Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37779628›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023

Low-intensity focused ultrasound targeting the nucleus accumbens as a potential treatment for substance use disorder: safety and feasibility clinical trial.

James J Mahoney, Marc W Haut, Jeffrey Carpenter, Manish Ranjan, Daisy G Y Thompson-Lake, Jennifer L Marton, Wanhong Zheng, James H Berry, Padma Tirumalai, Ashley Mears and 4 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06518785 (Ultrasound Neuromodulation of the Brain for Alcohol Use Disorder), which is not on this map. Cited by 47 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
13.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT06518785 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Ultrasound Neuromodulation of the Brain for Alcohol Use Disorder

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San FranciscoRan2025 to 2030Enrolled25ConditionsAlcohol Use DisorderArmsLow Intensity Focused Ultrasound
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James J MahoneyDepartment of Behavioral Medicine and Psychiatry, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Marc W HautDepartment of Behavioral Medicine and Psychiatry, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Jeffrey CarpenterDepartment of Neuroscience, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Manish RanjanDepartment of Neurosurgery, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Daisy G Y Thompson-LakeDepartment of Neuroscience, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Jennifer L MartonDepartment of Behavioral Medicine and Psychiatry, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Wanhong ZhengDepartment of Behavioral Medicine and Psychiatry, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
James H BerryDepartment of Behavioral Medicine and Psychiatry, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Padma TirumalaiDepartment of Neuroscience, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Ashley MearsDepartment of Neurosurgery, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Pierre D'HaeseDepartment of Neuroscience, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Victor S FinomoreDepartment of Neuroscience, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Sally L HodderWest Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Ali R RezaiDepartment of Neuroscience, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, United States.
West Virginia University · USBlanchette Rockefeller Neurosciences Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: While current treatments for substance use disorder (SUD) are beneficial, success rates remain low and treatment outcomes are complicated by co-occurring SUDs, many of which are without available medication treatments. Research involving neuromodulation for SUD has recently gained momentum. This study evaluated two doses (60 and 90 W) of Low Intensity Focused Ultrasound (LIFU), targeting the bilateral nucleus accumbens (NAc), in individuals with SUD. Methods: Four participants (three male), who were receiving comprehensive outpatient treatment for opioid use disorder at the time of enrollment and who also had a history of excessive non-opioid substance use, completed this pilot study. After confirming eligibility, these participants received 10 min sham LIFU followed by 20 min active LIFU (10 min to left then right NAc). Outcomes were the safety, tolerability, and feasibility during the LIFU procedure and throughout the 90-day follow-up. Outcomes also included the impact of LIFU on cue-induced substance craving, assessed via Visual Analog Scale (VAS), both acutely (pre-, during and post-procedure) and during the 90-day follow-up. Daily craving ratings (without cues) were also obtained for one-week prior to and one-week following LIFU. Results: Both LIFU doses were safe and well-tolerated based on reported adverse events and MRI scans revealed no structural changes (0 min, 24 h, and 1-week post-procedure). For the two participants receiving "enhanced" (90 W) LIFU, VAS craving ratings revealed active LIFU attenuated craving for participants' primary substances of choice relative to sham sonication. For these participants, reductions were also noted in daily VAS craving ratings (0 = no craving; 10 = most craving ever) across the week following LIFU relative to pre-LIFU; Participant #3 pre- vs. post-LIFU: opioids (3.6 ± 0.6 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4), heroin (4.2 ± 0.8 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4), methamphetamine (3.2 ± 0.4 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0), cocaine (2.4 ± 0.6 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0), benzodiazepines (2.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0), alcohol (6.0 ± 0.7 vs. 2.7 ± 0.8), and nicotine (5.6 ± 1.5 vs. 3.1 ± 0.7); Participant #4: alcohol (3.5 ± 1.3 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0) and nicotine (5.0 ± 1.8 vs. 1.2 ± 0.8) (all Discussion: In conclusion, LIFU targeting the NAc was safe and acutely reduced substance craving during the LIFU procedure, and potentially had longer-term impact on craving reductions. While early observations are promising, NAc LIFU requires further investigation in a controlled trial to assess the impact on substance craving and ultimately substance use and relapse.

Indexed as

addictioncravingfocused ultrasoundneuromodulationsubstance use disorder

Identifiers

PMID37779628
PMCPMC10540197
OpenAlexW4386774091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.