(1) Background: Synthetic cannabinoids (SCs) are emerging drugs of abuse sold as ‘K2’, ‘K9’ or ‘Spice’. Evidence shows that using SCs products leads to greater health risks than cannabis. They have been associated with greater toxicity and higher addiction potential unrelated to the primary psychoactive component of marijuana, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). Moreover, early cases of intoxication and death related to SCs highlight the inherent danger that may accompany the use of these substances. However, there is limited knowledge of the toxicology of Spice ingredients. This systematic review intends to analyze the toxicity of SCs compounds in Spice/K2 drugs. (2) Methods: Studies analyzing synthetic cannabinoid toxicity and dependence were included in the present review. We searched the PubMed database of the US National Library of Medicine, Google Scholar, CompTox Chemicals, and Web of Science up to May 2022. (3) Results: Sixty-four articles reporting the effects of synthetic cannabinoids in humans were included in our review. Ten original papers and fifty-four case studies were also included. Fourteen studies reported death associated with synthetic cannabinoid use, with AB-CHMINACA and MDMB-CHMICA being the main reported SCs. Tachycardia and seizures were the most common toxicity symptoms. The prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms was higher in third-generation SCs. (4) Conclusion: SCs may exhibit higher toxicity than THC and longer-lasting effects. Their use may be harmful, especially in people with epilepsy and schizophrenia, because of the increased risk of the precipitation of psychiatric and neurologic disorders. Compared to other drugs, SCs have a higher potential to trigger a convulsive crisis, a decline in consciousness, and hemodynamic changes. Therefore, it is crucial to clarify their potential harms and increase the availability of toxicology data in both clinical and research settings.

Background: cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving efficacy of pharmacotherapies tested for cocaine use disorder, in the context of randomized-controlled clinical trials. Objectives: we assessed the databases of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO, without date restrictions up to August 2022, to identify relevant studies. Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: we included double-blinded randomized-controlled trials investigating pharmacotherapies for cocaine craving and/or cocaine use disorder whose outcomes included cocaine craving. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Two authors screened studies’ titles and abstracts for inclusion, and both read all the included studies. We systematically gathered information on the following aspects of each study: title; author(s); year of publication; sample size; mean age; sample characteristics; study set-ting; whether participants were treatment-seeking; study design; craving measures; study interventions; drop-out rates; and other relevant outcomes. Results: Overall, we appraised 130 clinical trials, including 8137 participants. We further considered the drugs from the studies that scored equal to or greater than six points in the quality assessment. There was a correlation between craving and cocaine use outcomes (self-reports, timeline follow-back or urinary benzoylecgonine) in the vast majority of studies. In the short-term treatment, acute phenylalanine-tyrosine depletion, clonidine, fenfluramine, meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (m-CPP) and mecamylamine presented promising effects. In the long term, amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone presented promising anti-craving effects. Unfortunately, the highly tested medications were not successful in most of the trials, as follows: propranolol in the short term; amantadine, aripiprazole, bromocriptine, citicoline, ketamine, modafinil, olanzapine, topiramate in the long term. The remaining 52 medications had no positive anti-craving outcomes. Limitations: Our review was limited by high heterogeneity of craving assessments across the studies and by a great range of pharmacotherapies. Further, the majority of the studies considered abstinence and retention in treatment as the main outcomes, whereas craving was a secondary outcome and some of the studies evaluated patients with cocaine use disorder with comorbidities such as opioid or alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity. Lastly, most of the studies also included non-pharmacological treatments, such as counseling or psychotherapy. Conclusions: There is a direct association between craving and cocaine use, underscoring craving as an important treatment target for promoting abstinence among persons with cocaine use disorder. Clonidine, fenfluramine and m-CPP showed to be promising medications for cocaine craving in the short-term treatment, and amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone in the long-term treatment.

Background: Although Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) is highly prevalent worldwide, treating this condition remains challenging. Further, potential treatments for AUD do not fully address alcohol-induced neuroadaptive changes. Understanding the effects of pharmacotherapies for AUD on the human brain may lead to tailored, more effective treatments, and improved individual clinical outcomes. Objectives: We systematically reviewed the literature for studies investigating pharmacotherapies for AUD that included neuroimaging-based treatment outcomes. We searched the PubMed, Scielo, and PsycINFO databases up to January 2021. Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: Eligible studies included those investigating pharmacotherapies for AUD and employing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and/or proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (H-MRS). Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Two independent reviewers screened studies’ titles and abstracts for inclusion. Data extraction forms were shared among all the authors to standardize data collection. We gathered information on the following variables: sample size; mean age; sociodemographic and clinical characteristics; alcohol use status; study design and methodology; main neuroimaging findings and brain-regions of interest (i.e., brain areas activated by alcohol use and possible pharmacological interactions); and limitations of each study. Results: Out of 177 studies selected, 20 studies provided relevant data for the research topic. Findings indicate that: (1) Acamprosate and gabapentin may selectively modulate limbic regions and the anterior cingulate cortex; (2) Naltrexone and disulfiram effects may involve prefrontal, premotor, and cerebellar regions; (3) Pharmacotherapies acting on glutamate and GABA neurotransmission involve primarily areas underpinning reward and negative affective states, and; (4) Pharmacotherapies acting on opioid and dopamine systems may affect areas responsible for the cognitive and motor factors of AUD. Limitations: Most of the studies were focused on naltrexone. A small number of studies investigated the action of disulfiram and gabapentin, and no neuroimaging studies investigated topiramate. In addition, the time between medication and neuroimaging scans varied widely across studies. Conclusions: We identified key-brain regions modulated by treatments available for AUD. Some of the regions modulated by naltrexone are not specific to the brain reward system, such as the parahippocampal gyrus (temporal lobe), parietal and occipital lobes. Other treatments also modulate not specific regions of the reward system, but play a role in the addictive behaviors, including the insula and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The role of these brain regions in mediating the AUD pharmacotherapy response warrants investigation in future research studies.

(1) Background: The treatment of substance addiction is challenging and has persisted for decades, with only a few therapeutic options. Although there are some recommendations for specific treatments for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), there is no specific medication used to treat alcohol cravings, which could benefit millions of patients that are suffering from alcoholism. Cravings, or the urge to use drugs, refer to the desire to experience the effects of a previously experienced psychoactive substance. (2) Methods: We included original studies of alcohol abuse or dependence extracted from a controlled, blind, pharmacological treatment study which presented measures and outcomes related to alcohol cravings. (3) Results: Specific drugs used for the treatment of alcoholism, such as Naltrexone and Acamprosate, have had the best results in relieving craving symptoms, as well as promoting abstinence. Baclofen and anticonvulsants such as Gabapentin and Topiramate have shown good results in promoting abstinence and the cessation of cravings. (4) Conclusions: Specific drugs used for the treatment of alcoholism to obtain the best results can be considered the gold standard for promoting abstinence and relieving cravings. Anticonvulsants and Baclofen also had good results, with these medications being considered as second-line ones. Varenicline is an option for alcohol dependents who also concomitantly ingest tobacco.

Through new publications on the subject, the main goal of this article is to seek a change in the pattern of alcohol use before and after bariatric surgery. We searched the National Library of Medicine, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases. We included original articles regarding alcohol consumption before and after bariatric surgery to conduct the systematic review. Our systematic review, which included 18 articles, yielded mixed results. Meta-analysis of six articles did not reveal statistically significant differences in alcohol use behaviours before and one year after bariatric surgery. However, throughout the perspective of follow-up after bariatric surgery, nine out of the twelve articles showed improvement in the pattern of alcohol consumption when evaluated up to two years after the end of the surgical period, and four out of the five articles with monitoring beyond two years showed worsening in consumption, compared to pre-surgery alcohol use behaviours. Conclusions about the relationship between alcohol consumption and bariatric surgery are challenging primarily because of the variety of the methods used and the alcohol consumption measures. Despite that, our research pointed to an increased risk of alcohol use disorders two years after bariatric surgery.