Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Compound monograph · evidence extract

DSIP in alcohol use disorder — evidence extract

The Institute's graded assessment of DSIP for alcohol use disorder, with the contributing trials and the domain-by-domain certainty reasoning.

Document identifier
CEI-MN-038/EV-ADDICTION-ALCOHOL
Series
Evidence extract
Version
1.2
Published
24 Jul 2025
Last reviewed
24 May 2026
Next review
24 May 2028
Identifier
10.71829/cei.mono.38
Certainty
Very low
Cycle
2025 Q3

§1Evidence extract: Alcohol use disorder

§1.1Question and anchor outcome

Population
A pattern of alcohol use characterised by impaired control, salience, and physiological features, meeting recognised diagnostic criteria.
Intervention
DSIP, subcutaneous, intravenous or intranasal in historical studies
Comparator
As used in each contributing trial; reported per trial rather than pooled across comparator types
Anchor outcome
Drinks per drinking day

Additional outcomes the Institute extracts for this indication: Heavy drinking days; Percentage days abstinent; Alcohol craving scale score.

§1.2Contributing trials

No trial has been identified for DSIP in alcohol use disorder. The rating below reflects that absence.

§1.3Certainty assessment

Certainty assessment by domainDowngrading decision recorded for each certainty domain.Certainty domainNo concernSeriousVery seriousEffect on ratingRisk of biasno downgradeInconsistencyno downgradeIndirectnessdowngrade two levelsImprecisiondowngrade one levelPublication biasno downgradeTotal downgrading: 3 levelsVery low certainty
Figure 2. Domain-by-domain certainty assessment for DSIP in alcohol use disorder. The starting rating for a body of randomised evidence is high; each serious concern reduces it by one level and each very serious concern by two.

Table 2. Reasoning recorded against each certainty domain.

DomainRatingReasoning
Risk of biasNo concernNo serious concern identified in this domain.
InconsistencyNo concernNo serious concern identified in this domain.
IndirectnessVery seriousAn outcome that would answer the question was not measured in any contributing trial.
ImprecisionSeriousA single small trial contributes the whole estimate.
Publication biasNo concernNo serious concern identified in this domain.
Overall rating: Very low certainty. The Institute has very little confidence in the effect estimate. The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate. In this series a very low rating most often reflects an absence of controlled human evidence rather than conflicting evidence.

§1.4What this extract does not establish

References cited on this page

References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.

  1. D’Hondt M, Bracke N, Taevernier L, Gevaert B, Verbeke F, Wynendaele E, De Spiegeleer B. Related impurities in peptide medicines. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 2014;101:2–30. doi:10.1016/j.jpba.2014.06.012 · PMID 25044089
  2. Manning MC, Chou DK, Murphy BM, Payne RW, Katayama DS. Stability of protein pharmaceuticals: an update. Pharmaceutical Research 2010;27(4):544–575. doi:10.1007/s11095-009-0045-6 · PMID 20143256
  3. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · PMID 33782057

Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.

Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.