-
The New England Journal of Medicine Jan 2021The use of naltrexone plus bupropion to treat methamphetamine use disorder has not been well studied. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The use of naltrexone plus bupropion to treat methamphetamine use disorder has not been well studied.
METHODS
We conducted this multisite, double-blind, two-stage, placebo-controlled trial with the use of a sequential parallel comparison design to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended-release injectable naltrexone (380 mg every 3 weeks) plus oral extended-release bupropion (450 mg per day) in adults with moderate or severe methamphetamine use disorder. In the first stage of the trial, participants were randomly assigned in a 0.26:0.74 ratio to receive naltrexone-bupropion or matching injectable and oral placebo for 6 weeks. Those in the placebo group who did not have a response in stage 1 underwent rerandomization in stage 2 and were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive naltrexone-bupropion or placebo for an additional 6 weeks. Urine samples were obtained from participants twice weekly. The primary outcome was a response, defined as at least three methamphetamine-negative urine samples out of four samples obtained at the end of stage 1 or stage 2, and the weighted average of the responses in the two stages is reported. The treatment effect was defined as the between-group difference in the overall weighted responses.
RESULTS
A total of 403 participants were enrolled in stage 1, and 225 in stage 2. In the first stage, 18 of 109 participants (16.5%) in the naltrexone-bupropion group and 10 of 294 (3.4%) in the placebo group had a response. In the second stage, 13 of 114 (11.4%) in the naltrexone-bupropion group and 2 of 111 (1.8%) in the placebo group had a response. The weighted average response across the two stages was 13.6% with naltrexone-bupropion and 2.5% with placebo, for an overall treatment effect of 11.1 percentage points (Wald z-test statistic, 4.53; P<0.001). Adverse events with naltrexone-bupropion included gastrointestinal disorders, tremor, malaise, hyperhidrosis, and anorexia. Serious adverse events occurred in 8 of 223 participants (3.6%) who received naltrexone-bupropion during the trial.
CONCLUSIONS
Among adults with methamphetamine use disorder, the response over a period of 12 weeks among participants who received extended-release injectable naltrexone plus oral extended-release bupropion was low but was higher than that among participants who received placebo. (Funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and others; ADAPT-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03078075.).
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Amphetamine-Related Disorders; Bupropion; Delayed-Action Preparations; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Injections; Male; Medication Adherence; Methamphetamine; Middle Aged; Naltrexone; Narcotic Antagonists; Young Adult
PubMed: 33497547
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2020214 -
Clinical Rheumatology Apr 2014Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) has been demonstrated to reduce symptom severity in conditions such as fibromyalgia, Crohn's disease, multiple sclerosis, and complex regional... (Review)
Review
Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) has been demonstrated to reduce symptom severity in conditions such as fibromyalgia, Crohn's disease, multiple sclerosis, and complex regional pain syndrome. We review the evidence that LDN may operate as a novel anti-inflammatory agent in the central nervous system, via action on microglial cells. These effects may be unique to low dosages of naltrexone and appear to be entirely independent from naltrexone's better-known activity on opioid receptors. As a daily oral therapy, LDN is inexpensive and well-tolerated. Despite initial promise of efficacy, the use of LDN for chronic disorders is still highly experimental. Published trials have low sample sizes, and few replications have been performed. We cover the typical usage of LDN in clinical trials, caveats to using the medication, and recommendations for future research and clinical work. LDN may represent one of the first glial cell modulators to be used for the management of chronic pain disorders.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Chronic Pain; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Naltrexone; Neuroglia
PubMed: 24526250
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-014-2517-2 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Apr 2020To compare the benefits and harms of naltrexone-bupropion using evidence from clinical study reports. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
To compare the benefits and harms of naltrexone-bupropion using evidence from clinical study reports.
METHODS
We searched Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency websites, PubMed, and Clinicaltrials.gov (May 2016) to identify pivotal trials; we then sent a freedom of information request to the European Medicines Agency (July 2016). We included pivotal, phase III placebo-controlled trials. We assessed the risks of bias using the Cochrane criteria, and the quality of the evidence using GRADE. We used a random-effects model for meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Over a 27-month period (July 2016 to August 2018), we received 31 batches of clinical study report documents containing over 65 000 pages of data from 4 pivotal trials (n = 4536). Significantly more participants who took naltrexone-bupropion achieved ≥5% reduction in body weight: risk ratio (RR) = 2.1 (95% confidence interval 1.35-3.28), P = .001, GRADE = low, number needed to treat (NNT) to benefit = 5 (3-17); this represents a 2.53 kg (1.85-3.21) reduction in baseline body weight compared with placebo. Naltrexone-bupropion had significantly beneficial effects on other cardiovascular risk factors; however, the true effect sizes for these are uncertain because of incomplete outcome data. Naltrexone-bupropion significantly increased the risk of adverse events: RR = 1.11 (1.05-1.18, P = .0004, GRADE = low, NNT to harm = 12 7-27); serious adverse events: RR = 1.70 (1.38-2.1, P < .00001, GRADE = moderate, NNT to harm = 21 13-38); and discontinuation because of adverse events: RR = 1.92 (1.65-2.24, P < .00001, GRADE = moderate, NNT to discontinue treatment = 9 8-13).
CONCLUSIONS
Naltrexone-bupropion significantly reduces body weight by a small amount but significantly increases the risk of adverse events. A rigorous process of postmarketing surveillance is required.
Topics: Bupropion; Drug Combinations; Humans; Naltrexone; Obesity
PubMed: 31918448
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14210 -
Addiction (Abingdon, England) Feb 2018Pharmacologically controlled drinking in the treatment of alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorders (AUDs) is an emerging concept. Our objective was to explore the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Pharmacologically controlled drinking in the treatment of alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorders: a systematic review with direct and network meta-analyses on nalmefene, naltrexone, acamprosate, baclofen and topiramate.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Pharmacologically controlled drinking in the treatment of alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorders (AUDs) is an emerging concept. Our objective was to explore the comparative effectiveness of drugs used in this indication.
DESIGN
Systematic review with direct and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of nalmefene, naltrexone, acamprosate, baclofen or topiramate in non-abstinent adults diagnosed with alcohol dependence or AUDs. Two independent reviewers selected published and unpublished studies on Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, contacted pharmaceutical companies, the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration, and extracted data.
SETTING
Thirty-two RCTs.
PARTICIPANTS
A total of 6036 patients.
MEASUREMENTS
The primary outcome was total alcohol consumption (TAC). Other consumption outcomes and health outcomes were considered as secondary outcomes.
FINDINGS
No study provided direct comparisons between drugs. A risk of incomplete outcome data was identified in 26 studies (81%) and risk of selective outcome reporting in 17 (53%). Nalmefene [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.29, -0.10; I = 0%], baclofen (SMD = -1.00, 95% CI = -1.80, -0.19; one study) and topiramate (SMD = -0.77, 95% CI = -1.12, -0.42; I = 0%) showed superiority over placebo on TAC. No efficacy was observed for naltrexone or acamprosate. Similar results were observed for other consumption outcomes, except for baclofen (the favourable outcome on TAC was not reproduced). The number of withdrawals for safety reasons increased under nalmefene and naltrexone. No treatment demonstrated any harm reduction (no study was powered to explore health outcomes). Indirect comparisons suggested that topiramate was superior to nalmefene, naltrexone and acamprosate on consumption outcomes, but its safety profile is known to be poor.
CONCLUSIONS
There is currently no high-grade evidence for pharmacological treatment to control drinking using nalmefene, naltrexone, acamprosate, baclofen or topiramate in patients with alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorder. Some treatments show low to medium efficacy in reducing drinking across a range of studies with a high risk of bias. None demonstrates any benefit on health outcomes.
Topics: Acamprosate; Alcoholism; Baclofen; Naltrexone; Narcotic Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Topiramate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28940866
DOI: 10.1111/add.13974 -
International Immunopharmacology Nov 2023The global prevalence of Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC) stands at approximately 43 % among individuals who have previously had acute COVID-19. In...
The global prevalence of Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC) stands at approximately 43 % among individuals who have previously had acute COVID-19. In contrast, in the United States, the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) estimates that around 11 % of individuals who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 go on to experience long COVID. The underlying causes of PASC remains under investigation, and there are no currently established FDA-approved therapies. One of the leading hypotheses for the cause of PASC is the persistent activation of innate immune cells with increase systemic inflammation. Naltrexone is a medication with anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties that has been used in other conditions that overlap with PASC. We performed a retrospective review of a clinical cohort of 59 patients at a single academic center who received low-dose naltrexone (LDN) off-label as a potential therapeutic intervention for PASC. The use of LDN was associated with a fewer number of symptoms, improved clinical symptoms (fatigue, post-exertional malaise, unrefreshing sleep, and abnormal sleep pattern), and a better functional status. This observation warrants testing in rigorous, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; Naltrexone; SARS-CoV-2; Disease Progression
PubMed: 37804660
DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2023.110966 -
Journal of Medical Toxicology :... Mar 2016Naltrexone is a semi-synthetic opioid with competitive antagonist activity at mu opioid receptors. Its efficacy has been demonstrated in the treatment of alcohol and... (Review)
Review
Naltrexone is a semi-synthetic opioid with competitive antagonist activity at mu opioid receptors. Its efficacy has been demonstrated in the treatment of alcohol and opioid dependence, but adherence to daily dosing has been recognized as a factor limiting long-term effectiveness. Recently, a long-acting injectable formulation of naltrexone has received FDA-approval for treating alcohol and opioid dependence. This article reviews the pharmacology of naltrexone, the current evidence supporting the use of extended-release naltrexone, and the clinical challenges in the induction of patients to this medication.
Topics: Alcoholism; Animals; Behavior, Addictive; Delayed-Action Preparations; Drug Compounding; Humans; Injections; Naltrexone; Narcotic Antagonists; Opioid-Related Disorders; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26546222
DOI: 10.1007/s13181-015-0512-x -
Arthritis and Rheumatism Feb 2013To determine whether low dosages (4.5 mg/day) of naltrexone reduce fibromyalgia severity as compared with the nonspecific effects of placebo. In this replication and... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Low-dose naltrexone for the treatment of fibromyalgia: findings of a small, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, counterbalanced, crossover trial assessing daily pain levels.
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether low dosages (4.5 mg/day) of naltrexone reduce fibromyalgia severity as compared with the nonspecific effects of placebo. In this replication and extension study of a previous clinical trial, we tested the impact of low-dose naltrexone on daily self-reported pain. Secondary outcomes included general satisfaction with life, positive mood, sleep quality, and fatigue.
METHODS
Thirty-one women with fibromyalgia participated in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, counterbalanced, crossover study. During the active drug phase, participants received 4.5 mg of oral naltrexone daily. An intensive longitudinal design was used to measure daily levels of pain.
RESULTS
When contrasting the condition end points, we observed a significantly greater reduction of baseline pain in those taking low-dose naltrexone than in those taking placebo (28.8% reduction versus 18.0% reduction; P = 0.016). Low-dose naltrexone was also associated with improved general satisfaction with life (P = 0.045) and with improved mood (P = 0.039), but not improved fatigue or sleep. Thirty-two percent of participants met the criteria for response (defined as a significant reduction in pain plus a significant reduction in either fatigue or sleep problems) during low-dose naltrexone therapy, as contrasted with an 11% response rate during placebo therapy (P = 0.05). Low-dose naltrexone was rated equally tolerable as placebo, and no serious side effects were reported.
CONCLUSION
The preliminary evidence continues to show that low-dose naltrexone has a specific and clinically beneficial impact on fibromyalgia pain. The medication is widely available, inexpensive, safe, and well-tolerated. Parallel-group randomized controlled trials are needed to fully determine the efficacy of the medication.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Cross-Over Studies; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Female; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Middle Aged; Naltrexone; Narcotic Antagonists; Pain; Pain Measurement; Placebos; Self Report; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23359310
DOI: 10.1002/art.37734 -
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association... Aug 2021
Topics: Alcohol Deterrents; Alcoholism; Appetite Depressants; Humans; Naltrexone; Social Support; Topiramate
PubMed: 34344780
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.200895-f -
Pain Physician 2011Morphine sulfate and naltrexone hydrochloride extended-release capsules (EMBEDA, King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bristol, TN), indicated for management of chronic,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Morphine sulfate and naltrexone hydrochloride extended-release capsules (EMBEDA, King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bristol, TN), indicated for management of chronic, moderate-to-severe pain, contain pellets of extended-release morphine sulfate with a sequestered naltrexone core (MS-sNT). Taken as directed, morphine provides analgesia while naltrexone remains sequestered; if tampered with by crushing, naltrexone is released to mitigate morphine-induced euphoric effects. While it is necessary to establish that formulations intended to reduce attractiveness for abuse are successful in doing so, it is also necessary to demonstrate that product therapeutic integrity is maintained for patients.
OBJECTIVES
Data were reviewed from 3 studies to determine: 1) the quantity of naltrexone released when MS-sNT pellets are crushed (MS-sNTC) for at least 2 minutes with mortar and pestle); 2) the extent to which the naltrexone released upon crushing mitigated morphine-induced subjective effects; and 3) whether sequestered naltrexone precipitates opioid withdrawal when MS-sNT is taken as directed.
METHODS
The naltrexone bioavailability study compared naltrexone release from MS-sNTC with that from whole intact MS-sNT capsules (MS-sNTW) and an equal naltrexone solution (NS) dose. Equivalent bioavailability was established if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for geometric mean ratios (maximum plasma naltrexone concentration [Cmax] and area under the concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity [AUC∞]) fell between 80% and 125%. The oral pharmacodynamic study assessed drug liking and euphoria and pharmacokinetic properties of MS-sNTC and MS-sNTW compared with morphine sulfate solution (MSS) and placebo. The 12-month, open-label (OL) safety study evaluated safety of MS-sNT administered orally as directed in patients with chronic, moderate-to-severe pain. Safety assessments included withdrawal symptoms based on the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS).
RESULTS
Naltrexone from MS-sNTC met criteria for equivalent bioavailability to NS. Although morphine relative bioavailability was similar for MS-sNTC and MSS, mean peak (Emax) visual analog scale (VAS) scores for drug liking and Cole/Addiction Research Center Inventory Stimulation-Euphoria were significantly reduced for MS-sNTC vs MSS (p < 0.001). In these 2 studies, a total of 6 participants had one measurement of plasma naltrexone after MS-sNTW that was above the lower limit of quantification. In the OL safety study, 72/93 participants (77%) had no quantifiable naltrexone concentrations. There was neither evidence of naltrexone accumulation for any participant nor any significant correlation with MS-sNT dose, age, or sex. Of 4 participants with the highest naltrexone concentrations, none had COWS scores consistent with moderate opioid withdrawal symptoms. Only 5 participants had COWS scores consistent with moderate opioid withdrawal; all 5 had not taken MS-sNT as directed.
LIMITATIONS
Study populations may not be fully representative of patients receiving opioid therapy for the management of chronic, moderate-to-severe pain and of opioid abusers.
CONCLUSIONS
When MS-sNT capsules are crushed, all of the sequestered naltrexone (relative to oral NS) is released and immediately available to mitigate morphine-induced effects. When MS-sNT was crushed, the naltrexone released abated drug liking and euphoria relative to that from an equal dose of immediate-release morphine from MSS administration in a majority of participants. Naltrexone concentrations were low over a period of 12 months without evidence of accumulation, and there were no observable opioid withdrawal symptoms when MS-sNT was taken as directed.
Topics: Area Under Curve; Biological Availability; Capsules; Drug Combinations; Humans; Morphine; Naltrexone; ROC Curve
PubMed: 21785483
DOI: No ID Found -
Molecular Pharmaceutics Jun 2019The opioids buprenorphine hydrochloride (BUP) and naltrexone hydrochloride (NTX) show promise as a combination treatment for addiction, but no means of delivering the...
The opioids buprenorphine hydrochloride (BUP) and naltrexone hydrochloride (NTX) show promise as a combination treatment for addiction, but no means of delivering the two compounds in one medicine currently exist. In this paper, we report sufficient input rates of both these drugs from one iontophoretic transdermal drug delivery system. Experiments were performed using dermatomed pig skin mounted in glass side-bi-side cells. BUP and NTX were iontophoretically delivered together from the anode using direct constant current from Ag/AgCl electrodes. The transdermal drug fluxes and the masses of drugs in both the stratum corneum and the underlying epidermis/dermis were measured. The apparent electroosmotic flow was quantified using a neutral marker (acetaminophen). The effects of donor composition (drug concentration/molar fraction and pH), current density and profile, and the choice of receptor solution were assessed. Iontophoresis dramatically increased the flux of both drugs compared to passive control values. Target fluxes (calculated from literature clearance values and required therapeutic plasma concentrations) were greatly exceeded for NTX and were met for BUP. The latter accumulated in the skin and suppressed electroosmotic flow, inhibiting both its own flux and that of NTX. NTX, in turn, negatively influenced the flux of BUP via co-ion competition. Lowering current density by increasing the delivery area resulted in increased electroosmotic flow but did not significantly affect current-normalized drug fluxes. Delivering the drugs from both electrodes and reversing the polarity for every 2 h did not increase the flux of either compound. In summary, during iontophoresis, BUP and NTX inhibited each other's flux by two distinct mechanisms. While the more complex behavior of BUP complicates the optimization of this drug combination, iontophoresis nevertheless appears to be a feasible approach for the controlled codelivery of NTX and BUP through the skin.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Buprenorphine; Drug Delivery Systems; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; Iontophoresis; Naltrexone
PubMed: 31070927
DOI: 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.9b00337