Search

Background Over the past 60 years, the view that 'alcoholism' is a disease for which the only acceptable goal of treatment is abstinence has given way to the recognition that alcohol use disorders ( AUDs) occur on a continuum of severity, for which a variety of treatment options are appropriate. However, because the available treatments for AUDs are not effective for everyone, more research is needed to develop novel and more efficacious treatments to address the range of AUD severity in diverse populations. Here we offer recommendations for the design and analysis of alcohol treatment trials, with a specific focus on the careful conduct of randomized clinical trials of medications and nonpharmacological interventions for AUDs. Methods This paper provides a narrative review of the quality of published clinical trials and recommendations for the optimal design and analysis of treatment trials for AUDs. Results Despite considerable improvements in the design of alcohol clinical trials over the past 2 decades, many studies of AUD treatments have used faulty design features and statistical methods that are known to produce biased estimates of treatment efficacy. Conclusions The published statistical and methodological literatures provide clear guidance on methods to improve clinical trial design and analysis. Consistent use of state-of-the-art design features and analytic approaches will enhance the internal and external validity of treatment trials for AUDs across the spectrum of severity. The ultimate result of this attention to methodological rigor is that better treatment options will be identified for patients with an AUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Abstinence and no heavy drinking days are currently the only Food and Drug Administration–approved end points in clinical trials for alcohol use disorder (AUD). Many individuals who fail to meet these criteria may substantially reduce their drinking during treatment, and most individuals with AUD prefer drinking reduction goals. One‐ and two‐level reductions in World Health Organization (WHO) drinking risk levels have been proposed as alternative end points that reflect reduced drinking and are associated with reductions in drinking consequences, improvements in mental health, and reduced risk of developing alcohol dependence. The current study examined the association between WHO drinking risk level reductions and improvements in physical health and quality of life in a sample of individuals with alcohol dependence. Methods: Secondary data analysis of individuals with alcohol dependence (n = 1,142) enrolled in the longitudinal, prospective COMBINE study, a multi site randomized placebo‐controlled clinical trial, examining the association between reductions in WHO drinking risk levels and change in blood pressure, liver enzyme levels, and self‐reported quality of life following treatment for alcohol dependence. Results: One‐ and two‐level reductions in WHO drinking risk level during treatment were associated with significant reductions in systolic blood pressure (p < 0.001), improvements in liver enzyme levels (all p < 0.01), and significantly better quality of life (p < 0.001). Conclusions: One‐ and two‐level reductions in WHO drinking risk levels predicted significant improvements in markers of physical health and quality of life, suggesting that the WHO drinking risk level reduction could be a meaningful surrogate marker of improvements in how a person "feels and functions" following treatment for alcohol dependence. The WHO drinking risk levels could be useful in medical practice for identifying drinking reduction targets that correspond with clinically significant improvements in health and quality of life. At least 1‐ and 2‐level reductions in the World Health Organization (WHO) drinking risk levels by the end of treatment were associated with significant improvements at the end of treatment for physical health and quality of life outcomes. The WHO drinking risk level reductions capture considerable improvement in how patients feel and function in alcohol clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background To counteract the syndemics of HIV and alcohol in Sub-Saharan Africa, international collaborations have developed interventions to reduce alcohol consumption. Reliable and accurate methods are needed to estimate alcohol use outcomes. A direct alcohol biomarker called phosphatidylethanol ( PEth) has been shown to validate heavy, daily drinking, but the literature indicates mixed results for moderate and nondaily drinkers, including among HIV-infected populations. This study examined the associations of the PEth biomarker with self-report alcohol use at 2 time points in 127 HIV-infected outpatient drinkers in western Kenya. Methods Participants were consecutively enrolled in a randomized clinical trial to test the efficacy of a behavioral intervention to reduce alcohol use in Eldoret, Kenya. They endorsed current alcohol use, and a minimum score of 3 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption or consuming ≥6 drinks per occasion at least monthly in the past year. Study interviews and blood draws were conducted at baseline and at 3 months post treatment from July 2012 through September 2013. Alcohol use was assessed using the Timeline Followback questionnaire. Blood samples were analyzed for the presence of the PEth biomarker and were compared to self-reported alcohol use. We also conducted semistructured interviews with 14 study completers in February through March 2014. Results Baseline data indicated an average of moderate-heavy alcohol use: 50% drinking days and a median of 4.5 drinks per drinking day. At baseline, 46% of women (31 of 67) and 8% of men (5 of 60) tested negative for PEth ( p < 0.001). At the 3-month follow-up, 93% of women (25 of 27) and 97% of men (30 of 31) who reported drinking tested positive, while 70% of women (28 of 40) and 35% of men (10 of 29) who denied drinking tested negative for PEth. Interviews were consistent with self-reported alcohol use among 13 individuals with negative baseline results. Conclusions These results add to the growing literature showing lack of agreement between self-report and PEth results among unhealthy and nondaily drinkers, particularly women. More research is needed to determine at what level of consumption over what period of time PEth becomes a reliable and accurate indicator of alcohol use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule- IV ( AUDADIS- IV) and AUDADIS-5 are diagnostic interviews used in major epidemiological and other studies of alcohol use disorder ( AUD). Much of what we know regarding the prevalence of AUD in the United States is based upon this interview. However, past research and meta-analytic evidence suggest that differential operationalization of the AUD criteria across instruments can lead to differential endorsement of symptoms and resulting AUD diagnosis rates. In particular, studies employing the AUDADIS are observed to have markedly higher endorsement rates of withdrawal than other large epidemiological studies. One explanation for this is that when assessing withdrawal, the AUDADIS combines effects from the morning after drinking with those from the days following, thereby conflating hangover and withdrawal. Methods This study addresses whether this operationalization confounds rates of endorsement when compared to simpler, less ambiguous hangover or withdrawal stems. To this aim, 497 college student drinkers were randomized into 1 of 3 stem conditions: (i) hangover ( n = 164), (ii) withdrawal ( n = 167), or (iii) combined AUDADIS- IV ( n = 166). Results Across conditions, participants were more likely to report the occurrence of each withdrawal symptom in the combined stem condition than in the explicit withdrawal stem condition, but not in the explicit hangover stem condition. Within the combined stem condition, probed symptoms were more likely to be reported as a result of a hangover. Conclusions The AUDADIS potentially results in false positives for withdrawal, arguably a pathognomonic symptom of alcoholism and, in turn, likely affects rates of the diagnosis of AUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is an important and timely clinical issue particularly for combat veterans. Few pharmacologic options are available to treat PTSD, particularly among military personnel, and they are not based on rational neurobiology. The evidence for noradrenergic dysregulation in PTSD is strong, and the alpha-adrenergic agonist prazosin is one of the most promising medications to treat sleep disturbances associated with PTSD as well as PTSD symptoms among both veterans and civilians. Evidence also implicates noradrenergic dysregulation in the pathophysiology of alcohol dependence (AD); prazosin also may have efficacy in treating this disorder. The use of prazosin represents a rational and compelling approach for the treatment of PTSD and comorbid AD. Given the high rates of comorbid AD in trauma survivors with PTSD, and the enormous impact that these comorbid disorders have on psychosocial function and well-being, finding effective treatments for this population is of high clinical importance. Methods Ninety-six veterans with PTSD and comorbid AD were randomized to receive prazosin (16 mg) or placebo in an outpatient, randomized, double-blind, clinical trial for 13 weeks. Main outcomes included symptoms of PTSD, sleep disturbances, and alcohol use. Results Symptoms of PTSD improved over time, but contrary to the hypothesis, there was no medication effect on PTSD symptoms, or on sleep. Alcohol consumption also decreased over time, but there were no significant differences in outcomes between medication groups. Conclusions Prazosin was not effective in treating PTSD symptoms, improving sleep, or reducing alcohol consumption overall in this dually diagnosed group. This does not support the use of prazosin in an actively drinking population and suggests that the presence of a comorbid condition affects the efficacy of this medication. This study highlights the importance of conducting clinical trials in 'real-world' patients, as results may vary based on comorbid conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In clinical practice as well as research situations, it is of great importance to get reliable information about a patient's alcohol consumption. The aim of the study was to investigate the correlation of alcohol biomarkers (phosphatidylethanol [PEth], carbohydrate-deficient transferrin [ CDT], γ-glutamyltransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase) to retrospective as well as diary-based alcohol self-reports and to examine whether it is possible to correlate a biomarker result to a more precise level of alcohol consumption. Methods One hundred and sixty alcohol-dependent patients were included in a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of pharmacotherapy for alcohol dependence, of which 115 (76 men and 39 women) completed the study. Retrospective alcohol consumption data were collected at baseline, and alcohol diaries were used during the study. Blood samples for determination of alcohol biomarkers were collected on 5 occasions during the study. Results PEth and CDT showed a better correlation with alcohol consumption documented in the diary ( PEth rs = 0.56 and CDT rs = 0.35) than with retrospective consumption data ( PEth rs = 0.23 and CDT rs = 0.22). An even higher correlation ( rs = 0.63) was seen between the 2 alcohol biomarkers PEth and CDT. At all consumption levels, PEth had the highest sensitivity of all biomarkers studied. Conclusions PEth was the biomarker with the best correlation to self-reported alcohol consumption. PEth was superior to CDT owing to its substantially higher sensitivity but also due to its closer correlation to self-report. PEth values can be translated into an approximate level of alcohol consumption and PEth appears to be a more reliable measure of alcohol consumption than self-reports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]