADHD pharmacotherapies, and most studies were at risk of at least one important source of bias. Furthermore, the certainty of the evidence was very low to low for all outcomes, and there was limited reporting of long-term adverse events. As such, the choice between ADHD pharmacotherapies may depend on individual patient considerations, and future studies should assess the long-term effects of individual pharmacotherapies on patient-important outcomes, including quality of life, in robust blinded RCTs.

Registration

PROSPERO no. CRD 42015026049

Prescription psychostimulants for the treatment of stimulant use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

RATIONALE

Agonist-based pharmacologic intervention is an accepted approach in treatment of opioid and tobacco use disorders.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate usefulness of an agonist approach as treatment of (psycho)stimulant use disorder (PSUD).

METHODS

We reviewed PubMed/Medline, LILACS, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases searching for randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design studies evaluating outcomes of individuals treated for cocaine- or amphetamine-type substance use disorder. We combined results of all trials that included the following prescription psychostimulants (PPs): modafinil, methylphenidate, or amphetamines (mixed amphetamine salts, lisdexamphetamine, and dextroamphetamine). The combined sample consisted of 2889 patients. Outcomes of interest included the following: drug abstinence (defined as 2-3 weeks of sustained abstinence and the average maximum days of consecutive abstinence), percentage of drug-negative urine tests across trial, and retention in treatment. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and assessed quality of evidence using the GRADE system.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight trials were included. Treatment with PPs increases rates of sustained abstinence [risk ratio (RR) = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) = (1.10, 1.92)] and duration of abstinence [mean difference (MD) = 3.34, 95% CI = (1.06, 5.62)] in patients with PSUD, particularly those with cocaine use disorder (very low-quality evidence). Prescription amphetamines were particularly efficacious in promoting sustained abstinence in patients with cocaine use disorder [RR = 2.44, 95% CI = (1.66, 3.58)], and higher doses of PPs were particularly efficacious for treatment of cocaine use disorder [RR = 1.95, 95% CI = (1.38, 2.77)] (moderate-quality evidence). Treatment with prescription amphetamines also yielded more cocaine-negative urines [MD = 8.37%, 95% CI = (3.75, 12.98)]. There was no effect of PPs on the retention in treatment.

CONCLUSION

Prescription psychostimulants, particularly prescription amphetamines given in robust doses, have a clinically significant beneficial effect to promote abstinence in the treatment of individuals with PSUD, specifically the population with cocaine use disorder.

Prediction of drop-out and outcome in integrated cognitive behavioral therapy for ADHD and SUD: Results from a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with substance use disorder (SUD) or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have a high risk of drop out from treatment. Few studies have investigated predictors of therapy drop out and outcome in SUD patients with comorbid ADHD. Recently, integrated cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT/Integrated) was shown to be more effective than standard CBT (CBT/SUD) in the treatment of SUD + ADHD.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of demographic, clinical and neurocognitive variables with drop-out and treatment outcome, and to examine which of these variables are suitable for patient-treatment matching.

METHODS

We performed an RCT in which 119 patients were allocated to CBT/Integrated (n = 60) or CBT/SUD (n = 59). In addition, 55 patients had dropped out before randomization. Demographic variables, clinical characteristics and measures of cognitive functioning (Stroop, Tower of London (ToL) and Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART)) were included as predictors. Outcome measures were: early treatment drop-out, ADHD symptom severity, and substance use severity at end of treatment and follow up.

RESULTS

Primary substance of abuse (drugs as opposed to alcohol only) and lower accuracy scores on the ToL were significant predictors of early treatment drop-out. Having more depression and anxiety symptoms and using ADHD medication at baseline significantly predicted more ADHD symptoms at end of treatment, and higher accuracy scores on the ToL significantly predicted higher substance use at end of treatment. No significant predictor-by-treatment interactions were found.

CONCLUSION

The results add to the existing realization that also relatively mild cognitive deficits are a risk factor for treatment drop-out in these patients.

Methylphenidate for Attention-Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder in Adult Patients With Substance Use Disorders: Good Clinical Practice

Attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a widespread neurodevelopmental disorder in children and adolescents, persisting into adulthood in a majority of them. ADHD and substance use disorders (SUDs) commonly co-occur in the clinical adult population. The higher-than-normal prevalence rates of SUDs in people with ADHD indicate increased risk for developing SUD. This narrative review deals with the question of whether or not adults with both disorders should be treated with methylphenidate (MPH), addressing specific issues surrounding this form of treatment. MPH is considered as first-line pharmacotherapy for ADHD. However, because of its stimulant-like reinforcing properties, MPH has a significant addictive potential to which persons with SUDs are especially susceptible. Appropriate treatment is therefore complex. Because of concerns about misuse and diversion of MPH medication, clinicians may be reluctant to use MPH to manage ADHD symptoms in these patients. However, it is essential to diagnose and treat ADHD adequately as appropriate therapy reduces the impairments, as well as the risk of developing comorbid disorders and poor treatment response. MPH should not be deprived of these patients because of the risk for misuse, especially as several strategies can be applied to minimize this risk. To conclude, carefully applied guideline-based diagnostics to clarify the potential presence of ADHD as well as a responsible prescription practice in a well-defined therapeutic setting with reliable monitoring of medication intake and regular consultations are essential conditions for a safe and proficient MPH treatment of ADHD in patients with SUD.

Interventions with potential to target executive function deficits in addiction: current state of the literature

The inability to stop or reduce substance use despite motivation to do so is thought to result, in part, from self-control failure and can be understood within the framework of dual process models of addiction. These models view addictive behavior as the relative balance between automatic impulses and executive decision processes. This review focuses on treatments that aim to improve executive decision processes which often become dysregulated and ineffective in individuals with substance use disorders. It is posited that improving these executive function deficits should restore control over automatic impulses and drug seeking behavior.

Methylphenidate effects on processing speed in a clinical sample of adults with ADHD and substance use disorder: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are common comorbidities of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The most commonly prescribed medication for ADHD is methylphenidate. The clinical response to methylphenidate may be monitored against DSM-5 symptomatology, rating scales or interviews.

AIMS

To evaluate the use of perceptual and cognitive processing speed measures to monitor methylphenidate effects in adults with ADHD and SUD.

METHODS

A Quick Test of Cognitive Speed (AQT) monitored perceptual and cognitive processing speed in 28 adults with ADHD and SUD on treatment with methylphenidate before and after the morning dose.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients responded on AQT after the morning dose of methylphenidate. One-way ANOVA indicated significant treatment effects for color, form, and color-form combination naming, but not for shift cost values. Before the morning dose of methylphenidate, 92% were identified by cutoff time criteria for longer-than-normal processing times. After the morning dose of methylphenidate, 65% obtained color and form measures in the normal range for age peers. Only 35% obtained color-form processing measures in the normal range. Inter-individual response variability before medication intake was considerably larger than previously reported in studies of adults with ADHD only.

CONCLUSION

Proportionally, fewer adults with ADHD and SUD exhibited normalization of processing speed than previously observed for adults with ADHD without SUD. A potential clinical implication of the present study is that the AQT test may be used as a tool for dose-adjustment of central stimulants in the treatment of adults with ADHD and SUD.

Pharmacotherapeutic strategies for the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity (ADHD) disorder with comorbid substance-use disorder (SUD)

INTRODUCTION

Substance use disorder (SUD) is very common amongst patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The two disorders share partially overlapping features and SUD in ADHD is characterized by an early age of onset, high likelihood of poly-substance use, increased risk of suicide attempts, more hospitalizations, and scarce treatment adherence.

AREAS COVERED

This paper reviews randomized active comparator-controlled or placebo-controlled trials evaluating the use of pharmacotherapy in patients with ADHD and SUD. The authors include open label and observational studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Stimulant and non-stimulant treatments should be used to aid ADHD symptomatology in patients with SUD. SUD seems to be less responsive, suggesting a relative independence of the two conditions. For this reason, the association of ADHD-specific drugs and SUD-treatments should be recommended in a large proportion of patients suffering from both disorders. The rate and the quality of ADHD response to specific pharmacological treatments is highly variable, depending on the dose and the duration of the treatment, the age of the patient, and the severity and the chronicity of addiction. Further research is necessary to explore the divergences in treatment response of different ADHD subtypes in different subtypes of SUD.

How treatment improvement in ADHD and cocaine dependence are related to one another: A secondary analysis

BACKGROUND

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is overrepresented among individuals seeking treatment for substance use disorders. We previously reported that treatment with extended release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-XR) increased abstinence, compared to placebo, among patients with co-occurring ADHD and cocaine dependence. This secondary analysis investigates the temporal relationship between ADHD improvement and cocaine abstinence in the first six weeks of the trial.

METHODS

The study was a three-arm, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, 14-week trial comparing MAS-XR (60 mg or 80 mg daily) versus placebo among 126 participants with ADHD and cocaine dependence. An autoregressive cross-lagged structural equation model was fit and evaluated weekly ADHD improvement (defined as ≥30% reduction in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale) and urine-confirmed abstinence over the first six weeks.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with each of the possible overall patterns of response was: ADHD improves before cocaine abstinence: 24%; Cocaine abstinence occurs before ADHD improvement: 12%; ADHD improvement and abstinence occur during the same week: 6%; ADHD improves but abstinence never achieved: 34%; Abstinence achieved but ADHD never improves: 6%; Neither ADHD improvement nor abstinence: 18%. A significant cross-lagged association was found; subjects with ADHD improvement at week 2 had significantly higher odds of cocaine abstinence at week 3 (p = .014).

CONCLUSION

When treating co-occurring ADHD and cocaine dependence with stimulant medication, abstinence is most likely preceded by improvement in ADHD, which tends to occur early with medication treatment. Other observed temporal patterns suggest the potential complexity of the relationship between ADHD and cocaine dependence.

Behavioral economic analysis of the effects of N-substituted benztropine analogs on cocaine self-administration in rats

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Benztropine (BZT) analogs and other atypical dopamine uptake inhibitors selectively decrease cocaine self-administration at doses that do not affect responding maintained by other reinforcers. Those effects were further characterized in the current study using a behavioral economic assessment of how response requirement (price) affects reinforcers obtained (consumption) in rats.

METHODS

Two groups of rats were trained to press levers with food (45-mg pellet) or cocaine (0.32 mg/kg/injection) reinforcement under fixed-ratio (FR) 5-response schedules. In selected sessions, the FR requirement was increased (5-80) during successive 20-min components to determine demand curves, which plot consumption against price. An exponential function was fitted to the data to derive the consumption at zero price (Q ₀) and the rate of decrease in consumption (essential value, EV) with increased price. The BZT analogs, AHN1-055, AHN2-005, JHW007 (3.2-10 or 17.8 mg/kg, each), vehicle, or comparison drugs (methylphenidate, ketamine), were administered i.p. before selected demand-curve determinations.

RESULTS

Consumption of cocaine or food decreased with increased FR requirement. Each drug shifted the demand curve rightward at the lowest doses and leftward/downward at higher doses. The effects on EV and Q ₀ were greater for cocaine than for food-reinforced responding. Additionally, the effects of the BZT analogs on EV and Q ₀ were greater than those obtained with a standard dopamine transport inhibitor, methylphenidate, and the NMDA antagonist, ketamine (1.0-10.0 mg/kg, each). With these latter drugs, the demand-curve parameters were affected similarly with cocaine and food-maintained responding.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings, obtained using a behavioral economic assessment, suggest that BZT analogs selectively decrease the reinforcing effectiveness of cocaine.

Managing attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults using illicit psychostimulants: A systematic review

CONTEXT

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and stimulant use disorder commonly co-exist, and appropriate treatments have not been well established.

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidance for treatment of co-existing attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and stimulant use disorder.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of published English articles using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane, utilising consistent search terms.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials, comparing any treatment arm with a control group, for participants meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or equivalent criteria for both attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and stimulant use disorder.

RESULTS

Eight trials were identified for inclusion in this review. Four of eight studies showed improvement in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder outcome measures compared with placebo. Two of six studies that reported substance use outcomes showed improvement in treatment arms compared with placebo. Studies to show effect tended to be those with the highest treatment dosage.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for the efficacy of treatment of patients with comorbid stimulant use disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is limited. Promising outcomes need replication in further studies utilising higher treatment dosage.

Evaluation of the "Pipeline" for Development of Medications for Cocaine Use Disorder: A Review of Translational Preclinical, Human Laboratory, and Clinical Trial Research

Cocaine use disorder is a persistent public health problem for which no widely effective medications exist. Self-administration procedures, which have shown good predictive validity in estimating the abuse potential of drugs, have been used in rodent, nonhuman primate, and human laboratory studies to screen putative medications. This review assessed the effectiveness of the medications development process regarding pharmacotherapies for cocaine use disorder. The primary objective was to determine whether data from animal and human laboratory self-administration studies predicted the results of clinical trials. In addition, the concordance between laboratory studies in animals and humans was assessed. More than 100 blinded, randomized, fully placebo-controlled studies of putative medications for cocaine use disorder were identified. Of the 64 drugs tested in these trials, only 10 had been examined in both human and well-controlled animal laboratory studies. Within all three stages, few studies had been conducted for each drug and when multiple studies had been conducted conclusions were sometimes contradictory. Overall, however, there was good concordance between animal and human laboratory results when the former assessed chronic drug treatment. Although only seven of the ten reviewed drugs showed fully concordant results across all three types of studies reviewed, the analysis revealed several subject-related, procedural, and environmental factors that differ between the laboratory and clinical trial settings that help explain the disagreement for other drugs. The review closes with several recommendations to enhance translation and communication across stages of the medications development process that will ultimately speed the progress toward effective pharmacotherapeutic strategies for cocaine use disorder.

Pharmacological Treatment of ADHD in Addicted Patients: What Does the Literature Tell Us?

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Evaluate pharmacologic treatment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in patients with substance use disorder (SUD) • Assess the causes of the diminished efficacy of ADHD medication in patients with comorbid SUD OBJECTIVE: Substance use disorder (SUD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) frequently co-occur, and the presence of ADHD complicates the treatment of the addiction. Pharmacotherapy is a potent intervention in childhood and adult ADHD, but findings have been mixed in adolescent and adult ADHD patients with SUDs. This review focuses on several contributing factors and possible explanations, with implications both for future research and for clinical practice.

METHOD

This systematic review examined all randomized, placebo-controlled trials of pharmacotherapy for ADHD in adult and adolescent SUD patients.

RESULTS

The number of studies is limited, and several studies are hampered by qualitative flaws. The results, in general, are inconclusive for most medications studied, but more recent trials using psychostimulants in robust dosing have demonstrated significantly positive results.

CONCLUSION

In reviewing these trials, possible explanations relating to the particular characteristics and problems of this complex patient group are discussed. Several factors, including ADHD symptom severity, psychiatric comorbidity, persistent drug use, choice of medication, and concomitant psychosocial intervention, influence study results. Taking these factors into account may improve the likelihood of detecting significant effects in future research, as the recent positive trials have indicated, and may help in the appropriate selection of pharmacotherapy in clinical practice.

Treatment-refractory substance use disorder: Focus on alcohol, opioids, and cocaine

Substance use disorders are common, but only a small minority of patients receive adequate treatment. Although psychosocial therapies are effective, relapse is common. This review focusses on novel pharmacological and other treatments for patients with alcohol, opioid, or cocaine use disorders who do not respond to conventional treatments. Disulfiram, acamprosate, and the opioid antagonist naltrexone have been approved for the treatment of alcoholism. A novel, "as needed" approach is the use of the mu-opioid antagonist and partial kappa agonist nalmefene to reduce alcohol consumption. Other novel pharmacological approaches include the GABA-B receptor agonist baclofen, anticonvulsants such as topiramate and gabapentin, the partial nicotine receptor agonist varenicline, and other drugs. For opioid dependence, opioid agonist therapy with methadone or buprenorphine is the first-line treatment option. Other options include oral or depot naltrexone, morphine sulfate, depot or implant formulations, and heroin (diacetylmorphine) in treatment-refractory patients. To date, no pharmacological treatment has been approved for cocaine addiction; however, 3 potential pharmacological treatments are being studied, disulfiram, methylphenidate, and modafinil. Pharmacogenetic approaches may help to optimize treatment response in otherwise treatment-refractory patients and to identify which patients are more likely to respond to treatment, and neuromodulation techniques such as repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation also may play a role in the treatment of substance use disorders. Although no magic bullet is in sight for treatment-refractory patients, some novel medications and brain stimulation techniques have the potential to enrich treatment options at least for some patients.

Cooccurring Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders

Research shows that the majority of adolescents with substance use disorders also have other cooccurring psychiatric disorders, which has been associated with poorer treatment outcomes. Despite considerable consensus that treatment of cooccurring disorders should be integrated or concurrent, most such youth do not receive it. In addition to systemic and economic barriers, few studies have been conducted that inform evidence-based integrated treatment approaches. This article provides a review of current research from which empirically derived principles of integrated treatment can originate and which have informed the development of at least one evidence-based model of integrated mental health and substance treatment.

Psychostimulant drugs for cocaine dependence

BACKGROUND

Cocaine dependence is a severe disorder for which no medication has been approved. Like opioids for heroin dependence, replacement therapy with psychostimulants could be an effective therapy for treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychostimulants for cocaine abuse and dependence. Specific outcomes include sustained cocaine abstinence and retention in treatment. We also studied the influence of type of drug and comorbid disorders on psychostimulant efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

This is an update of the review previously published in 2010. For this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO up to 15 February 2016. We handsearched references of obtained articles and consulted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised parallel group controlled clinical trials comparing the efficacy of a psychostimulant drug versus placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 studies involving 2366 participants. The included studies assessed nine drugs: bupropion, dexamphetamine, lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate, modafinil, mazindol, methamphetamine, mixed amphetamine salts and selegiline. We did not consider any study to be at low risk of bias for all domains included in the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. Attrition bias was the most frequently suspected potential source of bias of the included studies. We found very low quality evidence that psychostimulants improved sustained cocaine abstinence (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.77, P = 0.02), but they did not reduce cocaine use (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.33) among participants who continued to use it. Furthermore, we found moderate quality evidence that psychostimulants did not improve retention in treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06). The proportion of adverse event-induced dropouts and cardiovascular adverse event-induced dropouts was similar for psychostimulants and placebo (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, respectively). When we included the type of drug as a moderating variable, the proportion of patients achieving sustained cocaine abstinence was higher with bupropion and dexamphetamine than with placebo. Psychostimulants also appeared to increase the proportion of patients achieving sustained cocaine and heroin abstinence amongst methadone-maintained, dual heroin-cocaine addicts. Retention to treatment was low, though, so our results may be compromised by attrition bias. We found no evidence of publication bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found mixed results. Psychostimulants improved cocaine abstinence compared to placebo in some analyses but did not improve treatment retention. Since treatment dropout was high, we cannot rule out the possibility that these results were influenced by attrition bias. Existing evidence does not clearly demonstrate the efficacy of any pharmacological treatment for cocaine dependence, but substitution treatment with psychostimulants appears promising and deserves further investigation.

Medications between psychiatric and addictive disorders

INTRODUCTION

Many epidemiological studies have revealed a frequent co-occurrence of psychiatric and substance use disorders. The term used in the literature to refer to this co-occurrence is dual diagnosis. The high prevalence of dual diagnosis has led physicians to observe the effects of medication prescribed to treat psychiatric disorders on the co-occurring substance use disorder and vice versa. The concept of medications between psychiatric and addictive disorders stems from these clinical observations, alongside which, however, it has developed from the observation that both psychiatric and substance use disorders share common neurobiological pathways and trigger common cognitive disorders. This has led researchers to develop medications on the basis of neurobiological and cognitive rationales.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

In our article, we review peculiar medications based on neurobiological and cognitive rationales and that have an impact in both psychiatric and addictive disorders.

RESULTS

We highlight how interesting these new prescriptions are for clinical observation and for the treatment of patients suffering from dual diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

We then go on to discuss the interest in them from the perspective of clinical practice and clinical research, in that the development of medications to treat dual diagnosis helps to further our knowledge of both psychiatric and substance use disorders.

Cognitive behavioural therapy for ADHD in adults: systematic review and meta-analyses

Systematically review and analyse the efficacy of CBT versus treatment as usual in adults with ADHD. The literature was systematically searched ending the 28 March 2014. Standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. CBT was efficacious in reducing symptoms of ADHD (SDM -1.0, 95% CI -1.5 to -0.5) when evaluated by the patients, but not when evaluated by a clinician. Symptoms of depression and anxiety were significantly reduced when self-reported (SMD -1.0, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.5 and -1.0, 95% CI -1.3 to -0.3, respectively) and evaluated by a clinician (SMD -0.9, 95% CI -1.7 to -0.2 and -0.9, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.1). The clinical global impression scores improved more in the group randomised to CBT (-1.0; 95% CI -1.6 to -0.4). CBT seems efficacious in some domains affecting adult patients with ADHD, but needs further evaluation.

Cognitive Function as a Transdiagnostic Treatment Target in Stimulant Use Disorders

Stimulant use disorder is an important public health problem, with an estimated 2.1 million current users in the United States alone. No pharmacological treatments are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for stimulant use disorder and behavioral treatments have variable efficacy and limited availability. Most individuals with stimulant use disorder have other comorbidities, most with overlapping symptoms and cognitive impairments. The goal of this article is to present a rationale for cognition as a treatment target in stimulant use disorder and to outline potential treatment approaches. Rates of lifetime comorbid psychiatric disorders among people with stimulant use disorders are estimated at 65% to 73%, with the most common being mood disorders (13% to 64%) and anxiety disorders (21% to 50%), as well as non-substance-induced psychotic disorders (<10%). There are several models of addictive behavior, but the dual process model particularly highlights the relevance of cognitive impairments and biases to the development and maintenance of addiction. This model explains addictive behavior as a balance between automatic processes and executive control, which in turn are related to individual (genetics, comorbid disorders, psychosocial factors) and other (craving, triggers, drug use) factors. Certain cognitive impairments, such as attentional bias and approach bias, are most relevant to automatic processes, while sustained attention, response inhibition, and working memory are primarily related to executive control. These cognitive impairments and biases are also common in disorders frequently comorbid with stimulant use disorder and predict poor treatment retention and clinical outcomes. As such, they may serve as feasible transdiagnostic treatment targets. There are promising pharmacological, cognitive, and behavioral approaches that aim to enhance cognitive function. Pharmacotherapies target cognitive impairments associated with executive control and include cholinesterase inhibitors (e.g., galantamine, rivastigmine) and monoamine transporter inhibitors (e.g., modafinil, methylphenidate). Cognitive behavioral therapy and cognitive rehabilitation also enhance executive control, while cognitive bias modification targets impairments associated with automatic processes. Cognitive enhancement to improve treatment outcomes is a novel and promising strategy, but its clinical value for the treatment of stimulant use disorder, with or without other psychiatric comorbidities, remains to be determined in future studies.

Efficacy, safety and variability in pharmacotherapy for adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analysis and meta-regression in over 9000 patients

RATIONALE

The factors underlying the variability in the results of randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials (RPCCT) assessing pharmacological interventions for adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are not fully understood.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of RPCCT comparing pharmacological treatment and placebo in adults with ADHD was carried out. The study outcomes were all-cause treatment discontinuation, efficacy on ADHD symptoms, and safety. Patient-, intervention-, and study design-related covariates were collected. Meta-regression methods were applied.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies involving 9952 patients were included. All-cause treatment discontinuation was slightly higher with pharmacological treatment than with placebo (odds ratio (OR) = 1.18; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.02, 1.36; p = 0.003). A better outcome on all-cause treatment discontinuation was observed in studies that provided concomitant psychotherapy when compared to those that did not (rate of OR (ROR) = 0.68, p = 0.048). Pharmacological treatment was efficacious for reducing ADHD symptoms (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.45; 95 % CI 0.37, 0.52; p < 0.00001), with stronger intervention effects found in studies investigating stimulant drugs (difference of SMD (Diff SMD) = 0.18, p = 0.017), in shorter studies (Diff SMD = -0.01, p = 0.044), and when clinician-rated scales were used (Diff SMD = 0.44, p < 0.0001). Pharmacological treatment was associated with more frequent adverse events (AEs) (OR = 2.29; 95 % CI 1.97, 2.66; p = 0.006). Studies with a lead-in phase and with a higher proportion of patients previously treated with stimulants were associated with a better safety outcome (ROR = 0.59, p = 0.017; ROR = 0.98, p = 0.036, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacological treatment provides mild symptom improvement but is associated with frequent AEs and higher treatment discontinuation than placebo, particularly when no concomitant psychotherapy is administered. Stimulants appear more efficacious than non-stimulant drugs and the former should be preferred over the latter. The efficacy of pharmacological treatment should be monitored over time because it may decrease progressively.

Adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Associations between subtype and lifetime substance use - a clinical study

ADHD is the one of the most prevalent childhood disorders and has been associated with impairments persisting into adulthood. Specifically, childhood ADHD is an independent clinical risk factor for the development of later substance use disorders (SUD). Moreover, adults who meet diagnostic criteria for ADHD have shown high rates of comorbid SUDs. Few studies, however, have reported on the relationship between ADHD subtypes and SUD in adult samples. The purpose of this study was to characterize a clinical sample of adults with ADHD and to identify possible associations between ADHD subtypes, lifetime substance use, and if ADHD subtypes may be preferentially associated with specific substances of abuse. We recruited 413 adult ADHD patients, performed an evaluation of their ADHD and conducted an interview on their use of psychotropic substances. Complete data was obtained for 349 patients. Lifetime substance abuse or dependence was 26% and occasional use was 57% in this sample. The inattentive subtype was significantly less likely to abuse or be dependent on cocaine than the combined subtype. Our findings underscore the high rate of comorbidity between substance use and ADHD in adults. The more frequent abuse/dependence of cocaine by adult patients with hyperactive-impulsive symptoms should be kept in mind when treating this patient group.

Subchronic administration of atomoxetine causes an enduring reduction in context-induced relapse to cocaine seeking without affecting impulsive decision making

Previous work has established a robust relationship between impulsivity and addiction, and revealed that impulsive decision making predisposes the vulnerability to cocaine-seeking behavior in rats. An important next step is to assess whether elevated relapse vulnerability can be treated via the reduction of impulsive decision making. Therefore, this study explored whether subchronic atomoxetine treatment can reduce relapse vulnerability by reducing impulsive decision making. Rats were trained in the delayed reward task and were subjected to 3 weeks of cocaine self-administration. Following drug self-administration, animals were divided to different experimental groups and received the noradrenaline transporter inhibitor and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder drug atomoxetine or vehicle subchronically for 20 days. On days 1 and 10 after treatment cessation, a context-induced reinstatement test was performed. Throughout the entire experiment, changes in impulsive decision making were continuously monitored. Subchronic treatment with atomoxetine reduced context-induced reinstatement both 1 and 10 days after treatment cessation, only in animals receiving no extinction training. Interestingly, neither subchronic nor acute atomoxetine treatments affected impulsive decision making. Our data indicate that the enduring reduction in relapse sensitivity by atomoxetine occurred independent of a reduction in impulsive decision making. Nonetheless, repeated atomoxetine administration seems a promising pharmacotherapeutical strategy to prevent relapse to cocaine seeking in abstinent drug-dependent subjects.

Clinical potential of methylphenidate in the treatment of cocaine addiction: a review of the current evidence

Background

Cocaine use continues to be a public health problem, yet there is no proven effective pharmacotherapy for cocaine dependence. A promising approach to treating cocaine dependence may be agonist-replacement therapy, which is already used effectively in the treatment of opioid and tobacco dependence. The replacement approach for cocaine dependence posits that administration of a long-acting stimulant medication should normalize the neurochemical and behavioral perturbations resulting from chronic cocaine use. One potential medication to be substituted for cocaine is methylphenidate (MPH), as this stimulant possesses pharmacobehavioral properties similar to those of cocaine.

Aim

To provide a qualitative review addressing the rationale for the use of MPH as a cocaine substitute and its clinical potential in the treatment of cocaine dependence.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE for clinical studies using MPH in patients with cocaine abuse/dependence and screened the bibliographies of the articles found for pertinent literature.

Results

MPH, like cocaine, increases synaptic dopamine by inhibiting dopamine reuptake. The discriminative properties, reinforcing potential, and subjective effects of MPH and cocaine are almost identical and, importantly, MPH has been found to substitute for cocaine in animals and human volunteers under laboratory conditions. When taken orally in therapeutic doses, its abuse liability, however, appears low, which is especially true for extended-release MPH preparations. Though there are promising data in the literature, mainly from case reports and open-label studies, the results of randomized controlled trials have been disappointing so far and do not corroborate the use of MPH as a substitute for cocaine dependence in patients without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Conclusion

Clinical studies evaluating MPH substitution for cocaine dependence have provided inconsistent findings. However, the negative findings may be explained by specific study characteristics, among them dosing, duration of treatment, or sample size. This needs to be considered when discussing the potential of MPH as replacement therapy for cocaine dependence. Finally, based on the results, we suggest possible directions for future research.

Use of Preclinical Drug vs. Food Choice Procedures to Evaluate Candidate Medications for Cocaine Addiction

Drug addiction is a disease that manifests as an inappropriate allocation of behavior towards the procurement and use of the abused substance and away from other behaviors that produce more adaptive reinforcers (e.g. exercise, work, family and social relationships). The goal of treating drug addiction is not only to decrease drug-maintained behaviors, but also to promote a reallocation of behavior towards alternative, nondrug reinforcers. Experimental procedures that offer concurrent access to both a drug reinforcer and an alternative, nondrug reinforcer provide a research tool for assessment of medication effects on drug choice and behavioral allocation. Choice procedures are currently the standard in human laboratory research on medications development. Preclinical choice procedures have been utilized in biomedical research since the early 1940's, and during the last 10-15 years, their use for evaluation of medications to treat drug addiction has increased. We propose here that parallel use of choice procedures in preclinical and clinical studies will facilitate translational research on development of medications to treat cocaine addiction. In support of this proposition, a review of the literature suggests strong concordance between preclinical effectiveness of candidate medications to modify cocaine choice in nonhuman primates and rodents and clinical effectiveness of these medications to modify either cocaine choice in human laboratory studies or metrics of cocaine abuse in patients with cocaine use disorder. The strongest evidence for medication effectiveness in preclinical choice studies has been obtained with maintenance on the monoamine releaser d-amphetamine, a candidate agonist medication for cocaine use analogous to use of methadone to treat heroin abuse or nicotine formulations to treat tobacco dependence.

Should we keep on? Looking into pharmacogenomics of ADHD in adulthood from a different perspective

A considerable proportion of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) do not respond to the treatment with methylphenidate. This scenario could be due to inherited interindividual differences that may alter pharmacologic treatment response. In this sense, in 2012 we conducted a systematic search on PUBMED-indexed literature for articles containing information about pharmacogenomics of ADHD in adults. Five studies were found on methylphenidate pharmacogenomics and the only significant association was reported by one particular study. However, this single association with the SLC6A3 gene was not replicated in two subsequent reports. In the present review, although we could not find additional pharmacogenomics studies, we discuss these up-to-date findings and suggest new approaches for this field. Additionally, using systeomic-oriented databases, we provide a broad picture of new possible candidate genes as well as potential gene-gene interactions to be investigated in pharmacogenomics of persistent ADHD.

Psychostimulants: Basic and Clinical Pharmacology

Substance use disorder, and particularly psychostimulant use disorder, has considerable socioeconomic burden globally. The psychostimulants include several chemical classes, being derivatives of benzoylecgonine, phenethylamine, phenylpropanolamine, or aminoaryloxazoline. Psychostimulant drugs activate the brain reward pathways of the mesoaccumbal system, and continued use leads to persistent neuroplastic and dysfunctional changes of a variety of structures involved in learning and memory, habit-forming learning, salience attribution, and inhibitory control. There are a variety of neurochemical and neurobehavioral changes in psychostimulant addiction, for example, dopaminergic, glutamatergic, serotonergic (5-HT-ergic), and γ-amino butyric acid (GABA) changes have all noted. In this chapter, we will review pharmacological changes associated with psychostimulant use and abuse in humans and animals, and on the basis of the best characterized and most widely abused psychostimulants (amphetamines, cocaine) discuss why use transitions into abuse and review basic science and clinical strategies that might assist in treating psychostimulant abuse.

Toward quality care in ADHD: defining the goals of treatment

OBJECTIVE

Therapeutic goals for chronic mental disorders like major depressive disorder (MDD) and schizophrenia have evolved in parallel with the growing medical knowledge about the course and treatment of these disorders. Although the knowledge base regarding the clinical course of ADHD, a chronic psychiatric disorder, has evolved beyond symptomatic improvement and short-term treatment response, long-term goals, such as functional remission, have not yet been clearly defined.

METHOD

A PubMed literature search was conducted to investigate the therapeutic goals of pharmacologic treatment referenced in the published literature from January 1998 through February 2010 using the following commonly used ADHD treatments as keywords: amphetamine, methylphenidate, atomoxetine, lisdexamfetamine, guanfacine, and clonidine. This search was then combined with an additional search that included the following outcome keywords: remission, relapse, remit, response, normal, normalization, recovery, and effectiveness.

RESULTS

Our search identified 102 publications. The majority (88.2% [90/102]) of these contained predefined criteria for treatment response. Predefined criteria for normalization and remission and/or relapse were presented in 4.9% (5/102), 12.7% (13/102), and 3.9% (4/102) of publications, respectively. There was a lack of consistency between the instruments used to measure outcomes as well as the criteria used to define treatment response, normalization, and remission as well as relapse.

CONCLUSION

The therapeutic goals in treating ADHD should address optimal treatment outcomes that go beyond modest reductions of ADHD symptoms to include syndromatic, symptomatic, and functional remission. Future work should focus on reliable and valid tools to measure these outcomes in the clinical trial setting.

Methylphenidate treatment beyond adolescence maintains increased cocaine self-administration in the spontaneously hypertensive rat model of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Past research with the spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) model of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder showed that adolescent methylphenidate treatment enhanced cocaine abuse risk in SHR during adulthood. The acquisition of cocaine self-administration was faster, and cocaine dose-response functions were shifted upward under fixed-ratio and progressive ratio schedules compared to adult SHR that received adolescent vehicle treatment or to control strains that received adolescent methylphenidate treatment. The current study determined if extending treatment beyond adolescence would ameliorate long-term consequences of adolescent methylphenidate treatment on cocaine abuse risk in adult SHR. Treatments (vehicle or 1.5mg/kg/day oral methylphenidate) began on postnatal day 28. Groups of male SHR were treated with vehicle during adolescence and adulthood, with methylphenidate during adolescence and vehicle during adulthood, or with methylphenidate during adolescence and adulthood. The group receiving adolescent-only methylphenidate was switched to vehicle on P56. Cocaine self-administration began on postnatal day 77, and groups receiving methylphenidate during adolescence and adulthood were treated either 1-h before or 1-h after daily sessions. At baseline under a fixed-ratio 1 schedule, cocaine self-administration (2h sessions; 0.3mg/kg unit dose) did not differ among the four treatment groups. Under a progressive ratio schedule (4.5h maximum session length; 0.01-1.0mg/kg unit doses), breakpoints for self-administered cocaine in SHR receiving the adult methylphenidate treatment 1-h pre-session were not different from the vehicle control group. However, compared to the vehicle control group, breakpoints for self-administered cocaine at the 0.3 and 1.0mg/kg unit doses were greater in adult SHR that received adolescent-only methylphenidate or received methylphenidate that was continued into adulthood and administered 1-h post-session. These findings suggest that extending methylphenidate treatment beyond adolescence does not ameliorate explicitly the long-term consequences of adolescent methylphenidate treatment. Pre-session methylphenidate may mask temporarily the detection of an increase in cocaine self-administration following chronic methylphenidate treatment.

Effectiveness of secondary prevention and treatment interventions for crack-cocaine abuse: a comprehensive narrative overview of English-language studies

There are an estimated several million crack-cocaine users globally; use is highest in the Americas. Most crack users are socio-economically marginalized (e.g., homeless), and feature elevated risks for morbidity (e.g., blood-borne viruses), mortality and crime/violence involvement, resulting in extensive burdens. No comprehensive reviews of evidence-based prevention and/or treatment interventions specifically for crack use exist. We conducted a comprehensive narrative overview of English-language studies on the efficacy of secondary prevention and treatment interventions for crack (cocaine) abuse/dependence. Literature searches (1990-2014) using pertinent keywords were conducted in main scientific databases. Titles/abstracts were reviewed for relevance, and full studies were included in the review if involving a primary prevention/treatment intervention study comprising a substantive crack user sample. Intervention outcomes considered included drug use, health risks/status (e.g., HIV or sexual risks) and select social outcome indicators. Targeted (e.g., behavioral/community-based) prevention measures show mixed and short-term effects on crack use/HIV risk outcomes. Material (e.g., safer crack use kit distribution) interventions also document modest efficacy in risk reduction; empirical assessments of environmental (e.g., drug consumption facilities) for crack smokers are not available. Diverse psycho-social treatment (including contingency management) interventions for crack abuse/dependence show some positive but also limited/short-term efficacy, yet likely constitute best currently available treatment options. Ancillary treatments show little effects but are understudied. Despite ample studies, pharmaco-therapeutic/immunotherapy treatment agents have not produced convincing evidence; select agents may hold potential combined with personalized approaches and/or psycho-social strategies. No comprehensively effective 'gold-standard' prevention/treatment interventions for crack abuse exist; concerted research towards improved interventions is urgently needed.