A Randomized Trial Evaluating Whether Topiramate Aids Smoking Cessation and Prevents Alcohol Relapse in Recovering Alcohol-Dependent Men

Individual Predictors of Response to A Behavioral Activation-Based Digital Smoking Cessation Intervention: A Machine Learning Approach

Background: Depression is prevalent among individuals who smoke cigarettes and increases risk for relapse. A previous clinical trial suggests that Goal2Quit, a behavioral activation-based smoking cessation mobile app, effectively increases smoking abstinence and reduces depressive symptoms. Objective: Secondary analyses were conducted on these trial data to identify predictors of success in depression-specific digitalized cessation interventions. Methods: Adult who smoked cigarettes (age = 38.4 ± 10.3, 53% women) were randomized to either use Goal2Quit for 12 weeks (N = 103), paired with a 2-week sample of nicotine replacement therapy (patch and lozenge) or to a Treatment-As-Usual (TAU) control (N = 47). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator was utilized to identify a subset of baseline variables predicting either smoking or depression intervention outcomes. The retained predictors were then fitted via linear regression models to determine relations to each intervention outcome. Results: Relative to TAU, only individuals who spent significant time using Goal2Quit (56 ± 46 min) were more likely to reduce cigarette use by at least 50% after 12 weeks, whereas those who spent minimal time using Goal2Quit (10 ± 2 min) did not exhibit significant changes. An interaction between educational attainment and treatment group revealed that, as compared to TAU, only app users with an educational degree beyond high school exhibited significant reductions in depression. Conclusions: The findings highlight the importance of tailoring depression-specific digital cessation interventions to individuals' unique engagement needs and educational level. This study provides a potential methodological template for future research aimed at personalizing technology-based treatments for cigarette users with depressive symptoms.

Efficacy and safety of alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy according to treatment duration in patients with alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Relapse is common in alcohol dependence (AD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD), so alcohol reduction therapy should be measured over as long a period as possible; however, existing reviews do not consider the duration of treatment and therefore alcohol reduction therapy may not have been appropriately evaluated. This review evaluated the efficacy and safety of alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy in patients with AD or AUD according to the duration of treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed 15 pharmacological agents. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for eligible trials through to May 2021. Outcomes were heavy drinking days (HDD), total alcohol consumption (TAC), any adverse event and days without drinking.

RESULTS

Fifty-five RCTs (n = 8891) were included. Nalmefene was superior to placebo for reducing HDD (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37, -0.18) and TAC (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.35, -0.16) in the long-term, but not in the short-term. Topiramate was superior to placebo for reducing HDD (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.59, -0.12) and days without drinking (SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.11, 0.82), and baclofen was superior for reducing TAC (SMD -0.70, 95% CI -1.29, -0.11), in the short-term. The frequency of adverse events was higher with nalmefene and topiramate than with placebo.

CONCLUSION

Nalmefene, topiramate and baclofen may be effective as alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy; however, only nalmefene has demonstrated long-term efficacy, and nalmefene and topiramate have a significantly higher frequency of adverse events compared with placebo.

A Bayesian meta-analysis of topiramate's effectiveness for individuals with alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Topiramate (TPM) has the potential to become one of the most prominent treatment options for alcohol use disorder (AUD). We investigated the efficacy of TPM for AUD treatment, considering new randomized controlled trials carried out since the publication of four prior investigations.

METHODS

We searched six major databases, comparing TPM to placebo for AUD treatment. We performed a Bayesian meta-analysis. We conducted a meta-regression, analyzing the effect of age, TPM dosage, duration of treatment, gender, and attrition rate on the outcomes measured. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42021286266.

RESULTS

TPM reduced heavy drinking days (d = 0.401, Bayes factor (BF) = 23.088) and weeks (d = 0.461, BF = 3.784), lowered alcohol craving (d = 0.477, BF = 107.749), prolonged abstinence throughout the duration of trials (d = 0.505, BF = 54.998), and decreased the amount of gamma-glutamyl transferase in the blood (d = 0.345, BF = 39.048). The analysis pointed out that TPM could reduce anxiety (d = 0.517, BF = 5.993). TPM's efficacy in relieving alcohol withdrawal, minimizing relapse, and decreasing depressive symptoms was inconclusive. There was evidence of a meta-regression effect of attrition rate on heavy drinking days and craving and length of treatment on abstinence.

CONCLUSION

TPM has the potential to become a key pharmacological agent in the treatment of AUD.

Topiramate decreases the salience of motivationally relevant visual cues among smokers with alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

There is preliminary evidence that the anticonvulsant topiramate increases the likelihood of both smoking and alcohol abstinence among smokers with alcohol use disorder (AUD), but its therapeutic mechanism has not been determined. We used event-related potentials (ERPs) to evaluate topiramate's effect on the salience of drug-related, emotional, and neutral pictorial cues to identify whether one of its potential therapeutic mechanisms involves reduction of the salience of motivationally relevant cues.

METHODS

Participants enrolled in a multisite clinical trial treating smokers with AUD were randomly assigned to receive placebo, low-dose topiramate (up to 125 mg/day), or high-dose topiramate (up to 250 mg/day), along with brief behavioral compliance enhancement treatment. A subsample (n = 101) completed ERP assessments at baseline (1 week pre-medication) and week 5 (5 weeks on medication; 1 week pre-quit). We assessed the salience of pleasant, unpleasant, cigarette-related, alcohol-related, and neutral pictorial cues using the late positive potential (LPP) ERP component and measured self-reported substance use, reinforcement, craving, and withdrawal.

RESULTS

Five weeks of high-dose topiramate treatment decreased LPP amplitudes in response to both emotional (pleasant and unpleasant) and drug-related cues (alcohol and cigarette), but not to neutral cues. However, results showed that the LPPs were not significant mediators of the relationship between topiramate dose and post-quit measures of substance use, reinforcement, craving, or withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that high-dose topiramate (up to 250 mg/day) decreases the motivational salience of both drug-related and emotional cues among smokers with AUD. However, the nonsignificant mediation analyses preclude any firm conclusions about whether this effect represents one of topiramate's therapeutic mechanisms of action.

Is the relapse concept in studies of substance use disorders a 'one size fits all' concept? A systematic review of relapse operationalisations

ISSUES

Relapse is a theoretical construct and empirical object of inquiry. It is unclear how relapse is operationalised with regard to the various phases in substance use disorders (SUD). The aim was to investigate relapse operationalisations in SUDs studies after short- and long-term abstinence and remission, recovery and slip/lapse.

APPROACH

Systematic review using the following databases: Epistemonikos, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL and DARE), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, CINAHL, Web of Science and PsycINFO. Search returned 3426 articles, with 276 meeting the following inclusion criteria: empirical study published in English in a peer-reviewed journal; samples meet diagnostic criteria for dependence syndrome or moderate-severe drug use disorder or alcohol use disorder; reports relapse, abstinence, recovery, remission, slip or lapse. Review protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020154062).

KEY FINDINGS

Thirty-two percent of the studies had no definition of 'relapse'. Most relapse operationalisations were defined according to measure (26%), time (17%), use (26%) and amount and frequency (27%). Of the 16 studies with a follow-up duration of up to 2 years, one (6%) contained a definition of 'long-term abstinence'. Of the 64 studies with a follow-up duration of more than 2 years, four (6%) contained a definition of 'long-term abstinence'. Of those, one (2%) mentioned 'early relapse' and one (2%) mentioned 'late relapse'.

IMPLICATIONS

Future research is needed to explore the possible difference between early and late relapse. Moreover, working to increase consensus on relapse operationalisations in SUD research is warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified no consensus on relapse operationalisations nor agreement on the differentiation between early and late relapse. The clinical utility of current relapse operationalisations seems low and may compromise knowledge accumulation about relapse and implementation of research into treatment.

The effects of pharmacological interventions on smoking cessation in people with alcohol dependence: A systematic review and meta-analysis of nine randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapies are widely used for smoking cessation. However, their efficacy for people with alcohol dependence remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the effects of pharmacotherapies on smoking cessation for people with alcohol dependence.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched in January 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the use of pharmacotherapies to promote smoking cessation in people with alcohol dependence. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. RevMan version 5.3 was used to perform meta-analyses of the changes in smoking behaviour, and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

The search identified nine RCTs involving 908 smokers with alcohol dependence; eight were published in the USA and one in Canada. The risk of bias was low in three studies and unclear in the remaining six. The meta-analysis results showed that, compared with the placebo group, Varenicline had a significant effect on short-term smoking cessation (three RCTs, odds ratio [OR] = 6.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [2.49, 15.78], P < .05, very low certainty). Naltrexone had no significant effect on smoking cessation in short-term or long-term observations (three RCTs, OR = 0.99, 95% CI: [0.54, 1.81], P = .97, moderate certainty), and Topiramate had no significant effects (two RCTs, OR = 1.56, 95% CI: [0.67, 3.46], P > .05, low certainty). Only one trial reported that Bupropion did not affect smoking cessation.

CONCLUSION

Varenicline may promote smoking cessation in people with alcohol dependence. However, Naltrexone, Topiramate and Bupropion have no clear effect on increasing smoking abstinence among drinkers. The small number of studies and the low certainty of evidence indicate that the results should be interpreted cautiously.

Efficacy and safety of topiramate in binge eating disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate in treating binge eating disorder (BED), using a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The RCTs assessing topiramate vs placebo with or without adjunctive psychotherapy in BED were reviewed using a systematic search in the PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review, and ClinicalTrials.gov search Websites, from inception to November 2019. Main outcomes were the changes in binge frequency, quality of life, and weight, respectively. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effect models and presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Three studies were eligible for inclusion, involving 528 BED patients. Topiramate was found to be significantly more efficacious than placebo in reducing: (a) the number of binge episodes per week (MD = -1.31; 95% CI = -2.58 to -0.03; I2 = 94%); (b) the number of binge days per week (MD = -0.98; 95% CI = -1.80 to -0.16; I2 = 94%); and (c) weight (MD = -4.91 kg; 95% CI = -6.42 to -3.41; I2 = 10%). However, participants in the topiramate groups withdrew significantly more frequently for safety reasons, relative to placebo participants (RR = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.13-3.18, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary findings support a possible efficacy of topiramate for the treatment of BED, even if safety concerns could limit the practical use of this treatment in BED subjects.

Use of Topiramate in the Spectrum of Addictive and Eating Disorders: A Systematic Review Comparing Treatment Schemes, Efficacy, and Safety Features

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Topiramate has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of epilepsy since the 1990s, and it has also been used off-label in the treatment of many types of addictive disorders. To date, no systematic review has embraced the entire field of addiction, both substance use and behavioral addictions, including eating disorders, to compare topiramate-based protocols and the related level of evidence in each addictive disorder. Our objective is to fill this gap.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using the MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases without a date or language limit. All trials and meta-analyses assessing the efficacy of topiramate in alcohol use disorder; cocaine use disorder; methamphetamine, nicotine, cannabis, opiate, and benzodiazepine use disorders; binge eating disorder; bulimia; and pathological gambling were analyzed. The quality of the studies was rated using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials (ROB-2), the Risk of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies (ROBINS-I), or the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, depending on the study design. Safety features were assessed based on a wider non-systematic review.

RESULTS

Sixty-two articles were reviewed. Treatment protocols were relatively homogenous across addictive disorders, with slow dose titration schemes and a maximum dose range of 200-400 mg per day. The most supportive evidence for topiramate efficacy was found in alcohol use disorder for drinking reduction parameters only. To a lesser extent, topiramate could be a promising therapeutic option for binge eating disorder and cocaine use disorder. Evidence was weak for other addictive disorders. No major tolerability issues were found, provided that basic safety rules were followed. Adverse drug reactions could lead to early treatment discontinuation.

DISCUSSION

Though off-label, addiction specialists should consider topiramate as a second-line option for drinking reduction in alcohol use disorder, as well as for binge eating disorder or cocaine use disorder.

Topiramate Pharmacotherapy for Alcohol Use Disorder and Other Addictions: A Narrative Review

: Topiramate is a non-benzodiazepine anticonvulsant medication with multi-faceted pharmacologic action. It has emerged as an efficacious pharmacotherapeutic option for the treatment of addiction, especially alcohol use disorder (AUD). We present a broad narrative review of the putative mechanism of action and clinical utility of topiramate with regard to AUD and other substance use disorders. Collective evidence suggests topiramate is an effective treatment option in AUD, with notable efficacy in reducing harmful drinking patterns in AUD. Though not currently approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for the indication of AUD, topiramate should be considered as a pharmacological treatment option with high utility among AUD patients. Early pharmacogenetic studies raise the intriguing possibility of identifying patients likely to respond to topiramate using genetic testing, and initial studies show that topiramate may also be useful in treating cocaine use disorder, smoking cessation and behavioral addictions. However, further research is needed in all these areas.

Topiramate for smoking cessation: Systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Topiramate is an antiepileptic drug that has been used for many labeled and off-labeled indications. It may be useful in reducing withdrawal symptoms of various addictive agents such as alcohol, cocaine, cannabis and smoking. To date, some studies have examined the effectiveness of topiramate for smoking cessation. The present review aims to synthesize the results from those studies and determine topiramate effectiveness in smoking cessation.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in the databases: PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, Egyptian Knowledge Bank, and Google Scholar. All clinical trials that examined the effect of topiramate, compared with the placebo, on smoking cessation rate were included. Statistical analysis using fixed effect models, heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis were conducted using RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Five trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Topiramate non-significantly increased prolonged smoking abstinence rate (OR=1.19, 95% CI: 0.57–2.5) compared with the placebo. On the other hand, topiramate significantly increased the abstinence rate at weeks 4, 6, 8 and 12 (OR=3.07, 95% CI: 1.19–7.93; OR=4.03, 95% CI: 1.98–8.2; OR=2.29, 95% CI: 1.23–4.28; and OR=2.45, 95% CI: 1.37–4.39; respectively) compared with the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the five trials, where publication bias cannot be excluded, the current evidence is not sufficient to show a significant difference to favor topiramate in prolonged smoking cessation over the placebo, although the 12th week point prevalence favored topiramate.

Randomized Clinical Trials Investigating Innovative Interventions for Smoking Cessation in the Last Decade

Every year, billions of dollars are spent treating smoking and related conditions, yet smoking-related morbidity and mortality continue to rise. There are currently only three FDA-approved medications for smoking cessation: nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, and varenicline. Although these medications increase abstinence rates, most individuals relapse following treatment. This chapter reviews clinical trials published within the past 10 years investigating novel smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Among these pharmacotherapies, some showed promising results, such as cytisine and endocannabinoid modulators, whereas others failed to produce significant effects. More research is needed to develop drugs that produce higher rates of long-term abstinence and to determine which subgroups of patients benefit from a given treatment.

Prospects for pharmacotherapies to treat alcohol use disorder: an update on recent human studies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to provide an update on medication development efforts for alcohol use disorder (AUD) by reviewing recently published (past 2 years) human studies that evaluated medications' effects on alcohol-related outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Forty-five publications were found suitable for this review. A variety of compounds have been tested in the past 2 years as potential pharmacological options for AUD, including medications that act on multiple targets (topiramate, aripiprazole, quetiapine), calcium channels (gabapentin), gamma-Aminobutyric acid receptors (baclofen, diazepam), glutamate receptors (ifenprodil, memantine, glycine), nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (varenicline, mecamylamine), α1 adrenergic receptors (prazosin, doxazosin), neuroendocrine pathways (oxytocin, a vasopressin receptor 1b antagonist, a ghrelin receptor inverse agonist) and others (samidorphan, ibudilast, N-acetylcysteine, citoline). Important findings and limitations regarding the effects of these medications on alcohol-related outcomes are discussed.

SUMMARY

There is a critical need to increase the armamentarium of medications for AUD. Human laboratory studies may help screen and prioritize promising targets and compounds before running large clinical trials. Given the complexity of AUD and the heterogeneity of afflicted patients, future studies should also investigate potential moderators and predictors of response to each pharmacological intervention.

Medication Development for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Focus on Clinical Studies

Compared to other medical disorders, including other brain diseases, the number of medications approved for alcohol use disorder (AUD) is very small. Disulfiram, naltrexone (oral and long-acting), and acamprosate are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat patients with AUD. These medications are also approved in other countries, including in Europe, where the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also approved nalmefene for AUD. Furthermore, baclofen was recently approved for AUD in France. These approved medications have small effect sizes, which are probably the consequence of the fact that they only work for some patients, yet a personalized approach to match the right medication with the right patient is still in its infancy. Therefore, research is needed to expand the armamentarium of medications that clinicians can use to treat their patients, as well as to better develop personalized approaches. This book chapter reviews other medications, beyond those approved by the FDA, that have shown efficacy in clinical trials, as well as medications which are still in the early stages of evaluation in human studies.

Topiramate for the Treatment of Dually Dependent on Opiates and Cocaine: A Single-center Placebo-controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Topiramate facilitates gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) transference and an ideal candidate for reducing cocaine use in methadone patients. The present study evaluated topiramate in Dual dependence on opiate and cocaine.

METHODS

This placebo-controlled study (Clinical Trial Registration Code: TCTR20170201001) conducted during the period 2013-2014, Cocaine-dependent individuals maintained on methadone (n=50) were randomized to receive topiramate or identical placebo capsules. Participants' dosage ranged between 25-300 mg/day (12 wk) in escalating doses. Methadone Doses started at 30 mg/day (median 100 mg/day; range 20 -140 mg/day). In addition, all subjects received brief behavioral compliance enhancement treatment (BBCET). The data were analyzed by Chi-square Test, generalized estimating equations (GEE) models, linear mixed effects (LME) model and Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Primary outcome measures included twelve weekly urine drug screens (cocaine abstinence, detection of benzoylecgonine) and treatment retention. Secondary outcome measures included correlation between cocaine craving with cocaine urine samples and Side effects of depression.

RESULTS

Topiramate was not better than placebo in reducing cocaine use. The secondary outcome showed that Topiramate was better than placebo in reducing cocaine craving. The mean [99% confidence interval (CI)] scores of cocaine craving were 24.31 (18.61-30.01) in experimental group and 21.84 (16.86-26.81) in control group (all P > 0.01). Retention and correlation between cocaine craving and cocaine urine samples were not significantly different between the groups. Topiramate usage was not associated with increase in depression symptoms as a side effect (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of topiramate in cocaine treatment is limited and needs the similar controlled clinical trials and can be used as a complementary intervention.

Predictors of reduced smoking quantity among recovering alcohol dependent men in a smoking cessation trial

INTRODUCTION

Adults with alcohol dependence (AD) have exceptionally high smoking rates and poor smoking cessation outcomes. Discovery of factors that predict reduced smoking among AD smokers may help improve treatment. This study examined baseline predictors of smoking quantity among AD smokers in a pharmacotherapy trial for smoking cessation.

METHODS

The sample includes male, AD smokers (N = 129) with 1-32 months of alcohol abstinence who participated in a 12-week trial of medication (topiramate vs. placebo) and adjunct counseling with 6 months of follow-up. Baseline measures of nicotine dependence, AD severity, psychopathology, motivation to quit smoking, and smoking-related cognitions were used to predict smoking quantity (cigarettes per day) at post-treatment and follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, the sample had statistically significant reductions in smoking quantity. Greater nicotine dependence (Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) = 0.82-0.90), motivation to quit (IRRs = 0.65-0.85), and intrinsic reasons for quitting (IRRs = 0.96-0.98) predicted fewer cigarettes/day. Conversely, greater lifetime AD severity (IRR = 1.02), depression severity (IRRs = 1.05-1.07), impulsivity (IRRs = 1.01-1.03), weight-control expectancies (IRRs = 1.10-1.15), and childhood sexual abuse (IRRs = 1.03-1.07) predicted more cigarettes/day.

CONCLUSIONS

Smokers with AD can achieve large reductions in smoking quantity during treatment, and factors that predict smoking outcomes in the general population also predict greater smoking reductions in AD smokers. Treatment providers can use severity of nicotine dependence and AD, motivation to quit, smoking-related cognitions, and severity of depression to guide treatment and improve outcomes among AD smokers.

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.

Current and Emerging Pharmacotherapies for Cessation of Tobacco Smoking

Tobacco use disorder is a chronic illness. With its high comorbidity rate, it is a major cause of years of life lost or years lived with disability; however, it is also considered the most preventable cause of death in developed countries. Since the development of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in 1978, treatment options have continued to evolve and expand. Despite this, currently available treatments remain insufficient, with less than 25% of smokers remaining abstinent 1 year after treatment. In this article, we review existing and emerging smoking cessation pharmacotherapies, with a special emphasis on the most promising agents that are currently being investigated. A search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the PubMed, Ovid, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases (August 2 to September 1, 2017) was undertaken for articles on smoking cessation pharmacotherapies, applying no language restrictions. More than 40 pharmacotherapies were reviewed including conventional pharmacotherapies-NRT, bupropion, and varenicline (all approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as first-line treatment of smoking cessation)-and novel therapies: cytisine, N-acetylcysteine, cycloserine, memantine, baclofen, topiramate, galantamine, and bromocriptine. Studies of combination NRT and varenicline showed the greatest smoking cessation rates. Clonidine and nortriptyline are second-line treatments used when first-line treatments fail or are contraindicated, or by patient preference. Some novel therapies, especially acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, cytisine, and N-acetylcysteine, display promising results. Because the results of randomized clinical trials were reported using varied end points and outcome measures, direct comparisons between different pharmacotherapies cannot easily be evaluated. Additional high-quality randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials with long-term follow-up, using validated sustained abstinence measures, are needed to find more effective smoking cessation aids.

Advancing Pharmacotherapy Development from Preclinical Animal Studies

Animal models provide rapid, inexpensive assessments of an investigational drug's therapeutic potential. Ideally, they support the plausibility of therapeutic efficacy and provide a rationale for further investigation. Here, I discuss how the absence of clear effective-ineffective categories for alcohol use disorder (AUD) medications and biases in the clinical and preclinical literature affect the development of predictive preclinical alcohol dependence (AD) models. Invoking the analogical argument concept from the philosophy of science field, I discuss how models of excessive alcohol drinking support the plausibility of clinical pharmacotherapy effects. Even though these models are not likely be completely discriminative, they are sensitive to clinically effective medications and have revealed dozens of novel medication targets. In that context, I discuss recent preclinical work on GLP-1 receptor agonists, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, glucocorticoid receptor antagonists, nociception agonists and antagonists, and CRF1 antagonists. Clinically approved medications are available for each of these drug classes. I conclude by advocating a translational approach in which drugs are evaluated highly congruent preclinical models and human laboratory studies. Once translation is established, I suggest the burden is to develop hypothesis-based therapeutic interventions maximizing the impact of the confirmed pharmacotherapeutic effects in the context of additional variables falling outside the model.

Advances in Pharmacotherapy Development: Human Clinical Studies

For more than 25 years, researchers have made advances in developing medications to treat alcohol use disorder (AUD), highlighted by the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) approval of disulfiram, naltrexone (oral and long-acting), and acamprosate. These medications are also approved in Europe, where the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recently added a fourth medication, nalmefene, for AUD. Despite these advances, today's medications have a small effect size, showing efficacy for only a limited number of individuals with AUD. However, a host of new medications, which act on variety of pharmacologic targets, are in the pipeline and have been evaluated in numerous human studies. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of medications currently being tested in human trials and looks at ongoing efforts to identify candidate compounds in human studies. As mentioned in the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism's Strategic Plan 2017-2021 ( https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/sites/default/files/StrategicPlan_NIAAA_optimized_2017-2020.pdf ), medications development remains a high priority. By developing more effective and safe medications, and identifying those patients who will benefit the most from these treatments, we can provide clinicians with the tools they need to treat this devastating disorder, providing relief for patients and their families and markedly improving public health and safety.

The Current State of Pharmacological Treatments for Cannabis Use Disorder and Withdrawal

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) commonly occurs and carries a notable economic and functional burden at both individual and societal levels. While there are no clearly efficacious medication treatments for CUD, 20 years of committed and high-quality research in the human laboratory and clinical settings have resulted in medications with demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of cannabis withdrawal, the ability to reduce cannabis use, and results that point to promising future work. The current state of pharmacology research for CUD highlights the need to consider particular characteristics of patients, such as gender, impulsivity, and severity of cannabis use, when selecting a medication in the off-label treatment of CUD or cannabis withdrawal. As a field, the body of work also exposes some areas in need of improvement in study design, selection of outcome measures, interpretation of results, and the overall process of evaluating candidate medications. Coming to a consensus as a field and addressing these gaps in future research will likely lend itself to further advances in improving the lives of patients with CUD.

Type A/Type B Alcoholism Predicts Differential Response to Topiramate in a Smoking Cessation Trial in Dually Diagnosed Men

OBJECTIVE

Babor's A/B typology characterizes alcohol-dependence subtypes, which differ across multiple defining variables; however, differences in cigarette smoking and cessation between these subtypes have not been previously investigated. Topiramate reduces heavy drinking and has separately been found to help non-alcohol-dependent individuals quit smoking. This study tested the hypothesis that topiramate's effects on smoking would be moderated by alcohol-dependence subtype, and explored craving as a mediator of this response.

METHOD

One hundred twenty-nine abstinent alcohol-dependent outpatient male smokers participated in this 12-week, randomized controlled trial comparing topiramate (maximum dosage 200 mg/day) with placebo, both with brief counseling, for smoking cessation. Participants were followed for 24 weeks following end of treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 125 participants with sufficient subtyping data, k-means cluster analysis categorized 52 (42%) as Type A alcoholics and 73 (58%) as Type B. Types A and B did not differ on baseline smoking characteristics, urges to smoke, or smoking consequence scores. Longitudinal mixed-effects regression indicated that the effect of treatment on smoking was moderated by the Type × Time interaction. Specifically, during the nontreatment follow-up phase, Type B's treated with topiramate had relative suppressed levels of smoking compared with placebo-treated Type B's. This moderating effect of the Type × Time interaction was mediated by intention to smoke and craving related to relief of negative affect.

CONCLUSIONS

Type B alcoholics demonstrated suppressed levels of smoking in response to topiramate treatment as compared with placebo, but only during the nontreatment follow-up phase. This effect was mediated, in part, through intention to smoke and craving to smoke to relieve negative affect. Our findings extend other studies demonstrating a differential medication response by alcoholism subtype.