Sinclair Method Studies
Aim
The goal of this systematic review was to identify moderators of naltrexone efficacy in the treatment of alcohol dependence.
Methods
We searched Pubmed, CINHAL, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library from 1990 to April 2012 and reference lists of pertinent review articles, which yielded 622 trial, pooled analysis and review articles. Using pre-established eligibility criteria, two reviewers independently determined whether abstracts contained evidence of demographic or biological characteristics, i.e. moderators, influencing naltrexone response in alcohol dependence. We assessed each publication for risk of bias and evaluated the strength of the body of evidence for each moderator.
Results
Twenty-eight publications (on 20 studies) met criteria for data synthesis. These included 26 publications from 12 randomized, placebo-controlled trials, three non-randomized, non-placebo studies and one randomized, non-placebo study. In addition, there were two publications from pooled analyses of four randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Family history of alcohol problems and the Asn40Asp polymorphism of the μ-opioid receptor gene showed a positive association with efficacy in four of five and three of five studies, respectively. Other moderators reported to be associated with efficacy included male sex (two of five studies), pre-treatment drinking (two of two studies) and high craving (two of five studies). However, the overall risk of bias in the published literature is high.
Conclusions
The identification of naltrexone-responsive alcohol-dependent patients is still in development. Studies to date point to two potential moderators—family history and presence of the OPRM1 Asn40Asp polymorphism—as having the strongest evidence. However, the data to date is still insufficient to recommend that any moderator be used in determining clinical treatment.
Main Outcome Measures Percent days abstinent from alcohol and time to first heavy drinking day.
Results All groups showed substantial reduction in drinking. During treatment, patients receiving naltrexone plus medical management (n = 302), CBI plus medical management and placebos (n = 305), or both naltrexone and CBI plus medical management (n = 309) had higher percent days abstinent (80.6, 79.2, and 77.1, respectively) than the 75.1 in those receiving placebos and medical management only (n = 305), a significant naltrexone × behavioral intervention interaction (P = .009). Naltrexone also reduced risk of a heavy drinking day (hazard ratio, 0.72; 97.5% CI, 0.53-0.98; P = .02) over time, most evident in those receiving medical management but not CBI. Acamprosate showed no significant effect on drinking vs placebo, either by itself or with any combination of naltrexone, CBI, or both. During treatment, those receiving CBI without pills or medical management (n = 157) had lower percent days abstinent (66.6) than those receiving placebo plus medical management alone (n = 153) or placebo plus medical management and CBI (n = 156) (73.8 and 79.8, respectively; P<.001). One year after treatment, these between-group effects were similar but no longer significant.
Conclusions Patients receiving medical management with naltrexone, CBI, or both fared better on drinking outcomes, whereas acamprosate showed no evidence of efficacy, with or without CBI. No combination produced better efficacy than naltrexone or CBI alone in the presence of medical management. Placebo pills and meeting with a health care professional had a positive effect above that of CBI during treatment. Naltrexone with medical management could be delivered in health care settings, thus serving alcohol-dependent patients who might otherwise not receive treatment.