medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Salud Mental

ISSN 0185-3325 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2010, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Salud Mental 2010; 33 (6)

El cerebro, las drogas y los genes

Ruiz CAE, Méndez DM, Prieto GB, Romano A, Caynas S, Prospéro GO
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 34
Page: 535-542
PDF size: 122.61 Kb.


Key words:

Drugs, rewarding system, punishment system, genes, epigenesis, environment, addictions comorbility.

ABSTRACT

In this second paper of the Brain, Drugs and Genes review we would like to discuss illicit drugs and the genetics that may predispose subjects to addiction.
We describe the effects, action sites and pathophysiological consequences of the use of these illicit drugs. The drugs that are reviewed are marijuana, heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine or MDMA, also known as ecstasy. All of them cause an effect on the brain, modifying the activity of the neuronal systems, altering the activity or availability of the neurotransmitters or emulating their actions. The risk of dependence is related to the velocity with which these drugs induce plastic changes in the brain, very much like a learning process. Such changes underlie the patient’s dependence to drugs. Therefore when a long term user quits and deprives the brain abruptly of these drugs, an abstinence syndrome is precipitated and it may be quite severe. Only for marijuana it seems to be mild, misleading people to believe this drug does not cause physical dependence.
Marijuana (Cannabis sativa) is a plant which has its active principle Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in almost all its parts, i. e. the flowers, stems, seeds and leaves. It actually contains over 60 cannabinoids as well as other chemical compounds. Marijuana causes euphoria followed by relaxation and several other reinforcing effects. Among the adverse effects marijuana causes: alteration of short-term memory, slowness of reflexes, depression and anxiety, bronchitis and lung infections. Marijuana effects depend on the activation of the CB1 and CB2 receptors, distributed in the entire body. The CB1 receptor is mainly present in the brain. In medicine, Δ9-THC has been useful in treating symptoms caused by chemotherapy, and in treating the anorexia caused by the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Also, an antagonist of the CB1 receptor, Rimonabant, has been used to treat morbid obesity withcertain degree of success. However, despite this promising application of Rimonabant, the side effects it caused led to its withdrawal from the market in Europe, Canada and Mexico.
Heroin, derived from morphine, which in turn is isolated from opium, causes euphoria and analgesia, suppresses hunger, increases energy and induces sleepiness. The adverse effects are liver and kidney diseases as well as a decrease in breathing and heart rates. This drug acts on the opioid receptors: MOR, DOR and KOR.
Cocaine, derived from the coca plant (Erythroxylum coca) produces immediate rewarding effects that last between 30 to 60 min, and causes anxiety once its serum concentration drops. Due to its very short half-life, it is the most addictive of all drugs. Cocaine reduces hunger, thirst and sleep. The most used forms of cocaine are powder and crack (available as rock). The mechanism of action by which cocaine and related compounds induce their effects is the blockade of the dopamine transporter at the synapsis, leaving dopamine available for a longer time at the synapses of the motivation-reward system. Cocaine and related compounds induce blood vessel constriction, muscular spasm, chest pain, and an increase in heart rate and blood pressure, thus augmenting the risk of cardiac arrest and stroke.
The methamphetamine, a synthetic stimulant, is a crystalline, odorless, bitter drug which causes a pleasant feeling and euphoria. Its action mechanism is the blockade of the dopamine transporter, same as cocaine. The effects pursued by the users of crystal methamphetamine are increased alertness, increase in physical activity and decrease in hunger. Its side effects include increase in body temperature, heart rate and blood pressure, thus augmenting the risk for stroke. Methamphetamine also triggers violent behavior,anxiety, irritability, confusion, paranoia and hallucinations. This compound has been used for medical reasons, such as in the treatment of narcolepsy and obesity.
3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, MDMA or ecstasy, is a synthetic compound with stimulant and hallucinatory effects. Its action is exerted mainly on the serotonin transporter, leaving serotonin available at the synapsis for a longer time. After clearance from the bloodstream this drug causes severe depression. Ecstasy is also combined with other stimulants.
All the drugs discussed here induce body changes that compromise the life of the user, or his health at the very least. Despite this fact, the highly reinforcing effects the drugs produce by over activating the motivation-rewarding system compel their repetitive use. Not all users, however, are equally vulnerable to becoming addicted or respond the same way to the use of drugs. The individual response depends, in part, on genetic factors, as we discuss in the following section.
It is evident that not only environmental factors account for the vulnerability to addiction. Genetic factors also have a substantial contribution. In order to facilitate the understanding of the interaction environment-gene, we define the following concepts: gene, allele, mutation, polymorphism, heritability and epigenesis. Apparently, the genetic contribution to addiction vulnerability varies depending on the drug. For example, cocaine and opiates are much more dependant obson genetic factors to trigger addiction than are nicotine, alcohol or marijuana. Mutations or polymorphisms carried by several genes might make the difference between being at high or low risk for addiction. They may also underlie the degree of response to rehabilitation treatments.
Addiction, then, is a result of an interaction between environment and genes. Environmental demands make the organism modify its structure and physiology in order to cope efficiently to such demands. One crucial way to do so is by changing gene expression. Changes in gene expression may be a consequence of chemical rearrangements in the chromatin structure, which lead to transcriptional modifications that affect the expression of the proteins the genes encode.
Consequently, the normal functions of such proteins in different systems are also altered. These adaptive rearrangements in the chromatin structure are called epigenesis. The epigenetic changes induced by environmental stimuli have been proved to affect the expression of several neurotransmitter receptors and trophic factors, among many other molecules crucial for the proper functioning of the Central Nervous System. Hence, these chromatin’s structural changes, triggered by environmental demands, are most likely to help the subject cope with such specific demands. However, this adaptation is not free of charge, and requires a toll to be paid which is: vulnerability to addiction.
Finally, one question arises: Who is the person most likely to seek a drug of abuse? Statistics have shown that those patients suffering from a psychiatric illness. This hypothesis suggests that addiction is a symptom or a disease caused by a psychiatric illness such as a personality disorder, depression or schizophrenia. Hence, at the end, drug addiction would be a co-morbid entity, generating what in Spanish we call the dual-disease. On the other hand, the self-medication hypothesis also makes sense, at least for an extensive group of patients. This hypothesis suggests that patients take drugs of abuse to relief the symptoms caused by their psychiatric pathology. The present review discusses the interaction between brain circuits, drugs and genes to generate an addict patient. We do not intend to revise each field exhaustively, but rather we intend to give the reader a general scenario on the convergence of these three worlds. Thus it may be better understood how addiction develops and how it may be treated.


REFERENCES

  1. Koob GF. Dynamics of neuronal circuits in addiction: reward, antireward, and emotional memory. Pharmacopsychiatry 2009;42(supl. 1):S32-S41.

  2. Hyman SE, Malenka RC. Addiction and the brain: The neurobiology of compulsion and its persistence. Nat Rev Neurosci 2001;2:695-703.

  3. Goldman D, Oroszi G, Dicci F. The genetics of addictions: uncovering the genes. Nat Rev Genetics 2005;6:521-532.

  4. Hall W, Degenhardt L. Adverse health effects of non-medical cannabis use. Lancet 2009;374:1383-1391.

  5. Reece AS. Chronic toxicology of cannabis. Clin Toxico 2009;47:517-524.

  6. Iyalomhe GB. Cannabis abuse and addiction: a contemporary literature review. Niger J Med 2009;18:128-133.

  7. Crippa JA, Zuardi AW, Martín-Santos R, Bhattacharyya S et al. Cannabis and Anxiety: a critical review of the evidence. Hum Psychopharmacol 2009;24:515-523.

  8. Http://www.who.int/es/

  9. Encuesta Nacional de Adicciones 2008. Instituto Nacional de Salud pública, México 2009.

  10. Aggarwal SK, Carter GT, Sullivan MD, Zumbrunnen C et al. Medical use of cannabis in the United States: Historical perspectives, current trends, and future directions. J Opiod Manag 2009;5:153-168.

  11. Méndez-Díaz M, Herrera-Solís A, Soria-Gómez E, Rueda-Orozco PE et al. Mighty cannabinoids: A potential pharmacological tool in medicine. En: M Méndez Ubach y Mondragón-Ceballos. Neural mechanisms of action of drugs of abuse and natural reinforcers. Kerala: Research Signpost; 2008; pp. 137-157.

  12. Soria EJ, Matías I, Cisneros M, Petrosinio S et al. Pharmacological enhancement of the cannabinoid system in the nucleus accumbens shell stimulates food intake and increases c-FOS expression in the hypothalamus. Brit J Pharmacol 2007;151:1109-1116.

  13. Van Gaal L, Scheen AJ, Rissanen AM, Rössner S et al. Long-term effect of CB1 blockade with rimonabant on cardiometabolic risk factors: two year results from the RIO-Europe Study. Eur Heart J 2008;29:1761-1771.

  14. Christensen R, Kristensen PK, Bartels EM, Bliddal H et al. Efficacy and safety of the weight-loss drug rimonabant: A meta-analysis of randomised trials. 2007;370:1706-1713.

  15. Kosten TR, George TP. The Neurobiology of Opioid Dependence: Implications for Treatment. Sci Pract Perspect 2002;1:13-20.

  16. Julien RM, Advokat CL, Comaty JE. A primer of drug action. Desimo primera edición. Nueva York: Worth Publishers; 2008.

  17. Yamamoto BK, Moszczynska A, Gudelsky GA. Amphetamine toxicities: classical and emerging mechanisms. Ann N Acad Sci 2010;1187:101-121.

  18. Klug WS, Cummings MR. Concepts of Genetics (6a Ed) Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2000.

  19. Mwenifumbo JC, Lessov-Schlaggar CN, Zhou Q, Krasnow RE et al. Identification of novel CYP2A6*1B variants: The CYP2A6*1B allele is associated with faster in vivo nicotine metabolism. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2008;83:115–121.

  20. Schlaepfer IR, Hoft NR, Ehringer MA. The genetic components of alcohol and nicotine co-addiction: from genes to behavior. Curr Drug Abuse Rev 2008;1:124-134.

  21. Lerman G, Wileyto EP, Patterson F, Rubstalis M et al. The functional mu opioide receptor (OPRM1) Asn40Asp variant predicts short-term response to nicotine replacement. Pharmacogenomics J 2004;4:184-192.

  22. Oroszi G, Anton RF, O’Malley S, Swift R et al. OPRM1 Asn40Asp predicts response to naltrexone treatment; a haplotype-based approach. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2009;33:383-393.

  23. Xu K, Lichtermann D, Lipsky RH, Franke P et al. Association of specific haplotypes of D2 dopamine receptor gene with vulnerability to heroin dependence in 2 distinct populations. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2004; 61:597-606.

  24. Haile CN, Kosten TH, Kosten TR. Pharmacogenetic treatments for drug addiction: Alcohol and opiates. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2008;34:355- 381.

  25. Ducci F, Goldman D. Genetic approaches to addiction: genes and alcohol. Addiction 2008;103:1414-1428.

  26. Gelernter J, Kranzler HR. Genetics of alcohol dependence. Hum Genet 2009;126:91-99.

  27. Liu D, Diorio J, Tannenbaum B, Caldji C et al. Maternal care, hippocampal glucocorticoid receptor expression and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal responses to stress. Science 1997;277:1659–1662.

  28. McGowan PO, Sasaki A, D’Alessio AC, Dymov S et al. Epigenetic regulation of the glucocorticoid receptor in human brain associates with childhood abuse. Nat Neurosci 2009;12:342-348.

  29. Maze I, Covington HE, Dietz DM, LaPlant Q et al. Essential role of the histon methyltransferase G9a in Cocaine-induced plasticity. Science 2010;327:213-216.

  30. Liu D, Diorio J, Day JC, Francis DD et al. Maternal care, hippocampal synaptogenesis and cognitive development in rats. Nat Neurosci 2001;2:799-806.

  31. Francis DD, Kuhar MJ. Frequency of maternal licking and grooming correlates negatively with vulnerability to cocaine and alcohol use in rats. Pharmacol Biochem Beh 2008;90:497–500.

  32. Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, Merikangas KR et al. Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psych 2005;62:617-627. Artículo sin conflicto de intereses

  33. Aron AR, Fletcher PC, Bullmore ET, Sahakian BJ et al. Stop-signal inhibition disrupted by damage to right inferior frontal gyrus in humans. Nat Neurosci 2003;6:115-116.

  34. Khantzian EJ. The ego, the self, and opiate addiction: Theoretical and treatment considerations. En: National Insstitute on Drug Abuse. Psychodynamics of drug dependence. Research Monograph series 12. 1977; pp.101-117.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Salud Mental. 2010;33