Skip to main content
Full access
Editorials
Published Online: 1 November 2024

Reductions in Substance Use as Outcome Targets for Treatment Development

Publication: American Journal of Psychiatry
Given the very high overdose death rates from opioids and stimulants and the increasing rates of cannabis use and use disorders among adults in the United States (1, 2), developing new medications and other treatments for substance use disorders is an urgent need. Unfortunately, the main outcome currently used for U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of medications to treat substance use disorders other than alcohol use disorder is abstinence, which is a very hard bar to reach. While achieving continuous abstinence has been documented to be clinically beneficial, such an outcome is difficult to achieve or sustain and is made particularly challenging as the brain circuits involved with self-regulation and stress reactivity have been compromised by drug use (3). Moreover, the weakening of social and economic support systems that many people with substance use disorders face imposes further barriers to abstinence. Such a difficult-to-achieve outcome has deterred the development of new agents to treat substance use disorders (4). Thus, identification of alternative meaningful outcomes with evidence of clinical benefit could increase successful development of new treatments to help patients even when not resulting in continuous abstinence (5).
For the alcohol field, strong evidence shows that reductions in the quantity and frequency of alcohol used, regardless of total abstinence, leads to improved health (6). In response, the FDA allows increases in the percentage of subjects with no heavy drinking days as an alternative to abstinence as a main outcome for medication trials to treat alcohol use disorder. Less information is available on the benefits of reduced frequency or intensity as related to other substances.
The risks of morbidity and mortality associated with every episode of illicit drug use, particularly with fentanyl’s current intrusion into illicit drug markets, pinpoints why a reduction in the frequency of illicit drug use could be clinically meaningful (4). Furthermore, researchers have also shown that nonabstinent reductions in use of stimulant drugs are associated with improvements in clinical outcomes (7, 8). As researchers and clinicians work to improve treatment outcomes for persons with substance use disorders, accumulating evidence points toward the benefits of both abstinence and nonabstinence reductions in quantity and frequency of drug use as scientifically justified endpoints (911). These are the issues addressed for cannabis use disorder in the article by McClure and colleagues in this issue of the Journal (12).
McClure and colleagues conducted a secondary analysis of clinical trials that focused on treating cannabis use disorder to determine 1) whether decreases in self-reported cannabis use were associated with improvements in cannabis-related problems and functional outcomes, and 2) if so, what percentage decrease in cannabis use is needed for meaningful improvement. The study’s exploratory analyses showed that among individuals age 18 and older undergoing treatment for cannabis use disorder, reductions in cannabis use falling short of total abstinence were associated with clinically meaningful improvement in “cannabis-related problems and functional outcomes.” The study used data from seven treatment studies conducted in the United States with a total combined sample of 920 persons and examined a range of outcomes (the self-reported Marijuana Problems Scale, the Health-Related Quality of Life scale, and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, as well as the clinician-rated Clinical Global Impressions severity scale). A key question that the investigators explored empirically was to use multivariable classification models to determine the levels of cannabis use reduction that were most strongly associated with improved outcomes. They found that reductions of approximately 50% in days of use and 75% in use amounts were associated with maximum improvements on the clinician-rated Clinical Global Impressions scale.
The exploratory nature of the McClure et al. study is related to the fact that none of the randomized clinical trials used for the study prespecified these outcomes in their plans. In addition, assessment of outcome improvement was developed based on a consensus approach, suggesting that future methodological studies of the measures of quantity of cannabis consumed are indicated. All study subjects were from a single research center, and the data were not designed to be consistent across all studies, which limited sample size for many of the tests. Despite these acknowledged limitations, McClure and colleagues provide data that should influence many other studies.
The implications of McClure and colleagues’ findings for medication development in general and for cannabis use disorder in particular are significant. For instance, FDA approval of medications for the treatment of substance use disorders other than alcohol has required abstinence outcomes in treatment studies, despite the FDA’s potential acceptance of nonabstinence outcomes as additional evidence in support of approval (13). To consider other outcomes (i.e., less than total abstinence) as the main outcome for FDA approval, a key need for the field is to conduct studies that document that such outcomes are associated with clinically meaningful improvements. McClure and colleagues’ study provides first-time evidence that reductions in cannabis use were beneficial to patients with a cannabis use disorder.
As there are very few FDA-approved medications for substance use disorders and none for cannabis or stimulant use disorders, a more nuanced understanding of how to achieve therapeutic benefit short of periods of total abstinence will facilitate the development of new treatments and in the process save lives and potentially help many patients recover. In this respect, McClure and colleagues’ findings build evidence toward new pathways to help medication development for cannabis use disorders. A primary strength of the study was its goal of establishing measures of reductions in cannabis use associated with meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes, including estimates of the minimum reductions necessary to improve outcomes. This is a first step to defining the requirements for a meaningful reduction in cannabis use—a finding that future studies can further assess and expand by including unit doses of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) (13). The increases in adverse consequences from cannabis use and use disorders and the lack of available treatments highlight the urgency of such work (2, 4, 14).

References

1.
Han B, Einstein EB, Jones CM, et al: Racial and ethnic disparities in drug overdose deaths in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Netw Open 2022; 5:e2232314
2.
Compton WM, Han B, Jones CM, et al: Cannabis use disorders among adults in the United States during a time of increasing use of cannabis. Drug Alcohol Depend 2019; 204:107468
3.
Volkow ND, Koob GF, McLellan AT: Neurobiologic advances from the brain disease model of addiction. N Engl J Med 2016; 374:363–371
4.
McCann DJ, Ramey T, Skolnick P: Outcome measures in medication trials for substance use disorders. Curr Treat Options Psychiatry 2015; 2:113–121
5.
Volkow ND, Weiss SRB: Importance of a standard unit dose for cannabis research. Addiction 2020; 115:1219–1221
6.
Falk D, Wang XQ, Liu L, et al: Percentage of subjects with no heavy drinking days: evaluation as an efficacy endpoint for alcohol clinical trials. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2010; 34:2022–2034
7.
Amin‐Esmaeili M, Farokhnia M, Susukida R, et al: Reduced drug use as an alternative valid outcome in individuals with stimulant use disorders: findings from 13 multisite randomized clinical trials. Addiction 2024; 119:833–843
8.
Votaw VR, Tuchman FR, Roos CR, et al: Examining cocaine use reductions and long-term outcomes in two clinical trials of continuing care for cocaine dependence. J Subst Use Addict Treat 2024; 163:209394
9.
Volkow ND, Woodcock J, Compton WM, et al: Medication development in opioid addiction: meaningful clinical end points. Sci Transl Med 2018; 10:eaan2595
10.
Kiluk BD, Fitzmaurice GM, Strain EC, et al: What defines a clinically meaningful outcome in the treatment of substance use disorders: reductions in direct consequences of drug use or improvement in overall functioning? Addiction 2019; 114:9–15
11.
Rosenberg H, Grant J, Davis AK: Acceptance of non-abstinence as an outcome goal for individuals diagnosed with substance use disorders: a narrative review of published research. J Stud Alcohol Drugs 2020; 81:405–415
12.
McClure EA, Neelon B, Tomko RL, et al: Association of cannabis use reduction with improved functional outcomes: an exploratory aggregated analysis from seven cannabis use disorder treatment trials to extract data-driven cannabis reduction metrics. Am J Psychiatry 2024; 181:988–996
13.
US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research: Stimulant Use Disorders: Developing Drugs for Treatment: Guidance for Industry. Silver Spring, MD, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, October 2023. https://www.fda.gov/media/172703/download
14.
Kondo KK, Morasco BJ, Nugent SM, et al: Pharmacotherapy for the treatment of cannabis use disorder: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2020; 172:398–412

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to American Journal of Psychiatry
Go to American Journal of Psychiatry
American Journal of Psychiatry
Pages: 947 - 948

History

Accepted: 9 September 2024
Published online: 1 November 2024
Published in print: November 01, 2024

Keywords

  1. Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders
  2. Cannabis

Authors

Details

Wilson M. Compton, M.D., M.P.E. [email protected]
National Institute on Drug Abuse, Bethesda, MD.
Nora D. Volkow, M.D.
National Institute on Drug Abuse, Bethesda, MD.

Notes

Send correspondence to Dr. Compton ([email protected]).

Competing Interests

Dr. Compton is a stockholder in 3M, General Electric, and Pfizer. Dr. Volkow reports no financial relationships with commercial interests.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

View Options

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Get Access

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share