Faculty Bibliography

Substance use disorders are prevalent co-occurring problems among people with schizophrenia, with lifetime rates approaching 80% in this population when tobacco use is taken into account. Substance use disorders are associated with significant adverse effects among people with schizophrenia, including worse psychiatric symptoms, lower functioning, and increased medical morbidity and mortality compared with schizophrenia patients without co-occurring substance use. The etiology of this relationship is multifactorial, involving neurobiological, genetic, and environmental factors. The substances most commonly used by people with schizophrenia are tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine. Screening, diagnosis, and treatment of substance use disorders are important and can have significant effects on clinical outcomes. Treatments for comorbid disorders include psychopharmacological, psychotherapeutic, and multidisciplinary interventions. Several medications have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of substance use disorders, which also appear to be helpful for patients with schizophrenia, although few controlled trials have been conducted specifically in this population. Psychosocial and psychological interventions have been adapted for use among patients with schizophrenia as well. Treatment of both psychotic illness and substance use disorders in an integrated way improves functional and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Clinically significant anxiety and depression are common in patients with cancer, and are associated with poor psychiatric and medical outcomes. Historical and recent research suggests a role for psilocybin to treat cancer-related anxiety and depression. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial, 29 patients with cancer-related anxiety and depression were randomly assigned and received treatment with single-dose psilocybin (0.3 mg/kg) or niacin, both in conjunction with psychotherapy. The primary outcomes were anxiety and depression assessed between groups prior to the crossover at 7 weeks. RESULTS: Prior to the crossover, psilocybin produced immediate, substantial, and sustained improvements in anxiety and depression and led to decreases in cancer-related demoralization and hopelessness, improved spiritual wellbeing, and increased quality of life. At the 6.5-month follow-up, psilocybin was associated with enduring anxiolytic and anti-depressant effects (approximately 60-80% of participants continued with clinically significant reductions in depression or anxiety), sustained benefits in existential distress and quality of life, as well as improved attitudes towards death. The psilocybin-induced mystical experience mediated the therapeutic effect of psilocybin on anxiety and depression. CONCLUSIONS: In conjunction with psychotherapy, single moderate-dose psilocybin produced rapid, robust and enduring anxiolytic and anti-depressant effects in patients with cancer-related psychological distress. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00957359.

Excessive alcohol consumption is one of the most important lifestyle factors affecting the disease burden in the Western world. The results of treatment in daily practice are modest at best. The aim of the RESCueH programme is to develop and evaluate methods, which are as practice-near as possible, and therefore can be implemented quickly and easily in everyday clinical practice. It is the first clinical alcohol programme to be transatlantic in scope, with implementation in treatment centers located in Denmark, Germany and the US. The RESCueH programme comprises 5 randomized controlled trials, and the studies can be expected to result in (1) more patients starting treatment in specialized outpatient clinics, (2) a greater number of elderly patients being treated, (3) increased patient motivation for treatment and thus improved adherence, (4) more patients with stable positive outcomes after treatment and (5) fewer patients relapsing into harmful drinking. The aim of this paper is to discuss the rationale for the RESCueH programme, to present the studies and expected results.

BACKGROUND: Secondary analysis using data from the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network randomized trial (NCT # 01207791), in which 1285 adult ED patients endorsing moderate to severe problems related to drug use were recruited from 6 US academic hospitals. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the utility of hair analysis in drug use disorder trials with infrequent visits, and its concordance with Timeline Follow Back (TLFB). METHODS: This study compared the self-reported drug use on the TLFB instrument with the biological measure of drug use from hair analysis for four major drug classes (Cannabis, Cocaine, Prescribed Opioids and Street Opioids). Both hair analysis and TLFB were conducted at 3, 6 and 12 month follow-up visit and each covered a 90-day recall period prior to the visit. RESULTS: The concordance between the hair sample results and the TLFB was high for cannabis and street opioids, but was low to moderate for cocaine and prescribed opioids. Under-reporting of drug use given the positive hair sample was always significantly lower for the drug the study participant noted as their primary drug of choice compared with other drugs the participant reported taking, irrespective of whether the drug of choice was cannabis, cocaine, street opioids and prescribed opioids. Over-reporting of drug use given the negative hair sample was always significantly higher for the drug of choice, except for cocaine. CONCLUSIONS: This study extends the literature on hair analysis supporting its use as a secondary outcome measure in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Attentional bias (i.e., differences in reaction time between drug and neutral cues) has been associated with a variety of drug-use behaviors (e.g., craving, abstinence). Reduction of bias may ultimately reduce use. OBJECTIVE: The current study examined whether attentional bias modification therapy (ABMT) reduced the frequency of drug use behaviors in individuals with cocaine use disorder (CUD). METHOD: Participants (n = 37) were randomly assigned to ABMT or control therapy, which systematically varied how frequently probes replaced neutral (ABMT = 100%; control therapy = 50%) relative to drug stimuli. Each intervention included 5 training sessions comprising a total of 2640 trials over 4 weeks. Clinical assessments occurred at baseline, post-intervention, 2 weeks and 3 months posttreatment. RESULTS: There were no baseline differences between groups on drug-use behaviors or other clinical measures. Contrary to predictions, both groups exhibited slower rather than faster reaction times for cocaine stimuli (p = 0.005) at baseline, with no relationship between bias and baseline measures of drug-use behavior. CONCLUSIONS: ABMT was not more effective than our control therapy at reducing attentional bias, reducing craving or changing other drug use behaviors. Current results suggest additional replication studies are needed to assess ABMT's efficacy in reducing drug-use behaviors in CUD.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety is common among persons with alcohol use disorder during early abstinence from alcohol. Although benzodiazepines are effective for short-term treatment of anxiety, they are rarely used beyond acute detoxification due to concerns about misuse or interactions with alcohol. OBJECTIVES: We conducted an open-label trial to explore the effects of coadministering lorazepam and disulfiram to alcohol-dependent patients with anxiety disorder symptoms. The rationale for this model is to minimize the risks of the benzodiazepine, while also potentially enhancing adherence to disulfiram. METHODS: Forty-one participants with DSM-IV alcohol dependence who also met syndromal criteria for anxiety disorder with or without co-occurring major depressive syndrome initiated treatment with lorazepam (starting dose 0.5 mg three times daily) and disulfiram (starting dose 500 mg three times weekly). Participants received 16 weeks of monitored pharmacotherapy with manualized medical management. RESULTS: Adherence to treatment decreased steadily with time (85.4% at 4 weeks, 36.6% at 16 weeks). Participants showed significant increases in percent abstinent days during treatment and at 24 weeks follow-up. Large reductions in anxiety, depression, and craving were observed during treatment, and improvement remained significant at 24 weeks. Duration of adherence with disulfiram strongly predicted abstinence at 16 weeks. There was no evidence of misuse of lorazepam or dose escalation during the study. CONCLUSION: Lorazepam can be safely used for short-term treatment of anxiety in combination with disulfiram treatment of alcohol use disorder. However, it is not clear that making lorazepam dispensing contingent on adherence to disulfiram enhances retention in disulfiram treatment.

Background: Impulsivity is a core feature of substance use disorders. Temporal discounting (TD) paradigms provide a modelbased approach to studying the dynamics of impulsive decisionmaking as drug-addicted individuals undergo treatment. Here we examine (1) how TD changes as opioid use disorder (OUD) subjects stabilize on maintenance therapy; and (2) how TD is predicted by (or is predictive of) relevant clinical outcomes. Methods: 30 individuals initiating treatment for OUD and 29 matched community controls (CC) were assessed weekly (up to 15 weeks) on a TD task. Drug use was monitored by urine toxicology and chart review. We analyzed the data with a hyperbolic discounting model and derived subject-specific parameters forTD rate, and the non-parametric proportion of immediate choices. Results: OUD subjects showed higher TD rates than CC (Means: 0.039 versus 0.139 respectively, p = 0.005). Although this measure had high test-retest reliability, OUD subjects exhibited more variability across the repeated measures. Subjects in the initial phase of treatment showed a progressive decrease of TD (p = 0.007). Recent heroin use predicted subjects' level of impulsivity: positive use in the previous week correlated with a significantly higher proportion of immediate choices (p = 0.02). We did not And a predictive effect of TD on heroin use the following week. Conclusions: These results suggest that TD greatly fluctuates in treatment-seeking heroin users, in contrast to its stability in CC. TD is both sensitive to the initial phase of treatment for OUD and to recent heroin use, but not predictive of future use in this population

AIMS: To examine the safety and effectiveness of buprenorphine + naloxone sublingual tablets (BUP, as Suboxone(R)) provided after administration of extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX, as Vivitrol(R)) to reduce cocaine use in participants who met DSM-IV criteria for cocaine dependence and past or current opioid dependence or abuse. METHODS: This multi-centered, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted under the auspices of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network, randomly assigned 302 participants at sites in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Ohio, New York, and Washington D.C., USA to 1 of 3 conditions provided with XR-NTX: 4 mg/day BUP (BUP4, n = 100), 16 mg/day BUP (BUP16, n = 100), or no buprenorphine (placebo; PLB, n = 102). Participants received pharmacotherapy for 8 weeks, with 3 clinic visits per week. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy was provided weekly. Follow-up assessments occurred at 1 and 3 months post-intervention. The planned primary outcome was urine drug screen (UDS)-corrected, self-reported cocaine use during the last 4 weeks of treatment. Planned secondary analyses assessed cocaine use by UDS, medication adherence, retention, and adverse events. RESULTS: No group differences were found between groups for the primary outcome (BUP4 vs. PLB, p = 0.262; BUP16 vs PLB, p = 0.185). Longitudinal analysis of UDS data during the evaluation period using generalized linear mixed equations found a statistically significant difference between BUP16 and PLB (p = 0.022, OR = 1.71) but not for BUP4 (p = 0.105, OR = 1.05). No secondary outcome differences across groups were found for adherence, retention, or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine + naloxone, used in combination with naltrexone, may be associated with reductions in cocaine use among people who meet DSM-IV criteria for cocaine dependence and past or current opioid dependence or abuse