Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33235284›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2021

Do behavioral pharmacology findings predict clinical trial outcomes? A proof-of-concept in medication development for alcohol use disorder.

Lara A Ray, Han Du, ReJoyce Green, Daniel J O Roche, Spencer Bujarski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. mGluPharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lara A RayUniversity of California, Department of Psychology, Los Angeles, CA, USA. lararay@psych.ucla.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5734-9444
Han DuUniversity of California, Department of Psychology, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
ReJoyce GreenUniversity of California, Department of Psychology, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Daniel J O RocheUniversity of California, Department of Psychology, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Spencer BujarskiUniversity of California, Department of Psychology, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

Clinical Neuroscience of Alcoholism: Integrating Neuroscience and Clinical TrialsK24AA025704 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI LARA A. RAY · 2018 to 2026
$1.3M
Development of minocycline as a neuroimmune therapy for alcohol use disorderK01AA026005 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI ROCHE, DANIEL · 2017 to 2021
$925k
NIAAA NIH HHS K01 AA026005NIAAA NIH HHS K24 AA025704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Behavioral pharmacology paradigms have been used for early efficacy testing of novel compounds for alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, the degree to which early efficacy in the human laboratory predicts clinical efficacy remains unclear. To address this gap in the literature we employed a novel meta-analytic approach. We searched the literature for medications tested for AUD using both behavioral pharmacology (i.e., alcohol administration) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs). For behavioral pharmacology, we computed medication effects on alcohol-induced stimulation, sedation, and craving during the alcohol administration (k = 51 studies, 24 medications). For RCTs, we computed medication effects on any drinking and heavy drinking (k = 118 studies, 17 medications). We used medication as the unit of analysis and applied the Williamson-York bivariate weighted least squares estimation to preserve the errors in both the independent and dependent variables. Results, with correction for publication bias, revealed a significant and positive relationship between medication effects on alcohol-induced stimulation (β = 1.18 p < 0.05), sedation (β = 2.38, p < 0.05), and craving (β = 3.28, p < 0.001) in the laboratory, and drinking outcomes in RCTs, such that medications that reduced stimulation, sedation, and craving during the alcohol administration were associated with better clinical outcomes. A leave-one-out Monte Carlo analysis examined the predictive utility of these laboratory endpoints for each medication. The observed clinical effect size was within one standard deviation of the mean predicted effect size for all but three pharmacotherapies. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that behavioral pharmacology endpoints of alcohol-induced stimulation, sedation, and craving track medication effects from the human laboratory to clinical trial outcomes. These results apply to alcohol administration phenotypes and may be especially useful to medications for which the mechanisms of action involve alterations in subjective responses to alcohol (e.g., antagonist medication). These methods and results can be applied to a host of clinical questions and can streamline the process of screening novel compounds for AUD. For instance, this approach can be used to quantify the predictive utility of cue-reactivity screening models and even preclinical models of medication development.

Indexed as

AlcoholismAlcohol DrinkingCravingDrug DevelopmentEthanolHumansEthanol

Identifiers

PMID33235284
PMCPMC8026961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.