Topiramate Combined with Cognitive Restructuring for the Treatment of Gambling Disorder: A Two-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Comparing efficacy of serotonergic, opioidergic, and glutamatergic drugs in gambling disorder: A pooled analysis of response trajectories versus placebo

Various pharmacological treatments have been explored to alleviate the symptoms and clinical manifestations of gambling disorder (GD) by targeting different neurotransmitter systems. This study retrospectively analyzed subjects with GD treated with serotonergic drugs, opioid antagonist drugs, and glutamatergic drugs compared to placebo, through a pooled analysis of clinical trials conducted at the University of Chicago. The Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale (G-SAS) was employed as the outcome measure. Temporal uniformity was ensured by managing timepoints as follows: baseline, early (4-5 weeks), intermediate (6-8 weeks), and final (10-16 weeks) from the start of treatment. A total of 253 treatment-seeking subjects were included, receiving either glutamatergic drugs (N-acetylcysteine, memantine), opioidergic drugs (naltrexone), serotonergic drugs (paroxetine, escitalopram), or placebo. Within-group analysis demonstrated significant improvement in GD symptoms across all treatment groups. When comparing interventions over time, glutamatergic drugs proved more effective than placebo from the early observation timepoint and onwards. Opioidergic drugs were more effective than placebo at the final observation timepoint, while serotonergic drugs showed no significant effect compared to placebo. Our findings reveal distinct efficacy patterns among the pharmacological classes, likely due to their different mechanisms of action and the various aspects of GD phenomenology they address. The significant placebo effect observed aligns with previous studies, underscoring the complexity of treating GD. In conclusion, given the heterogeneous nature of GD, these results emphasize the necessity of identifying and precisely characterizing GD subtypes to facilitate more tailored treatment approaches.

Pharmacotherapy and gambling disorder: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Gambling disorder (GD) is a psychiatric disorder classified in the DSM-5 as a non-substance-related and addictive disorder with extensive health and socioeconomic impacts. Its chronic and high-relapsing nature makes it essential to find treatment strategies that improve functioning and reduce impairment associated with it. The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate and summarize the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapy in GD.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted to identify systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and reviews on pharmacological interventions in patients with gambling disorder. A similar search of these databases and of Prospero, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Epistemonikos was conducted to identify clinical trials that were published since 2019.

RESULTS

The initial search identified 1925 articles. After screening and duplicate removal, 18 articles were included in the review (11 studies were systematic reviews and meta-analyses, 6 were reviews, and 1 was an open-label trial). Eight pharmacological agents (naltrexone, nalmefene, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, citalopram, escitalopram, lithium, and topiramate) that were studied in randomized controlled trials and open-label trials showed small to moderate effect sizes in reducing GD symptoms in some studies during post-hoc analyses.

CONCLUSION

The overall sum of evidence in the literature on the use of pharmacotherapy in GD is conflicting and inconclusive. Some studies have shown that pharmacotherapy's role in GD is promising, especially when the choice of the agent is guided by comorbid psychiatric disorders. However, significant limitations exist in the study designs, which need to be addressed in future research on the topic. Conducting future and more rigorous trials that address the limitations in the existing literature is necessary to establish more accurate efficacy data on the use of pharmacotherapy in this population.

Pharmacological management of gambling disorder: an update of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Gambling disorder (GD) is a mental health condition characterized by persistent and problematic betting behavior. GD generates distress and impairment, and treatment options include psychological and pharmacological interventions.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review explores existing pharmacological treatments for GD. The following classes of medications were considered: opioid-receptor antagonists (e.g. naltrexone and nalmefene), serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g. fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, escitalopram, and citalopram), glutamatergic agents (e.g. N-acetylcysteine (NAC), acamprosate, and memantine), mood stabilizers (e.g. topiramate, carbamazepine, lithium), and other medications (e.g. modafinil, nefazodone, olanzapine, haloperidol, tolcapone, and bupropion).

EXPERT OPINION

Due to the limitations of the studies reviewed, solid conclusions regarding the optimal choice of pharmacotherapy for individuals with GD are challenging to draw at this time. Despite some medications, such as naltrexone and nalmefene, showing promising results, efficacy has varied across studies. The review highlights current gaps/limitations, including small sample sizes, limited diversity in participant demographics, the need for exploring different gambling subtypes and treatment responses, high placebo response rates, lack of longer-term longitudinal information, limited investigation of neurobiological correlates and co-occurring disorders, and the importance of implementation research. Further research is needed to address these gaps and explore additional medications, as well as interventions like neuromodulation.

The pharmacological management of gambling disorder: if, when, and how

INTRODUCTION

Gambling disorder (GD) consists of a persistent, recurrent pattern of gambling that is associated with substantial distress or impairment. The etiology is multifactorial. GD frequently co-occurs with other psychiatric disorders and is often untreated. Different psychosocial interventions, particularly cognitive-behavioral therapy, are useful in the treatment of GD. Pharmacological therapy may also be helpful . No formal guidelines exist, and the management of the disease is often guided by few clinical elements.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases about treatment options for GD, considering both psychosocial treatments and available pharmacological ones.

EXPERT OPINION

The authors address whether and when it is appropriate to initiate pharmacological treatment for GD. They focus on providing clinicians with guidance on how to approach patients with GD in those situations where pharmacological therapy may be necessary. The reasons for the clinician to start thinking about a medication are examined. As specific traits in the psychopathology of GD may be managed with a strategic choice of the pharmacologic agent, the different available options are analyzed on the basis of their potential usefulness in GD. Issues that remain open about the pharmacological management of GD are summarized.

Efficacy and safety of topiramate for reducing impulsivity: A transdiagnostic systematic review and meta-analysis of a common clinical use

Impulsivity is an important transdiagnostic feature of many psychiatric disorders, as well as a marker of poorer outcome. Topiramate is broadly used for reducing impulsivity in various neuropsychiatric disorders, but no systematic review or meta-analysis has ever explored whether evidence supports this clinical use. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature, using PubMed, PsycInfo and Cochrane databases. We included all studies assessing the efficacy of topiramate in adults with high levels of impulsivity, based on either psychometric or neuropsychological measures. Seven articles were included, involving 578 participants. Important heterogeneity in designs and quality features was observed. Topiramate lowered impulsivity levels in two of the studies that used the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS) (401 participants) and in one of the studies that used neuropsychological measures (63 participants). Four other studies found no effect of topiramate on impulsivity. A larger reduction in the BIS-11 overall score, with a mean difference of 2.57 (95% confidence interval -4.12 to -1.02), was found in the topiramate group than the placebo group using a random effects model. However, one study accounted for the major part (85.5%) of it, and most included studies presented a high risk of bias. The use of a self-assessment scale induced an additional risk of self-report bias. No clear-cut evidence was found for a transdiagnostic effectiveness of topiramate in reducing impulsivity levels. However, encouraging results were found in some specific disorders.

Use of Topiramate in the Spectrum of Addictive and Eating Disorders: A Systematic Review Comparing Treatment Schemes, Efficacy, and Safety Features

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Topiramate has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of epilepsy since the 1990s, and it has also been used off-label in the treatment of many types of addictive disorders. To date, no systematic review has embraced the entire field of addiction, both substance use and behavioral addictions, including eating disorders, to compare topiramate-based protocols and the related level of evidence in each addictive disorder. Our objective is to fill this gap.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using the MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases without a date or language limit. All trials and meta-analyses assessing the efficacy of topiramate in alcohol use disorder; cocaine use disorder; methamphetamine, nicotine, cannabis, opiate, and benzodiazepine use disorders; binge eating disorder; bulimia; and pathological gambling were analyzed. The quality of the studies was rated using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials (ROB-2), the Risk of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies (ROBINS-I), or the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, depending on the study design. Safety features were assessed based on a wider non-systematic review.

RESULTS

Sixty-two articles were reviewed. Treatment protocols were relatively homogenous across addictive disorders, with slow dose titration schemes and a maximum dose range of 200-400 mg per day. The most supportive evidence for topiramate efficacy was found in alcohol use disorder for drinking reduction parameters only. To a lesser extent, topiramate could be a promising therapeutic option for binge eating disorder and cocaine use disorder. Evidence was weak for other addictive disorders. No major tolerability issues were found, provided that basic safety rules were followed. Adverse drug reactions could lead to early treatment discontinuation.

DISCUSSION

Though off-label, addiction specialists should consider topiramate as a second-line option for drinking reduction in alcohol use disorder, as well as for binge eating disorder or cocaine use disorder.

Non-invasive brain stimulation targets and approaches to modulate gambling-related decisions: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Despite intense neuroscience research on the neurobiological underpinnings of Gambling Disorder (GD) and gambling-related decision-making, effective treatments targeting these dysfunctions are still lacking. Non Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) techniques, such as transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), selectively modulate activity of brain circuits and have the potential to reverse alterations sustaining GD symptoms. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to determine the impact of different NIBS interventions on gambling-related decision processes.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive and translational search in three online databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science), in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. We included studies applying neuromodulation (TMS, tDCS) techniques in GD patients or assessing gambling-related decision-making in healthy subjects. In addition, we explored the potential impact of NIBS in drug-induced GD (e.g., Parkinson's Disease).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies have been included. We summarized results to detect the impact of different targets and stimulation/inhibition protocols in terms of gambling-related decision-making. The majority of both tDCS and TMS studies targeted the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Although heterogeneous in protocols and parameters, results from tDCS and TMS studies converge in indicating that the stimulation (instead of inhibition) of prefrontal regions could be beneficial to contrast dysfunctional gambling-related decision processes.

CONCLUSION

NIBS interventions show promise to be further tested in controlled clinical settings for the treatment of behavioral addictions. Further studies are also necessary to investigate connectivity changes and laterality issues (unilateral versus bilateral; left versus right) of NIBS application in GD.

A 12-Week Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Topiramate for the Treatment of Compulsive Buying Disorder

BACKGROUND

Topiramate is an anticonvulsant that has shown promise as a pharmacological agent for the treatment of addictive disorders, including compulsive buying disorder (CBD). The aim of the present study was to examine the efficacy of topiramate in the treatment of CBD and its associated characteristics using a 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design.

METHODS

Fifty patients seeking treatment of CBD who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to either the experimental group (n = 25) or the control group (n = 25). Both groups received 4 sessions of psychoeducation.

RESULTS

Forty-four participants completed the follow-up with no differences in the rate of dropout between groups. There were no differences between participants who received topiramate or placebo in reducing CBD symptoms assessed by the primary outcome scale (Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale - Shopping Version). However, participants who received topiramate were significantly more likely to show clinical improvement when assessed by a secondary outcome measure, the Compulsive Buying Follow-Up Scale. In addition, there was a trend among participants who received topiramate to report improvements in aspects of hoarding and impulsivity compared with the control group. There were significant improvements in comorbid depression and social adjustments over time, but no group × time interaction was found.

CONCLUSIONS

The results do not provide support for the use of topiramate in the treatment of CBD. Future investigation with larger and representative samples and longer follow-up period are needed.

Impulsiveness as a moderator of amphetamine treatment response for cocaine use disorder among ADHD patients

BACKGROUND

Amphetamines are a first-line treatment for ADHD and have shown promise for the treatment of cocaine use disorder (CUD), both alone and with comorbid ADHD. Impulsiveness is a key aspect of both ADHD and substance use disorders. We sought to understand the role of baseline impulsiveness in the treatment of comorbid CUD and ADHD.

METHODS

In a post hoc analysis (N = 76) of a 14-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of mixed amphetamine salts-extended release (MAS-ER) for comorbid ADHD and CUD, we examined the relationship between treatment response and participants' baseline Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) score by comparing those with scores below versus above the median. In the original trial, participants received daily 60 mg MAS-ER, 80 mg MAS-ER, or placebo, in conjunction with cognitive behavioral therapy.

RESULTS

The odds of a cocaine-abstinent week over time were significantly greater in the high BIS group compared to the low BIS group, both when missing data was treated as missing (p = .0155; OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.35 versus OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.15) and when missing data was treated as cocaine-positive (p = .003; OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06, 1.24 versus OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.88, 1.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results show an association between higher within-group trait impulsiveness, as measured by the BIS-11, and response to MAS-ER for CUD in a cohort with comorbid ADHD. This result further demonstrates that impulsiveness is an important factor when considering treatment options for patients with CUD and that higher baseline impulsiveness may predict response to treatment with psychostimulants for CUD.

Gambling and substance use: Comorbidity and treatment implications

Gambling disorder is a common condition that was previously listed as an impulse control disorder, but is now considered a substance-related and addictive disorder. Gambling disorder has been associated with various untoward long-term outcomes including impaired quality of life, relationship break-ups, debt and mortgage foreclosure, and elevated risk of suicidality. This paper provides a concise primer on gambling disorder, with a special focus on its parallels with substance use disorders. We consider clinical presentations, comorbid expression, heritability, and treatment approaches (psychological and pharmacological). Lastly, we highlight new treatment directions suggested by the literature.

Current pharmacotherapy for gambling disorder: a systematic review

Introduction: Gambling disorder is classified as an addictive disorder and is associated with significant distress and impairment in personal, social, occupational or other important areas of functioning. Although no pharmacotherapy has a formal indication for gambling disorder, data suggest potential benefits of specific medications.Area covered: This systematic review evaluated findings from 19 randomized controlled trials testing pharmacotherapies for the treatment of gambling disorder.Expert opinion: Few randomized controlled trials have studied pharmacotherapies for gambling disorder. Though results are limited, opioid antagonists like naltrexone showed promise in the pharmacological treatment of gambling disorder. Pharmacotherapy combined with psychotherapy treatments for gambling disorder may provide better rates of patient retention in comparison to pharmacology-only treatments, though further research is needed in this area. Future studies should address gaps relating to considerations of racial, ethnic, gender and other individual differences in clinical studies. Because gambling disorder often co-occurs with other psychiatric disorders, additional research is needed to test treatments for dually diagnosed patients.

Gambling disorder

Gambling disorder is characterized by a persistent, recurrent pattern of gambling that is associated with substantial distress or impairment. The prevalence of gambling disorder has been estimated at 0.5% of the adult population in the United States, with comparable or slightly higher estimates in other countries. The aetiology of gambling disorder is complex, with implicated genetic and environmental factors. Neurobiological studies have implicated cortico-striato-limbic structures and circuits in the pathophysiology of this disorder. Individuals with gambling disorder often go unrecognized and untreated, including within clinical settings. Gambling disorder frequently co-occurs with other conditions, particularly other psychiatric disorders. Behavioural interventions, particularly cognitive-behavioural therapy but also motivational interviewing and Gamblers Anonymous, are supported in the treatment of gambling disorder. No pharmacological therapy has a formal indication for the treatment of gambling disorder, although placebo-controlled trials suggest that some medications, such as opioid-receptor antagonists, may be helpful. Given the associations with poor quality of life and suicide, improved identification, prevention, policy and treatment efforts are needed to help people with gambling disorder.

Professionally delivered interventions for gambling disorder

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess recent developments in professionally delivered interventions for gambling disorder.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the past 24 months a number of reviews and individual studies have been published. Collectively they assess the efficacy and effectiveness of a range of interventions and identify methodological and other shortcomings. These studies advance knowledge with respect to pharmacological and psychological treatments including brief interventions delivered face-to-face and in other ways. Increased attention has been given to patient diversity, comorbidity, relapse, and nongambling outcomes. A variety of novel interventions have been developed and assessed.

SUMMARY

CBT and brief interventions remain well supported and appear to be similarly effective across varied patient groups. A range of promising new and combination treatments have been developed that require further evaluation. Larger, more robust pragmatic trials are required with diverse populations. Increased attention needs to be given to mechanisms of change, therapy mediators, patient retention, comorbidities, long-term treatment outcome, and relapse prevention.

Pharmacological Treatments for Disordered Gambling: A Meta-analysis

Disordered gambling is a public health concern associated with detrimental consequences for affected individuals and social costs. Currently, opioid antagonists are considered the first-line treatments to reduce symptoms of uncontrolled gambling. Only recently, glutamatergic agents and combined pharmacological and psychological treatments have been examined appearing promising options for the management of gambling disorder. A multilevel literature search yielded 34 studies including open-label and placebo-controlled trials totaling 1340 participants to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the short- and long-term efficacies of pharmacological and combined treatments. Pharmacological treatments were associated with large and medium pre-post reductions in global severity, frequency, and financial loss (Hedges's g: 1.35, 1.22, 0.80, respectively). The controlled effect sizes for the outcome variables were significantly smaller (Hedges's g: 0.41, 0.11, 0.22), but robust for the reduction of global severity at short-term. In general, medication classes yielded comparable effect sizes independent of predictors of treatment outcome. Of the placebo controlled studies, results showed that opioid antagonists and mood stabilizers, particularly the glutamatergic agent topiramate combined with a cognitive intervention and lithium for gamblers with bipolar disorders demonstrated promising results. However, more rigorously designed, large-scale randomized controlled trials with extended placebo lead-in periods are necessary. Moreover, future studies need to monitor concurrent psychosocial treatments, the type of comorbidity, use equivalent measurement tools, include outcome variables according to the Banff, Alberta Consensus, and provide follow-up data in order to broaden the knowledge about the efficacy of pharmacological treatments for this disabling condition.

How to measure monetary losses in gambling disorder? An evidence-based refinement

Diverse monetary measures have been utilized across different studies in gambling disorder (GD). However, there are limited evidence-based proposals regarding the best way to assess financial losses. We investigated how different variables of monetary losses correlate with validated assessments of gambling severity and overall functioning in a large sample of subjects with GD (n = 436). We found that relative monetary variables (i.e. when financial losses were evaluated in relation to personal income) showed the most robust correlations with gambling severity and overall psychosocial functioning. Percentage of monthly income lost from gambling was the variable with the best performance.

Gambling disorder: an integrative review of animal and human studies

Gambling disorder (GD), previously called pathological gambling and classified as an impulse control disorder in DSM-III and DSM-IV, has recently been reclassified as an addictive disorder in the DSM-5. It is widely recognized as an important public health problem associated with substantial personal and social costs, high rates of psychiatric comorbidity, poor physical health, and elevated suicide rates. A number of risk factors have been identified, including some genetic polymorphisms. Animal models have been developed in order to study the underlying neural basis of GD. Here, we discuss recent advances in our understanding of the risk factors, disease course, and pathophysiology. A focus on a phenotype-based dissection of the disorder is included in which known neural correlates from animal and human studies are reviewed. Finally, current treatment approaches are discussed, as well as future directions for GD research.

Treatment modalities for patients with gambling disorder

BACKGROUND

Gambling disorder (GD) is defined as persistent and recurrent problematic gambling behavior leading to clinically significant impairment or distress. The prevalence of GD has been shown to be 1.2-7.1% in the general population. GD can severely impact on personal and vocational wellbeing as well as lead to financial problems, and has been known to be difficult to treat. This review describes the available pharmacotherapy/psychosocial treatments for GD patients, and summarizes data on the effectiveness of these GD treatments.

METHODS

This review refers to newly as well as previously published studies and guidelines.

RESULTS

The description of pharmacotherapy mainly focuses on opioid receptor antagonists, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and mood stabilizers. Psychosocial treatments/strategies mainly include cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational interviewing, and Gamblers Anonymous. We also introduce relatively novel treatment modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

This review can help clinicians to decide treatment plans for their GD patients. In addition, it can be used as a reference for designing future research.