Meta-analysis of the effects of adjuvant drugs in co-occurring bipolar and substance use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) often have co-occurring substance use disorders (SUDs), which substantially impoverish the course of illness. Despite the importance of this dual diagnosis, the evidence of the efficacy and safety of adjuvant treatments is mostly unknown. OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs in patients with co-occurring BD and SUD. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge until 30th April 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCT) evaluating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs compared to placebo in patients with a dual diagnosis of BD and SUD. We meta-analyzed the effect of adjuvant drugs on general outcomes (illness severity, mania, depression, anxiety, abstinence, substance craving, substance use, gamma-GT, adherence, and adverse events) and used the results to objectively assess the quality of the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. For completeness, we also report the specific effects of specific adjuvant drugs in patients with specific substance disorders. RESULTS: We included 15 RCT studies (9 alcohol, 3 cocaine, 2 nicotine, and 1 cannabis) comprising 628 patients allocated to treatment and 622 to placebo. There was low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may reduce illness severity (g=-0.25, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.06), and very-low quality evidence that they may decrease substance use (g=-0.23, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.02) and increase substance abstinence (g=0.21, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.38). DISCUSSION: There is low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may help reduce illness severity, probably via facilitating abstinence and lower substance use. However, the evidence is weak; thus, these results should be considered cautiously until better evidence exists.

Association of perceived social support with sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables in patients with first-episode psychosis.

Patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP) report deficits in social support (SS) and diminished and less satisfactory social networks than healthy controls (HC). These SS difficulties are linked with symptomatology. The study objectives were to: (a) compare perceived SS between patients with FEP and HC; (b) study sex differences regarding perceived SS in patients with FEP and HC; and (c) explore which sociodemographic, clinical and psychosocial variables are related to perceived SS in the onset of FEP. A total of 146 participants were included: 76 patients with FEP (24 females, 52 males) and 70 HC (20 females, 50 males). Perceived SS was assessed with the DUKE-UNK instrument, which is divided into two subscales: confidant support (CS) and affective support (AS). Significant differences regarding perceived SS were observed between the samples. No sex differences were found concerning perceived SS in each group. For the group with FEP, more years of education, less anxiety/depressive symptoms and better functioning were the most relevant variables for more overall perceived SS and perceived CS. Also, less suicidal risk was the only important indicator for more perceived AS. Interventions in perceived SS could contribute to a good evolution of FEP.

APPRAISE-RS: Automated, updated, participatory, and personalized treatment recommender systems based on GRADE methodology.

Purpose: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have become fundamental tools for evidence-based medicine (EBM). However, CPG suffer from several limitations, including obsolescence, lack of applicability to many patients, and limited patient participation. This paper presents APPRAISE-RS, which is a methodology that we developed to overcome these limitations by automating, extending, and iterating the methodology that is most commonly used for building CPGs: the GRADE methodology. Method: APPRAISE-RS relies on updated information from clinical studies and adapts and automates the GRADE methodology to generate treatment recommendations. APPRAISE-RS provides personalized recommendations because they are based on the patient's individual characteristics. Moreover, both patients and clinicians express their personal preferences for treatment outcomes which are considered when making the recommendation (participatory). Rule-based system approaches are used to manage heuristic knowledge. Results: APPRAISE-RS has been implemented for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and tested experimentally on 28 simulated patients. The resulting recommender system (APPRAISE-RS/TDApp) shows a higher degree of treatment personalization and patient participation than CPGs, while recommending the most frequent interventions in the largest body of evidence in the literature (EBM). Moreover, a comparison of the results with four blinded psychiatrist prescriptions supports the validation of the proposal. Conclusions: APPRAISE-RS is a valid methodology to build recommender systems that manage updated, personalized and participatory recommendations, which, in the case of ADHD includes at least one intervention that is identical or very similar to other drugs prescribed by psychiatrists.

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con un trastorno del espectro esquizofrénico y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias / Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and a comorbid substance use

Aunque el correcto diagnóstico y manejo de los pacientes con esquizofrenia y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) determinaría una disminución de la morbilidad y mortalidad en estos pacientes, el desarrollo de estrategias terapéuticas eficientes es todavía una asignatura pendiente. Presentamos recomendaciones sobre el manejo farmacológico y psicológico de estos pacientes siguiendo la estructura PICO (Paciente-Intervención-Comparación-Outcome/resultados). Realizamos una evaluación de la calidad de los estudios y un resumen de la evidencia para cada pregunta siguiendo las recomendaciones del grupo de trabajo GRADE («Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation»).(AU)

Although correct diagnosis and management of patients with schizophrenia and a comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) would determine a decrease in morbidity and mortality in these patients, development of efficient therapeutic strategies is still pending. We present recommendations on the pharmacological and psychological management of these patients following the ‘PICO’ structure (Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcomes). Evaluation of the quality of studies and summary of the evidence for each question was performed following the recommendations of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) working group.(AU)

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con depresión y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias / Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with depression and a comorbid substance use disorder

La concurrencia de depresión y un trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) en pacientes que presentan patología dual ha sido reconocida desde hace mucho tiempo como una consideración importante en la práctica clínica. Esta revisión sintetiza la evidencia de intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales para trastornos comórbidos de depresión y uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de las mejores intervenciones para tratar a estos pacientes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE.(AU)

Co-occurrence of depression and a substance use disorder (SUD) in patients who present dual diagnoses has been long recognized as an important consideration in clinical practice. This review synthesizes the evidence of pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for comorbid depressive disorders and SUDs while providing clinical recommendations about the best interventions to address these patients. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach.(AU)

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con trastorno bipolar y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias / Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with bipolar disorder and comorbid substance use

Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que se han realizado en trastorno bipolar (TB) y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias versus los síntomas de estado de ánimo en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Muy pocos de los ensayos aleatorizados realizados hasta la fecha han proporcionado evidencia consistente para el manejo tanto de los síntomas de estado de ánimo como del uso de sustancias en pacientes con TB. No hay disponibilidad de ensayos clínicos para pacientes con TB que utilizan el cannabis. Algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de estado de ánimo sin beneficios para el uso de alcohol o sustancias ilícitas.(AU)

This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid bipolar disorder (BD) and substance use disorders (SUDs) while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus mood symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Very few of the randomized trials performed so far have provided consistent evidence for the management of both mood symptoms and substance use in patients with a BD. No clinical trials are available for bipolar patients using cannabis. Some treatments have shown benefit for mood symptoms without benefits for alcohol or illicit substance use.(AU)

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con un trastorno de ansiedad y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias / Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with an anxiety disorder and comorbid substance use

Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que han sido llevadas a cabo en trastornos de ansiedad con un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias y los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Hay ensayos clínicos disponibles únicamente para el trastorno por estrés postraumático (TEPT) y para el trastorno de ansiedad. En cuanto al diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias, todos los estudios han incluido pacientes con consumo de alcohol, ninguno de ellos ha abordado el consumo de cocaína, cannabis o nicotina. Aunque algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de ansiedad sin beneficios para el consumo de alcohol u otras sustancias, solo se han ensayado enfoques farmacológicos limitados (sertralina, desipramina, paroxetina, buspirona, naltrexona y disulfiram).(AU)

This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid anxiety disorders and SUDs while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus anxiety symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Clinical trials are only available for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and for social anxiety. Concerning the comorbid substance use, all the studies have included patients with alcohol use, none of them have dealt with cocaine, cannabis or nicotine use. Although some treatments have shown benefit for anxiety symptoms without benefits for alcohol or other substance use, only limited pharmacological approaches have been assayed (sertraline, desipramine, paroxetine, buspirone, naltrexone and disulfiram).(AU)

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias / Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and comorbid substance use

La evidencia actual confirma la alta comorbilidad entre el trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) y trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS). Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales que se han evaluado en pacientes con TDAH y TUS, y ofrece recomendaciones mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de alcohol, la atomoxetina es recomendable para reducir los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil) y el craving de alcohol (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cannabis, la atomoxetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de cannabis (recomendación débil). 3) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cocaína, el metilfenidato no es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH o para reducir el uso de cocaína (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de nicotina, es recomendable el metilfenidato para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil). Los psicoestimulantes, como metilfenidato o lisdexanfetamina, no son recomendables para reducir el uso de nicotina (recomendación débil). 5) Respecto de los pacientes con TDAH y cualquier TUS, el uso de los psicoestimulantes es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte).(AU)

Substantial evidence has confirmed the high comorbidity between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and a substance use disorder (SUD). This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions conducted in ADHD and SUDs, and provides clinical recommendations using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with ADHD and alcohol use, atomoxetine is recommended to reduce ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation) and alcohol craving (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with ADHD and cannabis use disorder, atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with ADHD and cocaine use disorder, methylphenidate is not recommended to improve ADHD symptoms or to reduce cocaine use (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with ADHD and comorbid nicotine use disorder, methylphenidate is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation). Psychoestimulants, such as methylphenidate or lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, are not recommended to reduce nicotine use (weak recommendation). 5) Regarding patients with ADHD and any SUD, the use of psychostimulants is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation).(AU)

Nocebo Response in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of 105 Randomized Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine nocebo response in ADHD, identify covariates modifying nocebo response, and study the relationship between nocebo response and drug safety. METHOD: Systematic review of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials (RCT) investigating the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for ADHD patients. The influence of covariates was studied using meta-regression. RESULTS: A total of 105 studies with 8,743 patients in placebo arms were included. Slightly over half (55.5%) of the patients experienced adverse events (AE) while receiving placebo. Nocebo response was associated positively with age, treatment length and method for collecting AEs. Studies with the largest nocebo response showcased the greatest drug response and the best outcome for drug safety. CONCLUSION: Nocebo response in ADHD RCTs is remarkable, showing a positive relationship with drug response, and a negative relationship with drug safety.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with bipolar disorder and comorbid substance use. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con trastorno bipolar y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid bipolar disorder (BD) and substance use disorders (SUDs) while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus mood symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Very few of the randomized trials performed so far have provided consistent evidence for the management of both mood symptoms and substance use in patients with a BD. No clinical trials are available for bipolar patients using cannabis. Some treatments have shown benefit for mood symptoms without benefits for alcohol or illicit substance use. Our results suggest that 1) we can (weakly) recommend the use of adjuvant valproate or naltrexone to improve symptoms of alcohol use disorder; 2) Lamotrigine add-on therapy seems to reduce cocaine-related symptoms and is therefore recommended (moderate strength); and 3) Varenicline is (weakly) recommended to improve nicotine abstinence. Integrated group therapy is the most-well validated and efficacious approach on substance use outcomes if substance use is targeted in an initial treatment phase.

Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que se han realizado en trastorno bipolar (TB) y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias versus los síntomas de estado de ánimo en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Muy pocos de los ensayos aleatorizados realizados hasta la fecha han proporcionado evidencia consistente para el manejo tanto de los síntomas de estado de ánimo como del uso de sustancias en pacientes con TB. No hay disponibilidad de ensayos clínicos para pacientes con TB que utilizan el cannabis. Algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de estado de ánimo sin beneficios para el uso de alcohol o sustancias ilícitas. Nuestros resultados sugieren que 1) podemos (débilmente) recomendar el uso de ácido valproico o naltrexona adyuvante para aliviar los síntomas del trastorno por consumo de alcohol; 2) el tratamiento complementario con lamotrigina parece reducir los síntomas relacionados con la cocaína y, por tanto, es recomendable (fuerza moderada); y 3) la vareniclina es recomendable (débilmente) para mejorar la abstinencia de la nicotina. La terapia grupal integrada es el enfoque con más validación y eficacia sobre los resultados en el uso de sustancias cuando este uso es abordado durante la fase inicial de tratamiento.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with an anxiety disorder and comorbid substance use. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con un trastorno de ansiedad y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid anxiety disorders and SUDs while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus anxiety symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Clinical trials are only available for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and for social anxiety. Concerning the comorbid substance use, all the studies have included patients with alcohol use, none of them have dealt with cocaine, cannabis or nicotine use. Although some treatments have shown benefit for anxiety symptoms without benefits for alcohol or other substance use, only limited pharmacological approaches have been assayed (sertraline, desipramine, paroxetine, buspirone, naltrexone and disulfiram). Our results suggest that 1) we can (weakly) recommend the use of desipramine over paroxetine to alleviate symptoms of anxiety in patients with a PTSD and alcohol use; 2) In these patients, the use of naltrexone to reduce symptoms of anxiety is also recommended (weak strength); and 3) SSRI antidepressants vs placebo can be recommended to reduce alcohol use (weak recommendation). Our review highlights the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite studies with generalizable samples to provide more definite guidance for clinical practice.

Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que han sido llevadas a cabo en trastornos de ansiedad con un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias y los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Hay ensayos clínicos disponibles únicamente para el trastorno por estrés postraumático (TEPT) y para el trastorno de ansiedad. En cuanto al diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias, todos los estudios han incluido pacientes con consumo de alcohol, ninguno de ellos ha abordado el consumo de cocaína, cannabis o nicotina. Aunque algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de ansiedad sin beneficios para el consumo de alcohol u otras sustancias, solo se han ensayado enfoques farmacológicos limitados (sertralina, desipramina, paroxetina, buspirona, naltrexona y disulfiram). Nuestros resultados sugieren que 1) podemos (débilmente) recomendar el uso de desipramina sobre la paroxetina para aliviar los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con un TEPT y consumo de alcohol; 2) en estos pacientes, el uso de naltrexona para reducir los síntomas de ansiedad es también recomendable (fuerza débil); y 3) se pueden recomendar antidepresivos ISRS frente a placebo para reducir el consumo de alcohol (recomendación débil). Nuestra revisión pone de relieve la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios más grandes, multisitio con muestras generalizables para proporcionar evidencia más definitiva para la práctica clínica.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and comorbid substance use. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

Substantial evidence has confirmed the high comorbidity between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and a substance use disorder (SUD). This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions conducted in ADHD and SUDs, and provides clinical recommendations using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with ADHD and alcohol use, atomoxetine is recommended to reduce ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation) and alcohol craving (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with ADHD and cannabis use disorder, atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with ADHD and cocaine use disorder, methylphenidate is not recommended to improve ADHD symptoms or to reduce cocaine use (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with ADHD and comorbid nicotine use disorder, methylphenidate is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation). Psychoestimulants, such as methylphenidate or lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, are not recommended to reduce nicotine use (weak recommendation). 5) Regarding patients with ADHD and any SUD, the use of psychostimulants is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation). In these patients, the use of atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to decrease substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation). Atomoxetine and psychostimulants appear to be safe in patients with any SUD (strong recommendation). Our review suggests the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite, randomized studies to provide more definite and conclusive evidence.

La evidencia actual confirma la alta comorbilidad entre el trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) y trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS). Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales que se han evaluado en pacientes con TDAH y TUS, y ofrece recomendaciones mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de alcohol, la atomoxetina es recomendable para reducir los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil) y el craving de alcohol (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cannabis, la atomoxetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de cannabis (recomendación débil). 3) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cocaína, el metilfenidato no es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH o para reducir el uso de cocaína (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de nicotina, es recomendable el metilfenidato para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil). Los psicoestimulantes, como metilfenidato o lisdexanfetamina, no son recomendables para reducir el uso de nicotina (recomendación débil). 5) Respecto de los pacientes con TDAH y cualquier TUS, el uso de los psicoestimulantes es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte). En estos pacientes, el uso de atomexetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte). La atomoxetina y los psicoestimulantes parecen ser seguros en pacientes con cualquier TUS (recomendación fuerte). Nuestra revisión sugiere la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios aleatorizados, multicéntricos y de mayor tamaño muestral para proporcionar más evidencia definitiva y concluyente.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and a comorbid substance use. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con un trastorno del espectro esquizofrénico y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

Although correct diagnosis and management of patients with schizophrenia and a comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) would determine a decrease in morbidity and mortality in these patients, development of efficient therapeutic strategies is still pending. We present recommendations on the pharmacological and psychological management of these patients following the 'PICO' structure (Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcomes). Evaluation of the quality of studies and summary of the evidence for each question was performed following the recommendations of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) working group. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, it is not possible to recommend one antipsychotic drug over another (between olanzapine, risperidone or haloperidol) for improving psychotic symptoms, reducing cannabis use, or improving pragmatic variables (weak recommendation). Clozapine cannot be recommended to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with schizophrenia and cocaine use disorder we recommend haloperidol over olanzapine to reduce craving (moderate recommendation), and olanzapine over haloperidol to improve motor side effects in these patients (moderate recommendation). 3) In patients with schizophrenia and alcohol use disorder while naltrexone is recommended to reduce alcohol use (in terms of reducing alcohol craving) (weak recommendation), there is insufficient evidence to make any recommendation on the use of adjuvant acamprosate (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with schizophrenia and nicotine use disorder, adjuvant bupropion and varenicline are recommended for reducing nicotine use and nicotine abstinence (strong/moderate recommendation). 5) In patients with schizophrenia and polydrug use disorder, second-generation over first-generation antipsychotic drugs and olanzapine over other second-generation antipsychotics are recommended to improve psychotic symptoms (moderate/weak recommendation).

Aunque el correcto diagnóstico y manejo de los pacientes con esquizofrenia y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) determinaría una disminución de la morbilidad y mortalidad en estos pacientes, el desarrollo de estrategias terapéuticas eficientes es todavía una asignatura pendiente. Presentamos recomendaciones sobre el manejo farmacológico y psicológico de estos pacientes siguiendo la estructura PICO (Paciente-Intervención-Comparación-Outcome/resultados). Realizamos una evaluación de la calidad de los estudios y un resumen de la evidencia para cada pregunta siguiendo las recomendaciones del grupo de trabajo GRADE («Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation¼). Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de cannabis, no es posible recomendar un fármaco antipsicótico sobre otro (entre olanzapina, risperidona o haloperidol) para mejorar los síntomas psicóticos, reducir el consumo de cannabis o mejorar las variables pragmáticas (recomendación débil). No se puede recomendar la clozapina para reducir el consumo de cannabis (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de cocaína, recomendamos haloperidol sobre olanzapina para reducir el craving (recomendación moderada) y olanzapina sobre haloperidol para mejorar los efectos secundarios motores en estos pacientes (recomendación moderada). 3) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de alcohol, mientras que se recomienda naltrexona para reducir el consumo de alcohol (en términos de reducción del craving de alcohol) (recomendación débil), no hay evidencia suficiente para hacer ninguna recomendación sobre el uso de acamprosato como adyuvante (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de nicotina, se recomiendan bupropión y vareniclina adyuvantes para reducir el consumo y la abstinencia de nicotina (recomendación fuerte/moderada). 5) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por policonsumo, se recomiendan antipsicóticos de segunda generación sobre los de primera generación y olanzapina sobre otros antipsicóticos de segunda generación para mejorar los síntomas psicóticos (recomendación moderada/débil).

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with depression and a comorbid substance use disorder. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con depresión y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

Co-occurrence of depression and a substance use disorder (SUD) in patients who present dual diagnoses has been long recognized as an important consideration in clinical practice. This review synthesizes the evidence of pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for comorbid depressive disorders and SUDs while providing clinical recommendations about the best interventions to address these patients. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest that 1) In patients with depression and alcohol consumption, the administration of non-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants instead of SSRI is recommended for improvement of depressive symptoms (strong recommendation). Neither SSRI (strong recommendation) nor non-SSRI (weak recommendation) antidepressants are recommended for reduction in alcohol consumption. 2) In patients with depression and cannabis use, the use of venlafaxine is not recommended (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with depression and cocaine consumption, the use of SSRI antidepressants for improving depressive symptoms (weak recommendation) or to reduce cocaine use is not recommended (strong recommendation). The use of non-SSRI antidepressants is only recommended for improving depressive symptoms (strong recommendation). 4) The administration of bupropion to reduce nicotine consumption is not recommended (strong recommendation). 5) Regarding psychological treatment, in patients with depression and co-occurring alcohol disorder, both pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioural therapy have positive effects on internalizing symptoms and in reducing alcohol consumption (weak recommendation). Our review suggests the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite, randomized studies to provide more definite evidence.

La concurrencia de depresión y un trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) en pacientes que presentan patología dual ha sido reconocida desde hace mucho tiempo como una consideración importante en la práctica clínica. Esta revisión sintetiza la evidencia de intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales para trastornos comórbidos de depresión y uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de las mejores intervenciones para tratar a estos pacientes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren que: 1) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de alcohol, se recomienda la administración de antidepresivos inhibidores de la recaptación de serotonina (ISRS) no selectivos en lugar de los ISRS para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación fuerte). No se recomiendan antidepresivos ISRS (recomendación fuerte) ni antidepresivos no ISRS (recomendación débil) para reducir el consumo de alcohol; 2) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de cannabis, no se recomienda el uso de venlafaxina (recomendación débil); 3) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de cocaína, no se recomienda el uso de antidepresivos ISRS para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación débil) o para reducir el consumo de cocaína (recomendación fuerte). El uso de antidepresivos no ISRS solo se recomienda para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación fuerte); 4) no se recomienda la administración de bupropión para reducir el consumo de nicotina (recomendación fuerte), y 5) en cuanto al tratamiento psicológico, en pacientes con depresión y trastorno de alcohol concurrente, tanto la farmacoterapia como la terapia cognitivo-conductual tienen efectos positivos en la internalización de los síntomas y en la reducción del consumo de alcohol (recomendación débil). Nuestra revisión sugiere la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios aleatorizados, multisitio y más grandes para proporcionar más evidencia definitiva.

Placebo Response and Its Predictors in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Meta-Analysis and Comparison of Meta-Regression and MetaForest.

BACKGROUND: High placebo response in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can reduce medication-placebo differences, jeopardizing the development of new medicines. This research aims to (1) determine placebo response in ADHD, (2) compare the accuracy of meta-regression and MetaForest in predicting placebo response, and (3) determine the covariates associated with placebo response. METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial investigating pharmacological interventions for ADHD was performed. Placebo response was defined as the change from baseline in ADHD symptom severity assessed according to the 18-item, clinician-rated, DSM-based rating scale. The effect of study design-, intervention-, and patient-related covariates in predicting placebo response was studied by means of meta-regression and MetaForest. RESULTS: Ninety-four studies including 6614 patients randomized to placebo were analyzed. Overall, placebo response was -8.9 points, representing a 23.1% reduction in the severity of ADHD symptoms. Cross-validated accuracy metrics for meta-regression were R2 = 0.0012 and root mean squared error = 3.3219 for meta-regression and 0.0382 and 3.2599 for MetaForest. Placebo response among ADHD patients increased by 63% between 2001 and 2020 and was larger in the United States than in other regions of the world. CONCLUSIONS: Strong placebo response was found in ADHD patients. Both meta-regression and MetaForest showed poor performance in predicting placebo response. ADHD symptom improvement with placebo has markedly increased over the last 2 decades and is greater in the United States than the rest of the world.

Relationship Between Treatment Duration and Efficacy of Pharmacological Treatment for ADHD: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of 87 Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials.

Objective: To determine the relationship between treatment duration and the efficacy of pharmacological treatment for reducing ADHD symptoms. Method: We conducted a systematic review of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy of pharmacological interventions in patients with ADHD. The last bibliographic search was performed in April 15, 2019. The effect of treatment duration on efficacy was studied using meta-regression. Results: A total of 87 studies lasting from 3 to 28 weeks were included. Pharmacological treatment improved ADHD symptom severity by -7.35 points. Treatment duration did not moderate the efficacy of pharmacological treatment. Consistent results were found for psychostimulant drugs, methylphenidate, amphetamine derivatives, atomoxetine, and α2-agonists. A negative correlation was found between baseline ADHD severity efficacy (Coefficient = -.250, p = .013). Conclusion: The efficacy of pharmacological treatment for ADHD remains stable over time. A greater efficacy in more severe patients is suggested.

Amphetamines for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a childhood-onset disorder characterised by inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. ADHD can persist into adulthood and can affects individuals' social and occupational functioning, as well as their quality of life and health. ADHD is frequently associated with other mental disorders such as substance use disorders and anxiety and affective disorders. Amphetamines are used to treat adults with ADHD, but uncertainties about their efficacy and safety remain. OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy and safety of amphetamines for adults with ADHD. SEARCH METHODS: In August 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, 10 other databases, and two trials registers, and we ran citation searches for included studies. We also contacted the corresponding authors of all included studies, other experts in the field, and the pharmaceutical company, Shire, and we searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews for other published, unpublished, or ongoing studies. For each included study, we performed a citation search in Web of Science to identify any later studies that may have cited it. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of amphetamines (at any dose) for ADHD in adults aged 18 years and over against placebo or an active intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted data from each included study. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) and the risk ratio (RR) to assess continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. We conducted a stratified analysis to determine the influence of moderating variables. We assessed trials for risk of bias and drew a funnel plot to investigate the possibility of publication bias. We rated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach, which yielded high, moderate, low, or very low quality ratings based on evaluation of within-trial risk of bias, directness of evidence, heterogeneity of data; precision of effect estimates, and risk of publication bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included 19 studies that investigated three types of amphetamines: dexamphetamine (10.2 mg/d to 21.8 mg/d), lisdexamfetamine (30 mg/d to 70 mg/d), and mixed amphetamine salts (MAS; 12.5 mg/d to 80 mg/d). These studies enrolled 2521 participants; most were middle-aged (35.3 years), Caucasian males (57.2%), with a combined type of ADHD (78.8%). Eighteen studies were conducted in the USA, and one study was conducted in both Canada and the USA. Ten were multi-site studies. All studies were placebo-controlled, and three also included an active comparator: guanfacine, modafinil, or paroxetine. Most studies had short-term follow-up and a mean study length of 5.3 weeks.We found no studies that had low risk of bias in all domains of the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, mainly because amphetamines have powerful subjective effects that may reveal the assigned treatment, but also because we noted attrition bias, and because we could not rule out the possibility of a carry-over effect in studies that used a cross-over design.Sixteen studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry, one study was publicly funded, and two studies did not report their funding sources.Amphetamines versus placeboSeverity of ADHD symptoms: we found low- to very low-quality evidence suggesting that amphetamines reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by clinicians (SMD -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.04 to -0.75; 13 studies, 2028 participants) and patients (SMD -0.51, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.28; six studies, 120 participants).Retention: overall, we found low-quality evidence suggesting that amphetamines did not improve retention in treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.13; 17 studies, 2323 participants).Adverse events: we found that amphetamines were associated with an increased proportion of patients who withdrew because of adverse events (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.63 to 4.45; 17 studies, 2409 participants).Type of amphetamine: we found differences between amphetamines for the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by clinicians. Both lisdexamfetamine (SMD -1.06, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.85; seven studies, 896 participants; low-quality evidence) and MAS (SMD -0.80, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.66; five studies, 1083 participants; low-quality evidence) reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms. In contrast, we found no evidence to suggest that dexamphetamine reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.80 to 0.32; one study, 49 participants; very low-quality evidence). In addition, all amphetamines were efficacious in reducing the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by patients (dexamphetamine: SMD -0.77, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.40; two studies, 35 participants; low-quality evidence; lisdexamfetamine: SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.01; three studies, 67 participants; low-quality evidence; MAS: SMD -0.45, 95% CI -1.02 to 0.12; one study, 18 participants; very low-quality evidence).Dose at study completion: different doses of amphetamines did not appear to be associated with differences in efficacy.Type of drug-release formulation: we investigated immediate- and sustained-release formulations but found no differences between them for any outcome.Amphetamines versus other drugsWe found no evidence that amphetamines improved ADHD symptom severity compared to other drug interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Amphetamines improved the severity of ADHD symptoms, as assessed by clinicians or patients, in the short term but did not improve retention to treatment. Amphetamines were associated with higher attrition due to adverse events. The short duration of studies coupled with their restrictive inclusion criteria limits the external validity of these findings. Furthermore, none of the included studies had an overall low risk of bias. Overall, the evidence generated by this review is of low or very low quality.

Psychostimulant drugs for cocaine dependence.

BACKGROUND: Cocaine dependence is a severe disorder for which no medication has been approved. Like opioids for heroin dependence, replacement therapy with psychostimulants could be an effective therapy for treatment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychostimulants for cocaine abuse and dependence. Specific outcomes include sustained cocaine abstinence and retention in treatment. We also studied the influence of type of drug and comorbid disorders on psychostimulant efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: This is an update of the review previously published in 2010. For this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO up to 15 February 2016. We handsearched references of obtained articles and consulted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised parallel group controlled clinical trials comparing the efficacy of a psychostimulant drug versus placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included 26 studies involving 2366 participants. The included studies assessed nine drugs: bupropion, dexamphetamine, lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate, modafinil, mazindol, methamphetamine, mixed amphetamine salts and selegiline. We did not consider any study to be at low risk of bias for all domains included in the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. Attrition bias was the most frequently suspected potential source of bias of the included studies. We found very low quality evidence that psychostimulants improved sustained cocaine abstinence (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.77, P = 0.02), but they did not reduce cocaine use (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.33) among participants who continued to use it. Furthermore, we found moderate quality evidence that psychostimulants did not improve retention in treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06). The proportion of adverse event-induced dropouts and cardiovascular adverse event-induced dropouts was similar for psychostimulants and placebo (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, respectively). When we included the type of drug as a moderating variable, the proportion of patients achieving sustained cocaine abstinence was higher with bupropion and dexamphetamine than with placebo. Psychostimulants also appeared to increase the proportion of patients achieving sustained cocaine and heroin abstinence amongst methadone-maintained, dual heroin-cocaine addicts. Retention to treatment was low, though, so our results may be compromised by attrition bias. We found no evidence of publication bias. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found mixed results. Psychostimulants improved cocaine abstinence compared to placebo in some analyses but did not improve treatment retention. Since treatment dropout was high, we cannot rule out the possibility that these results were influenced by attrition bias. Existing evidence does not clearly demonstrate the efficacy of any pharmacological treatment for cocaine dependence, but substitution treatment with psychostimulants appears promising and deserves further investigation.

The treatment of dual ADHD: a drop in the ocean. / Tratamiento del TDAH Dual: una Gota en el Desierto.

Editorial of vol 28-3.

Editorial del vol 28-3.

Tratamiento del TDAH Dual: una Gota en el Desierto / The treatment of dual ADHD: a drop in the ocean

No disponible