4.7 Review

Factors modulating neural reactivity to drug cues in addiction: A survey of human neuroimaging studies

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS
卷 38, 期 -, 页码 1-16

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.10.013

关键词

Addiction; Drug abuse; Cue reactivity; Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI); Positron emission tomography (PET); Modulation; Craving; Addiction severity; Treatment success; Withdrawal; Regulation; Sensory modality; Treatment status; Stress; Drug availability

资金

  1. National Institute on Drug Abuse Intramural Research Program (NIDA-IRP)
  2. Hessisches Ministerium fur Wissenschaft und Kultur (LOEWE Forschungsschwerpunkt Neuronale Koordination Frankfurt)
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE [ZIADA000573, ZIADA000470] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human neuroimaging studies suggest that neural cue reactivity is strongly associated with indices of drug use, including addiction severity and treatment success. However, little is known about factors that modulate cue reactivity. The goal of this review, in which we survey published fMRI and PET studies on drug cue reactivity in cocaine, alcohol, and tobacco cigarette users, is to highlight major factors that modulate brain reactivity to drug cues. First, we describe cue reactivity paradigms used in neuroimaging research and outline the brain circuits that underlie cue reactivity. We then discuss major factors that have been shown to modulate cue reactivity and review specific evidence as well as outstanding questions related to each factor. Building on previous model-building reviews on the topic, we then outline a simplified model that includes the key modulatory factors and a tentative ranking of their relative impact. We conclude with a discussion of outstanding challenges and future research directions, which can inform future neuroimaging studies as well as the design of treatment and prevention programs. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据