4.2 Article

Clock genes x stress x reward interactions in alcohol and substance use disorders

期刊

ALCOHOL
卷 49, 期 4, 页码 351-357

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.alcohol.2015.04.003

关键词

Circadian clock; Period genes; HPA axis; Alcohol; Cocaine; Nicotine

资金

  1. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (NGFN Plus) [FKZ: 01GS08152]
  2. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (e:Med program) [FKZ: 01ZX1311A]
  3. Ministerium fur Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst (MWK) in Baden-Wuerttemberg
  4. NIAAA [1R21 AA0023078-01]
  5. NARSAD from the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation [22646]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adverse life events and highly stressful environments have deleterious consequences for mental health. Those environmental factors can potentiate alcohol and drug abuse in vulnerable individuals carrying specific genetic risk factors, hence producing the final risk for alcohol- and substance-use disorders development. The nature of these genes remains to be fully determined, but studies indicate their direct or indirect relation to the stress hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and/or reward systems. Over the past decade, clock genes have been revealed to be key-players in influencing acute and chronic alcohol/drug effects. In parallel, the influence of chronic stress and stressful life events in promoting alcohol and substance use and abuse has been demonstrated. Furthermore, the reciprocal interaction of clock genes with various HPA-axis components, as well as the evidence for an implication of clock genes in stress-induced alcohol abuse, have led to the idea that clock genes, and Period genes in particular, may represent key genetic factors to consider when examining gene x environment interaction in the etiology of addiction. The aim of the present review is to summarize findings linking clock genes, stress, and alcohol and substance abuse, and to propose potential underlying neurobiological mechanisms. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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