Psychiatry · Clinical trials

Alcohol Use Disorder Clinical Trials

Approved therapies, the pivotal-trial endpoints they were judged on, the magnitude of benefit — and the drugs that failed their endpoints, and why.

Indication overview

About alcohol use disorder — and why its trials are hard

Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) is a chronic, relapsing condition defined by impaired control over drinking despite adverse consequences, affecting tens of millions in the U.S. Three medications carry FDA approval and anchor pharmacotherapy alongside psychosocial treatment. Naltrexone, an opioid-receptor antagonist, blunts the reinforcing effects of alcohol and reduces heavy-drinking days; it exists in oral (1994) and extended-release injectable (2006) forms. Acamprosate (2004), a glutamate/GABA modulator, supports abstinence maintenance in already-abstinent patients. Disulfiram (1951) deters drinking through an aversive acetaldehyde reaction but depends heavily on adherence. Effect sizes are modest and none targets craving completely, so medications remain underprescribed relative to disease burden. The landmark COMBINE trial (Anton, JAMA 2006) confirmed naltrexone plus medical management as effective, while acamprosate did not separate from placebo in that U.S. cohort. Research continues on gabapentin, topiramate, and baclofen off-label, reflecting persistent unmet need for agents that more powerfully reduce craving and relapse.

Indication

Alcohol Use Disorder

ICD-10-CM

F10.20 — Alcohol dependence

Approved therapies & pivotal evidence

What's been approved — and by how much it moved the endpoint

Drug (brand)	Approved	Setting	Pivotal trial	Primary endpoint	Magnitude of benefit
Naltrexone (ReVia / Vivitrol)	1994 (oral); 2006 (extended-release injectable)	Reduction of heavy drinking / relapse prevention in AUD, with counseling	COMBINE (Anton et al., JAMA 2006); Vivitrol pivotal (Garbutt et al., JAMA 2005)	Percent days abstinent / heavy-drinking days	COMBINE: naltrexone + medical management improved good clinical outcome and reduced heavy drinking vs placebo; Vivitrol 380 mg cut heavy-drinking event rate ~25% vs placebo
Acamprosate (Campral)	2004	Maintenance of abstinence in detoxified, abstinent patients	Pooled European RCTs; U.S. registration program	Continuous abstinence / cumulative abstinence duration	Meta-analyses show improved abstinence rates vs placebo (NNT ~12 for return to any drinking); no separation from placebo in COMBINE
Disulfiram (Antabuse)	1951	Aversive deterrent to support abstinence in motivated, supervised patients	VA Cooperative Study (Fuller et al., JAMA 1986)	Total abstinence / drinking days	No difference in total abstinence vs controls; among those who drank, disulfiram reduced drinking days — benefit tied to adherence/supervision

Where trials have failed

Drugs that missed their endpoint — and what contributed

The most instructive lessons in alcohol use disorder development come from programmes that failed the endpoint that mattered.

Drug / trial	Endpoint outcome	What contributed
Nalmefene — ESENSE1/ESENSE2, SENSE (as-needed dosing, EU program)	Approved in Europe (Selincro) for reducing consumption but never approved in the U.S. for AUD	Modest effect sizes, questions about clinical relevance and trial design at FDA; sponsor did not secure U.S. approval
Quetiapine — Litten et al. multisite RCT (2012)	Failed to reduce heavy drinking or improve drinking outcomes vs placebo	No efficacy signal in very heavy drinkers; sedation and metabolic side effects without benefit

Choosing the right endpoint

Primary endpoints that matter in alcohol use disorder trials

Percent heavy-drinking days — Now a widely accepted FDA-relevant outcome; heavy = 4+/5+ drinks (women/men) per day
Percent days abstinent — Core continuous measure of abstinence maintenance across AUD trials
Time to first heavy-drinking day / relapse — Survival-type endpoint capturing durability of response
Craving scales (e.g., OCDS, PACS) — Secondary mechanistic endpoint; correlates imperfectly with drinking outcomes

How iNGENū runs alcohol use disorder trials

Physician-led design, built for FDA submission

Endpoint & biomarker strategy

Board-certified specialists design endpoints and patient selection aligned to current FDA guidance for this indication.

FDA-ready data

Built to ICH-GCP and 21 CFR 312.120, with direct FDA submission — data accepted by the FDA, EMA and MHRA.

Faster, lower-cost delivery

~4-week ethics via the TGA CTN scheme, up to 43.5% R&D rebate, and 80–90% below US CRO cost.

↳

Planning a alcohol use disorder trial?
Request a fixed-milestone proposal and a tailored endpoint & feasibility summary for this indication.

Request a proposal

Frequently asked questions

Alcohol Use Disorder clinical trials — FAQs

Which AUD medication is first-line?

Naltrexone (oral or long-acting injectable) and acamprosate are both first-line per APA guidance; choice depends on abstinence status, opioid use, adherence, and renal/hepatic function. Naltrexone suits reduction of heavy drinking; acamprosate suits committed abstinence.

Why is disulfiram used less often?

It works by aversion, not craving reduction, and requires high motivation and ideally supervised dosing. Efficacy in trials depended almost entirely on adherence, so it is typically reserved for selected, monitored patients.

Are AUD medications widely prescribed?

No. Despite FDA approval and guideline support, only a small minority of people with AUD receive pharmacotherapy, reflecting stigma, limited prescriber familiarity, and modest average effect sizes.

Ready to discuss your alcohol use disorder trial?

Talk to our physician-led team about an FDA-ready, cost-efficient trial design.