Konstantinos Ioannidis, Cinzia Del Giovane, Charidimos Tzagarakis, Jeremy E Solly, Samuel J Westwood, Valeria Parlatini, Henrietta Bowden-Jones, Jon E Grant, Samuele Cortese, Samuel R Chamberlain
{"title":"赌博障碍的药物治疗：系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Konstantinos Ioannidis, Cinzia Del Giovane, Charidimos Tzagarakis, Jeremy E Solly, Samuel J Westwood, Valeria Parlatini, Henrietta Bowden-Jones, Jon E Grant, Samuele Cortese, Samuel R Chamberlain","doi":"10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical guidelines remain unclear on which medications for gambling disorder are to be preferred in terms of efficacy and tolerability. We aimed to compare pharmacological treatments for gambling disorder in terms of efficacy and tolerability, using network meta-analysis (NMA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on our pre-registered protocol [CRD42022329520], a structured search was conducted across broad range of databases, for double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of medications for gambling disorder. Data were independently extracted by two researchers. We used standardized mean differences (SMD) using Hedges' g to measure the efficacy outcomes, and for the effect for tolerability we used dropout rate due to medication side effects, expressed as odds ratio (OR). Confidence in the network estimates was assessed using the CINeMA framework. We followed the PRISMA-NMA guidelines for this work. Outcomes were gambling symptom severity and quality of life (for efficacy), and tolerability.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We included 22 RCTs in the systematic review and 16 RCTs (n = 977 participants) in the NMA. Compared with placebo, moderate confidence evidence indicated that nalmefene [Standardized Mean Difference (SMD): -0.86; 95 % confidence interval (CI: -1.32,-0.41)] reduced gambling severity, followed by naltrexone (SMD: -0.42; 95 %CI: (-0.85,0.01)). Naltrexone (SMD: -0.50; 95 %CI: (-0.85,-0.14)) and nalmefene (SMD: -0.36; 95 %CI: (-0.72,-0.01) were also more beneficial than placebo in terms of quality of life. Olanzapine and topiramate were not more efficacious than placebo. Nalmefene [Odds Ratio (OR): 7.55; 95 %CI: (2.24-25.41)] and naltrexone (OR: 7.82; 95 %CI: (1.26-48.70)) had significantly higher dropout due to side effects (lower tolerability) compared with placebo.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Based on NMA, nalmefene and naltrexone currently have the most supportive evidence for the pharmacological treatment of gambling disorder. Further clinical trials of novel compounds, and analysis of individual participant data are needed, to strengthen the evidence base, and help tailor treatments at the individual patient level.</p>","PeriodicalId":10554,"journal":{"name":"Comprehensive psychiatry","volume":"137 ","pages":"152566"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pharmacological management of gambling disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Konstantinos Ioannidis, Cinzia Del Giovane, Charidimos Tzagarakis, Jeremy E Solly, Samuel J Westwood, Valeria Parlatini, Henrietta Bowden-Jones, Jon E Grant, Samuele Cortese, Samuel R Chamberlain\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical guidelines remain unclear on which medications for gambling disorder are to be preferred in terms of efficacy and tolerability. We aimed to compare pharmacological treatments for gambling disorder in terms of efficacy and tolerability, using network meta-analysis (NMA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on our pre-registered protocol [CRD42022329520], a structured search was conducted across broad range of databases, for double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of medications for gambling disorder. Data were independently extracted by two researchers. We used standardized mean differences (SMD) using Hedges' g to measure the efficacy outcomes, and for the effect for tolerability we used dropout rate due to medication side effects, expressed as odds ratio (OR). Confidence in the network estimates was assessed using the CINeMA framework. We followed the PRISMA-NMA guidelines for this work. Outcomes were gambling symptom severity and quality of life (for efficacy), and tolerability.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We included 22 RCTs in the systematic review and 16 RCTs (n = 977 participants) in the NMA. Compared with placebo, moderate confidence evidence indicated that nalmefene [Standardized Mean Difference (SMD): -0.86; 95 % confidence interval (CI: -1.32,-0.41)] reduced gambling severity, followed by naltrexone (SMD: -0.42; 95 %CI: (-0.85,0.01)). Naltrexone (SMD: -0.50; 95 %CI: (-0.85,-0.14)) and nalmefene (SMD: -0.36; 95 %CI: (-0.72,-0.01) were also more beneficial than placebo in terms of quality of life. Olanzapine and topiramate were not more efficacious than placebo. Nalmefene [Odds Ratio (OR): 7.55; 95 %CI: (2.24-25.41)] and naltrexone (OR: 7.82; 95 %CI: (1.26-48.70)) had significantly higher dropout due to side effects (lower tolerability) compared with placebo.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Based on NMA, nalmefene and naltrexone currently have the most supportive evidence for the pharmacological treatment of gambling disorder. Further clinical trials of novel compounds, and analysis of individual participant data are needed, to strengthen the evidence base, and help tailor treatments at the individual patient level.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"137 \",\"pages\":\"152566\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152566\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comprehensive psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152566","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pharmacological management of gambling disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Background: Clinical guidelines remain unclear on which medications for gambling disorder are to be preferred in terms of efficacy and tolerability. We aimed to compare pharmacological treatments for gambling disorder in terms of efficacy and tolerability, using network meta-analysis (NMA).
Methods: Based on our pre-registered protocol [CRD42022329520], a structured search was conducted across broad range of databases, for double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of medications for gambling disorder. Data were independently extracted by two researchers. We used standardized mean differences (SMD) using Hedges' g to measure the efficacy outcomes, and for the effect for tolerability we used dropout rate due to medication side effects, expressed as odds ratio (OR). Confidence in the network estimates was assessed using the CINeMA framework. We followed the PRISMA-NMA guidelines for this work. Outcomes were gambling symptom severity and quality of life (for efficacy), and tolerability.
Findings: We included 22 RCTs in the systematic review and 16 RCTs (n = 977 participants) in the NMA. Compared with placebo, moderate confidence evidence indicated that nalmefene [Standardized Mean Difference (SMD): -0.86; 95 % confidence interval (CI: -1.32,-0.41)] reduced gambling severity, followed by naltrexone (SMD: -0.42; 95 %CI: (-0.85,0.01)). Naltrexone (SMD: -0.50; 95 %CI: (-0.85,-0.14)) and nalmefene (SMD: -0.36; 95 %CI: (-0.72,-0.01) were also more beneficial than placebo in terms of quality of life. Olanzapine and topiramate were not more efficacious than placebo. Nalmefene [Odds Ratio (OR): 7.55; 95 %CI: (2.24-25.41)] and naltrexone (OR: 7.82; 95 %CI: (1.26-48.70)) had significantly higher dropout due to side effects (lower tolerability) compared with placebo.
Interpretation: Based on NMA, nalmefene and naltrexone currently have the most supportive evidence for the pharmacological treatment of gambling disorder. Further clinical trials of novel compounds, and analysis of individual participant data are needed, to strengthen the evidence base, and help tailor treatments at the individual patient level.
期刊介绍：
"Comprehensive Psychiatry" is an open access, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the field of psychiatry and mental health. Its primary mission is to share the latest advancements in knowledge to enhance patient care and deepen the understanding of mental illnesses. The journal is supported by a diverse team of international editors and peer reviewers, ensuring the publication of high-quality research with a strong focus on clinical relevance and the implications for psychopathology.
"Comprehensive Psychiatry" encourages authors to present their research in an accessible manner, facilitating engagement with clinicians, policymakers, and the broader public. By embracing an open access policy, the journal aims to maximize the global impact of its content, making it readily available to a wide audience and fostering scientific collaboration and public awareness beyond the traditional academic community. This approach is designed to promote a more inclusive and informed dialogue on mental health, contributing to the overall progress in the field.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
