| Literature DB >> 29618101 |
Sophie Betka1,2,3, Cassandra Gould Van Praag1, Yannis Paloyelis4, Rod Bond2, Gaby Pfeifer1, Henrique Sequeira3, Theodora Duka2,5, Hugo Critchley1,6.
Abstract
Interoception, i.e. the perception and appraisal of internal bodily signals, is related to the phenomenon of craving, and is reportedly disrupted in alcohol use disorders. The hormone oxytocin influences afferent transmission of bodily signals and, through its potential modulation of craving, is proposed as a possible treatment for alcohol use disorders. However, oxytocin's impact on interoception in alcohol users remains unknown. Healthy alcohol users (n = 32) attended two laboratory sessions to perform tests of interoceptive ability (heartbeat tracking: attending to internal signals and, heartbeat discrimination: integrating internal and external signals) after intranasal administration of oxytocin or placebo. Effects of interoceptive accuracy, oxytocin administration and alcohol intake, were tested using mixed-effects models. On the tracking task, oxytocin reduced interoceptive accuracy, but did not interact with alcohol consumption. On the discrimination task, we found an interaction between oxytocin administration and alcohol intake: Oxytocin, compared with placebo, increased interoceptive accuracy in heavy drinkers, but not in light social drinkers. Our study does not suggest a pure interoceptive impairment in alcohol users but instead potentially highlights reduced flexibility of internal and external attentional resource allocation. Importantly, this impairment seems to be mitigated by oxytocin. This attentional hypothesis needs to be explicitly tested in future research.Entities:
Keywords: addiction; alcohol; alcohol use; attention; interoception; oxytocin
Year: 2018 PMID: 29618101 PMCID: PMC5928407 DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsy027
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci ISSN: 1749-5016 Impact factor: 3.436
Mean and standard deviations of psychometric measures, basal plasma OT level as well as interoceptive accuracy and heart rate for both tasks
| Mean | s.d. | Range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| TAS-20 | 55.42 | 9.76 | 36–74 |
| Units per week | 24.82 | 18.09 | 4.8–69.50 |
| STAI | 48.19 | 12.21 | 22–66 |
| BDI | 12.84 | 9.98 | 0–48 |
| Basal plasma OT level (pg/ml) | 1.61 | 0.57 | 0.95–3.07 |
| Mean discrimination Accuracy (Placebo) | 0.53 | 0.13 | 0.30–0.85 |
| Mean discrimination Accuracy (OT) | 0.58 | 0.18 | 0.30–0.95 |
| Mean heart rate during the discrimination task (Placebo; bpm) | 64.07 | 9.97 | 47.20–88.80 |
| Mean heart rate during the discrimination task (OT; bpm) | 66.67 | 11.15 | 46–80–88.10 |
| Mean tracking Accuracy (Placebo) | 0.78 | 0.12 | 0.55–0.97 |
| Mean tracking Accuracy (OT) | 0.68 | 0.23 | 0.25–0.97 |
| Mean heart rate during the tracking task (Placebo; bpm) | 62.12 | 9.89 | 44.30–83.80 |
| Mean heart rate during the tracking task (OT; bpm) | 65.45 | 11.17 | 43.30–85.70 |
Correlations coefficients for psychometric measures and basal plasma OT level
| TAS-20 | Units per week | STAI | BDI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Units per week | Pearson Correlation | 0.192 | |||
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.301 | ||||
| STAI | Pearson Correlation | 0.308 | −0.179 | ||
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.091 | 0.337 | |||
| BDI | Pearson Correlation | 0.354 | −0.117 | ||
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.051 | 0.531 | 0.005 | ||
| Basal plasma OT level | Pearson Correlation | −0.149 | 0.113 | −0.057 | −0.179 |
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.440 | 0.558 | 0.770 | 0.352 | |
**p < 0.01.
Mixed-effects regression model to explain accuracy on tracking task using predictors for OT/placebo (drug), alcohol intake (units per week) and their interaction, with heart rate (HR), anxiety (STAI), depression (BDI), alexithymia (TAS-20) and drug sequence as control variables, including all participants
| β | SE | z value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 0.794 | 0.025 | 32.254 | 0.000*** |
| Drug | –0.078 | 0.034 | –2.287 | 0.030* |
| Units per week | –0.002 | 0.001 | –1.689 | 0.105 |
| HR | –0.005 | 0.002 | –3.301 | 0.002** |
| STAI | –0.005 | 0.002 | –2.687 | 0.013* |
| BDI | 0.007 | 0.002 | 3.148 | 0.004** |
| TAS-20 | –0.001 | 0.002 | –0.676 | 0.506 |
| Sequence | –0.050 | 0.030 | –1.689 | 0.102 |
| Drug*Units | 0.002 | 0.002 | 1.256 | 0.220 |
Formula: Accuracy ∼ Drug * Units per week + HR + STAI + BDI + TAS-20 + Sequence + (1 + Drug|ID); signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05.
Mixed-effects regression model to explain accuracy on discrimination task using predictors for OT/placebo (drug), alcohol intake (units per week) and their interaction, with heart rate (HR), anxiety (STAI), depression (BDI), alexithymia (TAS-20) and drug sequence as control variables, including all participants
| Β | SE | z value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 0.097 | 0.107 | 0.904 | 0.366 |
| Drug | 0.236 | 0.140 | 1.686 | 0.092. |
| Units per week | –0.002 | 0.005 | –0.346 | 0.730 |
| HR | –0.013 | 0.006 | –2.043 | 0.041* |
| STAI | –0.010 | 0.007 | –1.511 | 0.131 |
| BDI | –0.004 | 0.008 | –0.435 | 0.664 |
| TAS-20 | 0.001 | 0.008 | 0.170 | 0.865 |
| Sequence | 0.032 | 0.137 | 0.236 | 0.813 |
| Drug*Unit | 0.018 | 0.008 | 2.239 | 0.025* |
Formula: Accuracy ∼ Drug * Units per week + HR + STAI + BDI + TAS-20 + Sequence + (-1 + Drug|ID); signif. codes: 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1.
Fig. 1.Scatterplot illustrating the interaction between Drug (OT/Placebo) and alcohol units per week on interoceptive accuracy during the heartbeat discrimination task. The y-axis is displaying the difference between interoceptive accuracy under OT and under placebo, in percentage. The shaded area represents the SE.