Dataset Information

Interoceptive attention in opioid and stimulant use disorder.

ABSTRACT: Blunted anterior insula activation during interoceptive perturbations has been associated with stimulant (cocaine and amphetamine) use disorder (SUD) and is related to risk for and prognosis of SUD. However, little is known whether these interoceptive alterations extend to opioid use disorder (OUD). This exploratory study used the same experimental probe during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to test the hypothesis that SUD and OUD exhibit interoceptive discrepancies characterized by subjective ratings and activation within the insula. Recently, abstinent individuals diagnosed with current SUD (n = 40) or current OUD (n = 20) were compared with healthy individuals (CTL; n = 30) on brain and self-report responses during an interoceptive attention task known to elicit insula activation. Participants selectively attended to interoceptive (heartbeat and stomach) and exteroceptive signals during blood-oxygen-level-dependent fMRI recording. Groups and conditions were compared on (a) activation within probabilistic cytoarchitectonic segmentations of the insula and (b) self-reported stimulus intensity. First, SUD showed amplified ratings of heart-related sensations but attenuation of dorsal dysgranular insula activity relative to CTL. Amplified ratings were linked to drug use recency, while attenuation was normalized with greater past-year stimulant use. Second, SUD and OUD showed attenuation of dorsal dysgranular insula activity during attention to stomach sensations relative to CTL. Taken together, these results are consistent with altered neural processing of interoceptive signals in drug addiction, particularly as a function of SUD. Future studies will need to determine whether interoceptive metrics help to explain substance use disorder pathophysiology and are useful for predicting outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Stewart JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7160014 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Stimulant use among individuals with opioid use disorder has recently increased, driven by changes in drug distribution channels. However, our understanding of polysubstance use is often limited by a need to provide targeted treatment to a primary drug of addiction. Yet there is a crucial need to better understand pathways to addiction, and how the use of multiple substances may differ between populations, as well as time periods. Methods: Using a national opioid surveillance system, we analyzed survey data from new entrants to 124 opioid use disorder treatment centers from 2017 to 2020. Age of first use was collected for prescription opioids, illicit opioids, prescription stimulants, crack/cocaine, and methamphetamines. Year of initial use of an opioid or stimulant was calculated and grouped by 5 year blocs, inclusive of initial use starting from 1991 and ending in 2020 (n = 6,048). Results: Lifetime exposure to stimulants was 82.5% among individuals with opioid use disorder. Mean age of initiation increased for all drugs in 2016-2020, in particular prescription opioids (22.3 to 31.8). Stimulants were initiating drugs for a substantial proportion of individuals with opioid use throughout the analyzed time period. Those initiating opioid/stimulant use from 1991 to 1995 had a mean average of 6.8 years between first and second drug exposure, which steadily decreased to 1.5 years between exposures in 2016-2020. Sankey plots depict significantly more drug transitions in those initiating use from 1991 to 2000 (65.1% had at least two drug transitions) compared to 2010-2020 (16.0%). Opioid-stimulant use increased over time among racial/ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, and those with an educational attainment of high school or less. Conclusion: These data highlight not only the substantial prevalence of stimulant use among individuals who develop opioid use disorder, but also the variability through which pathways of use occur. Prevention and intervention efforts need to take into account increasing ages of initial drug exposures, demographic shifts in stimulant-using populations, and more rapid drug transitions between opioid and stimulants. But at a broader level, prevention, harm reduction ideology, and addiction medicine needs to take into account the ubiquity of polysubstance use among individuals with substance use disorders.

Project description:Background: Stimulant use has substantially increased among people with opioid use disorder (OUD) and is associated with worse treatment outcomes. This study's objective was to compare risk of stimulant-related emergency department (ED) and hospital admissions associated with exposure to bupropion, OUD medication (buprenorphine, naltrexone, and methadone), and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs; active comparator) relative to days without active prescriptions for medication.Methods: This recurrent-event, case-crossover study used insurance claims from 51,084 individuals with OUD enrolled in the IBM MarketScan (2006-2016) Databases who had at least 1 stimulant-related ED or hospital admission. Conditional logistic regression models estimated the risk of admissions between days without active prescriptions and days with prescriptions for bupropion, OUD medication, and SSRIs. Secondary analyses were conducted by stimulant subtype (cocaine; amphetamine) and event subtype (falls, injuries, or poisonings; psychotic events).Results: Compared to days without active prescriptions, days with bupropion treatment were associated with decreased odds of stimulant-related ED or hospital admissions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.82) Among OUD medications, we observed strong protective associations with decreased admissions for buprenorphine (OR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.64-0.71), naltrexone (OR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.60-0.70), and methadone (OR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.51-0.67). The SSRI active comparator group was associated with a small protective association with decreased admissions (OR = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.93). These effects were sustained in secondary analyses stratifying by stimulant and event subtype.Conclusions: Bupropion and OUD medication, including both naltrexone and opioid agonists, are associated with fewer stimulant-related ED or hospital admissions in patients with OUD. Bupropion may show promise as adjunctive therapy targeting stimulant-specific poisoning risk.

Project description:ImportanceStudies have suggested a rise in opioid- and stimulant-involved overdoses in recent years in North America. This risk may be acute for individuals who have had contact with the criminal justice system, who are particularly vulnerable to overdose risk.ObjectiveTo examine the association of opioid and/or stimulant use disorder diagnoses with overdose (fatal and nonfatal) among people with histories of incarceration.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study, population-based health and corrections data were retrieved from the British Columbia Provincial Overdose Cohort, which contains a 20% random sample of residents of British Columbia. The analysis included all people in the 20% random sample who had a history of incarceration between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2014. Outcomes were derived from 5-years of follow-up data (January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019). Statistical analysis took place from January 2022 to June 2022.ExposuresSubstance use disorder diagnosis type (ie, opioid use disorder, stimulant use disorder, both, or neither), sociodemographic, health, and incarceration characteristics.Main outcomes and measuresHazard ratios (HRs) are reported from an Andersen-Gill model for recurrent nonfatal overdose events and from a Fine and Gray competing risk model for fatal overdose events.ResultsThe study identified 6816 people (5980 male [87.7%]; 2820 aged <30 years [41.4%]) with histories of incarceration. Of these, 293 (4.3%) had opioid use disorder only, 395 (6.8%) had stimulant use disorder only, and 281 (4.1%) had both diagnoses. During follow-up, 1655 people experienced 4026 overdoses including 3781 (93.9%) nonfatal overdoses, and 245 (6.1%) fatal overdoses. In adjusted analyses, the hazard of both fatal (HR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.48-3.86) and nonfatal (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.94-3.11) overdose was highest in the group with both opioid and stimulant use disorder diagnoses.Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study of people with a history of incarceration found an elevated hazard of fatal and nonfatal overdose among people with both opioid and stimulant use disorder diagnoses. This study suggests an urgent need to address the service needs of individuals who have had contact with the criminal justice system and who co-use opioids and stimulants.

Project description:AimsStimulant use disorder contributes to a substantial worldwide burden of disease, although evidence-based treatment options are limited. This systematic review of reviews aims to: (i) synthesize the available evidence on both psychosocial and pharmacological interventions for the treatment of stimulant use disorder; (ii) identify the most effective therapies to guide clinical practice, and (iii) highlight gaps for future study.MethodsA systematic database search was conducted to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Eligible studies were those that followed standard systematic review methodology and assessed randomized controlled trials focused on the efficacy of interventions for stimulant use disorder. Articles were critically appraised using an assessment tool adapted from Palmeteer et al. and categorized for quality as 'core' or 'supplementary' reviews. Evidence from the included reviews were further synthesized according to pharmacological or non-pharmacological management themes.ResultsOf 476 identified records, 29 systematic reviews examining eleven intervention modalities were included. The interventions identified include: contingency management, cognitive behavioural therapy, acupuncture, antidepressants, dopamine agonists, antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, disulfiram, opioid agonists, N-Acetylcysteine, and psychostimulants. There was sufficient evidence to support the efficacy of contingency management programs for treatment of stimulant use disorder. Psychostimulants, n-acetylcysteine, opioid agonist therapy, disulfiram and antidepressant pharmacological interventions were found to have insufficient evidence to support or discount their use. Results of this review do not support the use of all other treatment options.ConclusionsThe results of this review supports the use of contingency management interventions for the treatment of stimulant use disorder. Although evidence to date is insufficient to support the clinical use of psychostimulants, our results demonstrate potential for future research in this area. Given the urgent need for effective pharmacological treatments for stimulant use disorder, high-quality primary research focused on the role of psychostimulant medications for the treatment of stimulant use disorder is needed.

Dataset Information

Interoceptive attention in opioid and stimulant use disorder.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets