暴食症成功治疗后的利舍胺维持治疗:随机双盲安慰剂对照试验

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Psychological Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1017/s003329172400148x
Carlos M. Grilo, Valentina Ivezaj, Sydney Yurkow, Cenk Tek, Ashley A. Wiedemann, Ralitza Gueorguieva
{"title":"暴食症成功治疗后的利舍胺维持治疗:随机双盲安慰剂对照试验","authors":"Carlos M. Grilo, Valentina Ivezaj, Sydney Yurkow, Cenk Tek, Ashley A. Wiedemann, Ralitza Gueorguieva","doi":"10.1017/s003329172400148x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Controlled research examining maintenance treatments for responders to acute interventions for binge-eating disorder (BED) is limited. This study tested efficacy of lisdexamfetamine (LDX) maintenance treatment amongst acute responders. Methods This prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled single-site trial, conducted March 2019 to September 2023, tested LDX as maintenance treatment for responders to acute treatments with LDX-alone or with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT + LDX) for BED with obesity. Sixty-one (83.6% women, mean age 44.3, mean BMI 36.1 kg/m<jats:sup>2</jats:sup>) acute responders were randomized to LDX (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 32) or placebo (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 29) for 12 weeks; 95.1% completed posttreatment assessments. Mixed-models and generalized-estimating equations comparing maintenance LDX <jats:italic>v.</jats:italic> placebo included main/interactive effects of acute (LDX or CBT + LDX) treatments to examine their predictive/moderating effects. Results Relapse rates (to diagnosis-level binge-eating frequency) following maintenance treatments were 10.0% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 3/30) for LDX and 17.9% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 5/28) for placebo; intention-to-treat binge-eating remission rates were 59.4% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 19/32) and 65.5% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 19/29), respectively. Maintenance LDX and placebo did not differ significantly in binge-eating but differed in weight-loss and eating-disorder psychopathology. Maintenance LDX was associated with significant weight-loss (−2.3%) whereas placebo had significant weight-gain (+2.2%); LDX and placebo differed significantly in weight-change throughout treatment and at posttreatment. Eating-disorder psychopathology remained unchanged with LDX but increased significantly with placebo. Acute treatments did not significantly predict/moderate maintenance-treatment outcomes. Conclusions Adults with BED/obesity who respond to acute lisdexamfetamine treatment (regardless of additionally receiving CBT) had good maintenance during subsequent 12-weeks. Maintenance lisdexamfetamine, relative to placebo, did not provide further benefit for binge-eating but was associated with significantly better eating-disorder psychopathology outcomes and greater weight-loss.","PeriodicalId":20891,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lisdexamfetamine maintenance treatment for binge-eating disorder following successful treatments: randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Carlos M. Grilo, Valentina Ivezaj, Sydney Yurkow, Cenk Tek, Ashley A. Wiedemann, Ralitza Gueorguieva\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s003329172400148x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Controlled research examining maintenance treatments for responders to acute interventions for binge-eating disorder (BED) is limited. This study tested efficacy of lisdexamfetamine (LDX) maintenance treatment amongst acute responders. Methods This prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled single-site trial, conducted March 2019 to September 2023, tested LDX as maintenance treatment for responders to acute treatments with LDX-alone or with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT + LDX) for BED with obesity. Sixty-one (83.6% women, mean age 44.3, mean BMI 36.1 kg/m<jats:sup>2</jats:sup>) acute responders were randomized to LDX (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 32) or placebo (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 29) for 12 weeks; 95.1% completed posttreatment assessments. Mixed-models and generalized-estimating equations comparing maintenance LDX <jats:italic>v.</jats:italic> placebo included main/interactive effects of acute (LDX or CBT + LDX) treatments to examine their predictive/moderating effects. Results Relapse rates (to diagnosis-level binge-eating frequency) following maintenance treatments were 10.0% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 3/30) for LDX and 17.9% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 5/28) for placebo; intention-to-treat binge-eating remission rates were 59.4% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 19/32) and 65.5% (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 19/29), respectively. Maintenance LDX and placebo did not differ significantly in binge-eating but differed in weight-loss and eating-disorder psychopathology. Maintenance LDX was associated with significant weight-loss (−2.3%) whereas placebo had significant weight-gain (+2.2%); LDX and placebo differed significantly in weight-change throughout treatment and at posttreatment. Eating-disorder psychopathology remained unchanged with LDX but increased significantly with placebo. Acute treatments did not significantly predict/moderate maintenance-treatment outcomes. Conclusions Adults with BED/obesity who respond to acute lisdexamfetamine treatment (regardless of additionally receiving CBT) had good maintenance during subsequent 12-weeks. Maintenance lisdexamfetamine, relative to placebo, did not provide further benefit for binge-eating but was associated with significantly better eating-disorder psychopathology outcomes and greater weight-loss.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20891,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s003329172400148x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s003329172400148x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 对暴饮暴食症(BED)急性期干预措施应答者进行维持治疗的对照研究十分有限。本研究测试了利血平(LDX)对急性期应答者进行维持治疗的疗效。方法 这项前瞻性随机双盲安慰剂对照单点试验于2019年3月至2023年9月进行,测试了LDX作为单独使用LDX或认知行为疗法(CBT + LDX)治疗暴食症合并肥胖症的急性期应答者的维持治疗。61名(83.6%为女性,平均年龄44.3岁,平均体重指数36.1 kg/m2)急性期应答者被随机分配到LDX(32人)或安慰剂(29人)治疗12周;95.1%完成了治疗后评估。混合模型和广义估计方程比较了LDX与安慰剂的维持治疗效果,包括急性期(LDX或CBT + LDX)治疗的主要/交互效应,以检查其预测/调节作用。结果 LDX维持治疗后的复发率(达到诊断水平的暴食频率)为10.0%(3/30),安慰剂为17.9%(5/28);意向治疗暴食缓解率分别为59.4%(19/32)和65.5%(19/29)。维持性 LDX 和安慰剂在暴食方面没有显著差异,但在体重减轻和进食障碍心理病理学方面存在差异。维持性 LDX 可显著降低体重(-2.3%),而安慰剂可显著增加体重(+2.2%);在整个治疗过程中和治疗后,LDX 和安慰剂在体重变化方面存在显著差异。进食障碍心理病理学在使用 LDX 后保持不变,但在使用安慰剂后则明显增加。急性治疗对维持治疗结果的预测/调节作用不明显。结论 对利血平急性治疗(无论是否同时接受了CBT治疗)有反应的成人暴食症/肥胖症患者在随后的12周内保持良好的治疗效果。相对于安慰剂,利司他敏的维持治疗对暴饮暴食没有进一步的益处,但对进食障碍的精神病理学结果和体重减轻有显著改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Lisdexamfetamine maintenance treatment for binge-eating disorder following successful treatments: randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial
Background Controlled research examining maintenance treatments for responders to acute interventions for binge-eating disorder (BED) is limited. This study tested efficacy of lisdexamfetamine (LDX) maintenance treatment amongst acute responders. Methods This prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled single-site trial, conducted March 2019 to September 2023, tested LDX as maintenance treatment for responders to acute treatments with LDX-alone or with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT + LDX) for BED with obesity. Sixty-one (83.6% women, mean age 44.3, mean BMI 36.1 kg/m2) acute responders were randomized to LDX (N = 32) or placebo (N = 29) for 12 weeks; 95.1% completed posttreatment assessments. Mixed-models and generalized-estimating equations comparing maintenance LDX v. placebo included main/interactive effects of acute (LDX or CBT + LDX) treatments to examine their predictive/moderating effects. Results Relapse rates (to diagnosis-level binge-eating frequency) following maintenance treatments were 10.0% (N = 3/30) for LDX and 17.9% (N = 5/28) for placebo; intention-to-treat binge-eating remission rates were 59.4% (N = 19/32) and 65.5% (N = 19/29), respectively. Maintenance LDX and placebo did not differ significantly in binge-eating but differed in weight-loss and eating-disorder psychopathology. Maintenance LDX was associated with significant weight-loss (−2.3%) whereas placebo had significant weight-gain (+2.2%); LDX and placebo differed significantly in weight-change throughout treatment and at posttreatment. Eating-disorder psychopathology remained unchanged with LDX but increased significantly with placebo. Acute treatments did not significantly predict/moderate maintenance-treatment outcomes. Conclusions Adults with BED/obesity who respond to acute lisdexamfetamine treatment (regardless of additionally receiving CBT) had good maintenance during subsequent 12-weeks. Maintenance lisdexamfetamine, relative to placebo, did not provide further benefit for binge-eating but was associated with significantly better eating-disorder psychopathology outcomes and greater weight-loss.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological Medicine
Psychological Medicine 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
711
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Now in its fifth decade of publication, Psychological Medicine is a leading international journal in the fields of psychiatry, related aspects of psychology and basic sciences. From 2014, there are 16 issues a year, each featuring original articles reporting key research being undertaken worldwide, together with shorter editorials by distinguished scholars and an important book review section. The journal''s success is clearly demonstrated by a consistently high impact factor.
期刊最新文献
Characterizing Veteran suicide decedents that were not classified as high-suicide-risk Genetic architecture and socio-environmental risk factors for major depressive disorder in Nepal Do people recover from the impact of COVID-19 social isolation? Social connectivity and negative affective bias. Lisdexamfetamine maintenance treatment for binge-eating disorder following successful treatments: randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial Discussing the concept of substance-induced psychosis (SIP)
×
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