-
Psychological Medicine Oct 2019Accumulating evidence shows that a propensity towards a pro-inflammatory status in the brain plays an important role in schizophrenia. Anti-inflammatory drugs might... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Accumulating evidence shows that a propensity towards a pro-inflammatory status in the brain plays an important role in schizophrenia. Anti-inflammatory drugs might compensate this propensity. This study provides an update regarding the efficacy of agents with some anti-inflammatory actions for schizophrenia symptoms tested in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, the National Institutes of Health website (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were systematically searched for RCTs that investigated clinical outcomes.
RESULTS
Our search yielded 56 studies that provided information on the efficacy of the following components on symptom severity: aspirin, bexarotene, celecoxib, davunetide, dextromethorphan, estrogens, fatty acids, melatonin, minocycline, N-acetylcysteine (NAC), pioglitazone, piracetam, pregnenolone, statins, varenicline, and withania somnifera extract. The results of aspirin [mean weighted effect size (ES): 0.30; n = 270; 95% CI (CI) 0.06-0.54], estrogens (ES: 0.78; n = 723; CI 0.36-1.19), minocycline (ES: 0.40; n = 946; CI 0.11-0.68), and NAC (ES: 1.00; n = 442; CI 0.60-1.41) were significant in meta-analysis of at least two studies. Subgroup analysis yielded larger positive effects for first-episode psychosis (FEP) or early-phase schizophrenia studies. Bexarotene, celecoxib, davunetide, dextromethorphan, fatty acids, pregnenolone, statins, and varenicline showed no significant effect.
CONCLUSIONS
Some, but not all agents with anti-inflammatory properties showed efficacy. Effective agents were aspirin, estrogens, minocycline, and NAC. We observed greater beneficial results on symptom severity in FEP or early-phase schizophrenia.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Humans; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 31439071
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291719001995 -
The Journal of Pharmacology and... Mar 2021Nicotine is the major addictive component in tobacco. Cotinine is the major metabolite of nicotine and a weak agonist for nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs).... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
Nicotine is the major addictive component in tobacco. Cotinine is the major metabolite of nicotine and a weak agonist for nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs). Nicotine supports self-administration in rodents. However, it remains undetermined whether cotinine can be self-administered. This study aimed to characterize cotinine self-administration in rats, to compare effects of cotinine to those of nicotine, and to determine potential involvement of nAChRs in cotinine's effects. Adult Wistar rats were trained to self-administer cotinine or nicotine (0.0075, 0.015, 0.03, or 0.06 mg/kg per infusion) under fixed-ratio (FR) and progressive-ratio (PR) schedules. Blood nicotine and cotinine levels were determined after the last FR session. Effects of mecamylamine, a nonselective nAChR antagonist, and varenicline, a partial agonist for 42* nAChRs, on cotinine and nicotine self-administration were determined. Rats readily acquired cotinine self-administration, responded more on active lever, and increased motivation to self-administer cotinine when the reinforcement requirement increased. Blood cotinine levels ranged from 77 to 792 ng/ml. Nicotine induced more infusions at lower doses during FR schedules and greater breakpoints at higher doses during the PR schedule than cotinine. There was no difference in cotinine self-administration between male and female rats. Mecamylamine and varenicline attenuated nicotine but not cotinine self-administration. These results indicate that cotinine was self-administered by rats. These effects of cotinine were less robust than nicotine and exhibited no sex difference. nAChRs appeared to be differentially involved in self-administration of nicotine and cotinine. These results suggest cotinine may play a role in the development of nicotine use and misuse. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Nicotine addiction is a serious public health problem. Cotinine is the major metabolite of nicotine, but its involvement in nicotine reinforcement remains elusive. Our findings indicate that cotinine, at doses producing clinically relevant blood cotinine levels, supported intravenous self-administration in rats. Cotinine self-administration was less robust than nicotine. Mecamylamine and varenicline attenuated nicotine but not cotinine self-administration. These results suggest cotinine may play a role in the development of nicotine use and misuse.
Topics: Animals; Cotinine; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Interactions; Female; Male; Mecamylamine; Nicotine; Rats; Rats, Wistar; Receptors, Nicotinic; Self Administration; Varenicline
PubMed: 33361363
DOI: 10.1124/jpet.120.000367 -
Neuropharmacology Nov 2020The landscape of worldwide tobacco use is changing, with a decrease in traditional smoking and an exponential rise in electronic cigarette use. No new nicotine cessation... (Review)
Review
The landscape of worldwide tobacco use is changing, with a decrease in traditional smoking and an exponential rise in electronic cigarette use. No new nicotine cessation pharmacotherapies have come to market in the last 10 years. The current therapies that have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for nicotine cessation include nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline, a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, and the atypical antidepressant bupropion. Nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline both act on nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Bupropion inhibits the dopamine transporter, the norepinephrine transporter, and the nicotinic acetylcholine receptors to inhibit smoking behavior. Notwithstanding these treatments, rates of successful nicotine cessation in clinical trials remain low. Recent pharmacological approaches to improve nicotine cessation rates in animal models have turned their focus away from activating nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. The present review focuses on such pharmacological approaches, including nicotine vaccines, anti-nicotine antibodies, nicotine-degrading enzymes, cannabinoids, and metformin. Both immunopharmacological and enzymatic approaches rely on restricting and degrading nicotine within the periphery, thus preventing psychoactive effects of nicotine on the central nervous system. In contrast, pharmacologic inhibition of the enzymes which degrade nicotine could affect smoking behavior. Cannabinoid receptor agonists and antagonists interact with the dopamine reward pathway and show efficacy in reducing nicotine addiction-like behaviors in preclinical studies. Metformin is currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of diabetes. It activates specific intracellular kinases that may protect against the lower metabolism, higher oxidation, and inflammation that are associated with nicotine withdrawal. Further studies are needed to investigate non-nicotinic targets to improve the treatment of tobacco use disorder. This article is part of the special issue on 'Contemporary Advances in Nicotine Neuropharmacology'.
Topics: Animals; Antidepressive Agents; Bupropion; Disease Models, Animal; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Humans; Nicotinic Agonists; Receptors, Nicotinic; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Tobacco Use Disorder; Varenicline
PubMed: 32758566
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2020.108225 -
European Review For Medical and... Nov 2020Doxorubicin (DOX) is widely used to treat various types of cancer. However, DOX treatment increases oxidative stress and causes other undesirable effects, such as...
OBJECTIVE
Doxorubicin (DOX) is widely used to treat various types of cancer. However, DOX treatment increases oxidative stress and causes other undesirable effects, such as cardiotoxicity, cognitive impairment, and death. Nicotine has been shown to inhibit DOX-induced cytotoxicity in vitro by activating nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. This study aimed to investigate whether combined treatment with varenicline, a partial agonist of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, increased the survival rate of DOX-treated mice.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Forty male albino mice were divided into four groups of 10. Control-group mice received a single intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of 0.9% saline. The DOX group received a single dose of DOX (20 mg/kg body weight, i.p.). The varenicline group received varenicline daily in their drinking water at 0.1 mg/mL. The DOX+varenicline group received a single dose of DOX (20 mg/kg body weight, i.p.) and daily administration of varenicline in their drinking water (0.1 mg/mL). Mice were observed daily to evaluate the survival rate, and their body weight was recorded on alternate days.
RESULTS
All mice treated only with DOX died within 8 days. Co-administration of varenicline with DOX slightly improved the survival time and rate compared with the DOX-only group.
CONCLUSIONS
Combined treatment with varenicline and DOX may be useful for improving survival relative to treatment with DOX alone. This may be because varenicline is an α7-nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist; however, further research into its precise mechanism of action is required.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Animals; Doxorubicin; Injections, Intraperitoneal; Male; Mice; Oxidative Stress; Survival Rate; Varenicline; alpha7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor
PubMed: 33215455
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202011_23626 -
The American Journal of Psychiatry Sep 2021
Topics: Alcoholism; Anorexia Nervosa; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Comorbidity; Humans; Mental Disorders; Methadone; Naltrexone; Narcotics; Patient Outcome Assessment; Schizophrenia; Smoking; Varenicline
PubMed: 34516229
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2021.21070710 -
BMC Ophthalmology Jul 2023Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging evidence that nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonists (e.g., varenicline and simpinicline) nasal sprays are effective for DED. Our systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of varenicline nasal spray (VNS) for DED treatment.
METHODS
The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of VNS versus placebo were included. The efficacy endpoint was the mean change in the anesthetized Schirmer test score (STS), a measure of basal tear production, from baseline. The safety endpoints were serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse events (AEs). The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for continuous outcomes, while the risk ratio (RR) was used to demonstrate dichotomous variables. The certainty of the evidence was rated utilizing the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials.
RESULTS
Three RCTs (n = 1063) met the eligibility criteria. All RCTs had a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis found a statistically significant increase in the mean STS change from baseline on day 28. The pooled analysis found no significant difference between VNS and placebo in the frequency of SAEs and ocular AEs. However, VNS had a significant effect on developing nasal cavity-related AEs.
CONCLUSION
VNS caused a highly significant improvement regarding the efficacy endpoint but caused an increased frequency of some nasal cavity-related AEs (i.e., cough and throat irritation). However, it caused neither SAEs nor ocular AEs. Included studies had a low risk of bias.
Topics: Humans; Nasal Sprays; Varenicline; Dry Eye Syndromes
PubMed: 37452334
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-023-03069-y -
The Spine Journal : Official Journal of... Aug 2023High serum nicotine levels increase the risk of nonunion after spinal fusion. Varenicline, a pharmaceutical adjunct for smoking cessation, is a partial agonist designed...
BACKGROUND CONTEXT
High serum nicotine levels increase the risk of nonunion after spinal fusion. Varenicline, a pharmaceutical adjunct for smoking cessation, is a partial agonist designed to displace and outcompete nicotine at its receptor binding site, thereby limiting downstream activation. Given its mechanism, varenicline may have therapeutic benefits in mitigating nonunion for active smokers undergoing spinal fusion.
PURPOSE
To compare fusion rate and fusion mass characteristics between cohorts receiving nicotine, varenicline, or concurrent nicotine and varenicline after lumbar fusion.
STUDY DESIGN
Rodent noninstrumented spinal fusion model.
METHODS
Sixty eight-week-old male Sprague-Dawley rats weighing approximately 300 grams underwent L4-5 posterolateral fusion (PLF) surgery. Four experimental groups (control: C, nicotine: N, varenicline: V, and combined: NV [nicotine and varenicline]) were included for analysis. Treatment groups received nicotine, varenicline, or a combination of nicotine and varenicline delivered through subcutaneous osmotic pumps beginning two weeks before surgery until the time of sacrifice at age 14 weeks. Manual palpation testing, microCT imaging, bone histomorphometry, and biomechanical testing were performed on harvested spinal fusion segments.
RESULTS
Control (p=0.016) and combined (p=0.032) groups, when compared directly to the nicotine group, demonstrated significantly greater manual palpation scores. The fusion rate in the control (93.3%) and combined (93.3%) groups were significantly greater than that of the nicotine group (33.3%) (p=0.007, both). Biomechanical testing demonstrated greater Young's modulus of the fusion segment in the control (17.1 MPa) and combined groups (34.5 MPa) compared to the nicotine group (8.07 MPa) (p<0.001, both). MicroCT analysis demonstrated greater bone volume fraction (C:0.35 vs N:0.26 vs NV:0.33) (p<0.001, all) and bone mineral density (C:335 vs N:262 vs NV:328 mg Ha/cm) (p<0.001, all) in the control and combined groups compared to the nicotine group. Histomorphometry demonstrated a greater mineral apposition rate in the combined group compared to the nicotine group (0.34 vs 0.24 μm/day, p=0.025).
CONCLUSION
In a rodent spinal fusion model, varenicline mitigates the adverse effects of high nicotine serum levels on the rate and quality of spinal fusion.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
These findings have the potential to significantly impact clinical practice guidelines and the use of pharmacotherapy for active nicotine users undergoing fusion surgery.
Topics: Rats; Animals; Male; Nicotine; Varenicline; Pseudarthrosis; Rats, Sprague-Dawley; Smoking Cessation
PubMed: 37086977
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2023.04.005 -
Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental... Dec 2022The U.S. Food and Drug Administration identifies abstinence and the absence of heavy drinking days as outcomes for pharmacotherapy trials for alcohol use disorder (AUD).... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration identifies abstinence and the absence of heavy drinking days as outcomes for pharmacotherapy trials for alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, many individuals with AUD struggle to achieve these outcomes, which may discourage them from seeking treatment. World Health Organization (WHO) risk drinking levels have garnered attention in the alcohol field as potential non-abstinent outcomes for AUD medication trials. Further, testing combination pharmacotherapy for AUD represents an important direction in the field, particularly using medications such as naltrexone and varenicline, which are approved for treating AUD and smoking, respectively. The objective of the current study was to test the utility of the WHO risk drinking levels as a drinking outcome in a randomized clinical trial of combined varenicline and naltrexone for smoking cessation and drinking reduction. These analyses provide additional tests of the efficacy of this combination treatment.
METHODS
The current study is a secondary analysis of a phase 2, randomized, double-blind clinical trial, wherein participants (N = 165) who were daily smokers and heavy drinkers were randomly assigned to receive either 2 mg/day of varenicline plus 50 mg/day of naltrexone or 2 mg/day of varenicline plus placebo for 12 weeks. Medication effects on 1- and 2-level reductions in WHO risk drinking levels were assessed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks into the active medication period.
RESULTS
In logistic growth curve models individuals receiving the combined treatment had greater reductions in WHO risk drinking levels than individuals taking varenicline alone when assessed at 4 weeks into the active medication period. Among individuals who were WHO high and very high risk drinkers at baseline, the largest effect sizes favoring combination treatment were at Week 4 for the WHO 2-level reduction outcome (Cohen's h = 0.202) and Week 12 for the WHO 1-level reduction outcome (Cohen's h = 0.244), although these effects did not reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSIONS
These findings provide evidence that combined varenicline plus naltrexone treatment is effective at reducing WHO risk drinking levels, particularly among individuals who smoke cigarettes daily and drink heavily. These results add to a growing body of literature validating reductions in WHO risk drinking levels as outcomes of alcohol medication trials.
Topics: Humans; Varenicline; Naltrexone; Double-Blind Method; Alcoholism; Alcohol Drinking; World Health Organization; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36515648
DOI: 10.1111/acer.14953 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2020Whilst the pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco. Firstly,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Whilst the pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco. Firstly, nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms and antidepressants may relieve these. Additionally, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways or receptors that underlie nicotine addiction.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence for the efficacy, safety and tolerability of medications with antidepressant properties in assisting long-term tobacco smoking cessation in people who smoke cigarettes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Specialized Register, which includes reports of trials indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO, clinicaltrials.gov, the ICTRP, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in May 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited smokers, and compared antidepressant medications with placebo or no treatment, an alternative pharmacotherapy, or the same medication used in a different way. We excluded trials with less than six months follow-up from efficacy analyses. We included trials with any follow-up length in safety analyses.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. We also used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome measure was smoking cessation after at least six months follow-up, expressed as a risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model. Similarly, we presented incidence of safety and tolerance outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), psychiatric AEs, seizures, overdoses, suicide attempts, death by suicide, all-cause mortality, and trial dropout due to drug, as RRs (95% CIs).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 115 studies (33 new to this update) in this review; most recruited adult participants from the community or from smoking cessation clinics. We judged 28 of the studies to be at high risk of bias; however, restricting analyses only to studies at low or unclear risk did not change clinical interpretation of the results. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion increased long-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.52 to 1.77; I = 15%; 45 studies, 17,866 participants). There was insufficient evidence to establish whether participants taking bupropion were more likely to report SAEs compared to those taking placebo. Results were imprecise and CIs encompassed no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48; I = 0%; 21 studies, 10,625 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, downgraded one level due to imprecision). We found high-certainty evidence that use of bupropion resulted in more trial dropouts due to adverse events of the drug than placebo (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56; I = 19%; 25 studies, 12,340 participants). Participants randomized to bupropion were also more likely to report psychiatric AEs compared with those randomized to placebo (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.37; I = 15%; 6 studies, 4439 participants). We also looked at the safety and efficacy of bupropion when combined with other non-antidepressant smoking cessation therapies. There was insufficient evidence to establish whether combination bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in superior quit rates to NRT alone (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.51; I = 52%; 12 studies, 3487 participants), or whether combination bupropion and varenicline resulted in superior quit rates to varenicline alone (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.55; I = 15%; 3 studies, 1057 participants). We judged the certainty of evidence to be low and moderate, respectively; in both cases due to imprecision, and also due to inconsistency in the former. Safety data were sparse for these comparisons, making it difficult to draw clear conclusions. A meta-analysis of six studies provided evidence that bupropion resulted in inferior smoking cessation rates to varenicline (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.79; I = 0%; 6 studies, 6286 participants), whilst there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy between bupropion and NRT (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; I = 18%; 10 studies, 8230 participants). We also found some evidence that nortriptyline aided smoking cessation when compared with placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78; I = 16%; 6 studies, 975 participants), whilst there was insufficient evidence to determine whether bupropion or nortriptyline were more effective when compared with one another (RR 1.30 (favouring bupropion), 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; I = 0%; 3 studies, 417 participants). There was no evidence that any of the other antidepressants tested (including St John's Wort, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)) had a beneficial effect on smoking cessation. Findings were sparse and inconsistent as to whether antidepressants, primarily bupropion and nortriptyline, had a particular benefit for people with current or previous depression.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high-certainty evidence that bupropion can aid long-term smoking cessation. However, bupropion also increases the number of adverse events, including psychiatric AEs, and there is high-certainty evidence that people taking bupropion are more likely to discontinue treatment compared with placebo. However, there is no clear evidence to suggest whether people taking bupropion experience more or fewer SAEs than those taking placebo (moderate certainty). Nortriptyline also appears to have a beneficial effect on smoking quit rates relative to placebo. Evidence suggests that bupropion may be as successful as NRT and nortriptyline in helping people to quit smoking, but that it is less effective than varenicline. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the other antidepressants tested, such as SSRIs, aid smoking cessation, and when looking at safety and tolerance outcomes, in most cases, paucity of data made it difficult to draw conclusions. Due to the high-certainty evidence, further studies investigating the efficacy of bupropion versus placebo are unlikely to change our interpretation of the effect, providing no clear justification for pursuing bupropion for smoking cessation over front-line smoking cessation aids already available. However, it is important that where studies of antidepressants for smoking cessation are carried out they measure and report safety and tolerability clearly.
Topics: Anti-Anxiety Agents; Antidepressive Agents; Bupropion; Humans; Nortriptyline; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Smoking; Smoking Cessation; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Varenicline
PubMed: 32319681
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000031.pub5