AimTo test the efficacy and safety of osmotic release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate (MPH) in doses up to 180 mg/day to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and prevent any drug relapse in individuals with a co-diagnosis of ADHD and amphetamine dependence.DesignRandomized placebo-controlled 24-week double-blind trial with parallel groups design.SettingParticipants were recruited from medium security prisons in Sweden. The medication started within 2 weeks before release from prison and continued in out-patient care with twice-weekly visits, including once-weekly cognitive behavioural therapy.ParticipantsFifty-four men with a mean age of 42 years, currently incarcerated, meeting DSM-IV criteria for ADHD and amphetamine dependence.MeasurementsChange in self-reported ADHD symptoms, relapse to any drug use (amphetamine and other drugs) measured by urine toxicology, retention to treatment, craving and time to relapse.FindingsThe MPH-treated group reduced their ADHD symptoms during the trial (P = 0.011) and had a significantly higher proportion of drug-negative urines compared with the placebo group (P = 0.047), including more amphetamine-negative urines (P = 0.019) and better retention to treatment (P = 0.032).ConclusionsMethylphenidate treatment reduces attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms and the risk for relapse to substance use in criminal offenders with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and substance dependence.

This trial demonstrated the efficacy of naltrexone in reducing amphetamine use in amphetamine-dependent individuals.

Amphetamine abuse and dependence is a global health concern with a collateral increase in medical and social problems. Although some of the neurobiological mechanisms underlying amphetamine dependence and its devastating effects in humans are known, the development of rational and evidence-based treatment is lagging. There is evidence from preclinical studies suggesting that the endogenous opioid system plays a role in mediating some of the behavioral and neurochemical effects of amphetamine in a variety of controlled settings. In the present study we assessed the effects of naltrexone, an opioid antagonist (50 mg) on the subjective physiological and biochemical response to dexamphetamine (30 mg) in 20 amphetamine-dependent patients. Patients received naltrexone/amphetamine followed by placebo/amphetamine, 1 week apart in a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled design. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of pretreatment with naltrexone on the subjective response to amphetamine, using a Visual Analog Scale. The secondary objective was to investigate the effects of naltrexone on physiological and biochemical responses to amphetamine, as measured by changes in blood pressure, heart rate, skin conductance, and cortisol. Naltrexone significantly attenuated the subjective effects produced by dexamphetamine in dependent patients (po0.001). Pretreatment with naltrexone also significantly blocked the craving for dexamphetamine (po0.001). There was no difference between the groups on the physiological measures. The results suggest that the subjective effects of amphetamine could be modulated via the endogenous opioid system. The potential of naltrexone as an adjunct pharmaceutical for amphetamine dependence is promising.

Background Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is associated with cognitive deficits such as impaired executive functions, which are hypothesized to contribute to the progression of the disease and worsen treatment outcome. Training of working memory (WM) to improve cognitive functions and thereby reduce alcohol use has been proposed as a novel treatment strategy. Methods Patients with AUD (n = 50) who were recruited to an outpatient addiction clinic were randomized to receive 5 weeks of active WM training or control training. Participants had weekly follow‐up visits, and all cognitive training sessions were done online at home. Primary outcomes were WM function and change in self‐reported heavy drinking. Secondary outcomes were craving, other drinking outcomes, and performance on a range of neuropsychological tasks from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery. Results The active training group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in verbal WM compared with the control group. No statistically significant effect of training was found on the primary drinking outcome, but a trend was observed indicating that WM training reduces the number of drinks per drinking occasion. WM training had no statistically significant effect on any of the other neuropsychological tasks. Conclusions Cognitive training can improve WM function in individuals with AUD, suggesting that such interventions are feasible to administer in this patient population. The results do not support an effect of WM training on heavy drinking or transfer effects to other cognitive domains. Future studies should evaluate WM training as an adjunct to evidence‐based treatments for AUD to assess potential synergistic effects.