Clinical neuroscience of addiction: Applications to psychological science and practice

The Etiologic, Theory-Based, Ontogenetic Hierarchical Framework of Alcohol Use Disorder: A Translational Systematic Review of Reviews

Modern nosologies (e.g., ICD-11, DSM-5) for alcohol use disorder (AUD) and dependence prioritize reliability and clinical presentation over etiology, resulting in a diagnosis that is not always strongly grounded in basic theory and research. Within these nosologies, DSM-5 AUD is treated as a discrete, largely categorical, but graded, phenomenon, which results in additional challenges (e.g., significant phenotypic heterogeneity). Efforts to increase the compatibility between AUD diagnosis and modern conceptualizations of alcohol dependence, which describe it as dimensional and partially overlapping with other psychopathology (e.g., other substance use disorders) will inspire a stronger scientific framework and strengthen AUD's validity. We conducted a systematic review of 144 reviews to integrate addiction constructs and theories into a comprehensive framework with the aim of identifying fundamental mechanisms implicated in AUD. The product of this effort was the Etiologic, Theory-Based, Ontogenetic Hierarchical Framework (ETOH Framework) of AUD mechanisms, which outlines superdomains of cognitive control, reward, as well as negative valence and emotionality, each of which subsume narrower, hierarchically-organized components. We also outline opponent processes and self-awareness as key moderators of AUD mechanisms. In contrast with other frameworks, we recommend an increased conceptual role for negative valence and compulsion in AUD. The ETOH framework serves as a critical step towards conceptualizations of AUD as dimensional and heterogeneous. It has the potential to improve AUD assessment and aid in the development of evidence-based diagnostic measures that focus on key mechanisms in AUD, consequently facilitating treatment matching.

Clinical Neuroscience of Addiction: What Clinical Psychologists Need to Know and Why

The last three decades in psychological research have been marked by interdisciplinary science. Addiction represents a prime example of a disorder marked by a complex interaction among psychosocial and biological factors. This review highlights critical findings in the basic neuroscience of addiction and translates them into clinical language that can inform clinical psychologists in their research, teaching, and practice. From mechanisms of reward processing, learning and memory, allostasis, incentive-sensitization, withdrawal, tolerance, goal-directed decision making, habit learning, genetics, inflammation, and the microbiome, the common theme of this review is to illustrate the clinical utility of basic neuroscience research and to identify opportunities for clinical science. The thoughtful integration of basic and clinical science provides a powerful tool to fulfill the scientific mission of improving health care. Clinical psychologists have a crucial role to play in the translational science of addiction.

Reward and relief dimensions of temptation to drink: construct validity and role in predicting differential benefit from acamprosate and naltrexone

Researchers have sought to distinguish between individuals whose alcohol use disorder (AUD) is maintained by drinking to relieve negative affect ('relief drinkers') and those whose AUD is maintained by the rewarding effects of alcohol ('reward drinkers'). As an opioid receptor antagonist, naltrexone may be particularly effective for reward drinkers. Acamprosate, which has been shown to down-regulate the glutamatergic system, may be particularly effective for relief drinkers. This study sought to replicate and extend prior work (PREDICT study; Glöckner-Rist et al. ) by examining dimensions of reward and relief temptation to drink and subtypes of individuals with distinct patterns of reward/relief temptation. We utilized data from two randomized clinical trials for AUD (Project MATCH, n = 1726 and COMBINE study, n = 1383). We also tested whether classes of reward/relief temptation would predict differential response to naltrexone and acamprosate in COMBINE. Results replicated prior work by identifying reward and relief temptation factors, which had excellent reliability and construct validity. Using factor mixture modeling, we identified five distinct classes of reward/relief temptation that replicated across studies. In COMBINE, we found a significant class-by-acamprosate interaction effect. Among those most likely classified in the high relief/moderate reward temptation class, individuals had better drinking outcomes if assigned to acamprosate versus placebo. We did not find a significant class-by-naltrexone interaction effect. Our study questions the orthogonal classification of drinkers into only two types (reward or relief drinkers) and adds to the body of research on moderators of acamprosate, which may inform clinical decision making in the treatment of AUD.

Subjective response to alcohol and associated craving in heavy drinkers vs. alcohol dependents: an examination of Koob's allostatic model in humans

BACKGROUND

Koob's allostatic model of addiction emphasizes the transition from positive reinforcement to negative reinforcement as dependence develops. This study seeks to extend this well-established neurobiological model to humans by examining subjective response to alcohol (SR) as a biobehavioral marker of alcohol reinforcement. Specifically, this study examines (a) differential SR in heavy drinkers (HDs) vs. alcohol dependent individuals (ADs) and (b) whether HDs and ADs differ in terms of the association between SR and craving.

METHODS

Data was culled from two alcohol challenge studies, totalling 91 participants (oversampled on OPRM1 Asp40 carriers). Alcohol was administered intravenously and participants completed standard measures of SR and craving at BrAC's of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 g/dl. SR was modeled as a multi-dimensional construct consisting of stimulation, sedation, and tension relief.

RESULTS

ADs reported significantly higher sedation and craving initially and exhibited a blunted response to alcohol along escalating BrACs. ADs exhibited greater initial tension but did not differ from HDs in tension reduction across rising BrACs. Further, alcohol-induced stimulation was associated with alcohol craving to a significantly greater degree in HDs, as compared to ADs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides initial evidence that HDs and ADs differ in their subjective experience of alcohol and in the association between dimensions of SR and craving for alcohol. Hypotheses derived from the allostatic model were partially supported, such that, while ADs and HDs did not differ on stimulation response, there was a relative dissociation between positive reinforcement and craving in ADs as compared to HDs.