Aim Modafinil was tested for efficacy in facilitating abstinence in cocaine-dependent patients, compared to placebo. Methods This was a double-blind placebo-controlled study, with 12 weeks of treatment and a 4-week follow-up. Six outpatient substance abuse treatment clinics participated in the study. There were 210 treatment-seekers randomized, having a diagnosis of cocaine dependence; 72 participants were randomized to placebo, 69 to modafinil 200 mg, and 69 to modafinil 400 mg, taken once daily on awakening. Participants came to the clinic three times per week for assessments and urine drug screens, and had one hour of individual psychotherapy weekly. The primary outcome measure was the weekly percentage of cocaine non-use days. Results The GEE regression analysis showed that for the total sample, there was no significant difference between either modafinil group and placebo in the change in average weekly percent of cocaine non-use days over the 12-week treatment period (p > 0.79). However, two secondary outcomes showed significant effects by modafinil 200 mg: the maximum number of consecutive non-use days for cocaine (p = 0.02), and a reduction in craving (p = 0.04). Also, a post hoc analysis showed a significant effect of modafinil that increased the weekly percentage of non-use days in the subgroup of those cocaine patients who did not have a history of alcohol dependence (p < 0.02). Conclusions These data suggest that modafinil, in combination with individual behavioral therapy, was effective for increasing cocaine non-use days in participants without co-morbid alcohol dependence, and in reducing cocaine craving.

Bupropion is an antidepressant with stimulant properties, which inhibits the reuptake of dopamine (DA) and norepinepherine, and is purported to enhance DA neurotransmission. Bupropion is considered an appealing candidate medication for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence. The current laboratory study was set forth to assess the impact of bupropion treatment on the subjective effects produced by methamphetamine in the laboratory. We also assessed the effects of bupropion treatment on craving elicited by exposure to videotaped methamphetamine cues. A total of 26 participants were enrolled and 20 completed the entire study (n ¼ 10 placebo and n ¼ 10 bupropion, parallel groups design). Bupropion treatment was associated with reduced ratings of 'any drug effect' (po0.02), and 'high' (po0.02) following methamphetamine administration. There was also a significant bupropion-by-cue exposure interaction on General Craving Scale total score (po0.002), and on the Behavioral Intention subscale (po0.001). Overall, the data reveal that bupropion reduced acute methamphetamine-induced subjective effects and reduced cue-induced craving. Importantly, these data provide a rationale for the evaluation of bupropion in the treatment of methamphetamine dependence.

No abstract

Methamphetamine administration was well tolerated during bupropion treatment. There was no evidence of additive cardiovascular effects when the drugs were coadministered. This study provides initial evidence for the safety of prescribing bupropion for the treatment of methamphetamine abuse and dependence. The impact of bupropion treatment in patients who abuse larger doses of methamphetamine remains undetermined.

A variety of neuropharmacological strategies are being pursued in the search for an effective treatment for methamphetamine addiction. In this study, we investigated the safety and potential efficacy of aripiprazole, an antipsychotic agent acting on both dopamine and serotonin systems. We conducted a double-blind inpatient clinical pharmacology study to assess potential interactions between intravenous (IV) methamphetamine (15mg and 30mg) and oral aripiprazole (15mg). In addition, the effects of aripiprazole treatment on abstinence related craving and cue-induced craving were evaluated. Participants included non-treatment seeking, methamphetamine dependent patients (N=16), 18-45 years of age, currently using methamphetamine. Following baseline methamphetamine dosing (15mg and 30mg), participants received 2 weeks of treatment with aripiprazole (n=8) or placebo (n=8). Participants then completed cue exposure sessions using neutral and methamphetamine-related cues. Methamphetamine dosing (15mg and 30mg) was then repeated. Aripiprazole treatment had no effect on cue-induced methamphetamine craving, or on daily baseline craving assessed over the course of medication treatment, though aripiprazole treatment was associated with increased craving independent of methamphetamine dosing. Aripiprazole treatment was associated with significantly higher ratings on ARCI subscales reflecting euphoria and amphetamine-like effects following methamphetamine dosing. Aripiprazole was treatment was also associated with significant reductions in ratings of “bad effects” and reductions on the ARCI subscale for sedation effects following methamphetamine dosing. Aripiprazole treatment reduced the increase in systolic blood pressure following methamphetamine dosing, but had no other effects on cardiovascular responses to methamphetamine. Aripiprazole treatment did not alter the pharmacokinetics of methamphetamine. These findings indicate that aripiprazole treatment appears to be safe in volunteers with methamphetamine dependence, though the finding that aripiprazole increased some of the rewarding and stimulatory effects produced by acute methamphetamine suggests that 15mg aripiprazole is unlikely to be efficacious for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence. Further research with lower doses of aripiprazole, possibly using study designs aimed at evaluating efficacy for relapse prevention, are needed before ruling out aripiprazole as a treatment for methamphetamine dependence.

Aims Bupropion was tested for efficacy to achieve methamphetamine (MA) abstinence in dependent, non-daily users. Methods A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, with 12-week treatment and 4-week follow-up, was conducted with 204 treatment-seeking participants having MA dependence per DSM-IV, who used MA on a less-than-daily basis. 104 were randomized to matched placebo and 100 to bupropion, sustained-release 150mg, twice daily. Participants were seen three times weekly to obtain urine for MA and bupropion assays, study assessments, and thrice weekly, 90-minute, group psychotherapy. There was no biomarker for placebo adherence. The primary outcome was achievement of abstinence throughout the last two weeks of treatment; ‘success’ requiring at least two urine samples during each of Weeks 11 and 12, and all samples MA-negative (<300ng/mL). Results Bupropion and placebo groups did not differ significantly in the percentage achieving abstinence for the last 2 weeks of treatment (chi-square, p=0.32). Subgroup analysis of participants with lower baseline MA use (≤18 of last 30 days before consent) also revealed no difference in success between groups (p=0.73). Medication adherence per protocol (detectable bupropion, >5ng/mL, in ≥50% of urine samples from Study Weeks 1–10 and ≥66% of urine samples from Weeks 11–12) was achieved by 47% of participants taking bupropion. Conclusions These data indicate that bupropion did not increase abstinence in dependent participants who were using MA less-than-daily. Medication non-adherence was a limitation in this trial. Psychosocial therapy remains the mainstay of treatment for MA dependence. Further research on subgroups who may respond to bupropion may be warranted. Trial Registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT00687713.

No abstract

No abstract