The influence of acutely administered nicotine on cue-induced craving for gambling in at-risk video lottery terminal gamblers who smoke

Pharmacological interventions for the treatment of disordered and problem gambling

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological interventions for disordered and problem gambling have been employed in clinical practice. Despite the availability of several reviews of the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling, few have employed systematic search strategies or compared different categories of pharmacological interventions. Systematic reviews of high-quality evidence are therefore essential to provide guidance regarding the efficacy of different pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aims of the review were to: (1) examine the efficacy of major categories of pharmacological-only interventions (antidepressants, opioid antagonists, mood stabilisers, atypical antipsychotics) for disordered or problem gambling, relative to placebo control conditions; and (2) examine the efficacy of these major categories relative to each other.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (all years to 11 January 2022).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials evaluating a pharmacological intervention for the treatment of disordered or problem gambling. Eligible control conditions included placebo control groups or comparisons with another category of pharmacological intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures, including systematic extraction of included study characteristics and results and risk of bias assessment. Our primary outcome was reduction in gambling symptom severity. Our secondary outcomes were reduction in gambling expenditure, gambling frequency, time spent gambling, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and functional impairment; and responder status. We evaluated treatment effects for continuous and dichotomous outcomes using standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratios (RR), respectively, employing random-effects meta-analyses. A minimum of two independent treatment effects were required for a meta-analysis to be conducted (with only meta-analytic findings reported in this abstract).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies in the review (n = 1193 randomised) that reported outcome data scheduled for end of treatment. Length of treatment ranged from 7 to 96 weeks.  Antidepressants: Six studies (n = 268) evaluated antidepressants, with very low to low certainty evidence suggesting that antidepressants were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.09, n = 225), gambling expenditure (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.06, n = 144), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.23, n = 90), functional impairment (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.22, n = 110), and responder status (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.66, n = 268). Opioid antagonists: Four studies (n = 562) evaluated opioid antagonists, with very low to low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.19, n = 259), but no difference between groups in responder status (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.86 to 3.14, n = 562). Mood stabilisers: Two studies (n = 71) evaluated mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence suggesting that mood stabilisers were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -2.24 to 0.39, n = 71), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -1.14 to 0.83, n = 71), and anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.64 to 0.30, n = 71). Atypical antipsychotics:Two studies (n = 63) evaluated the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine, with very low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.08, n = 63). Comparative effectiveness: Two studies (n = 62) compared antidepressants with opioid antagonists, with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than opioid antagonists on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) at post-treatment. Two studies (n = 58) compared antidepressants with mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than mood stabilisers on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.56, n = 58) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.70, n = 58) at post-treatment. Tolerability and adverse events: Several common adverse effects were reported by participants receiving antidepressants (e.g. headaches, nausea, diarrhoea/gastrointestinal issues) and opioid antagonists (e.g. nausea, dry mouth, constipation). There was little consistency in the types of adverse effects experienced by participants receiving mood stabilisers (e.g. tiredness, headaches, concentration difficulties) or atypical antipsychotics (e.g. pneumonia, sedation, increased hypomania). Discontinuation of treatment due to these adverse events was highest for opioid antagonists (10% to 32%), followed by antidepressants (4% to 31%), atypical antipsychotics (14%), and mood stabilisers (13%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides preliminary support for the use of opioid antagonists (naltrexone, nalmefene) and atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine) to produce short-term improvements in gambling symptom severity, although a lack of available evidence precludes a conclusion regarding the degree to which these pharmacological agents can improve other gambling or psychological functioning indices. In contrast, the findings are inconclusive with regard to the effects of mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants) in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, and there is limited evidence to support the efficacy of antidepressants. However, these conclusions are based on very low to low certainty evidence characterised by a small number of included studies, high risk of bias, modest pooled sample sizes, imprecise estimates, moderate between-study heterogeneity, and exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidities. Moreover, there were insufficient studies to conduct meta-analyses on many outcome measures; to compare efficacy across and within major categories of interventions; to explore dosage effects; or to examine effects beyond post-treatment. These limitations suggest that, despite recommendations related to the administration of opioid antagonists in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, pharmacological interventions should be administered with caution and with careful consideration of patient needs. A larger and more methodologically rigorous evidence base with longer-term evaluation periods is required before definitive conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness and durability of pharmacological treatments for disordered or problem gambling.

Noradrenergic contributions to cue-driven risk-taking and impulsivity

RATIONALE

The flashing lights and sounds of modern casinos are alluring and may contribute to the addictive nature of gambling. Such cues can have a profound impact on the noradrenaline (NA) system, which could therefore be a viable therapeutic target for gambling disorder (GD). While there is substantial evidence to support the involvement of NA in the impulsive symptoms of GD, its function in mediating the "pro-addictive" impact of cues is less understood.

OBJECTIVE

We wished to investigate the role of NA in our rodent assay of decision making and impulsivity, the cued rat gambling task (crGT). Given that sex differences are prominent in addiction disorders, and increasingly reported in the monoaminergic regulation of behaviour, we also prioritised evaluating noradrenergic drugs in both sexes.

METHODS

Female and male rats were trained to stability on the crGT and then given intraperitoneal injections of the noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor atomoxetine, the α_2A receptor agonist guanfacine, the beta receptor antagonist propranolol, and the α₂ receptor antagonist yohimbine.

RESULTS

Atomoxetine dose-dependently improved decision-making score. Guanfacine selectively enhanced decision making in risk-preferring males and optimal performing females. Propranolol and yohimbine did not influence decision making. Atomoxetine and guanfacine reduced premature responses, while yohimbine bi-phasically affected this index of motor impulsivity.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the hypothesis that NA is an important neuromodulator of the cue-induced deficits in decision making observed in laboratory-based gambling paradigms, and suggest that NAergic drugs like atomoxetine and guanfacine may be useful in treating GD.

From sign-tracking to attentional bias: Implications for gambling and substance use disorders

Sign-tracking behavior in Pavlovian autoshaping is known to be a relevant index of the incentive salience attributed to reward-related cues. Evidence has accumulated to suggest that animals that exhibit a sign-tracker phenotype are especially vulnerable to addiction and relapse due to their proneness to attribute incentive salience to drug cues, and their relatively weak cognitive and attentional control over their behavior. Interestingly, sign-tracking is also influenced by reward uncertainty in a way that may promote gambling disorder. Research indicates that reward uncertainty sensitizes sign-tracking responses and favors the development of a sign-tracker phenotype, compatible with the conditioned attractiveness of lights and sounds in casinos for problem gamblers. The study of attentional biases in humans (an effect akin to sign-tracking in animals) leads to similar observations, notably that the propensity to develop attraction for conditioned stimuli (CSs) is predictive of addictive behavior. Here we review the literature on drug addiction and gambling disorder, highlighting the similarities between studies of sign-tracking and attentional biases.

Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior

Gambling disorder is an impairing condition confounded by psychiatric co-morbidity, particularly with substance use and anxiety disorders. Yet, our knowledge of the mechanisms that cause these disorders to coalesce remains limited. The Incentive Sensitization Theory suggests that sensitization of neural "wanting" pathways, which attribute incentive salience to rewards and their cues, is responsible for the excessive desire for drugs and cue-triggered craving. The resulting hyper-reactivity of the "wanting' system is believed to heavily influence compulsive drug use and relapse. Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse. Together, this evidence highlights a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization, whereby sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling behaviors enhance the sensitivity and dopaminergic response to any of those stimuli. Here, we review the literature on how cue attraction and reward uncertainty may underlie gambling pathology, and examine how this framework may advance our understanding of co-mordidity with substance-use disorders (e.g., alcohol, nicotine) and anxiety disorders. We argue that reward uncertainty, as seen in slot machines and games of chance, increases dopaminergic activity in the mesolimbic pathway and enhances the incentive value of reward cues. We propose that incentive sensitization by reward uncertainty may interact with and predispose individuals to drug abuse and stress, creating a mechanism through which co-mordidity of these disorders may emerge.

Cue-reactivity in behavioral addictions: A meta-analysis and methodological considerations

Background and aims Recent research has applied cue-reactivity paradigms to behavioral addictions. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to systematically analyze the effects of learning-based cue-reactivity in behavioral addictions. Methods The current meta-analysis includes 18 studies (29 data sets, 510 participants) that have used a cue-reactivity paradigm in persons with gambling (eight studies), gaming (nine studies), or buying (one study) disorders. We compared subjective, peripheral physiological, electroencephal, and neural responses toward addiction-relevant cues in patients versus control participants and toward addiction-relevant cues versus control cues in patients. Results Persons with behavioral addictions showed higher cue-reactivity toward addiction-relevant cues compared with control participants: subjective cue-reactivity (d = 0.84, p = .01) and peripheral physiological and electroencephal measures of cue-reactivity (d = 0.61, p < .01). Increased neural activation was found in the caudate nucleus, inferior frontal gyrus, median cingulate cortex, subgenual cingulate, and precentral gyrus. Persons with gambling, gaming, or buying disorders also showed higher cue-reactivity toward addiction-relevant cues compared with control cues: subjective cue-reactivity (d = 0.39, p = .11) and peripheral physiological and electroencephal measures of cue-reactivity (d = 0.47, p = .05). Increased neural activation was found in the caudate nucleus, inferior frontal gyrus, angular gyrus, inferior network, and precuneus. Discussion and conclusions Cue-reactivity not only exists in substance-use disorders but also in gambling, gaming, and buying disorders. Future research should differentiate between cue-reactivity in addictive behaviors and cue-reactivity in functional excessive behaviors such as passions, hobbies, or professions.

The use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for modulating craving and addictive behaviours: a critical literature review of efficacy, technical and methodological considerations

OBJECTIVES

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a potential therapeutic intervention for the treatment of addiction. This critical review aims to summarise the recent developments with respect to the efficacy of rTMS for all types of addiction and related disorders (including eating disorders), and concentrates on the associated methodological and technical issues.

METHODS

The bibliographic search consisted of a computerised screening of the Medline and ScienceDirect databases up to December 2013. Criteria for inclusion were the target problem was an addiction, a related disorder, or craving; the intervention was performed using rTMS; and the study was a clinical trial.

RESULTS

Of the potential 638 articles, 18 met the criteria for inclusion. Most of these (11 of the 18) supported the efficacy of rTMS, especially in the short term. In most cases, the main assessment criterion was the measurement of craving using a Visual Analogue Scale.

DISCUSSION

The results are discussed with respect to the study limitations and, in particular, the many methodological and technical discrepancies that were identified. Key recommendations are provided.

The impact of anticipated and unanticipated smoking opportunities on cigarette smoking and nicotine lozenge responses

BACKGROUND

Perceptions regarding the availability of smoking opportunities are known to affect cigarette craving; however, whether they impact actual smoking or how smokers respond to acute nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) administration is not known. This study examined the impact of pharmacological and expectancy components of NRT administration on craving and smoking in smokers anticipating or not anticipating an imminent smoking opportunity.

METHODS

In total, 154 smokers (84 male) completed an experimental session in which instructions regarding the nicotine content of a lozenge (4 mg vs. no nicotine) and regarding the availability of a future smoking opportunity were manipulated. Cigarette craving was assessed before and after manipulations and lozenge administration. All participants were then allotted 1h to self-administer as many cigarette puffs as they wished.

RESULTS

Unanticipated smoking opportunities reduced latency to self-administration (p<0.001), regardless of nicotine expectancy or pharmacology. When analyses included all participants, nicotine reduced intentions to smoke (p=0.016) and withdrawal-related craving (p=0.043) regardless of expectancy. Conversely, analyses using only "believers" of the nicotine content instructions revealed that nicotine expectancy reduced intentions to smoke (p=0.034) and withdrawal-related craving (p=0.047) regardless of actual nicotine administration. "Believers" also reported increased withdrawal-related craving when a smoking opportunity was perceived to be imminent (p=0.041). These effects were not significant when analyses included all participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that unexpected smoking opportunities may be more appealing than expected ones regardless of perceived or actual acute NRT use. They also highlight the importance of reporting balanced placebo findings using all participants as well as "believers" only.

Skewed by Cues? The Motivational Role of Audiovisual Stimuli in Modelling Substance Use and Gambling Disorders

The similarity between gambling disorder (GD) and drug addiction has recently been recognized at the diagnostic level. Understanding the core cognitive processes involved in these addiction disorders, and in turn their neurobiological mechanisms, remains a research priority due to the enormous benefits such knowledge would have in enabling effective treatment design. Animal models can be highly informative in this regard. Although numerous rodent behavioural paradigms that capture different facets of gambling-like behaviour have recently been developed, the motivational power of cues in biasing individuals towards risky choice has so far received little attention despite the central role played by drug-paired cues in successful laboratory models of chemical dependency. Here, we review some of the comparatively simple paradigms in which reward-paired cues are known to modulate behaviour in rodents, such as sign-tracking, Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer and conditioned reinforcement. Such processes are thought to play an important role in mediating responding for drug reward, and the need for future studies to address whether similar processes contribute to cue-driven risky choice is highlighted.

The impact of nicotine lozenges and stimulus expectancies on cigarette craving

Reduced craving associated with nicotine replacement therapy use is frequently attributed to the effects of nicotine pharmacology, however non-pharmacological factors may also play a role. This study examined the impact of nicotine pharmacology and non-pharmacological components of an acute nicotine lozenge (4 mg) on cigarette craving, mood and heart rate in 70 daily smokers (36 male). Smoking-related stimuli were used to assess cue-induced craving. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions in a balanced placebo design where half the participants were provided deceptive information regarding the nicotine content of a lozenge. Subjective ratings of craving and mood were collected and heart rate was assessed before and after neutral and smoking cues. Nicotine expectancy reduced withdrawal-related craving (p = 0.006) regardless of actual nicotine administration while combined nicotine expectancy and administration reduced intentions to smoke (p = 0.046) relative to each of the other conditions. Exposure to smoking-related stimuli increased cigarette craving (p ≤ 0.001) and negative affect (p ≤ 0.001) regardless of expectancy or pharmacology. Following the smoking cue, women reported a greater increase in withdrawal-related craving than men (p = 0.027). Findings suggest that both pharmacological and non-pharmacological components of nicotine lozenge administration contribute to its acute effects on craving, yet neither appears effective in preventing craving triggered by exposure to environmental smoking stimuli.