Corey R Roos1, Charla Nich2, Chung Jung Mun3, Theresa A Babuscio2, Justin Mendonca2, André Q C Miguel4, Elise E DeVito2, Sarah W Yip2, Katie Witkiewitz5, Kathleen M Carroll2, Brian D Kiluk2. 1. Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States. Electronic address: corey.roos@yale.edu. 2. Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States. 3. John Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States. 4. Washington State University Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington, United States; Department of Psychiatry, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil. 5. Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite calls for non-abstinence endpoints in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for cocaine use disorder, there is a lack of data validating non-abstinence endpoints. We conducted a clinical validation of reduction in cocaine frequency level as a non-abstinence endpoint in RCTs for cocaine use disorder (CUD). METHODS: We utilized a pooled dataset (n = 716; 63.6 % male, 51.4 % non-Hispanic white) from seven RCTs for CUD. We specified three cocaine frequency levels at baseline and end of treatment (EOT): abstinence, low frequency (1-4 days/month), and high frequency (5+ days/month). Multiple regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Among the sample, 38.3 % had at least a one-level reduction from baseline to EOT, whereas 61.7 % did not change/increased frequency level. At least a one-level reduction in cocaine frequency level from baseline to EOT versus no change/increase was significantly associated with better functioning up to one year following treatment on measures of cocaine use, as well as psychological, employment, legal, and other drug use problem severity domains of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI). We also conducted analyses only among those at the high frequency level at baseline and found those who reduced to low frequency use at EOT had similar outcomes at follow-up as those who reduced to abstinence. CONCLUSIONS: At least a one-level reduction in cocaine frequency level from pretreatment to EOT can be a clinically meaningful endpoint given its relation to sustained clinical benefit up to one-year following treatment. These data parallel recent findings regarding reduction in drinking risk level among individuals with alcohol use disorder.
BACKGROUND: Despite calls for non-abstinence endpoints in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for cocaine use disorder, there is a lack of data validating non-abstinence endpoints. We conducted a clinical validation of reduction in cocaine frequency level as a non-abstinence endpoint in RCTs for cocaine use disorder (CUD). METHODS: We utilized a pooled dataset (n = 716; 63.6 % male, 51.4 % non-Hispanic white) from seven RCTs for CUD. We specified three cocaine frequency levels at baseline and end of treatment (EOT): abstinence, low frequency (1-4 days/month), and high frequency (5+ days/month). Multiple regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Among the sample, 38.3 % had at least a one-level reduction from baseline to EOT, whereas 61.7 % did not change/increased frequency level. At least a one-level reduction in cocaine frequency level from baseline to EOT versus no change/increase was significantly associated with better functioning up to one year following treatment on measures of cocaine use, as well as psychological, employment, legal, and other drug use problem severity domains of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI). We also conducted analyses only among those at the high frequency level at baseline and found those who reduced to low frequency use at EOT had similar outcomes at follow-up as those who reduced to abstinence. CONCLUSIONS: At least a one-level reduction in cocaine frequency level from pretreatment to EOT can be a clinically meaningful endpoint given its relation to sustained clinical benefit up to one-year following treatment. These data parallel recent findings regarding reduction in drinking risk level among individuals with alcohol use disorder.
Authors: André Q C Miguel; Brian D Kiluk; Theresa A Babuscio; Charla Nich; Jair J Mari; Kathleen M Carroll Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-03-20 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Kathleen M Carroll; Charla Nich; Elise E DeVito; Julia M Shi; Mehmet Sofuoglu Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2018 Jan/Feb Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Andrea H Kline-Simon; Daniel E Falk; Raye Z Litten; Jennifer R Mertens; Joanne Fertig; Megan Ryan; Constance M Weisner Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Katie Witkiewitz; Daniel E Falk; Henry R Kranzler; Raye Z Litten; Kevin A Hallgren; Stephanie S O'Malley; Raymond F Anton Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Katie Witkiewitz; Kevin A Hallgren; Henry R Kranzler; Karl F Mann; Deborah S Hasin; Daniel E Falk; Raye Z Litten; Stephanie S O'Malley; Raymond F Anton Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2016-12-26 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Kathleen M Kantak; Jamie M Gauthier; Elon Mathieson; Eudokia Knyazhanskaya; Pedro Rodriguez-Echemendia; Heng-Ye Man Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2020-08-02 Impact factor: 3.332
Authors: Leigh V Panlilio; Samuel W Stull; Jeremiah W Bertz; Albert J Burgess-Hull; Stephanie T Lanza; Brenda L Curtis; Karran A Phillips; David H Epstein; Kenzie L Preston Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 4.415
Authors: Brian J Sherman; Michael J Sofis; Jacob T Borodovsky; Kevin M Gray; Aimee L McRae-Clark; Alan J Budney Journal: Psychol Addict Behav Date: 2021-07-01