Joshua L Gowin1, Tali M Ball2, Marc Wittmann3, Susan F Tapert4, Martin P Paulus5. 1. Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States; Section on Human Psychopharmacology, Laboratory of Clinical and Translational Studies, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Bethesda, MD, United States. Electronic address: joshua.gowin@nih.gov. 2. Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States. 3. Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States; Empirical and Analytical Psychophysics, Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology and Mental Health, Freiburg, Germany. 4. Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States; Psychology Service, VA San Diego Healthcare System, La Jolla, CA, United States. 5. Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States; Psychiatry Service, VA San Diego Healthcare System, La Jolla, CA, United States; Laureate Institute for Brain Research, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nearly half of individuals with substance use disorders relapse in the year after treatment. A diagnostic tool to help clinicians make decisions regarding treatment does not exist for psychiatric conditions. Identifying individuals with high risk for relapse to substance use following abstinence has profound clinical consequences. This study aimed to develop neuroimaging as a robust tool to predict relapse. METHODS: 68 methamphetamine-dependent adults (15 female) were recruited from 28-day inpatient treatment. During treatment, participants completed a functional MRI scan that examined brain activation during reward processing. Patients were followed 1 year later to assess abstinence. We examined brain activation during reward processing between relapsing and abstaining individuals and employed three random forest prediction models (clinical and personality measures, neuroimaging measures, a combined model) to generate predictions for each participant regarding their relapse likelihood. RESULTS: 18 individuals relapsed. There were significant group by reward-size interactions for neural activation in the left insula and right striatum for rewards. Abstaining individuals showed increased activation for large, risky relative to small, safe rewards, whereas relapsing individuals failed to show differential activation between reward types. All three random forest models yielded good test characteristics such that a positive test for relapse yielded a likelihood ratio 2.63, whereas a negative test had a likelihood ratio of 0.48. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that neuroimaging can be developed in combination with other measures as an instrument to predict relapse, advancing tools providers can use to make decisions about individualized treatment of substance use disorders. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
BACKGROUND: Nearly half of individuals with substance use disorders relapse in the year after treatment. A diagnostic tool to help clinicians make decisions regarding treatment does not exist for psychiatric conditions. Identifying individuals with high risk for relapse to substance use following abstinence has profound clinical consequences. This study aimed to develop neuroimaging as a robust tool to predict relapse. METHODS: 68 methamphetamine-dependent adults (15 female) were recruited from 28-day inpatient treatment. During treatment, participants completed a functional MRI scan that examined brain activation during reward processing. Patients were followed 1 year later to assess abstinence. We examined brain activation during reward processing between relapsing and abstaining individuals and employed three random forest prediction models (clinical and personality measures, neuroimaging measures, a combined model) to generate predictions for each participant regarding their relapse likelihood. RESULTS: 18 individuals relapsed. There were significant group by reward-size interactions for neural activation in the left insula and right striatum for rewards. Abstaining individuals showed increased activation for large, risky relative to small, safe rewards, whereas relapsing individuals failed to show differential activation between reward types. All three random forest models yielded good test characteristics such that a positive test for relapse yielded a likelihood ratio 2.63, whereas a negative test had a likelihood ratio of 0.48. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that neuroimaging can be developed in combination with other measures as an instrument to predict relapse, advancing tools providers can use to make decisions about individualized treatment of substance use disorders. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
Authors: Anna B Konova; Scott J Moeller; Dardo Tomasi; Muhammad A Parvaz; Nelly Alia-Klein; Nora D Volkow; Rita Z Goldstein Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2012-07-09 Impact factor: 3.386
Authors: Jennifer L Stewart; Colm G Connolly; April C May; Susan F Tapert; Marc Wittmann; Martin P Paulus Journal: Addiction Date: 2013-12-15 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: K K Bucholz; R Cadoret; C R Cloninger; S H Dinwiddie; V M Hesselbrock; J I Nurnberger; T Reich; I Schmidt; M A Schuckit Journal: J Stud Alcohol Date: 1994-03
Authors: Kristin K Nicodemus; Joseph H Callicott; Rachel G Higier; Augustin Luna; Devon C Nixon; Barbara K Lipska; Radhakrishna Vakkalanka; Ina Giegling; Dan Rujescu; David St Clair; Pierandrea Muglia; Yin Yao Shugart; Daniel R Weinberger Journal: Hum Genet Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Oscar V Torres; Subramanian Jayanthi; Bruce Ladenheim; Michael T McCoy; Irina N Krasnova; Jean Lud Cadet Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 3.332
Authors: Claire E Wilcox; Christopher C Abbott; Vince D Calhoun Journal: Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry Date: 2018-06-25 Impact factor: 5.067