Psychedelics for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Narrative Review with Candidate Mechanisms of Action.

IF 7.4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Eric A Miller, Christy Capone, Erica Eaton, Robert M Swift, Carolina L Haass-Koffler
{"title":"Psychedelics for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Narrative Review with Candidate Mechanisms of Action.","authors":"Eric A Miller, Christy Capone, Erica Eaton, Robert M Swift, Carolina L Haass-Koffler","doi":"10.1007/s40263-025-01199-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Psychedelics have been studied since the 1950s as a potential treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD), with over a dozen clinical trials of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), and several contemporary trials of psilocybin and ayahuasca for this indication. Herein, we characterize foundational studies from the 1950s to the present, with emphasis on key design factors that varied considerably between published studies. Critically, those design factors include pharmacological factors, such as presence or absence of a placebo control and the nature of the placebo (e.g., ephedrine, dextroamphetamine, diphenhydramine, or low-dose LSD), and non-pharmacological factors, such as the treatment setting and the presence or absence of psychotherapy. We found that observational studies nearly uniformly show promising results, but trials in which psychedelics were tested against placebo or standard of care control groups have been more inconsistent in both outcomes and methodologies. Given the inconsistency in published results, we review candidate mechanisms of action for psychedelics in the context of AUD. We take a biopsychosocial approach, reviewing mechanisms spanning several different hierarchical levels of analysis, including cellular neuroplasticity, cognitive neuroscience, subjective experience, and social connection. Taken together, this review highlights key findings on both the efficacy and potential mechanisms of psychedelics for the treatment of AUD, which could motivate future studies in this rapidly developing field.</p>","PeriodicalId":10508,"journal":{"name":"CNS drugs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CNS drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-025-01199-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Psychedelics have been studied since the 1950s as a potential treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD), with over a dozen clinical trials of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), and several contemporary trials of psilocybin and ayahuasca for this indication. Herein, we characterize foundational studies from the 1950s to the present, with emphasis on key design factors that varied considerably between published studies. Critically, those design factors include pharmacological factors, such as presence or absence of a placebo control and the nature of the placebo (e.g., ephedrine, dextroamphetamine, diphenhydramine, or low-dose LSD), and non-pharmacological factors, such as the treatment setting and the presence or absence of psychotherapy. We found that observational studies nearly uniformly show promising results, but trials in which psychedelics were tested against placebo or standard of care control groups have been more inconsistent in both outcomes and methodologies. Given the inconsistency in published results, we review candidate mechanisms of action for psychedelics in the context of AUD. We take a biopsychosocial approach, reviewing mechanisms spanning several different hierarchical levels of analysis, including cellular neuroplasticity, cognitive neuroscience, subjective experience, and social connection. Taken together, this review highlights key findings on both the efficacy and potential mechanisms of psychedelics for the treatment of AUD, which could motivate future studies in this rapidly developing field.

致幻剂治疗酒精使用障碍:具有候选作用机制的叙述性综述。
自20世纪50年代以来,致幻剂一直被研究作为酒精使用障碍(AUD)的潜在治疗方法,有十几项麦角酸二乙胺(LSD)的临床试验,以及几项裸盖菇素和死藤水的临床试验。在此,我们描述了从20世纪50年代到现在的基础研究,重点是在已发表的研究中差异很大的关键设计因素。至关重要的是,这些设计因素包括药理学因素,如是否存在安慰剂对照和安慰剂的性质(如麻黄碱、右苯丙胺、苯海拉明或低剂量LSD),以及非药理学因素,如治疗环境和是否存在心理治疗。我们发现,观察性研究几乎一致显示出有希望的结果,但将致幻剂与安慰剂或标准护理对照组进行对比的试验在结果和方法上都更加不一致。鉴于已发表的结果不一致,我们回顾了在AUD背景下致幻剂的候选作用机制。我们采用生物心理社会方法,回顾了跨越几个不同层次分析的机制,包括细胞神经可塑性、认知神经科学、主观经验和社会联系。综上所述,本综述强调了迷幻药治疗AUD的疗效和潜在机制的关键发现,这可能会激发这一快速发展领域的未来研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CNS drugs
CNS drugs 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
3.30%
发文量
82
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: CNS Drugs promotes rational pharmacotherapy within the disciplines of clinical psychiatry and neurology. The Journal includes: - Overviews of contentious or emerging issues. - Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on pharmacological approaches to managing neurological and psychiatric illnesses. - Systematic reviews that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement. - Adis Drug Reviews of the properties and place in therapy of both newer and established drugs in neurology and psychiatry. - Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies with a strong link to clinical practice, such as clinical pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies, clinical trials, meta-analyses, outcomes research, and pharmacoeconomic and pharmacoepidemiological studies. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in CNS Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信