Dataset Information

Efficacy of as-needed nalmefene in alcohol-dependent patients with at least a high drinking risk level: results from a subgroup analysis of two randomized controlled 6-month studies.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

The aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of as-needed use of nalmefene 18 mg versus placebo in reducing alcohol consumption in patients who did not reduce their alcohol consumption after an initial assessment, i.e. the pooled subgroup of patients with at least a high drinking risk level (men: >60 g/day; women: >40 g/day) at both screening and randomization from the two randomized controlled 6-month studies ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720) and ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461).

Methods

Nalmefene 18 mg and placebo were taken on an as-needed basis. All the patients also received a motivational and adherence-enhancing intervention (BRENDA). The co-primary outcomes were number of heavy drinking days (HDDs) and mean total alcohol consumption (g/day) in Month 6 measured using the Timeline Follow-back method. Additionally, data on clinical improvement, liver function and safety were collected throughout the study.

Results

The pooled population consisted of 667 patients: placebo n = 332; nalmefene n = 335. There was a superior effect of nalmefene compared with placebo in reducing the number of HDDs [treatment difference: -3.2 days (95% CI: -4.8; -1.6); P < 0.0001] and total alcohol consumption [treatment difference: -14.3 g/day (-20.8; -7.8); P < 0.0001] at Month 6. Improvements in clinical status and liver parameters were greater in the nalmefene group compared with the placebo group. Adverse events and adverse events leading to dropout were more common with nalmefene than placebo.

Conclusion

As-needed nalmefene was efficacious in reducing alcohol consumption in patients with at least a high drinking risk level at both screening and randomization, and the effect in this subgroup was larger than in the total population.

SUBMITTER: van den Brink W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3746807 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep-Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy of as-needed nalmefene in alcohol-dependent patients with at least a high drinking risk level: results from a subgroup analysis of two randomized controlled 6-month studies.

van den Brink Wim W Aubin Henri-Jean HJ Bladström Anna A Torup Lars L Gual Antoni A Mann Karl K

Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire) 20130719 5

<h4>Aims</h4>The aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of as-needed use of nalmefene 18 mg versus placebo in reducing alcohol consumption in patients who did not reduce their alcohol consumption after an initial assessment, i.e. the pooled subgroup of patients with at least a high drinking risk level (men: >60 g/day; women: >40 g/day) at both screening and randomization from the two randomized controlled 6-month studies ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720) and ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461).<h4> ...[more]

PMID: 23873853

Similar Datasets

Project description:There is preliminary evidence that approach avoid training can shift implicit alcohol associations and improve treatment outcomes. We sought to replicate and extend those findings in US undergraduate social drinkers (Study 1) and at-risk drinkers (Study 2). Three adaptations of the approach avoid task (AAT) were tested. The first adaptation - the approach avoid training - was a replication and targeted implicit alcohol approach associations. The remaining two adaptations - the general identity and personalized identity trainings - targeted implicit drinking identity associations, which are robust predictors of hazardous drinking in US undergraduates. Study 1 included 300 undergraduate social drinkers. They were randomly assigned to real or sham training conditions for one of the three training adaptations, and completed two training sessions, spaced one week apart. Study 2 included 288 undergraduates at risk for alcohol use disorders. The same training procedures were used, but the two training sessions occurred within a single week. Results were not as expected. Across both studies, the approach avoid training yielded no evidence of training effects on implicit alcohol associations or alcohol outcomes. The general identity training also yielded no evidence of training effects on implicit alcohol associations or alcohol outcomes with one exception; individuals who completed real training demonstrated no changes in drinking refusal self-efficacy whereas individuals who completed sham training had reductions in self-efficacy. Finally, across both studies, the personalized identity training yielded no evidence of training effects on implicit alcohol associations or alcohol outcomes. Despite having relatively large samples and using a well-validated training task, study results indicated all three training adaptations were ineffective at this dose in US undergraduates. These findings are important because training studies are costly and labor-intensive. Future research may benefit from focusing on more severe populations, pairing training with other interventions, increasing training dose, and increasing gamification of training tasks.

Project description:ObjectivesTo quantify risk of overall cancer across all levels of alcohol consumption among women and men separately, with a focus on light to moderate drinking and never smokers; and assess the influence of drinking patterns on overall cancer risk.DesignTwo prospective cohort studies.SettingHealth professionals in the United States.Participants88,084 women and 47,881 men participating in the Nurses' Health Study (from 1980) and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (from 1986), followed until 2010.Main outcomes and measuresRelative risks of cancer.Results19,269 and 7571 (excluding non-advanced prostate cancers) incident cancers were documented among women and men, respectively, over 3,144,853 person years. Compared with non-drinkers, light to moderate drinkers had relative risks of total cancer of 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.06) and 1.04 (1.00 to 1.09; P(trend) = 0.12) for alcohol intake of 0.1-4.9 and 5-14.9 g/day among women, respectively. Corresponding values for men were 1.03 (0.96 to 1.11), 1.05 (0.97 to 1.12), and 1.06 (0.98 to 1.15; P(trend) = 0.31) for alcohol intake of 0.1-4.9, 5-14.9, and 15-29.9 g/day, respectively. Associations for light to moderate drinking and total cancer were similar among ever or never smokers, although alcohol consumption above moderate levels (in particular ≥ 30 g/day) was more strongly associated with risk of total cancer among ever smokers than never smokers. For a priori defined alcohol related cancers in men, risk was not appreciably increased for light and moderate drinkers who never smoked (P(trend) = 0.18). However, for women, even an alcohol consumption of 5-14.9 g/day was associated with increased risk of alcohol related cancer (relative risk 1.13 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.20)), driven by breast cancer. More frequent and heavy episodic drinking was not further associated with risk of total cancer after adjusting for total alcohol intake.ConclusionLight to moderate drinking is associated with minimally increased risk of overall cancer. For men who have never smoked, risk of alcohol related cancers is not appreciably increased for light and moderate drinking (up to two drinks per day). However, for women who have never smoked, risk of alcohol related cancers (mainly breast cancer) increases even within the range of up to one alcoholic drink a day.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral studies have objectively quantified drinking through the use of Alcohol Monitoring System's (AMS) transdermal alcohol concentration (TAC) device known as SCRAM CAM. Criteria that AMS uses to detect drinking are known to be conservative and only reliably detect heavy drinking equivalent to 5 or more standard drinks. Our group has developed Research Rules used to process TAC data in a manner that will detect low-level and moderate drinking even though it is below the AMS criteria for detection.MethodsSixteen male and 14 female paid research volunteers wore TAC monitors for 28 days in their natural environments and responded daily to text message prompts to self-report the previous day's drinking. Current analyses describe the Research Rules that we developed and how use of those rules impacts the detection of self-reported drinking treated as the standard in sensitivity/specificity analysis.ResultsWe observed 606 occurrences of positive TAC events over a total of 867 days and processed the TAC data to retain 345 as possible drinking events, even though AMS criteria confirmed drinking for only 163 of these events. The kinds of TAC events removed or retained by our rules are illustrated as cases of low and moderate drinking days that were detected by our rules but not by the conservative AMS criteria. AMS-confirmed TAC events have a high specificity (99.8%) to detect primarily heavy drinking, but have a poor sensitivity to detect lower-level drinking and a poor specificity as an indicator of alcohol abstinence. In contrast, our Research Rules detected 100% of TAC events detected by AMS but also detected 31% of the lower-level drinking events not detected by AMS, with 91% specificity.ConclusionsReliance upon the AMS criteria for alcohol detection affords a high specificity for detection of heavy drinking but is a poor indicator of abstinence rates. In contrast, use of our Research Rules provides more sensitive means to quantify either any drinking or low-moderate levels of drinking while still maintaining good specificity.

Dataset Information

Efficacy of as-needed nalmefene in alcohol-dependent patients with at least a high drinking risk level: results from a subgroup analysis of two randomized controlled 6-month studies.

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Efficacy of as-needed nalmefene in alcohol-dependent patients with at least a high drinking risk level: results from a subgroup analysis of two randomized controlled 6-month studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets