Shou-Hua Li

Bupropion for the Treatment of Methamphetamine Dependence

Bupropion was tested for efficacy in increasing weeks of abstinence in methamphetamine-dependent patients, compared to placebo. This was a double-blind placebo-controlled study, with 12 weeks of treatment and a 30-day follow-up. Five outpatient substance abuse treatment clinics located west of the Mississippi participated in the study. One hundred and fifty-one treatment-seekers with DSM-IV diagnosis of methamphetamine dependence were consented and enrolled. Seventy-two participants were randomized to placebo and 79 to sustained-release bupropion 150 mg twice daily. Patients were asked to come to the clinic three times per week for assessments, urine drug screens, and 90-min group psychotherapy. The primary outcome was the change in proportion of participants having a methamphetamine-free week. Secondary outcomes included: urine for quantitative methamphetamine, self-report of methamphetamine use, subgroup analyses of balancing factors and comorbid conditions, addiction severity, craving, risk behaviors for HIV, and use of other substances. The generalized estimating equation regression analysis showed that, overall, the difference between bupropion and placebo groups in the probability of a non-use week over the 12-week treatment period was not statistically significant (p=0.09). Mixed model regression was used to allow adjustment for baseline factors in addition to those measured (site, gender, level of baseline use, and level of symptoms of depression). This subgroup analysis showed that bupropion had a significant effect compared to placebo, among male patients who had a lower level of methamphetamine use at baseline (p<0.0001). Comorbid depression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder did not change the outcome. These data suggest that bupropion, in combination with behavioral group therapy, was effective for increasing the number of weeks of abstinence in participants with low-to-moderate methamphetamine dependence, mainly male patients, regardless of their comorbid condition.

A multicenter trial of bupropion for cocaine dependence in methadone-maintained patients.

We conducted a multi-site, placebo-controlled, randomized double-blind clinical trial comparing bupropion HCL (300 mg/day) to placebo for the treatment of cocaine dependence in methadone-maintained subjects. A total of 149 subjects at three sites participated in a 12-week study. Outcome measures included cocaine use, level of depression, and psychosocial functioning. Results showed no significant differences between placebo and bupropion. Exploratory analyses suggested a medication effect for the subset of subjects depressed at study entry. The need to target subgroups of cocaine abusers in future pharmacotherapy trials and the possible role of treatment readiness are discussed.

A preliminary randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the safety and efficacy of ondansetron in the treatment of methamphetamine dependence

Methamphetamine dependence is an increasing public health problem in the United States. No efficacious medication for methamphetamine dependence has been developed. As ondansetron, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and modulator of cortico-mesolimbic dopamine function, has been shown to reduce some of the rewarding effects of d-amphetamine in animal and human laboratory studies, we decided to test whether it would be superior to placebo at reducing methamphetamine use. In a preliminary, multi-site, randomized, double-blind, 8-wk controlled trial, 150 methamphetamine-dependent men and women received ondansetron (0.25 mg, 1 mg, or 4 mg b.i.d.) or placebo. Participants were assessed on several measures of methamphetamine use including urine methamphetamine level up to three times per week. As a psychosocial adjunct to the medication condition, cognitive behavioural therapy also was administered three times per week. Ondansetron was well tolerated and was less likely than placebo to be associated with serious adverse events. Nevertheless, none of the ondansetron doses was superior to placebo at decreasing any of the measures of methamphetamine use, withdrawal, craving, or clinical severity of methamphetamine dependence. Our preliminary results do not support the utility of ondansetron, at the doses tested, as a treatment for methamphetamine dependence. These findings should be viewed in light of the possibility that a less intensive cognitive behavioural therapy regimen might have yielded more positive results in this initial phase II trial exploring for the efficacy of ondansetron.

6-18F-DOPA PET study in patients with schizophrenia

Presynaptic dopamine metabolism was studied in a group of patients with schizophrenia and in an age- and gender-matched normal control group using 6-[(18)F]fluoro-L-DOPA ((18)F-DOPA) and positron emission tomography (PET). Nineteen patients, nine drug-free, 10 on neuroleptics, and 13 normal control subjects underwent PET scans using (18)F-DOPA. The neuroleptic-treated patients were taking typical neuroleptics (N=4) or the atypical neuroleptic, clozapine (N=6). The ratio of specific/non-specific activity was calculated for eight cortical and subcortical regions of interest. Medication-free patients had a significant reduction in (18)F-DOPA uptake in the ventral striatum (P=0.04) and significantly increased uptake in the posterior cingulate (P=0.02) compared with normal control subjects. The 18F-DOPA PET technique proved to be useful and sensitive in detecting changes in dopamine metabolism in patients with schizophrenia in vivo. The results of this study provide evidence of an aberrant dopamine system in schizophrenia.

Modafinil for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence

AIM Modafinil was tested for efficacy in decreasing use in methamphetamine-dependent participants, compared to placebo. METHODS This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, with 12 weeks of treatment and a 4-week follow-up. Eight outpatient substance abuse treatment clinics participated in the study. There were 210 treatment-seekers randomized, who all had a DSM-IV diagnosis of methamphetamine dependence; 68 participants to placebo, 72 to modafinil 200mg, and 70 to modafinil 400mg, taken once daily on awakening. Participants came to the clinic three times per week for assessments, urine drug screens, and group psychotherapy. The primary outcome measure was a methamphetamine non-use week, which required all the weeks qualitative urine drug screens to be negative for methamphetamine. RESULTS Regression analysis showed no significant difference between either modafinil group (200 or 400mg) or placebo in change in weekly percentage having a methamphetamine non-use week over the 12-week treatment period (p=0.53). Similarly, a number of secondary outcomes did not show significant effects of modafinil. However, an ad-hoc analysis of medication compliance, by urinalysis for modafinil and its metabolite, did find a significant difference in maximum duration of abstinence (23 days vs. 10 days, p=0.003), between those having the top quartile of compliance (>85% of urines were positive for modafinil, N=36), and the lower three quartiles of modafinil 200 and 400mg groups (N=106). CONCLUSIONS Although these data suggest that modafinil, plus group behavioral therapy, was not effective for decreasing methamphetamine use, the study is probably inconclusive because of inadequate compliance with taking medication.

Topiramate for the treatment of methamphetamine addiction: a multi-center placebo-controlled trial

AIMS   Topiramate has shown efficacy at facilitating abstinence from alcohol and cocaine abuse. This double-blind, placebo-controlled out-patient trial tested topiramate for treating methamphetamine addiction. DESIGN   Participants (n = 140) were randomized to receive topiramate or placebo (13 weeks) in escalating doses from 25 mg/day [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED] to the target maintenance of 200 mg/day in weeks 6-12 (tapered in week 13). Medication was combined with weekly brief behavioral compliance enhancement treatment. SETTING   The trial was conducted at eight medical centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS   One hundred and forty methamphetamine-dependent adults took part in the trial. MEASUREMENTS   The primary outcome was abstinence from methamphetamine during weeks 6-12. Secondary outcomes included use reduction versus baseline, as well as psychosocial variables. FINDINGS   In the intent-to-treat analysis, topiramate did not increase abstinence from methamphetamine during weeks 6-12. For secondary outcomes, topiramate reduced weekly median urine methamphetamine levels and observer-rated severity of dependence scores significantly. Subjects with negative urine before randomization (n = 26) had significantly greater abstinence on topiramate versus placebo during study weeks 6-12. Topiramate was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS   Topiramate does not appear to promote abstinence in methamphetamine users but can reduce the amount taken and reduce relapse rates in those who are already abstinent.

Dopamine D3 Receptor Antagonist (GSK598809) Potentiates the Hypertensive Effects of Cocaine in Conscious, Freely-Moving Dogs

The chronic and relapsing nature of addiction presents unique challenges for ensuring the safety of a potential medication. A patient may use cocaine, for example, while taking the medication or take more medication than prescribed. Thus, a potential medication must be safe and not exacerbate the effects of cocaine. Multiple published studies support antagonism of brain dopamine D3 receptor function as a potential mechanism of action for an anti-addiction medication. Dopamine D3 receptors are widely distributed outside the central nervous system, however; for example, dopamine D3 receptors in the kidneys are implicated in regulating blood pressure. The selective dopamine D3 receptor antagonist GSK598809 [1-(2-fluoro-4-trifluoromethyl-phenyl)-3-{3-[4-methyl-5-(4-methyl-oxazol-5-yl)-4H-[1,2,4]triazol-3-ylsulfanyl]-propyl}-3-aza-bicyclo[3.1.0]hexane] has been proposed as a medication to treat cocaine and other substance use disorders. The US Food and Drug Administration has established guidelines recommending safety studies to investigate potential undesirable pharmacodynamic effects of a substance in relation to exposure in the therapeutic range and above. Hence, we assessed the interaction between this selective dopamine D3 receptor antagonist and cocaine on hemodynamics and cardiac function in freely-moving, telemetered dogs before conducting a clinical trial. GSK598809 increased the hemodynamic effect of cocaine in this model. Thus, the increase in blood pressure after intravenous cocaine was greater in animals that had been pretreated with GSK598809 compared with vehicle. This finding suggests that GSK598809 in particular, and perhaps dopamine D3 receptor antagonists as a class, may produce unacceptable cardiovascular risks as medications to treat cocaine use disorder.

Safety of atomoxetine in combination with intravenous cocaine in cocaine-experienced participants.

Objectives:Atomoxetine has been considered as an agonist replacement therapy for cocaine. We investigated the safety of the interaction of atomoxetine with cocaine and also whether cognitive function was affected by atomoxetine during short-term administration. Methods:In a double-blind placebo-controlled inpatient study of 20 cocaine-dependent volunteers, participants received atomoxetine 80 mg daily followed by 100 mg daily for 5 days each. On the fourth and fifth day at each dose, cocaine (20 and 40 mg) was infused intravenously in sequential daily sessions. Results:Preinfusion mean systolic pressures showed a small but statistically significant difference between placebo and both doses of atomoxetine. Preinfusion mean diastolic pressures were significant between placebo and atomoxetine 80 mg only. The diastolic pressure response to 40 mg cocaine was statistically significant only between the 80- and 100-mg atomoxetine doses. All electrocardiogram parameters were unchanged. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for “bad effect” in the atomoxetine group were significantly higher at baseline, then declined, and for “likely to use” declined with atomoxetine treatment. On the Addiction Research Center Inventory, the atomoxetine group scored significantly lower on amphetamine, euphoria, and energy subscales (P < 0.0001). Other VAS descriptors, Brief Substance Craving Scale, Profile of Moods State, and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale showed no differences. Atomoxetine did not affect cocaine pharmacokinetics. In tests of working memory, sustained attention, cognitive flexibility, and decision-making, atomoxetine improved performance on the visual n-back task. There were no differences in any pharmacokinetic parameters for cocaine with atomoxetine. Conclusions:Atomoxetine was tolerated safely by all participants. Certain cognitive improvements and a dampening effect on VAS scores after cocaine were observed, but should be weighed against small but significant differences in hemodynamic responses after atomoxetine.

Advantages of Joint Modeling of Component HIV Risk Behaviors and Non-Response: Application to Randomized Trials in Cocaine-Dependent and Methamphetamine-Dependent Populations

The HIV risk-taking behavior scale (HRBS) is an 11-item instrument designed to assess the risks of HIV infection due to self-reported injection-drug use and sexual behavior. A retrospective analysis was performed on HRBS data collected from approximately 1,000 participants pooled across seven clinical trials of pharmacotherapies for either the treatment of cocaine dependence or methamphetamine dependence. Analysis faced three important challenges. The sample contained a high proportion of missing assessments after randomization. Also, the HRBS scale consists of two distinct behavioral components which may or may not coincide in response patterns. In addition, distributions of responses on the subscales were highly concentrated at just a few values (e.g., 0, 6). To address these challenges, a single probit regression model was fit to three outcomes variables simultaneously – the two subscale totals plus an indicator variable for assessments not obtained (non-response). This joint-outcome regression model was able to identify that those who left assessment early had higher self-reported risk of injection-drug use and lower self-reported risky sexual behavior because the model was able to draw on information on associations among the three outcomes collectively. These findings were not identified in analyses performed on each outcome separately. No evidence for an effect of pharmacotherapies was observed, except to reduce missing assessments. Univariate-outcome modeling is not recommended for the HRBS.

Linear-rank testing of a non-binary, responder-analysis, efficacy score to evaluate pharmacotherapies for substance use disorders

The design of pharmacological trials for management of substance use disorders is shifting toward outcomes of successful individual-level behavior (abstinence or no heavy use). While binary success/failure analyses are common, McCann and Li (CNS Neurosci Ther 2012; 18: 414–418) introduced “number of beyond-threshold weeks of success” (NOBWOS) scores to avoid dichotomized outcomes. NOBWOS scoring employs an efficacy “hurdle” with values reflecting duration of success. Here, we evaluate NOBWOS scores rigorously. Formal analysis of mathematical structure of NOBWOS scores is followed by simulation studies spanning diverse conditions to assess operating characteristics of five linear-rank tests on NOBWOS scores. Simulations include assessment of Fisher’s exact test applied to hurdle component. On average, statistical power was approximately equal for five linear-rank tests. Under none of conditions examined did Fisher’s exact test exhibit greater statistical power than any of the linear-rank tests. These linear-rank tests provide good Type I and Type II error control for comparing distributions of NOBWOS scores between groups (e.g. active vs. placebo). All methods were applied to re-analyses of data from four clinical trials of differing lengths and substances of abuse. These linear-rank tests agreed across all trials in rejecting (or not) their null (equality of distributions) at ≤ 0.05.