Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 10, 2026

The Motivation for Alcohol Reward: Predictors of Progressive-Ratio Intravenous Alcohol Self-Administration in Humans
Published on: April 28, 2022
Percentage of subjects with no heavy drinking days: evaluation as an efficacy endpoint for alcohol clinical trials
Daniel Falk1, Xin Qun Wang, Lei Liu
1Division of Treatment and Recovery Research, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-9304, USA. falkde@mail.nih.gov
Background:
Percent subjects with no heavy drinking days (PSNHDDs), an efficacy end point recommended by the Food and Drug Administration, considers abstinent individuals or those engaging in low-risk drinking behavior as successful responders to treatment. As PSNHDD has been used infrequently in previous alcohol clinical trials, we evaluated the utility and validity of the PSNHDD outcome measure in 2 large alcohol clinical trials.
Methods:
Data sets from 2 alcohol trials, COMBINE and a multisite topiramate trial, were used to analyze PSNHDDs and other traditional end points for the topiramate, naltrexone, acamprosate, and placebo groups. Effect sizes of PSNHDDs were determined for each month of active treatment and by varying grace periods-early periods in the trial where outcome is not considered in the analysis-and were compared with that of other traditional outcome measures. Long-term outcomes were compared for groups that had no heavy drinking days versus those that had heavy drinking days during active treatment.
Results:
PSNHDD effect sizes were significant for both topiramate (0.34 and 0.25 at months 2 and 3, respectively) and naltrexone (0.24 and 0.26 at months 3 and 4, respectively). Given a 2-month grace period for naltrexone, the effect size of PSNHDDs was comparable to the effect sizes using traditional outcome measures. With a 1-month grace period for topiramate, it was greater than the majority of traditional outcome measures. Little is gained by allowing up to 1, 2, or 3 heavy drinking days as an end point. Subjects with no HDDs during treatment fared better than those with some HDDs on drinking outcomes and alcohol-related consequences during a 1-year follow-up.
Conclusions:
PSNHDD appears to be a clinically informative end point measure, especially when used with a grace period, and is as sensitive as most traditional outcome measures in detecting differences between the medication and placebo groups. Nonetheless, these findings should be replicated in other clinical data sets, particularly with medications that work via different mechanisms.
More Related Videos
07:31Murine Drinking Models in the Development of Pharmacotherapies for Alcoholism: Drinking in the Dark and Two-bottle Choice
Published on: January 7, 2019
07:50A Method for Evaluating the Reinforcing Properties of Ethanol in Rats without Water Deprivation, Saccharin Fading or Extended Access Training
Published on: January 29, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Hypothesis Test for Test of Independence
H0: The two variables (factors)...