4.4 Article

A preliminary randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the safety and efficacy of ondansetron in the treatment of cocaine dependence

Journal

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
Volume 84, Issue 3, Pages 256-263

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.02.011

Keywords

ondansetron; cocaine dependence; humans; 5-HT3 receptors; benzoylecgonine; cognitive behavioral therapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Prior studies have demonstrated inefficacy among dopamine receptor antagonists for treating cocaine dependence. An alternative approach would be to investigate the ability of indirect inhibitors of cortico-mesolimbic dopamine release, such as the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist ondansetron, to reduce cocaine's reinforcing effects. We hypothesized that ondansetron might be more efficacious than placebo at reducing cocaine intake and promoting abstinence in cocaine-dependent individuals. In a pilot randomized, double-blind, 10-week controlled trial, 63 treatment-seeking, cocaine-dependent men and women received ondansetron (0.25mg, 1.0mg, or 4.0mg twice daily) or placebo. Up to three times per week, participants were assessed on several measures of cocaine use, including urine benzoylecgonine. Cognitive behavioral therapy was administered weekly. Ondansetron was well tolerated, causing no serious adverse events. The ondansetron 4.0 mg group had the lowest dropout rate among all treatment groups and a greater rate of improvement in percentage of participants with a cocaine-free week compared with the placebo group (p = 0.02), whereas the ondansetron 1.0 mg group had a lower rate of improvement in percentage of weekly mean non-use days than did placebo recipients (p = 0.04). These results suggest the possibility of a non-linear dose-response function, with evidence supporting efficacy for the 4.0 mg group. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available