Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33634928›Full record

ArticleAddiction biology2021

Sustained brain response to repeated drug cues is associated with poor drug-use outcomes.

Paul S Regier, Kanchana Jagannathan, Teresa R Franklin, Reagan R Wetherill, Daniel D Langleben, Michael Gawyrsiak, Kyle M Kampman, Anna Rose Childress

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Neuroimaging Biomarkers in Addiction.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  10. N-acetylcysteine as a treatment for substance use cravings: A meta-analysis.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paul S RegierPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7942-1654
Kanchana JagannathanPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Teresa R FranklinPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Reagan R WetherillPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1991-6292
Daniel D LanglebenPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Michael GawyrsiakPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Kyle M KampmanPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Anna Rose ChildressPerelman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
University of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

T32 Translational Addiction Research Fellowship ProgramT32DA028874 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Julie A Blendy, Anna Rose Childress · 2010 to 2026
$5.0M
A Clinical Laboratory with Integrated Neuroscience (CLIN) for Early Evaluation of Medications for Substance Use DisordersUG1DA050209 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CHILDRESS, ANNA ROSE, KAMPMAN, KYLE MATTHEW · 2020 to 2024
$3.1M
NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA028874NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA050209
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A threefold increase in fatal cocaine overdoses during the past decade highlights the critical lack of medications for cocaine use disorders. The brain response to drug cues can predict future drug use; however, results have been mixed. We present preliminary evidence that a sustained response to repeated cocaine cues within a single task is a significant predictor of drug-use outcomes. Seventy-three cocaine inpatients were administered a passive-viewing fMRI task, featuring 500 ms novel evocative (cocaine, sexual, aversive) and neutral comparator cues in the first half (Half1), which were then repeated in the second half (Half2). After the baseline scan, patients received eight outpatient treatment weeks with twice-weekly drug screens. Drug-use outcome groups were empirically defined based on cocaine-positive or missing urines averaged across the outpatient phase: GOOD (<40%), POOR (>85%), and Intermediate (INT, between 40% and 85%) outcomes. Differences of response to initial (Half1) and repeated (Half2) cues in a priori (cue-reactive) regions were tested between outcome groups (3 [Group] × 2 [Halves] ANOVA). An interaction was found in the brain response to drug (but not sex or aversive) cues, with a significant difference between the GOOD and POOR outcome groups in Half2, driven by a significant decrease in brain response by the GOOD outcome group and a sustained brain response by the POOR outcome group, to repeated cocaine cues. The brain response to repeated drug cues may be a useful predictor of future drug use, encouraging future intervention studies to restore a "healthy" (decreasing) response to the repeated presentation of drug cues.

Indexed as

CuesAdultBrainCocaine-Related DisordersHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalebiomarkercocainecuesfMRIrelapse

Identifiers

PMID33634928
PMCPMC9906797
OpenAlexW3130273336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.