-
Addictive Behaviors Jun 2024Anxiety and depression are prevalent mental health problems in people who use illicit stimulants. Improved understanding of the temporal relationship between... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Anxiety and depression are prevalent mental health problems in people who use illicit stimulants. Improved understanding of the temporal relationship between methamphetamine, ecstasy/MDMA, or cocaine use with anxiety or depression informs public health interventions and treatment options for those experiencing this co-occurrence. This narrative systematic review sought to examine associations and temporality between the use of methamphetamine, ecstasy/MDMA, or cocaine, with anxiety or depressive symptoms. Method Systematic searches of 4 electronic databases were conducted up to August 2023. Study eligibility included the measurement of anxiety and/or depressive symptoms, and frequency of illicit stimulant use (methamphetamine, cocaine, or ecstasy/MDMA) at two separate time points, with data analysis of the association between these variables. The Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal Checklist was utilised to assess quality. Data was extracted, and a narrative synthesis incorporating an eight-criteria framework to assess associations was conducted. Results 4432 studies were screened for eligibility; 11 studies (3 RCTs and 8 prospective cohort studies) were included. Evidence for an association between depressive symptoms and methamphetamine use was demonstrated in six studies, with temporal evidence in three studies supporting methamphetamine use preceding depressive symptoms. Three studies reported an association between cocaine use and depressive symptoms. Evidence for associations with any of the illicit stimulants and anxiety symptoms was lacking.
CONCLUSIONS
There was some evidence to support a case for temporality, particularly for methamphetamine use and depressive symptoms. Investing in longitudinal studies is pivotal to understanding the dynamic and reciprocal relationship between illicit stimulant use and anxiety or depressive symptoms. A limitation of the study was the variation in the measurement and analysis of outcomes.
Topics: Humans; N-Methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine; Methamphetamine; Depression; Prospective Studies; Anxiety; Cocaine; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Cocaine-Related Disorders
PubMed: 38394960
DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2024.107988 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Mar 2022Amphetamine-type stimulants continue to dominate the global drug markets. Despite this, no pharmacotherapy has been approved for treatment of amphetamine and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Amphetamine-type stimulants continue to dominate the global drug markets. Despite this, no pharmacotherapy has been approved for treatment of amphetamine and methamphetamine use disorder (AMD). We evaluate the efficacy of mirtazapine in the treatment of AMD, given emerging evidence that it may alleviate methamphetamine and amphetamine (MA/A) cravings and withdrawals.
METHODS
We searched five databases from inception until January 28, 2021 for studies with a comparator group evaluating mirtazapine for treatment of AMD. We collected data on reduction in MA/A use, treatment retention, sexual behaviors, depression symptoms, cravings and adverse events. We assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. Where appropriate, we conducted fixed-effect meta-analyses weighted by inverse variance and calculated the absolute risk reduction.
RESULTS
Among the 206 studies screened, we included two parallel-arm placebo-controlled RCTs conducted among cis-gender men and transgender women (n = 180). We found that mirtazapine use likely results in a small reduction of methamphetamine use compared to placebo after 12-weeks (relative risk [RR]=0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63, 1.03; n = 133; moderate certainty evidence due to imprecision). We also found that the use of mirtazapine probably does not improve retention in treatment (RR=1.01, 95% CI: 0.91, 1.12; n = 180; moderate certainty evidence) or depression symptom severity (mean difference [MD]=0.45, 95% CI: -2.88, 3.78; n = 53; moderate certainty evidence). There were no serious adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Mirtazapine probably results in a small reduction in continued methamphetamine use among cisgender men and transgender women with AMD, but probably does not improve patients' retention in treatment or depression symptom severity.
STUDY REGISTRATION
PROSPERO ID: CRD42021236806.
Topics: Central Nervous System Stimulants; Female; Humans; Male; Methamphetamine; Mirtazapine; Remission Induction; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 35066460
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2022.109295 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Oct 2018Demand for treatment for amphetamine use is increasing internationally. Establishing effective pharmacotherapy provides broader treatment options for people who are... (Review)
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.
Topics: Amphetamine; Amphetamine-Related Disorders; Dextroamphetamine; Humans; Medication Adherence; Methylphenidate; Modafinil; Naltrexone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30173086
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.06.038 -
Addiction (Abingdon, England) Dec 2019Addiction to methamphetamine/amphetamine (MA/A) is a major public health problem. Currently there are no pharmacotherapies for MA/A use disorder that have been approved... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Addiction to methamphetamine/amphetamine (MA/A) is a major public health problem. Currently there are no pharmacotherapies for MA/A use disorder that have been approved for use by the US Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicines Agency. We reviewed the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for MA/A use disorder to assess the quality, publication bias and overall strength of the evidence.
METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched multiple data sources (MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library) to April 2019 for systematic reviews (SRs) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Included studies recruited adults who had MA/A use disorder; sample sizes ranged from 19 to 229 participants. Outcomes of interest were abstinence, defined as 3 or more consecutive weeks with negative urine drug screens (UDS); overall use, analyzed as the proportion of MA/A negative UDS specimens; and treatment retention. One SR of pharmacotherapies for MA/A use disorder and 17 additional RCTs met our inclusion criteria encompassing 17 different drugs (antidepressants, antipsychotics, psychostimulants, anticonvulsants and opioid antagonists). We combined the findings of trials with comparable interventions and outcome measures in random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed quality, publication bias and the strength of evidence for each outcome using standardized criteria.
RESULTS
There was low-strength evidence from two RCTs that methylphenidate may reduce MA/A use: 6.5 versus 2.8% MA/A-negative UDS in one study (n = 34, P = 0.008) and 23 versus 16% in another study (n = 54, P = 0.047). Antidepressants as a class had no statistically significant effect on abstinence or retention on the basis of moderate strength evidence. Studies of anticonvulsants, antipsychotics (aripiprazole), opioid antagonists (naltrexone), varenicline and atomoxetine provided either low-strength or insufficient evidence of no effect on the outcomes of interest. Many of the studies had high or unclear risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of low- to moderate-strength evidence, most medications evaluated for methamphetamine/amphetamine use disorder have not shown a statistically significant benefit. However, there is low-strength evidence that methylphenidate may reduce use.
Topics: Amphetamine-Related Disorders; Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents; Antipyretics; Drug Therapy; Humans; Methylphenidate; Naltrexone; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Varenicline
PubMed: 31328345
DOI: 10.1111/add.14755 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2016Cocaine dependence is a severe disorder for which no medication has been approved. Like opioids for heroin dependence, replacement therapy with psychostimulants could be... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cocaine dependence is a severe disorder for which no medication has been approved. Like opioids for heroin dependence, replacement therapy with psychostimulants could be an effective therapy for treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of psychostimulants for cocaine abuse and dependence. Specific outcomes include sustained cocaine abstinence and retention in treatment. We also studied the influence of type of drug and comorbid disorders on psychostimulant efficacy.
SEARCH METHODS
This is an update of the review previously published in 2010. For this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO up to 15 February 2016. We handsearched references of obtained articles and consulted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised parallel group controlled clinical trials comparing the efficacy of a psychostimulant drug versus placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 26 studies involving 2366 participants. The included studies assessed nine drugs: bupropion, dexamphetamine, lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate, modafinil, mazindol, methamphetamine, mixed amphetamine salts and selegiline. We did not consider any study to be at low risk of bias for all domains included in the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. Attrition bias was the most frequently suspected potential source of bias of the included studies. We found very low quality evidence that psychostimulants improved sustained cocaine abstinence (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.77, P = 0.02), but they did not reduce cocaine use (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.33) among participants who continued to use it. Furthermore, we found moderate quality evidence that psychostimulants did not improve retention in treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06). The proportion of adverse event-induced dropouts and cardiovascular adverse event-induced dropouts was similar for psychostimulants and placebo (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, respectively). When we included the type of drug as a moderating variable, the proportion of patients achieving sustained cocaine abstinence was higher with bupropion and dexamphetamine than with placebo. Psychostimulants also appeared to increase the proportion of patients achieving sustained cocaine and heroin abstinence amongst methadone-maintained, dual heroin-cocaine addicts. Retention to treatment was low, though, so our results may be compromised by attrition bias. We found no evidence of publication bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review found mixed results. Psychostimulants improved cocaine abstinence compared to placebo in some analyses but did not improve treatment retention. Since treatment dropout was high, we cannot rule out the possibility that these results were influenced by attrition bias. Existing evidence does not clearly demonstrate the efficacy of any pharmacological treatment for cocaine dependence, but substitution treatment with psychostimulants appears promising and deserves further investigation.
PubMed: 27670244
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007380.pub4 -
Systematic Reviews Nov 2016Amphetamine and methamphetamine use disorders are associated with severe health and social consequences. No pharmacological therapy has been approved for the treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Amphetamine-Related Disorders; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Humans; Methamphetamine
PubMed: 27842569
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0370-x -
Journal of Clinical Nursing Jul 2018To review the clinical impact methamphetamine has on emergency departments by assessing the available research on the rates and features of methamphetamine-related... (Review)
Review
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
To review the clinical impact methamphetamine has on emergency departments by assessing the available research on the rates and features of methamphetamine-related presentations.
BACKGROUND
Globally, methamphetamine availability, distribution and use have rapidly increased. As a result, the number of methamphetamine-related presentations to emergency departments has also increased. In this context, it is timely to review the rate and features of methamphetamine-related presentations to understand the impact of methamphetamine on emergency departments and facilitate the allocation of services, staff and resources.
DESIGN
An integrative literature review.
METHODS
This study presents an integrated literature review, following the systematic review process as outlined in the PRISMA flow chart. Several databases were searched using a combination of search terms. Articles were measured against inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the final ten articles were subjected to quality appraisal and outcomes reported.
RESULTS
Methamphetamine accounted for 2.3% or less of all emergency departments presentations. The majority of methamphetamine users presenting to emergency departments were males, with a mean age 31-37. Methamphetamine-related presentations to emergency departments were more likely to present with trauma, psychosis, and be placed on 24-hr psychiatric hold. Methamphetamine-related presentations were more likely to present with agitation, aggression and homicidal behaviour and present to emergency departments out of hours and accompanied by police compared with other emergency departments substance-related presentations.
CONCLUSIONS
Several important themes were highlighted in this review that has an impact on emergency departments services, resources and staff. Understanding the rate and patterns of methamphetamine-related presentations can help to provide evidence for policy development and staff education in emergency departments.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE
Methamphetamine-related presenters are more aggressive and agitated and more likely to be brought in by police. There is a need for policy development and staff training around these issues and further research in this area using stronger study designs.
Topics: Emergency Service, Hospital; Female; Humans; Male; Methamphetamine; Psychoses, Substance-Induced; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 29679414
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14493 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Oct 2022The relationship between amphetamine use and aggressive or violent behaviour is unclear. This review examined laboratory data collected in humans, who were administered... (Review)
Review
The relationship between amphetamine use and aggressive or violent behaviour is unclear. This review examined laboratory data collected in humans, who were administered an acute dose of amphetamine or methamphetamine, in order to investigate the link between amphetamines and aggression. It is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019127711). Included in the analysis are data from twenty-eight studies. Behavioural and/or subjective measures of aggression were assessed in one thousand and sixty-nine research participants, with limited amphetamine-use histories, following a single amphetamine dose (0-35 mg). The available published evidence indicates that neither amphetamine nor methamphetamine acutely increased aggression as assessed by traditional laboratory measures. Future research should assess supratherapeutic amphetamine doses as well as include a broader range of multiple aggression measures, facilitating simultaneous assessment of the various components that comprise this complex, multifaceted construct.
Topics: Aggression; Amphetamine; Amphetamine-Related Disorders; Humans; Methamphetamine
PubMed: 35926727
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104805 -
International Journal of Legal Medicine May 2016Body packing is the term used for the intracorporeal concealment of illicit drugs, mainly cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and cannabinoids. These drugs are produced in... (Review)
Review
Body packing is the term used for the intracorporeal concealment of illicit drugs, mainly cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and cannabinoids. These drugs are produced in the form of packages and are swallowed or placed in various anatomical cavities and body orifices. Basing on these two ways of transportation a distinction between body stuffers and body pushers can be made, with the former described as drug users or street dealers who usually carry small amounts of drugs and the latter as professional drug couriers who carry greater amounts of drugs. A review of the literature regarding body packing is presented, with the aim to highlight the toxicological and radiological features related to this illegal practice. Raising awareness about the encountered mean body levels of the drugs and the typical imaging signs of the incorporated packages could be useful for clinicians and forensic pathologists to (a) identify possible unrecognized cases of body packing and (b) prevent the serious health consequences and deaths frequently occurring after the packages' leakage or rupture or the packages' mass obstructing the gastrointestinal lumen.
Topics: Chromatography, Liquid; Diagnostic Imaging; Drug Trafficking; Foreign Bodies; Forensic Sciences; Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry; Humans; Illicit Drugs
PubMed: 26932867
DOI: 10.1007/s00414-015-1310-3