32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Methadone vs. buprenorphine/naloxone during early opioid substitution treatment: a naturalistic comparison of cognitive performance relative to healthy controls

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Both methadone- and buprenorphine-treated opioid-dependent patients frequently show cognitive deficits in attention, working memory, and verbal memory. However, no study has compared these patient groups with each other during early opioid substitution treatment (OST). Therefore, we investigated attention, working memory, and verbal memory of opioid-dependent patients within six weeks after the introduction of OST in a naturalistic setting and compared to those of healthy controls.

          Methods

          The sample included 16 methadone-, 17 buprenorphine/naloxone-treated patients, and 17 healthy controls matched for sex and age. In both groups buprenorphine was the main opioid of abuse during the recent month. Benzodiazepine codependence, recent use, and comedication were also common in both patient groups. Analysis of variance was used to study the overall group effect in each cognitive test. Pair-wise group comparisons were made, when appropriate

          Results

          Methadone-treated patients, as a group, had significantly slower simple reaction time (RT) compared to buprenorphine/naloxone-treated patients. In Go/NoGo RT methadone patients were significantly slower than controls. Both patient groups were significantly debilitated compared to controls in working memory and verbal list learning. Only methadone patients were inferior to controls in story recall. In simple RT and delayed story recall buprenorphine/naloxone patients with current benzodiazepine medication ( n = 13) were superior to methadone patients with current benzodiazepine medication ( n = 13). When methadone patients were divided into two groups according to their mean dose, the patient group with a low dose (mean 40 mg, n = 8) showed significantly faster simple RT than the high dose group (mean 67 mg, n = 8).

          Conclusion

          Deficits in attention may only be present in methadone-treated early phase OST patients and may be dose-dependent. Working memory deficit is common in both patient groups. Verbal memory deficit may be more pronounced in methadone-treated patients than in buprenorphine/naloxone-treated patients. In sum, to preserve cognitive function in early OST, the use of buprenorphine/naloxone may be more preferable to methadone use of, at least if buprenorphine has been recently abused and when benzodiazepine comedication is used. Longitudinal studies are needed to investigate if the better performance of buprenorphine/naloxone-treated patients is a relatively permanent effect or reflects "only" transient opioid switching effect.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Drugs of abuse: anatomy, pharmacology and function of reward pathways.

          Drugs of abuse are very powerful reinforcers, and even in conditions of limited access (where the organism is not dependent) these drugs will motivate high rates of operant responding. This presumed hedonic property and the drugs' neuropharmacological specificity provide a means of studying the neuropharmacology and neuroanatomy of brain reward. Three major brain systems appear to be involved in drug reward--dopamine, opioid and GABA. Evidence suggests a midbrain-forebrain-extrapyramidal circuit with its focus in the nucleus accumbens. Data implicating dopamine and opioid systems in indirect sympathomimetic and opiate reward include critical elements in both the nucleus accumbens and ventral tegmental areas. Ethanol reward appears to depend on an interaction with the GABAA receptor complex but may also involve common elements such as dopamine and opioid peptides in this midbrain-forebrain-extrapyramidal circuit. These results suggest that brain reward systems have a multidetermined neuropharmacological basis that may involve some common neuroanatomical elements.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Mapping motor inhibition: conjunctive brain activations across different versions of go/no-go and stop tasks.

            Conjunction analysis methods were used in functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate brain regions commonly activated in subjects performing different versions of go/no-go and stop tasks, differing in probability of inhibitory signals and/or contrast conditions. Generic brain activation maps highlighted brain regions commonly activated in (a) two different go/no-go task versions, (b) three different stop task versions, and (c) all 5 inhibition task versions. Comparison between the generic activation maps of stop and go/no-go task versions revealed inhibitory mechanisms specific to go/no-go or stop task performance in 15 healthy, right-handed, male adults. In the go/no-go task a motor response had to be selectively executed or inhibited in either 50% or 30% of trials. In the stop task, the motor response to a go-stimulus had to be retracted on either 50 or 30% of trials, indicated by a stop signal, shortly (250 ms) following the go-stimulus. The shared "inhibitory" neurocognitive network by all inhibition tasks comprised mesial, medial, and inferior frontal and parietal cortices. Generic activation of the go/no-go task versions identified bilateral, but more predominantly left hemispheric mesial, medial, and inferior frontal and parietal cortices. Common activation to all stop task versions was in predominantly right hemispheric anterior cingulate, supplementary motor area, inferior prefrontal, and parietal cortices. On direct comparison between generic stop and go/no-go activation maps increased BOLD signal was observed in left hemispheric dorsolateral prefrontal, medial, and parietal cortices during the go/no-go task, presumably reflecting a left frontoparietal specialization for response selection. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Catecholamine modulation of prefrontal cortical cognitive function.

              The prefrontal cortex (PFC) utilizes working memory to guide behavior and to release the organism from dependence on environmental cues and is commonly disrupted in neuropsychiatric disorders, normal aging, or exposure to uncontrollable stress. This review posits that the PFC is very sensitive to changes in the neuromodulatory inputs it receives from norepinephrine (NE) and dopamine (DA) systems and that this sensitivity can lead to marked changes in the working-memory functions of the PFC. While NE and DA have important beneficial influences on processing in this area, very high levels of catecholamine release, for example, during exposure to uncontrollable stress, disrupt the cognitive functions of the PFC. This fresh understanding of the neurochemical influences on PFC function has led to new treatments for cognitive disorders such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and may help to elucidate the prevalence of PFC dysfunction in other mental disorders.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Clin Pharmacol
                BMC Clinical Pharmacology
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6904
                2007
                12 June 2007
                : 7
                : 5
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Unit for Drug Dependence, Department of Psychiatry, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Box 590, FIN-00029 Helsinki, Finland
                [2 ]Unit on Prevention and Treatment of Addictions, Department of Mental Health and Alcohol Research, National Public Health Institute (KTL), Finland
                [3 ]Research Unit of Substance Abuse Medicine, University of Helsinki, Finland
                [4 ]Department of Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural Sciences, Helsinki, Finland
                [5 ]National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health STAKES, Finland and Psychiatric Unit, Vaasa Central Hospital, Vaasa, Finland
                Article
                1472-6904-7-5
                10.1186/1472-6904-7-5
                1914339
                17565668
                8746dfa7-2273-453f-8e0b-49e9f382832c
                Copyright © 2007 Rapeli et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 25 January 2007
                : 12 June 2007
                Categories
                Research Article

                Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine
                Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article