A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessing the efficacy of levetiracetam extended-release in very heavy drinking alcohol-dependent patients

Efficacy of medications for the treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD): A systematic review and meta-analysis considering baseline AUD severity

Baseline severity of alcohol use disorder (AUD) is an influencing factor in the response to medications recommended for the treatment of AUD. The scarce efficacy of AUD medications partly justifies their limited uses. We were interested in evaluating the efficacy of approved and recommended AUD medications using generic inverse-variance, an analysis facilitating comparison between medications and placebo both at the end of the study and, concomitantly, to baseline values for the same participants. We conducted a systematic review to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any medication to placebo providing, both at baseline and end of treatment, percent heavy drinking days (%HDD), percent drinking days (%DD), and/or drinks per drinking day (DDD). We searched PubMed, Embase, PMC, and three CT registers from inception to April 2023. A total of 79 RCTs (11,737 AUD participants; 30 different medications) were included: 47 RCTs (8465 participants) used AUD medications, and 32 RCTs (3272 participants) used other medications. At baseline, participants consumed on average approximately 12 DDD, and experienced 70 % DD, and 61 % HDD. Placebo halved or reduced these values to a third. Compared to placebo, AUD medications further reduced these outcomes (moderate to high certainty evidence). Other medications reduced the DDD without modifying other alcohol outcomes. AUD medications increased the risk of developing adverse events (high-certainty evidence). Despite the large placebo effects, our results support the benefits of providing AUD medications to people with AUD, helping them reduce alcohol consumption.

Mining clinical data for novel medications to treat alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a highly prevalent and often debilitating condition associated with high morbidity and mortality. Current AUD medications have limited efficacy and uptake. Alternative pharmacological options are needed.

METHODS

We constructed a mechanistic tree of all US Food and Drug Administration approved medications and used a tree-based scan statistic, TreeScan, to identify medications associated with greater than expected improvements in alcohol consumption. Our cohort included all United States (US) Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patients with a diagnosis of AUD between 10/1/1999 and 9/30/2019 with multiple Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption Module scores within the VA electronic health record data.

RESULTS

Medications statistically associated with decreased alcohol consumption had, at large, minor effect sizes. Medications used in the treatment of chronic or life-threatening conditions like diabetes, chronic kidney disease, hepatitis C virus, or cancer produced larger effect sizes. Asenapine, an atypical antipsychotic, had a large effect with an observed to expected ratio of 1.78 (p = 0.003). Our findings were replicated in a propensity score matched population.

CONCLUSION

Most medications significantly associated with decreased alcohol consumption in our analysis were either contraindicated with alcohol or likely attributable to patients abstaining from alcohol due to severe illness. However, the large effect of asenapine is notable, and a worthwhile candidate for more careful analysis.

Beyond monoamines: I. Novel targets and radiotracers for Positron emission tomography imaging in psychiatric disorders

With the emergence of positron emission tomography (PET) in the late 1970s, psychiatry had access to a tool capable of non-invasive assessment of human brain function. Early applications in psychiatry focused on identifying characteristic brain blood flow and metabolic derangements using radiotracers such as [¹⁵ O]H₂ O and [¹⁸ F]FDG. Despite the success of these techniques, it became apparent that more specific probes were needed to understand the neurochemical bases of psychiatric disorders. The first neurochemical PET imaging probes targeted sites of action of neuroleptic (dopamine D₂ receptors) and psychoactive (serotonin receptors) drugs. Based on the centrality of monoamine dysfunction in psychiatric disorders and the measured success of monoamine-enhancing drugs in treating them, the next 30 years witnessed the development of an armamentarium of PET radiopharmaceuticals and imaging methodologies for studying monoamines. Continued development of monoamine-enhancing drugs over this time however was less successful, realizing only modest gains in efficacy and tolerability. As patent protection for many widely prescribed and profitable psychiatric drugs lapsed, drug development pipelines shifted away from monoamines in search of novel targets with the promises of improved efficacy, or abandoned altogether. Over this period, PET radiopharmaceutical development activities closely paralleled drug development priorities resulting in the development of new PET imaging agents for non-monoamine targets. Part one of this review will briefly survey novel PET imaging targets with relevance to the field of psychiatry, which include the metabotropic glutamate receptor type 5 (mGluR5), purinergic P₂ X₇ receptor, type 1 cannabinoid receptor (CB₁ ), phosphodiesterase 10A (PDE10A), and describe radiotracers developed for these and other targets that have matured to human subject investigations. Current limitations of the targets and techniques will also be discussed.

The Impact of Exercise and Virtual Reality Executive Function Training on Cognition Among Heavy Drinking Veterans With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Pilot Feasibility Study

Executive function (EF) underlies self-control deficits in alcohol use disorder (AUD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Cognitive training is a promising adjunctive treatment targeting TBI- and AUD- related cognitive dysfunction. However, major limitations related to compliance and generalizability in the field of cognitive training exist. Physical activity is associated with enhanced cognitive performance across several executive functions and may enhance the benefits of cognitive training. Virtual reality provides multisensory embodied experiences which are likely to engage brain networks more efficiently than standard cognitive training systems, ultimately resulting in greater near- and far-transfer effects. This pilot study aimed to obtain feasibility data and a preliminary assessment of an enriched virtual reality (VR) EF training (EFT) intervention combined with exercise (NCT03786276). Using an 8-week randomized adaptive design study, 30 AUD treatment seeking U.S. Veterans completed nine sessions of exercise-only (n = 15) or gameplay control (n = 15) over 3 weeks, followed by a week-4 repeat assessment in Phase 1. Twenty-three participants completed and moved onto Phase II, where they completed up to nine sessions of VR-EFT plus exercise and completed a week-8 end-of-study assessment. Primary outcomes included feasibility to retain participants, usability, and satisfaction of using VR-EFT. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included within group assessment of change in cognitive function, alcohol use, alcohol craving, and post-concussive symptoms among the three treatment conditions.VR-EFT was feasible with moderate usability and high acceptability ratings.The most common VR-related adverse effect was motion sickness (n = 2/16, 12.5%). The VR-EFT condition was associated with significant improvement in inhibition-switching and visual scanning (both p < 0.05) during Phase II. Exercise-only was associated with significant improvements in cognitive inhibition, cognitive flexibility, reductions in alcohol craving, and number of standard alcohol drinks per week (all p ≤ 0.05). The gaming-control condition was associated with improvement in cognitive flexibility and visuospatial immediate recall (both p < 0.05) during Phase 1. Recruitment and retention of U.S. veterans with AUD and TBI into an exercise plus VR-EFT intervention is feasible, but technological barriers may impact usability. VR-EFT was associated with improvement in executive function domains that were targeted in as little as 3-week and nine sessions of VR-EFT exposure. Results are promising and indicate the need for a larger controlled investigation to assess the efficacy of VR-EFT to enhance treatment outcomes among AUD treatment-seeking U.S. veterans with co-occurring AUD and TBI.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT03786276.

A randomized pilot trial of topiramate for alcohol use disorder in veterans with traumatic brain injury: Effects on alcohol use, cognition, and post-concussive symptoms

BACKGROUND

Topiramate is an effective treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD) and has also been used in the care of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). This pilot study aimed to obtain a preliminary assessment of topiramate's efficacy in reducing alcohol use and post-concussive symptoms, and its potential negative impact on cognitive function in 32 Veterans with co-occurring AUD and mTBI.

METHODS

This was a prospective 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study of flexible-dose topiramate or placebo. Primary outcome was reduction of drinking days per week within the topiramate arm. Secondary outcomes included between group comparisons of alcohol use and craving, post-concussive symptoms, and cognitive function.

RESULTS

Drinking days per week significantly decreased within both the topiramate and placebo arm. There were no significant treatment-by-week interactions on alcohol use/craving, or post-concussive symptoms in intent-to-treat analyses. In per-protocol analyses, topiramate significantly reduced number of drinks per week compared with placebo. Topiramate transiently impaired verbal fluency and working memory. Processing speed, cognitive inhibition, and mental flexibility significantly improved between weeks 1 and 12, regardless of treatment arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant improvement occurred in both the topiramate and placebo groups over 12 weeks of treatment in alcohol use and post-concussive symptoms. Among treatment completers there was greater reduction of alcohol use in the topiramate arm. Topiramate was also associated with negative but transient effects on cognitive function. Results suggest both a possible benefit for topiramate treatment in reducing alcohol use and some potential for negative cognitive effects in Veterans with AUD and mTBI.

Outcome Assessment in Trials of Pharmacological Treatments for Alcohol Use Disorders: Fair and Strict Testing

Outcome assessment in the pharmacological treatment of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) faces specific challenges resulting from low adherence to treatment, high rates of dropout, and the susceptibility of patient self-reports to bias. This review discusses methodological issues in planning, conducting, and interpreting clinical trials on AUD treatment against the background of the principle of 'strictness and fairness' of testing. Threats to fairness include factors that limit the implementation of an intervention, such as low compliance and early treatment termination. In turn, fairness of testing is increased by factors that support the degree to which an intervention is implemented, such as the use of adequate pretreatments and the matching of psychosocial and pharmacological treatment strategies. Furthermore, selecting outcomes on the basis of an intervention's mechanism of action and including continuous outcomes as sensitive measures of drinking change further increases fairness by increasing the likelihood that the data will adequately reflect the effects of the intervention. On the other hand, strictness of testing is increased by all measures that limit the influence of confounders that could potentially lead to an overestimation of effects. The use of a side effect-mimicking placebo to prevent an unmasking of blinding and the repeated assessment of alcohol biomarkers to validate drinking self-reports might be valid strategies to further increase the strictness of testing by limiting risks of bias in trials of AUD treatment.

Cannabidiol as a Novel Candidate Alcohol Use Disorder Pharmacotherapy: A Systematic Review

There is substantial interest in the therapeutic potential of cannabidiol (CBD), a nonpsychoactive cannabinoid found in plants of the genus Cannabis. The goal of the current systematic review was to characterize the existing literature on this topic and to evaluate the credibility of CBD as a candidate pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder (AUD). Using a comprehensive search strategy, 303 unique potential articles were identified and 12 ultimately met criteria for inclusion (8 using rodent models, 3 using healthy adult volunteers, and 1 using cell culture). In both rodent and cell culture models, CBD was found to exert a neuroprotective effect against adverse alcohol consequences on the hippocampus. In rodent models, CBD was found to attenuate alcohol-induced hepatotoxicity, specifically, alcohol-induced steatosis. Finally, findings from preclinical rodent models also indicate that CBD attenuates cue-elicited and stress-elicited alcohol seeking, alcohol self-administration, withdrawal-induced convulsions, and impulsive discounting of delayed rewards. In human studies, CBD was well tolerated and did not interact with the subjective effects of alcohol. Collectively, given its favorable effects on alcohol-related harms and addiction phenotypes in preclinical models, CBD appears to have promise as a candidate AUD pharmacotherapy. This is further bolstered by the absence of abuse liability and its general tolerability. A clear limitation to the literature is the paucity of human investigations. Human preclinical and clinical studies are needed to determine whether these positive effects in model systems substantively translate into clinically relevant outcomes.

State-of-the-art behavioral and pharmacological treatments for alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and its associated consequences remain significant public health concerns. Given that AUD represents a spectrum of severity, treatment options represent a continuum of care, ranging from single-session brief interventions to more intensive, prolonged, and specialized treatment modalities.

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative literature review seeks to describe the best practices for AUD by placing a particular emphasis on identifying those practices which have received the most empirical support.

METHOD

This review summarizes psychological and pharmacological intervention options for AUD treatment, with a focus on the relapse prevention phase of recovery. Psychological and pharmacological treatments are summarized in terms of the empirical evidence favoring each approach and the level of AUD severity for which they are most indicated.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

One of the broad assertions from this review is that while AUD is highly prevalent, seeking treatment for AUD is not. There are a myriad of behavioral and pharmacological treatments that have shown compelling evidence of efficacy for the treatment of AUD. In the behavioral treatment literature, cognitive behavioral therapy has received the most consistent support. Opioid antagonism (via naltrexone) has been the most widely studied pharmacotherapy and has produced moderate effect sizes. While none of the treatments reviewed herein represents a so-called silver bullet for AUD, they each have the potential to significantly improve the odds of recovery. Precision medicine, or the identification of best treatment matches for individual patients, looms as an important overarching goal for the field, although specific matches are not yet sufficiently reliable in their empirical evidence to warrant clinical dissemination.

Pharmacotherapy for Alcohol Use Disorder

Alcohol use disorder is a common, destructive, and undertreated disease. As understanding of alcohol use disorder has evolved, so has our ability to manage patients with pharmacotherapeutic agents in addition to nondrug therapy, including various counseling strategies. Providers now have a myriad of medications, both approved and not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, to choose from and can personalize care based on treatment goals, comorbidities, drug interactions, and drug availability. This review explores these treatment options and offers the prescriber practical advice regarding when each option may or may not be appropriate for a specific patient.

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.

Medications development for the treatment of alcohol use disorder: insights into the predictive value of animal and human laboratory models

Development of effective treatments for alcohol use disorder (AUD) represents an important public health goal. This review provides a summary of completed preclinical and clinical studies testing pharmacotherapies for the treatment of AUD. We discuss opportunities for improving the translation from preclinical findings to clinical trial outcomes, focusing on the validity and predictive value of animal and human laboratory models of AUD. Specifically, while preclinical studies of medications development have offered important insights into the neurobiology of the disorder and alcohol's molecular targets, limitations include the lack of standardized methods and streamlined processes whereby animal studies can readily inform human studies. Behavioral pharmacology studies provide a less expensive and valuable opportunity to assess the feasibility of a pharmacotherapy prior to initiating larger scale clinical trials by providing insights into the mechanism of the drug, which can then inform recruitment, analyses, and assessments. Summary tables are provided to illustrate the wide range of preclinical, human laboratory, and clinical studies of medications development for alcoholism. Taken together, this review highlights the challenges associated with animal paradigms, human laboratory studies, and clinical trials with the overarching goal of advancing treatment development and highlighting opportunities to bridge the gap between preclinical and clinical research.

Automatic avoidance tendencies for alcohol cues predict drinking after detoxification treatment in alcohol dependence

Alcohol dependence is characterized by conflict between approach and avoidance motivational orientations for alcohol that operate in automatic and controlled processes. This article describes the first study to investigate the predictive validity of these motivational orientations for relapse to drinking after discharge from alcohol detoxification treatment in alcohol-dependent patients. One hundred twenty alcohol-dependent patients who were nearing the end of inpatient detoxification treatment completed measures of self-reported (Approach and Avoidance of Alcohol Questionnaire; AAAQ) and automatic (modified Stimulus-Response Compatibility task) approach and avoidance motivational orientations for alcohol. Their drinking behavior was assessed via telephone follow-ups at 2, 4, and 6 months after discharge from treatment. Results indicated that, after controlling for the severity of alcohol dependence, strong automatic avoidance tendencies for alcohol cues were predictive of higher percentage of heavy drinking days (PHDD) at 4-month (β = 0.22, 95% CI [0.07, 0.43]) and 6-month (β = 0.22, 95% CI [0.01, 0.42]) follow-ups. We failed to replicate previous demonstrations of the predictive validity of approach subscales of the AAAQ for relapse to drinking, and there were no significant predictors of PHDD at 2-month follow-up. In conclusion, strong automatic avoidance tendencies predicted relapse to drinking after inpatient detoxification treatment, but automatic approach tendencies and self-reported approach and avoidance tendencies were not predictive in this study. Our results extend previous findings and help to resolve ambiguities with earlier studies that investigated the roles of automatic and controlled cognitive processes in recovery from alcohol dependence. (PsycINFO Database Record

An exploratory evaluation of Take Control: A novel computer-delivered behavioral platform for placebo-controlled pharmacotherapy trials for alcohol use disorder

Placebo-controlled pharmacotherapy trials for alcohol use disorder (AUD) require an active behavioral platform to avoid putting participants at risk for untreated AUD and to better assess the effectiveness of the medication. Therapist-delivered platforms (TDP) can be costly and present a risk to study design because of the variability in therapist fidelity. Take Control is a novel computer-delivered behavioral platform developed for use in pharmacotherapy trials sponsored by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Clinical Investigations Group (NCIG). This behavioral platform was developed with the goal of reducing trial implementation costs and limiting potential bias introduced by therapists providing TDP. This exploratory study is the first to compare Take Control with TDP on measures related to placebo response rate, medication adherence, and participant retention. Data were drawn from the placebo arms of four multisite, double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCT) for AUD conducted by NCIG from 2007 to 2015. Data were compared from subjects receiving TDP (n=156) in two RCTs and Take Control (n=155) in another two RCTs. Placebo response rate, as represented by weekly percentage of heavy drinking days, was similar between groups. Subjects who received Take Control had a higher rate of medication adherence than those who received TDP. Subject retention was not significantly different between groups. The findings suggest that Take Control is comparable to TDP on measures of retention, medication adherence, and placebo response. Additional research is needed to evaluate Take Control directly against TDPs in a randomized trial.

Discovery, Development, and Adoption of Medications to Treat Alcohol Use Disorder: Goals for the Phases of Medications Development

For more than 25 years, advances have been made in developing medications to treat alcohol use disorder (AUD), highlighted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approval of naltrexone (oral and long-acting) and acamprosate. Despite this progress, more work remains to be done in this area because these medications, although effective for some people, do not work for everyone. A high priority for the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcohol is to put into place a solid infrastructure to aid in the development of medications that are more effective than those currently available and with few side effects. Medication development, especially for a disorder as complex as AUD, is challenging and involves multiple phases, including discovery of "druggable" targets, preclinical studies, human clinical trials, and the adoption and implementation of the new medication into mainstream medicine. A successful medications development program requires clearly established goals for each phase to ensure that a candidate compound is not trapped in one particular phase, a condition known as "the valley of death." In this article, the phases of medication development are described as they apply to AUD, and specific goals of each phase are identified for the next decade. In addition, several important crosscutting themes are outlined for each phase, all of which are essential for advancing medications development. These include identifying and validating screening models and druggable targets, making use of precision medicine, and establishing partnerships among key stakeholders. Our goal in writing this article is to provide a guide on medications development that will aid the alcohol research community in planning, testing, and developing medications for AUD.

Considerations in the Evaluation of Potential Efficacy of Medications for Alcohol and Drug Use Disorders: An Editorial

The societal burden created by alcohol and drug use disorders is estimated to be on the order of hundreds of billions of dollars, creating a need for effective medications to reduce use and prevent relapse. While there are FDA-approved medications to facilitate abstinence and prevent relapse for some indications including, alcohol, tobacco, and opiate use disorders, there are no approved treatments for other abused substances, including cocaine, methamphetamine, and cannabis, leaving these critical medical needs unmet. The development of such medications has fallen largely to the government with efforts spearheaded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse. Both agencies have medication development programs with preclinical components that include the standardized evaluation of compounds using animal models. This chapter describes the rationale and considerations involved in the use of such models, including reinstatement of drug self-administration.

Recruitment techniques for alcohol pharmacotherapy clinical trials: A cost-benefit analysis

OBJECTIVES

Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) represent a large public health burden with relatively few efficacious pharmacotherapies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for new AUD therapies can be hampered by ineffective recruitment, leading to increased trial costs. The current analyses examined the effectiveness of recruitment efforts during two consecutive outpatient RCTs of novel AUD pharmacotherapies conducted between 2009 and 2012.

METHODS

During an initial phone screen, participants identified an ad source for learning about the study. Qualified persons were then scheduled for in-person screens. The present analyses examined demographic differences amongst the eight ad sources utilized. Recruitment effectiveness was determined by dividing the number of persons meeting criteria for an in-person screen by the total number of callers from each ad source. Cost-effectiveness was determined by dividing total ad source cost by number of screens, participants randomized, and completers.

RESULTS

1,813 calls resulted in 1,005 completed phone screens. The most common ad source was TV (34%), followed by print (29%), word-of-mouth (11%), flyer (8%), internet (5%), radio (5%), bus ad (2%), and billboard (1%). Participants reporting bus ads (46%), billboard (44%), or print ads (34%) were significantly more likely than the other sources to meet criteria to be scheduled for in-person screens. The most cost-effective ad source was print ($2,506 per completer), while bus ad was the least cost-effective ($13,376 per completer).

CONCLUSIONS

Recruitment in AUD RCTs can be successful using diverse advertising methods. The present analyses favored use of print ads as most cost-effective.

Modified-Release Formulations of Second-Generation Antiepileptic Drugs: Pharmacokinetic and Clinical Aspects

Modified-release or extended-release (XR) formulations are used to decrease the frequency of dosing for drugs with rapid elimination, to improve convenience and adherence. Use of a modified-release formulation can decrease the peak to trough fluctuations in serum concentrations and theoretically improve the therapeutic benefit of the drug, by decreasing adverse events associated with the higher peak concentrations. Once-daily formulations of lamotrigine (Lamictal XR(®)), levetiracetam (Keppra XR(®)), oxcarbazepine (Oxtellar XR(®), Apydan(®) extent) and topiramate (Qudexy XR™, Trokendi XR™) are approved for the treatment of focal and/or generalized onset seizures. Other seizure medications have been approved for non-epileptic symptoms. Gabapentin XR (Gralise(®)) is approved for the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgias. Gabapentin enacarbil XR (Horizant(®)) is a prodrug of gabapentin and is indicated for treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia and restless leg syndrome, a novel indication. For all but Qudexy XR™, the tablets/capsules must be swallowed whole, without cutting, crushing or chewing, in order to maintain the XR properties of the formulation. Qudexy XR™ can be swallowed intact or the capsules can be opened and sprinkled onto soft food for those with swallowing difficulties, for example, children and the elderly. The bioavailability of Gralise(®) and Horizant(®) is significantly affected by food, specifically fat content, and should be taken with a meal to maximize absorption. Overall, the primary advantage of the newly released XR formulations is the once-daily dosing to improve convenience and adherence, with very limited data suggesting improved tolerability.

Alcohol liver disease: A review of current therapeutic approaches to achieve long-term abstinence

Harmful alcohol drinking may lead to significant damage on any organ or system of the body. Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is the most prevalent cause of advanced liver disease in Europe. In ALD, only alcohol abstinence was associated with a better long-term survival. Therefore, current effective therapeutic strategy should be oriented towards achieving alcohol abstinence or a significant reduction in alcohol consumption. Screening all primary care patients to detect those cases with alcohol abuse has been proposed as population-wide preventive intervention in primary care. It has been suggested that in patients with mild alcohol use disorder the best approach is brief intervention in the primary care setting with the ultimate goal being abstinence, whereas patients with moderate-to-severe alcohol use disorder must be referred to specialized care where detoxification and medical treatment of alcohol dependence must be undertaken.

Methods to analyze treatment effects in the presence of missing data for a continuous heavy drinking outcome measure when participants drop out from treatment in alcohol clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Attrition is common in alcohol clinical trials and the resultant loss of data represents an important methodological problem. In the absence of a simulation study, the drinking outcomes among those who are lost to follow-up are not known. Individuals who drop out of treatment and continue to provide drinking data, however, may be a reasonable proxy group for making inferences about the drinking outcomes of those lost to follow-up.

METHODS

We used data from the COMBINE study, a multisite, randomized clinical trial, to examine drinking during the 4 months of treatment among individuals who dropped out of treatment but continued to provide drinking data (i.e., "treatment dropouts;" n = 185). First, we estimated the observed treatment effect size for naltrexone versus placebo in a sample that included both treatment completers (n = 961) and treatment dropouts (n = 185; total N = 1,146), as well as the observed treatment effect size among just those who dropped out of treatment (n = 185). In both the total sample (N = 1,146) and the dropout sample (n = 185), we then deleted the drinking data after treatment dropout from those 185 individuals to simulate missing data. Using the deleted data sets, we then estimated the effect of naltrexone on the continuous outcome percent heavy drinking days using 6 methods to handle missing data (last observation carried forward, baseline observation carried forward, placebo mean imputation, missing = heavy drinking days, multiple imputation (MI), and full information maximum likelihood [FIML]).

RESULTS

MI and FIML produced effect size estimates that were most similar to the true effects observed in the full data set in all analyses, while missing = heavy drinking days performed the worst.

CONCLUSIONS

Although missing drinking data should be avoided whenever possible, MI and FIML yield the best estimates of the treatment effect for a continuous outcome measure of heavy drinking when there is dropout in an alcohol clinical trial.

Anticonvulsants for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome and alcohol use disorders

Alcoholic patients suffer from harmful allostatic neuroplastic changes in the brain causing an acute withdrawal syndrome upon cessation of drinking followed by a protracted abstinence syndrome and an increased risk of relapse to heavy drinking. Benzodiazepines have long been the treatment of choice for detoxifying patients and managing alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS). Non-benzodiazepine anticonvulsants (NBACs) are increasingly being used both for alcohol withdrawal management and for ongoing outpatient treatment of alcohol dependence, with the goal of either abstinence or harm reduction. This expert narrative review summarizes the scientific basis and clinical evidence supporting the use of NBACs in treating AWS and for reducing harmful drinking patterns. There is less evidence in support of NBAC therapy for AWS, with few placebo-controlled trials. Carbamazepine and gabapentin appear to be the most promising adjunctive treatments for AWS, and they may be useful as monotherapy in select cases, especially in outpatient settings and for the treatment of mild-to-moderate low-risk patients with the AWS. The body of evidence supporting the use of the NBACs for reducing harmful drinking in the outpatient setting is stronger. Topiramate appears to have a robust effect on reducing harmful drinking in alcoholics. Gabapentin is a potentially efficacious treatment for reducing the risk of relapse to harmful drinking patterns in outpatient management of alcoholism. Gabapentin's ease of use, rapid titration, good tolerability, and efficacy in both the withdrawal and chronic phases of treatment make it particularly appealing. In summary, several NBACs appear to be beneficial in treating AWS and alcohol use disorders.

Zonisamide, topiramate, and levetiracetam: efficacy and neuropsychological effects in alcohol use disorders

The anticonvulsant topiramate not only decreases ethanol consumption in alcohol dependence (AD) but also may produce several adverse events including cognitive impairment. Zonisamide is a structurally related anticonvulsant that is a promising agent for the treatment of AD and may have greater tolerability than topiramate. This study evaluated the effects of zonisamide (400 mg/d) on alcohol consumption and its neurotoxic effects in subjects with AD. A double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted using 2 comparator anticonvulsant drugs, topiramate (300 mg/d) and levetiracetam (2000 mg/d), which does not impair cognition. Study medications were administered for 14 weeks, including a 2-week taper period. Medication adherence was facilitated using Brief Behavioral Compliance Enhancement Treatment. The neurotoxicity of the study drugs was assessed using neuropsychological tests and the AB-Neurotoxicity Scale. Compared with placebo, both zonisamide and topiramate produced significant reductions in the drinks consumed per day, percent days drinking, and percent days heavy drinking. Only the percent days heavy drinking was significantly decreased in the levetiracetam group. The topiramate cell was the only group that had a significant increase on the mental slowing subscale of the Neurotoxicity Scale compared with placebo at study weeks 11 and 12. Topiramate and zonisamide both produced modest reductions in verbal fluency and working memory. These findings indicate that zonisamide may have efficacy in the treatment of AD, with effect sizes similar to topiramate. Both of these drugs produced similar patterns of cognitive impairment, although only the topiramate group reported significant increases in mental slowing.

Levetiracetam as adjunctive therapy for acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome in hospitalized patients

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines are often considered the standard of care for managing symptoms of acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Because of potential adverse effects, other agents have been evaluated in this patient population. Previous studies have produced mixed results on the efficacy of levetiracetam in alcohol withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine whether adjunctive levetiracetam reduces the amount of symptom-triggered benzodiazepines required by patients experiencing symptoms of alcohol withdrawal.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who experienced symptoms of alcohol withdrawal while hospitalized. The outcomes of patients who received adjunctive levetiracetam were compared with those of patients who received only the standard of care (control group).

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty patients (125 in each cohort) were included. No significant differences were found in the benzodiazepine requirements of the 2 cohorts. The control group required a median average daily dose of 2.0 mg of lorazepam (range, 0.1-17 mg/d) compared with the levetiracetam group, which required a median average daily dose of 1.3 mg of lorazepam (range, 0.0-53.5 mg/d) (P = 0.09). The patients in the control group required a median total of 6 mg of lorazepam during their hospitalization compared with a median total of 5.5 mg in the levetiracetam group. Both cohorts had a median length of stay of 3 days, although those in the levetiracetam group had a shorter length of intensive care unit stay and spent less time mechanically ventilated.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjunctive use of levetiracetam does not significantly reduce the benzodiazepine requirements of patients experiencing symptoms of alcohol withdrawal in the inpatient setting.

Pharmacotherapy of Co-Occurring Schizophrenia and Substance Use Disorders

Substance use disorders, common in patients with schizophrenia, can lead to poor outcomes. Here we review the literature on the use of antipsychotics in patients with co-occurring schizophrenia and substance use disorder as well as evidence for the use of adjunctive pharmacological treatments targeting substance use in these patients. We also discuss a neurobiological formulation suggesting that the cooccurrence of these disorders may be related to a dysfunction in the dopamine mediated brain reward circuitry. Typical antipsychotics do not appear to decrease substance use in this population. Randomized, controlled trials provide some support for use of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine for co-occurring cannabis use disorder, naltrexone and disulfiram for alcohol use disorder, and also nicotine replacement therapy, sustained-release bupropion and varenicline for tobacco use disorder. Nonetheless, data regarding treatment in patients with these co-occurring disorders are still limited, and many studies reported to date have been either underpowered or did not include a control condition. Further research is needed to evaluate optimal pharmacotherapeutic strategies for this population.

Levetiracetam results in increased and decreased alcohol drinking with different access procedures in C57BL/6J mice

The antiepileptic levetiracetam (LEV) has been investigated for the treatment of alcohol abuse. However, little is known about how LEV alters the behavioral effects of alcohol in laboratory animals. The acute effects of LEV on alcohol drinking by male C57BL/6J mice were investigated using two different drinking procedures, limited access [drinking-in-the-dark (DID)] and intermittent access (IA) drinking. In the first experiment (DID), mice had access to a single bottle containing alcohol or sucrose for 4 h every other day. In the second experiment (IA), mice had IA to two bottles, one containing alcohol or sucrose and one containing water, for 24 h on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. In both experiments, mice were administered LEV (0.3-100 mg/kg intraperitoneally) or vehicle 30 min before access to the drinking solutions. In the DID mice, LEV increased alcohol intake from 4.3 to 5.4 g/kg, whereas in the IA mice LEV decreased alcohol intake from 4.8 to 3.0 g/kg in the first 4 h of access and decreased 24 h alcohol intake from 20 to ∼15 g/kg. These effects appear specific to alcohol, as LEV did not affect sucrose intake in either experiment. LEV appears to differentially affect drinking in animal models of moderate and heavier alcohol consumption.

Topiramate treatment of alcohol use disorder in veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder: a randomized controlled pilot trial

BACKGROUND

The course of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is frequently and severely complicated by co-occurring alcohol use disorder (AUD), yet there are few reports of pharmacologic treatments for these comorbid conditions. The objective of this pilot study was to obtain a preliminary assessment of the efficacy and safety of topiramate in reducing alcohol use and PTSD symptoms in veterans with both disorders.

METHODS

This was a prospective 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial of flexible-dose topiramate up to 300 mg/d in 30 veterans with PTSD and AUD. The primary outcome measure was frequency of drinking. Secondary outcomes consisted of other measures of alcohol use and PTSD symptom severity.

RESULTS

Within-group analyses showed that topiramate treatment was associated with significant reductions in frequency and amount of alcohol use and alcohol craving from baseline through week 12. Between-group analyses showed that topiramate reduced frequency of alcohol use and alcohol craving significantly more than placebo and tended to reduce drinking amount. Topiramate treatment was also associated with decreased PTSD symptom severity and tended to reduce hyperarousal symptoms compared with placebo. Topiramate transiently impaired learning and memory, with significant recovery by the end of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary results indicate that in veterans with co-occurring PTSD and AUD, topiramate may be effective in reducing alcohol consumption, alcohol craving, and PTSD symptom severity-particularly hyperarousal symptoms. Topiramate was associated with transient cognitive impairment but was otherwise well tolerated.

Pharmacological approaches to reducing craving in patients with alcohol use disorders

Research on the concept of craving may lead to better understanding of the biobehavioural circuitries that contribute to the complexity of alcohol use disorders (AUDs). The experiences described as craving or desire to drink are often associated with physical responses such as increased salivation and heart rate, and alteration of stress hormones, as well as psychological responses such as anxiety and depression. Greater craving has been associated with an increased probability of alcohol relapse. Reversal of craving, which is understood as a symptom of protracted abstinence, offers the possibility of preventing relapses and treating alcoholism. Various medications have been studied to establish whether they are able to reduce craving; however, the results obtained from clinical studies have been inconsistent. Here, we review the interdisciplinary models developed to evaluate craving, then the different approaches used to assess and measure craving and, finally, the medications utilized and tested to lessen craving in patients suffering from AUDs.

Anticonvulsants for alcohol dependence

BACKGROUND

Alcohol dependence is a major public health problem that is characterised by recidivism and a host of medical and psychosocial complications. Besides psychosocial interventions, different pharmacological interventions have been or currently are under investigation through Cochrane systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of the review is to assess the benefits/risks of anticonvulsants for the treatment of alcohol dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Trials Register (October 2013), PubMed (1966 to October 2013), EMBASE (1974 to October 2013) and CINAHL (1982 to October 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing anticonvulsants alone or in association with other drugs and/or psychosocial interventions versus placebo, no treatment and other pharmacological or psychosocial interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 25 studies were included in the review (2641 participants). Most participants were male, with an average age of 44 years. Anticonvulsants were compared with placebo (17 studies), other medications (seven studies) and no medication (two studies). The mean duration of the trials was 17 weeks (range four to 52 weeks). The studies took place in the USA, Europe, South America, India and Thailand. Variation was reported in the characteristics of the studies, including their design and the rating instruments used. For many key outcomes, the risk of bias associated with unclear or unconcealed allocation and lack of blinding affected the quality of the evidence.Anticonvulsants versus placebo: For dropouts (16 studies, 1675 participants, risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (Cl) 0.74 to 1.19, moderate-quality evidence) and continuous abstinence (eight studies, 634 participants, RR 1.21, 95% Cl 95% 0.97 to 1.52, moderate-quality evidence), results showed no evidence of differences. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that anticonvulsants reduced drinks/drinking days (11 studies, 1126 participants, mean difference (MD) -1.49, 95% Cl -2.32 to -0.65) and heavy drinking (12 studies, 1129 participants, standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35, 95% Cl -0.51 to -0.19). Moreover, withdrawal for medical reasons (12 studies, 1410 participants, RR 1.22, 95% Cl 0.58 to 2.56, moderate-quality evidence) showed no evidence of difference, but for specific adverse effects (nine studies, 1164 participants), two of 18 adverse event outcomes favoured placebo. The direction of results was confirmed by subgroup analyses for topiramate and partially for gabapentin and valproate.Anticonvulsants versus naltrexone: No evidence of difference was shown in dropout rates (five studies, 528 participants, RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.06), severe relapse rates (four studies, 427 participants, RR 0.69, 95% Cl 0.44 to 1.07) and continuous abstinence rates (five studies, 528 participants, RR 1.21, 95% Cl 0.99 to 1.49); anticonvulsants were associated with fewer heavy drinking days (three studies, 308 participants, MD -5.21, 95% Cl -8.58 to -1.83), more days to severe relapse (three studies, 244 participants, MD 11.88, 95% Cl 3.29 to 20.46) and lower withdrawal for medical reasons (three studies, 245 participants, RR 0.13, 95% Cl 0.03 to 0.58).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At the current stage of research, randomised evidence supporting the clinical use of anticonvulsants to treat alcohol dependence is insufficient. Results are conditioned by heterogeneity and by the low number and quality of studies comparing anticonvulsants with other medications. The uncertainty associated with these results leaves to clinicians the need to balance possible benefits/risks of treatment with anticonvulsants versus other medications as supported by evidence of efficacy.

Alcohol use disorder: pathophysiology, effects, and pharmacologic options for treatment

Alcohol use disorders (AUD) continue to be a concerning health issue worldwide. Harmful alcohol use leads to 2.5 million deaths annually worldwide. Multiple options exist for the management of dependence on alcohol, not all of which are approved by drug-regulating agencies. Current practice in treating AUD does not reflect the diversity of pharmacologic options that have potential to provide benefit, and guidance for clinicians is limited. Few medications are approved for treatment of AUD, and these have exhibited small and/or inconsistent effects in broad patient populations with diverse drinking patterns. The need for continued research into the treatment of this disease is evident in order to provide patients with more specific and effective options. This review describes the neurobiological mechanisms of AUD that are amenable to treatment and drug therapies that target pathophysiological conditions of AUD to reduce drinking. In addition, current literature on pharmacologic (both approved and non-approved) treatment options for AUD offered in the United States and elsewhere are reviewed. The aim is to inform clinicians regarding the options for alcohol abuse treatment, keeping in mind that not all treatments are completely successful in reducing craving or heavy drinking or increasing abstinence.

Current pharmacological treatment approaches for alcohol dependence

INTRODUCTION

At present, the substances acamprosate, naltrexone and disulfiram are available for pharmacotherapy in alcohol dependence, but clinical studies found only modest effect sizes of these treatment options.

AREAS COVERED

This article focuses on current pharmacological treatment approaches for alcohol dependence, which have been evaluated in randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs).

EXPERT OPINION

Besides the opioid system modulator nalmefene, which has recently been approved as a medication for the reduction of alcohol consumption, several compounds have been investigated in patients with alcohol dependence using a randomized, placebo-controlled design. In these studies, the antiepileptic drugs topiramate and gabapentin were found to be effective in improving several drinking-related outcomes, whereas levetiracetam failed to show efficacy in the treatment of alcohol dependence. Clinical studies using (low-dose) baclofen, a selective GABA-B receptor agonist, produced conflicting results, so that results of further trials are needed. Varenicline has also shown mixed results in two RCTs, but might possibly be useful in patients with comorbid nicotine dependence. The α1 adrenergic antagonist prazosin is currently under investigation in alcohol dependence with and without comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Finally, first clinical evidence suggests that the 5-HT3 antagonist ondansetron might possibly be used in future within a pharmacogenetic treatment approach in alcohol dependence.

Missing data in alcohol clinical trials: a comparison of methods

BACKGROUND

The rate of participant attrition in alcohol clinical trials is often substantial and can cause significant issues with regard to the handling of missing data in statistical analyses of treatment effects. It is common for researchers to assume that missing data is indicative of participant relapse, and under that assumption, many researchers have relied on setting all missing values to the worst-case scenario for the outcome (e.g., missing = heavy drinking). This sort of single-imputation method has been criticized for producing biased results in other areas of clinical research, but has not been evaluated within the context of alcohol clinical trials, and many alcohol researchers continue to use the missing = heavy drinking assumption.

METHODS

Data from the COMBINE study, a multisite randomized clinical trial, were used to generate simulated situations of missing data under a variety of conditions and assumptions. We manipulated the sample size (n = 200, 500, and 1,000) and dropout rate (5, 10, 25, 30%) under 3 missing data assumptions (missing completely at random, missing at random, and missing not at random). We then examined the association between receiving naltrexone and heavy drinking during the first 10 weeks following treatment using 5 methods for treating missing data (complete case analysis [CCA], last observation carried forward [LOCF], missing = heavy drinking, multiple imputation [MI], and full information maximum likelihood [FIML]).

RESULTS

CCA, LOCF, and missing = heavy drinking produced the most biased naltrexone effect estimates and standard errors under conditions that are likely to exist in randomized clinical trials. MI and FIML produced the least biased naltrexone effect estimates and standard errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Assuming that missing = heavy drinking produces biased results of the treatment effect and should not be used to evaluate treatment effects in alcohol clinical trials.

The placebo effect in clinical trials for alcohol dependence: an exploratory analysis of 51 naltrexone and acamprosate studies

BACKGROUND

The placebo effect often undermines efforts to determine treatment effectiveness in clinical trials. A significant placebo response occurs in alcohol trials, but it is not well understood. The purpose of this study was to characterize the placebo response across multiple naltrexone and acamprosate studies.

METHODS

Fifty-one trials, 3 with a naltrexone and an acamprosate arm, 31 with at least 1 naltrexone arm, and 17 with at least 1 acamprosate arm, were identified from Cochrane reviews and PubMed search. To be included in this study, patients had to be at least 18 years old, abstinent from alcohol before randomization, and meet a diagnosis of alcohol dependence. Pearson correlation coefficients (rp ) and simple linear regression were used to describe the strength of linear relationships between placebo response and treatment effect size. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (rs ) were used to examine the strength of associations between study characteristics and placebo response.

RESULTS

For the end point measures of percent days abstinent and total abstinence, a negative relationship was evident between placebo response and treatment effect size in the naltrexone trials (rp  = -0.55, p < 0.01 and rp  = -0.20, p = 0.35, respectively) as well as in the acamprosate trials (rp  = -0.45, p = 0.09 and rp  = -0.56, p = 0.01, respectively). The placebo response for percent days abstinent was negatively correlated with mean age of participants (rs  = -0.42, p = 0.05) across naltrexone trials and positively correlated with publication year (rs  = 0.57, p = 0.03) across acamprosate trials. However, these 2 study characteristics were not significantly correlated with treatment effect size.

CONCLUSIONS

The placebo response varied considerably across trials and was negatively correlated with the treatment effect size. Additional studies are required to fully understand the complex nature of the placebo response and to evaluate approaches to minimize its effects.

Levetiracetam has opposite effects on alcohol- and cocaine-related behaviors in C57BL/6J mice

The antiepileptic drug levetiracetam (LEV) is a potential treatment for alcohol use disorders, yet few preclinical studies exist on its effects in animal models relevant to drug or alcohol abuse. We investigated the effects of LEV on locomotor stimulation following acute and repeated administration of alcohol or cocaine and on alcohol- and cocaine-mediated changes in responding for brain stimulation reward (BSR) in C57BL/6J mice. LEV alone (10.0-100.0 mg/kg intraperitoneally) had no significant effect on locomotor activity or intracranial self-stimulation. Pretreatment with LEV reduced acute locomotor stimulation by 2.0 g/kg alcohol, attenuated the development of locomotor sensitization to alcohol with repeated exposure, and produced a shift in the dose-response curve for alcohol on BSR threshold without affecting maximum operant response rate (MAX). Conversely, LEV pretreatment enhanced both acute locomotor stimulation by 15 mg/kg cocaine and development of locomotor sensitization following repeated exposure and produced a leftward shift in the dose-response curve for cocaine on BSR threshold without affecting MAX. Electrophysiological recordings in vitro showed that LEV reduced excitatory currents in both ventral tegmental area (VTA) dopamine neurons and nucleus accumbens (NAc) medium spiny neurons, consistent with a presynaptic effect. The opposite effects of LEV pretreatment on alcohol- and cocaine-related behaviors may predict its clinical utility in the treatment of patients with alcohol, but not psychostimulant abuse disorders.

Novel anticonvulsants for reducing alcohol consumption: A review of evidence from preclinical rodent drinking models

Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are a major public health issue and have an enormous social and economic burden in developed, developing, and third-world countries. Current pharmacotherapies for treating AUDs suffer from deleterious side effects and are only effective in preventing relapse in a subset of individuals. This signifies an essential need for improved medications to reduce heavy episodic drinking and alcohol-related problems. Growing literature has provided support for the use of anticonvulsants in suppressing symptoms induced by alcohol withdrawal. Emerging clinical and preclinical evidence suggests that a number of well-tolerated anticonvulsants may also decrease alcohol drinking. This review will focus on recent evidence supporting the efficacy of novel anticonvulsants in reducing voluntary alcohol consumption in rodent models. The data demonstrate that anticonvulsants reduce drinking in standard home cage two-bottle choice paradigms, self-administration of alcohol in operant chambers, and cue- and stress-induced reinstatement of alcohol seeking behaviors in rats and mice. This review also highlights evidence that some anticonvulsants were only moderately effective in reducing drinking in select strains of rodents or models. This suggests that genetics, possible neuroadaptations, or the pharmacological target affect the ability of anticonvulsants to attenuate alcohol consumption. Nonetheless, anticonvulsants are relatively safe, have little abuse potential, and can work in combination with other drugs. The results from these preclinical and clinical studies provide compelling evidence that anticonvulsants are a promising class of medication for the treatment of AUDs.

Quality of life among alcohol-dependent patients: how satisfactory are the available instruments? A systematic review

AIM

The purpose of this systematic review was to compare quality-of-life instruments used as outcome measures in randomized clinical trials for alcohol-dependence treatment.

METHODS

Randomized controlled clinical trials, indexed in the EMBASE, PubMed and PsycINFO databases since 1981, which aimed at improving the quality of life in alcohol-dependent patients and used as instrument to measure the quality of life, as specifically designated by the authors, were included.

RESULTS

Of the 331 articles screened, 18 studies were included in the review. Eight different quality-of-life instruments were used as outcome measures. Twenty-seven life domains were explored. Between-scale heterogeneity was high. The scale most frequently used was the medical outcomes study 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Only 1 clinical trial demonstrated a significant difference between intervention groups at all endpoints, using the quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire (Q-LES-Q).

CONCLUSION

Because many different instruments were used, it is difficult to compare quality-of-life improvement between trials. The most frequently used instrument was a generic health status measure that may not be well suited as a quality-of-life measure for subjects with alcohol dependence. The construction and validation of a specific patient-reported outcome based on alcohol-dependent patients' concerns would effectively contribute to the assessment of treatment efficacy.