Search

Background Prior studies, utilizing interview-based assessments, suggest that most of the genetic risk factors for drug abuse (DA) are non-specific with a minority acting specifically on risk for abuse of particular psychoactive substance classes. We seek to replicate these findings using objective national registry data. Methods We examined abuse of cannabis, stimulants (including cocaine) and sedatives ascertained from national Swedish registers in male–male monozygotic (1720 pairs) and dizygotic twins (1219 pairs) combined with near-age full siblings (76,457 pairs) to provide sufficient power. Modeling was performed using Mx. Results A common pathway model fitted better than an independent pathway model. The latent liability to DA was highly heritable but also influenced by shared environment. Cannabis, stimulant and sedative abuse all loaded strongly on the common factor. Estimates for the total heritability for the three forms of substance abuse ranged from 64 to 70%. Between 75 and 90% of that genetic risk was non-specific, coming from the common factor with the remainder deriving from substance specific genetic risk factors. By contrast, all of the shared environmental effects, which accounted for 18–20% of the variance in liability, were non-specific. Conclusions In accord with prior studies based on personal interviews, the large preponderance of genetic risk factors for abuse of specific classes of psychoactive substance are non-specific. These results suggest that genetic variation in the primary sites of action of the psychoactive drugs, which differ widely across most drug classes, play a minor role in human individual differences in risk for DA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Using twins assessed during adolescence (Virginia Twin Study of Adolescent Behavioral Development: 8–17 years) and followed up in early adulthood (Young Adult Follow-Up, 18–27 years), we tested 13 genetically informative models of co-occurrence, adapted for the inclusion of covariates. Models were fit, in Mx, to data at both assessments allowing for a comparison of the mechanisms that underlie the lifetime co-occurrence of cannabis and tobacco use in adolescence and early adulthood. Both cannabis and tobacco use were influenced by additive genetic (38–81%) and non-shared environmental factors with the possible role of non-shared environment in the adolescent assessment only. Causation models, where liability to use cannabis exerted a causal influence on the liability to use tobacco fit the adolescent data best, while the reverse causation model (tobacco causes cannabis) fit the early adult data best. Both causation models (cannabis to tobacco and tobacco to cannabis) and the correlated liabilities model fit data from the adolescent and young adult assessments well. Genetic correlations (0.59–0.74) were moderate. Therefore, the relationship between cannabis and tobacco use is fairly similar during adolescence and early adulthood with reciprocal influences across the two psychoactive substances. However, our study could not exclude the possibility that ‘gateways’ and ‘reverse gateways’, particularly within a genetic context, exist, such that predisposition to using one substance (cannabis or tobacco) modifies predisposition to using the other. Given the high addictive potential of nicotine and the ubiquitous nature of cannabis use, this is a public health concern worthy of considerable attention. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]