Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Prefrontal iTBS reduces methamphetamine craving (SMD -1.03) but shows no effect on nicotine cravingBrain Stimulation May Reduce Craving in Methamphetamine Use Disorder

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that prefrontal iTBS reduces methamphetamine cravings but shows no effect on nicotine cravings.

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of prefrontal intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) compared to sham stimulation in individuals with substance use disorders. The analysis included 9 trials involving 556 participants across conditions including methamphetamine and nicotine use disorders.

The meta-analysis found a significant reduction in overall craving (SMD = -0.65, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.21; p = 0.003) compared to sham stimulation. Specifically, the effect was larger in methamphetamine use disorder (SMD = -1.03, 95% CI -1.29 to -0.77). Conversely, no detectable effect was found for nicotine use disorder (SMD = 0.01, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.30). Regarding abstinence, the pooled estimate favored active iTBS (OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.39).

Several limitations were noted, including substantial heterogeneity for craving outcomes (I2 = 81%) and a small evidence base with short follow-up periods for abstinence data. Clinical application is currently limited by the substance-specific nature of the findings; while iTBS may reduce methamphetamine cravings, its utility for nicotine craving is unproven. Abstinence results require confirmation in larger trials with longer follow-up durations.

How this fits prior evidence

This meta-analysis extends prior evidence regarding non-pharmacological interventions for methamphetamine use disorder. It specifically builds upon the network meta-analysis of exercise, TMS, and behavioral therapies for methamphetamine use disorder craving, and the finding that high-frequency rTMS plus exercise reduced craving and negative emotions in methamphetamine use disorder. While both studies suggest potential for neuromodulation in MUD, this meta-analysis provides specific evidence for iTBS's efficacy over sham stimulation.

Researchers analyzed data from 9 different trials involving 556 people with substance use disorders. They looked at the effects of prefrontal intermittent theta-burst stimulation, known as iTBS, compared to a sham treatment. The study specifically looked at how this brain stimulation affected cravings and abstinence for substances like methamphetamine and nicotine.

The results showed that iTBS was linked to a significant reduction in cravings for those with methamphetamine use disorder. However, the same treatment did not show any measurable effect on cravings for people using nicotine. While the data suggested that active iTBS might help with staying sober from drugs, these findings are based on a small number of studies and short follow-up periods.

Because the evidence for long-term abstinence is limited and the results vary depending on the specific substance, these findings are not yet ready to change standard medical practice. The study highlights that while brain stimulation shows promise for methamphetamine cravings, more large-scale trials with longer follow-ups are needed to confirm its effectiveness.

What this means for you:
Brain stimulation may reduce methamphetamine cravings, but results for nicotine were not significant.

Common questions

Does this treatment work for everyone with a substance use disorder?

The results were specific to the type of substance used. While the study found that iTBS reduced cravings for those with methamphetamine use disorder, it showed no detectable effect on cravings for nicotine use disorder.

Is this treatment effective for staying sober?

The data favored active iTBS for abstinence compared to sham stimulation. However, the researchers noted that the evidence base is small and the follow-up periods were short, so these results need more study.

What are the risks or side effects of this procedure?

The provided data did not report any specific adverse events, serious side effects, or reasons for patients to stop treatment during the trials. You should speak with a doctor regarding specific safety concerns.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedAug 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) for substance use disorders (SUDs), with craving reduction as the primary outcome and abstinence as the secondary outcome, and to examine whether treatment effects differed by substance type.MethodsPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PEDro were searched from inception to March 17, 2026 for randomized sham-controlled trials of prefrontal iTBS in individuals with SUDs. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were calculated for craving outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for abstinence. Random-effects models, substance-specific subgroup analyses, and leave-one-out sensitivity analyses were used as appropriate.ResultsNine randomized sham-controlled trials involving 556 participants were included. Eight trials (n = 512) contributed continuous craving data. Active iTBS was associated with a reduction in craving relative to sham stimulation (SMD = −0.65, 95% CI −1.08 to −0.21; p = 0.003), although heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 81%). Subgroup analyses showed a larger effect in methamphetamine use disorder (five trials, n = 311; SMD = −1.03, 95% CI −1.29 to −0.77; I2 = 11%) and no detectable effect in nicotine use disorder (three trials, n = 201; SMD = 0.01, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.30; I2 = 3%). Three trials involving nicotine or alcohol use disorder contributed abstinence data; the pooled estimate favored active iTBS (OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.39), but the evidence base was small and follow-up was short.ConclusionCurrent evidence suggests that prefrontal iTBS may reduce craving in methamphetamine use disorder, but the overall evidence remains substance-specific and should not be interpreted as demonstrating efficacy across all SUDs. No benefit was detected for nicotine craving. The preliminary abstinence finding requires confirmation in larger trials with longer follow-up before conclusions can be drawn regarding sustained abstinence or relapse prevention.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, CRD420261363708.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.