Implementing Approach-Bias Modification as Add-On to Varieties of Clinical Treatment for Alcohol Use Disorders: Results of a Multicenter RCT

INTRODUCTION

Abstinence rates after inpatient treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD) are modest (1-year rate around 50%). One promising approach is to re-train the automatically activated action tendency to approach alcohol-related stimuli (alcohol-approach bias) in AUD patients, as add-on to regular treatment. As efficacy has been demonstrated in well-controlled randomized controlled trials, the important next step is to add alcohol-approach-bias modification (alcohol-ApBM) to varieties of existing treatments for AUD. Therefore, this prospective, multicenter implementation-RCT examined whether adding alcohol-ApBM to regular treatments (various abstinence-oriented treatments including both individual and group-based interventions) would significantly increase abstinence rates compared to receiving regular treatment only, in a variety of naturalistic settings with different therapeutic approaches.

METHODS

A total of 1,586 AUD inpatients from 9 German rehabilitation clinics were randomly assigned to receive either ApBM in addition to regular treatment or not. Training satisfaction of patients and therapists was measured after training. Success rates were determined at 3, 6, and 12 months post-treatment.

RESULTS

Return rates of the post-treatment assessments varied greatly between clinics, often being low (18-76%). Nevertheless, ApBM significantly increased success rates after 3 months. After 6 and 12 months, the differences were not significant. ApBM was evaluated mostly positively by patients and therapists.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

ApBM was an effective add-on to regular treatment of AUD at 3 months follow-up, across a variety of AUD treatment settings. However, low return rates for the clinical outcomes reduced the effect size of ApBM considerably. The application of ApBM proved feasible in varying clinical settings, offering the opportunity to modify automatic processes and to promote abstinence.

Does selective inhibition training reduce relapse rates when added to standard treatment of alcohol use disorder? A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Alcohol-dependent individuals tend to selectively approach alcohol cues in the environment, demonstrating an alcohol approach bias. Because approach bias modification (ApBM) training can reduce the approach bias and decrease relapse rates in alcohol-dependent patients when added to abstinence-focused treatment, it has become a part of regular treatment. Moreover, in selective inhibition (SI) training, responses to one category of stimuli (i.e., alcohol stimuli) are selectively inhibited in an adapted Go/No-Go task. SI-Training has been found to effectively devalue the inhibited category and to reduce consumption of alcohol among social drinkers. This study investigated whether SI-Training can further improve the effects of treatment as usual that includes ApBM, and if so, whether the effect is mediated by a devaluation of the inhibited alcohol stimuli.

METHODS

Abstinent alcohol-dependent inpatients (N=434) were randomly assigned to receive 6 sessions of either active (n = 214, 32% female) or sham (n = 220, 38% female) SI-Training, in addition to standard treatment that includes active ApBM. Ratings were used to assess changes in the evaluation of alcohol stimuli after the training. Relapse rates were assessed 3 and 12 months after treatment discharge.

RESULTS

Alcohol stimuli were rated negatively before and after the training, and the training did not influence these ratings. Evaluation of nonalcoholic drinks became more positive after active SI-Training. Both ApBM and SI-Training showed the expected training effects on reaction times. Contrary to expectations, SI-Training conditions did not yield different abstinence rates 3 or 12 months after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence supporting the hypothesis that SI-Training amplifies the relapse-preventing effect of ApBM. Moreover, alcohol stimuli were rated negatively before and after treatment and were not influenced by SI-Training.

Paediatric issues relating to the pharmacotherapy of allergic rhinitis

The prevalence of allergic rhinitis in children has risen significantly over the last two decades. Important comorbidities like asthma have grown in parallel due to a complex mix of environmental and genetic factors. These conditions have similar allergic inflammatory mechanisms, which raises the possibility of treating both conditions by targeting shared inflammatory mediators pharmacologically. The first line treatment for paediatric allergic rhinitis is a topical nasal corticosteroid or a non-sedating antihistamine. Available intranasal corticosteroids show superior symptom control to second-generation antihistamines. However, most topical steroids and non-sedating antihistamines have equivalent clinical efficacy within their respective classes, so the choice of agent depends on safety and tolerability. Ideally, topical nasal steroids should exhibit high local receptor binding affinity and low systemic bioavailability, allied with a lack of long-term growth suppression in children and adolescents. Regular use of topical steroids is advisable, but intermittent and prophylactic use is also effective. Second-generation antihistamines are effective and some have no adverse cardiac or sedative effects. Non-sedating antihistamine treatment can ameliorate rhinitis-induced decrements in learning. alpha-Adrenergic nasal decongestants provide short-term benefit, but topical agents can cause rebound symptoms. Prophylactic treatment with chromones is safe and effective, but multiple daily dosing is needed. Ipratroprium bromide nasal spray is useful as an intermittent therapy for mild disease or as add-on treatment, but its effect is limited to the control of rhinorrhoea. Children with allergic rhinitis should receive pharmacotherapy if allergen avoidance measures are ineffective, ideally with a topical intranasal steroid or a second-generation antihistamine.

Inhaled mometasone furoate reduces oral prednisone requirements while improving respiratory function and health-related quality of life in patients with severe persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroid therapy in severe persistent asthma has been shown to reduce or eliminate oral corticosteroid (OCS) use while retaining effective asthma control.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the ability of mometasone furoate (MF) delivered by means of dry powder inhaler to reduce daily oral prednisone requirements in OCS-dependent patients with severe persistent asthma.

METHODS

We performed a 12-week, double-blind, placebocontrolled trial (21 centers, 132 patients) comparing 2 doses of MF (400 and 800 microg administered twice daily) with placebo, followed by a 9-month open-label phase in which 128 patients received treatment with MF.

RESULTS

At the endpoint of the double-blind trial, MF 400 and 800 mg twice daily reduced daily OCS requirements by 46.0% and 23.9%, respectively, whereas placebo increased OCS requirements by 164.4% (P <.01). Oral steroids were eliminated in 40%, 37%, and 0% of patients in the MF 400 and 800 mg twice daily and placebo groups, respectively. Pulmonary function and quality of life significantly increased for MF-treated patients. Further reductions in OCS requirements were achieved with long-term MF treatment in the open-label phase.

CONCLUSION

MF inhaled orally as a dry powder is an effective alternative to systemic corticosteroids in patients with severe persistent asthma.

Once-daily mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler in the treatment of patients with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Although inhaled glucocorticoids are recommended for all stages of persistent asthma, compliance with long-term therapy is often poor, leading to significant morbidity and mortality. A simplified, once-daily dosing regimen may foster improved compliance.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily (AM) administration of mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler (MF DPI) 200 microg and 400 microg with placebo in patients with asthma previously maintained only on short-acting inhaled beta-adrenergic receptor agonists.

METHODS

This was a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study. The mean change from baseline to endpoint (last treatment visit) for FEV1 was the primary efficacy variable.

RESULTS

At endpoint, both doses of MF DPI were significantly more effective than placebo (P < or = .05) in improving FEV1. Based on morning peak expiratory flow rate, once-daily MF DPI 400 microg was more effective than placebo (P < or = .001) at endpoint. Both active treatments also demonstrated improvement at endpoint in asthma symptom scores, physician-evaluated response to therapy and use of rescue medication. Although both MF DPI dosages were efficacious, MF DPI 400 microg provided additional improvement in some measures of pulmonary function (eg, morning PEFR) when these agents were administered once daily in the morning. Both doses of MF DPI were well tolerated and treatment-related adverse events occurred at a similar incidence among the three treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that once-daily (AM) MF DPI provides a convenient and effective treatment option for patients with mild or moderate persistent asthma.

Absence of growth retardation in children with perennial allergic rhinitis after one year of treatment with mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray

OBJECTIVE

Intranasal corticosteroids are used widely for the treatment of allergic rhinitis because they are effective and well tolerated. However, their potential to suppress growth of pediatric subjects with allergic rhinitis continues to be a concern, particularly in light of reports of growth suppression after treatment with intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate or intranasal budesonide (see the article by Skoner et al in this month's issue). A 1-year study of prepubertal patients between 3 and 9 years of age with perennial allergic rhinitis was conducted to assess the effects on growth of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (MFNS), a new once-daily (QD) intranasal corticosteroid with negligible bioavailability.

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study. Ninety-eight subjects were randomized to treatment with either MFNS 100 microg QD or placebo for 1 year. Each subject's height was required to be between the 5th and 95th percentile at baseline, and skeletal age at screening was required to be within 2 years of chronological age, as determined by left wrist x-rays. Washout periods for medications that affect either childhood growth or allergic rhinitis symptoms were established based on estimated period of effect, and these medications were prohibited during the study. However, short courses of either oral prednisone lasting no longer than 7 days or low-potency topical dermatologic corticosteroids lasting no longer than 10 days were permitted if necessary. Height was measured with a calibrated stadiometer at baseline and at 4, 8, 12, 26, 39, and 52 weeks, and the primary safety variable was the change in standing height. The rate of growth was also calculated for each subject as the slope (linear regression) of the change in height from baseline using data from all visits of subjects who had at least 2 visits. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical- (HPA)-axis function was assessed via cosyntropin stimulation testing at baseline and at 26 and 52 weeks. All analyses were based on all randomized subjects (intent-to-treat principle). The change from baseline in standing height was analyzed by a 2-way analysis of variance that extracted sources of variation attributable to treatment, center, and treatment-by-center interaction.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics were similar at baseline. Eighty-two subjects completed the study (42 in the MFNS group and 40 in the placebo group), and 93% of subjects achieved at least 80% compliance with therapy. After 1 year of treatment, no suppression of growth was seen in subjects treated with MFNS, and mean standing heights were similar for both treatment groups at all time points. For the primary safety variable (change in height from baseline), both treatment groups were similar at all time points except for weeks 8 and 52. Subjects treated with MFNS had a slightly greater mean increase in height than subjects treated with placebo at these time points: the change in height was 6.95 cm versus 6.35 cm at the 1-year time point. However, the rate of growth (.018 cm/day) averaged for all time points over the course of the study was similar for both treatment groups. Additional analyses found that MFNS did not retard growth in any sex or age subgroup of subjects. The use of exogenous corticosteroids other than the study drug was also similar among the 2 treatment groups. Results from cosyntropin stimulation testing confirmed the absence of systemic effects of MFNS. The change from baseline in the difference between prestimulation and poststimulation levels was similar for both treatment groups after 1 year of treatment, with no evidence of HPA-axis suppression in MFNS-treated subjects at any time point. Incidences of treatment-related adverse events were similar for both treatment groups, with 16% of MFNS-treated subjects reporting adverse events, compared with 22% of placebo-treated subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

A dose-ranging study of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (MFNS; Nasonex) 200 microg once daily for the treatment and prophylaxis of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and treatment of perennial rhinitis have been demonstrated in adults. However, the dose response of MFNS in pediatric patients has not yet been characterized.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to determine the dose-response relationship of 3 different doses of MFNS in a pediatric population.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled study of 679 children 6 to 11 years of age with histories of SAR and documented positive skin test responses. Patients were randomized to one of the following treatment groups for 4 weeks: MFNS 25 microgram once daily, MFNS 100 microgram once daily, MFNS 200 microgram once daily, beclomethasone dipropionate 84 microgram twice daily (168 microgram/day), or placebo. Physician evaluations were performed at days 4, 8, 15, and 29, and patient evaluations were analyzed for days 1 to 15 and 16 to 29.

RESULTS

The mean reduction from baseline in physician-evaluated total nasal symptom scores at day 8 (the primary efficacy variable) was significantly greater in the MFNS and beclomethasone dipropionate groups than in the placebo group (P </=.02). No significant differences were observed among the 3 MFNS groups. However, as treatment continued, symptoms in patients treated with MFNS 100 or 200 microgram once daily continued to improve, whereas those treated with MFNS 25 microgram once daily demonstrated little further improvement. By day 29, MFNS 100 and 200 microgram once daily both were significantly more effective than MFNS 25 microgram once daily in relieving symptoms of SAR, but MFNS 200 microgram provided no additional benefit over MFNS 100 microgram. All doses of MFNS were well tolerated, and cosyntropin stimulation tests performed before and after treatment found no evidence of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that the most appropriate therapeutic dosage of MFNS in the treatment of SAR in children 6 to 11 years of age is 100 microgram once daily. In addition, MFNS at doses up to 200 microgram once daily for 4 weeks was well tolerated and had no detectable effects on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function.

The effects of triamcinolone acetonide aqueous nasal spray on adrenocortical function in children with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Suppression of adrenocortical function, a risk associated with oral corticosteroids, is minimized with intranasal corticosteroids. Triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) aqueous nasal spray, at therapeutic doses, has no measurable effect on adrenocortical function in adults with allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE

This double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the effect of once-daily TAA aqueous nasal spray (220 or 440 microg) with placebo on adrenocortical function after 6 weeks of treatment in pediatric (children 6 to 12 years of age) patients with allergic rhinitis. The pharmacokinetic profile of TAA was examined after once-daily intranasal administration of TAA aqueous nasal spray 440 microg for 6 weeks.

METHODS

Eighty children received TAA aqueous nasal spray 220 microg or 440 microg or placebo for 6 weeks. Adrenocortical function was assessed by analyzing plasma cortisol levels before stimulation (0 hour) and at 30 and 60 minutes after a rapid 1-hour intravenous cosyntropin stimulation test performed before treatment and after 6 weeks of treatment. Samples for pharmacokinetic evaluation were collected from 19 patients at baseline (0 hour) and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 6 hours after the final dose of study medication.

RESULTS

After 6 weeks, no significant effects on adrenocortical function were observed at 30 or 60 minutes after cosyntropin stimulation with either dose of TAA aqueous nasal spray. TAA concentrations in plasma showed rapid elimination of the drug, with little or no accumulation.

CONCLUSIONS

TAA aqueous nasal spray (220 or 440 microg/day) has no measurable effect on adrenocortical function in pediatric patients with allergic rhinitis. Pharmacokinetic parameters after 440 microg/day of TAA aqueous nasal spray indicate a rapid decline of plasma drug levels, with little or no systemic accumulation of study drug.

A placebo- and active-controlled randomized trial of prophylactic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis with mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray

BACKGROUND

Topical nasal corticosteroids have become a mainstay of treatment for the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). It is likely that topical corticosteroids, by blocking an initial influx of inflammatory cells in the nasal mucosa induced by aeroallergens, may have a preventive effect on nasal allergy symptoms when administered before the pollen season.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of an 8-week course of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS), 200 micrograms once daily, in the treatment of SAR compared with beclomethasone dipropionate aqueous nasal spray (BDP), 168 micrograms twice daily, and placebo vehicle, when treatment is initiated before the anticipated onset of the ragweed season.

METHODS

Three hundred forty-nine patients with SAR to ragweed pollen from nine centers in the Northeast and Midwest of the United States were randomized to one of the three intranasal study medications (MFNS, 200 micrograms once daily, BDP, 168 micrograms twice daily, or placebo vehicle), starting 4 weeks before the estimated start of the ragweed season.

RESULTS

The proportion of "minimal symptom" days (total nasal symptom score < or = 2) was statistically significantly higher in both the MFNS and BDP groups when compared with the placebo vehicle group (p < 0.01). The two active treatment groups were not statistically significantly different from each other. MFNS and BDP displayed a similar safety profile that did not differ from placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This suggests that MFNS, 200 micrograms (once daily), is a useful therapy in the prophylactic treatment of SAR.

Loratadine-pseudoephedrine combination versus placebo in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Two hundred sixty-four patients with moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis were treated with loratadine 5 mg plus pseudoephedrine 120 mg twice a day or placebo in a 28-day multicenter study. Four nasal and four non-nasal symptoms were evaluated for efficacy. At the last evaluable visit, the active treatment group had significantly lower (P = .05) mean combined nasal and non-nasal symptom scores than the placebo group. Also, the physician's rating of overall therapeutic response was significantly better in the active-treatment group (P = .03). Dry mouth, insomnia, and nervousness were reported by a significantly greater proportion (P less than or equal to .04) in the active-treatment group. Sedation occurred in 7% of patients in each treatment group and 6% of patients in each group discontinued the study because of adverse experiences. Loratadine plus pseudoephedrine was safe and significantly more effective than placebo in relieving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis.