Treatment discontinuation in pharmacological clinical trials for gambling disorder

BACKGROUND

Gambling disorder affects 0.5-2% of the population, and of those who receive treatment, dropout tends to be relatively high. Very little is known about participant-specific variables linked to treatment discontinuation/dropout in gambling disorder, especially in pharmacological clinical trial settings.

METHODS

Data were pooled from eight previous randomized, controlled pharmacological clinical trials conducted in people with gambling disorder. Demographic and clinical variables were compared between those who did versus did not subsequently dropout from those treatment trials.

RESULTS

The sample comprised data from 635 individuals, and the overall rate of treatment dropout was 40%. Subsequent treatment dropout was significantly associated with the following: positive family history of gambling disorder in one or more first degree relatives (relative risk [RR] of dropout in those with positive history vs not = 1.30), preference for mainly strategic vs non-strategic gambling activities (RR = 1.43), lower levels of education (Cohen's D = 0.22), and higher levels of functional disability (Cohen's D = 0.18). These variables did not differ significantly as a function of treatment condition (medication versus placebo). Dropouts and completers did not differ significantly in terms of the other demographic or clinical variables that were considered.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified several candidate participant-specific predictors of pharmacological treatment dropout in gambling disorder. The findings highlight the need for future studies to address a wider range of contextual variables at large scale (including also study-specific variables e.g. trial/intervention duration), including in naturalistic treatment and clinical trial settings, with a view to developing algorithms that might usefully predict dropout risk.

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.

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.

[Gambling addiction as a side effect of low dose pramipexole in the treatment of restless legs syndrome]

Pathologic gambling is a rare but severe side effect of dopamine agonists (DA). Low dosage DA, as given when treating restless legs syndrome (RLS), has been thought only to have mild side effects. This case report describes two patients with low dosage pramipexole for RLS, who developed gambling addiction for a decade, highly affecting their quality of life. After stopping the treatment, the patients' gambling addiction ceased. Even though this is a very rare side effect, patients prescribed a DA should be informed of the risk of gambling addiction, independently of dosage.

Treating gambling disorder with as needed administration of intranasal naloxone: a pilot study to evaluate acceptability, feasibility and outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There is growing interest in the use of medication-assisted treatments for gambling disorder (GD). Opioid receptor antagonists are hypothesised to blunt the craving associated with gambling. This study was designed to assess the feasibility of using an intranasal naloxone spray to treat GD.

DESIGN

An 8-week, open-label, uncontrolled pilot study.

SETTING

A single study site in the capital region of Finland.

SUBJECTS

Twenty problem gamblers (nine men) were randomised into two groups. Group A (n=10) took one dose into one nostril (2 mg naloxone), as needed, with a maximum of 4 doses/day (max. 8 mg/day). Group B (n=10) took one dose into each nostril (4 mg naloxone) as needed, with a maximum of 4 doses/day (max. 16 mg/day).

INTERVENTION

Naloxone hydrochloride nasal spray.

MEASURES

Acceptability and feasibility of the intervention were assessed. Use of study medication, adverse events, gambling frequency and gambling expenditure were recorded in a mobile diary. Problem gambling: South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS), depressive symptoms: Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and alcohol use: Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test were recorded.

RESULTS

Study completion rate was 90%. Acceptability and feasibility scores were high. Group B used intranasal naloxone more frequently than group A, and consequently used more naloxone. No serious adverse events were reported. The postintervention SOGS scores were lower (median=4 (IQR=3.75) versus preintervention scores (median=12 (IQR=4.75)). Depressive symptoms were reduced during the trial (preintervention BDI median=9, IQR=9 vs postintervention BDI median=6, IQR=6).

CONCLUSIONS

The acceptability and feasibility of using intranasal naloxone were high, and no serious adverse events were reported. Preliminary results suggest mixed results in terms of gambling behaviour (ie, reduced frequency but not expenditure) and decreased depressive symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT2016-001828-56.

Blockade of dopamine D1-family receptors attenuates the mania-like hyperactive, risk-preferring, and high motivation behavioral profile of mice with low dopamine transporter levels

BACKGROUND

Patients with bipolar disorder mania exhibit poor cognition, impulsivity, risk-taking, and goal-directed activity that negatively impact their quality of life. To date, existing treatments for bipolar disorder do not adequately remediate cognitive dysfunction. Reducing dopamine transporter expression recreates many bipolar disorder mania-relevant behaviors (i.e. hyperactivity and risk-taking). The current study investigated whether dopamine D1-family receptor blockade would attenuate the risk-taking, hypermotivation, and hyperactivity of dopamine transporter knockdown mice.

METHODS

Dopamine transporter knockdown and wild-type littermate mice were tested in mouse versions of the Iowa Gambling Task (risk-taking), Progressive Ratio Breakpoint Test (effortful motivation), and Behavioral Pattern Monitor (activity). Prior to testing, the mice were treated with the dopamine D1-family receptor antagonist SCH 23390 hydrochloride (0.03, 0.1, or 0.3 mg/kg), or vehicle.

RESULTS

Dopamine transporter knockdown mice exhibited hyperactivity and hyperexploration, hypermotivation, and risk-taking preference compared with wild-type littermates. SCH 23390 hydrochloride treatment decreased premature responding in dopamine transporter knockdown mice and attenuated their hypermotivation. SCH 23390 hydrochloride flattened the safe/risk preference, while reducing activity and exploratory levels of both genotypes similarly.

CONCLUSIONS

Dopamine transporter knockdown mice exhibited mania-relevant behavior compared to wild-type mice. Systemic dopamine D1-family receptor antagonism attenuated these behaviors in dopamine transporter knockdown, but not all effects were specific to only the knockdown mice. The normalization of behavior via blockade of dopamine D1-family receptors supports the hypothesis that D1 and/or D5 receptors could contribute to the mania-relevant behaviors of dopamine transporter knockdown mice.

Neuroscience in gambling policy and treatment: an interdisciplinary perspective

Neuroscientific explanations of gambling disorder can help people make sense of their experiences and guide the development of psychosocial interventions. However, the societal perceptions and implications of these explanations are not always clear or helpful. Two workshops in 2013 and 2014 brought together multidisciplinary researchers aiming to improve the clinical and policy-related effects of neuroscience research on gambling. The workshops revealed that neuroscience can be used to improve identification of the dangers of products used in gambling. Additionally, there was optimism associated with the diagnostic and prognostic uses of neuroscience in problem gambling and the provision of novel tools (eg, virtual reality) to assess the effectiveness of new policy interventions before their implementation. Other messages from these workshops were that neuroscientific models of decision making could provide a strong rationale for precommitment strategies and that interdisciplinary collaborations are needed to reduce the harms of gambling.

Opioid receptor antagonists in the treatment of pathological gambling

no abstract

Right inferior frontal cortex activity correlates with tolcapone responsivity in problem and pathological gamblers

Failures of self-regulation in problem and pathological gambling (PPG) are thought to emerge from failures of top-down control, reflected neurophysiologically in a reduced capacity of prefrontal cortex to influence activity within subcortical structures. In patients with addictions, these impairments have been argued to alter evaluation of reward within dopaminergic neuromodulatory systems. Previously we demonstrated that augmenting dopamine tone in frontal cortex via use of tolcapone, an inhibitor of the dopamine-degrading enzyme catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT), reduced delay discounting, a measure of impulsivity, in healthy subjects. To evaluate this potentially translational approach to augmenting prefrontal inhibitory control, here we hypothesized that increasing cortical dopamine tone would reduce delay discounting in PPG subjects in proportion to its ability to augment top-down control. To causally test this hypothesis, we administered the COMT inhibitor tolcapone in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subject study of 17 PPG subjects who performed a delay discounting task while functional MRI images were obtained. In this subject population, we found that greater BOLD activity during the placebo condition within the right inferior frontal cortex (RIFC), a region thought to be important for inhibitory control, correlated with greater declines in impulsivity on tolcapone versus placebo. Intriguingly, connectivity between RIFC and the right striatum, and not the level of activity within RIFC itself, increased on tolcapone versus placebo. Together, these findings support the hypothesis that tolcapone-mediated increases in top-down control may reduce impulsivity in PPG subjects, a finding with potential translational relevance for gambling disorders, and for behavioral addictions in general.

•

Nonplanning impulsivity correlates with changes in delay discounting on tolcapone.

•

Inferior frontal cortical activity covaries with changes in discounting on tolcapone.

•

The strength of frontostriatal connectivity correlates with tolcapone response.

•

Enhancing cortical dopamine tone may be useful in treatment of addictive disorders.

Evaluating the Impact of Naltrexone on the Rat Gambling Task to Test Its Predictive Validity for Gambling Disorder

Gambling Disorder has serious consequences and no medications are currently approved for the treatment of this disorder. One factor that may make medication development difficult is the lack of animal models of gambling that would allow for the pre-clinical screening of efficacy. Despite this, there is evidence from clinical trials that opiate antagonists, in particular naltrexone, may be useful in treating gambling disorder. To-date, the effects of naltrexone on pre-clinical models of gambling have not been evaluated. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effects of naltrexone in an animal model of gambling, the rat gambling task (rGT), to determine whether this model has some predictive validity. The rGT is a model in which rats are given a choice of making either a response that produces a large reward or a small reward. The larger the reward, the greater the punishment, and thus this task requires that the animal inhibit the ‘tempting’ choice, as the smaller reward option produces overall the most number of rewards per session. People with gambling disorder chose the tempting option more, thus the rGT may provide a model of problem gambling. It was found that naltrexone improved performance on this task in a subset of animals that chose the ‘tempting’, disadvantageous choice, more at baseline. Thus, the results of this study suggest that the rGT should be further investigated as a pre-clinical model of gambling disorder and that further investigation into whether opioid antagonists are effective in treating Gambling Disorder may be warranted.

Time-dependent effects of corticosterone on reward-based decision-making in a rodent model of the Iowa Gambling Task

Corticosteroid hormones, released after stress, are known to change neuronal activity in two time-domains: within minutes via non-genomic pathways and with a delay of >1 h through pathways involving transcriptional regulation. Recent evidence in rodents and humans indicates that these two modes of corticosteroid action differently affect cognitive tasks. Here, we investigated whether reward-based decision-making, in a rat model of the Iowa Gambling Task (rIGT), is also differently altered by rapid versus delayed actions of corticosterone. We targeted the rapid and delayed time domain by injecting corticosterone (CORT, 1 mg/kg, s.c.) at 30 min (rapid) or 180 min (delayed) respectively prior to behavioural testing, during the final 3 days of the behavioural paradigm. In saline treated rats, the number of visits to the disadvantageous arm decreased over trial blocks, whilst this was attenuated when CORT was administered 30 min before testing. This attenuation was associated with a significantly increased c-Fos expression in the lateral orbitofrontal cortex and insular cortex, and a trend for an increase in the infralimbic cortex. The rapid corticosteroid effect contrasted with treatment 180 min before testing, where the number of visits to the disadvantageous arm as well as c-Fos labelling was not affected. These findings indicate that rapid corticosteroid actions impair reward-based decision-making.

Pathological gambling and substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

Pathological gambling (CPG) has been considered as a behavioral addiction having similarities with substance use disorders (SUDs).

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

Current conceptualizations of addiction, as well as experimental studies of PG and SUDs, are reviewed in order to provide a perspective on tbe areas of convergence between addictive behaviors in PG and SUDs.

RESULTS

Shared features exist in diagnostic, clinical, physiological, and behavioral domains. CONCLUSIONS AND SCIELLTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Similarities between PG and SUDs have important implicatiol1s for categorizing, assessing, preventing and treating both PO and SUDs.

Treatment of pathological gambling with naltrexone pharmacotherapy and brief intervention: a pilot study

We explored the efficacy of the opiate antagonist, naltrexone, as a treatment for pathological gambling. Treatment seeking pathological gamblers (n = 39) (according to both South Oaks Gambling Screen and a screen based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) participated into our treatment study during 2009. The subjects were instructed to use 50 mg of naltrexone before gambling or when feeling craving towards gambling. The protocol contained one initial doctor visit with motivational brief intervention. During period that were free of gambling, the subjects were instructed to practice other healthy behavioral alternatives to gambling. The primary outcome measure was the Yale Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale adapted for Pathological Gambling. The other outcome measurements were the EQ-5D quality of life survey, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, and the Beck Depression Inventory. The average age of the subjects was 39 years; 80% were men. Highly significant (p < 0.01) decreases in reported obsessive-compulsive gambling and depressive symptoms and increases in the subjective quality of life developed in the study. These positive changes suggest that this simple, inexpensive treatment helps pathological gamblers. The role of naltrexone in the treatment effect, however, needs to be determined with a larger, placebo-controlled study.