Logge Warren B, Haber Paul S, Hurzeler Tristan, Gallagher Hugh, Kranzler Henry, Morley Kirsten C
Edith Collins Centre for Translational Research in Alcohol, Drugs and Toxicology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Specialty of Addiction Medicine, Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2025 Jan 24. doi: 10.1007/s00213-025-06745-7.
Both topiramate and naltrexone have been shown to affect neural alcohol cue reactivity in alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, their comparative effects on alcohol cue reactivity are unknown. Moreover, while naltrexone has been found to normalize hyperactive localized network connectivity implicated in AUD, no studies have examined the effect of topiramate on intrinsic functional connectivity or compared functional connectivity between these two widely used medications.
This study compared topiramate versus naltrexone on alcohol cue-elicited brain activation and intrinsic functional connectivity in patients with alcohol use disorder.
Forty-seven participants with alcohol use disorder received daily topiramate (titrating the dose up to 200 mg/day n = 21) or naltrexone (50 mg/day, n = 26) for at least 6 weeks. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we examined intrinsic functional connectivity during rest and alcohol cue-elicited neural activation during a visual alcohol cue reactivity task 120 min following treatment administration. Functional connectivity and alcohol cue reactivity and percentage of heavy drinking days (% HDD) associations were assessed.
No differences in either intrinsic functional connectivity or alcohol cue-elicited neural activity were seen between topiramate and naltrexone-treated groups. Overall, participants showed increased alcohol cue-elicited activation in three clusters spanning occipital regions involved in visual recognition of stimuli, and hypoactivation to both alcohol and control cues in three clusters involved in salience attribution and processing of emotional valence of external stimuli. No differences between topiramate versus naltrexone were observed for either functional measure or associations with post-scan % HDD.
Topiramate and naltrexone enacted comparable alcohol cue reactivity and intrinsic functional connectivity patterns. Some overall responses of increased brain activation to alcohol cues in visual processing regions coupled with reduced activation to alcohol and control cues were evidenced for both treatments. These activation patterns were in regions expected to show attenuation of brain activity resulting from treatment. Topiramate and naltrexone may thus enact functional effects through similar modulation of functional neural activity in individuals with AUD.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03479086 https://www.
gov/study/NCT03479086 .
托吡酯和纳曲酮均已被证明会影响酒精使用障碍(AUD)中的神经酒精线索反应性。然而,它们对酒精线索反应性的比较效果尚不清楚。此外,虽然已发现纳曲酮可使AUD中涉及的过度活跃的局部网络连接正常化,但尚无研究探讨托吡酯对内在功能连接的影响,也没有比较这两种广泛使用的药物之间的功能连接。
本研究比较了托吡酯与纳曲酮对酒精使用障碍患者酒精线索诱发的大脑激活和内在功能连接的影响。
47名酒精使用障碍参与者每天接受托吡酯(剂量滴定至200毫克/天,n = 21)或纳曲酮(50毫克/天,n = 26)治疗至少6周。使用功能磁共振成像(fMRI),我们在治疗给药后120分钟的视觉酒精线索反应任务中检查了静息期间的内在功能连接和酒精线索诱发的神经激活。评估了功能连接、酒精线索反应性以及重度饮酒天数百分比(% HDD)的关联。
托吡酯治疗组和纳曲酮治疗组在内在功能连接或酒精线索诱发的神经活动方面均未观察到差异。总体而言,参与者在涉及刺激视觉识别的枕叶区域的三个簇中表现出酒精线索诱发的激活增加,而在涉及显著性归因和外部刺激情感效价处理的三个簇中对酒精和对照线索的激活均降低。在功能测量或与扫描后% HDD的关联方面,未观察到托吡酯与纳曲酮之间的差异。
托吡酯和纳曲酮表现出可比的酒精线索反应性和内在功能连接模式。两种治疗均显示出视觉处理区域中大脑对酒精线索的激活增加以及对酒精和对照线索的激活减少的一些总体反应。这些激活模式出现在预期因治疗而脑活动减弱的区域。因此,托吡酯和纳曲酮可能通过对AUD个体的功能性神经活动进行类似的调节来发挥功能作用。
ClinicalTrials.gov,NCT03479086 https://www.
gov/study/NCT03479086 。