A meta-regression of methodological features that predict the effects of medications on the subjective response to alcohol.

ReJoyce Green, Han Du, Erica N Grodin, Steven J Nieto, Spencer Bujarski, Daniel J O Roche, Lara A Ray
Author Information
  1. ReJoyce Green: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. ORCID
  2. Han Du: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  3. Erica N Grodin: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. ORCID
  4. Steven J Nieto: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. ORCID
  5. Spencer Bujarski: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  6. Daniel J O Roche: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. ORCID
  7. Lara A Ray: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. ORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Alcohol administration paradigms have been used for early efficacy testing of novel compounds for alcohol use disorder (AUD). There has been an ongoing debate about sample characteristics and methodological features that affect the likelihood of detecting an early efficacy signal for AUD medications. We conducted a meta-regression to test whether the drinking level of the study sample and the peak breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) in the alcohol administration study predict the efficacy of AUD pharmacotherapies on the subjective responses to alcohol.
METHODS: We computed the effects of 21 medications on alcohol-induced stimulation, sedation, negative mood, and craving during alcohol administration in 49 studies.
RESULTS: Meta-regression analyses indicated a significant and positive effect of pre-study drinks per month on alcohol-induced stimulation (�� = 0.142, p < 0.0001), such that as drinking increases, the benefit of medication over placebo decreases. There was an effect of drinks per month on negative mood (�� = -0.164, p = 0.0248), such that at higher levels of drinks per month, the effects of medications on negative mood are stronger. For sedation, there was an effect of peak BrAC (�� = 0.119, p = 0.0002), such that at low levels of peak BrAC, the effects of medication on sedation were null. For craving, there was a peak BrAC �� drinks per month interaction such that at low levels of BrAC, a heavier drinking sample is required to detect the effects of medication on craving. Sensitivity analyses comparing naltrexone studies and non-naltrexone studies suggested that naltrexone was less sensitive to drinks per month across subjective response domains.
CONCLUSIONS: These analyses show that design features are critical in studies that test the effects of medications on the subjective responses to alcohol. By specifying the significance and directionality of these effects, as well as the specific points in BrAC or drinks per month at which medication effects are detectable, the study offers recommendations for design features of alcohol administration studies that aim to inform AUD medication development.

Keywords

References

  1. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2015 Apr;39(4):594-602 [PMID: 25833022]
  2. Addict Biol. 2019 Nov;24(6):1138-1152 [PMID: 31148304]
  3. Psychol Methods. 2017 Dec;22(4):799-817 [PMID: 29265851]
  4. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2016 Jan;40(1):6-17 [PMID: 26727518]
  5. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2013 Feb;103(4):784-91 [PMID: 23262301]
  6. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2020;258:443-462 [PMID: 31628604]
  7. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1984 Sep;41(9):879-84 [PMID: 6466047]
  8. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015 Feb;52:59-71 [PMID: 25459893]
  9. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010 Nov;35(2):334-44 [PMID: 19941895]
  10. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2011 Oct;35(10):1726-8 [PMID: 21919923]
  11. Addict Biol. 2017 Jan;22(1):235-245 [PMID: 26256114]
  12. Am J Psychiatry. 2021 Jun;178(6):560-571 [PMID: 33397141]
  13. BJPsych Open. 2019 Apr 22;5(3):e38 [PMID: 31685074]
  14. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2021 Feb;46(3):519-527 [PMID: 33235284]
  15. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2017 Nov;43(6):703-710 [PMID: 28426264]
  16. Curr Top Behav Neurosci. 2013;13:489-509 [PMID: 21560041]
  17. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2015 Mar;76(2):287-95 [PMID: 25785804]
  18. Br J Pharmacol. 2011 Oct;164(4):1335-56 [PMID: 21470204]
  19. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011 Apr;68(4):389-99 [PMID: 21464363]
  20. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2017 Feb;41(2):414-420 [PMID: 28129451]
  21. Behav Res Ther. 2016 Nov;86:11-22 [PMID: 27266992]
  22. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2017 Aug;42(9):1776-1788 [PMID: 28091532]
  23. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1994 Feb;62(1):75-82 [PMID: 8034833]
  24. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011 Jan 1;113(1):21-8 [PMID: 20727682]
  25. Biol Psychiatry. 2016 Mar 15;79(6):489-98 [PMID: 26117308]
  26. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2014;118:381-401 [PMID: 25175870]
  27. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2015 Sep;40(10):2347-56 [PMID: 25801501]
  28. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2009 Dec;33(12):2154-61 [PMID: 19764932]
  29. Addict Biol. 2021 Mar;26(2):e12903 [PMID: 32286721]
  30. EClinicalMedicine. 2019 Jun 17;12:70-78 [PMID: 31388665]
  31. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2020 Jan;44(1):23-35 [PMID: 31803968]
  32. Addict Biol. 2017 May;22(3):581-615 [PMID: 26833803]
  33. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2017 Aug;42(9):1825-1832 [PMID: 28393896]
  34. Res Synth Methods. 2020 Jan;11(1):36-65 [PMID: 31782621]
  35. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019 Jul 1;200:40-49 [PMID: 31085377]
  36. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2013 Jan;37 Suppl 1:E116-24 [PMID: 23240711]
  37. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008 Jul 1;96(1-2):1-15 [PMID: 18436394]
  38. Curr Pharm Des. 2010;16(19):2149-58 [PMID: 20482505]
  39. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2014 Jul 1;140:161-7 [PMID: 24837580]
  40. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2015 Jul;39(7):1193-202 [PMID: 26010049]
  41. J Abnorm Psychol. 2011 Aug;120(3):557-71 [PMID: 21443289]
  42. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2014 Jan;38(1):27-32 [PMID: 23889161]
  43. Addict Biol. 2012 May;17(3):513-27 [PMID: 22458728]

Grants

  1. F32 AA027699/NIAAA NIH HHS
  2. T32 DA024635/NIDA NIH HHS
  3. K24 AA025704/NIAAA NIH HHS
  4. K24AA025704/NIAAA NIH HHS
  5. R21 AA029771/NIAAA NIH HHS
  6. F32AA027699/NIAAA NIH HHS
  7. K01AA026005/NIAAA NIH HHS
  8. K01 AA026005/NIAAA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Affect
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Alcohol Drinking
Alcoholism
Behavior
Breath Tests
Child
Craving
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
Ethanol
Humans
Hypnotics and Sedatives
Middle Aged
Naltrexone
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult

Chemicals

Hypnotics and Sedatives
Ethanol
Naltrexone

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0alcoholeffectspermonthmedicationmedicationsBrACdrinksadministrationefficacyAUDfeaturespeaksubjectivestudiesearlysampledrinkingstudysedationnegativemoodcravinganalyseseffectlevelsusedisordermethodologicalmeta-regressiontestpredictresponsesalcohol-inducedstimulation�� = 0p = 0lownaltrexoneresponsedesignBACKGROUND:AlcoholparadigmsusedtestingnovelcompoundsongoingdebatecharacteristicsaffectlikelihooddetectingsignalconductedwhetherlevelbreathconcentrationpharmacotherapiesMETHODS:computed21in 49 studiesRESULTS:Meta-regressionindicatedsignificantpositivepre-study142p < 00001increasesbenefitplacebodecreases�� = -01640248higherstronger1190002nullBrAC �� drinksinteractionheavierrequireddetectSensitivitycomparingnon-naltrexonesuggestedlesssensitiveacrossdomainsCONCLUSIONS:showcriticalspecifyingsignificancedirectionalitywellspecificpointsdetectableoffersrecommendationsaiminformdevelopmenthumanlaboratory

Similar Articles

Cited By