Dataset Information

Do treatment improvements in PTSD severity affect substance use outcomes? A secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial in NIDA's Clinical Trials Network.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of the analysis was to examine the temporal course of improvement in symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorder among women in outpatient substance abuse treatment.Participants were 353 women randomly assigned to 12 sessions of either trauma-focused or health education group treatment. PTSD and substance use assessments were conducted during treatment and posttreatment at 1 week and after 3, 6, and 12 months. A continuous Markov model was fit on four defined response categories (nonresponse, substance use response, PTSD response, or global response [improvement in both PTSD and substance use]) to investigate the temporal association between improvement in PTSD and substance use symptom severity during the study's treatment phase. A generalized linear model was applied to test this relationship over the follow-up period.Subjects exhibiting nonresponse, substance use response, or global response tended to maintain original classification; subjects exhibiting PTSD response were significantly more likely to transition to global response over time, indicating maintained PTSD improvement was associated with subsequent substance use improvement. Trauma-focused treatment was significantly more effective than health education in achieving substance use improvement, but only among those who were heavy substance users at baseline and had achieved significant PTSD reductions.PTSD severity reductions were more likely to be associated with substance use improvement, with minimal evidence of substance use symptom reduction improving PTSD symptoms. Results support the self-medication model of coping with PTSD symptoms and an empirical basis for integrated interventions for improved substance use outcomes in patients with severe symptoms.

SUBMITTER: Hien DA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2806486 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do treatment improvements in PTSD severity affect substance use outcomes? A secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial in NIDA's Clinical Trials Network.

Hien Denise A DA Jiang Huiping H Campbell Aimee N C AN Hu Mei-Chen MC Miele Gloria M GM Cohen Lisa R LR Brigham Gregory S GS Capstick Carrie C Kulaga Agatha A Robinson James J Suarez-Morales Lourdes L Nunes Edward V EV

The American journal of psychiatry 20091116 1

<h4>Objective</h4>The purpose of the analysis was to examine the temporal course of improvement in symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorder among women in outpatient substance abuse treatment.<h4>Method</h4>Participants were 353 women randomly assigned to 12 sessions of either trauma-focused or health education group treatment. PTSD and substance use assessments were conducted during treatment and posttreatment at 1 week and after 3, 6, and 12 months. A continu ...[more]

PMID: 19917596

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe US Food and Drug Administration recognizes total abstinence and no heavy drinking days as outcomes for pivotal pharmacotherapy trials for alcohol use disorder (AUD). Many patients have difficulty achieving these outcomes, which can discourage seeking treatment and has slowed the development of medications that affect alcohol use.ObjectiveTo compare 2 drinking-reduction outcomes with total abstinence and no heavy drinking outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsData were obtained from 3 multisite, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of medications for treating alcohol dependence (naltrexone, varenicline, and topiramate) in adults with DSM-IV-categorized alcohol dependence.Main outcomes and measuresWithin each trial, the percentage of participants in active and placebo conditions who met responder definitions of abstinence, no heavy drinking days, a WHO 1-level reduction, and a WHO 2-level reduction was computed by month with corresponding effect sizes (Cohen h).ResultsAcross the 3 trials (N = 1169; mean [SD] age, 45 [10] years; 824 [70.5%] men), the percentage of participants classified as responders during the last 4 weeks of treatment was lowest for abstinence (naltrexone, 34.7% [100 of 288]; varenicline, 7.3% [7 of 96]; topiramate, 11.7% [21 of 179]) followed by no heavy drinking days (naltrexone, 51.0% [147 of 288]; varenicline, 24.0% [23 of 96]; topiramate, 20.7% [37 of 179]), WHO 2-level reduction (naltrexone, 75.0% [216 of 288]; varenicline, 55.2% [53 of 96]; topiramate, 44.7% [80 of 179]), and WHO 1-level reduction (naltrexone, 83.3% [240 of 288]; varenicline, 69.8 [67 of 96]; topiramate, 54.7% [98 of 179]) outcomes. Standardized treatment effects observed for the WHO 2-level reduction outcomes (naltrexone, Cohen h = 0.214 [95% CI, 0.053 -0.375]; varenicline, 0.273 [95% CI, -0.006 to 0.553]; topiramate, 0.230 [95% CI, 0.024-0.435]) and WHO 1-level reduction (naltrexone, Cohen h = 0.116 [95% CI, -0.046 to 0.277]; varenicline, 0.338 [95% CI, 0.058-0.617]; topiramate, 0.014 [95% CI, -0.192 to 0.219]) were comparable with those obtained using abstinence (naltrexone, Cohen h = 0.142 [95% CI, -0.020 to 0.303]; varenicline, 0.146 [95% CI, -0.133 to 0.426]; topiramate, 0.369 [95% CI, 0.163-0.574]) and no heavy drinking days (naltrexone, Cohen h = 0.140 [95% CI, -0.021 to 0.302]; varenicline, 0.232 [95% CI, -0.048 to 0.511]; topiramate, 0.207 [95% CI, 0.002-0.413]).Conclusions and relevanceWHO drinking risk level reductions appear to be worthwhile indicators of treatment outcome in AUD pharmacotherapy trials. These outcomes may align with drinking reduction goals of many patients and capture clinically meaningful improvements experienced by more patients than either abstinence or no heavy drinking days.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00006206; NCT01146613; NCT00210925.

Project description:ImportancePrevious studies have reported an association between hypoglycemia and cardiovascular (CV) events in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), but it is unclear if this association is causal or identifies a high-risk patient phenotype.ObjectiveTo evaluate the associations between hypoglycemia and CV outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis secondary analysis was a post hoc assessment of the multinational, double-blind CARMELINA (Cardiovascular and Renal Microvascular Outcome Study With Linagliptin; 2013-2016) and CAROLINA (Cardiovascular Outcome Trial of Linagliptin vs Glimepiride in Type 2 Diabetes; 2010-2018) randomized clinical trials of the antihyperglycemic drug, linagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor. Participants were adults with T2D at high CV risk with or without high kidney risk. By design, participants in the CARMELINA trial had longer duration of T2D and had a higher CV risk than participants in the CAROLINA trial. Data analyses were conducted between June 2021 and June 2023.InterventionLinagliptin or placebo in the CARMELINA trial, and linagliptin or glimepiride in the CAROLINA trial.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome for both trials was CV death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke (3-point major adverse CV events [3P-MACE]). For the present analyses, hospitalization for heart failure (HF) was added. Hypoglycemia was defined as plasma glucose less than 54 mg/dL or severe hypoglycemia (episodes requiring the assistance of another person). Associations between the first hypoglycemic episode and subsequent CV events and between nonfatal CV events (MI, stroke, hospitalization for HF) and subsequent hypoglycemic episodes were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. Sensitivity analyses explored the risk of CV events within 60 days after each hypoglycemic episode.ResultsIn the CARMELINA trial (6979 patients; 4390 males [62.9%]; mean [SD] age, 65.9 [9.1] years), there was an association between hypoglycemia and subsequent 3P-MACE plus hospitalization for HF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04-1.46) as well as between nonfatal CV events and subsequent hypoglycemia (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.06-1.83). In the CAROLINA trial (6033 patients; 3619 males (60.0%); mean [SD] age, 64.0 [9.5] years), there was no association between hypoglycemia and subsequent 3P-MACE plus hospitalization for HF (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.76-1.32) and between nonfatal CV events and subsequent hypoglycemia (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.96-2.16). In analyses of CV events occurring within 60 days after hypoglycemia, there was either no association or too few events to analyze.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found bidirectional associations between hypoglycemia and CV outcomes in the CARMELINA trial but no associations in either direction in the CAROLINA trial, challenging the notion that hypoglycemia causes adverse CV events. The findings from the CARMELINA trial suggest that both hypoglycemia and CV events more likely identify patients at high risk for both.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01897532 (CARMELINA) and NCT01243424 (CAROLINA).

Project description:Traditionally in acute stroke clinical trials, the primary clinical outcome employed is a dichotomized modified Rankin Scale (mRS). New statistical methods, such as responder analysis, are being used in stroke studies to address the concern that baseline prognostic variables, such as stroke severity, impact the likelihood of a successful outcome. Responder analysis allows the definition of success to vary according to baseline prognostic variables, producing a more clinically relevant insight into the actual effect of investigational treatments. It is unclear whether or not statistical analyses should adjust for prognostic variables when responder analysis is used, as the outcome already takes these prognostic variables into account. This research aims to investigate the effect of covariate adjustment in the responder analysis framework in order to determine the appropriate analytic method.Using a current stroke clinical trial and its pilot studies to guide simulation parameters, 1,000 clinical trials were simulated at varying sample sizes under several treatment effects to assess power and type I error. Covariate-adjusted and unadjusted logistic regressions were used to estimate the treatment effect under each scenario. In the case of covariate-adjusted logistic regression, the trichotomized National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was used in adjustment.Under various treatment effect settings, the operating characteristics of the unadjusted and adjusted analyses do not substantially differ. Power and type I error are preserved for both the unadjusted and adjusted analyses.Our results suggest that, under the given treatment effect scenarios, the decision whether or not to adjust for baseline severity when using a responder analysis outcome should be guided by the needs of the study, as type I error rates and power do not appear to vary largely between the methods. These findings are applicable to stroke trials which use the mRS for the primary outcome, but also provide a broader insight into the analysis of binary outcomes that are defined based on baseline prognostic variables.This research is part of the Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) trial, Identification Number NCT01369069.

Dataset Information

Do treatment improvements in PTSD severity affect substance use outcomes? A secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial in NIDA's Clinical Trials Network.

Publications

Do treatment improvements in PTSD severity affect substance use outcomes? A secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial in NIDA's Clinical Trials Network.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets