-
Brain Sciences Aug 2023(1) Background: The treatment of substance addiction is challenging and has persisted for decades, with only a few therapeutic options. Although there are some... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: The treatment of substance addiction is challenging and has persisted for decades, with only a few therapeutic options. Although there are some recommendations for specific treatments for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), there is no specific medication used to treat alcohol cravings, which could benefit millions of patients that are suffering from alcoholism. Cravings, or the urge to use drugs, refer to the desire to experience the effects of a previously experienced psychoactive substance. (2) Methods: We included original studies of alcohol abuse or dependence extracted from a controlled, blind, pharmacological treatment study which presented measures and outcomes related to alcohol cravings. (3) Results: Specific drugs used for the treatment of alcoholism, such as Naltrexone and Acamprosate, have had the best results in relieving craving symptoms, as well as promoting abstinence. Baclofen and anticonvulsants such as Gabapentin and Topiramate have shown good results in promoting abstinence and the cessation of cravings. (4) Conclusions: Specific drugs used for the treatment of alcoholism to obtain the best results can be considered the gold standard for promoting abstinence and relieving cravings. Anticonvulsants and Baclofen also had good results, with these medications being considered as second-line ones. Varenicline is an option for alcohol dependents who also concomitantly ingest tobacco.
PubMed: 37626562
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13081206 -
American Family Physician Jan 2024Excessive alcohol use is a leading cause of preventable death in the United States, with alcohol-related deaths increasing during the pandemic. The Substance Abuse and...
Excessive alcohol use is a leading cause of preventable death in the United States, with alcohol-related deaths increasing during the pandemic. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration recommends that physicians offer pharmacotherapy with behavioral interventions for patients diagnosed with alcohol use disorder. Several medications are available to help patients reduce drinking and maintain abstinence; however, in 2019, only 7.3% of Americans with alcohol use disorder received any treatment, and only 1.6% were prescribed medications to treat the disorder. Strong evidence shows that naltrexone and gabapentin reduce heavy-drinking days and that acamprosate prevents return-to-use in patients who are currently abstinent; moderate evidence supports the use of topiramate in decreasing heavy-drinking days. Disulfiram has been commonly prescribed, but little evidence supports its effectiveness outside of supervised settings. Other medications, including varenicline and baclofen, may be beneficial in reducing heavy alcohol use. Antidepressants do not decrease alcohol use in patients who do not have mood disorders, but they may help patients who meet criteria for depression to decrease their alcohol intake. Systematic policies are needed to expand the use of medications when treating alcohol use disorder in inpatient and outpatient populations.
Topics: Humans; Alcoholism; Alcohol Deterrents; Acamprosate; Alcohol Drinking; Naltrexone; Disulfiram
PubMed: 38227873
DOI: No ID Found -
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association... Apr 2024
Topics: Humans; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Smoking Cessation
PubMed: 38621778
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.230806-f -
Tobacco Control Sep 2023
Topics: Humans; Racial Groups
PubMed: 37591558
DOI: 10.1136/tc-2023-057998 -
Contact Lens & Anterior Eye : the... Feb 2024To comprehensively review the efficacy and safety of OC-01 varenicline nasal spray versus vehicle nasal spray (VNS) in the treatment in dry eye disease (DED). (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To comprehensively review the efficacy and safety of OC-01 varenicline nasal spray versus vehicle nasal spray (VNS) in the treatment in dry eye disease (DED).
METHODS
A systematic review that included full-length randomized controlled studies (RCTs), as well as post hoc analyses of RCTs reporting new findings on OC-01 VNS treatment in three databases, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, was performed according to the PRISMA statement. The search period included studies published between December 2021 and September 2023. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to analyze the quality of the studies selected.
RESULTS
A total of 8 studies were included in this systematic review. OC-01 VNS treatment achieved higher improvement than vehicle in all reported variables. The mean differences between both groups were in favor of OC-01 VNS treatment and were as follow: eye dryness score base on a visual analogue scale (EDS-VAS) of -7.5 ± 2.2 points [-11.6 to -5.6], Schirmer test (ST) with anesthesia of 6.6 ± 2.3 mm [4.9 to 11.8] and total corneal fluorescein staining (tCFS) of -1.2 ± 0.01 points [-1.2 to -1.1]. Similar improvements were reported with OC-01 VNS 0.03 mg and 0.06 mg. Adverse events (AEs) were 15.5 ± 19.4 % [-13 to 80.5] higher in the OC-01 VNS group with an overall adherence > 93 %.
CONCLUSIONS
OC-01 VNS improves dry eye symptoms and signs with a satisfactory tolerability. Therefore, OC-01 VNS seems to be a safe and effective treatment that could be recommended in patients with DED. This new treatment could be particularly useful in those patients who have difficulties with the administration of traditional topical therapies.
Topics: Humans; Dry Eye Syndromes; Fluorescein; Nasal Sprays; Tears; Varenicline
PubMed: 38065797
DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2023.102097 -
Nicotine & Tobacco Research : Official... Aug 2023A smoking-cessation program was implemented as a randomized non-inferiority trial in primary care practices in Croatia and Slovenia to investigate whether a standard... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
INTRODUCTION
A smoking-cessation program was implemented as a randomized non-inferiority trial in primary care practices in Croatia and Slovenia to investigate whether a standard 4-week treatment with cytisine was at least as effective and feasible as a standard 12-week treatment with varenicline in helping smokers quit.
AIMS AND METHODS
Out of 982 surveyed smokers, 377 were recruited to the non-inferiority trial: 186 were randomly assigned to cytisine and 191 to varenicline treatment. The primary cessation outcome was 7-day abstinence after 24 weeks, while the primary feasibility outcome was defined by adherence to the treatment plan. We also compared the rates of adverse events between the two treatment groups.
RESULTS
The cessation rate after 24 weeks was 32.46% (62/191) in the varenicline group and 23.12% (43/186) in the cytisine group (odds ratio [OR]: 95%, credible interval [CI]: 0.39 to 0.98). Of 191 participants assigned to varenicline treatment 59.16% (113) were adherent, while 70.43% (131 of 186) were adherent in the cytisine group (OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.56). Participants assigned to cytisine experienced fewer total (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.81) and fewer severe or more extreme adverse events (IRR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.47).
CONCLUSIONS
This randomized non-inferiority trial (n = 377) found the standard 4-week cytisine treatment to be less effective than the standard 12-week varenicline treatment for smoking cessation. However, adherence to the treatment plan, ie, feasibility, was higher, and the rate of adverse events was lower among participants assigned to cytisine treatment.
IMPLICATIONS
The present study found the standard 12 weeks of varenicline treatment to be more effective than the standard 4 weeks of cytisine treatment for smoking cessation in a primary care setting in Croatia and Slovenia. Participants assigned to cytisine, however, had a higher adherence to the treatment plan and a lower rate of adverse events. Estimates from the present study may be especially suitable for generalizations to high-smoking prevalence populations in Europe. Given the much lower cost of cytisine treatment, its lower rate of adverse events, and higher feasibility (but its likely lower effectiveness with the standard dosage regimen), future analyses should assess the cost-effectiveness of the two treatments for health policy considerations.
Topics: Humans; Alkaloids; Azocines; Benzazepines; Nicotine; Nicotinic Agonists; Primary Health Care; Quinolizines; Smoking Cessation; Treatment Outcome; Varenicline
PubMed: 37291049
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntad065 -
Journal of Pharmacy Practice Dec 2023To examine the literature pertaining to safety and efficacy of intranasal (IN) varenicline for the treatment of dry eye disease (DED). A literature search of PubMed... (Review)
Review
To examine the literature pertaining to safety and efficacy of intranasal (IN) varenicline for the treatment of dry eye disease (DED). A literature search of PubMed was performed (1985 to January 2022) using the following search terms: varenicline, OC-01, intranasal, and dry eye. Additional data were acquired from references of identified articles, prescribing information, government databases, and manufacturer website. All relevant English-language studies were included in this review. IN varenicline was FDA approved for the treatment of DED in 2021. IN varenicline has demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in outcomes related to basal tear film production as measured by a Schirmer test score (STS) in data from phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. Safety data from these trials have demonstrated that IN varenicline is generally well tolerated with minimal ocular side effects. The most common side effects reported in the trials were sneezing, coughing, along with throat and nasal irritation. Patients suffering from DED have been traditionally treated with ophthalmic preparations; however, many patients struggle with proper administration of ophthalmic products. IN varenicline stimulates nicotinic cholinergic receptors and basal tear film production through the trigeminal parasympathetic nerve pathway (TPP). There is no evidence to support the long-term remission of DED symptoms with IN varenicline as seen with anti-inflammatory modulators. IN varenicline offers an effective and novel approach to management of DED for patients who desire a non-ophthalmic preparation with a favorable side effect profile.
Topics: Humans; Varenicline; Dry Eye Syndromes; Tears
PubMed: 35703427
DOI: 10.1177/08971900221108725 -
Addiction Biology Aug 2023To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants in helping smokers quit tobacco dependence, five databases were searched for randomized... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants in helping smokers quit tobacco dependence, five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT ) on different antidepressant interventions involving smoking cessation in populations (September 2022). The STATA 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis. The Cochrane bias risk tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and CINeMA was used to evaluate the evidence credibility for the effect of different interventions on smoking cessation. In all, 107 RCTs involving 42 744 patients were included. Seven studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. All trials reported 18 interventions and 153 pairwise comparisons were generated. The network meta-analysis showed that compared with placebo, varenicline + bupropion (OR = 3.53, 95% CI [2.34, 5.34]), selegiline + nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (OR = 3.78, 95% CI [1.20, 11.92]), nortriptyline + NRT (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.21, 4.47), nortriptyline (OR = 1.58, 95% CI [1.11,2.26]), naltrexone + bupropion (OR = 3.84, 95% CI [1.39, 10.61]), bupropion + NRT (OR = 2.29, 95% CI [1.87, 2.81]) and bupropion (OR = 1.70, 95% CI [1.53, 1.89]) showed benefits with respect to smoking cessation. In addition, bupropion + NRT showed better effects than bupropion (OR = 1.35, 95% CI [1.12, 1.64]) and NRT (OR = 1.38, 95% CI [1.13, 1.69]) alone. The final cumulative ranking curve showed that varenicline + bupropion was the most likely to be the best intervention. There was moderate- to very-low-certainty evidence that most interventions showed benefits for smoking cessation compared with placebo, including monotherapy and combination therapies. Varenicline + bupropion had a higher probability of being the best intervention for smoking cessation.
Topics: Humans; Smoking Cessation; Bupropion; Varenicline; Nortriptyline; Network Meta-Analysis; Smoking; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Antidepressive Agents; Alcoholism
PubMed: 37500482
DOI: 10.1111/adb.13303 -
Health Psychology Research 2023Bupropion had been in use since the late 1980s as an unconventional treatment for depression. Unlike other antidepressants, bupropion has no serotonergic activity and...
Bupropion had been in use since the late 1980s as an unconventional treatment for depression. Unlike other antidepressants, bupropion has no serotonergic activity and inhibits the reuptake of norepinephrine and dopamine. The drug has been used to treat depression, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and smoking cessation. This investigation reviews the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of bupropion and its mechanisms of action and interactions with other drugs. We evaluated the efficacy of major on and off-label uses of bupropion, focusing on the indications, benefits, and adverse effects. Our review demonstrates that bupropion is superior to placebo and non-inferior to SSRIs such as escitalopram in treating major depressive disorder. More research is needed to determine positive patient-centered outcomes such as increases in quality of life. In the case of ADHD, the evidence for efficacy is mixed with poorly conducted randomized clinical trials, small sample sizes, and a lack of long-term assessments. The same is true in the case of bipolar disorder in which there is still limited and controversial data available on bupropion's safety and efficacy. In the case of smoking cessation, bupropion is found to be an effective anti-smoking drug with synergistic benefits when used as a combination therapy. We conclude that bupropion has the potential to provide benefit for a subset of patients who do not tolerate other typical antidepressants or anti-smoking therapies or for those whose treatment goals align with bupropion's unique side effect profile, such as smokers who wish to quit and lose weight. Additional research is needed to determine the drug's full clinical potential, particularly in the areas of adolescent depression and combination therapy with varenicline or dextromethorphan. Clinicians should use this review to understand the varied uses of the drug and identify the situations and patient populations in which bupropion can lend its greatest benefit.
PubMed: 37405312
DOI: 10.52965/001c.81043 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Preclinical studies have identified glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, and the antismoking agents varenicline and bupropion as tentative agents for...
Preclinical studies have identified glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, and the antismoking agents varenicline and bupropion as tentative agents for treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD). Combining different medications is a recent approach that has gained attention regarding heterogenous and difficult-to-treat diseases, like AUD. Successfully, this approach has been tested for the combination of varenicline and bupropion as it prevents relapse to alcohol drinking in rats. However, studies assessing the effects of the combination of semaglutide, an FDA-approved GLP-1R agonist for diabetes type II, and varenicline or bupropion to reduce alcohol intake in male and female rats remains to be conducted. Another approach to influence treatment outcome is to combine a medication with feeding interventions like high fat diet (HFD). While HFD reduces alcohol intake, the ability of the combination of HFD and semaglutide to alter alcohol drinking is unknown and thus the subject for a pilot study. Therefore, three intermittent alcohol drinking experiments were conducted to elucidate the effectiveness of these treatment combinations. We show that semaglutide, bupropion or HFD reduces alcohol intake in male as well as female rats. While various studies reveal beneficial effects of combinatorial pharmacotherapies for the treatment of AUD, we herein do not report any additive effects on alcohol intake by adding either varenicline or bupropion to semaglutide treatment. Neither does HFD exposure alter the ability of semaglutide to reduce alcohol intake. Although no additive effects by the combinatorial treatments are found, these findings collectively provide insight into possible monotherapeutical treatments for AUD.
PubMed: 37719854
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1180512