Dronabinol and lofexidine for cannabis use disorder: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Levin FR
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4729291 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Cannabis dependence is a substantial public health problem. Behavioral treatments have shown promise, but there are no effective medications for cannabis dependence. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dronabinol, a synthetic form of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, a naturally occurring pharmacologically active component of marijuana, in treating cannabis dependence. 156 cannabis-dependent adults were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week trial. After a 1-week placebo lead-in phase, participants were randomized to receive dronabinol 20mg twice a day or placebo. Doses were maintained until the end of week 8 and then tapered off over 2 weeks. All participants received weekly motivational enhancement and relapse prevention therapy. Marijuana use was assessed using the timeline follow back method. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in the proportion of participants who achieved 2 weeks of abstinence at the end of the maintenance phase (dronabinol: 17.7%; placebo: 15.6%). Although both groups showed a reduction in marijuana use over time, there were no differences between the groups. Treatment retention was significantly higher at the end of the maintenance phase on dronabinol (77%), compared to placebo (61%) (P=.02), and withdrawal symptoms were significantly lower on dronabinol than placebo (P=.02). This is the first trial using an agonist substitution strategy for treatment of cannabis dependence. Dronabinol showed promise, it was well-tolerated, and improved treatment retention and withdrawal symptoms. Future trials might test higher doses, combinations of dronabinol with other medications with complementary mechanisms, or with more potent behavioral interventions.
| S-EPMC3154755 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Alcohol use disorder is a major societal and individual burden that exacerbates health outcomes, decreases quality of life, and negatively affects U.S. healthcare spending. Although pharmacological treatments are available for alcohol use disorder, many of them are limited by small effect sizes and used infrequently. Citicoline is a widely available over-the-counter supplement with a favorable side effect profile. It acts through cholinergic pathways and phospholipid metabolism. The current report examines the effect of oral citicoline on alcohol use, craving, depressive symptoms, and cognitive outcomes in individuals with alcohol use disorder. METHODS:A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, pilot study of citicoline (titrated to 2,000 mg/d) in 62 adults (age 18 to 75) with alcohol use disorder was conducted. Alcohol use, such as number of drinking days, amount used, and number of heavy drinking days, was assessed using the Timeline Followback method and liver enzymes, while alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale. A neurocognitive battery (e.g., Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test) and depressive symptoms scale (e.g., Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report) scores were also collected. Data were analyzed using a random regression analysis. RESULTS:The primary outcome analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat sample and consisted of 55 participants (78.2% men and 21.8% women, mean age of 46.47 ± 9.15 years). In the assessment period, the drinking days, on average, represented 77% of the assessed days. Significant between-group differences were not observed on alcohol use, craving, and cognitive or depressive symptom measures. Citicoline was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS:This proof-of-concept study observed that citicoline was well tolerated, but was not associated with a reduction in alcohol use or other outcomes, as compared to placebo. The favorable effects reported with citicoline for cocaine use, cognitive disorders, and other conditions do not appear to extend to alcohol use disorder.
| S-EPMC6370505 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background A substantial and unmet clinical need exists for pharmacological treatment of cannabis use disorders. Cannabidiol could offer a novel treatment, but it is unclear which doses might be efficacious or safe. Therefore, we aimed to identify efficacious doses and eliminate inefficacious doses in a phase 2a trial using an adaptive Bayesian design.MethodsWe did a phase 2a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, adaptive Bayesian trial at the Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (University College London, London, UK). We used an adaptive Bayesian dose-finding design to identify efficacious or inefficacious doses at a-priori interim and final analysis stages. Participants meeting cannabis use disorder criteria from DSM-5 were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) in the first stage of the trial to 4-week treatment with three different doses of oral cannabidiol (200 mg, 400 mg, or 800 mg) or with matched placebo during a cessation attempt by use of a double-blinded block randomisation sequence. All participants received a brief psychological intervention of motivational interviewing. For the second stage of the trial, new participants were randomly assigned to placebo or doses deemed efficacious in the interim analysis. The primary objective was to identify the most efficacious dose of cannabidiol for reducing cannabis use. The primary endpoints were lower urinary 11-nor-9-carboxy-δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-COOH):creatinine ratio, increased days per week with abstinence from cannabis during treatment, or both, evidenced by posterior probabilities that cannabidiol is better than placebo exceeding 0·9. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02044809) and the EU Clinical Trials Register (2013-000361-36).FindingsBetween May 28, 2014, and Aug 12, 2015 (first stage), 48 participants were randomly assigned to placebo (n=12) and to cannabidiol 200 mg (n=12), 400 mg (n=12), and 800 mg (n=12). At interim analysis, cannabidiol 200 mg was eliminated from the trial as an inefficacious dose. Between May 24, 2016, and Jan 12, 2017 (second stage), randomisation continued and an additional 34 participants were allocated (1:1:1) to cannabidiol 400 mg (n=12), cannabidiol 800 mg (n=11), and placebo (n=11). At final analysis, cannabidiol 400 mg and 800 mg exceeded primary endpoint criteria (0·9) for both primary outcomes. For urinary THC-COOH:creatinine ratio, the probability of being the most efficacious dose compared with placebo given the observed data was 0·9995 for cannabidiol 400 mg and 0·9965 for cannabidiol 800 mg. For days with abstinence from cannabis, the probability of being the most efficacious dose compared with placebo given the observed data was 0·9966 for cannabidiol 400 mg and 0·9247 for cannabidiol 800 mg. Compared with placebo, cannabidiol 400 mg decreased THC-COOH:creatinine ratio by -94·21 ng/mL (95% interval estimate -161·83 to -35·56) and increased abstinence from cannabis by 0·48 days per week (0·15 to 0·82). Compared with placebo, cannabidiol 800 mg decreased THC-COOH:creatinine ratio by -72·02 ng/mL (-135·47 to -19·52) and increased abstinence from cannabis by 0·27 days per week (-0·09 to 0·64). Cannabidiol was well tolerated, with no severe adverse events recorded, and 77 (94%) of 82 participants completed treatment.InterpretationIn the first randomised clinical trial of cannabidiol for cannabis use disorder, cannabidiol 400 mg and 800 mg were safe and more efficacious than placebo at reducing cannabis use.FundingMedical Research Council.
| S-EPMC7116091 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite the availability of evidence-based treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), not all patients experience sufficient benefit or are able to tolerate them. Tolcapone is a catechol-O-methyl-transferase (COMT) enzyme inhibitor that augments cortical dopaminergic transmission. Conduct a proof of concept study to examine whether a COMT inhibitor would reduce OCD symptoms to a greater extent than placebo. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind crossover trial in adults with OCD (N = 20). Participants were assessed at baseline, after 2 weeks of tolcapone, and again after 2 weeks of placebo on measures of OCD symptom severity and psychosocial functioning. There was a 1-week washout period between the 2-week treatment phases. Two weeks of tolcapone was associated with significant improvement in OCD versus two weeks of placebo (t = 2.194, P = 0.0409). The mean percentage decreases in the total Yale-Brown obsessive-compulsive scale (YBOCS) scores for the entire sample over the corresponding 2-week period were 16.4% for tolcapone and 3.6% for placebo. These data indicate that brain penetrant COMT inhibitors merit further investigation as a candidate new treatment for OCD.
| S-EPMC7611531 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a prevalent and impairing condition, and established psychosocial treatments convey limited efficacy. In light of recent findings supporting the efficacy of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) for CUD in adolescents, the objective of this trial was to evaluate its efficacy in adults. METHODS:In a 12-week double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial, treatment-seeking adults ages 18-50 with CUD (N=302), enrolled across six National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network-affiliated clinical sites, were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a 12-week course of NAC 1200mg (n=153) or placebo (n=149) twice daily. All participants received contingency management (CM) and medical management. The primary efficacy measure was the odds of negative urine cannabinoid tests during treatment, compared between NAC and placebo participants. RESULTS:There was not statistically significant evidence that the NAC and placebo groups differed in cannabis abstinence (odds ratio=1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.63-1.59, p=0.984). Overall, 22.3% of urine cannabinoid tests in the NAC group were negative, compared with 22.4% in the placebo group. Many participants were medication non-adherent; exploratory analysis within medication-adherent subgroups revealed no significant differential abstinence outcomes by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS:In contrast with prior findings in adolescents, there is no evidence that NAC 1200mg twice daily plus CM is differentially efficacious for CUD in adults when compared to placebo plus CM. This discrepant finding between adolescents and adults with CUD may have been influenced by differences in development, cannabis use profiles, responses to embedded behavioral treatment, medication adherence, and other factors.
| S-EPMC5535813 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The potential synergistic effects of combining cannabinoids and opioids for analgesia has received considerable attention. No studies to date have evaluated this combination in patients with chronic pain. The present study aimed to evaluate the combined analgesic and drug effects of oral opioid (hydromorphone) and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (dronabinol), as well as their effects on physical and cognitive functioning, and human abuse potential (HAP) outcomes among individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This was a within-subject, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Participants (N = 37; 65% women; mean age = 62) diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis of ≥3/10 average pain intensity were included. Participants received (1) placebo-placebo, (2) hydromorphone (4 mg)-placebo; (3) dronabinol (10 mg)-placebo, and (4) hydromorphone (4 mg)-dronabinol (10 mg). Clinical and experimentally-induced pain, physical and cognitive function, subjective drug effects, HAP, adverse events, and pharmacokinetics were evaluated. No significant analgesic effects were observed for clinical pain severity or physical functioning across all drug conditions. Little enhancement of hydromorphone analgesia by dronabinol was observed on evoked pain indices. While subjective drug effects and some HAP ratings were increased in the combined drug condition, these were not significantly increased over the dronabinol alone condition. No serious adverse events were reported; hydromorphone produced more mild adverse events than placebo, but hydromorphone + dronabinol produced more moderate adverse events than both placebo and hydromorphone alone. Only hydromorphone impaired cognitive performance. Consistent with laboratory studies on healthy adults, the present study shows minimal benefit of combining dronabinol (10 mg) and hydromorphone (4 mg) for analgesia and improving physical functioning in adults with KOA.
| S-EPMC10516978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To optimize the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical research, it is first necessary to review the current use of these outcomes in clinical trials to determine under what circumstances they are most useful, and to reveal current limitations.To investigate current patterns of use of PROs in clinical trials.We conducted a systematic literature review of all double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials using one or more PROs as a study outcome from 2004 to 2006. Data were abstracted and analyzed with descriptive statistics and logistic regression to characterize the use of PROs in clinical trials.The 180 clinical trials that met the study inclusion criteria used 173 unique instruments to measure a total of 466 PROs. Most PRO measurements were obtained using relatively few PRO instruments, with one-third of PRO instruments applied in more than 1 trial. In multivariable analysis, tests of statistical significance were more often reported for PROs used as primary trial outcomes. Statistically significant PRO outcomes (P<0.05) were more likely among disease-specific PROs compared with general PROs, PROs with a discussion of minimally important difference, and larger trials.PRO instruments may be improved through efforts to provide centralized electronic administration, cross-validation, and standardized interpretation of clinically relevant outcomes. The majority of PROs used in current clinical trials come from relatively few, commonly used disease-specific PRO instruments within major therapeutic areas.
| S-EPMC3682647 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the efficacy, safety, and clinical benefit of a once-daily formulation of trazodone (Trazodone Contramid((c)) OAD) in the treatment of major depressive disorder. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS:In this double-blind study, 412 patients with major depressive disorder (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria) were randomized 1:1 to receive either Trazodone Contramid OAD (150 to 375mg) or placebo. Treatment was titrated over two weeks to each individual optimal dose. Patients then continued six weeks of treatment; further dose adjustments were allowed based on efficacy and tolerability. MEASUREMENTS:The primary end point was change in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total score from baseline to last study visit. Secondary end points included Hamilton Depression Rating Scale responders/remitters, change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Clinician and Patient Global Improvement Scales, and quality of sleep. RESULTS:From the end of titration to the end of the six-week treatment period, the mean maximum daily dose of the intent-to-treat population was 310mg for the active group and 355mg for the placebo group. There was a statistically significant difference between trazodone and placebo on the mean HAMD-17 score (-11.4 vs. -9.3, P=0.012). A significant difference was present as early as Week 1 and was maintained at all subsequent study visits. Many secondary end points supported these findings, including improvements in quality of sleep. The most frequent adverse events were the same for both the treatment and placebo groups: headache and somnolence. There were no serious adverse events that were considered related to treatment. There were no clinically significant electrocardiogram or laboratory abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS:The trazodone Contramid formulation was more effective than placebo in major depressive disorder and was well tolerated.
| S-EPMC2719441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSelective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are commonly used to treat pediatric anxiety disorders, including generalized anxiety disorder (GAD); however, their efficacy and tolerability are difficult to predict. This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram in adolescents with GAD (DSM-IV-TR) and the impact of variants in HTR2A and serotonin transporter (SLC6A4) genes and cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) phenotypes on response as well as CYP2C19 phenotype on escitalopram pharmacokinetics from February 2015 through November 2018.MethodsPatients were treated with escitalopram (forced titration to 15 mg/d, then flexible titration to 20 mg/d) (n = 26, mean ± SD age: 14.8 ± 1.7 years) or placebo (n = 25, mean ± SD age: 14.9 ± 1.6 years) for 8 weeks. Outcomes were the change in scores on the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scales as well as vital signs and adverse events. Plasma escitalopram and desmethylcitalopram area under the curve during 24 hours (AUC0-24) and maximum concentration (Cmax) were determined and compared across CYP2C19 phenotypes.ResultsEscitalopram was superior to placebo for mean ± SD baseline-to-endpoint change in PARS (-8.65 ± 1.3 vs -3.52 ± 1.1, P = .005) and CGI scores, and increasing CYP2C19 metabolism was associated with decreases in escitalopram Cmax (P = .07) and AUC0-24 (P < .05). Vital signs, corrected QT interval, and adverse events were similar in patients who received escitalopram and placebo.ConclusionsEscitalopram reduces anxiety symptoms, and pharmacogenetics variables influence the trajectory and magnitude of improvement. Variation in CYP2C19 metabolism accounts for significant differences in escitalopram pharmacokinetics, raising the possibility that CYP2C19 phenotype should be considered when prescribing escitalopram.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02818751.
| S-EPMC7504974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES: Gastroesophageal reflux is considered to cause sleep disturbance, whereas proton pump inhibitor (PPI) administration is reported to improve insomnia associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The majority of patients with gastroesophageal reflux are asymptomatic and a significant number with erosive esophagitis are also reported to be asymptomatic. We examined whether PPI administration has a therapeutic effect for improving insomnia in patients without reflux symptoms in the same manner as patients with reflux symptoms. METHODS: We performed a randomized multicenter double-blind placebo-controlled trial using 176 patients with insomnia regardless of the presence of reflux symptoms. The patients were divided into those administered omeprazole (20 mg) or a placebo for 14 days. Four self-reporting questionnaires, QOLRAD-J (Japanese translation of Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia), Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and a sleep diary, were used for evaluating GERD-related quality of life (QOL) and sleep disturbance. RESULTS: We evaluated 171 patients with insomnia, of whom 69 had typical reflux symptoms. Omeprazole statistically significantly improved GERD-related QOL from 30.8±0.7 to 33.0±0.5 (P<0.01) (QOLRAD-J, total) and from 6.0±0.2 to 6.6±0.1 (P<0.01) (QOLRAD-J, sleep-related) when administrated to patients with reflux symptoms. Omeprazole also improved insomnia significantly better than the placebo in patients with reflux symptoms; PSQI, from 9.3±0.5 to 7.9±0.5 (P<0.01) and sleep diary, from 2.1±0.1 to 1.8±0.1 (P<0.01). On the other hand, the therapeutic effects of omeprazole and the placebo were not different in patients without reflux symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that PPI administration is effective only for insomnia in patients with reflux symptoms.
| S-EPMC4077042 | biostudies-other