Sustained-release methylphenidate in methamphetamine dependence treatment: a double-blind and placebo-controlled trial

Effect of Acupuncture for Methadone Reduction : A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) is effective for managing opioid use disorder, but adverse effects mean that optimal therapy occurs with the lowest dose that controls opioid craving.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of acupuncture versus sham acupuncture on methadone dose reduction.

DESIGN

Multicenter, 2-group, randomized, sham-controlled trial. (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200058123).

SETTING

6 MMT clinics in China.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 65 years or younger with opioid use disorder who attended clinic daily and had been using MMT for at least 6 weeks.

INTERVENTION

Acupuncture or sham acupuncture 3 times a week for 8 weeks.

MEASUREMENTS

The 2 primary outcomes were the proportion of participants who achieved a reduction in methadone dose of 20% or more compared with baseline and opioid craving, which was measured by the change from baseline on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Of 118 eligible participants, 60 were randomly assigned to acupuncture and 58 were randomly assigned to sham acupuncture (2 did not receive acupuncture). At week 8, more patients reduced their methadone dose 20% or more with acupuncture than with sham acupuncture (37 [62%] vs. 16 [29%]; risk difference, 32% [97.5% CI, 13% to 52%]; P < 0.001). In addition, acupuncture was more effective in decreasing opioid craving than sham acupuncture with a mean difference of -11.7 mm VAS (CI, -18.7 to -4.8 mm; P < 0.001). No serious adverse events occurred. There were no notable differences between study groups when participants were asked which type of acupuncture they received.

LIMITATION

Fixed acupuncture protocol limited personalization and only 12 weeks of follow-up after stopping acupuncture.

CONCLUSION

Eight weeks of acupuncture were superior to sham acupuncture in reducing methadone dose and decreasing opioid craving.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Perceptions of prospective pharmaceutical stimulant substitution treatments among people who use illicit stimulants in Vancouver, Canada

BACKGROUND

Stimulant-involved overdose deaths are increasing, driven by polysubstance use and adulteration of the illicit drug supply. While emerging evidence for prescription stimulant substitution is promising, there are no approved treatment options for stimulant use disorder that address the realities of an unpredictable drug supply. This study explores treatment experiences of people who use illicit stimulants (PWUS) to identify gaps and perceptions of prospective pharmaceutical stimulant substitution treatments (SST).

METHODS

In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 86 PWUS in Vancouver, Canada. Thematic analysis focused on experiences of available treatment options for stimulant use and perceptions of prospective SST.

RESULTS

Participants identified how primarily behavioral treatment approaches do not meet the unique needs of PWUS, in contrast with the range of medical treatments available for opioid use disorder. Participants anticipated health and social benefits if they were able to access SST, including avoiding the toxic illicit stimulant supply, reduced engagement in criminalized activities, and greater economic security. Perceptions of prospective SST were informed by knowledge of existing opioid treatments. This led some participants to be unsupportive of SST, citing concerns around agency and highly regulated operational contexts that do not align with the lived realities of stimulant use.

CONCLUSION

Findings demonstrate the need for SST pilot programs in real-world settings and underscore the health and social advantages SST may offer; although drawing on existing opioid treatment models to implement SST pilots may limit success. Thus, any novel treatments for stimulant use must centre the lived realities of PWUS.

Prescription psychostimulants for the treatment of amphetamine-type stimulant use disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is currently no standard of care for pharmacological treatment of amphetamine-type stimulant (ATS) use disorder (ATSUD). This systematic review with meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42022354492) aimed to pool results from randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate efficacy and safety of prescription psychostimulants (PPs) for ATSUD.

METHODS

Major indexing sources and trial registries were searched to include records published before 29 August 2022. Eligible studies were RCTs evaluating efficacy and safety of PPs for ATSUD. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Risk ratio (RR) and risk difference were calculated for random-effect meta-analysis of dichotomous variables. Mean difference and standardized mean difference (SMD) were calculated for random-effect meta-analysis of continuous variables.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs (n = 561 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Trials studied methylphenidate (n = 7), with daily doses of 54-180 mg, and dextroamphetamine (n = 3), with daily doses of 60-110 mg, for 2-24 weeks. PPs significantly decreased end-point craving [SMD  -0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.55, -0.03], while such a decrease did not reach statistical significance for ATS use, as evaluated by urine analysis (UA) (RR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.85-1.01). No effect was observed for self-reported ATS use, retention in treatment, dropout following adverse events, early-stage craving, withdrawal and depressive symptoms. In a sensitivity analysis, treatment was associated with a significant reduction in UA positive for ATS (RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.79-0.99) after removing studies with a high risk of bias. In subgroup analyses, methylphenidate and high doses of PPs were negatively associated with ATS use by UA, while higher doses of PPs and treatment duration (≥ 20 weeks) were positively associated with longer retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals with amphetamine-type stimulant use disorder, treatment with prescription psychostimulants may decrease ATS use and craving. While effect size is limited, it may increase with a higher dosage of medications.

Methamphetamine Toxicities and Clinical Management

Methamphetamine Toxicities and Clinical ManagementMethamphetamine increases the release and blocks the uptake of norepinephrine, serotonin, and dopamine. This article reviews the morbidity and mortality associated with methamphetamine use and discusses prevention and treatment strategies.

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

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

Association of Pharmacological Treatments and Hospitalization and Death in Individuals With Amphetamine Use Disorders in a Swedish Nationwide Cohort of 13 965 Patients

Importance

There are no medications approved by authorities for the treatment of amphetamine or methamphetamine dependence, and studies investigating the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments in hard outcomes, such as hospitalization and death, are lacking.

Objective

To investigate the association between pharmacotherapies and hospitalization and mortality outcomes in persons with amphetamine or methamphetamine use disorder.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This nationwide register-based cohort study was conducted from July 2006 to December 2018 with a median (IQR) follow-up time of 3.9 (1.0-6.1) years. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2021, to May 24, 2022. All residents aged 16 to 64 years living in Sweden with a registered first-time diagnosis of amphetamine or methamphetamine use disorder and without previous diagnoses of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder were identified from nationwide registers of inpatient care, specialized outpatient care, sickness absence, and disability pension.

Exposures

Medications for substance use disorders (SUDs) or for attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder, mood stabilizers, antidepressants, benzodiazepines and related drugs, and antipsychotics. Medication use vs nonuse was modeled with the PRE2DUP (from prescription drug purchases to drug use periods) method.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were hospitalization due to SUD and any hospitalization or death, which were analyzed using within-individual models by comparing use and nonuse periods of 17 specific medications or medication classes in the same individual to minimize selection bias. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality, studied using between-individual analysis as traditional Cox models.

Results

There were 13 965 individuals in the cohort (9671 [69.3%] male; mean [SD] age, 34.4 [13.0] years). During follow-up, 7543 individuals (54.0%) were taking antidepressants, 6101 (43.7%) benzodiazepines, 5067 (36.3%) antipsychotics, 3941 (28.2%) ADHD medications (1511 [10.8%] were taking lisdexamphetamine), 2856 (20.5%) SUD medications, and 1706 (12.2%) mood stabilizers. A total of 10 341 patients (74.0%) were hospitalized due to SUDs, 11 492 patients (82.3%) were hospitalized due to any cause or died, and 1321 patients (9.5%) died of any cause. Lisdexamphetamine was the only medication in this study that was significantly associated with a decrease in risk of 3 outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.94 for SUD hospitalization; aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78-0.95 for any hospitalization or death; aHR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.77 for all-cause mortality). Methylphenidate use also was associated with lower all-cause mortality (aHR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.74). Use of benzodiazepines was associated with a significantly higher risk of SUD hospitalization (aHR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.12-1.22), any hospitalization or death (aHR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.17-1.24), and all-cause mortality (aHR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.20-1.60). Use of antidepressants or antipsychotics was associated with a slight increase in risk of SUD hospitalization (aHR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11 and aHR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09) as well as any hospitalization or death (aHR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.06-1.14 and aHR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.10, respectively).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, use of lisdexamphetamine was associated with improved outcomes in persons with amphetamine or methamphetamine use disorders, encouraging the conduct of randomized clinical trials. Prescription benzodiazepine use was associated with poor outcomes.

Multiple comparison of different noninvasive brain stimulation and pharmacologic interventions in patients with methamphetamine use disorders: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

In recent decades, the prevalence of amphetamine and methamphetamine use disorders has at least doubled in some regions/countries, with accompanying high risks of drug overdose-associated mortality. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) methods may be effective treatments. However, the comparative efficacy of the NIBS protocol for amphetamine/methamphetamine use disorder (AUD/MUD) remains unknown to date. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and acceptability of various NIBS methods/protocols for AUD/MUD management.

METHODS

A frequentist model-based NMA was conducted. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of NIBS and guideline-recommended pharmacologic treatments to reduce craving severity in patients with either AUD or MUD.

RESULTS

Twenty-two RCTs including 1888 participants met the eligibility criteria. Compared with the sham/placebo group (study = 19, subjects = 891), a combination of intermittent theta burst stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and continuous TBS over the left ventromedial prefrontal cortex (study = 1, subjects = 19) was associated with the largest decreases in craving severity [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -1.50; 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) = -2.70 to -0.31]. High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the left DLPFC was associated with the largest improvements in depression and quality of sleep (study = 3, subjects = 86) (SMD = -2.48; 95%CIs = -3.25 to -1.71 and SMD = -2.43; 95%CIs = -3.38 to -1.48, respectively). The drop-out rate of most investigated treatments did not significantly differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

The combined TBS protocol over the prefrontal cortex was associated with the greatest improvement in craving severity. Since few studies were available for inclusion, additional large-scale randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Goofballing of Opioid and Methamphetamine: The Science Behind the Deadly Cocktail

Globally, millions of people suffer from various substance use disorders (SUD), including mono-and polydrug use of opioids and methamphetamine. Brain regions such as the cingulate cortex, infralimbic cortex, dorsal striatum, nucleus accumbens, basolateral and central amygdala have been shown to play important roles in addiction-related behavioral changes. Clinical and pre-clinical studies have characterized these brain regions and their corresponding neurochemical changes in numerous phases of drug dependence such as acute drug use, intoxication, craving, withdrawal, and relapse. At present, many studies have reported the individual effects of opioids and methamphetamine. However, little is known about their combined effects. Co-use of these drugs produces effects greater than either drug alone, where one decreases the side effects of the other, and the combination produces a prolonged intoxication period or a more desirable intoxication effect. An increasing number of studies have associated polydrug abuse with poorer treatment outcomes, drug-related deaths, and more severe psychopathologies. To date, the pharmacological treatment efficacy for polydrug abuse is vague, and still at the experimental stage. This present review discusses the human and animal behavioral, neuroanatomical, and neurochemical changes underlying both morphine and methamphetamine dependence separately, as well as its combination. This narrative review also delineates the recent advances in the pharmacotherapy of mono- and poly drug-use of opioids and methamphetamine at clinical and preclinical stages.

Ifenprodil for the treatment of methamphetamine use disorder: An exploratory, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial

Aim

No effective pharmacological interventions have been developed for patients with methamphetamine use disorder. Ifenprodil is a blocker of G protein‐activated inwardly rectifying potassium channels, which play a key role in the mechanism of action of addictive substances. We conducted a randomized, double‑blind, exploratory, dose‐ranging, placebo‐controlled trial to examine the clinical efficacy of ifenprodil for the treatment of methamphetamine use disorder.

Methods

Participants were assigned to three groups: placebo, 60 mg/d ifenprodil, or 120 mg/d ifenprodil. The drug administration period was 84 days. The primary outcome was the use or nonuse of methamphetamine during the drug administration period in the placebo group vs 120 mg/d ifenprodil group. We also assessed drug use status, relapse risk based on the Stimulant Relapse Risk Scale (SRRS), drug craving, and methamphetamine in urine as secondary outcomes. We further evaluated drug use status and SRRS subscale scores in patients who were not taking addiction medications during the study.

Results

Ifenprodil did not affect the primary or secondary outcomes. However, the additional analyses showed that the number of days of methamphetamine use during the follow‐up period and scores on the emotionality problems subscale of the SRRS improved in the 120 mg/d ifenprodil group. The safety of ifenprodil was confirmed in patients with methamphetamine use disorder.

Conclusion

The present findings did not confirm the efficacy of ifenprodil for methamphetamine use disorder treatment based on the primary or secondary outcomes, but we found evidence of its safety and efficacy in reducing emotionality problems.

Clinical trial registration

The study was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (no. UMIN000030849) and Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (no. jRCTs031180080). The main registration site is jRCT (https://jrct.niph.go.jp/).

We conducted an exploratory, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial to investigate the clinical safety and efficacy of ifenprodil for the treatment of methamphetamine use disorder in Japanese patients. Our findings confirmed the safety of ifenprodil, and ifenprodil at the highest dose exerted slight efficacy.

Effects of the GluN2B-selective antagonist Ro 63-1908 on acquisition and expression of methamphetamine conditioned place preference in male and female rats

BACKGROUND

Methamphetamine abuse has increased significantly in recent years. Currently, there are no FDA-approved pharmacotherapies for the treatment of methamphetamine use disorder. The goal of the current study was to determine if the N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) GluN2B-selective antagonist Ro 63-1908 can block the conditioned rewarding effects of methamphetamine as assessed in conditioned place preference (CPP).

METHODS

Two main experiments were conducted. In the first experiment, male (n = 24) and female (n = 24) rats received either vehicle or Ro 63-1908 (1.0-10.0 mg/kg) 30 min prior to the posttest to determine if blocking the GluN2B subunit attenuates expression of methamphetamine CPP. In the second experiment, male (n = 18) and female (n = 18) rats received either vehicle or Ro 63-1908 (1.0 or 3.0 mg/kg) 30 min prior to each conditioning session to determine if blocking the GluN2B subunit attenuates acquisition of methamphetamine CPP.

RESULTS

Ro 63-1908 (3.0 mg/kg) blocked acquisition of methamphetamine CPP in male rats, but only attenuated CPP in female rats. Ro 63-1908 did not alter expression of CPP in either sex. Increasing the dose of Ro 63-1908 (10.0 mg/kg) failed to block acquisition of CPP in an additional group of female rats (n = 6). A control experiment showed that Ro 63-1908 (3.0 mg/kg) did not produce CPP or conditioned place aversion in male rats (n = 6) or in female rats (n = 6).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that Ro 63-1908 is able to decrease the conditioned rewarding effects of methamphetamine.

Adding extended-release methylphenidate to psychological intervention for treatment of methamphetamine dependence: A double-blind randomized controlled trial

Background: Iran has been faced with an emerging epidemic of methamphetamine (MA) use during recent years. No effective pharmacotherapy has been identified for MA treatment; and psychological interventions are the only available effective treatment. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of extended-release methylphenidate (ER-MTP) for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence. Methods: Sixty-two people with methamphetamine dependence, according to DSM-IV-TR, were randomly assigned to either fixed-dose extended-release methylphenidate (ER-MTP) (60 mg per day) or placebo for 12 weeks. All participants received twice-weekly cognitive behavioral treatment for stimulant dependence. Recent drug use and craving level were measured using weekly rapid urine test and craving visual analogue scale, respectively. The severity of addiction was measured using the Addiction Severity Index at baseline and study completion. Assessment of MA withdrawal was conducted using Amphetamine Withdrawal Questionnaire and Amphetamine Selective Severity Assessment at baseline, day 3, week 1, week 4 and week 12. Depression and high-risk behaviors assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory and the high-risk behavior questionnaire at baseline, weeks 4 and 12 of the study. SPSS software version 22 was used for data analysis and p<0.05 was considered significant. Results: Percent of weekly MA negative urine tests was not significantly different between groups during the course of the study (p=0.766). Two groups showed similar retention rates. Changes in MA craving, withdrawal, addiction severity, depression and high-risk behaviors were not significantly different between groups. No serious adverse event was observed. Conclusion: Our finding did not show the superiority of fixed-schedule ER-MTP over placebo when added to an intensive biweekly outpatient psychosocial treatment. Further studies using individually tailored flexible-dose regimes might provide new insights regarding the safety and efficacy of psychostimulant maintenance treatment for MA dependence.

The therapeutic effects of methylphenidate and matrix-methylphenidate on addiction severity, craving, relapse and mental health in the methamphetamine use disorder

Background

Little evidence has examined the therapeutic effects of methylphenidate (MPH) and Matrix Model treatment on addiction severity, craving, relapse and mental health in people who use methamphetamine (PWUM). This study was conducted to determine the effects of MPH, Matrix Model treatment, and Matrix-MPH on addiction severity, craving, relapse and mental health in PWUM.

Methods

This clinical trial was conducted among 100 patients with METH users. Participants were randomly divided into four groups who received: 1) 22 sessions of 45-min, twice a week for Matrix Model treatment (n = 25); 2) MPH 10 mg/day in the first month, 7.5 mg/day in the second month and 5 mg/day in the third month (n = 25); 3) Matrix Model treatment combined with MPH (n = 25); 4) control group (n = 25) for 12 weeks. Addiction severity, craving, relapse and mental status were evaluated at baseline and end-of-trial.

Results

Matrix Model treatment combined with MPH significantly reduced MA craving (P < 0.001) and addiction severity (P < 0.001). In addition, Matrix Model treatment combined with MPH resulted in a significant increase of mental health (P = 0.001), compared with Matrix Model treatment, MPH, and control group. Also, negative METH urine test significantly increased in the Matrix Model treatment combined with MPH group compared with the other groups (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

In conclusion, Matrix Model treatment combined with MPH for 12 weeks had beneficial effects on addiction severity, craving, relapse, and mental health in PWUM, compared with Matrix Model treatment, MPH, and control group.

Trial registration

This study was retrospectively registered in the Iranian website (www.irct.ir) for clinical trials registration (http://www.irct.ir: IRCT20171105037245N1). Registration date: 9 December 2017.

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

RATIONALE

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Stimulant safe supply: a potential opportunity to respond to the overdose epidemic

Background

Occurring against the backdrop of an overdose crisis, stimulant use and stimulant-involved deaths in North America are increasing at an alarming rate. Many of these deaths are being attributed to fentanyl and related analogs, which have been increasingly found within street-level stimulant supplies. Within this, people experiencing socio-economic marginalization are at the greatest risk of overdose and other harms from adulterated stimulants. Current treatments for stimulant use disorder have limited effectiveness, and even less applicability to the lived realities of marginalized stimulant users. Emerging technologies, such as drug checking, are being implemented to support safer stimulant use, but the accessibility and utility of these technologies to stimulant users are framed by experiences of vulnerability that render them largely ineffective.

Stimulant safe supply

Solutions that provide a legal and safe supply of non-adulterated stimulants of known quality, and within a health care framework, are needed to directly address the risk of an increasingly adulterated stimulant supply. Similar innovative opioid-focused interventions are being piloted with medications that have a similar pharmacological effect as their illicit counterparts. While there are currently no approved pharmacotherapies for stimulant use, research has demonstrated a number of stimulant medications that are promising substitutes for cocaine and methamphetamine use. Much like with opioid-focused pharmacotherapies, having a consistent and safe supply of stimulants can lead to improved health outcomes and will drastically reduce overdose risk. However, for a stimulant safe supply intervention to be a success, it must provide the high and performance-enhancing effects that people seek from the illicit market, which requires doses and user agency that trials to date have not provided.

Conclusion

Efforts are needed to investigate the feasibility of pharmacological stimulant-based interventions that address safe supply needs. The promise of similar opioid-focused approaches in addressing both overdose-related risks and experiences related to vulnerability underscores the need to advance safe supply approaches targeted towards people who use stimulants. Given the current overdose crisis and rising stimulant use across North America, the implementation and evaluation of such novel stimulant-focused interventions should be a public health priority.

Pharmacological Treatment of Methamphetamine/Amphetamine Dependence: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Stimulant drugs are second only to cannabis as the most widely used class of illicit drug globally, accounting for 68 million past-year consumers. Dependence on amphetamines (AMPH) or methamphetamine (MA) is a growing global concern. Yet, there is no established pharmacotherapy for AMPH/MA dependence. A comprehensive assessment of the research literature on pharmacotherapy for AMPH/MA dependence may inform treatment guidelines and future research directions.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the peer-reviewed literature via the electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and SCOPUS for randomised controlled trials reported in the English language examining a pharmacological treatment for AMPH/MA dependence or use disorder. We included all studies published to 19 June 2019. The selected studies were evaluated for design; methodology; inclusion and exclusion criteria; sample size; pharmacological and (if included) psychosocial interventions; length of follow-up and follow-up schedules; outcome variables and measures; results; overall conclusions and risk of bias. Outcome measures were any reported impact of treatment related to AMPH/MA use.

RESULTS

Our search returned 43 studies that met our criteria, collectively enrolling 4065 participants and reporting on 23 individual pharmacotherapies, alone or in combination. Disparate outcomes and measures (n = 55 for the primary outcomes) across studies did not allow for meta-analyses. Some studies demonstrated mixed or weak positive signals (often in defined populations, e.g. men who have sex with men), with some variation in efficacy signals dependent on baseline frequency of AMPH/MA use. The most consistent positive findings have been demonstrated with stimulant agonist treatment (dexamphetamine and methylphenidate), naltrexone and topiramate. Less consistent benefits have been shown with the antidepressants bupropion and mirtazapine, the glutamatergic agent riluzole and the corticotropin releasing factor (CRF-1) antagonist pexacerfont; whilst in general, antidepressant medications (e.g. selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs], tricyclic antidepressants [TCAs]) have not been effective in reducing AMPH/MA use.

CONCLUSIONS

No pharmacotherapy yielded convincing results for the treatment of AMPH/MA dependence; mostly studies were underpowered and had low treatment completion rates. However, there were positive signals from several agents that warrant further investigation in larger scale studies; agonist therapies show promise. Common outcome measures should include change in use days. Future research must address the heterogeneity of AMPH/MA dependence (e.g. coexisting conditions, severity of disorder, differences between MA and AMPH dependence) and the role of psychosocial intervention.

Pharmacotherapeutic strategies for methamphetamine use disorder: mind the subgroups

Introduction: Drug use related deaths are increasing and the lack of effective treatment for psychostimulants can be largely held responsible. Particularly, no pharmacotherapy is approved for methamphetamine (METH) use disorder despite decades of research. Only psychosocial interventions are clinically used, with limited long-term recovery and relapse.Areas covered: This review aims to select and describe the most relevant findings to date. Selected clinical trials were found in PubMed using the following keywords ('methamphetamine') and ('addiction' OR 'withdrawal' OR 'treatment' OR 'pharmacotherapy'). Randomized placebo-controlled trials enrolling treatment-seeking METH-dependent subjects and inherent secondary analysis were included.Expert opinion: Overall, end-of-treatment abstinence, reduced METH use or lower relapse rates were seen on METH dependent subgroups or attained significance only following post hoc analysis, irrespective of the medication tested. For example, light and heavy METH users seem to respond differently to pharmacotherapy. This together with the heterogeneous nature of the METH dependent population strongly suggests that some drugs herein described (e.g. mirtazapine, methylphenidate) should be further tested in clinical trials focused on subgroups. Lastly, objective measures, such as urinalysis, are mandatory to include in clinical trials and early treatment response and/or medication compliance should be carefully monitored and considered as predictors of success/failure.

An initial randomized controlled trial of behavioral activation for treatment of concurrent crystal methamphetamine dependence and sexual risk for HIV acquisition among men who have sex with men

Men who have sex with men (MSM) continue to be the largest risk group for HIV infections in the U.S., where crystal methamphetamine abuse heightens risk for HIV infection through greater engagement in condomless anal sex (CAS). Existing treatments lack attention to replacement activities or the role of depressed mood. Behavioral activation (BA) is an evidence-based approach for depression that involves identifying and participating in pleasurable, goal-directed activities. We hypothesize, for MSM abusing crystal methamphetamine, re-learning how to engage in non-drug-using aspects of life would facilitate their ability to benefit from sexual risk reduction (SRR) counseling. Project IMPACT was a pilot randomized-controlled-trial. Forty-six MSM at sexual risk of acquiring HIV who met DSM-IV criteria for crystal methamphetamine dependence were enrolled. Of those MSM, 41 were randomized: 21 were assigned to the intervention, two sessions of SRR, ten sessions of BA with SRR, and one session of relapse prevention; 20 participants were assigned to a control condition (two sessions of SRR). At the acute post-intervention visit, intervention participants reported an average of 3.2 CAS acts with men who were HIV-infected or whose status they did not know, compared to 4.5 among control participants (β = -0.36; 95% CI: -0.69, -0.02; p = 0.035). At the 6-month post-intervention visit, intervention participants reported 1.1 CAS acts with men who were HIV-infected or whose status they did not know compared to 2.8 among control participants (β = -0.95; 95% CI: -1.44, -0.46; p < 0.0001). Similarly, intervention participants reported 1.0 CAS acts under the influence of crystal methamphetamine with men who were HIV-infected or whose status they did not know compared to 2.5 among control participants (β = -0.87; 95% CI: -1.38, -0.36; p = 0.0005). Lastly, intervention participants reported more continuous days abstaining from crystal methamphetamine compared to control (50.1 vs. 39.0, respectively) (β = 0.25; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.34; p < 0.0001). Findings are encouraging, provide evidence of feasibility and acceptability, and demonstrate initial efficacy for reducing sexual risk for HIV and crystal methamphetamine use.

Treatment of amphetamine abuse/use disorder: a systematic review of a recent health concern

OBJECTIVES

The study systematically reviewed the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments alone or combined with brief cognitive-behavioural therapy (BCBT) for treating Iranian amphetamine abusers. The secondary aim was to review the efficacy of BCBT alone or combined with pharmacological treatments for treating amphetamine abusers in the world.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Published trials were considered for inclusion. The review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Web of Science, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group's Specialised Register of Trials, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, PsychINFO, Iran Medex, Magiran and the Scientific Information Database were searched (January 2001 to March 2019). The reference lists of included studies were hand searched for more information. A systematic literature search in eight databases produced 10 trials.

RESULTS

Risperidone reduced positive psychotic symptoms while aripiprazole reduced negative psychotic symptoms. Methylphenidate reduced craving and depression compared with placebo. Topiramate reduced addiction severity and craving for methamphetamine abuse compared with placebo. Buprenorphine reduced methamphetamine craving more than methadone. Haloperidol and risperidone reduced psychosis. Riluzole reduced craving, withdrawal, and depression compared with placebo. Abstinence from amphetamine or reduction in amphetamine abuse was confirmed in four BCBT studies and one study which applied BCBT with a pharmacological treatment which were stable between two and 12-months. Other changes in BCBT studies were as follows: reduced polydrug use; drug injection, criminality and severity of amphetamine dependence at six-month follow-up; improved general functioning; mental health; stage of change as well as improved motivation to change in a pharmacological + BCBT study.

CONCLUSION

A review of trials indicates that pharmacological treatments and BCBT in a research setting outperform control conditions in treating amphetamines abuse and associated harms. Large-scale studies should determine if both treatments can be effective in clinical settings.

Riluzole for treatment of men with methamphetamine dependence: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Riluzole is a glutamate regulator and effective in treatment of neuropsychiatric conditions.

AIMS

We assessed riluzole for treatment of methamphetamine dependence.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, male outpatients with methamphetamine dependence who were 18-65 years old received either 50 mg riluzole ( n=34) or placebo ( n=54) twice daily for 12 weeks. Patients were excluded in case of comorbid serious medical conditions or neurologic disorders, comorbid psychiatric disorders other than methamphetamine dependence requiring specific treatment interventions, simultaneous positive urine test result for substances of abuse other than methamphetamine, smoking >3 days per week, simultaneous consumption of medications which are contraindicated or have interaction with riluzole.

RESULTS

Concerning primary outcomes, the cumulative mean number of attended weekly visits was higher in the riluzole arm compared with the placebo arm approaching a statistically significant difference (riluzole, median (range)=13.00 (2.00-13.00); placebo=4.00 (2.00-13.00); Mann-Whitney U=505.00, p-value=0.073), and the weekly measured rate of positive methamphetamine urine test results was significantly lower in the riluzole arm by the end of the study (riluzole=1 (5.00%), placebo=9 (45.00%), p-value=0.004). Patients in the riluzole arm experienced significantly greater improvement on all the craving, withdrawal, and depression measures regarding mean score changes from baseline to endpoint. No significant difference was detected between the two arms in terms of incidence of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Future randomized clinical trials are needed to investigate proper dosing strategy in a more inclusive sample.

Study of effects of ifenprodil in patients with methamphetamine dependence: Protocol for an exploratory, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Aims

Pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine dependence has not yet been developed in Japan or elsewhere in the world. Ifenprodil is a blocker of G protein‐activated inwardly rectifying potassium channels that play a key role in the mechanism of action of addictive substances. Our aim is to examine the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ifenprodil for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence in a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial.

Methods

The recruitment of outpatients with methamphetamine dependence began in January 2018. The patients will be randomized into three arms: placebo, 60 mg/d ifenprodil, or 120 mg/d ifenprodil. Placebo or ifenprodil will be taken for 84 days. We will use Cerocral fine granule 4%^® (ifenprodil tartrate). Follow‐up assessments will be conducted for 84 d after the drug administration period. All of the patients will be assessed by self‐administered questionnaires and urine tests. The primary outcome will be the presence or absence of methamphetamine use during the 84‐day administration period in the 120 mg/d ifenprodil and placebo groups. Secondary outcomes will include the number of days and percentage of days of abstinence from methamphetamine use, positive urine for methamphetamine, relapse risk, and drug craving.

Discussion

This study is the first clinical trial of ifenprodil treatment for methamphetamine dependence and is designed as an intervention test with off‐label drug use. The present study is expected to provide evidence of the effects of ifenprodil treatment on methamphetamine dependence.

Trial registry

This trial was registered in the UMIN clinical trial registry (UMIN000030849; date of registration: January 17, 2018).

This study is the first clinical trial of ifenprodil treatment for methamphetamine dependence and is designed as an intervention test with off‐label drug use. The present study is expected to provide evidence of the effects of ifenprodil treatment on methamphetamine dependence.

Pharmacotherapy for amphetamine dependence: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Demand for treatment for amphetamine use is increasing internationally. Establishing effective pharmacotherapy provides broader treatment options for people who are dependent on amphetamine and may encourage engagement in evidence-based behavioral treatment. This study aimed to identify medicines that have potential in improving treatment outcomes for people who are dependent on amphetamines.

METHODS

Medline, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from 1997 to 2012 and again from 2013 to 2016. Studies on medications for amphetamine/methamphetamine dependence treatment were selected and assessed by two independent researchers. A meta-narrative review approach was used to synthesize results.

RESULTS

A total of 49 studies investigating 20 potential pharmacotherapies were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 35 studies related to 33 level II quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Five medications were subject to multiple RCTs. Four of these medicines demonstrated some limited evidence of benefit for reducing amphetamine use: methylphenidate (as reported in three studies), bupropion (in three studies), modafinil (two studies), and naltrexone (one study). Four RCTs of dexamphetamine suggest its benefit on secondary outcomes such as treatment retention, but not for reducing amphetamine use. Six other medicines indicate the potential for efficacy, but the number of studies is too small to draw conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

No medicine has as yet demonstrated sufficient, consistent evidence of effectiveness to support its use in routine treatment. High study drop-out and poor medication adherence limits the strength of evidence and raises important clinical questions about how to improve treatment engagement and outcomes.

Pexacerfont as a CRF1 antagonist for the treatment of withdrawal symptoms in men with heroin/methamphetamine dependence: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

We assessed the efficacy of pexacerfont, a CRF1 antagonist, for the treatment of withdrawal symptoms. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, male patients with amphetamine or opioid dependence, on the basis of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), in the age range 18-55 years, received either pexacerfont or placebo (300, 200, and 100 mg/day in the first, second, and third week, respectively). No antidepressants, behavioral interventions, or substitution therapy were administered. Candidates were excluded if they had DSM-IV-TR axis I or II disorders (other than depressive/anxiety disorders). The primary outcomes were difference in the distribution of positive urine test results for heroin and methamphetamine at the end of the trial, and the mean difference in the change in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for craving from the baseline to the endpoint between the two groups. No significant difference was detected for urine test results, but a significant difference was observed for craving scores. Also, significant time×treatment interactions were found for all the scales including VAS craving, VAS temptation severity, frequency of temptation, Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale, Amphetamine Withdrawal Questionnaire, Beck Anxiety Inventory, and Beck Depression Inventory II. Our findings favor pexacerfont as a potential treatment for withdrawal from drug dependence; however, further comprehensive studies are warranted.

The neurobiological mechanisms of physical exercise in methamphetamine addiction

Methamphetamine (METH) is the primary drug within amphetamine-type stimulants which are the second most abused group of drugs worldwide. There is no pharmacological treatment addressed specifically to METH addiction, and behavioral therapy is shadowed by poor long-term recovery and relapse. Therefore, novel approaches to manage METH addiction are an urgent need. This review aims to describe the current state of physical exercise use on methamphetamine addiction management. The following searching terms in PubMed were used: ("physical exercise" OR "exercise") AND "methamphetamine." Relevant references from key publications and gray literature were also reviewed to identify additional citations for inclusion. Original investigation regarding physical exercise and methamphetamine addiction (clinical data) or neurobiological mechanisms of physical exercise in animal models of methamphetamine administration (preclinical data) was included. Overall, METH users demonstrated improvements, including better fitness and emotional measures, lower relapse rates, and sustained abstinence when compared to nonexercised individuals. The neurobiological mechanisms of physical exercise in METH users seem to reflect an interplay of several agents, including neurochemicals, oxidative stress, neurogenesis, gliogenesis, and blood-brain barrier as disclosed by preclinical data. Exercise-based interventions alone or as a conjoint therapy may be a useful tool for managing METH addiction.

Pharmacotherapeutic agents in the treatment of methamphetamine dependence

INTRODUCTION

Methamphetamine use is a serious public health concern in many countries and is second to cannabis as the most widely abused illicit drug in the world. Effective management for methamphetamine dependence remains elusive and the large majority of methamphetamine users relapse following treatment. Areas covered: Progression in the understanding of the pharmacological basis of methamphetamine use has provided us with innovative opportunities to develop agents to treat dependence. The current review summarizes relevant literature on the neurobiological and clinical correlates associated with methamphetamine use. We then outline agents that have been explored for potential treatments in preclinical studies, human laboratory phase I and phase II trials over the last ten years. Expert opinion: No agent has demonstrated a broad and strong effect in achieving MA abstinence in Phase II trials. Agents with novel therapeutic targets appear promising. Advancement in MA treatment, including translation into practice, faces several clinical challenges.

Efficacy and safety of psychostimulants for amphetamine and methamphetamine use disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Amphetamine and methamphetamine use disorders are associated with severe health and social consequences. No pharmacological therapy has been approved for the treatment of these disorders. Psychostimulants can act as maintenance-like therapies for managing substance use among these patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the literature examining the efficacy and safety of psychostimulant agents for increasing abstinence and treatment retention among patients with amphetamine and methamphetamine use disorders.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL from inception to August 2016. Selection of studies, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. We conducted meta-analyses to provide a pooled summary estimate for included trials and report the review according to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

We identified and selected 17 studies with 1387 participants. Outcome reporting across trials was inconsistent, and the overall quality of evidence was very low due to high risk of bias and indirectness. A meta-analysis of five trials (642 participants) found no effect of psychostimulants for end-of-study abstinence (odds ratio = 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.45). Additionally, the pooled estimate from 14 studies (1184 participants) showed no effect of psychostimulants for treatment retention (odds ratio = 1.20, 95% confidence interval = 0.91 to 1.58). The incidence of serious adverse events did not differ between intervention and placebo groups based on qualitative reports from trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative analyses showed no effect of psychostimulants for sustained abstinence or treatment retention. We also identified the need for more rigorous studies in this research area with clinician and patient important outcomes.

Classics in Chemical Neuroscience: Methylphenidate

As the first drug to see widespread use for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), methylphenidate was the forerunner and catalyst to the modern era of rapidly increasing diagnosis, treatment, and medication development for this condition. During its often controversial history, it has variously elucidated the importance of dopamine signaling in memory and attention, provoked concerns about pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement, driven innovation in controlled-release technologies and enantiospecific therapeutics, and stimulated debate about the impact of pharmaceutical sales techniques on the practice of medicine. In this Review, we will illustrate the history and importance of methylphenidate to ADHD treatment and neuroscience in general, as well as provide key information about its synthesis, structure-activity relationship, pharmacological activity, metabolism, manufacturing, FDA-approved indications, and adverse effects.

Effects of 7-day continuous D-amphetamine, methylphenidate, and cocaine treatment on choice between methamphetamine and food in male rhesus monkeys

BACKGROUND

Methamphetamine addiction is a significant public health problem for which no Food and Drug Administration-approved pharmacotherapies exist. Preclinical drug vs. food choice procedures have been predictive of clinical medication efficacy in the treatment of opioid and cocaine addiction. Whether preclinical choice procedures are predictive of candidate medication effects for other abused drugs, such as methamphetamine, remains unclear. The present study aim was to determine continuous 7-day treatment effects with the monoamine releaser d-amphetamine and the monoamine uptake inhibitor methylphenidate on methamphetamine vs. food choice. In addition, 7-day cocaine treatment effects were also examined.

METHODS

Behavior was maintained under a concurrent schedule of food delivery (1-g pellets, fixed-ratio 100 schedule) and methamphetamine injections (0-0.32mg/kg/injection, fixed-ratio 10 schedule) in male rhesus monkeys (n=4). Methamphetamine choice dose-effect functions were determined daily before and during 7-day periods of continuous intravenous treatment with d-amphetamine (0.01-0.1mg/kg/h), methylphenidate (0.032-0.32mg/kg/h), or cocaine (0.1-0.32mg/kg/h).

RESULTS

During saline treatment, increasing methamphetamine doses resulted in a corresponding increase in methamphetamine vs. food choice. Continuous 7-day treatments with d-amphetamine, methylphenidate or cocaine did not significantly attenuate methamphetamine vs. food choice up to doses that decreased rates of operant responding. However, 0.1mg/kg/h d-amphetamine did eliminate methamphetamine choice in two monkeys.

CONCLUSIONS

The present subchronic treatment results support the utility of preclinical methamphetamine choice to evaluate candidate medications for methamphetamine addiction. Furthermore, these results confirm and extend previous results demonstrating differential pharmacological mechanisms between cocaine choice and methamphetamine choice.