Search

The prevalence of pathological gambling is 3.4% to 6% in treated Parkinson's disease, which is higher than the background population rate. In this review we discuss current evidence to indicate that dopamine agonists are much more likely to trigger this behavior than either L-dopa or selective monoamine oxidase B inhibitor monotherapy. New insights from recent behavioral and functional imaging studies and possible treatment approaches are also covered. A PubMed literature search using the terms "gambling" and "Parkinson's disease," "impulse control disorder," "impulsive compulsive behaviour," "dopamine agonist," of individual dopamine agonists, and of ongoing drug trials, using http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, was carried out for the period up to January 2011. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Alcohol dependence (AD) and gambling disorder (GD) are common addiction disorders with significant physical and mental health consequences. AD and GD are associated with dysregulated responses to reward which could be due to a common mechanism of dysregulated endogenous opioid signalling. We explored associations between reward anticipation responses, using the Monetary Incentive Delay (MID) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) task, and mu-opioid receptor (MOR) availability and endogenous opioid release capacity using [ 11 C]carfentanil positron emission tomography (PET), in 13 AD, 15 GD and 14 heathy control (HC) participants. We also examined differences in MID task reward anticipation responses between AD, GD and HC participants. These were secondary exploratory analysis of data collected to examine differences in MOR PET in addiction. We did not find significant differences in MID win > neutral anticipation BOLD responses compared between participant groups in a priori ROIs (ventral striatum, putamen, caudate) or whole brain analyses. We found no significant correlations between MID win > neutral anticipation BOLD responses and [ 11 C]carfentanil PET measures, except for limited negative correlations between putamen MOR availability and MID win > neutral anticipation BOLD response in AD participants. Previous research has suggested a limited role of endogenous opioid signalling on MID task reward anticipation responses in AD and HCs as these responses are not modulated by opioid receptor blockade and this may explain our lack of significant correlations in HC and AD or GD participants. Our results, particularly the lack of differences in MID win > neutral anticipation BOLD responses across participants groups, may be limited due to only including AD or GD participants who are abstinent or in active treatment., Competing Interests: Prof Luke Clark is the Director of the Centre for Gambling Research at 10.13039/501100005247UBC, which is supported by funding from the Province of British Columbia and the British Columbia Lottery Corporation (BCLC), a Canadian Crown Corporation. The Province of BC government and the BCLC had no role in the design, analysis, or interpretation of the study, and impose no constraints on publishing. LC has received remuneration from the International Center for Responsible Gaming (travel; speaker honoraria; academic services), the Institut fur Glucksspiel und Gesellschaft (Germany; travel; speaker honoraria), GambleAware (UK; academic services), Gambling Research Australia (academic services), Alberta Gambling Research Institute (Canada; travel; academic services), German Foundation for Gambling Research (advisory board; travel). He has been remunerated for legal consultancy by the BCLC. He has not received any further direct or indirect payments from the gambling industry or groups substantially funded by gambling. LC receives an honorarium for his role as Co-Editor-in-Chief for International Gambling Studies from Taylor & Francis, and he has received royalties from Cambridge Cognition Ltd. relating to neurocognitive testing. Prof David Nutt is the CRO of Awakn Life Sciences, chair of DrugScience [UK] and PAREA Europe, a member of the Lundbeck Foundation Neurotorium programme and chair of its editorial board, advisor to the British National Formulary and a member of the International Centre for Science in Drug Policy. He has received grants or clinical trial payments from Wellcome Trust, MRC, COMPASS Pathways and Usona, speaking honoraria from Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka and Rovi, has share options in P1vital, Awakn, Psyched Wellness and Neurotherapeutics and is a director of Equasy Enterprises and GABA Labs. He has been an expert witness in a number of legal cases relating to psychotropic drugs, is editor of the Drug Science Policy and Law Journal and has edited/written 38 books, some of which have been purchased by pharmaceutical companies.Prof Anne Lingford-Hughes reports honoraria for speaking engagements and/or attendance at conferences from 10.13039/501100013327Lundbeck, 10.13039/501100013327Lundbeck Institute UK, 10.13039/100004319Pfizer and Servier; she has received research grants or support from Alcarelle and Lundbeck; she is a member of the 10.13039/501100000544British Association for Psychopharmacology and receives honoraria for speaking at educational events and led their ‘addiction’ guidelines, which received support from Archimedes Pharma, 10.13039/501100013327Lundbeck, 10.13039/100004319Pfizer and Schering.The other authors declare no conflicts of interest in relation to this paper., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: In 1990, the United States' Institute of Medicine promoted the principles of outcomes monitoring in the alcohol and other drugs treatment field to improve the evidence synthesis and quality of research. While various national outcome measures have been developed and employed, no global consensus on standard measurement has been agreed for addiction. It is thus timely to build an international consensus. Convened by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM), an international, multi-disciplinary working group reviewed the existing literature and reached consensus for a globally applicable minimum set of outcome measures for people who seek treatment for addiction. Methods: To this end, 26 addiction experts from 11 countries and 5 continents, including people with lived experience ( n = 5; 19%), convened over 16 months (December 2018-March 2020) to develop recommendations for a minimum set of outcome measures. A structured, consensus-building, modified Delphi process was employed. Evidence-based proposals for the minimum set of measures were generated and discussed across eight videoconferences and in a subsequent structured online consultation. The resulting set was reviewed by 123 professionals and 34 people with lived experience internationally. Results: The final consensus-based recommendation includes alcohol, substance, and tobacco use disorders, as well as gambling and gaming disorders in people aged 12 years and older. Recommended outcome domains are frequency and quantity of addictive disorders, symptom burden, health-related quality of life, global functioning, psychosocial functioning, and overall physical and mental health and wellbeing. Standard case-mix (moderator) variables and measurement time points are also recommended. Conclusions: Use of consistent and meaningful outcome measurement facilitates carer-patient relations, shared decision-making, service improvement, benchmarking, and evidence synthesis for the evaluation of addiction treatment services and the dissemination of best practices. The consensus set of recommended outcomes is freely available for adoption in healthcare settings globally.

Gambling Disorder (GD) is an impactful behavioural addiction for which there appear to be underpinning genetic contributors. Twin studies show significant GD heritability results and intergenerational transmission show high rates of transmission. Recent developments in polygenic and multifactorial risk prediction modelling provide promising opportunities to enable early identification and intervention for at risk individuals. People with GD often have significant delays in diagnosis and subsequent help-seeking that can compromise their recovery. In this paper we advocate for more research into the utility of polygenic and multifactorial risk modelling in GD research and treatment programs and rigorous evaluation of its costs and benefits.

Competing Interests: SD sits on the Executive Committee of the Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG) for which he receives an annual honorarium. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Chronic illnesses are a major threat to global population health through the lifespan into older age. Despite world-wide public health goals, there has been a steady increase in chronic and non-communicable diseases (e.g., cancer, cardiovascular and metabolic disorders) and strong growth in mental health disorders. In 2010, 67% of deaths worldwide were due to chronic diseases and this increased to 74% in 2019, with accelerated growth in the COVID-19 era and its aftermath. Aging and wellbeing across the lifespan are positively impacted by the presence of effective prevention and management of chronic illness that can enhance population health. This paper provides a short overview of the journey to this current situation followed by discussion of how we may better address what the World Health Organization has termed the "tsunami of chronic diseases." In this paper we advocate for the development, validation, and subsequent deployment of integrated: 1. Polygenic and multifactorial risk prediction tools to screen for those at future risk of chronic disease and those with undiagnosed chronic disease. 2. Advanced preventive, behavior change and chronic disease management to maximize population health and wellbeing. 3. Digital health systems to support greater efficiencies in population-scale health prevention and intervention programs. It is argued that each of these actions individually has an emerging evidence base. However, there has been limited research to date concerning the combined population-level health effects of their integration. We outline the conceptual framework within which we are planning and currently conducting studies to investigate the effects of their integration., Competing Interests: SRC’s research is funded by the NHS and was previously funded by Wellcome (an independent charity). SRC receives a stipend for editorial work at Elsevier journals (Comprehensive Psychiatry, and Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews). HB-J is the Director of the UK National Problem Gambling Clinic and the UK National Centre for Gaming Disorders which are now fully funded by the NHS. These clinics have previously received funding from NHS England, Central and North West London NHS Trust, and GambleAware. HB-J is Vice President of the Royal Society of Medicine and sits on several national and international Boards. HB-J has been on research teams funded by the Medical Research Council, the Wellcome Trust, and the Wolfson Family Trust. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Thomas, Browning, Charchar, Klein, Ory, Bowden-Jones and Chamberlain.)

Gambling problems are often associated with homelessness and linked to elevated psychiatric morbidity and homelessness chronicity. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence rates of problem gambling (PG) and gambling disorder (GD) in homeless people. Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched databases Medline, Embase and PsycINFO from inception of databases to 4th may 2021. We included studies reporting prevalence estimates on clinical gambling problems in representative samples of homeless people based on standardized diagnostics. Risk of bias was assessed. A random effects meta-analysis was performed, and subgroup analyses based on methodological characteristics of primary studies were conducted. We identified eight studies from five countries, reporting information on 1938 participants. Prevalence rates of clinically significant PG and GD ranged from 11.3 to 31.3%. There was evidence for substantial heterogeneity with I 2  = 86% (95% CI 63-97%). A subgroup of four low risk of bias studies displayed a significantly lower results ranging from 11.3 to 23.6%. Additionally, high rates of subclinical problem gambling were reported (11.6-56.4%). At least one in ten homeless persons experiences clinically significant PG or GD. Social support and health care services for the homeless should address this problem by implementing models for early detection and treatment., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Internet gaming disorder (IGD) is an emerging condition within the field of behavioural addictions. IGD has been demonstrated to be highly comorbid with many other mental health disorders. Among these, substance use has been associated with IGD, and there are underlying similarities between behavioural addictions and substance use disorders. The main aims of the present study were (i) to investigate the association between high-risk gaming and substance use among young adults drawn from the general Italian population; and (ii) to explore the psychopathological correlates of high-risk gaming., Methods: Lifetime substance use, type of substances consumed, and frequency of use were investigated through an online survey in a sample of 913 adults aged 18-40 years. High-risk gaming was assessed using the ten-item Internet Gaming Disorder Test (IGDT-10). Psychopathology was assessed using the Revised 90-item Symptom Checklist (SCL-90-R)., Results: High-risk gaming prevalence rate was 4.4%. High-risk gamers scored higher on all dimensions of psychopathology, confirming the association between high-risk gaming and psychiatric distress. Regarding substance use, high-risk gamers were more commonly polysubstance users and more commonly made use of psychodysleptic substances. High-risk gamers were more commonly frequent substance users, and 32.5% of high-risk gamers used or had used psychoactive substances often or everyday throughout their lives., Discussion and Conclusion: The findings are in line with the concept of a common neurobiological vulnerability for both gaming and substance use. There is the need for more research to examine the phenomenology of gaming and its interplay with substance use to help develop effective interventions and prevention strategies., (© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Global concern about problematic usage of the internet (PUI), and its public health and societal costs, continues to grow, sharpened in focus under the privations of the COVID-19 pandemic. This narrative review reports the expert opinions of members of the largest international network of researchers on PUI in the framework of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action (CA 16207), on the scientific progress made and the critical knowledge gaps remaining to be filled as the term of the Action reaches its conclusion. A key advance has been achieving consensus on the clinical definition of various forms of PUI. Based on the overarching public health principles of protecting individuals and the public from harm and promoting the highest attainable standard of health, the World Health Organisation has introduced several new structured diagnoses into the ICD-11, including gambling disorder, gaming disorder, compulsive sexual behaviour disorder, and other unspecified or specified disorders due to addictive behaviours, alongside naming online activity as a diagnostic specifier. These definitions provide for the first time a sound platform for developing systematic networked research into various forms of PUI at global scale. Progress has also been made in areas such as refining and simplifying some of the available assessment instruments, clarifying the underpinning brain-based and social determinants, and building more empirically based etiological models, as a basis for therapeutic intervention, alongside public engagement initiatives. However, important gaps in our knowledge remain to be tackled. Principal among these include a better understanding of the course and evolution of the PUI-related problems, across different age groups, genders and other specific vulnerable groups, reliable methods for early identification of individuals at risk (before PUI becomes disordered), efficacious preventative and therapeutic interventions and ethical health and social policy changes that adequately safeguard human digital rights. The paper concludes with recommendations for achievable research goals, based on longitudinal analysis of a large multinational cohort co-designed with public stakeholders., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pharmacological interventions for disordered and problem gambling have been employed in clinical practice. Despite the availability of several reviews of the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling, few have employed systematic search strategies or compared different categories of pharmacological interventions. Systematic reviews of high-quality evidence are therefore essential to provide guidance regarding the efficacy of different pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling., Objectives: The primary aims of the review were to: (1) examine the efficacy of major categories of pharmacological-only interventions (antidepressants, opioid antagonists, mood stabilisers, atypical antipsychotics) for disordered or problem gambling, relative to placebo control conditions; and (2) examine the efficacy of these major categories relative to each other.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (all years to 11 January 2022)., Selection Criteria: We included randomised trials evaluating a pharmacological intervention for the treatment of disordered or problem gambling. Eligible control conditions included placebo control groups or comparisons with another category of pharmacological intervention., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard methodological procedures, including systematic extraction of included study characteristics and results and risk of bias assessment. Our primary outcome was reduction in gambling symptom severity. Our secondary outcomes were reduction in gambling expenditure, gambling frequency, time spent gambling, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and functional impairment; and responder status. We evaluated treatment effects for continuous and dichotomous outcomes using standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratios (RR), respectively, employing random-effects meta-analyses. A minimum of two independent treatment effects were required for a meta-analysis to be conducted (with only meta-analytic findings reported in this abstract)., Main Results: We included 17 studies in the review (n = 1193 randomised) that reported outcome data scheduled for end of treatment. Length of treatment ranged from 7 to 96 weeks.  Antidepressants: Six studies (n = 268) evaluated antidepressants, with very low to low certainty evidence suggesting that antidepressants were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.09, n = 225), gambling expenditure (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.06, n = 144), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.23, n = 90), functional impairment (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.22, n = 110), and responder status (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.66, n = 268). Opioid antagonists: Four studies (n = 562) evaluated opioid antagonists, with very low to low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.19, n = 259), but no difference between groups in responder status (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.86 to 3.14, n = 562). Mood stabilisers: Two studies (n = 71) evaluated mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence suggesting that mood stabilisers were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -2.24 to 0.39, n = 71), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -1.14 to 0.83, n = 71), and anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.64 to 0.30, n = 71). Atypical antipsychotics:Two studies (n = 63) evaluated the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine, with very low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.08, n = 63). Comparative effectiveness: Two studies (n = 62) compared antidepressants with opioid antagonists, with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than opioid antagonists on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) at post-treatment. Two studies (n = 58) compared antidepressants with mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than mood stabilisers on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.56, n = 58) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.70, n = 58) at post-treatment. Tolerability and adverse events: Several common adverse effects were reported by participants receiving antidepressants (e.g. headaches, nausea, diarrhoea/gastrointestinal issues) and opioid antagonists (e.g. nausea, dry mouth, constipation). There was little consistency in the types of adverse effects experienced by participants receiving mood stabilisers (e.g. tiredness, headaches, concentration difficulties) or atypical antipsychotics (e.g. pneumonia, sedation, increased hypomania). Discontinuation of treatment due to these adverse events was highest for opioid antagonists (10% to 32%), followed by antidepressants (4% to 31%), atypical antipsychotics (14%), and mood stabilisers (13%)., Authors' Conclusions: This review provides preliminary support for the use of opioid antagonists (naltrexone, nalmefene) and atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine) to produce short-term improvements in gambling symptom severity, although a lack of available evidence precludes a conclusion regarding the degree to which these pharmacological agents can improve other gambling or psychological functioning indices. In contrast, the findings are inconclusive with regard to the effects of mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants) in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, and there is limited evidence to support the efficacy of antidepressants. However, these conclusions are based on very low to low certainty evidence characterised by a small number of included studies, high risk of bias, modest pooled sample sizes, imprecise estimates, moderate between-study heterogeneity, and exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidities. Moreover, there were insufficient studies to conduct meta-analyses on many outcome measures; to compare efficacy across and within major categories of interventions; to explore dosage effects; or to examine effects beyond post-treatment. These limitations suggest that, despite recommendations related to the administration of opioid antagonists in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, pharmacological interventions should be administered with caution and with careful consideration of patient needs. A larger and more methodologically rigorous evidence base with longer-term evaluation periods is required before definitive conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness and durability of pharmacological treatments for disordered or problem gambling., (Copyright © 2022 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)