Ondansetron reduces naturalistic drinking in nontreatment-seeking alcohol-dependent individuals with the LL 5'-HTTLPR genotype: a laboratory study

Association between 5-HTRs gene polymorphism and alcohol use disorder in Han males from Yunnan, China

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) has become a very serious medical and social problem. It is found that genetic polymorphisms of the 5-hydroxytryptamine receptors (5-HTRs) genes were associated with the risk of AUD. However, the results are controversial among different ethnic groups. At present, the correlation between 5-HTRs gene polymorphism and AUD in Han population from Yunnan Province remains unclear. In this study, 13 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of HTR1B, HTR2A, HTR3A, HTR3B and HTR7 were detected by universal fluorescent probe technique. The CT genotype frequency of HTR3A rs1062613 was significantly higher in AUD case group than that in control group (P = 0.037, OR = 2.193, 95% CI: 1.048-4.366). The study indicated that the genetic polymorphisms of 5-HTRs were significantly associated with risk of AUD in Han male from Yunnan, China. In addition, this study further demonstrated the impact of alcohol on human health, especially liver damage, by analyzing the blood biochemical indicators of patients with AUD and combining them with their medical history.

Efficacy and safety of alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy according to treatment duration in patients with alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Relapse is common in alcohol dependence (AD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD), so alcohol reduction therapy should be measured over as long a period as possible; however, existing reviews do not consider the duration of treatment and therefore alcohol reduction therapy may not have been appropriately evaluated. This review evaluated the efficacy and safety of alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy in patients with AD or AUD according to the duration of treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed 15 pharmacological agents. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for eligible trials through to May 2021. Outcomes were heavy drinking days (HDD), total alcohol consumption (TAC), any adverse event and days without drinking.

RESULTS

Fifty-five RCTs (n = 8891) were included. Nalmefene was superior to placebo for reducing HDD (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37, -0.18) and TAC (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.35, -0.16) in the long-term, but not in the short-term. Topiramate was superior to placebo for reducing HDD (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.59, -0.12) and days without drinking (SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.11, 0.82), and baclofen was superior for reducing TAC (SMD -0.70, 95% CI -1.29, -0.11), in the short-term. The frequency of adverse events was higher with nalmefene and topiramate than with placebo.

CONCLUSION

Nalmefene, topiramate and baclofen may be effective as alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy; however, only nalmefene has demonstrated long-term efficacy, and nalmefene and topiramate have a significantly higher frequency of adverse events compared with placebo.

A critical scientific evaluation of a purportedly negative data report - response to Seneviratne et al. 2022

A core principle in the pursuit of scientific knowledge is that science is self-correcting and that important results should be replicable. Hypotheses need to be reinforced, adjusted, or rejected when novel results are obtained. Replication of results confirms hypotheses and enhances their integration into scientific practice. In contrast, publication of substantiated and replicated negative findings (i.e., non-significant or opposite findings) can be the basis to reject erroneous hypotheses or develop alternative strategies for investigation. Replication is a problem in all research fields. The Psychology Reproductivity Project reported that only 36% of 'highly influential' published research in highly ranked journals were reproduced. Similar to positive data, negative data can be flawed. Errors in a negative data set can be based on methodology, statistics, conceptual defects, and flawed peer review. The peer review process has received progressive scrutiny. A large-scale review of the peer review process of manuscripts submitted to the British Medical Journal group indicated that the process could be characterized as inconsistent, inaccurate, and biased. Further analysis indicated that the peer process is easily manipulated, indicative of a failed system, is a major factor behind the lack of replication in science (acceptance of flawed manuscripts), suppresses opposing scientific evidence and views, and causes gaps in and lack of growth of science. Complicating the integrity of scientific publication is the role of Editors/Researchers. Ethical guidelines exist for major publishing houses about editorial ethics, behavior, and practice.

Off-label and investigational drugs in the treatment of alcohol use disorder: A critical review

Compounds known to be successful in the treatment of alcohol use disorder include the aversive agent, Disulfiram, the glutamatergic NMDA receptor antagonist, Acamprosate, and the opioid receptor antagonists, Naltrexone and Nalmefene. Although all four are effective in maintaining abstinence or reduction of alcohol consumption, only a small percentage of patients receive pharmacological treatment. In addition, many other medications have been investigated for their therapeutic potential in the treatment of alcohol use disorder. In this review we summarize and compare Baclofen, Gabapentin, Topiramate, Ondansetron, Varenicline, Aripiprazole, Quetiapine, Clozapine, Antidepressants, Lithium, Neuropeptide Y, Neuropeptide S, Corticotropin-releasing factor antagonists, Oxytocin, PF-05190457, Memantine, Ifenprodil, Samidorphan, Ondelopran, ABT-436, SSR149415, Mifepristone, Ibudilast, Citicoline, Rimonabant, Surinabant, AM4113 and Gamma-hydroxybutyrate While some have shown promising results in the treatment of alcohol use disorder, others have disappointed and should be excluded from further investigation. Here we discuss the most promising results and highlight medications that deserve further preclinical or clinical study. Effective, patient-tailored treatment will require greater understanding provided by many more preclinical and clinical studies.

Validation of serotonin transporter mRNA as a quantitative biomarker of heavy drinking and its comparison to ethyl glucuronide/ethyl sulfate: A randomized, double-blind, crossover trial

BACKGROUND

The serotonin transporter (SERT) mRNA was previously reported to be a quantitative and pathophysiology-based biomarker of heavy drinking in 5HTTLPR:LL genotype-carriers treated with ondansetron. Here, we validated the potential use of SERT mRNA for quantitative prediction of recent alcohol consumption (in the absence of treatment) and compared it with the known biomarkers ethyl glucuronide (EtG) and ethyl sulfate (EtS).

METHODS

Binge drinking men and women of European ancestry aged 21 to 65 years were enrolled in a 12-day, in-patient, randomized, double-blind, crossover study, where they were administered three beverage doses (placebo, 0.5 g/kg [0.4 g/kg] ethanol, and 1 g/kg [0.9 g/kg] ethanol for men [women]) individually in three 4-day periods (experiments), separated by minimum 7-day washout period. Diet, sleep, and physical activity were controlled throughout the inpatient experiments. Twenty-nine participants were randomized to receive beverage doses counterbalancing the sequence of treatment and gender within subgroups stratified by SERT genotypes 5HTTLPR:LL+rs25531:AA (LA LA ) versus 5HTTLPR:LS/SS. Peripheral venous blood was collected daily for (1) quantification of SERT mRNA (the primary outcome measure) using qRT-PCR and (2) plasma EtG and EtS levels using tandem mass-spectrometry.

RESULTS

The association between administered beverage dose and SERT mRNA from completers of at least one 4-day experiment (N = 18) assessed by a linear mixed model was not statistically significant. Significant positive associations were found with beverage dose and plasma EtG, EtS and EtG/EtS ratio (β = 5.8, SE = 1.2, p < 0.0001; β = 1.3, SE = 0.6, p = 0.023; and β = 3.0, SE = 0.7, p < 0.0001, respectively; the C-statistics for discriminating outcomes were 0.97, 0.8, and 0.92, respectively). Additionally, we observed a sequence effect with a greater placebo effect on SERT mRNA when it was administered during the first experiment (p = 0.0009), but not on EtG/EtS measures.

CONCLUSION

The findings do not validate the use of SERT as a biomarker of heavy drinking. Larger and more innovative studies addressing the effects of placebo, race, gender, and response to treatment with serotonergic agents are needed to fully assess the utility of SERT as a biomarker of heavy and binge drinking.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pharmacogenetic study of ondansetron for treating alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

In a previous study, ondansetron, a serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, reduced drinking intensity (drinks/drinking day [DPDD]) among European-ancestry (EA) participants with moderate-to-severe alcohol use disorder (AUD) and variants in genes encoding the serotonin transporter (SLC6A4) and 5-HT3A (HTR3A), and 5-HT3B (HTR3B) receptors. We tested whether (1) ondansetron reduces DPDD among individuals of either European or African ancestry (AA), and (2) that reductions in DPDD are greatest among ondansetron-treated individuals with population-specific combinations of genotypes at SLC6A4, HTR3A, and HTR3B.

METHODS

In this 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial, adults with AUD were randomized to receive low-dose oral ondansetron (0.33 mg twice daily) or placebo stratified by "responsive" versus "nonresponsive" genotype defined using population-specific genotypes at the three genetic loci. Generalized estimating equation regression models and a modified intent-to-treat analysis were used to compare the treatment groups on the primary outcome-DPDD-and two secondary outcomes-heavy drinking days per week [HDD] and drinks per day [DPD] across the 16 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Of 296 prospective participants screened, 95 (58 EA and 37 AA) were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication. In the modified intent-to-treat analysis, the ondansetron group averaged 0.40 more DPDD (p = 0.51), 1.35 times as many HDD (p = 0.16), and 1.06 times as many DPD (p = 0.59) as the placebo group. There were no significant interactions with genotype. There were no study-related serious adverse events (AEs) and similar proportions of participants in the two treatment groups experienced AEs across organ systems.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that low-dose oral ondansetron is beneficial in the treatment of AUD, irrespective of genotype, thus failing to confirm prior study findings. However, the study was underpowered to identify medication by genotype interactions.

A pharmacogenomic investigation of the cardiac safety profile of ondansetron in children and pregnant women

BACKGROUND

Ondansetron is a highly effective antiemetic for the treatment of nausea and vomiting. However, this medication has also been associated with QT prolongation. Pharmacogenomic information on therapeutic response to ondansetron exists, but no investigation has been performed on genetic factors that influence the cardiac safety of this medication.

METHODS

Three patient groups receiving ondansetron were recruited and followed prospectively (pediatric post-surgical patients n = 101; pediatric oncology patients n = 98; pregnant women n = 62). Electrocardiograms were conducted at baseline, and 5- and 30-min post-ondansetron administration, to determine the effect of ondansetron treatment on QT interval. Pharmacogenomic associations were assessed via analyses of comprehensive CYP2D6 genotyping and genome-wide association study data.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, 62 patients (24.1%) met the criteria for prolonged QT, with 1.2% of the cohort exhibiting unsafe QT prolongation. The most significant shift from baseline occurred at five minutes post-ondansetron administration (P = 9.8 × 10^-4). CYP2D6 activity score was not associated with prolonged QT. Genome-wide analyses identified novel associations with a missense variant in TLR3 (rs3775291; P = 2.00 × 10^-7) and a variant linked to the expression of SLC36A1 (rs34124313; P = 1.97 × 10^-7).

CONCLUSIONS

This study has provided insight into the genomic basis of ondansetron-induced cardiac changes and has emphasized the importance of genes that have been implicated in serotonin-related traits. These biologically-relevant findings represent the first step towards understanding this adverse event with the overall goal to improve the safety of this commonly used antiemetic medication.

An inpatient human laboratory study assessing the safety and tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and biobehavioral effect of GET 73 when co-administered with alcohol in individuals with alcohol use disorder

RATIONALE

Previous work suggests that GET 73, a novel compound with putative activity on the metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 (mGluR5), may represent a novel pharmacological treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD).

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we investigated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and biobehavioral effects of GET 73, when co-administered with alcohol, in individuals with alcohol dependence (AD).

METHODS

This was an inpatient, cross-over, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, human laboratory study with non-treatment-seeking, alcohol-dependent individuals. The study used a within-subject design, with two counterbalanced stages, during which participants received GET 73 and then placebo, or vice versa. During each stage, participants underwent an alcohol interaction session and, on a separate day, an alcohol cue reactivity, followed by an alcohol self-administration session.

RESULTS

Safety outcomes of GET 73 were excellent with no serious adverse events, nor adverse events of severe grade. The co-administration of alcohol and GET 73 did not affect the pharmacokinetics of GET 73 or alcohol. GET 73, compared to placebo, did not affect the alcohol-related stimulation effects, but increased the subjective sedative effects of alcohol. GET 73 did not affect alcohol cue-induced craving, or alcohol self-administration in the laboratory.

CONCLUSIONS

The study confirms the safety and tolerability of GET 73 when co-administered with alcohol. Although, under this experimental condition, we did not detect an effect on alcohol craving and consumption in the laboratory, additional studies should be conducted administering GET 73 for an extended period in an outpatient setting.

Alcohol-related changes in behaviors and characteristics from the baseline to the randomization session for treatment and non-treatment seeking participants with alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Participants who are enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may be more motivated to change their behaviors after being enrolled in a study and that motivation may vary by treatment status.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this secondary analysis were to investigate if changes in alcohol-related behaviors/characteristics from the baseline to the randomization session differed overall and to assess those differences between non-treatment and treatment seeking individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD).

METHODS

Our sample included participants from eight RCTs conducted at Brown University (N = 281, 34% female). To assess differences across alcohol-related behaviors/characteristics, we investigated changes in craving (obsessive compulsive drinking scale) and alcohol drinking (percent abstinent days, drinks per week (DPW) and percent heavy drinking days (HDD)) overall and between treatment status.

RESULTS

Results showed that there were baseline differences, such as increased AUD severity and craving for alcohol in treatment seeking participants (p's < .05) in the overall sample. Next, we showed that craving, DPW and HDD decreased and percent abstinent days increased from baseline to randomization (p's < .05). When controlling for treatment status and sociodemographic characteristics, treatment seeking, compared to non-treatment seeking participants, had a greater reduction in alcohol craving (p < .001) and a greater increase in percentage of drinking days (p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrated that alcohol-related behaviors and characteristics changed after enrollment. Severity, craving and drinking behaviors also differed between treatment-seeking status, which can potentially impact medication development stages for AUD such as clinical trial eligibility, enrollment and study outcomes.

[Pharmacotherapy of alcohol withdrawal: update and new developments]

Bislang sind nur wenige Medikamente zur pharmakologischen Rückfallprophylaxe der Alkoholabhängigkeit zugelassen. Neben dem in Deutschland nicht mehr vertriebenen Disulfiram sind es die Opioidantagonisten Naltrexon und Nalmefen sowie das vermutlich über glutamaterge Neurone wirkende Acamprosat. Baclofen und γ‑Hydroxybutyrat (GHB) sind in einzelnen Ländern zugelassen. Wirkstoffe wie z. B. Vareniclin, Gabapentin und Topiramat können für die Rückfallprophylaxe der Alkoholabhängigkeit von Interesse sein, jedoch ist bislang keine Zulassung erfolgt. Vor dem Hintergrund der zur Revision anstehenden S3-Leitlinie zur Diagnose und Behandlung alkoholbezogener Störungen wird der heutige Kenntnisstand zur Pharmakotherapie der Alkoholabhängigkeit dargestellt.

Changes in Circulating Metabolome Precede Alcohol-Related Diseases in Middle-Aged Men: A Prospective Population-Based Study With a 30-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Heavy alcohol use has been associated with altered circulating metabolome. We investigated whether changes in the circulating metabolome precede incident diagnoses of alcohol-related diseases.

METHODS

This is a prospective population-based cohort study where the participants were 42- to 60-year-old males at baseline (years 1984 to 1989). Subjects who received a diagnosis for an alcohol-related disease during the follow-up were defined as cases (n = 92, mean follow-up of 13.6 years before diagnosis). Diagnoses were obtained through linkage with national health registries. We used 2 control groups: controls who self-reported similar levels of alcohol use as compared to cases at baseline (alcohol-controls, n = 92), and controls who self-reported only light drinking at baseline (control-controls, n = 90). A nontargeted metabolomics analysis of baseline serum samples was performed.

RESULTS

There were significant differences between the study groups in the baseline serum levels of 64 metabolites: in amino acids (e.g., glutamine [FDR-corrected q-value = 0.0012]), glycerophospholipids (e.g., lysophosphatidylcholine 16:1 [q = 0.0008]), steroids (e.g., cortisone [q = 0.00001]), and fatty acids (e.g., palmitoleic acid [q = 0.0031]). The main finding was that after controlling for baseline levels of self-reported alcohol use and the biomarker of alcohol use, gamma-glutamyl transferase, and when compared to both alcohol-control and control-control group, the alcohol-case group had lower serum levels of asparagine (Cohen's d = -0.48 [95% CI -0.78 to -0.19] and d = -0.49 [-0.78 to -0.19], respectively) and serotonin (d = -0.45 [-0.74 to -0.15], and d = -0.46 [-0.75 to -0.16], respectively), with no difference between the two control groups (asparagine d = 0.00 [-0.29 to 0.29] and serotonin d = -0.01 [-0.30 to 0.29]).

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in the circulating metabolome, especially lower serum levels of asparagine and serotonin, are associated with later diagnoses of alcohol-related diseases, even after adjustment for the baseline level of alcohol use.

Differences in Sociodemographic and Alcohol-Related Clinical Characteristics Between Treatment Seekers and Nontreatment Seekers and Their Role in Predicting Outcomes in the COMBINE Study for Alcohol Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

One of the challenges in early-stage clinical research aimed at developing novel treatments for alcohol use disorder (AUD) is that the enrolled participants are heavy drinkers, but do not seek treatment for AUD.

AIMS

To compare nontreatment seekers with alcohol dependence (AD) from 4 human laboratory studies conducted at Brown University (N = 240; 65.4% male) to treatment seekers with AD from the multisite COMBINE study (N = 1,383; 69.1% male) across sociodemographic and alcohol-related clinical variables and to evaluate whether the variables that significantly differentiate the 2 samples predict the 3 main COMBINE clinical outcomes: time to relapse, percent days abstinent (PDA), and good clinical outcome.

METHODS

Sample characteristics were assessed by parametric and nonparametric testing. Three regression models measured the association between the differing variables and the 3 main COMBINE clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

The nontreatment seekers, compared to the treatment seekers, were more ethnically diverse, less educated, single, and working part-time or unemployed (p's < 0.05); they met fewer DSM-IV AD criteria and had significantly lower scores on alcohol-related scales (p's < 0.05); they were less likely to have a father with alcohol problems (p < 0.0001) and had a significantly earlier age of onset and longer duration of AD (p's < 0.05); they also had significantly more total drinks, drinks per drinking day, heavy drinking days (HDD), and lower PDA in the 30 days prior to baseline (p's < 0.0001 to <0.05). Having more HDD in the 30 days prior to baseline predicted all of the 3 COMBINE clinical outcomes. All the other characteristics mentioned above that differed significantly between the 2 groups predicted at least 1 of the 3 COMBINE clinical outcomes, except for level of education, age of onset, and duration of AD.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed differences between groups should be considered in efforts across participant recruitment at different stages of the development of new treatments for AUD.

Pharmacotherapies and personalized medicine for alcohol use disorder: a review

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is highly prevalent and among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Pharmacotherapies for AUD are limited, thus making identification of patient subgroups that are most likely to respond favorably crucial. In this article, pharmacogenetic research on US FDA-approved and commonly prescribed off-label medications for the treatment of AUD is comprehensively reviewed. While the field has advanced in understanding pharmacotherapies for AUD and potential genetic moderators of treatment responses, the pharmacogenetic data to guide the prescribing clinician are limited and should be interpreted with caution. Precision medicine for AUD with more beneficial treatment responses and minimal side effects remains a high priority for further research.

Advances in the science and treatment of alcohol use disorder

Alcohol is a major contributor to global disease and a leading cause of preventable death, causing approximately 88,000 deaths annually in the United States alone. Alcohol use disorder is one of the most common psychiatric disorders, with nearly one-third of U.S. adults experiencing alcohol use disorder at some point during their lives. Alcohol use disorder also has economic consequences, costing the United States at least $249 billion annually. Current pharmaceutical and behavioral treatments may assist patients in reducing alcohol use or facilitating alcohol abstinence. Although recent research has expanded understanding of alcohol use disorder, more research is needed to identify the neurobiological, genetic and epigenetic, psychological, social, and environmental factors most critical in the etiology and treatment of this disease. Implementation of this knowledge in clinical practice and training of health care providers is also needed to ensure appropriate diagnosis and treatment of individuals suffering from alcohol use disorder.

Pharmacogenetics of alcohol use disorder treatments: an update

Introduction: Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is highly prevalent; costly economically, socially, and interpersonally; and grossly undertreated. The low rate of utilization of medications with demonstrated (albeit modest) efficacy is particularly noteworthy. One approach to increasing the utility and safety of available medications is to use a precision medicine approach, which seeks to identify patients for whom specific medications are likely to be most efficacious and have the fewest adverse effects. Areas Covered: We review the literature on the pharmacogenetics of AUD treatment using both approved and off-label medications. We cover both laboratory studies and clinical trials, highlighting valuable mechanistic insights and underscoring the potential value of precision-based care for AUD. Expert Opinion: Pharmacotherapy can be a useful component of AUD treatment. Currently, the evidence regarding genetic predictors of medication efficacy is very limited. Thus, a precision medicine approach is not yet ready for widespread clinical implementation. Further research is needed to identify candidate genetic variants that moderate the response to both established and novel medications. The growing availability of large-scale, longitudinal datasets that enable the synthesis of genetic and electronic health record data provides important opportunities to develop this area of research.

Medication Development for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Focus on Clinical Studies

Compared to other medical disorders, including other brain diseases, the number of medications approved for alcohol use disorder (AUD) is very small. Disulfiram, naltrexone (oral and long-acting), and acamprosate are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat patients with AUD. These medications are also approved in other countries, including in Europe, where the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also approved nalmefene for AUD. Furthermore, baclofen was recently approved for AUD in France. These approved medications have small effect sizes, which are probably the consequence of the fact that they only work for some patients, yet a personalized approach to match the right medication with the right patient is still in its infancy. Therefore, research is needed to expand the armamentarium of medications that clinicians can use to treat their patients, as well as to better develop personalized approaches. This book chapter reviews other medications, beyond those approved by the FDA, that have shown efficacy in clinical trials, as well as medications which are still in the early stages of evaluation in human studies.

Comparing and Combining Topiramate and Aripiprazole on Alcohol-Related Outcomes in a Human Laboratory Study

Aims

The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of topiramate up to 200 mg/day and of aripiprazole up to 15 mg/day, alone and combined, in reducing alcohol-related outcomes in a human laboratory study.

Method

This was a 5 week, between-subject, double-blind, placebo-controlled human laboratory study with topiramate [0 mg/day (placebo), 100 mg/day, 200 mg/day] and aripiprazole [0 mg/day (placebo), 7.5 mg/day, 15 mg/day] in 90 non-treatment seeking, heavy drinking, alcohol-dependent individuals. Main outcomes were the efficacy of 200 mg/day topiramate and 15 mg/day aripiprazole, alone and combined, in reducing drinks consumed during an alcohol self-administration procedure (human laboratory phase) and while receiving the study medications prior to the laboratory session (naturalistic drinking phase). Other outcomes in the laboratory phase included alcohol craving, and alcohol biphasic effects.

Results

In the human laboratory phase, topiramate 200 mg/day reduced alcohol craving [**P < 0.01] and amplified alcohol-induced stimulation [*P < 0.05], but did not reduce the number of drinks consumed. Topiramate 200 mg/day was also effective in reducing drinking days [*P < 0.05], and alcohol craving [*P < 0.05], in the naturalistic drinking phase. No significant findings were found for aripiprazole for any of the outcomes analyzed.

Conclusion

Participants receiving 200 mg/day topiramate reported reduced alcohol drinking and craving, and increased alcohol-related stimulation. These findings provide further support for the role of topiramate as a pharmacological treatment for AUD.

ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier

NCT00884884.

Short Summary

This study tested topiramate and aripiprazole alone and in combination. The results replicate past findings and suggest that topiramate may be an effective treatment for alcohol use disorder. The present results suggest that the combination of topiramate and aripiprazole do not warrant further evaluation.

Advances in Pharmacotherapy Development: Human Clinical Studies

For more than 25 years, researchers have made advances in developing medications to treat alcohol use disorder (AUD), highlighted by the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) approval of disulfiram, naltrexone (oral and long-acting), and acamprosate. These medications are also approved in Europe, where the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recently added a fourth medication, nalmefene, for AUD. Despite these advances, today's medications have a small effect size, showing efficacy for only a limited number of individuals with AUD. However, a host of new medications, which act on variety of pharmacologic targets, are in the pipeline and have been evaluated in numerous human studies. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of medications currently being tested in human trials and looks at ongoing efforts to identify candidate compounds in human studies. As mentioned in the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism's Strategic Plan 2017-2021 ( https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/sites/default/files/StrategicPlan_NIAAA_optimized_2017-2020.pdf ), medications development remains a high priority. By developing more effective and safe medications, and identifying those patients who will benefit the most from these treatments, we can provide clinicians with the tools they need to treat this devastating disorder, providing relief for patients and their families and markedly improving public health and safety.

Medications for substance use disorders (SUD): emerging approaches

INTRODUCTION

Substance use disorders are a group of chronic relapsing disorders of the brain, which have massive public health and societal impact. In some disorders (e.g., heroin/prescription opioid addictions) approved medications have a major long-term benefit. For other substances (e.g., cocaine, amphetamines and cannabis) there are no approved medications, and for alcohol there are approved treatments, which are not in wide usage. Approved treatments for tobacco use disorders are available, and novel medications are also under study. Areas covered: Medication-based approaches which are in advanced preclinical stages, or which have reached proof-of concept clinical laboratory studies, as well as clinical trials. Expert opinion: Current challenges involve optimizing translation between preclinical and clinical development, and between clinical laboratory studies to therapeutic clinical trials. Comorbidities including depression or anxiety are challenges for study design and analysis. Improved pharmacogenomics, biomarker and phenotyping approaches are areas of interest. Pharmacological mechanisms currently under investigation include modulation of glutamatergic, GABA, vasopressin and κ-receptor function, as well as inhibition of monoamine re-uptake. Other factors that affect potential market size for emerging medications include stigma, availability of treatment settings, adoption by clinicians, and the prevalence of persons with SUD who are not actively treatment-seeking.

Guidelines for biological treatment of substance use and related disorders, part 1: Alcoholism, first revision

These practice guidelines for the biological treatment of alcohol use disorders are an update of the first edition, published in 2008, which was developed by an international Task Force of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP). For this 2016 revision, we performed a systematic review (MEDLINE/PUBMED database, Cochrane Library) of all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of alcoholism and extracted data from national guidelines. The Task Force evaluated the identified literature with respect to the strength of evidence for the efficacy of each medication and subsequently categorised it into six levels of evidence (A-F) and five levels of recommendation (1-5). Thus, the current guidelines provide a clinically and scientifically relevant, evidence-based update of our earlier recommendations. These guidelines are intended for use by clinicians and practitioners who evaluate and treat people with alcohol use disorders and are primarily concerned with the biological treatment of adults with such disorders.

Treatment of alcohol use disorders in patients with alcoholic liver disease

Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) is one of the leading causes of disease and disability in almost all European countries. Among the alcohol-related diseases, alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is the most common. At present, alcohol is the most frequent cause of liver cirrhosis in the Western world. The cornerstone of treatment for ALD is achieving total alcohol abstinence and preventing relapse; medical and surgical treatments for ALD are limited when drinking continues. This narrative review summarizes current treatments for AUDs with a particular emphasis to the treatment of AUDs in patients with ALD. Medical management, psychosocial and pharmacological interventions are analyzed, underlying limits and options in AUD patients. Finally, this review discusses the most appropriate setting for the management of AUD patients with advanced liver disease as well as the indications for liver transplantation in AUD patients.

Variation in the Serotonin Transporter Gene and Alcoholism: Risk and Response to Pharmacotherapy

SLC6A4, the gene encoding the serotonin transporter protein (5-HTT), has been extensively examined as a risk factor for alcohol dependence (AD). More recently, variability in the transporter gene was identified to be a potential moderator of treatment response to serotonergic medications such as ondansetron and sertraline. There is an insertion-deletion polymorphism in the promoter region (5-HTTLPR) of the SLC6A4, with the most common alleles being a 14-repeat short (S) allele and a 16-repeat long (L) allele. The S allele has often been associated with AD. By contrast, the L allele has been associated with pharmacological responsiveness in some individuals with AD. Differences in clinical phenotype may determine the utility of the 5-HTTLPR polymorphism as a moderator of pharmacological interventions for AD. We review the AD typology and disease onset in the context of pharmacogenetic and genomic studies that examine the utility of 5-HTTLPR in improving treatment outcomes.

Advances in Medications and Tailoring Treatment for Alcohol Use Disorder

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a chronic heritable brain disorder with a variable clinical presentation. This variability, or heterogeneity, in clinical presentation suggests complex interactions between environmental and biological factors, resulting in several underlying pathophysiological mechanisms in the development and progression of AUD. Classifying AUD into subgroups of common clinical or pathological characteristics would ease the complexity of teasing apart underlying molecular mechanisms. Genetic association analyses have revealed several polymorphisms-small differences in DNA-that increase a person's vulnerability to develop AUD and other alcohol-related intermediate characteristics, such as severity of drinking, age of AUD onset, or measures of craving. They also have identified polymorphisms associated with reduced drinking. Researchers have begun utilizing these genetic polymorphisms to identify alcoholics who might respond best to various treatments, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of currently tested medications for treating AUD. This review compares the efficacy of medications tested for treatment of AUD with and without incorporating genetics. It then discusses advances in pre-clinical genetic and genomic studies that potentially could be adapted to clinical trials to improve treatment efficacy. Although a pharmacogenetic approach is promising, it is relatively new and will need to overcome many challenges, including inadequate scientific knowledge and social and logistic constraints, to be utilized in clinical practice.

Ondansetron and sertraline may interact with 5-HTTLPR and DRD4 polymorphisms to reduce drinking in non-treatment seeking alcohol-dependent women: exploratory findings

The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine the interaction of 5-HTTLPR and DRD4 exon III polymorphisms with gender in non-treatment seeking alcohol-dependent (AD) individuals while alternately taking ondansetron and sertraline. Evidence suggests that alcohol dependence may be influenced by a genetic interaction that may be gender-specific with temporal changes making pharmacological treatment with serotonergic drugs complex. The main trial was a within-subject double-blind placebo-controlled human laboratory study with 77 non-treatment-seeking AD individuals randomized (55 completed, 49 complete data) to receive 200 mg/day of sertraline or 0.5 mg/day of ondansetron for 3 weeks followed by an alcohol self-administration experiment (ASAE), then placebo for 3 weeks followed by a second ASAE, then receive the alternate drug, in a counterbalanced order, for 3 weeks followed by a third ASAE. Results for men were not significant. Women with the LL 5-HTTLPR genotype receiving ondansetron and SS/SL 5-HTTLPR genotype receiving sertraline (matched), drank significantly fewer drinks per drinking day (DDD) during the 7 days prior to the first and third ASAEs than women receiving the mismatched medication (i.e., sertraline to LL and ondansetron to SS/SL). In a 3-way interaction, 5-HTTLPR alleles by DRD4 alleles by medications, women with the LL genotype who received ondansetron and had DRD4≥7 exon III repeats drank significantly fewer DDD as did SS/SL women who received sertraline but conversely had DRD4<7 repeats in the 7-day period leading up to the first and third ASAEs. Consistent with these data was a significant reduction of milliliters consumed ad libitum during these same ASAEs. These exploratory findings add possible support to gender and genetic differences among AD individuals in response to serotonergic pharmacotherapies. Future trials should be powerful enough to take into account that endophenotypes and a targeting of serotonergic interactions may be essential to successfully treat alcohol dependence.