A practice quit model to test early efficacy of medications for alcohol use disorder in a randomized clinical trial.

RATIONALE: Screening novel medications for alcohol use disorder (AUD) requires models that are both efficient and ecologically-valid. Ideally, such models would be associated with the outcomes of a given medication in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: To test a novel human laboratory model in which individuals with intrinsic motivation to change their drinking engage in a "practice quit" attempt consisting of 6 days of complete abstinence from alcohol. METHOD: Individuals with current AUD completed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of naltrexone (50 mg), varenicline (2 mg bid), or matched placebo. Participants were titrated onto the study medication for 1 week prior to starting the 6-day practice quit attempt. During the practice quit attempt, participants completed daily interviews with research staff. All participants completed an alcohol cue-exposure paradigm before starting the study medication and after 2 weeks of study medication. RESULTS: There were no significant medication effect on drinks per drinking day (F(2,49) = 0.66, p = 0.52) or percent days abstinent (F(2,49) = 0.14, p = 0.87) during the 6-day practice quit period. There were no medication effects on alcohol cue-reactivity (F(2,44) = 0.80, p = 0.46). Notably, participants sharply reduced their drinking during the entire 13-day medication treatment period, as compared to reducing only during the 6-day practice quit period. During the total medication period, higher levels of motivation to change was associated with higher percent days abstinent (F(1,49) = 8.12, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports mostly null findings, which challenges us to decompose its nuanced design to consider model refinements. Possible changes to the model include considering the requirement for intrinsic motivation for change, including a longer practice quit period, encompassing the medication administration timeframe in the practice quit period, increasing the required sample size for signal detection, and examining a post COVID-19 pandemic cohort.

Novel Agents for the Pharmacological Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder.

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a highly prevalent but severely under-treated disorder, with only three widely-approved pharmacotherapies. Given that AUD is a very heterogeneous disorder, it is unlikely that one single medication will be effective for all individuals with an AUD. As such, there is a need to develop new, more effective, and diverse pharmacological treatment options for AUD with the hopes of increasing utilization and improving care. In this qualitative literature review, we discuss the efficacy, mechanism of action, and tolerability of approved, repurposed, and novel pharmacotherapies for the treatment of AUD with a clinical perspective. Pharmacotherapies discussed include: disulfiram, acamprosate, naltrexone, nalmefene, topiramate, gabapentin, varenicline, baclofen, sodium oxybate, aripiprazole, ondansetron, mifepristone, ibudilast, suvorexant, prazosin, doxazosin, N-acetylcysteine, GET73, ASP8062, ABT-436, PF-5190457, and cannabidiol. Overall, many repurposed and novel agents discussed in this review demonstrate clinical effectiveness and promise for the future of AUD treatment. Importantly, these medications also offer potential improvements towards the advancement of precision medicine and personalized treatment for the heterogeneous AUD population. However, there remains a great need to improve access to treatment, increase the menu of approved pharmacological treatments, and de-stigmatize and increase treatment-seeking for AUD.

Ibudilast, a neuroimmune modulator, reduces heavy drinking and alcohol cue-elicited neural activation: a randomized trial.

Ibudilast, a neuroimmune modulator which selectively inhibits phosphodiesterases (PDE)-3, -4, -10, and -11, and macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF), shows promise as a novel pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, the mechanisms of action underlying ibudilast's effects on the human brain remain largely unknown. Thus, the current study examined the efficacy of ibudilast to improve negative mood, reduce heavy drinking, and attenuate neural reward signals in individuals with AUD. Fifty-two nontreatment-seeking individuals with AUD were randomized to receive ibudilast (n = 24) or placebo (n = 28). Participants completed a 2-week daily diary study during which they filled out daily reports of their past day drinking, mood, and craving. Participants completed an functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) alcohol cue-reactivity paradigm half-way through the study. Ibudilast did not have a significant effect on negative mood (ß = -0.34, p = 0.62). However, ibudilast, relative to placebo, reduced the odds of heavy drinking across time by 45% (OR = 0.55, (95% CI: 0.30, 0.98)). Ibudilast also attenuated alcohol cue-elicited activation in the ventral striatum (VS) compared to placebo (F(1,44) = 7.36, p = 0.01). Alcohol cue-elicited activation in the VS predicted subsequent drinking in the ibudilast group (F(1,44) = 6.39, p = 0.02), such that individuals who had attenuated ventral striatal activation and took ibudilast had the fewest number of drinks per drinking day in the week following the scan. These findings extend preclinical and human laboratory studies of the utility of ibudilast to treat AUD and suggest a biobehavioral mechanism through which ibudilast acts, namely, by reducing the rewarding response to alcohol cues in the brain leading to a reduction in heavy drinking.

State-of-the-art behavioral and pharmacological treatments for alcohol use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and its associated consequences remain significant public health concerns. Given that AUD represents a spectrum of severity, treatment options represent a continuum of care, ranging from single-session brief interventions to more intensive, prolonged, and specialized treatment modalities. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative literature review seeks to describe the best practices for AUD by placing a particular emphasis on identifying those practices which have received the most empirical support. METHOD: This review summarizes psychological and pharmacological intervention options for AUD treatment, with a focus on the relapse prevention phase of recovery. Psychological and pharmacological treatments are summarized in terms of the empirical evidence favoring each approach and the level of AUD severity for which they are most indicated. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: One of the broad assertions from this review is that while AUD is highly prevalent, seeking treatment for AUD is not. There are a myriad of behavioral and pharmacological treatments that have shown compelling evidence of efficacy for the treatment of AUD. In the behavioral treatment literature, cognitive behavioral therapy has received the most consistent support. Opioid antagonism (via naltrexone) has been the most widely studied pharmacotherapy and has produced moderate effect sizes. While none of the treatments reviewed herein represents a so-called silver bullet for AUD, they each have the potential to significantly improve the odds of recovery. Precision medicine, or the identification of best treatment matches for individual patients, looms as an important overarching goal for the field, although specific matches are not yet sufficiently reliable in their empirical evidence to warrant clinical dissemination.

Characteristics of Misdemeanants Treated for Competency Restoration.

There are an estimated 60,000 evaluations annually for competence to stand trial for felony indictments and likely more for misdemeanor indictments. Thus, there is an increasing interest in determining factors associated with a defendant's likelihood of being restored to competence to stand trial. Although previous studies have found that a misdemeanor charge predicts significantly less likelihood of restoration of competence when compared with felony charges, states typically allow treatment facilities less time to restore misdemeanor defendants than felony defendants. As there are no studies examining factors associated with restoration of competence to stand trial for misdemeanor defendants, separately from felony defendants, we conducted a retrospective study to examine demographic, clinical, and forensic characteristics associated with restoration of competence to stand trial of misdemeanor defendants. Almost 70 percent of defendants regained competence to stand trial during the study period. When restorable, defendants regained competence in less than three weeks, on average, which addresses a current question in the field regarding time limits for restoration of competence to stand trial. Single marital status and length of stay in the treatment facility during restoration of competence to stand trial were significantly associated with restorability. States may consider such factors when developing and reviewing time limit policies in consideration of the Jackson v. Indiana ruling and when designing interventions aimed at restoring competence to stand trial to misdemeanor defendants in a cost-efficient manner.

Demographics.

There is a large proportion of minority youth involved in the juvenile justice system. Disproportionate minority contact (DMC) occurs when the proportion of any ethnic group is higher at any given stage in the juvenile justice process than the proportion of this group in the general population. There are several theories explaining the presence and persistence of DMC. This article reviews the history of DMC and the theories and implications of this problem. It discusses several targets for interventions designed to reduce DMC and offer resources in this area.