A Multisite, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Vigabatrin for Treating Cocaine Dependence | Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology | JAMA Psychiatry | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.173.234.169. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.  Results From the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings NSDUH series H-41. US Dept of Health and Human Services publication (SMA) 11-4658. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2011
2.
Di Chiara G, Imperato A. Drugs abused by humans preferentially increase synaptic dopamine concentrations in the mesolimbic system of freely moving rats.  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1988;85(14):5274-52782899326PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Hurd YL, Weiss F, Koob GF, And NE, Ungerstedt U. Cocaine reinforcement and extracellular dopamine overflow in rat nucleus accumbens: an in vivo microdialysis study.  Brain Res. 1989;498(1):199-2032790475PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Kalivas PW, Nakamura M. Neural systems for behavioral activation and reward.  Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1999;9(2):223-22710322190PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Engberg G, Nissbrandt H. γ-Hydroxybutyric acid (GHBA) induces pacemaker activity and inhibition of substantia nigra dopamine neurons by activating GABAB-receptors.  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 1993;348(5):491-4978114948PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Finlay JM, Damsma G, Fibiger HC. Benzodiazepine-induced decreases in extracellular concentrations of dopamine in the nucleus accumbens after acute and repeated administration.  Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1992;106(2):202-2081549647PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Dewey SL, Morgan AE, Ashby CR Jr,  et al.  A novel strategy for the treatment of cocaine addiction.  Synapse. 1998;30(2):119-1299723781PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Molina PE, Ahmed N, Ajmal M,  et al.  Co-administration of γ-vinyl GABA and cocaine: preclinical assessment of safety.  Life Sci. 1999;65(11):1175-118210503933PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Willmore LJ, Abelson MB, Ben-Menachem E, Pellock JM, Shields WD. Vigabatrin: 2008 update.  Epilepsia. 2009;50(2):163-17319230067PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Eke T, Talbot JF, Lawden MC. Severe persistent visual field constriction associated with vigabatrin.  BMJ. 1997;314(7075):180-1819022432PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Kälviäinen R, Nousiainen I, Mäntyjärvi M,  et al.  Vigabatrin, a GABAergic antiepileptic drug, causes concentric visual field defects.  Neurology. 1999;53(5):922-92610496247PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Schmitz B, Schmidt T, Jokiel B, Pfeiffer S, Tiel-Wilck K, Rüther K. Visual field constriction in epilepsy patients treated with vigabatrin and other antiepileptic drugs: a prospective study.  J Neurol. 2002;249(4):469-47511967655PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Gillis MCC. Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties. 37th ed. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Pharmacists Association; 2002:1513-1515
14.
Maguire MJ, Hemming K, Wild JM, Hutton JL, Marson AG. Prevalence of visual field loss following exposure to vigabatrin therapy: a systematic review.  Epilepsia. 2010;51(12):2423-243121070215PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Malmgren K, Ben-Menachem E, Frisén L. Vigabatrin visual toxicity: evolution and dose dependence.  Epilepsia. 2001;42(5):609-61511380567PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Brodie JD, Case BG, Figueroa E,  et al.  Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vigabatrin for the treatment of cocaine dependence in Mexican parolees.  Am J Psychiatry. 2009;166(11):1269-127719651710PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Brodie JD, Figueroa E, Dewey SL. Treating cocaine addiction: from preclinical to clinical trial experience with γ-vinyl GABA.  Synapse. 2003;50(3):261-26514515344PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Brodie JD, Figueroa E, Laska EM, Dewey SL. Safety and efficacy of γ-vinyl GABA (GVG) for the treatment of methamphetamine and/or cocaine addiction.  Synapse. 2005;55(2):122-12515543630PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Fechtner RD, Khouri AS, Figueroa E,  et al.  Short-term treatment of cocaine and/or methamphetamine abuse with vigabatrin: ocular safety pilot results.  Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124(9):1257-126216966620PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams JBW. Structured Clinical Interview of Axis I DSM-IV Disorders: Patient Edition (With Psychotic Screen)Version 2.0. New York: Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute; 1996
21.
Bickel WK, Marsch LA, Buchhalter AR, Badger GJ. Computerized behavior therapy for opioid-dependent outpatients: a randomized controlled trial.  Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;16(2):132-14318489017PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Timeline follow back: a technique for assessing self-reported ethanol consumption. In: Allen J, Litten RZ, eds. Techniques to Assess Alcohol Consumption. Clifton, NJ: Humana Press, Inc; 1992:19-28
23.
Fals-Stewart W, O’Farrell TJ, Freitas TT, McFarlin SK, Rutigliano P. The timeline followback reports of psychoactive substance use by drug-abusing patients: psychometric properties.  J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000;68(1):134-14410710848PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Somoza E, Somoza P, Lewis D,  et al.  The SRPHK1 outcome measure for cocaine-dependence trials combines self-report, urine benzoylecgonine levels, and the concordance between the two to determine a cocaine-use status for each study day.  Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008;93(1-2):132-14018029115PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Donovan DM, Bigelow GE, Brigham GS,  et al.  Primary outcome indices in illicit drug dependence treatment research: systematic approach to selection and measurement of drug use end-points in clinical trials.  Addiction. 2012;107(4):694-70821781202PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Tracy K, Baker S, LoCastro J, Mezinskis J, Simon S, Somoza E. The Substance Clinical Global Impression (SCGI) Scale: measuring global functioning in substance related clinical trials. In: Proceedings From the 61st Annual Scientific Meeting of the College on Problems of Drug Dependence: Problems of Drug Dependence, 1999. NIDA research monograph 180. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse; 2000:169
27.
Mezinskis J, Dryenforth S, Goldsmith R, Cohen R, Somoza E. Craving and withdrawal symptoms for various drugs of abuse.  Psychiatr Ann. 1998;28(10):577-583Google Scholar
28.
McLellan AT, Kushner H, Metzger D,  et al.  The Fifth Edition of the Addiction Severity Index.  J Subst Abuse Treat. 1992;9(3):199-2131334156PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Miller NR, Johnson MA, Paul SR,  et al.  Visual dysfunction in patients receiving vigabatrin: clinical and electrophysiologic findings.  Neurology. 1999;53(9):2082-208710599785PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Harding GF, Wild JM, Robertson KA, Rietbrock S, Martinez C. Separating the retinal electrophysiologic effects of vigabatrin: treatment versus field loss.  Neurology. 2000;55(3):347-35210932265PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Harding GF, Robertson K, Spencer EL, Holliday I. Vigabatrin: its effect on the electrophysiology of vision.  Doc Ophthalmol. 2002;104(2):213-22911999628PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
González Pérez J, Parafita Mato M, Segade García A, Díaz Rey A. Intraocular motility, electrophysiological tests and visual fields in drug addicts.  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1995;15(5):493-4988524581PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Richens A. Pharmacology and clinical pharmacology of vigabatrin.  J Child Neurol. 1991;(suppl 2)  S7-S101940127PubMedGoogle Scholar
34.
Shorter D, Kosten TR. Novel pharmacotherapeutic treatments for cocaine addiction.  BMC Med. 2011;9:e119http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216852/. Accessed February 22, 201322047090PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Article
June 2013

A Multisite, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Vigabatrin for Treating Cocaine Dependence

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (Dr E. C. Somoza) and Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, and Cincinnati Addiction Research Center (Drs E. C. Somoza and Winhusen, Mr Lewis, and Ms P. Somoza), Cincinnati, Ohio; Catalyst Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc, Coral Gables (Mr Winship and Drs Gorodetzky and Miller), and Operation PAR, Inc, Largo (Dr Sheehan), Florida; Division of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts (Dr Ciraulo); Addiction Pharmacology Research Laboratory, St Luke's Hospital, San Francisco (Dr Galloway), and Pacific Coast Research Associates, Culver City (Dr Watson), California; Be Well Center, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio (Dr Roache); Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute, Roanoke (Dr Bickel); and Center for Chemical Dependence, The Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland (Dr Jasinski). Dr Segal is in private practice at Segal Institute for Clinical Research, North Miami, Florida.

JAMA Psychiatry. 2013;70(6):630-637. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.872
Abstract

Importance Cocaine dependence is a significant public health problem, yet no validated pharmacological treatment exists. The potent γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)ergic medication vigabatrin has previously been shown to be effective in a double-blind single-site study conducted in Mexico.

Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of vigabatrin for the treatment of cocaine dependence in a US sample.

Design and Setting Multisite, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week clinical trial with follow-up visits at weeks 13, 16, 20, and 24 in 11 US sites.

Participants In total, 186 treatment-seeking participants with cocaine dependence (mean age, 45 years). Approximately 67% were male, and about 60% were of African American race/ethnicity.

Interventions Participants received twice-daily doses of vigabatrin (total dosage, 3.0 g/d) or matched placebo, plus weekly computerized cognitive behavioral therapy and biweekly individual counseling for 13 weeks. Contingency management encouraged the provision of urine samples.

Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome measure was the proportion of participants with cocaine abstinence during the last 2 weeks of the 12-week treatment phase as assessed by self-reports and quantitative urine drug screens. The weekly fraction of cocaine use days and the number of drug-free urine samples during weeks 1 through 13 were key secondary measures.

Results No significant differences were observed between the vigabatrin group and the placebo group on the primary outcome measure (P = .67), key secondary measures (P > .99), or other outcome measures. However, while pill counts and self-reports indicated that more than 66% of all participants (and >63% of the vigabatrin group) took more than 70% of their medication, post hoc vigabatrin urine concentration levels suggested that approximately 40% to 60% of patients taking vigabatrin may not have been adherent. This lack of adherence may have obscured any evidence of vigabatrin efficacy. No visual acuity or visual field deterioration occurred in any of the participants.

Conclusions and Relevance No protocol-defined differences in efficacy between vigabatrin treatment and placebo were detected for any outcome variable. This may have been due to medication nonadherence or, alternatively, due to the weak efficacy of vigabatrin.

Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00611130

×