SynthesisPloS one2017
Harms associated with taking nalmefene for substance use and impulse control disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Toward Developing Alternative Opioid Antagonists for Treating Community Overdose: A Model-Based Evaluation of Important Pharmacological Attributes.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
- Nalmefene Hydrochloride: Potential Implications for Treating Alcohol and Opioid Use Disorder.Substance abuse and rehabilitation · 2024Review
- Treatment of opioid overdose: current approaches and recent advances.Psychopharmacology · 2022Review
- Review
- Financial reimbursement - irrelevant for GPs' readiness to implement brief intervention to reduce alcohol consumption? A cross-sectional vignette study.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Nalmefene Phase IV Study: A Seeding Flying in the Face of Evidence?Clinical drug investigation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
importanceNalmefene is a newly approved drug for alcohol use disorder, but the risk of harms has not been evaluated from empirical trial evidence.
objectiveTo assess the harm of nalmefene administered to individuals diagnosed with substance use or impulse control disorders by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: A search was performed in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2014), MEDLINE via PubMed (1950), EMBASE via Ovid (1974), and Clinicaltrials.gov through December 2014. STUDY SELECTION: This study included only randomised controlled trials with placebo or active controls that administered nalmefene to adult individuals for treating impulse control and/or substance use disorders. Both published and unpublished randomised controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Internal validity was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Published information from the trials was supplemented by contact between reviewers and industry sponsor. Data were combined using two meta-approaches in fixed effects models; Peto Odds Ratios and risk differences were reported with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Number of patients with serious adverse events, including specific psychiatric serious adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events.
resultsOf 20 potentially relevant studies, 15 randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria, and 8 of these provided data enabling the meta-analysis. Overall, serious adverse events did not occur more often in the nalmefene group than in the placebo group (Peto Odds Ratio = 0.97 [95% CI 0.64-1.44]; P = 0.86). Risk of psychiatric serious adverse events was slightly elevated, albeit not at a statistically significant level (Peto Odds Ratio = 1.32 [95% CI 0.62, 2.83]; P = 0.47). Withdrawals due to adverse events were significantly more likely to occur with nalmefene compared to placebo (Peto Odds Ratio = 3.22 [95% CI 2.46-4.22]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The three-fold increased risk of withdrawal from treatment on nalmefene due to adverse events is a matter of safety concern. The nature of these adverse events cannot be elucidated further without access to individual patients data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.