Robert Miranda1,2,3, Stephanie S O'Malley1,2,3, Hayley Treloar Padovano1,2,3, Ran Wu1,2,3, Daniel E Falk1,2,3, Megan L Ryan1,2,3, Joanne B Fertig1,2,3, Thomas H Chun1,2,3, Srinivas B Muvvala1,2,3, Raye Z Litten1,2,3. 1. From the, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, (RMJ, SSO, HTP, RW, DEF, MLR, JBF, THC, SBM, RZL), Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA. 2. Department of Psychiatry, (RMJ, SSO, HTP, RW, DEF, MLR, JBF, THC, SBM, RZL), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. 3. Division of Medications Development, (RMJ, SSO, HTP, RW, DEF, MLR, JBF, THC, SBM, RZL), National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The alcohol cue reactivity paradigm is increasingly used to screen medications for the treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD) and other substance use disorders. Yet, its prospective association with craving and naturalistic drinking outcomes in clinical trials remains unknown. This study embedded repeated human laboratory assessments of alcohol cue reactivity within the context of a randomized controlled trial to examine the effects of varenicline tartrate (Chantix® ), a partial agonist of α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, on alcohol craving among treatment-seeking heavy drinkers with AUD. Our main objectives were to test whether varenicline, as compared to placebo, blunts alcohol cue-elicited craving and test whether alcohol cue reactivity observed in the human laboratory predicts subsequent alcohol craving and use during the remainder of the trial. DESIGN AND METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, 2-site study compared the effects of varenicline (up to 2 mg/d) and placebo on responses to in vivo alcohol cue and affective picture cue exposure in the human laboratory. Forty-seven volunteers (18 females, 29 males), ages 23 to 67 years (M = 43.7, SD = 11.5), were recruited from the community via advertisements to participate in a clinical trial designed to study the effects of varenicline on alcohol use. Participants were randomized to either varenicline or placebo for 6 weeks. RESULTS:Varenicline did not attenuate cue-induced alcohol craving relative to placebo, but craving captured during the cue reactivity paradigm significantly predicted subsequent alcohol use in real-world settings during the clinical trial. Higher craving predicted heavier alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are among the first to show alcohol cue-induced craving captured during a human laboratory paradigm predicts drinking outcomes in the context of a clinical trial.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The alcohol cue reactivity paradigm is increasingly used to screen medications for the treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD) and other substance use disorders. Yet, its prospective association with craving and naturalistic drinking outcomes in clinical trials remains unknown. This study embedded repeated human laboratory assessments of alcohol cue reactivity within the context of a randomized controlled trial to examine the effects of varenicline tartrate (Chantix® ), a partial agonist of α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, on alcohol craving among treatment-seeking heavy drinkers with AUD. Our main objectives were to test whether varenicline, as compared to placebo, blunts alcohol cue-elicited craving and test whether alcohol cue reactivity observed in the human laboratory predicts subsequent alcohol craving and use during the remainder of the trial. DESIGN AND METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, 2-site study compared the effects of varenicline (up to 2 mg/d) and placebo on responses to in vivo alcohol cue and affective picture cue exposure in the human laboratory. Forty-seven volunteers (18 females, 29 males), ages 23 to 67 years (M = 43.7, SD = 11.5), were recruited from the community via advertisements to participate in a clinical trial designed to study the effects of varenicline on alcohol use. Participants were randomized to either varenicline or placebo for 6 weeks. RESULTS:Varenicline did not attenuate cue-induced alcohol craving relative to placebo, but craving captured during the cue reactivity paradigm significantly predicted subsequent alcohol use in real-world settings during the clinical trial. Higher craving predicted heavier alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are among the first to show alcohol cue-induced craving captured during a human laboratory paradigm predicts drinking outcomes in the context of a clinical trial.
Authors: Tammy Chung; Antonio Noronha; Kathleen M Carroll; Marc N Potenza; Kent Hutchison; Vince D Calhoun; John D E Gabrieli; Jon Morgenstern; Sara Jo Nixon; Bruce E Wexler; Judson Brewer; Lara Ray; Francesca Filbey; Timothy J Strauman; Hedy Kober; Sarah W Feldstein Ewing Journal: Curr Addict Rep Date: 2016-07-09
Authors: Andrea de Bejczy; Elin Löf; Lisa Walther; Joar Guterstam; Anders Hammarberg; Gulber Asanovska; Johan Franck; Anders Isaksson; Bo Söderpalm Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2015-09-28 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: J MacKillop; L R Few; M K Stojek; C M Murphy; S F Malutinok; F T Johnson; S G Hofmann; J E McGeary; R M Swift; P M Monti Journal: Transl Psychiatry Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Elizabeth M Burnette; Steven J Nieto; Erica N Grodin; Lindsay R Meredith; Brian Hurley; Karen Miotto; Artha J Gillis; Lara A Ray Journal: Drugs Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 9.546
Authors: Erica N Grodin; Elizabeth M Burnette; ReJoyce Green; Aaron C Lim; Karen Miotto; Lara A Ray Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-06-23 Impact factor: 4.852