Buprenorphine added on brief cognitive behavioral therapy for treatment of methamphetamine use disorder

Background: Methamphetamine (MA) use remains a major public health concern around the world. Recent findings suggest that buprenorphine may be helpful for cocaine use reduction. Moreover, animal studies described reduced dopamine peak effect following MA use, due to the administration of low dose buprenorphine. Objectives: This study examined the effectiveness of buprenorphine with brief cognitive behavioral therapy on MA use disorder. Methods: The study was conducted in an outpatient substance abuse treatment center in Qazvin, Iran. Nineteen MA users received buprenorphine for 24 weeks combined with brief cognitive behavioral therapy in an outpatient substance abuse treatment program, three times per week, as a before and after non - randomization study. Clinical outcomes included treatment retention, MA use, degree of MA dependency and craving, quality of life, cognitive abilities questionnaire, addiction severity and also adverse events. Data was analyzed by performing repeated measures analysis and the Friedman test for nonparametric variables. Results: Fifteen participants completed the study during six months and frequency of MA use was significantly decreased at 24 weeks (P < 0.001). There were also significant reductions in craving (P < 0.001), degree of MA dependence (P < 0.001), and improvements in quality of life, cognitive ability, and some subscales of addiction severity. Conclusions: The results of this preliminary clinical study demonstrated that buprenorphine could potentially attenuate MA craving and alternate rewarding effects of MA and had promising effects on cognitive impairment. Furthermore, buprenorphine can be considered as a harm reduction intervention in some communities, in which the people, as a result of cultural beliefs, do not accept a therapy, which only consists of counseling and no medications

Atomoxetine Efficacy in Methamphetamine Dependence during Methadone Maintenance Therapy

BACKGROUND: Co-occurring methamphetamine (METH) use during methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) is a highly prevalent and progressive problem in Iran. There are no registered pharmacological treatments for treating METH use disorder. The present study investigates the potential efficacy of atomoxetine in the treatment of these patients. METHODS: In a double-blind, controlled clinical trial, 86 METH-dependents on MMT randomly received either atomoxetine (40 mg/d) or placebo. We measured the craving scores with visual analog scale (VAS) on a weekly basis, and evaluated depression, anxiety and stress with the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) on a monthly basis. Measurements were made in each weekly visit with urinary METH drug test. RESULTS: Atomoxetine significantly reduced METH craving (P < 0.001). Negative METH urine test increased significantly in the drug group compared to the placebo group (P = 0.007). While initially the METH urine test was positive for all patients, 56 (25/45) in the atomoxetine group and 26 (11/41) in the placebo group had negative METH urine tests after 8 weeks. DASS were decreased in both groups with a greater reduction in the atomoxetine group depression (P = 0.028), anxiety (P = 0.038), and stress (P = 0.031). Only mild side effects were observed. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the safety and clinical tolerance of atomoxetine, and its appropriate efficacy in suppressing METH craving and possible potential effects on its treatment. © 2019 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

Cumulative and booster effects of tdcs sessions on drug cravings, lapse, and cognitive impairment in methamphetamine use disorder: A case study report

Background and Objectives Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation method, which shows promising therapeutic effects in controlling drug cravings. Methods In this study, we present cumulative and booster effects of tDCS sessions on methamphetamine cravings, lapse, and cognitive impairment in a methamphetamine dependent subject. Results Our study shows cumulative effects of continuous anodal tDCS sessions on right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) could reduce drug cravings and their consequences. Discussion and Conclusions Moreover, booster tDCS treatments might be helpful in controlling psychological stress and drug cravings. (Am J Addict 2016;25:264-266) © 2016 American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry

A Methodological Checklist for fMRI Drug Cue Reactivity Studies: Development and Expert Consensus

Cue reactivity is one of the most frequently used paradigms in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of substance use disorders (SUDs). Although there have been promising results elucidating the neurocognitive mechanisms of SUDs and SUD treatments, the interpretability and reproducibility of these studies is limited by incomplete reporting of participants’ characteristics, task design, craving assessment, scanning preparation and analysis decisions in fMRI drug cue reactivity (FDCR) experiments. This hampers clinical translation, not least because systematic review and meta-analysis of published work are difficult. This consensus paper and Delphi study aims to outline the important methodological aspects of FDCR research, present structured recommendations for more comprehensive methods reporting and review the FDCR literature to assess the reporting of items that are deemed important. Forty-five FDCR scientists from around the world participated in this study. First, an initial checklist of items deemed important in FDCR studies was developed by several members of the Enhanced NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analyses (ENIGMA) Addiction working group on the basis of a systematic review. Using a modified Delphi consensus method, all experts were asked to comment on, revise or add items to the initial checklist, and then to rate the importance of each item in subsequent rounds. The reporting status of the items in the final checklist was investigated in 108 recently published FDCR studies identified through a systematic review. By the final round, 38 items reached the consensus threshold and were classified under seven major categories: ‘Participants’ Characteristics’, ‘General fMRI Information’, ‘General Task Information’, ‘Cue Information’, ‘Craving Assessment Inside Scanner’, ‘Craving Assessment Outside Scanner’ and ‘Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations’. The review of the 108 FDCR papers revealed significant gaps in the reporting of the items considered important by the experts. For instance, whereas items in the ‘General fMRI Information’ category were reported in 90.5% of the reviewed papers, items in the ‘Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations’ category were reported by only 44.7% of reviewed FDCR studies. Considering the notable and sometimes unexpected gaps in the reporting of items deemed to be important by experts in any FDCR study, the protocols could benefit from the adoption of reporting standards. This checklist, a living document to be updated as the field and its methods advance, can help improve experimental design, reporting and the widespread understanding of the FDCR protocols. This checklist can also provide a sample for developing consensus statements for protocols in other areas of task-based fMRI

A methodological checklist for fMRI drug cue reactivity studies:development and expert consensus

Cue reactivity measured by functional magnetic resonance imaging is used in studies of substance-use disorders. This Consensus Statement is the result of a Delphi process to arrive at parameters that should be reported in describing these studies. Cue reactivity is one of the most frequently used paradigms in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of substance use disorders (SUDs). Although there have been promising results elucidating the neurocognitive mechanisms of SUDs and SUD treatments, the interpretability and reproducibility of these studies is limited by incomplete reporting of participants characteristics, task design, craving assessment, scanning preparation and analysis decisions in fMRI drug cue reactivity (FDCR) experiments. This hampers clinical translation, not least because systematic review and meta-analysis of published work are difficult. This consensus paper and Delphi study aims to outline the important methodological aspects of FDCR research, present structured recommendations for more comprehensive methods reporting and review the FDCR literature to assess the reporting of items that are deemed important. Forty-five FDCR scientists from around the world participated in this study. First, an initial checklist of items deemed important in FDCR studies was developed by several members of the Enhanced NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analyses (ENIGMA) Addiction working group on the basis of a systematic review. Using a modified Delphi consensus method, all experts were asked to comment on, revise or add items to the initial checklist, and then to rate the importance of each item in subsequent rounds. The reporting status of the items in the final checklist was investigated in 108 recently published FDCR studies identified through a systematic review. By the final round, 38 items reached the consensus threshold and were classified under seven major categories: Participants Characteristics, General fMRI Information, General Task Information, Cue Information, Craving Assessment Inside Scanner, Craving Assessment Outside Scanner and Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations. The review of the 108 FDCR papers revealed significant gaps in the reporting of the items considered important by the experts. For instance, whereas items in the General fMRI Information category were reported in 90.5% of the reviewed papers, items in the Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations category were reported by only 44.7% of reviewed FDCR studies. Considering the notable and sometimes unexpected gaps in the reporting of items deemed to be important by experts in any FDCR study, the protocols could benefit from the adoption of reporting standards. This checklist, a living document to be updated as the field and its methods advance, can help improve experimental design, reporting and the widespread understanding of the FDCR protocols. This checklist can also provide a sample for developing consensus statements for protocols in other areas of task-based fMRI.Funding Agencies|National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)United States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Alcohol Abuse &amp; Alcoholism (NIAAA) [P50 AA010761]; Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)German Research Foundation (DFG) [402170461-TRR 265, 40217046-TRR 265, 421888313, 437718741, 324164820]; DFGGerman Research Foundation (DFG)European Commission [402170461 - TRR 265]; California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Grant Program of the University of California [T30IP0962]; Laureate Institute for Brain Research (LIBR); Warren K. Family Foundation; Oklahoma Center for Advancement of Science and Technologies (OCAST) [HR18-139]; Brain and Behavior Foundation (NARSAD Young Investigator Award) [27305]; National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)United States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [R01 DA030344, R21DA044465]; NIDAUnited States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [R01DA041528, R01DA048301, R01DA047851, K23DA042898, K12 DA000167, U01 DA041089, U24 DA041147, P30 DA048742]; NCCIH [R01AT010627]; NIAAAUnited States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Alcohol Abuse &amp; Alcoholism (NIAAA) [F32AA027699, R01 AA027765, R01 AA026859, U01 AA021692, U24 AA021695, R01AA023665, R01AA022328]; NIHUnited States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA [R01DA039135, K02DA042987, R01 DA041866, R01AA026844, K08AA023545, K23AA023894, R01DA040670, R21HL144673, R01DA041438, R21DA045853]; Bundesministerium fur Bildung und ForschungFederal Ministry of Education &amp; Research (BMBF) [FKZ: 01ZX1503, 01ZX1909B]; Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Major project [2019SHZDZX02]; Eli Lilly Canada Chair on schizophrenia researchEli Lilly; Australian Medical Research Future FundMedical Research Future Fund (MRFF) [MRF1141214]; National Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [81871426]</p

A methodological checklist for fMRI drug cue reactivity studies:development and expert consensus

Cue reactivity is one of the most frequently used paradigms in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of substance use disorders (SUDs). Although there have been promising results elucidating the neurocognitive mechanisms of SUDs and SUD treatments, the interpretability and reproducibility of these studies is limited by incomplete reporting of participants’ characteristics, task design, craving assessment, scanning preparation and analysis decisions in fMRI drug cue reactivity (FDCR) experiments. This hampers clinical translation, not least because systematic review and meta-analysis of published work are difficult. This consensus paper and Delphi study aims to outline the important methodological aspects of FDCR research, present structured recommendations for more comprehensive methods reporting and review the FDCR literature to assess the reporting of items that are deemed important. Forty-five FDCR scientists from around the world participated in this study. First, an initial checklist of items deemed important in FDCR studies was developed by several members of the Enhanced NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analyses (ENIGMA) Addiction working group on the basis of a systematic review. Using a modified Delphi consensus method, all experts were asked to comment on, revise or add items to the initial checklist, and then to rate the importance of each item in subsequent rounds. The reporting status of the items in the final checklist was investigated in 108 recently published FDCR studies identified through a systematic review. By the final round, 38 items reached the consensus threshold and were classified under seven major categories: ‘Participants’ Characteristics’, ‘General fMRI Information’, ‘General Task Information’, ‘Cue Information’, ‘Craving Assessment Inside Scanner’, ‘Craving Assessment Outside Scanner’ and ‘Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations’. The review of the 108 FDCR papers revealed significant gaps in the reporting of the items considered important by the experts. For instance, whereas items in the ‘General fMRI Information’ category were reported in 90.5% of the reviewed papers, items in the ‘Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations’ category were reported by only 44.7% of reviewed FDCR studies. Considering the notable and sometimes unexpected gaps in the reporting of items deemed to be important by experts in any FDCR study, the protocols could benefit from the adoption of reporting standards. This checklist, a living document to be updated as the field and its methods advance, can help improve experimental design, reporting and the widespread understanding of the FDCR protocols. This checklist can also provide a sample for developing consensus statements for protocols in other areas of task-based fMRI.</p

A methodological checklist for fMRI drug cue reactivity studies : development and expert consensus

Cue reactivity measured by functional magnetic resonance imaging is used in studies of substance-use disorders. This Consensus Statement is the result of a Delphi process to arrive at parameters that should be reported in describing these studies. Cue reactivity is one of the most frequently used paradigms in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of substance use disorders (SUDs). Although there have been promising results elucidating the neurocognitive mechanisms of SUDs and SUD treatments, the interpretability and reproducibility of these studies is limited by incomplete reporting of participants characteristics, task design, craving assessment, scanning preparation and analysis decisions in fMRI drug cue reactivity (FDCR) experiments. This hampers clinical translation, not least because systematic review and meta-analysis of published work are difficult. This consensus paper and Delphi study aims to outline the important methodological aspects of FDCR research, present structured recommendations for more comprehensive methods reporting and review the FDCR literature to assess the reporting of items that are deemed important. Forty-five FDCR scientists from around the world participated in this study. First, an initial checklist of items deemed important in FDCR studies was developed by several members of the Enhanced NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analyses (ENIGMA) Addiction working group on the basis of a systematic review. Using a modified Delphi consensus method, all experts were asked to comment on, revise or add items to the initial checklist, and then to rate the importance of each item in subsequent rounds. The reporting status of the items in the final checklist was investigated in 108 recently published FDCR studies identified through a systematic review. By the final round, 38 items reached the consensus threshold and were classified under seven major categories: Participants Characteristics, General fMRI Information, General Task Information, Cue Information, Craving Assessment Inside Scanner, Craving Assessment Outside Scanner and Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations. The review of the 108 FDCR papers revealed significant gaps in the reporting of the items considered important by the experts. For instance, whereas items in the General fMRI Information category were reported in 90.5% of the reviewed papers, items in the Pre- and Post-Scanning Considerations category were reported by only 44.7% of reviewed FDCR studies. Considering the notable and sometimes unexpected gaps in the reporting of items deemed to be important by experts in any FDCR study, the protocols could benefit from the adoption of reporting standards. This checklist, a living document to be updated as the field and its methods advance, can help improve experimental design, reporting and the widespread understanding of the FDCR protocols. This checklist can also provide a sample for developing consensus statements for protocols in other areas of task-based fMRI.Funding Agencies|National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)United States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Alcohol Abuse &amp; Alcoholism (NIAAA) [P50 AA010761]; Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)German Research Foundation (DFG) [402170461-TRR 265, 40217046-TRR 265, 421888313, 437718741, 324164820]; DFGGerman Research Foundation (DFG)European Commission [402170461 - TRR 265]; California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Grant Program of the University of California [T30IP0962]; Laureate Institute for Brain Research (LIBR); Warren K. Family Foundation; Oklahoma Center for Advancement of Science and Technologies (OCAST) [HR18-139]; Brain and Behavior Foundation (NARSAD Young Investigator Award) [27305]; National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)United States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [R01 DA030344, R21DA044465]; NIDAUnited States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [R01DA041528, R01DA048301, R01DA047851, K23DA042898, K12 DA000167, U01 DA041089, U24 DA041147, P30 DA048742]; NCCIH [R01AT010627]; NIAAAUnited States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USANIH National Institute on Alcohol Abuse &amp; Alcoholism (NIAAA) [F32AA027699, R01 AA027765, R01 AA026859, U01 AA021692, U24 AA021695, R01AA023665, R01AA022328]; NIHUnited States Department of Health &amp; Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA [R01DA039135, K02DA042987, R01 DA041866, R01AA026844, K08AA023545, K23AA023894, R01DA040670, R21HL144673, R01DA041438, R21DA045853]; Bundesministerium fur Bildung und ForschungFederal Ministry of Education &amp; Research (BMBF) [FKZ: 01ZX1503, 01ZX1909B]; Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Major project [2019SHZDZX02]; Eli Lilly Canada Chair on schizophrenia researchEli Lilly; Australian Medical Research Future FundMedical Research Future Fund (MRFF) [MRF1141214]; National Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [81871426]</p