Long-term safety and efficacy of nalmefene in Japanese patients with alcohol dependence

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.

Emerging drugs in phase II and III clinical development for the treatment of alcohol use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) poses an ongoing significant global health burden. AUD is highly prevalent and affects not only the individuals with AUD, but also their communities and society at large. Even though pharmacotherapy is an integral part of AUD treatment, the few available substances show limited efficacy and limited clinical impact. Thus, there is a need for new innovative pharmacotherapeutic approaches.

AREAS COVERED

This paper provides a comprehensive review of drugs approved for the treatment of AUD as well as those currently in phase II and III development. Data from recent clinical trials has been reviewed and supplemented by additional literature based on a systematic search of the PubMed database and clinical trials registries. Compounds discussed include disulfiram, naltrexone, nalmefene, acamprosat, baclofen, sodium oxybate, doxazosin, varenicline, zonisamide, gabapentin, apremilast, ibudilast, ivermectin, tolcapone, mifepristone, suvorexant, ketamine, psilocybin, semaglutide, oxytocin and cannabidiol.

EXPERT OPINION

Even though the majority of the discussed compounds lack sufficient evidence to support their efficacy, multiple promising new treatment options are currently under investigation. Future research has to consider specific phenotypes and subgroups of AUD as well as a possible enhancement of the effects of psychotherapy through combination with pharmacotherapy. Practitioners should be encouraged to use available compounds to support existing therapeutic regimens.

Nalmefene combined noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in Chinese patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease coupled with type II respiratory failure: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nalmefene is an opioid system modulator with antagonist activity at the μ and δ receptors and partial agonist activity at the κ receptor. Previous studies have suggested that nalmefene could improve respiratory function in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, there is no comprehensive systematic review published regarding the clinical efficacy of nalmefene.

METHODS

We explored the following electronic bibliographic databases: EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, Wanfang, and Chinese national knowledge infrastructure. To collect data from randomized controlled trials on the therapy of COPD coupled with type II respiratory failure and nalmefene + noninvasive ventilator treatment. The retrieved articles were screened to determine the final inclusion criteria and to extract relevant data, such as the clinical efficacy rate, pulmonary function, blood gas analysis, and adverse reactions. In our study, we used relative risk and weighted mean deviation, as well as a 95% confidence interval for describing nalmefene effectiveness and safety while treating COPD with type II respiratory failure.

RESULTS

The outcomes of the meta-analysis demonstrated that the clinical efficacy rate of the nalmefene + noninvasive ventilation group was higher than that of the naloxone + noninvasive ventilation and noninvasive ventilation groups. Moreover, the improvement indices of pH value, partial pressure and saturation of blood oxygen, partial pressure of carbon dioxide, and pulmonary function of the nalmefene + noninvasive ventilation group were better than those of the noninvasive ventilation group, and there was no increase in the occurrence of adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSION

Nalmefene combined with noninvasive ventilation can significantly improve the blood gas index and lung function in patients with COPD combined with type II respiratory failure.