Search

Psychological and neurobiological markers in individuals with gambling disorder (GD) could reflect transdiagnostic vulnerability to addiction or neuroadaptive consequences of long-term gambling. Using an endophenotypic approach to identify vulnerability markers, we tested the biological relatives of cases with GD. Male participants seeking treatment for GD (n= 20) were compared with a male control group (n= 18). Biological siblings of cases with GD (n= 17, unrelated to the current GD group) were compared with a separate control group (n= 19) that overlapped partially with the GD control group. Participants completed a comprehensive assessment of clinical scales, neurocognitive functioning, and fMRI of unexpected financial reward. The GD group displayed elevated levels of self-report impulsivity and delay discounting, and increased risk-taking on the Cambridge Gamble Task. We did not observe impaired motor impulsivity on the stop-signal task. Siblings of GD showed some overlapping effects; namely, elevated impulsivity (negative urgency) and increased risk-taking on the Cambridge Gamble Task. We did not observe any differences in the neural response to win outcomes, either in the GD or sibling analysis compared with their control group. Within the GD group, activity in the thalamus and caudate correlated negatively with gambling severity. Increased impulsivity and risk-taking in GD are present in biological relatives of cases with GD, suggesting these markers may represent pre-existing vulnerability to GD.

Evidence suggests that disturbances in neurobiological mechanisms of reward and inhibitory control maintain addiction and provoke relapse during abstinence. Abnormalities within the dopamine system may contribute to these disturbances and pharmacologically targeting the D3 dopamine receptor (DRD3) is therefore of significant clinical interest. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the acute effects of the DRD3 antagonist GSK598809 on anticipatory reward processing, using the monetary incentive delay task (MIDT), and response inhibition using the Go/No-Go task (GNGT). A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design approach was used in abstinent alcohol dependent, abstinent poly-drug dependent and healthy control volunteers. For the MIDT, there was evidence of blunted ventral striatal response to reward in the poly-drug-dependent group under placebo. GSK598809 normalized ventral striatal reward response and enhanced response in the DRD3-rich regions of the ventral pallidum and substantia nigra. Exploratory investigations suggested that the effects of GSK598809 were mainly driven by those with primary dependence on alcohol but not on opiates. Taken together, these findings suggest that GSK598809 may remediate reward deficits in substance dependence. For the GNGT, enhanced response in the inferior frontal cortex of the poly-drug group was found. However, there were no effects of GSK598809 on the neural network underlying response inhibition nor were there any behavioral drug effects on response inhibition. GSK598809 modulated the neural network underlying reward anticipation but not response inhibition, suggesting that DRD3 antagonists may restore reward deficits in addiction.