AIM: Modafinil was tested for efficacy in decreasing use in methamphetamine-dependent participants, compared to placebo. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, with 12 weeks of treatment and a 4-week follow-up. Eight outpatient substance abuse treatment clinics participated in the study. There were 210 treatment-seekers randomized, who all had a DSM-IV diagnosis of methamphetamine dependence; 68 participants toplacebo, 72 to modafinil 200mg, and 70 to modafinil 400mg, taken once daily on awakening. Participants came to the clinic three times per week for assessments, urine drug screens, and group psychotherapy. The primary outcome measure was a methamphetamine non-use week, which required all the week's qualitative urine drug screens to be negative for methamphetamine. RESULTS: Regression analysis showed no significant difference between either modafinil group (200 or 400mg) or placebo in change in weekly percentage having a methamphetamine non-use week over the 12-week treatment period (p=0.53). Similarly, a number of secondary outcomes did not show significant effects of modafinil. However, an ad-hoc analysis of medication compliance, by urinalysis for modafinil and its metabolite, did find a significant difference in maximum duration of abstinence (23 days vs. 10 days, p=0.003), between those having the top quartile of compliance (>85% of urines were positive for modafinil, N=36), and the lower three quartiles of modafinil 200 and 400mg groups (N=106). CONCLUSIONS: Although these data suggest that modafinil, plus group behavioral therapy, was not effective for decreasing methamphetamine use, the study is probably inconclusive because of inadequate compliance with taking medication. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
RCT Entities:
AIM: Modafinil was tested for efficacy in decreasing use in methamphetamine-dependent participants, compared to placebo. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, with 12 weeks of treatment and a 4-week follow-up. Eight outpatient substance abuse treatment clinics participated in the study. There were 210 treatment-seekers randomized, who all had a DSM-IV diagnosis of methamphetamine dependence; 68 participants to placebo, 72 to modafinil 200mg, and 70 to modafinil 400mg, taken once daily on awakening. Participants came to the clinic three times per week for assessments, urine drug screens, and group psychotherapy. The primary outcome measure was a methamphetamine non-use week, which required all the week's qualitative urine drug screens to be negative for methamphetamine. RESULTS: Regression analysis showed no significant difference between either modafinil group (200 or 400mg) or placebo in change in weekly percentage having a methamphetamine non-use week over the 12-week treatment period (p=0.53). Similarly, a number of secondary outcomes did not show significant effects of modafinil. However, an ad-hoc analysis of medication compliance, by urinalysis for modafinil and its metabolite, did find a significant difference in maximum duration of abstinence (23 days vs. 10 days, p=0.003), between those having the top quartile of compliance (>85% of urines were positive for modafinil, N=36), and the lower three quartiles of modafinil 200 and 400mg groups (N=106). CONCLUSIONS: Although these data suggest that modafinil, plus group behavioral therapy, was not effective for decreasing methamphetamine use, the study is probably inconclusive because of inadequate compliance with taking medication. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
Authors: Lenard A Adler; Thomas Spencer; Stephen V Faraone; Fred W Reimherr; Douglas Kelsey; David Michelson; Joseph Biederman Journal: J Atten Disord Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.256
Authors: Diana Nguyen; Lynne M Smith; Linda L Lagasse; Chris Derauf; Penny Grant; Rizwan Shah; Amelia Arria; Marilyn A Huestis; William Haning; Arthur Strauss; Sheri Della Grotta; Jing Liu; Barry M Lester Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: L Ferraro; T Antonelli; S Tanganelli; W T O'Connor; M Perez de la Mora; J Mendez-Franco; F A Rambert; K Fuxe Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Charles A Dackis; Kyle M Kampman; Kevin G Lynch; Helen M Pettinati; Charles P O'Brien Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Danielle C Turner; Luke Clark; Jonathan Dowson; Trevor W Robbins; Barbara J Sahakian Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2004-05-15 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Keith A Hermanstyne; Glenn-Milo Santos; Eric Vittinghoff; Deirdre Santos; Grant Colfax; Phillip Coffin Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-08-05 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Ann L Anderson; Shou-Hua Li; Denka Markova; Tyson H Holmes; Nora Chiang; Roberta Kahn; Jan Campbell; Daniel L Dickerson; Gantt P Galloway; William Haning; John D Roache; Christopher Stock; Ahmed M Elkashef Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2015-02-07 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Brendan J Tunstall; Chelsea P Ho; Jianjing Cao; Janaína C M Vendruscolo; Brooke E Schmeichel; Rachel D Slack; Gianluigi Tanda; Alexandra J Gadiano; Rana Rais; Barbara S Slusher; George F Koob; Amy H Newman; Leandro F Vendruscolo Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 5.250