-
Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental... Oct 2020Alcohol use disorder (AUD) presents a significant public health concern given the high prevalence estimates and numerous deleterious-associated consequences. The FDA...
A Call to Action: A Systematic Review Examining the Failure to Include Females and Members of Minoritized Racial/Ethnic Groups in Clinical Trials of Pharmacological Treatments for Alcohol Use Disorder.
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) presents a significant public health concern given the high prevalence estimates and numerous deleterious-associated consequences. The FDA currently has approved 3 pharmacological treatments for alcohol use disorder: acamprosate, naltrexone, and disulfiram. Previous research suggests that there may exist differences in the prevalence of and outcomes related to AUD across sex and racial/ethnic groups. Other work indicates that there may be differences in the efficacy of existing pharmacological treatments for AUD across demographic groups. The purpose of the present study was to examine the inclusion of women and members of minoritized racial/ethnic groups in published randomized clinical trials of pharmacological treatments for alcohol use disorder since 1994, in accordance with the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993. PubMed was systematically searched using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The initial search located 842 articles. After exclusion of ineligible articles, 102 remained for analysis. Of those included in the review, only 11.8% reported full sex and racial/ethnic characteristics of their study participants. Of the total sample, 6 articles were specifically examining 1 racial/ethnic group, and 11 were specifically examining 1 sex. Two articles (2.2%) did not report information regarding the sex breakdown of their participants, while 47 (49.0%) did not report any information regarding the racial/ethnic breakdown of their sample. Despite guidelines set forth by NIH, only 5.9% of articles conducted subgroup analyses to examine differences in treatment outcomes by sex or race/ethnicity, and only 16.7% of articles included considerations related to cultural inclusion when discussing study limitations. These results varied by medication type. Results suggest that considerably greater efforts must be put forth by the larger scientific community regarding the inclusion, analysis, and reporting of data focused on women and non-White racial and ethnic groups.
Topics: Alcoholism; Female; Humans; Male; Minority Groups; Patient Selection; Racial Groups; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sex Factors; Women
PubMed: 32997374
DOI: 10.1111/acer.14440 -
Der Nervenarzt Jan 2008Substance use disorder is the most common psychiatric comorbidity in patients with schizophrenia, revealing prevalence rates of up to 65%. Recommendations of... (Review)
Review
Substance use disorder is the most common psychiatric comorbidity in patients with schizophrenia, revealing prevalence rates of up to 65%. Recommendations of antipsychotic pharmacotherapy in schizophrenia are based on studies excluding patients with this double diagnosis. In this systematic review the available pharmacological studies in this subgroup of patients are summarised and discussed with regard to evidence-based medicine. Most available studies concern small sample sizes, and the level of evidence in those studies was low. Data suggest efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) (aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone) superior to orally administered conventional antipsychotics. Treatment with SGAs revealed superior improvement of distinct psychopathological symptoms, similarly to those studies excluding patients with comorbid substance abuse. In some studies reduced craving and increased reduction of substance abuse could be demonstrated. Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) added to antipsychotic maintenance therapy showed efficacy in reducing substance abuse and craving, whereas studies with other antidepressive agents (e.g. selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) are lacking. Administration of the anti-craving agents naltrexone and disulfiram led to a decrease of drug intake in a few studies. Unfortunately no studies are available using acamprosate in patients with schizophrenia and comorbid alcoholism. In conclusion the preferential use of SGAs in patients with schizophrenia and comorbid substance use disorder is suggested, and the early initiation of concomitant treatment with TCAs (depending on current psychopathological status) and anti-craving agents has to be considered.
Topics: Alcohol Deterrents; Alcoholism; Algorithms; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Antipsychotic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Comorbidity; Diagnosis, Dual (Psychiatry); Disulfiram; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Therapy, Combination; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Naltrexone; Narcotic Antagonists; Schizophrenia; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 17619840
DOI: 10.1007/s00115-007-2310-4 -
Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs Jul 2022This article reviews research on post-acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome (PAWS) management.
OBJECTIVE
This article reviews research on post-acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome (PAWS) management.
METHOD
We conducted a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Revision and Meta-Analyses)-guided scoping review of the published PAWS literature, searching six electronic databases (from their inception through December 2020) for English-language randomized and nonrandomized studies.
RESULTS
A total of 16 treatment studies met the inclusion criteria. The strength of evidence overall for pharmacologic treatments is low, with often only short-term results being reported, small treatment samples used, or inconsistent results found. However, for negative affect and sleep symptoms, more evidence supports using gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) and anticonvulsants (carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine). Although preliminary data support acamprosate, there were no controlled trials. Despite an older treatment trial showing some positive data for amitriptyline for mood, the clinical measures used were problematic, and side effects and safety profile limit its utility. Finally, there is no evidence that melatonin and other agents (homatropine, Proproten-100) show PAWS symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS
Although there is some evidence for targeted pharmacotherapy for treating specific PAWS symptoms, there are few recent, robust, placebo-controlled trials, and the level of evidence for treatment efficacy is low.
Topics: Alcoholism; Anticonvulsants; Benzodiazepines; Gabapentin; Humans; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 35838423
DOI: 10.15288/jsad.2022.83.470 -
Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica =... Oct 2013Synthesize and assess the available scientific evidence from the period 2008-2012 on interventions of demonstrated efficacy in the treatment and rehabilitation of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Synthesize and assess the available scientific evidence from the period 2008-2012 on interventions of demonstrated efficacy in the treatment and rehabilitation of adolescents and adults engaged in the problematic use of alcohol and other substances.
METHODS
A systematic review was undertaken with search and analysis of national and international literature on the subject in Spanish and English in the main international databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, LILACS, Embase, PsycINFO, SciELO, the databases of the York University Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (DARE, ETS Database), the Cochrane Library, and other sources of gray literature. The search criteria included randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews but excluded observational studies, qualitative studies, and articles of poor methodological quality.
RESULTS
The final sample consisted of 69 studies. The psychosocial interventions shown to be effective were cognitive behavioral therapy, family interventions, self-help interventions using the Internet, couples behavioral therapy, community strengthening and family training, telephone monitoring and support, and integrated therapy for substance abuse disorder with anxiety and depression comorbidity. Pharmacological interventions of demonstrated effectiveness were acamprosate, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), and benzodiazepines in problematic alcohol use, as well as maintenance therapy with high-dose opioids.
CONCLUSIONS
The demonstrated effectiveness of psychosocial and pharmacological interventions is slight but significant. However, strongly multidisciplinary interventions that use a cognitive behavioral approach and the involvement of people close to the consumer, as well as some of the specific pharmacological interventions, have been shown to yield the best results in terms of indicators of abstinence and prevention of relapses.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Alcohol Drinking; Humans; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 24301737
DOI: No ID Found -
International Journal of Psychiatry in... 2011To summarize published data on pharmacologic treatments for alcohol dependence alone and in combination with brief psychosocial therapies that may be feasible for... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To summarize published data on pharmacologic treatments for alcohol dependence alone and in combination with brief psychosocial therapies that may be feasible for primary care and specialty medical settings.
METHODS
We conducted electronic searches of published original research articles and reviews in MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Embase, and PsychINFO. In addition, hand searches of reference lists of review articles, supplemental searches of internet references and contacts with experts in the field were conducted. Randomized controlled studies published between January 1960 and August 2010 that met our inclusion/exclusion criteria were included.
RESULTS
A total of 85 studies, representing 18,937 subjects, met our criteria for inclusion. The evidence base for oral naltrexone (6% more days abstinent than placebo in the largest study) and topiramate (prescribed off-label) (e.g., 26.2% more days abstinent than placebo in a recent study) is positive but modest. Acamprosate shows modest efficacy with recently abstinent patients, with European studies showing better results than U.S. ones. The evidence-base for disulfiram is equivocal. Depot naltrexone shows efficacy (25% greater reduction in rate of heavy drinking vs. placebo, in one of the largest studies) in a limited number of studies. Some studies suggest that patients do better with extensive psychosocial treatments added to medications while others show that brief support can be equally effective.
CONCLUSIONS
Although treatment effects are modest, medications for alcohol dependence, in conjunction with either brief support or more extensive psychosocial therapy, can be effective in primary and specialty care medical settings.
Topics: Acamprosate; Alcohol Deterrents; Alcoholism; Disulfiram; Fructose; Humans; Naltrexone; Narcotic Antagonists; Off-Label Use; Taurine; Topiramate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22439295
DOI: 10.2190/PM.42.3.b -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023Harmful alcohol use is defined as unhealthy alcohol use that results in adverse physical, psychological, social, or societal consequences and is among the leading risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Harmful alcohol use is defined as unhealthy alcohol use that results in adverse physical, psychological, social, or societal consequences and is among the leading risk factors for disease, disability and premature mortality globally. The burden of harmful alcohol use is increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and there remains a large unmet need for indicated prevention and treatment interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in these settings. Evidence regarding which interventions are effective and feasible for addressing harmful and other patterns of unhealthy alcohol use in LMICs is limited, which contributes to this gap in services.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial and pharmacologic treatment and indicated prevention interventions compared with control conditions (wait list, placebo, no treatment, standard care, or active control condition) aimed at reducing harmful alcohol use in LMICs.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indexed in the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group (CDAG) Specialized Register, the Cochrane Clinical Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) through 12 December 2021. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Web of Science, and Opengrey database to identify unpublished or ongoing studies. We searched the reference lists of included studies and relevant review articles for eligible studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All RCTs comparing an indicated prevention or treatment intervention (pharmacologic or psychosocial) versus a control condition for people with harmful alcohol use in LMICs were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 66 RCTs with 17,626 participants. Sixty-two of these trials contributed to the meta-analysis. Sixty-three studies were conducted in middle-income countries (MICs), and the remaining three studies were conducted in low-income countries (LICs). Twenty-five trials exclusively enrolled participants with alcohol use disorder. The remaining 51 trials enrolled participants with harmful alcohol use, some of which included both cases of alcohol use disorder and people reporting hazardous alcohol use patterns that did not meet criteria for disorder. Fifty-two RCTs assessed the efficacy of psychosocial interventions; 27 were brief interventions primarily based on motivational interviewing and were compared to brief advice, information, or assessment only. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to brief interventions given the high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Studies reporting continuous outcomes: Tau² = 0.15, Q =139.64, df =16, P<.001, I² = 89%, 3913 participants, 17 trials, very low certainty; Studies reporting dichotomous outcomes: Tau²=0.18, Q=58.26, df=3, P<.001, I² =95%, 1349 participants, 4 trials, very low certainty). The other types of psychosocial interventions included a range of therapeutic approaches such as behavioral risk reduction, cognitive-behavioral therapy, contingency management, rational emotive therapy, and relapse prevention. These interventions were most commonly compared to usual care involving varying combinations of psychoeducation, counseling, and pharmacotherapy. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to psychosocial treatments due to high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 1.15; Q = 444.32, df = 11, P<.001; I²=98%, 2106 participants, 12 trials, very low certainty). Eight trials compared combined pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions with placebo, psychosocial intervention alone, or another pharmacologic treatment. The active pharmacologic study conditions included disulfiram, naltrexone, ondansetron, or topiramate. The psychosocial components of these interventions included counseling, encouragement to attend Alcoholics Anonymous, motivational interviewing, brief cognitive-behavioral therapy, or other psychotherapy (not specified). Analysis of studies comparing a combined pharmacologic and psychosocial intervention to psychosocial intervention alone found that the combined approach may be associated with a greater reduction in harmful alcohol use (standardized mean difference (standardized mean difference (SMD))=-0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.61 to -0.24; 475 participants; 4 trials; low certainty). Four trials compared pharmacologic intervention alone with placebo and three with another pharmacotherapy. Drugs assessed were: acamprosate, amitriptyline, baclofen disulfiram, gabapentin, mirtazapine, and naltrexone. None of these trials evaluated the primary clinical outcome of interest, harmful alcohol use. Thirty-one trials reported rates of retention in the intervention. Meta-analyses revealed that rates of retention between study conditions did not differ in any of the comparisons (pharmacologic risk ratio (RR) = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.44, 247 participants, 3 trials, low certainty; pharmacologic in addition to psychosocial intervention: RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.40, 363 participants, 3 trials, moderate certainty). Due to high levels of heterogeneity, we did not calculate pooled estimates comparing retention in brief (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.00; Q = 172.59, df = 11, P<.001; I = 94%; 5380 participants; 12 trials, very low certainty) or other psychosocial interventions (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.01; Q = 34.07, df = 8, P<.001; I = 77%; 1664 participants; 9 trials, very low certainty). Two pharmacologic trials and three combined pharmacologic and psychosocial trials reported on side effects. These studies found more side effects attributable to amitriptyline relative to mirtazapine, naltrexone and topiramate relative to placebo, yet no differences in side effects between placebo and either acamprosate or ondansetron. Across all intervention types there was substantial risk of bias. Primary threats to validity included lack of blinding and differential/high rates of attrition.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In LMICs there is low-certainty evidence supporting the efficacy of combined psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use relative to psychosocial interventions alone. There is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of pharmacologic or psychosocial interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use largely due to the substantial heterogeneity in outcomes, comparisons, and interventions that precluded pooling of these data in meta-analyses. The majority of studies are brief interventions, primarily among men, and using measures that have not been validated in the target population. Confidence in these results is reduced by the risk of bias and significant heterogeneity among studies as well as the heterogeneity of results on different outcome measures within studies. More evidence on the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions, specific types of psychosocial interventions are needed to increase the certainty of these results.
Topics: Humans; Male; Acamprosate; Alcoholism; Amitriptyline; Developing Countries; Disulfiram; Mirtazapine; Naltrexone; Ondansetron; Topiramate
PubMed: 37158538
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013350.pub2 -
Brain Sciences Mar 2022Although Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) is highly prevalent worldwide, treating this condition remains challenging. Further, potential treatments for AUD do not fully... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) is highly prevalent worldwide, treating this condition remains challenging. Further, potential treatments for AUD do not fully address alcohol-induced neuroadaptive changes. Understanding the effects of pharmacotherapies for AUD on the human brain may lead to tailored, more effective treatments, and improved individual clinical outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
We systematically reviewed the literature for studies investigating pharmacotherapies for AUD that included neuroimaging-based treatment outcomes. We searched the PubMed, Scielo, and PsycINFO databases up to January 2021.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS
Eligible studies included those investigating pharmacotherapies for AUD and employing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and/or proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (H-MRS).
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Two independent reviewers screened studies' titles and abstracts for inclusion. Data extraction forms were shared among all the authors to standardize data collection. We gathered information on the following variables: sample size; mean age; sociodemographic and clinical characteristics; alcohol use status; study design and methodology; main neuroimaging findings and brain-regions of interest (i.e., brain areas activated by alcohol use and possible pharmacological interactions); and limitations of each study.
RESULTS
Out of 177 studies selected, 20 studies provided relevant data for the research topic. Findings indicate that: (1) Acamprosate and gabapentin may selectively modulate limbic regions and the anterior cingulate cortex; (2) Naltrexone and disulfiram effects may involve prefrontal, premotor, and cerebellar regions; (3) Pharmacotherapies acting on glutamate and GABA neurotransmission involve primarily areas underpinning reward and negative affective states, and; (4) Pharmacotherapies acting on opioid and dopamine systems may affect areas responsible for the cognitive and motor factors of AUD.
LIMITATIONS
Most of the studies were focused on naltrexone. A small number of studies investigated the action of disulfiram and gabapentin, and no neuroimaging studies investigated topiramate. In addition, the time between medication and neuroimaging scans varied widely across studies.
CONCLUSIONS
We identified key-brain regions modulated by treatments available for AUD. Some of the regions modulated by naltrexone are not specific to the brain reward system, such as the parahippocampal gyrus (temporal lobe), parietal and occipital lobes. Other treatments also modulate not specific regions of the reward system, but play a role in the addictive behaviors, including the insula and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The role of these brain regions in mediating the AUD pharmacotherapy response warrants investigation in future research studies.
PubMed: 35326342
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12030386 -
Journal of Autism and Developmental... Mar 2016Autism spectrum disorders are an emerging health problem worldwide, but little is known about their pathogenesis. It has been hypothesized that autism may result from an... (Review)
Review
Autism spectrum disorders are an emerging health problem worldwide, but little is known about their pathogenesis. It has been hypothesized that autism may result from an imbalance between excitatory glutamatergic and inhibitory GABAergic pathways. Commonly used medications such as valproate, acamprosate, and arbaclofen may act on the GABAergic system and be a potential treatment for people with ASD. The present systematic review aimed at evaluating the state-of-the-art of clinical trials of GABA modulators in autism. To date there is insufficient evidence to suggest the use of these drugs in autistic subjects, even if data are promising. Of note, short-term use of all the reviewed medications appears to be safe. Future well designed trials are needed to elucidate these preliminary findings.
Topics: Autism Spectrum Disorder; GABA Modulators; Humans; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 26443675
DOI: 10.1007/s10803-015-2619-y -
Current Pharmaceutical Design 2010Alcohol dependence is a major disease burden of adults in modern society worldwide. There is no cure for alcohol dependence. In this study, we have examined the... (Review)
Review
Alcohol dependence is a major disease burden of adults in modern society worldwide. There is no cure for alcohol dependence. In this study, we have examined the molecular targets of ethanol-induced toxicity in humans based on a systematic review of literature data and then discussed current and potential therapeutic targets for alcohol abuse and dependence. Using human samples with ethanol exposure, microarray analyses of gene expression have shown that numerous genes are up- and/or down-regulated by alcohol exposure. The ethanol-responsive genes mainly encode functional proteins such as proteins involved in nucleic acid binding, transcription factors, selected regulatory molecules, and receptors. These genes are also correlated with important biological pathways, such as angiogenesis, integrin signalling pathway, inflammation, wnt signaling pathway, platelet-derived growth factor signaling pathway, p53 pathway, epidermal growth factor receptor signaling pathway and apoptosis signaling pathway. Currently, only three medications were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence, including the aldehyde dehydrogenase inhibitor disulfiram, the micro-opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone, and the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor inhibitor acamprosate (oral and injectable extended-release formulations). In addition, a number of agents are being investigated as novel treatments for alcohol abuse and dependence. These include selective 5-HT reuptake inhibitors (e.g. fluoxetine), 5-HT(1) receptor agonists (e.g. buspirone), 5-HT(2) receptor antagonists (e.g. ritanserin), 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists (e.g. ondansetron), dopamine receptor antagonists (e.g. aripiprazole and quetiapine), dopamine receptor agonists (e.g. bromocriptine), GABA(B) receptor agonists (e.g. baclofen), and cannabinoid-1 (CB(1)) receptor antagonists. Some of these agents have shown promising efficacy in initial clinical studies. However, further randomized studies with larger samples are warranted to establish their efficacy and safety profiles in the treatment of alcohol dependence.
Topics: Adult; Alcohol Deterrents; Alcoholism; Animals; Drug Design; Ethanol; Gene Expression Regulation; Humans; Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis; Polymorphism, Genetic; Rats; Signal Transduction
PubMed: 20184550
DOI: 10.2174/138161210791034030 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2018Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and alcohol-related impairments belong to the most widespread psychiatric disorders leading to specific psychophysical, affective and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and alcohol-related impairments belong to the most widespread psychiatric disorders leading to specific psychophysical, affective and cognitive symptoms and consequences for psychosocial well-being and health. Alcohol consumption is increasingly becoming a problem in many developing regions and AUD prevalence is estimated at 4.1% worldwide, with highest prevalence in European countries (7.5%), and the North America (6.0%). Therapeutic approaches, including pharmacotherapy, play an important role in treating patients with AUD.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of baclofen for treating people with AUD, who are currently drinking, with the aim of achieving and maintaining abstinence or reducing alcohol consumption.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two further databases and two clinical trials registries, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles. The date of the most recent search was 30 January 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least four weeks' treatment duration and 12 weeks' overall study duration comparing baclofen for relapse prevention of AUD with placebo, no treatment or other treatments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 RCTs (1128 participants). All studies but three recruited fewer than 100 participants. Participants had a diagnosis of alcohol dependence according the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) IV or the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 criteria who were currently drinking. The mean age of participants was 48 years, and there were more men (69%), than women. All studies compared baclofen to placebo, except for one study that evaluated baclofen versus acamprosate. The included studies considered baclofen at different doses (range 10 mg a day to 150 mg a day). In all but one of the studies, participants in both the baclofen and placebo groups received psychosocial treatment or counselling of various intensity.We judged most of the studies at low risk of selection, performance, detection (subjective outcome), attrition and reporting bias.We did not find any difference between baclofen and placebo for the primary outcomes: relapse-return to any drinking (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.04; 5 studies, 781 participants, moderate certainty evidence); frequency of use by percentage of days abstinent (MD 0.39, 95% CI -11.51 to 12.29; 6 studies, 465 participants, low certainty evidence) and frequency of use by percentage of heavy drinking days at the end of treatment (MD 0.25, 95% CI -1.25 to 1.76; 3 studies, 186 participants, moderate certainty evidence); number of participants with at least one adverse event (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.10; 4 studies, 430 participants, high certainty evidence); the dropout rate at the end of treatment (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.26, 8 studies, 977 participants, high certainty evidence) and dropout due to adverse events (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.07; 7 studies, 913 participants, high certainty evidence).We found evidence that baclofen increases amount of use (drink per drinking days), (MD 1.55, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.77; 2 studies, 72 participants, low certainty evidence).Among secondary outcomes, there was no difference on craving (MD 1.38, 95% CI -1.28 to 4.03, 5 studies, 469 participants), and anxiety (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.28; 5 trials, 509 participants). We found that baclofen increased depression (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.48; 3 studies, 387 participants).Concerning the specific adverse events we found that baclofen increased: vertigo (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.74; 7 studies, 858 participants), somnolence/sedation (RR 1.48, 95%CI 1.11 to 1.96; 8 studies, 946 participants), paraesthesia (RR 4.28, 95% CI 2.11 to 8.67; 4 studies, 593 participants), and muscle spasms/rigidity (RR 1.94, 95%CI 1.08 to 3.48; 3 studies, 551 participants). For all the other adverse events we did not find significant differences between baclofen and placebo.For the comparison baclofen versus acamprosate, we were only able to extract data for one outcome, craving. For this outcome, we found that baclofen increased craving compared with acamprosate (MD 14.62, 95% CI 12.72 to 16.52; 1 study, 49 participants).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
None of the primary or secondary outcomes of the review showed evidence of a difference between baclofen and placebo. The high heterogeneity among primary studies results limits the interpretation of the summary estimate, the identification of moderators and mediators of baclofen's effects on alcohol use remains a challenge for further research. Even though some results from RCTs are promising, current evidence remains uncertain regarding the use of baclofen as a first-line treatment for people with AUDs.
Topics: Acamprosate; Alcohol Deterrents; Alcohol Drinking; Alcoholism; Baclofen; Craving; Depression; Female; GABA-B Receptor Agonists; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Dropouts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence
PubMed: 30484285
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012557.pub2