Literature DB >> 11687171

Treatment for amphetamine dependence and abuse.

M Srisurapanont1, N Jarusuraisin, P Kittirattanapaiboon.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ease of synthesis from inexpensive and readily available chemicals makes possible the wide spread of amphetamine dependence and abuse. Amphetamine use is of concern because it causes a variety of devastating health consequences, including physical and neurological disorders due to amphetamines, amphetamine-induced mental disorders, health consequences of amphetamine use and social consequences of amphetamine use.
OBJECTIVES: To search and determine risks, benefits and costs of a variety treatments for amphetamine dependence or abuse. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches of MEDLINE (1966 - December 2000), EMBASE (1980 - February 2001), CINAHL (1982 - January 2001) and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library 2000 issue 4) were undertaken. References to the articles obtained by any means were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical controlled trials (CCTs) were included. Participants were people with amphetamine dependence or abuse, diagnosed by any set of criteria. Any kinds of biological and psychological treatment both alone and combined were examined. A variety of outcomes, for example, number of treatment responders, score changes, were considered. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers evaluated and extracted the data independently. The dichotomous data were extracted on an intention-to-treat basis in which the dropouts were assigned as participants with the worst outcomes. The Relative Risk (RR) with the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to assess the dichotomous data. The Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) with 95% CI was used to assessed the continuous data. MAIN
RESULTS: Fluoxetine, amlodipine, imipramine and desipramine have been investigated in four randomised-controlled trials. In comparison to placebo, short-term treatment of fluoxetine (40 mg/day) significantly decreased craving. In comparison to imipramine 10 mg/day, medium-term treatment of imipramine 150 mg/day significantly increased the duration of adherence to treatment. All four drugs had no benefits on a variety of outcomes, including amphetamine use. REVIEWER'S
CONCLUSIONS: The evidence about the treatment for amphetamine dependence and abuse is very limited. It shows that fluoxetine, amlodipine, imipramine and desipramine have very limited benefits for amphetamine dependence and abuse. Fluoxetine may decrease craving in short-term treatment. Imipramine may increase duration of adherence to treatment in medium-term treatment. Apart from these, no other benefits, in particular proximal benefits, can be found. This limited evidence suggests that no treatment has been demonstrated to be effective for the treatment of amphetamine dependence and abuse. Although there is a large number of people with amphetamine dependence and abuse worldwide, very few controlled trials in this issue have been conducted. As the previous treatment trials show no promising result, other treatments, both biological and psychosocial, should be further investigated. However, the results of neurotoxic studies of amphetamines are also crucial for the study designs appropriate for further treatment studies for amphetamine dependence and abuse.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11687171     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  12 in total

Review 1.  Potential adverse effects of amphetamine treatment on brain and behavior: a review.

Authors:  S M Berman; R Kuczenski; J T McCracken; E D London
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 15.992

Review 2.  The burden and management of crystal meth use.

Authors:  Jane A Buxton; Naomi A Dove
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-06-03       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Methylphenidate vs. resperidone in treatment of methamphetamine dependence: A clinical trial.

Authors:  Hassan Solhi; Hamid Reza Jamilian; Amir Mohammad Kazemifar; Javad Javaheri; Akram Rasti Barzaki
Journal:  Saudi Pharm J       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  mGluR5 antagonism attenuates methamphetamine reinforcement and prevents reinstatement of methamphetamine-seeking behavior in rats.

Authors:  Justin T Gass; Megan P H Osborne; Noreen L Watson; Jordan L Brown; M Foster Olive
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2008-09-17       Impact factor: 7.853

5.  Withdrawal symptoms in abstinent methamphetamine-dependent subjects.

Authors:  Todd Zorick; Liam Nestor; Karen Miotto; Catherine Sugar; Gerhard Hellemann; Graham Scanlon; Richard Rawson; Edythe D London
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 6.526

Review 6.  Animal models and treatments for addiction and depression co-morbidity.

Authors:  Neil E Paterson; Athina Markou
Journal:  Neurotox Res       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.911

Review 7.  Neurochemical consequences of dysphoric state during amphetamine withdrawal in animal models: a review.

Authors:  Junichi Kitanaka; Nobue Kitanaka; Motohiko Takemura
Journal:  Neurochem Res       Date:  2007-06-29       Impact factor: 3.996

8.  Six-month outcomes of a Web-based intervention for users of amphetamine-type stimulants: randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Robert J Tait; Rebecca McKetin; Frances Kay-Lambkin; Bradley Carron-Arthur; Anthony Bennett; Kylie Bennett; Helen Christensen; Kathleen M Griffiths
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 9.  The Health Effect of Psychostimulants: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Thierry Favrod-Coune; Barbara Broers
Journal:  Pharmaceuticals (Basel)       Date:  2010-07-22

10.  The glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, exendin-4, attenuates the rewarding properties of psychostimulant drugs in mice.

Authors:  Emil Egecioglu; Jörgen A Engel; Elisabet Jerlhag
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.