OBJECTIVE: Individuals who are methamphetamine dependent exhibit higher rates of cognitive dysfunction than healthy people who do not use methamphetamine, and this dysfunction may have a negative effect on the success of behavioral treatments for the disorder. Therefore, a medication that improves cognition, such as modafinil (Provigil), may serve as a useful adjunct to behavioral treatments for methamphetamine dependence. Although cognitive-enhancing effects of modafinil have been reported in several populations, little is known about the effects of modafinil in methamphetamine-dependent individuals. We thus sought to evaluate the effects of modafinil on the cognitive performance of methamphetamine-dependent and healthy individuals. METHOD:Seventeen healthy subjects and 24 methamphetamine- dependent subjects participated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Effects of modafinil (200 mg, single oral dose) were assessed on participants' performance on tests of inhibitory control, working memory, and processing speed/attention. RESULTS: Across subjects, modafinil improved performance on a test of sustained attention, with no significant improvement on any other cognitive tests. However, within the methamphetamine-dependent group only, participants with a high baseline frequency of methamphetamine use demonstrated a greater effect of modafinil on tests of inhibitory control and processing speed than those participants with low baseline use of methamphetamine. CONCLUSIONS: Although modafinil produced limited effects across all participants, methamphetamine-dependent participants with a high baseline use of methamphetamine demonstrated significant cognitive improvement on modafinil relative to those with low baseline methamphetamine use. These results add to the findings from a clinical trial that suggested that modafinil may be particularly useful in methamphetamine-dependent subjects who use the drug frequently.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Individuals who are methamphetamine dependent exhibit higher rates of cognitive dysfunction than healthy people who do not use methamphetamine, and this dysfunction may have a negative effect on the success of behavioral treatments for the disorder. Therefore, a medication that improves cognition, such as modafinil (Provigil), may serve as a useful adjunct to behavioral treatments for methamphetamine dependence. Although cognitive-enhancing effects of modafinil have been reported in several populations, little is known about the effects of modafinil in methamphetamine-dependent individuals. We thus sought to evaluate the effects of modafinil on the cognitive performance of methamphetamine-dependent and healthy individuals. METHOD: Seventeen healthy subjects and 24 methamphetamine- dependent subjects participated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Effects of modafinil (200 mg, single oral dose) were assessed on participants' performance on tests of inhibitory control, working memory, and processing speed/attention. RESULTS: Across subjects, modafinil improved performance on a test of sustained attention, with no significant improvement on any other cognitive tests. However, within the methamphetamine-dependent group only, participants with a high baseline frequency of methamphetamine use demonstrated a greater effect of modafinil on tests of inhibitory control and processing speed than those participants with low baseline use of methamphetamine. CONCLUSIONS: Although modafinil produced limited effects across all participants, methamphetamine-dependent participants with a high baseline use of methamphetamine demonstrated significant cognitive improvement on modafinil relative to those with low baseline methamphetamine use. These results add to the findings from a clinical trial that suggested that modafinil may be particularly useful in methamphetamine-dependent subjects who use the drug frequently.
Authors: Nancy Jo Wesensten; Gregory Belenky; Mary A Kautz; David R Thorne; Rebecca M Reichardt; Thomas J Balkin Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2001-10-19 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: David C Glahn; Sebastian Therman; Marko Manninen; Matti Huttunen; Joakko Kaprio; Jouko Lönnqvist; Tyrone D Cannon Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2003-04-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Ruth Salo; Thomas E Nordahl; Kate Possin; Martin Leamon; David R Gibson; Gantt P Galloway; Neil M Flynn; Avishai Henik; Adolf Pfefferbaum; Edith V Sullivan Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2002-08-05 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Danielle C Turner; Trevor W Robbins; Luke Clark; Adam R Aron; Jonathan Dowson; Barbara J Sahakian Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Danielle C Turner; Luke Clark; Edith Pomarol-Clotet; Peter McKenna; Trevor W Robbins; Barbara J Sahakian Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2004-07 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: Aaron C Lim; Erica N Grodin; Rejoyce Green; Alexandra Venegas; Lindsay R Meredith; Kelly E Courtney; Nathasha R Moallem; Philip Sayegh; Edythe D London; Lara A Ray Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Adam C Mar; Simon R O Nilsson; Begoña Gamallo-Lana; Ming Lei; Theda Dourado; Johan Alsiö; Lisa M Saksida; Timothy J Bussey; Trevor W Robbins Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2017-07-26 Impact factor: 4.530