Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37132085›Full record

Trial reportAddiction (Abingdon, England)2023

Who responds to a multi-component treatment for cannabis use disorder? Using multivariable and machine learning models to classify treatment responders and non-responders.

Rachel L Tomko, Bethany J Wolf, Erin A McClure, Matthew J Carpenter, Kathryn M Magruder, Lindsay M Squeglia, Kevin M Gray

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pharmacotherapies for cannabis use disorder.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Can We Predict Who Will Experience Adverse Events While Using Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapy? A Secondary Analysis of the EAGLES Clinical Trial.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel L TomkoDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6961-4399
Bethany J WolfDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Erin A McClureDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9744-7818
Matthew J CarpenterDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8909-1302
Kathryn M MagruderDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Lindsay M SquegliaDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Kevin M GrayDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Medical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials NetworkUG1DA015831 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Gail D'Onofrio, Roger D. Weiss · 2015 to 2026
$110.8M
Project-004UG1DA020024 · NIDA · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI Steven J Shoptaw, MADHUKAR H. TRIVEDI · 2015 to 2026
$71.6M
The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials NetworkU10DA013045 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI LING, WALTER NMN · 1999 to 2015
$52.6M
Southern Consortium Node of the Clinical Trials Network (Varenicline)UG1DA013727 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI KATHLEEN T. BRADY, Kelly S. Barth · 2015 to 2026
$24.8M
Concept ProjectU10DA020024 · NIDA · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI TRIVEDI, MADHUKAR H. · 2005 to 2015
$22.6M
Clinical Trials Network: Pacific Northwest Node (CTN-0082, -0131, -0139 and dissemination library)UG1DA013714 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Mary Akiko Hatch, John M. Roll · 2015 to 2026
$19.8M
Neuroscience-informed Treatment Development for Adolescent Alcohol Use DisordersK23AA025399 · NIAAA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI SQUEGLIA, LINDSAY · 2016 to 2020
$1.0M
A novel data-driven approach for personalizing smoking cessation pharmacotherapyR03CA270677 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI TOMKO, RACHEL LYNN, WOLF, BETHANY JACOBS · 2022 to 2023
$151k
NCI NIH HHS R03 CA270677NIAAA NIH HHS K23 AA025399NIDA NIH HHS HHSN271201200017CNIDA NIH HHS U10 DA013045NIDA NIH HHS U10 DA020024NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013714NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013727NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA015831NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA020024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsTreatments for cannabis use disorder (CUD) have limited efficacy and little is known about who responds to existing treatments. Accurately predicting who will respond to treatment can improve clinical decision-making by allowing clinicians to offer the most appropriate level and type of care. This study aimed to determine whether multivariable/machine learning models can be used to classify CUD treatment responders versus non-responders.

methodsThis secondary analysis used data from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network multi-site outpatient clinical trial in the United States. Adults with CUD (n = 302) received 12 weeks of contingency management, brief cessation counseling and were randomized to receive additionally either (1) N-Acetylcysteine or (2) placebo. Multivariable/machine learning models were used to classify treatment responders (i.e. two consecutive negative urine cannabinoid tests or a 50% reduction in days of use) versus non-responders using baseline demographic, medical, psychiatric and substance use information.

resultsPrediction performance for various machine learning and regression prediction models yielded area under the curves (AUCs) >0.70 for four models (0.72-0.77), with support vector machine models having the highest overall accuracy (73%; 95% CI = 68-78%) and AUC (0.77; 95% CI = 0.72, 0.83). Fourteen variables were retained in at least three of four top models, including demographic (ethnicity, education), medical (diastolic/systolic blood pressure, overall health, neurological diagnosis), psychiatric (depressive symptoms, generalized anxiety disorder, antisocial personality disorder) and substance use (tobacco smoker, baseline cannabinoid level, amphetamine use, age of experimentation with other substances, cannabis withdrawal intensity) characteristics.

conclusionsMultivariable/machine learning models can improve on chance prediction of treatment response to outpatient cannabis use disorder treatment, although further improvements in prediction performance are likely necessary for decisions about clinical care.

Indexed as

CannabinoidsCannabisMarijuana AbuseSubstance-Related DisordersAcetylcysteineAdultHumansResearch DesignAcetylcysteineCannabinoidsclinical decision supportcontingency managementmachine learningN-acetylcysteinesubstance use disordertreatment

Identifiers

PMID37132085
PMCPMC10524796
OpenAlexW4367835180

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.