View Item 

Show simple item record

Heroin delay discounting and impulsivity: Modulation by DRD1 genetic variation
dc.contributor.authorMoses, Tabitha E.H.
dc.contributor.authorBurmeister, Margit
dc.contributor.authorGreenwald, Mark K.
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-05T19:34:40Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_13_MONTHS
dc.date.available2020-05-05T19:34:40Z
dc.date.issued2020-05
dc.identifier.citationMoses, Tabitha E.H.; Burmeister, Margit; Greenwald, Mark K. (2020). "Heroin delay discounting and impulsivity: Modulation by DRD1 genetic variation." Addiction Biology 25(3): n/a-n/a.
dc.identifier.issn1355-6215
dc.identifier.issn1369-1600
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/154910
dc.description.abstractBackgroundDopamine D1 receptors (encoded by DRD1) are implicated in drug addiction and high‐risk behaviors. Delay discounting (DD) procedures measure decisional balance between choosing smaller/sooner rewards vs larger/later rewards. Individuals with higher DD (rapid discounting) are prone to maladaptive behaviors that provide immediate reinforcement (eg, substance use). DRD1 variants have been linked with increased DD (in healthy volunteers) and opioid abuse. This study determined whether four dopaminergic functional variants modulated heroin DD and impulsivity.MethodsSubstance use, DD, and genotype data (DRD1 rs686 and rs5326, DRD3 rs6280, COMT rs4680) were obtained from 106 current heroin users. Subjects completed an array of DD choices during two imagined conditions: heroin satiation and withdrawal. Rewards were expressed as $10 heroin bag units, with maximum delayed amount of 30 bags. Delays progressively increased from 3 to 96 hours.ResultsDRD1 rs686 (A/A, n = 25; G/A, n = 56; G/G, n = 25) was linearly related to the difference in heroin DD (area under the curve; AUC) between the heroin satiation and withdrawal conditions; specifically, G/G homozygotes had a significantly smaller (satiation minus withdrawal) AUC difference score had higher drug‐use impulsivity questionnaire scores, relative to A/A homozygotes, with G/A intermediate. DRD3 and COMT variants were not associated with these DD and impulsivity outcomes.ConclusionDRD1 rs686 modulated the difference in heroin DD score between pharmacological states and was associated with drug‐use impulsivity. These data support a role of DRD1 in opioid DD and impulsive behaviors.Time course of heroin (satiation – withdrawal) difference score for each DRD1 rs686 genotype group.
dc.publisherWestern Psychological Services
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherheroin
dc.subject.otherimpulsivity
dc.subject.otherDRD1
dc.subject.otherdopamine
dc.subject.otherdelay discounting
dc.titleHeroin delay discounting and impulsivity: Modulation by DRD1 genetic variation
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNeurology and Neurosciences
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154910/1/adb12777_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154910/2/adb12777.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/adb.12777
dc.identifier.sourceAddiction Biology
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdinoff B, Rilling LM, Williams MJ, et al. Impulsivity, neural deficits, and the addictions. J Addict Dis. 2007; 26 ( sup1 ): 25 ‐ 39.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKreek MJ, Nielsen DA, Butelman ER, LaForge KS. Genetic influences on impulsivity, risk taking, stress responsivity and vulnerability to drug abuse and addiction. Nat Neurosci. 2005; 8 ( 11 ): 1450 ‐ 1457.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRajan R, Krishnan S, Sarma G, Sarma SP, Kishore A. Dopamine receptor d3 rs6280 is associated with aberrant decision‐making in parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord Clin Pract. 2018; 5 ( 4 ): 413 ‐ 416.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSavitz J, Hodgkinson CA, Martin‐Soelch C, et al. The functional drd3 ser9gly polymorphism (rs6280) is pleiotropic, affecting reward as well as movement. PLoS One. 2013; 8 ( 1 ): e54108.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYuferov V, Levran O, Proudnikov D, Nielsen DA, Kreek MJ. Search for genetic markers and functional variants involved in the development of opiate and cocaine addiction and treatment. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010; 1187 ( 1 ): 184 ‐ 207.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZachary RA. The manual of the shipley institute of living scale. 120th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services; 1991.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHodgkinson CA, Yuan Q, Xu K, et al. Addictions biology: haplotype‐based analysis for 130 candidate genes on a single array. Alcohol Alcohol. 2008; 43 ( 5 ): 505 ‐ 515.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeck RC, Triplett MF. Test–retest reliability of a group‐administered paper–pencil measure of delay discounting. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2009; 17 ( 5 ): 345 ‐ 355.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJohnson MW, Bruner NR. Test–retest reliability and gender differences in the sexual discounting task among cocaine‐dependent individuals. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2013; 21 ( 4 ): 277 ‐ 286.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOdum AL. Delay discounting: trait variable? Behav Processes. 2011; 87 ( 1 ): 1 ‐ 9.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWoodcock EA, Lundahl LH, Burmeister M, Greenwald MK. Functional mu opioid receptor polymorphism (oprm1 a 118 g) associated with heroin use outcomes in caucasian males: a pilot study. Am J Addict. 2015; 24 ( 4 ): 329 ‐ 335.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMyerson J, Green L, Warusawitharana M. Area under the curve as a measure of discounting. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001; 76 ( 2 ): 235 ‐ 243.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBurchard EG, Ziv E, Coyle N, et al. The importance of race and ethnic background in biomedical research and clinical practice. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348 ( 12 ): 1170 ‐ 1175.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYaeger R, Avila‐Bront A, Abdul K, et al. Comparing genetic ancestry and self‐described race in African Americans born in the United States and in Africa. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008; 17 ( 6 ): 1329 ‐ 1338.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGaunt TR, Rodríguez S, Day INMN. Cubic exact solutions for the estimation of pairwise haplotype frequencies: implications for linkage disequilibrium analyses and a web tool ‘cubex. BMC Bioinformatics. 2007; 8 ( 1 ): 428.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRodriguez S, Gaunt TR, Day INMM. Hardy‐weinberg equilibrium testing of biological ascertainment for mendelian randomization studies. Am J Epidemiol. 2009; 169 ( 4 ): 505 ‐ 514.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuang W, Li MD. Differential allelic expression of dopamine d1 receptor gene (drd1) is modulated by microrna mir‐504. Biol Psychiatry. 2009; 65 ( 8 ): 702 ‐ 705.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZhu F, Yan C, Wen Y, et al. Dopamine d1 receptor gene variation modulates opioid dependence risk by affecting transition to addiction. PLoS One. 2013; 8 ( 8 ): e70805.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJiménez KM, Pereira‐morales AJ, Forero DA. A functional polymorphism in the drd1 gene, that modulates its regulation by mir‐504, is associated with depressive symptoms. Psychiatry Investig. 2018; 15 ( 4 ): 402 ‐ 406.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJoormann J, Gotlib IH. Emotion regulation in depression: relation to cognitive inhibition. Cogn Emot. 2010; 24 ( 2 ): 281 ‐ 298.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGiordano L, Bickel W, Loewenstein G, Jacobs E, Marsch L, Badger G. Mild opioid deprivation increases the degree that opioid‐dependent outpatients discount delayed heroin and money. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2002; 163 ( 2 ): 174 ‐ 182.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTang H, Quertermous T, Rodriguez B, et al. Genetic structure, self‐identified race/ethnicity, and confounding in case‐control association studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2005; 76 ( 2 ): 268 ‐ 275.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDaly AK, Day CP. Candidate gene case‐control association studies: advantages and potential pitfalls. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001; 52 ( 5 ): 489 ‐ 499.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBickel WK, Marsch LA. Toward a behavioral economic understanding of drug dependence: delay discounting processes. Addiction. 2001; 96 ( 1 ): 73 ‐ 86.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePeters J, Büchel C. The neural mechanisms of inter‐temporal decision‐making: understanding variability. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011; 15 ( 5 ): 227 ‐ 239.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLin H, Epstein LH. Living in the moment: effects of time perspective and emotional valence of episodic thinking on delay discounting. Behav Neurosci. 2014; 128 ( 1 ): 12 ‐ 19.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLi X, Zhang F, Zhou Y, Zhang M, Wang X, Shen M. Decision‐making deficits are still present in heroin abusers after short‐ to long‐term abstinence. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013; 130 ( 1‐3 ): 61 ‐ 67.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStoltman JJK, Woodcock EA, Lister JJ, Lundahl LH, Greenwald MK. Heroin delay discounting: modulation by pharmacological state, drug‐use impulsivity, and intelligence. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2015; 23 ( 6 ): 455 ‐ 463.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAnokhin AP, Grant JD, Mulligan RC, Heath AC. The genetics of impulsivity: evidence for the heritability of delay discounting. Biol Psychiatry. 2015; 77 ( 10 ): 887 ‐ 894.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGray JC, MacKillop J. Impulsive delayed reward discounting as a genetically‐influenced target for drug abuse prevention: a critical evaluation. Front Psychol. 2015; 6: 1104.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKohno M, Nurmi EL, Laughlin CP, et al. Functional genetic variation in dopamine signaling moderates prefrontal cortical activity during risky decision making. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2016; 41 ( 3 ): 695 ‐ 703.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpanagel R, Weiss F. The dopamine hypothesis of reward: past and current status. Trends Neurosci. 1999; 22 ( 11 ): 521 ‐ 527.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSteidl S, Wasserman DI, Blaha CD, Yeomans JS. Opioid‐induced rewards, locomotion, and dopamine activation: a proposed model for control by mesopontine and rostromedial tegmental neurons. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017; 83: 72 ‐ 82.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBelcher AM, Volkow ND, Moeller FG, Ferré S. Personality traits and vulnerability or resilience to substance use disorders. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014; 18 ( 4 ): 211 ‐ 217.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDobbs LK, Lemos JC, Alvarez VA. Restructuring of basal ganglia circuitry and associated behaviors triggered by low striatal d2 receptor expression: implications for substance use disorders. Genes Brain Behav. 2017; 16 ( 1 ): 56 ‐ 70.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO’Hara BF, Smith SS, Bird G, et al. Dopamine d2 receptor rflps, haplotypes and their association with substance use in black and caucasian research volunteers. Hum Hered. 1993; 43 ( 4 ): 209 ‐ 218.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKravitz AV, Kreitzer AC. Striatal mechanisms underlying movement, reinforcement, and punishment. Phys Ther. 2012; 27: 167 ‐ 177.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBatel P, Houchi H, Daoust M, Ramoz N, Naassila M, Gorwood P. A haplotype of the drd1 gene is associated with alcohol dependence. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2008; 32 ( 4 ): 567 ‐ 572.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeninger RJ, Miller R. Dopamine d1‐like receptors and reward‐related incentive learning. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1998; 22 ( 2 ): 335 ‐ 345.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLuca P, Laurin N, Misener VL, et al. Association of the dopamine receptor d1 gene, drd1, with inattention symptoms in families selected for reading problems. Mol Psychiatry. 2007; 12 ( 8 ): 776 ‐ 785.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJenni NL, Larkin JD, Floresco SB. Prefrontal dopamine d1 and d2 receptors regulate dissociable aspects of decision making via distinct ventral striatal and amygdalar circuits. J Neurosci. 2017; 37 ( 26 ): 6200 ‐ 6213.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBaetu I, Burns NR, Urry K, Barbante GG, Pitcher JB. Commonly‐occurring polymorphisms in the comt, drd1 and drd2 genes influence different aspects of motor sequence learning in humans. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2015; 125: 176 ‐ 188.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePattij T, Schetters D, Schoffelmeer ANM. Dopaminergic modulation of impulsive decision making in the rat insular cortex. Behav Brain Res. 2014; 270: 118 ‐ 124.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSonntag KC, Brenhouse HC, Freund N, Thompson BS, Puhl M, Andersen SL. Viral over‐expression of d1 dopamine receptors in the prefrontal cortex increase high‐risk behaviors in adults: comparison with adolescents. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2014; 231 ( 8 ): 1615 ‐ 1626.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWang Z, Liang S, Yu S, et al. Distinct roles of dopamine receptors in the lateral thalamus in a rat model of decisional impulsivity. Neurosci Bull. 2017; 33 ( 4 ): 413 ‐ 422.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKoffarnus MN, Newman AH, Grundt P, Rice KC, Woods JH. Effects of selective dopaminergic compounds on a delay discounting task. Behav Pharmacol. 2011; 22 ( 4 ): 300 ‐ 311.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLe Foll B, Gallo A, Le SY, et al. Genetics of dopamine receptors and drug addiction: a comprehensive review. Behav Pharmacol. 2009; 20 ( 1 ): 1 ‐ 17.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePeng S, Du J, Jiang H, et al. The dopamine receptor d1 gene is associated with the length of interval between first heroin use and onset of dependence in chinese han heroin addicts. J Neural Transm. 2013; 120 ( 11 ): 1591 ‐ 1598.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJacobs MM, Ökvist A, Horvath M, et al. Dopamine receptor d1 and postsynaptic density gene variants associate with opiate abuse and striatal expression levels. Mol Psychiatry. 2012; 18: 1205.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVerdejo‐García A, Lawrence AJ, Clark L. Impulsivity as a vulnerability marker for substance‐use disorders: review of findings from high‐risk research, problem gamblers and genetic association studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2008; 32 ( 4 ): 777 ‐ 810.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
adb12777_am.pdf
Size:
495.4KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
adb12777.pdf
Size:
659.6KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.