The use of naltrexone in pathological and problem gambling: A UK case series

Treatment of harmful gambling: a scoping review of United Kingdom-based intervention research

BACKGROUND

Understanding and treating the harm caused by gambling is a growing international psychiatric and public health challenge. Treatment of gambling harm may involve psychological and pharmacological intervention, in conjunction with peer support. This scoping review was conducted to identify, for the first time, the characteristics and extent of United Kingdom (UK) based gambling treatment research. We reviewed studies conducted among people seeking treatment for disordered or harmful gambling in the UK, the settings, research designs, and outcome measures used, and to identify any treatment research gaps.

METHODS

Systematic searches of PsycInfo, PsycArticles, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were carried out for gambling treatment research or evaluation studies conducted in the UK. Studies were included if they evaluated the effectiveness of an intervention or treatment designed to improve symptoms of harmful or problematic gambling, reported outcomes of interventions on treatment adherence, gambling symptoms, or behaviours using standardised measures, were conducted in the UK, and were published since 2000.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Four were retrospective chart reviews, two were single-participant case reports, one described a retrospective case series, and one employed a cross-sectional design. None used an experimental design.

CONCLUSION

The limited number of studies included in this review highlights a relative paucity of gambling treatment research conducted in UK settings. Further work should seek to identify potential barriers and obstacles to conducting gambling treatment research in the UK.

Current Understanding of Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder and Co-occurring Conditions: What Clinicians Should Know about Pharmacological Options

Compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD) has recently been recognized as a psychiatric disorder. Pharmacological treatments for CSBD have received little study and thus have limited empirical support. The main objective of the present work is to review existing literature on the efficacy of different drugs on the symptomatology of CSBD, including the subtype of problematic pornography use (PPU). The main pharmacological approaches to treating CSBD have included opioid antagonists (naltrexone and nalmefene), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (paroxetine, citalopram, fluoxetine, and sertraline), mood stabilizers (topiramate), tricyclic antidepressants (clomipramine), serotonin antagonist and reuptake inhibitors (nefazodone), and N-acetylcysteine. Since people with CSBD may experience different co-occurring disorders, these should be considered when choosing the best pharmacological treatment. Pharmacological therapy for CSBD/PPU has been suggested as an adjunct to psychological therapies, which, for the moment, have the most empirical evidence. However, to evaluate the efficacy of most of the drugs presented in this narrative review, data to date have only been available from case studies. Thus, empirical support is scant and generalizability of results is limited, highlighting the need for more research in this area.

Pharmacological management of gambling disorder: an update of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Gambling disorder (GD) is a mental health condition characterized by persistent and problematic betting behavior. GD generates distress and impairment, and treatment options include psychological and pharmacological interventions.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review explores existing pharmacological treatments for GD. The following classes of medications were considered: opioid-receptor antagonists (e.g. naltrexone and nalmefene), serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g. fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, escitalopram, and citalopram), glutamatergic agents (e.g. N-acetylcysteine (NAC), acamprosate, and memantine), mood stabilizers (e.g. topiramate, carbamazepine, lithium), and other medications (e.g. modafinil, nefazodone, olanzapine, haloperidol, tolcapone, and bupropion).

EXPERT OPINION

Due to the limitations of the studies reviewed, solid conclusions regarding the optimal choice of pharmacotherapy for individuals with GD are challenging to draw at this time. Despite some medications, such as naltrexone and nalmefene, showing promising results, efficacy has varied across studies. The review highlights current gaps/limitations, including small sample sizes, limited diversity in participant demographics, the need for exploring different gambling subtypes and treatment responses, high placebo response rates, lack of longer-term longitudinal information, limited investigation of neurobiological correlates and co-occurring disorders, and the importance of implementation research. Further research is needed to address these gaps and explore additional medications, as well as interventions like neuromodulation.

The role of contextual factors in avenues to recover from gambling disorder: a scoping review

Introduction

Recovery from complex conditions such as gambling disorders (GD) often entail considerable change and require a range of adaptable interventions in the health care system. Outcomes from such avenues to change are influenced by multifarious contextual factors, which are less frequently considered in treatment outcome studies. Accordingly, this scoping review aims to map the level of evidence and explore how contextual factors influence the provision and outcomes of GD interventions.

Methods

A systematic search in selected health and social science research databases yielded a total of 2.464 unique references. The results were screened in three selection steps-titles (n = 2.464), abstracts (n = 284) and full-text (n = 104). The scoping approach was applied to provide a narrative account of the final included references (n = 34).

Results and discussion

Findings suggest that the research on GD treatment is in the early stages of development. Additionally, studies on GD interventions are characterized by cultural biases (Region and ethnicity and Gender perspectives), while three key elements are described as successful avenues to recover from GD (Competence, Perception and Utilization). In line with these findings, proposals for future research and treatment designs are made.

Genetic Addiction Risk and Psychological Profiling Analyses for "Preaddiction" Severity Index

Since 1990, when our laboratory published the association of the DRD2 Taq A1 allele and severe alcoholism in JAMA, there has been an explosion of genetic candidate association studies, including genome-wide association studies (GWAS). To develop an accurate test to help identify those at risk for at least alcohol use disorder (AUD), a subset of reward deficiency syndrome (RDS), Blum's group developed the genetic addiction risk severity (GARS) test, consisting of ten genes and eleven associated risk alleles. In order to statistically validate the selection of these risk alleles measured by GARS, we applied strict analysis to studies that investigated the association of each polymorphism with AUD or AUD-related conditions, including pain and even bariatric surgery, as a predictor of severe vulnerability to unwanted addictive behaviors, published since 1990 until now. This analysis calculated the Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium of each polymorphism in cases and controls. Pearson's χ2 test or Fisher's exact test was applied to compare the gender, genotype, and allele distribution if available. The statistical analyses found the OR, 95% CI for OR, and the post risk for 8% estimation of the population's alcoholism prevalence revealed a significant detection. Prior to these results, the United States and European patents on a ten gene panel and eleven risk alleles have been issued. In the face of the new construct of the "preaddiction" model, similar to "prediabetes", the genetic addiction risk analysis might provide one solution missing in the treatment and prevention of the neurological disorder known as RDS.

Pharmacological interventions for the treatment of disordered and problem gambling

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological interventions for disordered and problem gambling have been employed in clinical practice. Despite the availability of several reviews of the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling, few have employed systematic search strategies or compared different categories of pharmacological interventions. Systematic reviews of high-quality evidence are therefore essential to provide guidance regarding the efficacy of different pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aims of the review were to: (1) examine the efficacy of major categories of pharmacological-only interventions (antidepressants, opioid antagonists, mood stabilisers, atypical antipsychotics) for disordered or problem gambling, relative to placebo control conditions; and (2) examine the efficacy of these major categories relative to each other.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (all years to 11 January 2022).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials evaluating a pharmacological intervention for the treatment of disordered or problem gambling. Eligible control conditions included placebo control groups or comparisons with another category of pharmacological intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures, including systematic extraction of included study characteristics and results and risk of bias assessment. Our primary outcome was reduction in gambling symptom severity. Our secondary outcomes were reduction in gambling expenditure, gambling frequency, time spent gambling, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and functional impairment; and responder status. We evaluated treatment effects for continuous and dichotomous outcomes using standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratios (RR), respectively, employing random-effects meta-analyses. A minimum of two independent treatment effects were required for a meta-analysis to be conducted (with only meta-analytic findings reported in this abstract).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies in the review (n = 1193 randomised) that reported outcome data scheduled for end of treatment. Length of treatment ranged from 7 to 96 weeks.  Antidepressants: Six studies (n = 268) evaluated antidepressants, with very low to low certainty evidence suggesting that antidepressants were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.09, n = 225), gambling expenditure (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.06, n = 144), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.23, n = 90), functional impairment (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.22, n = 110), and responder status (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.66, n = 268). Opioid antagonists: Four studies (n = 562) evaluated opioid antagonists, with very low to low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.19, n = 259), but no difference between groups in responder status (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.86 to 3.14, n = 562). Mood stabilisers: Two studies (n = 71) evaluated mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence suggesting that mood stabilisers were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -2.24 to 0.39, n = 71), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -1.14 to 0.83, n = 71), and anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.64 to 0.30, n = 71). Atypical antipsychotics:Two studies (n = 63) evaluated the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine, with very low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.08, n = 63). Comparative effectiveness: Two studies (n = 62) compared antidepressants with opioid antagonists, with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than opioid antagonists on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) at post-treatment. Two studies (n = 58) compared antidepressants with mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than mood stabilisers on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.56, n = 58) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.70, n = 58) at post-treatment. Tolerability and adverse events: Several common adverse effects were reported by participants receiving antidepressants (e.g. headaches, nausea, diarrhoea/gastrointestinal issues) and opioid antagonists (e.g. nausea, dry mouth, constipation). There was little consistency in the types of adverse effects experienced by participants receiving mood stabilisers (e.g. tiredness, headaches, concentration difficulties) or atypical antipsychotics (e.g. pneumonia, sedation, increased hypomania). Discontinuation of treatment due to these adverse events was highest for opioid antagonists (10% to 32%), followed by antidepressants (4% to 31%), atypical antipsychotics (14%), and mood stabilisers (13%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides preliminary support for the use of opioid antagonists (naltrexone, nalmefene) and atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine) to produce short-term improvements in gambling symptom severity, although a lack of available evidence precludes a conclusion regarding the degree to which these pharmacological agents can improve other gambling or psychological functioning indices. In contrast, the findings are inconclusive with regard to the effects of mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants) in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, and there is limited evidence to support the efficacy of antidepressants. However, these conclusions are based on very low to low certainty evidence characterised by a small number of included studies, high risk of bias, modest pooled sample sizes, imprecise estimates, moderate between-study heterogeneity, and exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidities. Moreover, there were insufficient studies to conduct meta-analyses on many outcome measures; to compare efficacy across and within major categories of interventions; to explore dosage effects; or to examine effects beyond post-treatment. These limitations suggest that, despite recommendations related to the administration of opioid antagonists in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, pharmacological interventions should be administered with caution and with careful consideration of patient needs. A larger and more methodologically rigorous evidence base with longer-term evaluation periods is required before definitive conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness and durability of pharmacological treatments for disordered or problem gambling.

Developmental Considerations for the Use of Naltrexone in Children and Adolescents

Naltrexone (NTX) is a well-tolerated drug with a wide safety margin and mechanism of action that affords use across a wide variety of indications in adults and children. By antagonizing the opioid reward system, NTX can modulate behaviors that involve compulsivity or impulsivity, such as substance use, obesity, and eating disorders. Evidence regarding the disposition and efficacy of NTX is mainly derived from adult studies of substance use disorders and considerable variability exists. Developmental changes, plausible disease-specific alterations and genetic polymorphisms in NTX disposition, and pharmacodynamic pathways should be taken into consideration when optimizing the use of NTX in the pediatric population. This review highlights the current state of the evidence and gaps in knowledge regarding NTX to facilitate evidence-based pharmacotherapy of mental health conditions, for which few pharmacologic options exist.

Endogenous Opiates and Behavior: 2018

This paper is the forty-first consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2018 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonists and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (2), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (3) and humans (4), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (5), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (6), stress and social status (7), learning and memory (8), eating and drinking (9), drug abuse and alcohol (10), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (11), mental illness and mood (12), seizures and neurologic disorders (13), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (14), general activity and locomotion (15), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (16), cardiovascular responses (17), respiration and thermoregulation (18), and immunological responses (19).

Professionally delivered interventions for gambling disorder

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess recent developments in professionally delivered interventions for gambling disorder.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the past 24 months a number of reviews and individual studies have been published. Collectively they assess the efficacy and effectiveness of a range of interventions and identify methodological and other shortcomings. These studies advance knowledge with respect to pharmacological and psychological treatments including brief interventions delivered face-to-face and in other ways. Increased attention has been given to patient diversity, comorbidity, relapse, and nongambling outcomes. A variety of novel interventions have been developed and assessed.

SUMMARY

CBT and brief interventions remain well supported and appear to be similarly effective across varied patient groups. A range of promising new and combination treatments have been developed that require further evaluation. Larger, more robust pragmatic trials are required with diverse populations. Increased attention needs to be given to mechanisms of change, therapy mediators, patient retention, comorbidities, long-term treatment outcome, and relapse prevention.