Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Risks and Benefits of Nalmefene in the Treatment of Adult Alcohol Dependence: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Published and Unpublished Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials
by
Laviolle, Bruno
, Bellissant, Eric
, Palpacuer, Clément
, Reymann, Jean Michel
, Boussageon, Rémy
, Naudet, Florian
in
Alcohol use
/ Alcoholism
/ Alcoholism - drug therapy
/ Bias
/ Clinical trials
/ Drug therapy
/ FDA approval
/ Humans
/ Life Sciences
/ Meta-analysis
/ Mortality
/ Naltrexone - adverse effects
/ Naltrexone - analogs & derivatives
/ Naltrexone - therapeutic use
/ Narcotic Antagonists - adverse effects
/ Narcotic Antagonists - therapeutic use
/ Performance evaluation
/ Quality of life
/ Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
/ Researchers
/ Risk Assessment
/ Studies
/ Treatment Outcome
2015
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Risks and Benefits of Nalmefene in the Treatment of Adult Alcohol Dependence: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Published and Unpublished Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials
by
Laviolle, Bruno
, Bellissant, Eric
, Palpacuer, Clément
, Reymann, Jean Michel
, Boussageon, Rémy
, Naudet, Florian
in
Alcohol use
/ Alcoholism
/ Alcoholism - drug therapy
/ Bias
/ Clinical trials
/ Drug therapy
/ FDA approval
/ Humans
/ Life Sciences
/ Meta-analysis
/ Mortality
/ Naltrexone - adverse effects
/ Naltrexone - analogs & derivatives
/ Naltrexone - therapeutic use
/ Narcotic Antagonists - adverse effects
/ Narcotic Antagonists - therapeutic use
/ Performance evaluation
/ Quality of life
/ Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
/ Researchers
/ Risk Assessment
/ Studies
/ Treatment Outcome
2015
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Risks and Benefits of Nalmefene in the Treatment of Adult Alcohol Dependence: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Published and Unpublished Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials
by
Laviolle, Bruno
, Bellissant, Eric
, Palpacuer, Clément
, Reymann, Jean Michel
, Boussageon, Rémy
, Naudet, Florian
in
Alcohol use
/ Alcoholism
/ Alcoholism - drug therapy
/ Bias
/ Clinical trials
/ Drug therapy
/ FDA approval
/ Humans
/ Life Sciences
/ Meta-analysis
/ Mortality
/ Naltrexone - adverse effects
/ Naltrexone - analogs & derivatives
/ Naltrexone - therapeutic use
/ Narcotic Antagonists - adverse effects
/ Narcotic Antagonists - therapeutic use
/ Performance evaluation
/ Quality of life
/ Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
/ Researchers
/ Risk Assessment
/ Studies
/ Treatment Outcome
2015
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Risks and Benefits of Nalmefene in the Treatment of Adult Alcohol Dependence: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Published and Unpublished Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials
Journal Article
Risks and Benefits of Nalmefene in the Treatment of Adult Alcohol Dependence: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Published and Unpublished Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials
2015
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Nalmefene is a recent option in alcohol dependence treatment. Its approval was controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the aggregated data (registered as PROSPERO 2014:CRD42014014853) to compare the harm/benefit of nalmefene versus placebo or active comparator in this indication.
Three reviewers searched for published and unpublished studies in Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, and bibliographies and by mailing pharmaceutical companies, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the US Food and Drug Administration. Double-blind randomized clinical trials evaluating nalmefene to treat adult alcohol dependence, irrespective of the comparator, were included if they reported (1) health outcomes (mortality, accidents/injuries, quality of life, somatic complications), (2) alcohol consumption outcomes, (3) biological outcomes, or (4) treatment safety outcomes, at 6 mo and/or 1 y. Three authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of the trials identified. Relevant trials were evaluated in full text. The reviewers independently assessed the included trials for methodological quality using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias. On the basis of the I2 index or the Cochrane's Q test, fixed or random effect models were used to estimate risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs), or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs. In sensitivity analyses, outcomes for participants who were lost to follow-up were included using baseline observation carried forward (BOCF); for binary measures, patients lost to follow-up were considered equal to failures (i.e., non-assessed patients were recorded as not having responded in both groups). Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) versus placebo, with a total of 2,567 randomized participants, were included in the main analysis. None of these studies was performed in the specific population defined by the EMA approval of nalmefene, i.e., adults with alcohol dependence who consume more than 60 g of alcohol per day (for men) or more than 40 g per day (for women). No RCT compared nalmefene with another medication. Mortality at 6 mo (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.08; 2.01]) and 1 y (RR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.04; 23.95]) and quality of life at 6 mo (SF-36 physical component summary score: MD = 0.85, 95% CI [-0.32; 2.01]; SF-36 mental component summary score: MD = 1.01, 95% CI [-1.33; 3.34]) were not different across groups. Other health outcomes were not reported. Differences were encountered for alcohol consumption outcomes such as monthly number of heavy drinking days at 6 mo (MD = -1.65, 95% CI [-2.41; -0.89]) and at 1 y (MD = -1.60, 95% CI [-2.85; -0.35]) and total alcohol consumption at 6 mo (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI [-0.30; -0.10]). An attrition bias could not be excluded, with more withdrawals for nalmefene than for placebo, including more withdrawals for safety reasons at both 6 mo (RR = 3.65, 95% CI [2.02; 6.63]) and 1 y (RR = 7.01, 95% CI [1.72; 28.63]). Sensitivity analyses showed no differences for alcohol consumption outcomes between nalmefene and placebo, but the weight of these results should not be overestimated, as the BOCF approach to managing withdrawals was used.
The value of nalmefene for treatment of alcohol addiction is not established. At best, nalmefene has limited efficacy in reducing alcohol consumption.
Publisher
Public Library of Science,Public Library of Science (PLoS)
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.