3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Neurological correlates of brain reward circuitry linked to opioid use disorder (OUD): Do homo sapiens acquire or have a reward deficiency syndrome?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The extant literature confirms that an array of polymorphic genes related to- neurotransmitters and second messengers govern the net release of dopamine in the Nucleus Accumbens (NAc) in the mesolimbic region of the brain. They are linked predominantly to motivation, anti-stress, incentive salience (wanting), and wellbeing. Notably, in 2000 the Nobel Prize was awarded to Carlsson, Greengard, and Kandel for their work on the molecular and cellular function of dopaminergic activity at neurons. This historical psychopharmacological work involved neurotransmission of serotonin, endorphins, glutamate, and dopamine, and the seminal work of Blum, Gold, Volkow, Nestler, and others related to neurotransmitter function and related behaviors. Currently, Americans are facing their second and worst opioid epidemic, prescribed opioids, and easy access drive this epidemic of overdoses, and opioid use disorders (OUDs). Presently the clinical consensus is to treat OUD, as if it were an opioid deficiency syndrome, with long-term to life-long opioid substitution therapy. Opioid agonist administration is seen as necessary to replace missing opioids, treat OUD, and prevent overdoses, like insulin is used to treat diabetes. Treatment of OUD and addiction, in general, is similar to the endocrinopathy conceptualization in that it views opioid agonist MATs as an essential core to therapy. Is this approach logical? Other than as harm reduction, is using opioids to treat OUD therapeutic or harmful in the long term? This historical Trieste provides a molecular framework to understand the current underpinnings of endorphinergic/dopaminergic mechanisms related to opioid deficiency syndrome and generalized reward processing depletion.

          WC 249.

          Highlights

          • Historical psychopharmacological work involved neurotransmission of serotonin, endorphins, glutamate, and dopamine, and the seminal work of Blum, Gold, Volkow, Nestler, and others related to neurotransmitter function and related behaviors.

          • The molecular framework to understand the current underpinnings of endorphinergic/dopaminergic mechanisms related to opioid deficiency syndrome and generalized reward processing depletion.

          • Presently the clinical consensus is to treat OUD, as if it were an opioid deficiency syndrome, with long-term to life-long opioid substitution therapy.

          • Opioid agonist administration is seen as necessary to replace missing opioids, treat OUD, and prevent overdoses, like insulin is used to treat diabetes. Is this approach logical?

          Related collections

          Most cited references166

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Drugs abused by humans preferentially increase synaptic dopamine concentrations in the mesolimbic system of freely moving rats.

          The effect of various drugs on the extracellular concentration of dopamine in two terminal dopaminergic areas, the nucleus accumbens septi (a limbic area) and the dorsal caudate nucleus (a subcortical motor area), was studied in freely moving rats by using brain dialysis. Drugs abused by humans (e.g., opiates, ethanol, nicotine, amphetamine, and cocaine) increased extracellular dopamine concentrations in both areas, but especially in the accumbens, and elicited hypermotility at low doses. On the other hand, drugs with aversive properties (e.g., agonists of kappa opioid receptors, U-50,488, tifluadom, and bremazocine) reduced dopamine release in the accumbens and in the caudate and elicited hypomotility. Haloperidol, a neuroleptic drug, increased extracellular dopamine concentrations, but this effect was not preferential for the accumbens and was associated with hypomotility and sedation. Drugs not abused by humans [e.g., imipramine (an antidepressant), atropine (an antimuscarinic drug), and diphenhydramine (an antihistamine)] failed to modify synaptic dopamine concentrations. These results provide biochemical evidence for the hypothesis that stimulation of dopamine transmission in the limbic system might be a fundamental property of drugs that are abused.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Epigenetics: definition, mechanisms and clinical perspective.

            A vast array of successive epigenetic modifications ensures the creation of a healthy individual. Crucial epigenetic reprogramming events occur during germ cell development and early embryogenesis in mammals. As highlighted by the large offspring syndrome with in vitro conceived ovine and bovine animals, any disturbance during germ cell development or early embryogenesis has the potential to alter epigenetic reprogramming. Therefore the complete array of human assisted reproductive technology (ART), starting from ovarian hormonal stimulation to embryo uterine transfer, could have a profound impact on the epigenetic state of human in vitro produced individuals. Although some investigators have suggested an increased incidence of epigenetic abnormalities in in vitro conceived children, other researchers have refuted these allegations. To date, multiple reasons can be hypothesized why irrefutable epigenetic alterations as a result of ART have not been demonstrated yet. Thieme Medical Publishers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The development and maintenance of drug addiction.

              What is the defining property of addiction? We dust off a several-decades-long debate about the relative importance of two forms of reinforcement—positive reinforcement, subjectively linked to drug-induced euphoria, and negative reinforcement, subjectively linked to the alleviation of pain—both of which figure importantly in addiction theory; each of these forms has dominated addiction theory in its time. We agree that addiction begins with the formation of habits through positive reinforcement and that drug-opposite physiological responses often establish the conditions for negative reinforcement to come into play at a time when tolerance, in the form of increasing reward thresholds, appears to develop into positive reinforcement. Wise’s work has tended to focus on positive-reinforcement mechanisms that are important for establishing drug-seeking habits and reinstating them quickly after periods of abstinence, whereas Koob’s work has tended to focus on the negative-reinforcement mechanisms that become most obvious in the late stages of sustained addiction. While we tend to agree with each other about the early and late stages of addiction, we hold different views as to (i) the point between early and late at which the diagnosis of ‘addiction’ should be invoked, (ii) the relative importance of positive and negative reinforcement leading up to this transition, and (iii) the degree to which the specifics of negative reinforcement can be generalized across the range of addictive agents.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Neurol Sci
                J. Neurol. Sci
                Journal of the Neurological Sciences
                Elsevier B.V.
                0022-510X
                1878-5883
                15 September 2020
                15 November 2020
                15 September 2020
                : 418
                : 117137
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States
                [b ]Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Western University Health Sciences, Pomona, CA, United States
                [c ]Department of Neuroscience and Genetics, Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya, Israel
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author.
                Article
                S0022-510X(20)30474-3 117137
                10.1016/j.jns.2020.117137
                7490287
                32957037
                926dfb79-1b35-499f-be78-ace2867cf564
                © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 5 May 2020
                : 19 August 2020
                : 8 September 2020
                Categories
                Review Article

                Neurology
                brain reward cascade (brc),opioid use disorder (oud),neurotransmission,endorphinergic mechanisms,genetic testing of addiction liability,dopamine release and homeostasis,reward deficiency syndrome (rds),endorphinergic deficiency syndrome,dopamine deficiency syndrome,precision addiction management’

                Comments

                Comment on this article