Kava for generalised anxiety disorder: A 16-week double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study

J. Sarris, G. Byrne, C. Bousman, Lachlan Cribb, K. Savage, O. Holmes, Jenifer A Murphy, P. Macdonald, Anika Short, Sonia Nazareth, E. Jennings, Stuart Thomas, E. Ogden, Suneel Chamoli, A. Scholey, C. Stough
{"title":"Kava for generalised anxiety disorder: A 16-week double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study","authors":"J. Sarris, G. Byrne, C. Bousman, Lachlan Cribb, K. Savage, O. Holmes, Jenifer A Murphy, P. Macdonald, Anika Short, Sonia Nazareth, E. Jennings, Stuart Thomas, E. Ogden, Suneel Chamoli, A. Scholey, C. Stough","doi":"10.1177/0004867419891246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Previous randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies have shown that Kava (a South Pacific medicinal plant) reduced anxiety during short-term administration. The objective of this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to perform a larger, longer-term trial assessing the efficacy and safety of Kava in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder and to determine whether gamma-aminobutyric acid transporter (SLC6A1) single-nucleotide polymorphisms were moderators of response. Methods: The trial was a phase III, multi-site, two-arm, 16-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating an aqueous extract of dried Kava root administered twice per day in tablet form (standardised to 120 mg of kavalactones twice/day) in 171 currently non-medicated anxious participants with diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder. The trial took place in Australia. Results: An analysis of 171 participants revealed a non-significant difference in anxiety reduction between the Kava and placebo groups (a relative reduction favouring placebo of 1.37 points; p = 0.25). At the conclusion of the controlled phase, 17.4% of the Kava group were classified as remitted (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score < 7) compared to 23.8% of the placebo group (p = 0.46). No SLC6A1 polymorphisms were associated with treatment response, while carriers of the rs2601126 T allele preferentially respond to placebo (p = 0.006). Kava was well tolerated aside from poorer memory (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.044) and tremor/shakiness (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.024) occurring more frequently in the Kava group. Liver function test abnormalities were significantly more frequent in the Kava group, although no participant met criteria for herb-induced hepatic injury. Conclusion: While research has generally supported Kava in non-clinical populations (potentially for more ‘situational’ anxiety as a short-term anxiolytic), this particular extract was not effective for diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder.","PeriodicalId":8576,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"477 1","pages":"288 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867419891246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

Objective: Previous randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies have shown that Kava (a South Pacific medicinal plant) reduced anxiety during short-term administration. The objective of this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to perform a larger, longer-term trial assessing the efficacy and safety of Kava in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder and to determine whether gamma-aminobutyric acid transporter (SLC6A1) single-nucleotide polymorphisms were moderators of response. Methods: The trial was a phase III, multi-site, two-arm, 16-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating an aqueous extract of dried Kava root administered twice per day in tablet form (standardised to 120 mg of kavalactones twice/day) in 171 currently non-medicated anxious participants with diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder. The trial took place in Australia. Results: An analysis of 171 participants revealed a non-significant difference in anxiety reduction between the Kava and placebo groups (a relative reduction favouring placebo of 1.37 points; p = 0.25). At the conclusion of the controlled phase, 17.4% of the Kava group were classified as remitted (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score < 7) compared to 23.8% of the placebo group (p = 0.46). No SLC6A1 polymorphisms were associated with treatment response, while carriers of the rs2601126 T allele preferentially respond to placebo (p = 0.006). Kava was well tolerated aside from poorer memory (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.044) and tremor/shakiness (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.024) occurring more frequently in the Kava group. Liver function test abnormalities were significantly more frequent in the Kava group, although no participant met criteria for herb-induced hepatic injury. Conclusion: While research has generally supported Kava in non-clinical populations (potentially for more ‘situational’ anxiety as a short-term anxiolytic), this particular extract was not effective for diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
卡瓦治疗广泛性焦虑症:一项为期16周的双盲、随机、安慰剂对照研究
目的:先前的随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究表明,卡瓦(一种南太平洋药用植物)在短期服用期间可以减少焦虑。这项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究的目的是进行一项更大规模、更长期的试验,评估Kava治疗广泛性焦虑症的有效性和安全性,并确定γ -氨基丁酸转运体(SLC6A1)单核苷酸多态性是否是反应的调节因子。方法:该试验是一项III期、多地点、两组、16周、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究,研究了干卡瓦根的水提取物,以片剂的形式每天两次给药(标准剂量为卡瓦内酯120毫克/天两次),171名目前未服用药物的诊断为广泛性焦虑症的焦虑参与者。审判在澳大利亚进行。结果:对171名参与者的分析显示,Kava组和安慰剂组在焦虑减轻方面无显著差异(安慰剂组相对减少1.37分;P = 0.25)。在对照期结束时,17.4%的卡瓦组被归类为缓解(汉密尔顿焦虑评定量表评分< 7),而安慰剂组为23.8% (p = 0.46)。SLC6A1多态性与治疗反应无关,而rs2601126 T等位基因携带者对安慰剂有优先反应(p = 0.006)。除了记忆力较差外,Kava耐受性良好(Kava = 36 vs安慰剂= 23;p = 0.044)和震颤/颤抖(Kava = 36 vs安慰剂= 23;p = 0.024),在Kava组更常见。尽管没有参与者符合草药性肝损伤的标准,但在Kava组中肝功能检查异常明显更频繁。结论:虽然研究普遍支持卡瓦在非临床人群中的应用(可能更多的“情境性”焦虑作为短期抗焦虑药),但这种特殊的提取物对诊断为广泛性焦虑障碍无效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mortality in people living with dementia who self-harmed: An Australian data linkage study Exploring the use of electroconvulsive therapy in the anticoagulated population: A systematic review Evaluation of Monitoring Practices in Patients on Novel Antipsychotics Myoclonus in Psychiatry Pain Medicine: New Frontiers in Moving from Cell to Soul, and Back
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1