A human laboratory study investigating the effects of quetiapine on marijuana withdrawal and relapse in daily marijuana smokers

Rethinking Substance Use as Social History: Charting a Way Forward

Physicians have traditionally asked about substance use within the Social History section of the consultation note. Drawing on social science theory and using the authors' own experiences as generalists and addiction scholars, we consider the possible unintended harms associated with this approach. The inclusion of the substance use history within the Social History reproduces the discourse of substance use disorders as "life-style choices" rather than medical conditions, and reinforces stigma among healthcare workers through the attribution of personal responsibility for complications associated with problematic substance use. The ongoing placement of the substance use history within the Social History may lead to a failure to diagnose and make appropriate management plans for clients with substance use disorders. These missed opportunities may include inadequate withdrawal management leading to discharge before medically advised, insufficient use of evidence-based pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, polypharmacy, medical complications, and repeated admissions to hospital. We argue instead that the Substance Use History should be a stand-alone section within the consultation note. This new section would reduce the invisibility of substance use disorders within our medical systems and model that these chronic medical conditions are amenable to prevention, treatment and harm reduction through the application of evidence-based practices.

Integrative Pharmacology in the Treatment of Substance Use Disorders

The detrimental physical, mental, and socioeconomic effects of substance use disorders (SUDs) have been apparent to the medical community for decades. However, it has become increasingly urgent in recent years to develop novel pharmacotherapies to treat SUDs. Currently, practitioners typically rely on monotherapy. Monotherapy has been shown to be superior to no treatment at all for most substance classes. However, many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have revealed that monotherapy leads to poorer outcomes when compared with combination treatment in all specialties of medicine. The results of RCTs suggest that monotherapy frequently fails since multiple dysregulated pathways, enzymes, neurotransmitters, and receptors are involved in the pathophysiology of SUDs. As such, research is urgently needed to determine how various neurobiological mechanisms can be targeted by novel combination treatments to create increasingly specific yet exceedingly comprehensive approaches to SUD treatment. This article aims to review the neurobiology that integrates many pathophysiologic mechanisms and discuss integrative pharmacology developments that may ultimately improve clinical outcomes for patients with SUDs. Many neurobiological mechanisms are known to be involved in SUDs including dopaminergic, nicotinic, N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA), and kynurenic acid (KYNA) mechanisms. Emerging evidence indicates that KYNA, a tryptophan metabolite, modulates all these major pathophysiologic mechanisms. Therefore, achieving KYNA homeostasis by harmonizing integrative pathophysiology and pharmacology could prove to be a better therapeutic approach for SUDs. We propose KYNA-NMDA-α7nAChRcentric pathophysiology, the "conductor of the orchestra," as a novel approach to treat many SUDs concurrently. KYNA-NMDA-α7nAChR pathophysiology may be the "command center" of neuropsychiatry. To date, extant RCTs have shown equivocal findings across comparison conditions, possibly because investigators targeted single pathophysiologic mechanisms, hit wrong targets in underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms, and tested inadequate monotherapy treatment. We provide examples of potential combination treatments that simultaneously target multiple pathophysiologic mechanisms in addition to KYNA. Kynurenine pathway metabolism demonstrates the greatest potential as a target for neuropsychiatric diseases. The investigational medications with the most evidence include memantine, galantamine, and N-acetylcysteine. Future RCTs are warranted with novel combination treatments for SUDs. Multicenter RCTs with integrative pharmacology offer a promising, potentially fruitful avenue to develop novel therapeutics for the treatment of SUDs.

Ligne directrice canadienne pour la prise en charge clinique de la consommation d’alcool à risque élevé et du trouble d’utilisation de l’alcool

Contexte:

Au Canada, on note que les équipes soignantes et les personnes qui bénéficieraient de soins ciblés connaissent peu les interventions fondées sur des données probantes pour la prise en charge clinique du trouble d’utilisation de l’alcool. Pour combler cette lacune, l’Initiative canadienne de recherche sur l’abus de substances a créé un comité national dans le but d’élaborer une ligne directrice pour la prise en charge clinique de la consommation d’alcool à risque élevé et du trouble lié à la consommation d’alcool.

Méthodes:

L’élaboration de cette ligne directrice s’est faite selon le processus ADAPTE, et est inspirée par une ligne directrice britanno-colombienne de 2019 pour le trouble lié à la consommation d’alcool. Un comité national de rédaction de la ligne directrice (composé de 36 membres de divers horizons, notamment des universitaires, des médecins, des personnes ayant ou ayant eu des expériences de consommation d’alcool et des personnes s’identifiant comme Autochtones ou Métis) a choisi les thèmes prioritaires, a passé en revue les données probantes et atteint un consensus relatif aux recommandations. Nous avons utilisé l’outil AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument II) et les principes de divulgation des intérêts et de gestion des conflits lors du processus de rédaction des lignes directrices (Principles for Disclosure of Interests and Management of Conflicts in Guidelines) publiés en anglais par le Réseau international des lignes directrices (Guidelines International Network) pour nous assurer que la ligne directrice répondait aux normes internationales de transparence, de qualité élevée et de rigueur méthodologique. Nous avons évalué les recommandations finales à l’aide de l’approche GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Les recommandations ont fait l’objet d’une revue externe par 13 spécialistes et parties prenantes d’ici et de l’étranger.

Recommandations:

La ligne directrice comprend 15 recommandations qui concernent le dépistage, le diagnostic, la prise en charge du sevrage et le traitement continu, y compris les interventions psychosociales, les pharmacothérapies et les programmes communautaires. Le comité de rédaction de la ligne directrice a reconnu la nécessité d’insister sur la sous-utilisation des interventions qui pourraient être bénéfiques et sur les modes de prescription et autres pratiques d’usage courant qui ne reposent pas sur des données probantes et pourraient aggraver les effets de la consommation d’alcool.

Interprétation:

La ligne directrice se veut une ressource à l’intention des médecins, des responsables des orientations politiques et des membres des équipes cliniques et autres, de même que des personnes, des familles et des communautés affectées par la consommation d’alcool. Ces recommandations proposent un cadre fondé sur des données probantes pour alléger le lourd fardeau du trouble d’utilisation de l’alcool au Canada et combler les besoins en matière de traitements et de soins.

Treatment of Adolescent Cannabis Use Disorders

This review summarizes treatments for cannabis use disorder (CUD) in adolescents. The best supported CUD treatments are cognitive behavioral psychotherapies, including family-based models that facilitate environmental changes and youth-focused models that incorporate skills training, motivational interviewing, and contingency management to promote reductions in cannabis use. Some medications show promise in reducing cannabis craving and withdrawal symptoms. Further research is needed on the efficacy and implementation of existing treatments given the changes in cannabis use trends over time and on emerging technologies that may expand access to evidence-based CUD treatments.

Worsening stimulant use disorder outcomes coinciding with off-label antipsychotic prescribing: a commonly unrecognised side effect?

Antipsychotic medications exert their effects via dopamine antagonism and are widely used off-label among persons with substance use disorders (SUD). While dopamine antagonists are recognised to stimulate food craving and weight gain, outside of possibly increasing nicotine craving and use, their impact on other SUD outcomes is poorly recognised. In this context, research has demonstrated that antipsychotic therapy can produce 'supersensitivity' to dopamine, enhancing the motivational effects of addictive drugs. Worsened drug craving and higher rates of substance use have also been observed in double-blind placebo-controlled trials. Nevertheless, widespread off-label antipsychotic prescribing among persons with SUD implies that the risks of worsening SUD outcomes are overall poorly recognised in both primary care and among specialists. We present a typical case of worsening stimulant use disorder in a patient prescribed antipsychotic medication for low mood and insomnia, highlighting that this is likely a widely under-recognised adverse effect of off-label antipsychotic therapy.

Canadian guideline for the clinical management of high-risk drinking and alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

In Canada, low awareness of evidence-based interventions for the clinical management of alcohol use disorder exists among health care providers and people who could benefit from care. To address this gap, the Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse convened a national committee to develop a guideline for the clinical management of high-risk drinking and alcohol use disorder.

METHODS

Development of this guideline followed the ADAPTE process, building upon the 2019 British Columbia provincial guideline for alcohol use disorder. A national guideline committee (consisting of 36 members with diverse expertise, including academics, clinicians, people with lived and living experiences of alcohol use, and people who self-identified as Indigenous or Métis) selected priority topics, reviewed evidence and reached consensus on the recommendations. We used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument (AGREE II) and the Guidelines International Network's Principles for Disclosure of Interests and Management of Conflicts to ensure the guideline met international standards for transparency, high quality and methodological rigour. We rated the final recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool; the recommendations underwent external review by 13 national and international experts and stakeholders.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The guideline includes 15 recommendations that cover screening, diagnosis, withdrawal management and ongoing treatment, including psychosocial treatment interventions, pharmacotherapies and community-based programs. The guideline committee identified a need to emphasize both underused interventions that may be beneficial and common prescribing and other practice patterns that are not evidence based and that may potentially worsen alcohol use outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

The guideline is intended to be a resource for physicians, policymakers and other clinical and nonclinical personnel, as well as individuals, families and communities affected by alcohol use. The recommendations seek to provide a framework for addressing a large burden of unmet treatment and care needs for alcohol use disorder within Canada in an evidence-based manner.

Unravelling the landscape of Cannabis craving pharmacological treatments: a PRISMA-guided review of evidence

Currently, few treatments are available for craving in general, and none of them have received approval for cannabis craving. The objective of this review is to evaluate existing studies analysing treatments for cannabis craving and explore novel treatment possibilities for these patients. The study followed PRISMA guidelines and conducted an extensive database search. Inclusion criteria included human randomised controlled trials examining drug effects on craving symptoms. Exclusion criteria involved studies unrelated to craving, non-pharmacological treatments, duplicates, and non-English/Spanish/Portuguese articles. Our included 22 studies that investigated a wide range of compounds used for cravings related to other drugs, as well as interventions based on healthcare professionals' empirical knowledge. The current pharmacological treatments largely involve off-label drug use and the utilisation of cannabinoid-based medications, such as combinations of THC and lofexidine, oxytocin, progesterone, and N-acetylcysteine. These emerging treatments show promise and have the potential to revolutionise current clinical practices, but further investigation is needed to establish their efficacy. In this context, it is essential to consider non-pharmacological interventions, such as psychotherapy and behavioural treatments. These approaches play a crucial role in complementing pharmacological interventions and addressing the complex nature of the disorder.

Systematic review and rationale of using psychedelics in the treatment of cannabis use disorder

Introduction

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is prevalent in ~2-5% of adults in the United States and is anticipated to increase as restrictions to cannabis decrease and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content in cannabis products increase. No FDA-approved medications for CUD are currently available, despite trials of dozens of re-purposed and novel drugs. Psychedelics have garnered interest as a therapeutic class in other substance use disorders, and self-report surveys suggest they may result in positive outcomes for CUD. Herein, we review the existing literature pertaining to psychedelic use in persons with or at risk for CUD and consider the potential rationale underpinning psychedelics as a treatment for CUD.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in several databases. Inclusion criteria were primary research reporting use of psychedelics or related substances and CUD for treatment in human subjects. Exclusion criteria were results including psychedelics or related substances without changes in cannabis use or risks associated with CUD.

Results

Three hundred and five unique results were returned. One article was identified using the non-classical psychedelic ketamine in CUD; three articles were identified as topically relevant based on their secondary data or consideration of mechanism. Additional articles were reviewed for purposes of background, review of safety considerations, and formulating rationale.

Conclusion

Limited data and reporting are available on the use of psychedelics in persons with CUD, and more research is needed given the anticipated increase in CUD incidence and increasing interest in psychedelic use. While psychedelics, broadly, have a high therapeutic index with infrequent serious adverse effects, particular adverse effects at risk in the CUD population, such as psychosis and cardiovascular events, should be considered. Possible mechanisms by which psychedelics have therapeutic potential in CUD are explored.

Treatment of Adolescent Cannabis Use Disorders

This review summarizes treatments for cannabis use disorder (CUD) in adolescents. The best supported CUD treatments are cognitive behavioral psychotherapies, including family-based models that facilitate environmental changes and youth-focused models that incorporate skills training, motivational interviewing, and contingency management to promote reductions in cannabis use. Some medications show promise in reducing cannabis craving and withdrawal symptoms. Further research is needed on the efficacy and implementation of existing treatments given the changes in cannabis use trends over time and on emerging technologies that may expand access to evidence-based CUD treatments.

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome and cannabis withdrawal syndrome: a review of the management of cannabis-related syndrome in the emergency department

Background

Cannabis-related medical consultations are increasing worldwide, a non-negligible public health issue; patients presenting to acute care traditionally complain of abdominal pain and vomiting. Often recurrent, these frequent consultations add to the congestion of already chronically saturated emergency department(s) (ED). In order to curb this phenomenon, a specific approach for these patients is key, to enable appropriate treatment and long-term follow-up.

Objectives

This study reviews cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) and cannabis withdrawal syndrome (CWS), in a bid to help promote better understanding and handling of pathologies associated with chronic cannabis use. Following a literature review, we present a novel therapeutic algorithm aimed at guiding clinicians, in a bid to improve long-term outcomes and prevent recurrences.

Methods

Using the keywords “Cannabis,” “Hyperemesis,” “Syndrome,” “Withdrawal,” and “Emergency Medicine,” we completed a literature review of three different electronic databases (PubMed®, Google scholar®, and Cochrane®), up to November 2021.

Results

Although often presenting with similar symptoms such as abdominal pain and vomiting, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) and cannabis withdrawal syndrome (CWS) are the result of two differing pathophysiological processes. Distinguishing between these two syndromes is essential to provide appropriate symptomatic options.

Conclusion

The correct identification of the underlying cannabis-related syndrome, and subsequent therapeutic choice, may help decrease ED presentations. Our study emphasizes the importance of both acute care and long-term outpatient follow-up, as key processes in cannabis-related disorder treatment.

Objective sleep outcomes in randomized-controlled trials in persons with substance use disorders: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Improving sleep health is an important target for substance use disorder (SUD) research. However, there is little guidance for SUD researchers regarding the use of technologies to objectively assess sleep outcomes in randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). This systematic review aimed to describe the use of technologies to objectively measure sleep outcomes in RCTs conducted in persons with SUDs, in order to inform future sleep intervention studies in SUD populations.

METHODS

This study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on May 7th, 2020 (CRD42020182004). RCTs were reviewed here if they were peer-reviewed manuscripts that included objective measures of sleep in RCTs that sought to improve sleep in persons with SUDs.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 13,403 potential articles, with 27 meeting a priori criteria to be included in this review. The most common SUD was alcohol use disorder (59%). The most common technology used to assess sleep was polysomnography (41%), followed by actigraphy (37%), ambulatory polysomnography or components of polysomnography (e.g., electroencephalography; 19%), and at-home sleep apnea testing (7%). The most common sleep outcome reported was total sleep time (96%).

CONCLUSIONS

There are a range of options to assess objective sleep outcomes. Polysomnography or ambulatory devices that directly measure brain activity are critical to advance medications through the regulatory process for the indication of improving sleep duration, continuity, and/or sleep onset latency outcomes. Actigraphy is also useful in preliminary investigations and in detecting the relationship between diurnal and SUD-related behaviors.

Patient-reported sleep outcomes in randomized-controlled trials in persons with substance use disorders: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbances and disorders are a common and sometimes recalcitrant problem in persons recovering from substance use disorders (SUDs). As such, several randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted to address sleep disturbances in a variety of SUD subpopulations and clinical scenarios. The goal of this systematic review was to collate patient-reported sleep outcomes used in past SUD-related RCTs to provide guidance for future sleep research in persons with SUDs.

METHODS

This systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on May 7th, 2020 (CRD42020182004). Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed manuscripts describing RCTs in an SUD population.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 13,403 candidate articles, and 76 met a priori criteria and were included in this review. Thirty-five (46.1%) assessed sleep as a primary outcome (i.e., sleep improvement was the primary goal of the research) and 41 (53.9%) assessed sleep as a secondary outcome (i.e., sleep improvement was an important outcome, but not the primary outcome). The most commonly used measures included the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, the Insomnia Severity Index, and sleep diaries. However, multiple additional sleep assessments were also used, including visual analogue and Likert scales.

CONCLUSIONS

The field of addiction medicine would benefit from a streamlined approach in assessing patient-reported sleep in RCTs, including commonly used and validated assessments of sleep quality, inserting daily or repeated measures into RCTs, and including questionnaires that assess clinically relevant insomnia or other sleep disorders.

5HT-2C agonist lorcaserin decreases cannabis self-administration in daily cannabis smokers

There are no FDA-approved treatments for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Preclinical research has shown that the 5HT-2C agonist lorcaserin attenuates cue-induced reinstatement of THC seeking and self-administration. The goal of this placebo-controlled, counterbalanced, within-subject human laboratory study was to examine lorcaserin's effects on cannabis intoxication and self-administration. Lorcaserin (10 mg BID) was administered during one of two 13-day inpatient phases and placebo during the other; each phase was separated by ≥7 days of washout. Inpatient phases comprised (1) standardized cannabis administration (7.0% THC) at no financial cost (intoxication), counterbalanced with (2) the option to self-administer cannabis following either 0 or 3 days of abstinence. Cognitive task performance, food intake, subjective ratings of drug effects, objective/subjective sleep measures, and tobacco cigarette use were also assessed. Fifteen normal-weight, daily cannabis users (4F, 11M) not seeking treatment for CUD completed the study. Lorcaserin significantly reduced cannabis self-administration following 0 and 3 days of cannabis abstinence and also reduced craving for cannabis during abstinence. Lorcaserin produced small but significant increases in positive cannabis ratings and body weight relative to placebo. Lorcaserin also reduced tobacco cigarette smoking on days of cannabis administration relative to placebo. During abstinence, subjective but not objective measures of sleep quality worsened during lorcaserin maintenance. Overall, lorcaserin's ability to decrease drug taking and cannabis craving in nontreatment-seeking cannabis users supports further investigation of 5HT-2C agonists as potential pharmacotherapies for CUD.

Quetiapine treatment for cannabis use disorder

BACKROUND

Pharmacotherapy for cannabis use disorder (CUD) is an important unmet public health need.

METHODS

In a 12-week randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, the efficacy of quetiapine (300 mg nightly) for the treatment of CUD was tested in 130 outpatients. Weekly cannabis use was categorized into three groups: heavy use (5-7 days), moderate use (2-4 days) and light use (0-1 days).

RESULTS

At baseline both groups were considered heavy users (using days per week: median = 7.0; interquartile range (IQR): 6.5-7.0; daily dollar value: median = $121.4; IQR: 73.8-206.3). The week-by-treatment interaction was marginally significant (χ²(2) = 5.56, P = .06). With each week, the odds of moderate compared to heavy use significantly increased in the quetiapine group (OR=1.17, P < .0001), but not significantly in the placebo group (OR=1.05, P = .16). The odds of light versus heavy use did not significantly differ over time (P = .12). Treatment was also associated with reduced cannabis withdrawal symptoms by 10.4% each week (95% CI: 8.9-11.8). No serious adverse events occurred during the study and no evidence of development of a movement disorder was detected. Adverse effects were not significantly different between the quetiapine and placebo treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of quetiapine to treat CUD was associated with an increased likelihood of heavy frequency use transitioning to moderate use, but not light use. The clinical significance of reductions in cannabis use, short of abstinence warrants further study.

The effect of daily aerobic cycling exercise on sleep quality during inpatient cannabis withdrawal: A randomised controlled trial

Sleep disturbance is a common symptom encountered by cannabis-dependent individuals abstaining from cannabis use. In the present study, we investigated the effect of daily aerobic cycling exercise versus control stretching on sleep quality during inpatient cannabis withdrawal in treatment-seeking dependent cannabis users. The protocol incorporated three consecutive phases: a 4-Day (4-Night) (at-home) 'Baseline' phase, a 6-Day (5-Night) 'Treatment' phase (within a 7-Day inpatient hospital stay) and a 3-Day (4-Night) (at-home) 'Post-Treatment' phase. Participants performed 35 min of monitored activity per day during the Treatment phase. The intervention group (n = 19) cycled at ~60% aerobic capacity (VO_2max ), while the control group (n = 12) performed a stretching routine. Objective sleep quality was measured nightly throughout the study using wrist actigraphy ratings of subjective sleep quality were also recorded during the Treatment phase. There were no group differences in sleep measures during the Baseline phase (all p > .05). Objective sleep onset latency increased from the Baseline to the Treatment phase in the control (stretching) group (p = .042). In contrast, the Cycling group exhibited improvements in sleep duration (p = .008) and sleep efficiency (p = .023) during the Treatment phase compared to the Baseline phase. Cycling also increased sleep duration (p = .005), decreased average wake bout (p = .040) and tended to increase sleep efficiency (p = .051) compared to stretching during the Treatment phase. Subjective sleep quality ratings did not differ between groups (p > .10). These preliminary findings suggest that moderate-intensity aerobic exercise may attenuate the sleep disturbances associated with cannabis withdrawal.

Pharmacotherapies for Cannabis Use Disorders: Clinical Challenges and Promising Therapeutic Agents

This chapter reviews pharmacotherapies that have been trialled for cannabis dependence, identifying those that warrant further research and those of little or uncertain value. A diverse range of medicines have been tested, representing a broad range of pharmacological strategies. These include tetrahydrocannabinol preparations, various types of antidepressant, anxiolytics, a glutamatergic modulator and the neuropeptide oxytocin. Cannabinoid agonists warrant further research. For the FAAH inhibitor PF-04457845, oxytocin, varenicline and gabapentin, although there is a signal to indicate further research is warranted, these medications do not yet have sufficient evidence to support clinical use, and larger, longer-term trials are needed in representative treatment-seeking populations. Special populations that warrant consideration are those with cannabis dependence and concurrent mental health conditions and those that develop dependence through therapeutic use.

Guanfacine decreases symptoms of cannabis withdrawal in daily cannabis smokers

The α2a-adrenergic agonist, lofexidine, reduced cannabis withdrawal-related sleep disruption in the laboratory, but side effects (e.g. fatigue, hypotension) limit its utility as a treatment for cannabis use disorder. This study tested the potential efficacy and tolerability of a daily bedtime administration of the FDA-approved α2a-adrenergic agonist, guanfacine, in a human laboratory model of cannabis use disorder. Daily, nontreatment-seeking cannabis smokers (13M, 2F) completed a within-subject study comprising two 9-day inpatient study phases. Each phase tested the effects of daily placebo or immediate-release guanfacine (2 mg) on cannabis intoxication (5.6 percent THC; 2 days), withdrawal (4 days of abstinence) and subsequent 'relapse' (3 days of cannabis self-administration). Ratings of mood, sleep, cardiovascular effects, food intake, psychomotor performance and cannabis self-administration were assessed. An outpatient phase preceded each inpatient phase for medication clearance or dose induction. Under placebo medication conditions, cannabis abstinence produced significant withdrawal, including irritability, sleep disruption and anorexia. Guanfacine reduced ratings of irritability and improved objective measures of sleep during cannabis withdrawal relative to placebo but did not reduce cannabis self-administration. Guanfacine was well tolerated with little evidence of fatigue and only small decreases in blood pressure: no dose was held due to hypotension. Thus, a single daily administration of guanfacine at bedtime improved sleep and mood during cannabis withdrawal relative to placebo. This positive signal supports further studies varying the guanfacine dose, formulation or frequency of administration, or combining it with other medications to increase the likelihood of having an impact on cannabis use.

Pharmacotherapies for cannabis dependence

BACKGROUND

Globally, cannabis use is prevalent and widespread. There are currently no pharmacotherapies approved for treatment of cannabis use disorders.This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in the Cochrane Library in Issue 12, 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapies as compared with each other, placebo or no pharmacotherapy (supportive care) for reducing symptoms of cannabis withdrawal and promoting cessation or reduction of cannabis use.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to March 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs involving the use of medications to treat cannabis withdrawal or to promote cessation or reduction of cannabis use, or both, in comparison with other medications, placebo or no medication (supportive care) in people diagnosed as cannabis dependent or who were likely to be dependent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 RCTs involving 1755 participants: 18 studies recruited adults (mean age 22 to 41 years); three studies targeted young people (mean age 20 years). Most (75%) participants were male. The studies were at low risk of performance, detection and selective outcome reporting bias. One study was at risk of selection bias, and three studies were at risk of attrition bias.All studies involved comparison of active medication and placebo. The medications were diverse, as were the outcomes reported, which limited the extent of analysis.Abstinence at end of treatment was no more likely with Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) preparations than with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.52; 305 participants; 3 studies; moderate-quality evidence). For selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers, buspirone and N-acetylcysteine, there was no difference in the likelihood of abstinence at end of treatment compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence).There was qualitative evidence of reduced intensity of withdrawal symptoms with THC preparations compared to placebo. For other pharmacotherapies, this outcome was either not examined, or no significant differences was reported.Adverse effects were no more likely with THC preparations (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.17; 318 participants; 3 studies) or N-acetylcysteine (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.23; 418 participants; 2 studies) compared to placebo (moderate-quality evidence). For SSRI antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, buspirone and N-acetylcysteine, there was no difference in adverse effects compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence).There was no difference in the likelihood of withdrawal from treatment due to adverse effects with THC preparations, SSRIs antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers, buspirone and N-acetylcysteine compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence).There was no difference in the likelihood of treatment completion with THC preparations, SSRI antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants and buspirone compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence) or with N-acetylcysteine compared to placebo (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21; 418 participants; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers appeared to reduce the likelihood of treatment completion (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.92; 141 participants; 3 studies; low-quality evidence).Available evidence on gabapentin (anticonvulsant), oxytocin (neuropeptide) and atomoxetine was insufficient for estimates of effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is incomplete evidence for all of the pharmacotherapies investigated, and for many outcomes the quality of the evidence was low or very low. Findings indicate that SSRI antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, bupropion, buspirone and atomoxetine are probably of little value in the treatment of cannabis dependence. Given the limited evidence of efficacy, THC preparations should be considered still experimental, with some positive effects on withdrawal symptoms and craving. The evidence base for the anticonvulsant gabapentin, oxytocin, and N-acetylcysteine is weak, but these medications are also worth further investigation.

The Effects of the Addiction Programme of Probation on Treatment Motivation, Abstinence and Quality of Life: a Comparative Study with Motivational Interviewing and Individual Intervention

Introduction

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Addiction Programme of Probation (APP) created by the Substance Abuse Treatment Commission of Ministry of Health.

Methods

The sample was consisted of probationers who were referred to Ege University by probation offices in February 2010. Literate probationers aged above 18, who fulfilled the SCID-I criteria for substance dependence, or had positive urine sample for illegal drugs were included. The probationers were allocated respectively to three treatment groups: APP (n=28); Motivational Interviewing (MI; n=30); Individual Intervention (II; n=30). The effectiveness of the treatment modalities was assessed by the State Anxiety Inventory; the WHO Quality of Life-Brief form; the Treatment Motivation Questionnaire. Visual analogue and Likert-type scales were used to assess the sense of the importance and the readiness of quitting drugs also the levels of craving. Urine toxicological analyses were performed fortnightly.

Results

The APP increased the readiness of quitting drugs. The MI increased both the sense of importance and readiness of quitting drugs, decreased the frequency and severity of craving. The II improved the mental and physical health, increased the confidence in treatment also readiness of quitting drugs. Additionally, II decreased the level of anxiety, the severity, frequency and duration of craving. There was a significant decrease in positive urine samples of all groups.

Conclusion

Because of changing only "the level of being ready to quit substance abuse", APP is considered as an inadequate program compared with MI and II.

The Effects of the Addiction Programme of Probation on Treatment Motivation, Abstinence and Quality of Life: a Comparative Study with Motivational Interviewing and Individual Intervention

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Addiction Programme of Probation (APP) created by the Substance Abuse Treatment Commission of Ministry of Health.

METHODS

The sample was consisted of probationers who were referred to Ege University by probation offices in February 2010. Literate probationers aged above 18, who fulfilled the SCID-I criteria for substance dependence, or had positive urine sample for illegal drugs were included. The probationers were allocated respectively to three treatment groups: APP (n=28); Motivational Interviewing (MI; n=30); Individual Intervention (II; n=30). The effectiveness of the treatment modalities was assessed by the State Anxiety Inventory; the WHO Quality of Life-Brief form; the Treatment Motivation Questionnaire. Visual analogue and Likert-type scales were used to assess the sense of the importance and the readiness of quitting drugs also the levels of craving. Urine toxicological analyses were performed fortnightly.

RESULTS

The APP increased the readiness of quitting drugs. The MI increased both the sense of importance and readiness of quitting drugs, decreased the frequency and severity of craving. The II improved the mental and physical health, increased the confidence in treatment also readiness of quitting drugs. Additionally, II decreased the level of anxiety, the severity, frequency and duration of craving. There was a significant decrease in positive urine samples of all groups.

CONCLUSION

Because of changing only "the level of being ready to quit substance abuse", APP is considered as an inadequate program compared with MI and II.

What do we know about the pharmacotheraputic management of insomnia in cannabis withdrawal: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sleep disturbance is one of the hallmarks of cannabis withdrawal. Studies have indicated that treatment of this key symptom may facilitate abstinence. In the present paper we aim to provide a systematic review of the extant literature on pharmacological management of sleep disturbance associated with cannabis withdrawal.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic literature search across five electronic databases including PubMed, Psycinfo, MEDLINE, Cochrane review and Embase. Human studies using a pharmacological treatment for sleep disturbances associated with cannabis withdrawal were included. Review articles, case-series, open trials, posters, and editorials were excluded.

RESULTS

Seventeen publications, involving 562 participants, were included in this review. Major limitations involved small sample size, high dropout rate, methodological limitations, and heterogeneity of participants. Most of the studies were at high risk of bias, further downgrading the level of evidence. A meta-analysis was not performed due to lack of quantitative data, marked heterogeneity and low quality of the included studies.

CONCLUSION

There is not sufficient evidence for any of the reviewed treatment options. Methodological limitations in a majority of the studies rendered their findings preliminary. Of the twelve investigated pharmacological agents, Gabapentin, Lofexidine, Mirtazapine, Quetiapine, and Zolpidem showed some primary benefits for treatment of sleep difficulties associated with cannabis withdrawal; however, future prospective studies are required to confirm such results.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This review examines the current evidence for potential pharmacological options for treatment of cannabis withdrawal and associated sleep disturbance. It furthers our knowledge and provides groundwork for future research. (Am J Addict 2018;27:453-464).

When and How to Treat Possible Cannabis Use Disorder

Cannabis (marijuana) is a drug product derived from the plant Cannabis sativa. Cannabinoid is a general term for all chemical constituents of the cannabis plant. Legalization of marijuana in numerous US states, the availability of cannabis of higher potency, and the emergence of synthetic cannabinoids may have contributed to increased demand for related medical services. The most effective available treatments for cannabis use disorder are psychosocial approaches. There is no pharmacotherapy approved treatment. This article reviews the current state of knowledge regarding effective treatments for cannabis use disorder.

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.

Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder: Current Science and Future Outlook

Cannabis is the most commonly used illicit substance in the United States. Rates of cannabis use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) have increased in the past decade, paralleling changes in the legal and political climate favoring legalization. Almost 20 million people 12 years or older report past-month cannabis use, and 8 million report daily or near-daily use. Concurrently, the perception that cannabis use poses a significant risk of negative consequences has decreased. Contrary to this perception, heavy cannabis use is associated with cognitive impairment, increased risk for psychotic disorders and other mental health problems, lower education attainment, and unemployment. Clinical trials of various treatments for CUD have likewise increased, focusing primarily on psychotherapy treatments, specifically motivational enhancement therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and contingency management. Their findings suggest that a combination of these three modalities produces the best abstinence outcomes, although abstinence rates remain modest and decline after treatment. More recently, pharmacotherapy trials have been conducted as adjunctive interventions to psychosocial treatment. N-acetylcysteine and gabapentin are two of the most promising medications, although no pharmacologic treatment has emerged as clearly efficacious. In this review, we provide a detailed summary of clinical trials that evaluated psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy for treating CUD and discuss emerging areas of clinical research and cannabis-specific barriers to treatment.

The cannabis withdrawal syndrome: current insights

The cannabis withdrawal syndrome (CWS) is a criterion of cannabis use disorders (CUDs) (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fifth Edition) and cannabis dependence (International Classification of Diseases [ICD]-10). Several lines of evidence from animal and human studies indicate that cessation from long-term and regular cannabis use precipitates a specific withdrawal syndrome with mainly mood and behavioral symptoms of light to moderate intensity, which can usually be treated in an outpatient setting. Regular cannabis intake is related to a desensitization and downregulation of human brain cannabinoid 1 (CB1) receptors. This starts to reverse within the first 2 days of abstinence and the receptors return to normal functioning within 4 weeks of abstinence, which could constitute a neurobiological time frame for the duration of CWS, not taking into account cellular and synaptic long-term neuroplasticity elicited by long-term cannabis use before cessation, for example, being possibly responsible for cannabis craving. The CWS severity is dependent on the amount of cannabis used pre-cessation, gender, and heritable and several environmental factors. Therefore, naturalistic severity of CWS highly varies. Women reported a stronger CWS than men including physical symptoms, such as nausea and stomach pain. Comorbidity with mental or somatic disorders, severe CUD, and low social functioning may require an inpatient treatment (preferably qualified detox) and post-acute rehabilitation. There are promising results with gabapentin and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol analogs in the treatment of CWS. Mirtazapine can be beneficial to treat CWS insomnia. According to small studies, venlafaxine can worsen the CWS, whereas other antidepressants, atomoxetine, lithium, buspirone, and divalproex had no relevant effect. Certainly, further research is required with respect to the impact of the CWS treatment setting on long-term CUD prognosis and with respect to psychopharmacological or behavioral approaches, such as aerobic exercise therapy or psychoeducation, in the treatment of CWS. The up-to-date ICD-11 Beta Draft is recommended to be expanded by physical CWS symptoms, the specification of CWS intensity and duration as well as gender effects.

Clinical Laboratory Evaluation of Electronic Cigarettes/Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: Methodological Challenges

OBJECTIVE

Evaluating electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) in the clinical laboratory is critical to understanding their effects. However, laboratory evaluation of ECIGs can be challenging, as they are a novel, varied, and evolving class of products. The objective of this paper is to describe some methodological challenges to the clinical laboratory evaluation of ECIGs.

METHODS

The authors gathered information about challenges involved in the laboratory evaluation of ECIGs. Challenges were categorized and solutions provided when possible.

RESULTS

Methods used to study combustible cigarettes may need to be adapted to account for ECIG novelty and differences within the class. Challenges to ECIG evaluation can include issues related to 1) identification of ECIG devices and liquids, 2) determination of short -term ECIG abstinence, 3) measurement of use behavior, and 4) assessment of dependence. These challenges are discussed, and some suggestions to inform ECIG evaluation using clinical laboratory methods are provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of challenges and developing, validating, and reporting methods used to address them aids interpretation of results and replication efforts, thus enhancing the rigor of science used to protect public health through appropriate, empirically-based, ECIG regulation.

Effects of zolpidem alone and in combination with nabilone on cannabis withdrawal and a laboratory model of relapse in cannabis users

RATIONALE

Each year, over 300,000 individuals in the USA enter treatment for cannabis use disorder (CUD). The development of effective pharmacotherapy for CUD is a priority.

OBJECTIVE

This placebo-controlled study examined the effects of zolpidem alone and in combination with nabilone on cannabis withdrawal and a laboratory measure of relapse.

METHODS

Eleven daily, non-treatment-seeking cannabis users completed three, 8-day inpatient phases; each phase tested a different medication condition in counter-balanced order. On the first day of each phase, participants were administered placebo capsules t.i.d. and smoked experimenter-administered active cannabis (5.6 % Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)). On days 2-8, the participants were administered capsules containing either placebo (0 mg at 0900, 1800, and 2300 hours), zolpidem (0 mg at 0900 and 1800, and 12.5 mg at 2300), or zolpidem (12.5 mg at 2300) and nabilone (3 mg at 0900 and 1800). Cannabis withdrawal, subjective capsule effects, and cognitive performance were examined on days 3-4, when only inactive cannabis (0.0 % THC) was available for self-administration. "Relapse" was measured on days 5-8, when participants could self-administer active cannabis.

RESULTS

Both medication conditions decreased withdrawal-related disruptions in sleep, but only zolpidem in combination with nabilone decreased withdrawal-related disruptions in mood and food intake relative to placebo. Zolpidem in combination with nabilone, but not zolpidem alone, decreased self-administration of active cannabis. Zolpidem in combination with nabilone also produced small increases in certain abuse-related subjective capsule ratings, while zolpidem alone did not. Neither medication condition altered cognitive performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical testing of nabilone, either alone, or in combination with zolpidem is warranted.

Progress toward pharmacotherapies for cannabis-use disorder: an evidence-based review

Cannabis is the most widely used and variably regulated drug in the world, with increasing trends of use being reported in the US, Australia, Asia, and Africa. Evidence has shown a decrease in the age of commencement of cannabis use in some developed countries and a prolongation of risk of initiation to cannabis use beyond adolescence among more recent users. Cannabis use is associated with numerous health risks and long-term morbidity, as well as risk of developing cannabis-use disorders. Cannabis users infrequently seek professional treatment, and normally do so after a decade of use. Cannabis-use disorders are currently treated using a selection of psychosocial interventions. Severity of withdrawal is a factor that increases the risk of relapse, and is the target of pharmacotherapy studies. Currently, there is no approved pharmacotherapy for cannabis-use disorders. A number of approaches have been examined, and trials are continuing to find a safe and effective medication with little abuse liability.

Sleep abnormalities associated with alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, and opiate use: a comprehensive review

Sleep abnormalities are associated with acute and chronic use of addictive substances. Although sleep complaints associated with use and abstinence from addictive substances are widely recognized, familiarity with the underlying sleep abnormalities is often lacking, despite evidence that these sleep abnormalities may be recalcitrant and impede good outcomes. Substantial research has now characterized the abnormalities associated with acute and chronic use of alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, and opiates. This review summarizes this research and discusses the clinical implications of sleep abnormalities in the treatment of substance use disorders.

Screening Medications for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder

Cannabis use has been increasingly accepted legally and in public opinion. However, cannabis has the potential to produce adverse physical and mental health effects, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) occurs in a substantial percentage of both occasional and daily cannabis users. Many people have difficulty discontinuing use despite receiving treatment. Therefore, it would be beneficial to develop safe and effective medications for treating CUD. To achieve this, methods have been developed for screening and evaluating potential medications using animal models and controlled experimental protocols in human volunteers. In this chapter, we describe: (1) animal models available for assessing the effect of potential medications on specific aspects of CUD, (2) the main findings obtained so far with these animal models, (3) the approaches used to assess potential medications in humans in laboratory experiments and clinical trials, and (4) the effectiveness of several potential pharmacotherapies on particular aspects of CUD modeled in these human studies.

Open-label pilot study of quetiapine treatment for cannabis dependence

BACKGROUND

There are no efficacious pharmacotherapies for cannabis dependence. The effects of quetiapine are well matched to the symptoms of cannabis withdrawal and could be useful in the treatment of cannabis dependence.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate quetiapine for the treatment of cannabis dependence and determine the optimal dosing.

METHODS

In an eight-week open-label outpatient pilot trial, we evaluated the feasibility of quetiapine treatment for cannabis dependence in 15 outpatients. Quetiapine was gradually titrated to 600 mg or the maximum tolerated dose.

RESULTS

The mean study retention was 6.5 weeks (±2.3), with 67% of participants completing all eight weeks of the trial. The mean maximum dose achieved was 197 mg/day (range: 25-600 mg/day). Only two of the 15 participants were able to achieve the target dose of 600 mg daily. There were no serious adverse events and no participants were discontinued from the trial due to adverse effects. The most common reported adverse effects were fatigue (80% of participants) and somnolence (47%). From baseline to week 8, the modeled overall decrease in daily dollar value of marijuana was 76.3% (CI: 63.4%, 84.7%). Over the eight weeks of the study, there was a 46.9% (CI: 11%, 68.3%) decrease in urine tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (THCOOH) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary results are promising in that quetiapine treatment was tolerated by cannabis-dependent patients and associated with decreased cannabis use. The recommended maximum target dose for cannabis-dependent patients is 300 mg daily. These preliminary data support further evaluation of quetiapine as a treatment for cannabis dependence.

Interactions between disordered sleep, post-traumatic stress disorder, and substance use disorders

Disordered sleep is associated with a number of adverse health consequences and is an integral component of many psychiatric disorders. Rates of substance use disorders (SUDs) are markedly higher among individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and this relationship may be partly mediated by disturbed sleep. Sleep disturbances (e.g. insomnia, daytime sleepiness, vivid nightmares) are hallmark features of PTSD and there is evidence that individuals with PTSD engage in substance use as a means of coping with these symptoms. However, prolonged substance use can lead to more severe sleep disturbances due to the development of tolerance and withdrawal. Behavioural or pharmacological treatment of disordered sleep is associated with improved daytime symptoms and psychosocial functioning among individuals who have developed PTSD. Initial research also suggests that improving sleep could be similarly beneficial in reducing coping oriented substance use and preventing relapse among those seeking treatment for SUDs. Together, these findings suggest that ameliorating sleep disturbance among at-risk individuals would be a viable target for the prevention and treatment of PTSD and associated SUDs, but prospective research is needed to examine this hypothesis. Enhanced understanding of the interrelation between sleep, PTSD, and SUDs may yield novel prevention and intervention approaches for these costly, prevalent and frequently co-occurring disorders.

Novel Pharmacologic Approaches to Treating Cannabis Use Disorder

With large and increasing numbers of people using cannabis, the development of cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a growing public health concern. Despite the success of evidence-based psychosocial therapies, low rates of initial abstinence and high rates of relapse during and following treatment for CUD suggest a need for adjunct pharmacotherapies. Here we review the literature on medication development for the treatment of CUD, with a particular focus on studies published within the last three years (2010-2013). Studies in both the human laboratory and in the clinic have tested medications with a wide variety of mechanisms. In the laboratory, the following medication strategies have been shown to decrease cannabis withdrawal and self-administration following a period of abstinence (a model of relapse): the cannabinoid receptor agonist, nabilone, and the adrenergic agonist, lofexidine, alone and in combination with dronabinol (synthetic THC), supporting clinical testing of these medication strategies. Antidepressant, anxiolytic and antipsychotic drugs targeting monoamines (norepinephrine, dopamine, and serotonin) have generally failed to decrease withdrawal symptoms or laboratory measures of relapse. In terms of clinical trials, dronabinol and multiple antidepressants (fluoxetine, venlafaxine and buspirone) have failed to decrease cannabis use. Preliminary results from controlled clinical trials with gabapentin and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) support further research on these medication strategies. Data from open label and laboratory studies suggest lithium and oxytocin also warrant further testing. Overall, it is likely that different medications will be needed to target distinct aspects of problematic cannabis use: craving, ongoing use, withdrawal and relapse. Continued research is needed in preclinical, laboratory and clinical settings.

Pharmacotherapies for cannabis dependence

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is the most prevalent illicit drug in the world. Demand for treatment of cannabis use disorders is increasing. There are currently no pharmacotherapies approved for treatment of cannabis use disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapies as compared with each other, placebo or supportive care for reducing symptoms of cannabis withdrawal and promoting cessation or reduction of cannabis use.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (to 4 March 2014), MEDLINE (to week 3 February 2014), EMBASE (to 3 March 2014) and PsycINFO (to week 4 February 2014). We also searched reference lists of articles, electronic sources of ongoing trials and conference proceedings, and contacted selected researchers active in the area.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials involving the use of medications to reduce the symptoms and signs of cannabis withdrawal or to promote cessation or reduction of cannabis use, or both, in comparison with other medications, placebo or no medication (supportive care) in participants diagnosed as cannabis dependent or who were likely to be dependent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. All review authors confirmed the inclusion decisions and the overall process.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 randomised controlled trials involving 958 participants. For 10 studies the average age was 33 years; two studies targeted young people; and age data were not available for two studies. Approximately 80% of study participants were male. The studies were at low risk of selection, performance, detection and selective outcome reporting bias. Three studies were at risk of attrition bias.All studies involved comparison of active medication and placebo. The medications included preparations containing tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) (two studies), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants (two studies), mixed action antidepressants (three studies), anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers (three studies), an atypical antidepressant (two studies), an anxiolytic (one study), a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (one study) and a glutamatergic modulator (one study). One study examined more than one medication. Diversity in the medications and the outcomes reported limited the extent that analysis was possible. Insufficient data were available to assess the utility of most of the medications to promote cannabis abstinence at the end of treatment.There was moderate quality evidence that completion of treatment was more likely with preparations containing THC compared to placebo (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.55; 2 studies, 207 participants, P = 0.006). There was some evidence that treatment with preparations containing THC was associated with reduced cannabis withdrawal symptoms and craving, but this latter outcome could not be quantified. For mixed action antidepressants compared with placebo (2 studies, 179 participants) there was very low quality evidence on the likelihood of abstinence from cannabis at the end of follow-up (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.12 to 5.41), and moderate quality evidence on the likelihood of treatment completion (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.21). For this same outcome there was very low quality evidence for the effects of SSRI antidepressants (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.53; 2 studies, 122 participants), anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.46; 2 studies, 75 participants), and the atypical antidepressant, bupropion (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.67; 2 studies, 92 participants). Available evidence on gabapentin (anticonvulsant) and N-acetylcysteine (glutamatergic modulator) was insufficient for quantitative estimates of their effectiveness, but these medications may be worth further investigation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is incomplete evidence for all of the pharmacotherapies investigated, and for many of the outcomes the quality was downgraded due to small sample sizes, inconsistency and risk of attrition bias. The quantitative analyses that were possible, combined with general findings of the studies reviewed, indicate that SSRI antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, atypical antidepressants (bupropion), anxiolytics (buspirone) and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (atomoxetine) are probably of little value in the treatment of cannabis dependence. Preparations containing THC are of potential value but, given the limited evidence, this application of THC preparations should be considered still experimental. Further studies should compare different preparations of THC, dose and duration of treatment, adjunct medications and therapies. The evidence base for the anticonvulsant gabapentin and the glutamatergic modulator N-acetylcysteine is weak, but these medications are also worth further investigation.

Crosswalk between DSM-IV dependence and DSM-5 substance use disorders for opioids, cannabis, cocaine and alcohol

BACKGROUND

Ascertaining agreement between DSM-IV and DSM-5 is important to determine the applicability of treatments for DSM-IV conditions to persons diagnosed according to the proposed DSM-5.

METHODS

Data from a nationally representative sample of US adults were used to compare concordance of past-year DSM-IV opioid, cannabis, cocaine and alcohol dependence with past-year DSM-5 disorders at thresholds of 3+, 4+, 5+ and 6+ positive DSM-5 criteria among past-year users of opioids (n=264), cannabis (n=1622), cocaine (n=271) and alcohol (n=23,013). Substance-specific 2 × 2 tables yielded overall concordance (kappa), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV).

RESULTS

For DSM-IV alcohol, cocaine and opioid dependence, optimal concordance occurred when 4+ DSM-5 criteria were endorsed, corresponding to the threshold for moderate DSM-5 alcohol, cocaine and opioid use disorders. Maximal concordance of DSM-IV cannabis dependence and DSM-5 cannabis use disorder occurred when 6+ criteria were endorsed, corresponding to the threshold for severe DSM-5 cannabis use disorder. At these optimal thresholds, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV generally exceeded 85% (>75% for cannabis).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, excellent correspondence of DSM-IV dependence with DSM-5 substance use disorders was documented in this general population sample of alcohol, cannabis, cocaine and opioid users. Applicability of treatments tested for DSM-IV dependence is supported by these results for those with a DSM-5 alcohol, cocaine or opioid use disorder of at least moderate severity or severe cannabis use disorder. Further research is needed to provide evidence for applicability of treatments for persons with milder substance use disorders.

A review of human drug self-administration procedures

Drug self-administration procedures in laboratory settings allow us to closely model drug-taking behavior in real-world settings. This review provides an overview of many of the common self-administration methods used in human laboratory research. Typically, self-administration studies provide a quantifiable measure of the reinforcing effect of a drug, which is believed to be predictive of its potential for abuse. Several adaptations of the self-administration paradigm exist, the simplest of which allows participants free access to the drug under investigation. Free-access procedures allow investigators to observe patterns of drug self-administration and drug effects in a controlled setting. Allowing participants to choose between two simultaneously available reinforcers (choice procedures) is another well-established method of assessing the reinforcing effects of a drug. Offering a choice between two reinforcers (e.g. two different doses of the same drug, two different drugs, or drug and nondrug reinforcers) provides researchers with a point of comparison (e.g. between a drug of known abuse potential and a novel drug). When combined with other endpoints, such as subjective effects ratings, physiological responses, and cognitive performance, human self-administration paradigms have contributed significantly to our understanding of the factors that contribute to, maintain, and alter drug-taking behavior including: craving, positive subjective effects, toxicity, drug interactions and abstinence. This area of research has also begun to incorporate other techniques such as imaging and genetics to further understand the multifaceted nature of substance abuse. The present paper summarizes the different self-administration techniques that are commonly used today and the application of other procedures that may complement interpretation of the drug self-administration findings.

Nabilone decreases marijuana withdrawal and a laboratory measure of marijuana relapse

Few individuals seeking treatment for marijuana use achieve sustained abstinence. The cannabinoid receptor agonist, Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC; dronabinol), decreases marijuana withdrawal symptoms, yet does not decrease marijuana use in the laboratory or clinic. Dronabinol has poor bioavailability, which may contribute to its poor efficacy. The FDA-approved synthetic analog of THC, nabilone, has higher bioavailability and clearer dose-linearity than dronabinol. This study tested whether nabilone administration would decrease marijuana withdrawal symptoms and a laboratory measure of marijuana relapse relative to placebo. Daily, nontreatment-seeking marijuana smokers (8 men and 3 women), who reported smoking 8.3±3.1 marijuana cigarettes/day completed this within-subject study comprising three, 8-day inpatient phases; each phase tested a different nabilone dose (0, 6, 8 mg/day, administered in counter-balanced order on days 2-8). On the first inpatient day, participants took placebo capsules and smoked active marijuana (5.6% THC) at six timepoints. For the next 3 days, they had the opportunity to self-administer placebo marijuana (0.0% THC; withdrawal), followed by 4 days in which active marijuana was available for self-administration (5.6% THC; relapse). Both nabilone dose conditions decreased marijuana relapse and reversed withdrawal-related irritability and disruptions in sleep and food intake (p<0.05). Nabilone (8 mg/day) modestly worsened psychomotor task performance. Neither dose condition increased ratings of capsule 'liking' or desire to take the capsules relative to placebo. Thus, nabilone maintenance produced a robust attenuation of marijuana withdrawal symptoms and a laboratory measure of relapse even with once per day dosing. These data support testing of nabilone for patients seeking marijuana treatment.

Predictors of marijuana relapse in the human laboratory: robust impact of tobacco cigarette smoking status

BACKGROUND

Few marijuana smokers in treatment achieve sustained abstinence, yet factors contributing to high relapse rates are unknown.

METHODS

Study 1: data from five inpatient laboratory studies assessing marijuana intoxication, withdrawal, and relapse were combined to assess factors predicting the likelihood and severity of relapse. Daily, nontreatment-seeking marijuana smokers (n = 51; 10 ± 5 marijuana cigarettes/day) were enrolled. Study 2: to isolate the effects of cigarette smoking, marijuana intoxication, withdrawal, and relapse were assessed in daily marijuana and cigarette smokers (n = 15) under two within-subject, counter-balanced conditions: while smoking tobacco cigarettes as usual (SAU), and after at least 5 days without cigarettes (Quit).

RESULTS

Study 1: 49% of participants relapsed the first day active marijuana became available. Tobacco cigarette smokers (75%), who were not abstaining from cigarettes, were far more likely to relapse than non-cigarette smokers (odds ratio: 19, p < .01). Individuals experiencing more positive subjective effects (i.e., feeling "high") after marijuana administration and those with more negative affect and sleep disruption during marijuana withdrawal were more likely to have severe relapse episodes (p < .05). Study 2: most participants (>87%) relapsed to marijuana whether in the SAU or Quit phase. Tobacco cigarette smoking did not significantly influence relapse, nor did it affect marijuana intoxication or most symptoms of withdrawal relative to tobacco cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily marijuana smokers who also smoke cigarettes have high rates of marijuana relapse, and cigarette smoking versus recent abstinence does not directly influence this association. These data indicate that current cigarette smoking is a clinically important marker for increased risk of marijuana relapse.