OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to empirically derive alcohol dependence (AD) subtypes based on clinical characteristics using data from a nationally representative epidemiological survey. METHOD: A sample of 1484 respondents to the National Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) with past year AD was subjected to latent class analysis in order to identify homogeneous subtypes. RESULTS: The best-fitting model was a five-cluster solution. The largest cluster (Cluster 1: approximately 31%) was comprised of young adults, who rarely sought help for drinking, had moderately high levels of periodic heavy drinking, relatively low rates of comorbidity, and the lowest rate of multigenerational AD (approximately 22%). In contrast, Clusters 4 and 5 (approximately 21% and 9%, respectively) had substantial rates of multigenerational AD (53% and 77%, respectively), had the most severe AD criteria profile, were associated with both comorbid psychiatric and other drug use disorders, lower levels of psychosocial functioning, and had engaged in significant help-seeking. Clusters 2 and 3 (approximately 19% each) had the latest onset, the lowest rates of periodic heavy drinking, medium/low levels of comorbidity, moderate levels of help-seeking, and higher psychosocial functioning. CONCLUSION: Five distinct subtypes of AD were derived, distinguishable on the basis of family history, age of AD onset, endorsement of DSM-IV AUD criteria, and the presence of comorbid psychiatric and substance use disorders. These clinically relevant subtypes, derived from the general population, may enhance our understanding of the etiology, treatment, natural history, and prevention of AD and inform the DSM-V research agenda.
OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to empirically derive alcohol dependence (AD) subtypes based on clinical characteristics using data from a nationally representative epidemiological survey. METHOD: A sample of 1484 respondents to the National Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) with past year AD was subjected to latent class analysis in order to identify homogeneous subtypes. RESULTS: The best-fitting model was a five-cluster solution. The largest cluster (Cluster 1: approximately 31%) was comprised of young adults, who rarely sought help for drinking, had moderately high levels of periodic heavy drinking, relatively low rates of comorbidity, and the lowest rate of multigenerational AD (approximately 22%). In contrast, Clusters 4 and 5 (approximately 21% and 9%, respectively) had substantial rates of multigenerational AD (53% and 77%, respectively), had the most severe AD criteria profile, were associated with both comorbid psychiatric and other drug use disorders, lower levels of psychosocial functioning, and had engaged in significant help-seeking. Clusters 2 and 3 (approximately 19% each) had the latest onset, the lowest rates of periodic heavy drinking, medium/low levels of comorbidity, moderate levels of help-seeking, and higher psychosocial functioning. CONCLUSION: Five distinct subtypes of AD were derived, distinguishable on the basis of family history, age of AD onset, endorsement of DSM-IV AUD criteria, and the presence of comorbid psychiatric and substance use disorders. These clinically relevant subtypes, derived from the general population, may enhance our understanding of the etiology, treatment, natural history, and prevention of AD and inform the DSM-V research agenda.
Authors: Deborah A Dawson; Bridget F Grant; Frederick S Stinson; Patricia S Chou; Boji Huang; W June Ruan Journal: Addiction Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Michael T Lynskey; Elliot C Nelson; Rosalind J Neuman; Kathleen K Bucholz; Pamela A F Madden; Valerie S Knopik; Wendy Slutske; John B Whitfield; Nicholas G Martin; Andrew C Heath Journal: Twin Res Hum Genet Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 1.587
Authors: Bridget F Grant; Deborah A Dawson; Frederick S Stinson; S Patricia Chou; Mary C Dufour; Roger P Pickering Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2004-06-11 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Bridget F Grant; Frederick S Stinson; Deborah A Dawson; S Patricia Chou; Mary C Dufour; Wilson Compton; Roger P Pickering; Kenneth Kaplan Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2004-08
Authors: Bridget F Grant; Deborah A Dawson; Frederick S Stinson; Patricia S Chou; Ward Kay; Roger Pickering Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2003-07-20 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Marcel A de Dios; Bradley J Anderson; Debra S Herman; Claire E Hagerty; Celeste M Caviness; Alan J Budney; Michael Stein Journal: Womens Health Issues Date: 2010 May-Jun
Authors: Lorenzo Leggio; George A Kenna; Miriam Fenton; Erica Bonenfant; Robert M Swift Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2009-01-31 Impact factor: 7.444
Authors: Jon Morgenstern; Alexis N Kuerbis; Andrew C Chen; Christopher W Kahler; Donald A Bux; Henry R Kranzler Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2012-05-21
Authors: Susmita Chatterjee; Pia Steensland; Jeffrey A Simms; Joan Holgate; Jotham W Coe; Raymond S Hurst; Christopher L Shaffer; John Lowe; Hans Rollema; Selena E Bartlett Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2010-11-03 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Richard L Bell; Helen J K Sable; Giancarlo Colombo; Petri Hyytia; Zachary A Rodd; Lawrence Lumeng Journal: Pharmacol Biochem Behav Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 3.533
Authors: Mary-Anne Enoch; Kenneth Johnson; David T George; Gunter Schumann; Howard B Moss; Henry R Kranzler; David Goldman Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2009-06-10 Impact factor: 3.455