Risk-related decision making evokes distinct brain activation patterns in reward evaluation regions in substance use naïve versus non-naïve adolescents
McQuaid, G. A.; Darcey, V. L.; Patterson, A. E.; Rose, E. J.; VanMeter, J. W.; Fishbein, D. H.
Show abstract
Identifying brain and behavioral precursors to substance use (SU) may guide interventions that delay initiation in youth at risk for SU disorders (SUD). Heightened reward-sensitivity and risk-taking may confer risk for SUD. In a longitudinal, prospective study, we characterized behavioral and neural profiles associated with reward-sensitivity and risk-taking in substance-naive adolescents, examining whether they differed as a function of SU initiation at 18- and 36-months follow-up. Adolescents (N=70; 11.1-14.0 years) completed a reward-related decision-making task (Wheel of Fortune (WOF)) while undergoing functional MRI. Measures of reward sensitivity (Behavioral Inhibition System-Behavioral Approach System; BIS-BAS), impulsive decision-making (delay discounting task), and SUD risk (Drug Use Screening Inventory, Revised (DUSI-R)) were collected at baseline. Baseline metrics were compared for youth who did (SI; n=27) and did not (SN; n=43) initiate SU at follow-up. While groups displayed similar discounting and risk taking behavior, SI youth showed more variable patterns of activation in left insular cortex during high-risk selections, and left anterior cingulate cortex in response to rewarded outcomes. SI participants scored higher on the DUSI-R and BAS subscales. Results suggest differences in brain regions critical in the development and experience of SUDs may precede SU and serve as a biomarker for SUD risk.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Neural Response To Threat And Reward Among Young Adults At Risk For Alcohol Use Disorder 95%
- A Multivariate Approach to Understanding the Genetic Overlap between Externalizing Phenotypes and Substance Use Disorders 93%
- Neurogenetic and multi-omic sources of overlap among sensation seeking, alcohol consumption, and alcohol use disorder 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Change in Striatal Functional Connectivity Networks Across Two Years Due to Stimulant Exposure in Childhood ADHD: Results from the ABCD Sample 94%
- Computational Mechanisms Underlying Multi-Step Planning Deficits in Methamphetamine Use Disorder 94%
- Neural Correlates of Positive and Negative Valence System Dysfunction in Adolescents Revealed by Data-Driven Parcellation and Resting-State Network Modeling 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Developing Functional Network Connectivity of the Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex Mediates Externalizing Psychopathology in Adolescents with Child Neglect 94%
- Lower neural value signaling in the prefrontal cortex is related to childhood family income and depressive symptomatology during adolescence 93%
- Integrating Multilevel, Multidomain and Multimodal Neuroimaging Factors to Predict Early Alcohol Exposure Trajectories Using Explainable AI 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Differential Roles of Positive and Negative Valence Systems in the Development of Post-Traumatic Stress Psychopathology 94%
- Functional brain connectivity predictors of prospective substance use initiation and their environmental correlates 94%
- Maladaptive avoidance learning in the orbitofrontal cortex in adolescents with major depression 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Nicotine dependence (trait) and acute nicotinic stimulation (state) modulate attention but not cognitive control: converging fMRI evidence from Go-Nogo and Flanker tasks 94%
- The Addiction Risk Factor: A Unitary Genetic Vulnerability Characterizes Substance Use Disorders and Their Associations with Common Correlates 93%
- Longitudinal Neurocognitive Trajectories in a Large Cohort of Youth Who Use Cannabis: Combining Self-Report and Toxicology 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.