Erica N Grodin1, Suzanna Donato1, Han Du1, ReJoyce Green1, Spencer Bujarski1, Lara A Ray1,2. 1. Department of Psychology, University of California, 502 Portola Plaza, Los Angeles, California 90095 USA. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences. University of California, 757 Westwood Plaza #4, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA.
Abstract
AIMS: To test whether two critical design features, inclusion criteria of required pre-trial abstinence and pre-trial alcohol use disorder (AUD) diagnosis, predict the likelihood of detecting treatment effects in AUD pharmacotherapy trials. METHODS: This secondary data analysis used data collected from a literature review to identify randomized controlled pharmacotherapy trials for AUD. Treatment outcomes were selected into abstinence and no heavy drinking. Target effect sizes were calculated for each outcome and a meta-regression was conducted to test the effects of required pre-trial abstinence, required pre-trial AUD diagnosis, and their interaction on effect sizes. A sub-analysis was conducted on trials, which included FDA-approved medications for AUD. RESULTS: In total, 118 studies testing 19 medications representing 21,032 treated participants were included in the meta-regression analysis. There was no significant effect of either predictor on abstinence or no heavy drinking outcomes in the full analysis or in the sub-study of FDA-approved medications. CONCLUSION: By examining these design features in a quantitative, rather than qualitative, fashion the present study advances the literature and shows that requiring AUD diagnosis or requiring pre-trial abstinence do not impact the likelihood of a significant medication effect in the trial.
AIMS: To test whether two critical design features, inclusion criteria of required pre-trial abstinence and pre-trial alcohol use disorder (AUD) diagnosis, predict the likelihood of detecting treatment effects in AUD pharmacotherapy trials. METHODS: This secondary data analysis used data collected from a literature review to identify randomized controlled pharmacotherapy trials for AUD. Treatment outcomes were selected into abstinence and no heavy drinking. Target effect sizes were calculated for each outcome and a meta-regression was conducted to test the effects of required pre-trial abstinence, required pre-trial AUD diagnosis, and their interaction on effect sizes. A sub-analysis was conducted on trials, which included FDA-approved medications for AUD. RESULTS: In total, 118 studies testing 19 medications representing 21,032 treated participants were included in the meta-regression analysis. There was no significant effect of either predictor on abstinence or no heavy drinking outcomes in the full analysis or in the sub-study of FDA-approved medications. CONCLUSION: By examining these design features in a quantitative, rather than qualitative, fashion the present study advances the literature and shows that requiring AUD diagnosis or requiring pre-trial abstinence do not impact the likelihood of a significant medication effect in the trial.
Authors: Stephanie S O'Malley; James C Garbutt; David R Gastfriend; Qunming Dong; Henry R Kranzler Journal: J Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 3.153
Authors: Matthew C H Rohn; Mary R Lee; Samuel B Kleuter; Melanie L Schwandt; Daniel E Falk; Lorenzo Leggio Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Susanne Rösner; Andrea Hackl-Herrwerth; Stefan Leucht; Philippe Lehert; Simona Vecchi; Michael Soyka Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2010-09-08
Authors: Katie Witkiewitz; John W Finney; Alex H S Harris; Daniel R Kivlahan; Henry R Kranzler Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2015-08-11 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: D V Sheehan; Y Lecrubier; K H Sheehan; P Amorim; J Janavs; E Weiller; T Hergueta; R Baker; G C Dunbar Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 1998 Impact factor: 4.384