Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania and the VISN 4 MIRECC, Philadelphia VAMC, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2012 Mar;36(3):509-16. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2011.01609.x. Epub 2011 Sep 6.
A variety of typologies have been used to categorize alcoholism's diverse manifestations. Although the most widely studied typologies are dichotomous ones based on genetic epidemiologic findings or using cluster analytic methods, recent efforts have utilized a single item or the onset of a diagnosis of alcohol dependence to subtype individuals based on the age of alcoholism onset. We compared 3 different methods to subtype alcoholics.
This secondary analysis used data from 134 alcohol-dependent participants in a placebo-controlled trial of sertraline (Kranzler et al., 2011). We compared cluster analysis to distinguish 2 risk/severity subtypes (Babor et al., 1992) with 2 age-of-onset subtypes (i.e., based on the age of onset of problem drinking or the age at which alcohol dependence criteria were first met).
Each method yielded subgroups that differed significantly from one another on demographic and clinical measures. Although concordance was high between the 2 age-of-onset methods, it was poor between the age-of-onset methods and the cluster analysis-derived approach. All 3 subtyping approaches significantly moderated the effects of sertraline or placebo, but only in the L'L' genotype group, as originally reported (Kranzler et al., 2011). In all cases, sertraline treatment was superior to placebo in later-onset individuals and inferior to placebo in the earlier-onset groups.
Because age-of-onset subtypes can be defined retrospectively on an individual basis, they may be more clinically useful than cluster-derived subtypes, which require group data. Because the 2 age-of-onset measures we examined appear to have comparable validity, a single item is easier to use as a measure of the age of onset of problem drinking.
已经使用了各种类型学对酒精中毒的不同表现进行分类。尽管最广泛研究的类型学是基于遗传流行病学发现或使用聚类分析方法的二分类型学,但最近的研究利用单一项目或酒精依赖诊断的开始来基于酒精中毒开始的年龄对个体进行亚型分类。我们比较了 3 种不同的方法来对酒精中毒者进行亚型分类。
这是一项对舍曲林(Kranzler 等人,2011)安慰剂对照试验中的 134 名酒精依赖者的二次分析。我们比较了聚类分析,以区分 2 种风险/严重程度亚型(Babor 等人,1992)和 2 种发病年龄亚型(即,基于问题饮酒的发病年龄或首次满足酒精依赖标准的年龄)。
每种方法在人口统计学和临床测量上都产生了与其他方法显著不同的亚组。虽然 2 种发病年龄方法之间的一致性很高,但与聚类分析方法的一致性很差。所有 3 种亚型分类方法都显著调节了舍曲林或安慰剂的效果,但仅在最初报道的 L'L'基因型组中(Kranzler 等人,2011)。在所有情况下,舍曲林治疗在晚发性个体中优于安慰剂,而在早发性组中则劣于安慰剂。
由于发病年龄亚型可以在个体基础上进行回顾性定义,因此它们可能比聚类衍生的亚型更具临床实用性,后者需要群体数据。由于我们检查的 2 种发病年龄测量方法似乎具有相当的有效性,因此单个项目更容易作为问题饮酒发病年龄的衡量标准。