Search

Objective: Substance use disorder (SUD) is a major public health crisis, with increased overdose deaths in the past decade. This has coincided with a tremendous amount of research on those who misuse substances. However, extensive research on SUD vulnerability characteristics such as impulsivity may be complemented by research on theoretically relevant aspects of cognition. The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) was designed to measure a person’s ability to subdue quick, intuitive decisions to reflect or deliberate. To some decision making theorists, this measure may help explain why some people are better able to inhibit “gut reactions” than others. Methods: We recruited 140 veterans from a Veterans Affairs medical center; 91 of whom were receiving SUD treatment. Participants completed the CRT and a measure of trait impulsivity (the UPPS-P). We ran planned ANCOVAs assessing differences in the number of correct answers on the CRT and the proportion of errors that were intuitive. Results: Participants who were receiving treatment gave significantly fewer correct, reflective answers on the CRT compared to controls. However, there were no significant differences in the proportion of errors that were due to intuitive responses. These findings did not change when controlling for age and/or trait impulsivity. Conclusion: Those suffering from SUD may exhibit cognitive deficits that do not stem from intuitive thinking. These deficits may, in turn, exacerbate issues arising from elevated impulsivity. Additional research which better incorporates decision making theory may be invaluable in providing clinically-relevant results and positive public health outcomes.

IMPORTANCE: Selecting effective antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) is an imprecise practice, with remission rates of about 30% at the initial treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether pharmacogenomic testing affects antidepressant medication selection and whether such testing leads to better clinical outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that compared treatment guided by pharmacogenomic testing vs usual care. Participants included 676 clinicians and 1944 patients. Participants were enrolled from 22 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers from July 2017 through February 2021, with follow-up ending November 2021. Eligible patients were those with MDD who were initiating or switching treatment with a single antidepressant. Exclusion criteria included an active substance use disorder, mania, psychosis, or concurrent treatment with a specified list of medications. INTERVENTIONS: Results from a commercial pharmacogenomic test were given to clinicians in the pharmacogenomic-guided group (n = 966). The comparison group received usual care and access to pharmacogenomic results after 24 weeks (n = 978). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The co–primary outcomes were the proportion of prescriptions with a predicted drug-gene interaction written in the 30 days after randomization and remission of depressive symptoms as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9) (remission was defined as PHQ-9 ≤ 5). Remission was analyzed as a repeated measure across 24 weeks by blinded raters. RESULTS: Among 1944 patients who were randomized (mean age, 48 years; 491 women [25%]), 1541 (79%) completed the 24-week assessment. The estimated risks for receiving an antidepressant with none, moderate, and substantial drug-gene interactions for the pharmacogenomic-guided group were 59.3%, 30.0%, and 10.7% compared with 25.7%, 54.6%, and 19.7% in the usual care group. The pharmacogenomic-guided group was more likely to receive a medication with a lower potential drug-gene interaction for no drug-gene vs moderate/substantial interaction (odds ratio [OR], 4.32 [95% CI, 3.47 to 5.39]; P

The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study is an ongoing, nationwide study of the effects of environmental influences on behavioral and brain development in adolescents. The main objective of the study is to recruit and assess over eleven thousand 9-10-year-olds and follow them over the course of 10 years to characterize normative brain and cognitive development, the many factors that influence brain development, and the effects of those factors on mental health and other outcomes. The study employs state-of-the-art multimodal brain imaging, cognitive and clinical assessments, bioassays, and careful assessment of substance use, environment, psychopathological symptoms, and social functioning. The data is a resource of unprecedented scale and depth for studying typical and atypical development. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the baseline neuroimaging processing and subject-level analysis methods used by ABCD. Processing and analyses include modality-specific corrections for distortions and motion, brain segmentation and cortical surface reconstruction derived from structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI), analysis of brain microstructure using diffusion MRI (dMRI), task-related analysis of functional MRI (fMRI), and functional connectivity analysis of resting-state fMRI. This manuscript serves as a methodological reference for users of publicly shared neuroimaging data from the ABCD Study.

The ABCD study is recruiting and following the brain development and health of over 10,000 9-10 year olds through adolescence. The imaging component of the study was developed by the ABCD Data Analysis and Informatics Center (DAIC) and the ABCD Imaging Acquisition Workgroup. Imaging methods and assessments were selected, optimized and harmonized across all 21 sites to measure brain structure and function relevant to adolescent development and addiction. This article provides an overview of the imaging procedures of the ABCD study, the basis for their selection and preliminary quality assurance and results that provide evidence for the feasibility and age-appropriateness of procedures and generalizability of findings to the existent literature.

Children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are at increased risk for substance abuse. Response inhibition is a hallmark of ADHD, yet the combined effects of ADHD and regular substance use on neural networks associated with response inhibition are unknown. Task-based functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) data from young adults with childhood ADHD with (n = 25) and without (n = 25) cannabis use ≥ monthly in the past year were compared with a local normative comparison group (LNCG) with (n = 11) and without (n = 12) cannabis use. Go/NoGo behavioral and fMRI data were evaluated for main and interaction effects of ADHD diagnosis and cannabis use. ADHD participants made significantly more commission errors on NoGo trials than controls. ADHD participants also had less frontoparietal and frontostriatal activity, independent of cannabis use. No main effects of cannabis use on response inhibition or functional brain activation were observed. An interaction of ADHD diagnosis and cannabis use was found in the right hippocampus and cerebellar vermis, with increased recruitment of these regions in cannabis-using controls during correct response inhibition. ADHD participants had impaired response inhibition combined with less fronto-parietal/striatal activity, regardless of cannabis use history. Cannabis use did not impact behavioral response inhibition. Cannabis use was associated with hippocampal and cerebellar activation, areas rich in cannabinoid receptors, in LNCG but not ADHD participants. This may reflect recruitment of compensatory circuitry in cannabis using controls but not ADHD participants. Future studies targeting hippocampal and cerebellar-dependent function in these groups may provide further insight into how this circuitry is altered by ADHD and cannabis use.