Δ9-THC reduces reward-related brain activity in healthy adults

Lack of effect of methamphetamine on reward-related brain activity in healthy adults

INTRODUCTION

Stimulant drugs are thought to alter processing of rewarding stimuli. However, the mechanisms by which they do this are not fully understood.

METHOD

In this study we used EEG to assess effects of single doses of methamphetamine (MA) on neural responses during anticipation and receipt of reward in healthy volunteers. Healthy young men and women (N = 28) completed three sessions in which they received placebo, a low MA dose (10 mg) or a higher MA dose (20 mg) under double blind conditions. Subjective and cardiovascular measures were obtained, and EEG was used to assess brain activity during an electrophysiological version of the Monetary Incentive Delay (eMID) task.

RESULTS

EEG measures showed expected patterns during anticipation and receipt of reward, and MA produced its expected effects on mood and cardiovascular function. However, MA did not affect EEG responses during either anticipation or receipt of rewards.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the effects of MA on EEG signals of reward processing are subtle, and not related to the drug's effects on subjective feelings of well-being. The findings contribute to our understanding of the neural effects of MA during behaviors related to reward.

The Effects of Acute Cannabis With and Without Cannabidiol on Neural Reward Anticipation in Adults and Adolescents

BACKGROUND

Adolescents may respond differently to cannabis than adults, yet no previous functional magnetic resonance imaging study has examined acute cannabis effects in this age group. In this study, we investigated the neural correlates of reward anticipation after acute exposure to cannabis in adolescents and adults.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover experiment. Forty-seven adolescents (n = 24, 12 females, ages 16-17 years) and adults (n = 23, 11 females, ages 26-29 years) matched on cannabis use frequency (0.5-3 days/week) completed the Monetary Incentive Delay task during functional magnetic resonance imaging after inhaling cannabis with 0.107 mg/kg Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol ("THC") (8 mg THC for a 75-kg person) or with THC plus 0.320 mg/kg cannabidiol ("THC+CBD") (24 mg CBD for a 75-kg person), or placebo cannabis. We investigated reward anticipation activity with whole-brain analyses and region of interest analyses in the right and left ventral striatum, right and left anterior cingulate cortex, and right insula.

RESULTS

THC reduced anticipation activity compared with placebo in the right (p = .005, d= 0.49) and left (p = .003, d = 0.50) ventral striatum and the right insula (p = .01, d = 0.42). THC+CBD reduced activity compared with placebo in the right ventral striatum (p = .01, d = 0.41) and right insula (p = .002, d = 0.49). There were no differences between "THC" and "THC+CBD" conditions and no significant drug by age group interaction effect, supported by Bayesian analyses. There were no significant effects in the whole-brain analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In weekly cannabis users, cannabis suppresses the brain's anticipatory reward response to money, and CBD does not modulate this effect. Furthermore, the adolescent reward circuitry is not differentially sensitive to acute effects of cannabis on reward anticipation.

Low doses of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) increase reward-related brain activity

Renewed interest in classic psychedelics as treatments for psychiatric disorders warrants a deeper understanding of their neural mechanisms. Single, high doses of psychedelic drugs have shown promise in treating depressive disorders, perhaps by reversing deficits in reward processing in the brain. In addition, there are anecdotal reports that repeated ingestion of low doses of LSD, or "microdosing", improve mood, cognition, and feelings of wellbeing. However, the effects of low doses of classic psychedelics on reward processing have not been studied. The current study examined the effects of two single, low doses of LSD compared to placebo on measures of reward processing. Eighteen healthy adults completed three sessions in which they received placebo (LSD-0), 13 μg LSD (LSD-13) and 26 μg LSD (LSD-26) in a within-subject, double-blind design. Neural activity was recorded while participants completed the electrophysiological monetary incentive delay task. Event-related potentials were measured during feedback processing (Reward-Positivity: RewP, Feedback-P3: FB-P3, and Late-Positive Potential: LPP). Compared to placebo, LSD-13 increased RewP and LPP amplitudes for reward (vs. neutral) feedback, and LSD-13 and LSD-26 increased FB-P3 amplitudes for positive (vs. negative) feedback. These effects were unassociated with most subjective measures of drug effects. Thus, single, low doses of LSD (vs. placebo) increased three reward-related ERP components reflecting increased hedonic (RewP), motivational (FB-P3), and affective processing of feedback (LPP). These results constitute the first evidence that low doses of LSD increase reward-related brain activity in humans. These findings may have important implications for the treatment of depressive disorders.

Neutral CB1 Receptor Antagonists as Pharmacotherapies for Substance Use Disorders: Rationale, Evidence, and Challenge

Cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1R) has been one of the major targets in medication development for treating substance use disorders (SUDs). Early studies indicated that rimonabant, a selective CB1R antagonist with an inverse agonist profile, was highly promising as a therapeutic for SUDs. However, its adverse side effects, such as depression and suicidality, led to its withdrawal from clinical trials worldwide in 2008. Consequently, much research interest shifted to developing neutral CB1R antagonists based on the recognition that rimonabant’s side effects may be related to its inverse agonist profile. In this article, we first review rimonabant’s research background as a potential pharmacotherapy for SUDs. Then, we discuss the possible mechanisms underlying its therapeutic anti-addictive effects versus its adverse effects. Lastly, we discuss the rationale for developing neutral CB1R antagonists as potential treatments for SUDs, the supporting evidence in recent research, and the challenges of this strategy. We conclude that developing neutral CB1R antagonists without inverse agonist profile may represent attractive strategies for the treatment of SUDs.