Pharmacotherapy and gambling disorder: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Gambling disorder (GD) is a psychiatric disorder classified in the DSM-5 as a non-substance-related and addictive disorder with extensive health and socioeconomic impacts. Its chronic and high-relapsing nature makes it essential to find treatment strategies that improve functioning and reduce impairment associated with it. The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate and summarize the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapy in GD.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted to identify systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and reviews on pharmacological interventions in patients with gambling disorder. A similar search of these databases and of Prospero, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Epistemonikos was conducted to identify clinical trials that were published since 2019.

RESULTS

The initial search identified 1925 articles. After screening and duplicate removal, 18 articles were included in the review (11 studies were systematic reviews and meta-analyses, 6 were reviews, and 1 was an open-label trial). Eight pharmacological agents (naltrexone, nalmefene, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, citalopram, escitalopram, lithium, and topiramate) that were studied in randomized controlled trials and open-label trials showed small to moderate effect sizes in reducing GD symptoms in some studies during post-hoc analyses.

CONCLUSION

The overall sum of evidence in the literature on the use of pharmacotherapy in GD is conflicting and inconclusive. Some studies have shown that pharmacotherapy's role in GD is promising, especially when the choice of the agent is guided by comorbid psychiatric disorders. However, significant limitations exist in the study designs, which need to be addressed in future research on the topic. Conducting future and more rigorous trials that address the limitations in the existing literature is necessary to establish more accurate efficacy data on the use of pharmacotherapy in this population.

Treatment discontinuation in pharmacological clinical trials for gambling disorder

BACKGROUND

Gambling disorder affects 0.5-2% of the population, and of those who receive treatment, dropout tends to be relatively high. Very little is known about participant-specific variables linked to treatment discontinuation/dropout in gambling disorder, especially in pharmacological clinical trial settings.

METHODS

Data were pooled from eight previous randomized, controlled pharmacological clinical trials conducted in people with gambling disorder. Demographic and clinical variables were compared between those who did versus did not subsequently dropout from those treatment trials.

RESULTS

The sample comprised data from 635 individuals, and the overall rate of treatment dropout was 40%. Subsequent treatment dropout was significantly associated with the following: positive family history of gambling disorder in one or more first degree relatives (relative risk [RR] of dropout in those with positive history vs not = 1.30), preference for mainly strategic vs non-strategic gambling activities (RR = 1.43), lower levels of education (Cohen's D = 0.22), and higher levels of functional disability (Cohen's D = 0.18). These variables did not differ significantly as a function of treatment condition (medication versus placebo). Dropouts and completers did not differ significantly in terms of the other demographic or clinical variables that were considered.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified several candidate participant-specific predictors of pharmacological treatment dropout in gambling disorder. The findings highlight the need for future studies to address a wider range of contextual variables at large scale (including also study-specific variables e.g. trial/intervention duration), including in naturalistic treatment and clinical trial settings, with a view to developing algorithms that might usefully predict dropout risk.

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.

Betting on Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation to Treat Gambling Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Gambling disorder (GD) is a behavioral addiction that severely impacts individuals' functioning, leading to high socioeconomic costs. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NiBS) has received attention for treating psychiatric and neurological conditions in recent decades, but there is no recommendation for its use for GD. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and analyze the available literature to determine the effectiveness of NiBS in treating GD. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we screened four electronic databases up to July 2022 and selected relevant English-written original articles. We included ten papers in the systematic review and seven in the meta-analysis. As only two studies employed a sham-controlled design, the pre-post standardized mean change (SMCC) was computed as effect size only for real stimulation. The results showed a significant effect of NiBS in reducing craving scores (SMCC = -0.69; 95% CI = [-1.2, -0.2], p = 0.010). Moreover, considering the GD's frequent comorbidity with mood disorders, we ran an exploratory analysis of the effects of NiBS on depressive symptoms, which showed significant decreases in post-treatment scores (SMCC = -0.71; 95% CI = [-1.1, -0.3], p < 0.001). These results provide initial evidence for developing NiBS as a feasible therapy for GD symptoms but further comprehensive research is needed to validate these findings. The limitations of the available literature are critically discussed.

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.

Update on Gambling Disorder

Gambling disorder (GD) is estimated to be experienced by about 0.5% of the adult population in the United States. The etiology of GD is complex and includes genetic and environmental factors. Specific populations appear particularly vulnerable to GD. GD often goes unrecognized and untreated. GD often co-occurs with other conditions, particularly psychiatric disorders. Behavioral interventions are supported in the treatment of GD. No medications have a formal indication for the GD, although clinical trials suggest some may be helpful. Noninvasive neuromodulation is being explored as a possible treatment. Improved identification, prevention, and treatment of GD are warranted.

Impact of Gambling Supply Reduction During COVID-19 Shutdowns on Gambling Problems and Gambling Behaviour in Australia: A National Longitudinal Study

Restricting access to gambling products is one possible harm reduction strategy. We examined whether land-based gambling product supply restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted gambling problems and gambling engagement. In a three-wave, online, longitudinal study, 462 Australian adults (M_age = 44.94; 87% male) who gambled completed survey measures of demographics, gambling engagement (land-based and online), gambling problems, and psychological distress. Analyses were pre-registered and examined the impacts of restrictions on gambling problems and engagement. During the period of restrictions, there were no significant differences in gambling problems (OR = 0.88 [95%CI 0.55-1.42], p = .610) nor online gambling (B = 4.48 [95%CI-0.40-9.35], p = .071) between states experiencing and not experiencing restrictions. There was a small overall reduction in gambling engagement at 2-(t = 2.03, p = .043) and 5-months (t = 2.37, p = .019) post-restrictions, but no change in gambling problems (t = 1.25, p = .211; t = 1.50, p = .134). Amongst those at moderate-to-high risk of problems at baseline, there were no significant reductions in gambling engagement (t = 0.58, p = .564; t = 1.20, p = .232) or problems (t = 0.92, p = .359; t = 1.53, p = .126) at 2- and 5-months post-restrictions. Findings show only a modest impact of COVID-related supply restrictions on gambling engagement and no impact on gambling problems up to 5 months follow-up. The wide-ranging psychosocial and financial impacts of the pandemic may have overshadowed any potential beneficial effects of the supply restrictions on problem gambling levels. Policies to promote and improve access to problem gambling treatment services are needed even following periods of reduced availability of gambling products.

Pharmacological and Psychosocial Treatment of Adults With Gambling Disorder: A Meta-Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Gambling disorder (GD) leads to impaired socioeconomical functioning and increased social costs. Although the research on GD has been rising over the years, approved treatment guidelines are currently not available. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the pharmacological and psychosocial treatment of adults with GD, and to identify possible agreed-upon standards of care.

METHODS

MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Embase, and CINAHL electronic databases were searched up to April 2019 for systematic reviews on pharmacological, psychosocial, and combined treatment of adults with GD. Twenty-six studies were eventually included in this meta-review.

RESULTS

Studies reported promising results of opioid antagonists and mood stabilizers in reducing GD-related symptomatology. Lithium was particularly effective in subjects with comorbid bipolar disorders. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was the most commonly used psychological intervention and reduced global severity, gambling frequency, and financial loss. Motivational interviewing (MI) seemed to improve several GD domains, alone or in combination with CBT. Self-help interventions (SHIs) showed some efficacy in promoting treatment-seeking, and in combination with other treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate evidence of effect for CBT, but weaker evidence for pharmacotherapy and SHIs. Results suggested some efficacy for MI in the short but not in the long term. It is likely that certain interventions might be more effective than others on specific features of GD. Further studies are needed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of individual and combined psychosocial and pharmacological interventions, to deliver patient-tailored treatments.

Interventions to reduce the public health burden of gambling-related harms: a mapping review

Recognition is growing that gambling, although highly profitable for corporations and governments, is a source of serious and unevenly distributed harm. This recognition has led to demands for public health strategies at the local, national, and international levels. We aimed to identify review-level evidence for interventions to address or prevent gambling-related harms and explore policy implications, using stakeholder consultation to assess the evidence base, identify gaps, and suggest key research questions. We opted for a systematic mapping review and narrative synthesis for all forms of gambling in any setting. We included participants from the whole population, identified gamblers including self-defined, and specific populations at risk (eg, children and young people). We included all outcome measures relating to prevention or treatment of gambling-related harms that were reported by review authors. After duplication, the searches generated 1080 records. Of 43 potential papers, 13 were excluded at the full paper stage and 30 papers were included in the Review. We identified whole-population preventive interventions, such as demand reduction (n=3) and supply reduction (n=4) interventions, and targeted treatment interventions for individuals addicted to gambling, such as therapeutic (n=12), pharmacological (n=5), and self-help or mutual support (n=4) interventions. We also reviewed studies (n=2) comparing these approaches. Interventions to screen, identify, and support individuals at risk of gambling-related harms and interventions to support ongoing recovery and prevent relapse for individuals with a gambling addiction were not represented in the review-level evidence. A public health approach suggests that there are opportunities to reduce gambling-related harms by intervening across the whole gambling pathway, from regulation of access to gambling to screening for individuals at risk and services for individuals with an identified gambling problem. The dearth of evidence for some interventions means that implementation must be accompanied by robust evaluation.

Excessive Spending in a "Free-to-Play" Smartphone Game

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Although gaming disorder is increasingly recognized, there has been limited consideration of the impact of free-to-play games with in-game purchases, also called microtransactions.

METHODS

Case report (n = 1).

RESULTS

A patient with posttraumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder in remission, polysubstance use disorders in remission, and opioid use disorder on buprenorphine/naloxone developed gaming disorder (based on International Classification of Diseases, 11th revision) and spent up to 40% of his monthly income on microtransactions within a smartphone game. Treatment consisted of relinquishing access to electronic payment mechanisms, motivational interviewing, and couples therapy.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The case highlights how in-game purchases may cause patients with gaming disorder to experience financial consequences, and the need for further characterization of the clinical ramifications of microtransactions.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report in the medical literature of a patient with gaming disorder developing excessive in-game spending from expenditures on microtransactions. (Am J Addict 2020;29:528-530).

Gambling and substance use: Comorbidity and treatment implications

Gambling disorder is a common condition that was previously listed as an impulse control disorder, but is now considered a substance-related and addictive disorder. Gambling disorder has been associated with various untoward long-term outcomes including impaired quality of life, relationship break-ups, debt and mortgage foreclosure, and elevated risk of suicidality. This paper provides a concise primer on gambling disorder, with a special focus on its parallels with substance use disorders. We consider clinical presentations, comorbid expression, heritability, and treatment approaches (psychological and pharmacological). Lastly, we highlight new treatment directions suggested by the literature.

Treatments for internet addiction, sex addiction and compulsive buying: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Internet addiction, sex addiction and compulsive buying are common behavioral problems, which share similarities with gambling disorder and substance use disorders. However, little is known about the efficacy of their treatments. The objective of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of the treatments of such problem behaviors, and to draw parallels to gambling disorder and substance use disorders in terms of treatment response.

METHODS

Literature search yielded 91 studies totaling 3,531 participants to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the short-term and long-term efficacy of psychological, pharmacological and combined treatments for internet addiction, sex addiction, and compulsive buying.

RESULTS

Psychological, pharmacological, and combined treatments were associated with robust pre-post improvements in the global severity of internet addiction (Hedges's g: 1.51, 1.13, and 2.51, respectively) and sex addiction (Hedges's g: 1.09, 1.21, and 1.91, respectively). For compulsive buying, psychological and pharmacological treatments were also associated with a large-sized pre-post reduction in global severity (Hedges's g: 1.00 and 1.52, respectively). The controlled pre-post and within-group pre-follow-up effect sizes were in the similar range, with few exceptions. Moderator analyses suggest that psychological interventions are effective for reducing compulsive behaviors, especially when delivered face-to-face and conducted over extended periods of time. Combinations of cognitive-behavioral approaches with medications showed an advantage over monotherapies.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that treatments for common behavioral addictions are effective in the short term, similar to those implemented for gambling disorder and substance use disorders, but more rigorous clinical trials are needed.

Current pharmacotherapy for gambling disorder: a systematic review

Introduction: Gambling disorder is classified as an addictive disorder and is associated with significant distress and impairment in personal, social, occupational or other important areas of functioning. Although no pharmacotherapy has a formal indication for gambling disorder, data suggest potential benefits of specific medications.Area covered: This systematic review evaluated findings from 19 randomized controlled trials testing pharmacotherapies for the treatment of gambling disorder.Expert opinion: Few randomized controlled trials have studied pharmacotherapies for gambling disorder. Though results are limited, opioid antagonists like naltrexone showed promise in the pharmacological treatment of gambling disorder. Pharmacotherapy combined with psychotherapy treatments for gambling disorder may provide better rates of patient retention in comparison to pharmacology-only treatments, though further research is needed in this area. Future studies should address gaps relating to considerations of racial, ethnic, gender and other individual differences in clinical studies. Because gambling disorder often co-occurs with other psychiatric disorders, additional research is needed to test treatments for dually diagnosed patients.

Dopamine and Gambling Disorder: Prospects for Personalized Treatment

Purpose of Review

To address variation in the severity of gambling disorder, this review evaluates the contribution of mesocorticolimbic dopamine neurons to potential behavioral endophenotypes, the influence of individual differences in the dopamine system on gambling and related behaviors, and the possible role for dopaminergic medications in the treatment of gambling disorder.

Recent Findings

Newer work has suggested that dopaminergic dysfunction can lead to increased reward anticipation and a greater sensitivity to uncertainty, which in turn may drive addictive gambling behaviors. In addition, increased impulsivity, a well-recognized risk factor for gambling disorder, has been linked to dopaminergic dysfunction. More recently, emerging evidence has suggested that dopaminergic medications can influence the discounting of delayed rewards.

Summary

Dopaminergic drugs that increase the salience of long-term over short-term goals may ameliorate symptoms of impulsive individuals with gambling disorder. More broadly, improved understanding of intermediate behavioral and other phenotypes with a defined neurobiological substrate may allow for personalized treatment of gambling disorder and other psychiatric conditions.

Gambling disorder

Gambling disorder is characterized by a persistent, recurrent pattern of gambling that is associated with substantial distress or impairment. The prevalence of gambling disorder has been estimated at 0.5% of the adult population in the United States, with comparable or slightly higher estimates in other countries. The aetiology of gambling disorder is complex, with implicated genetic and environmental factors. Neurobiological studies have implicated cortico-striato-limbic structures and circuits in the pathophysiology of this disorder. Individuals with gambling disorder often go unrecognized and untreated, including within clinical settings. Gambling disorder frequently co-occurs with other conditions, particularly other psychiatric disorders. Behavioural interventions, particularly cognitive-behavioural therapy but also motivational interviewing and Gamblers Anonymous, are supported in the treatment of gambling disorder. No pharmacological therapy has a formal indication for the treatment of gambling disorder, although placebo-controlled trials suggest that some medications, such as opioid-receptor antagonists, may be helpful. Given the associations with poor quality of life and suicide, improved identification, prevention, policy and treatment efforts are needed to help people with gambling disorder.

Pharmacological Treatments for Disordered Gambling: A Meta-analysis

Disordered gambling is a public health concern associated with detrimental consequences for affected individuals and social costs. Currently, opioid antagonists are considered the first-line treatments to reduce symptoms of uncontrolled gambling. Only recently, glutamatergic agents and combined pharmacological and psychological treatments have been examined appearing promising options for the management of gambling disorder. A multilevel literature search yielded 34 studies including open-label and placebo-controlled trials totaling 1340 participants to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the short- and long-term efficacies of pharmacological and combined treatments. Pharmacological treatments were associated with large and medium pre-post reductions in global severity, frequency, and financial loss (Hedges's g: 1.35, 1.22, 0.80, respectively). The controlled effect sizes for the outcome variables were significantly smaller (Hedges's g: 0.41, 0.11, 0.22), but robust for the reduction of global severity at short-term. In general, medication classes yielded comparable effect sizes independent of predictors of treatment outcome. Of the placebo controlled studies, results showed that opioid antagonists and mood stabilizers, particularly the glutamatergic agent topiramate combined with a cognitive intervention and lithium for gamblers with bipolar disorders demonstrated promising results. However, more rigorously designed, large-scale randomized controlled trials with extended placebo lead-in periods are necessary. Moreover, future studies need to monitor concurrent psychosocial treatments, the type of comorbidity, use equivalent measurement tools, include outcome variables according to the Banff, Alberta Consensus, and provide follow-up data in order to broaden the knowledge about the efficacy of pharmacological treatments for this disabling condition.

Opioid Antagonists for Pharmacological Treatment of Gambling Disorder: Are they Relevant?

Background:

To date, no drugs have been approved for gambling disorder. Numerous publications have described the value of opioid antagonists. Indeed, the mesocorticolimbic dopaminergic pathway has been suggested as the underlying cause of reward-seeking behaviour, and it is modulated by the opioid system.

Objective:

This study aims to evaluate the relevance of opioid antagonists for treating GD.

Method:

A systematic literature review was conducted. A search of the PubMed electronic database, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Systematic Review Database without any limits was performed.

Results:

There is little information concerning the effects of opioid antagonists on GD. The total search with “nalmefene and gambling” without any limits revealed only 11 articles. The search with “naltrexone and gambling” without any limits gener-ated 47 articles. Nevertheless, the best available data support the use of opioid antagonists, particularly in individuals with a history of alcohol use disorder or strong gambling urges.

Conclusion:

Future trials are still needed. Indeed, opioid antagonists effectiveness has been investigated in only a limited number of patients, clinical trials do not reflect the heterogeneity of GD and there is little knowledge of the predictive factors of response to treatments. Moreover, differential affinity to nalmefene for kappa receptors may be associated with a particular effect in a yet to be defined addiction phenotype. Head to head comparisons between naltrexone and nalmefene would be helpful in combining other medication or psychotherapy. The identification of subgroups of patients that are more likely to benefit from opioid antagonists should be a goal

Screening for problem gambling within mental health services: a comparison of the classification accuracy of brief instruments

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Despite the over-representation of people with gambling problems in mental health populations, there is limited information available to guide the selection of brief screening instruments within mental health services. The primary aim was to compare the classification accuracy of nine brief problem gambling screening instruments (two to five items) with a reference standard among patients accessing mental health services.

DESIGN

The classification accuracy of nine brief screening instruments was compared with multiple cut-off scores on a reference standard.

SETTING

Eight mental health services in Victoria, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 837 patients were recruited consecutively between June 2015 and January 2016.

MEASUREMENTS

The brief screening instruments were the Lie/Bet Questionnaire, Brief Problem Gambling Screen (BPGS) (two- to five-item versions), NODS-CLiP, NODS-CLiP2, Brief Biosocial Gambling Screen (BBGS) and NODS-PERC. The Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) was the reference standard.

FINDINGS

The five-item BPGS was the only instrument displaying satisfactory classification accuracy in detecting any level of gambling problem (low-risk, moderate-risk or problem gambling) (sensitivity = 0.803, specificity = 0.982, diagnostic efficiency = 0.943). Several shorter instruments adequately detected both problem and moderate-risk, but not low-risk, gambling: two three-item instruments (NODS-CLiP, three-item BPGS) and two four-item instruments (NODS-PERC, four-item BPGS) (sensitivity = 0.854-0.966, specificity = 0.901-0.954, diagnostic efficiency = 0.908-0.941). The four-item instruments, however, did not provide any considerable advantage over the three-item instruments. Similarly, the very brief (two-item) instruments (Lie/Bet and two-item BPGS) adequately detected problem gambling (sensitivity = 0.811-0.868, specificity = 0.938-0.943, diagnostic efficiency = 0.933-0.934), but not moderate-risk or low-risk gambling.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal brief screening instrument for mental health services wanting to screen for any level of gambling problem is the five-item Brief Problem Gambling Screen (BPGS). Services wanting to employ a shorter instrument or to screen only for more severe gambling problems (moderate-risk/problem gambling) can employ the NODS-CLiP or the three-item BPGS. Services that are only able to accommodate a very brief instrument can employ the Lie/Bet Questionnaire or the two-item BPGS.

Gambling Disorder: Exploring Pre-treatment and In-treatment Dropout Predictors. A UK Study

The aim of this study was to identify predictors of treatment dropout in a sample of gamblers attending a specialist clinic for gambling disorder. We analysed data on 846 treatment-seeking pathological gamblers. Firstly, we investigated differences in socio-demographic and clinical variables between treatment completers and pre-treatment dropouts, as well as between treatment completers and during-treatment dropouts. Subsequently, variables were entered into a multinomial logistic regression model to identify significant predictors of pre-treatment and in-treatment dropout. Overall, 44.8% of clients did not complete the treatment: 27.4% dropped out before starting it, while 17.4% dropped out during the treatment. Younger age and use of drugs were associated with pre-treatment dropout, while family history of gambling disorder, a lower PGSI score, and being a smoker were related with in-treatment dropout. Our findings suggest that pre-treatment dropouts differ from in-treatment dropouts, and, thus, further research will benefit from considering these groups separately. In addition, this newly gained knowledge will also be helpful in increasing treatment retention in specific subgroups of problem gamblers.

An overview of gambling disorder: from treatment approaches to risk factors

Gambling disorder (GD) has been reclassified recently into the "Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders" category of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), a landmark occurrence for a behavioral addiction. GD is characterized by recurrent, maladaptive gambling behavior that results in clinically significant distress. Although the number of randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments is limited, some pharmacological treatments, notably opiate antagonists, have been employed in the treatment of GD. Patients with GD often present cognitive distortions and specific personality traits, making treatment more difficult. Cognitive behavioral therapy has become the most common psychological intervention for treating gambling problems, and it is effective in reducing gambling behavior. In this brief overview, we provide a report on the state of pharmacological and psychological treatments for gambling disorder. Risk factors and potential future lines of research are addressed.

Food Addiction in Gambling Disorder: Frequency and Clinical Outcomes

Background: The food addiction (FA) model is receiving increasing interest from the scientific community. Available empirical evidence suggests that this condition may play an important role in the development and course of physical and mental health conditions such as obesity, eating disorders, and other addictive behaviors. However, no epidemiological data exist on the comorbidity of FA and gambling disorder (GD), or on the phenotype for the co-occurrence of GD+FA.

Objectives: To determine the frequency of the comorbid condition GD+FA, to assess whether this comorbidity features a unique clinical profile compared to GD without FA, and to generate predictive models for the presence of FA in a GD sample.

Method: Data correspond to N = 458 treatment-seeking patients who met criteria for GD in a hospital unit specialized in behavioral addictions.

Results: Point prevalence for FA diagnosis was 9.2%. A higher ratio of FA was found in women (30.5%) compared to men (6.0%). Lower FA prevalence was associated with older age. Patients with high FA scores were characterized by worse psychological state, and the risk of a FA diagnosis was increased in patients with high scores in the personality traits harm avoidance and self-transcendence, and low scores in cooperativeness (R² = 0.18).

Conclusion: The co-occurrence of FA in treatment-seeking GD patients is related to poorer emotional and psychological states. GD treatment interventions and related behavioral addictions should consider potential associations with problematic eating behavior and aim to include techniques that aid patients in better managing this behavior.

Gambling disorder: an integrative review of animal and human studies

Gambling disorder (GD), previously called pathological gambling and classified as an impulse control disorder in DSM-III and DSM-IV, has recently been reclassified as an addictive disorder in the DSM-5. It is widely recognized as an important public health problem associated with substantial personal and social costs, high rates of psychiatric comorbidity, poor physical health, and elevated suicide rates. A number of risk factors have been identified, including some genetic polymorphisms. Animal models have been developed in order to study the underlying neural basis of GD. Here, we discuss recent advances in our understanding of the risk factors, disease course, and pathophysiology. A focus on a phenotype-based dissection of the disorder is included in which known neural correlates from animal and human studies are reviewed. Finally, current treatment approaches are discussed, as well as future directions for GD research.

Naltrexone in the Treatment of Broadly Defined Behavioral Addictions: A Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Broadly defined behavioral addiction is a conceptual framework including behaviors characterized by loss of control and continuation despite significant negative consequences. Broadly defined behavioral addictions share many similarities with substance use disorders. As naltrexone is one of the most studied treatment for substance use disorders, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCT) assessing the effectiveness of naltrexone in the treatment of broadly defined behavioral addictions.

METHOD

We conducted a literature search and selection, up to January 1, 2017, according to previously set inclusion criteria. The selected trials underwent a quality assessment before data extraction and statistical analysis, which used fixed and random effects models. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated using Hedge's adjusted g.

RESULTS

A total of 6 RCTs (n = 356) were included. Of these, 3 assessed naltrexone effectiveness in the treatment of pathological gambling, and 3 tested its benefits in broadly defined behavioral addictions other than pathological gambling (kleptomania, trichotillomania, and impulsive compulsive disorders). The meta-analysis of the whole sample resulted in a statistically significant score improvement under naltrexone versus placebo (fixed effect model: SMD = -0.27, 95% CI [-0.51 to -0.03], z = 2.23; p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

The results of our meta-analysis suggest a beneficial effect of naltrexone in the treatment of broadly defined behavioral addictions.

Treatment modalities for patients with gambling disorder

BACKGROUND

Gambling disorder (GD) is defined as persistent and recurrent problematic gambling behavior leading to clinically significant impairment or distress. The prevalence of GD has been shown to be 1.2-7.1% in the general population. GD can severely impact on personal and vocational wellbeing as well as lead to financial problems, and has been known to be difficult to treat. This review describes the available pharmacotherapy/psychosocial treatments for GD patients, and summarizes data on the effectiveness of these GD treatments.

METHODS

This review refers to newly as well as previously published studies and guidelines.

RESULTS

The description of pharmacotherapy mainly focuses on opioid receptor antagonists, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and mood stabilizers. Psychosocial treatments/strategies mainly include cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational interviewing, and Gamblers Anonymous. We also introduce relatively novel treatment modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

This review can help clinicians to decide treatment plans for their GD patients. In addition, it can be used as a reference for designing future research.

Blunted Endogenous Opioid Release Following an Oral Amphetamine Challenge in Pathological Gamblers

Pathological gambling is a psychiatric disorder and the first recognized behavioral addiction, with similarities to substance use disorders but without the confounding effects of drug-related brain changes. Pathophysiology within the opioid receptor system is increasingly recognized in substance dependence, with higher mu-opioid receptor (MOR) availability reported in alcohol, cocaine and opiate addiction. Impulsivity, a risk factor across the addictions, has also been found to be associated with higher MOR availability. The aim of this study was to characterize baseline MOR availability and endogenous opioid release in pathological gamblers (PG) using [(11)C]carfentanil PET with an oral amphetamine challenge. Fourteen PG and 15 healthy volunteers (HV) underwent two [(11)C]carfentanil PET scans, before and after an oral administration of 0.5 mg/kg of d-amphetamine. The change in [(11)C]carfentanil binding between baseline and post-amphetamine scans (ΔBPND) was assessed in 10 regions of interest (ROI). MOR availability did not differ between PG and HV groups. As seen previously, oral amphetamine challenge led to significant reductions in [(11)C]carfentanil BPND in 8/10 ROI in HV. PG demonstrated significant blunting of opioid release compared with HV. PG also showed blunted amphetamine-induced euphoria and alertness compared with HV. Exploratory analysis revealed that impulsivity positively correlated with caudate baseline BPND in PG only. This study provides the first evidence of blunted endogenous opioid release in PG. Our findings are consistent with growing evidence that dysregulation of endogenous opioids may have an important role in the pathophysiology of addictions.

Opioid antagonists in broadly defined behavioral addictions: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Naltrexone (NTX), a mu-opioid receptor antagonist, has been approved for the treatment of alcoholism and opioid dependence. More recently, however, NTX and a related drug, nalmefene (NMF), have also shown positive results for the treatment of gambling disorders.

AREAS COVERED

In this study, we reviewed the trials testing the effect of opioid antagonists (OA) in gambling disorders and in other broadly defined behavioral addictions, including selected DSM-5 disruptive, impulse-control, and conduct disorders, obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, eating disorders, and other conditions not currently recognized by official classification schemes. We found six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of OA in gambling disorder, two RCTs of OA in trichotillomania (hair pulling disorder), two RCTs of OA in binge eating disorder, and one RCT of OA for kleptomania. We also reviewed case reports on hypersexual disorder, compulsive buying and skin picking disorders.

EXPERT OPINION

The reviewed data supported the use of OA, namely NTX and NMF, in gambling disorder (both) and kleptomania (NTX). We did not find enough evidence to support the use of NTX or NMF in trichotillomania (hair pulling disorder), excoriation (skin-picking) disorder, compulsive buying disorder, hypersexual disorder, or binge eating disorder.

Behavioral addictions in addiction medicine: from mechanisms to practical considerations

Recent progress has been made in our understanding of nonsubstance or "behavioral" addictions, although these conditions and their most appropriate classification remain debated and the knowledge basis for understanding the pathophysiology of and treatments for these conditions includes important gaps. Recent developments include the classification of gambling disorder as a "Substance-Related and Addictive Disorder" in the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and proposed diagnostic criteria for Internet Gaming Disorder in Section 3 of DSM-5. This chapter reviews current neuroscientific understandings of behavioral addictions and the potential of neurobiological data to assist in the development of improved policy, prevention, and treatment efforts.

Clinical and Research Implications of Gambling Disorder in DSM-5

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders contains significant changes related to the diagnosis of gambling problems. These changes include the renaming of the disorder from pathological gambling to gambling disorder, reclassification of gambling disorder from an impulse control disorder to an addictive disorder, removal of the illegal acts criterion, lowering diagnostic threshold to endorsement of four criteria, and recognizing that the course of the disorder is no longer chronic for all diagnosed. This paper reviews the rationale and research support for these changes. Implications of the new revisions for both research and clinical practice are reviewed, including a discussion about future directions for research efforts.

The latest achievements in the pharmacotherapy of gambling disorder

Gambling disorder (GD) is becoming increasingly prevalent both among adults and adolescents. Unfortunately, this disorder is largely underestimated, while it can still lead to serious social and personal consequences, including criminal behavior or suicide attempts. In the past, the only means of treating gambling were psychobehavioral therapies. Nowadays, this disorder could also respond to many drugs from different classes such as opioid antagonists, serotonin selective reuptake inhibitors, mood stabilizers, atypical antipsychotics or glutamatergic agents. This review presents current pharmacological strategies and the results of clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of pharmacotherapy for GD. It also discusses the importance of distinguishing different pathological gambler subtypes such as impulsive, obsessive-compulsive and addictive subtypes as this may have serious pharmacological implications.