Confusion and controversy related to the potential for cannabis use to cause harm, or alternatively to provide benefit, continues globally. This issue has grown in intensity and importance with the increased recognition of the public health implications related to the escalation of the legalization of cannabis and cannabinoid products. This selective overview and commentary attempt to succinctly convey what is known about one potential consequence of cannabis use, the development of cannabis use disorder (CUD). Such knowledge may help guide a reasonable and objective public health perspective on the potential impact of cannabis use and CUD. Current scientific data and clinical observation strongly support the contention that cannabis use, like the use of other substances such as alcohol, opioids, stimulants, and tobacco, can develop into a use disorder (addiction) with important clinical consequences. Epidemiological data indicate that the majority of those who use cannabis do not have problems related to their use, but a substantial subset (10-30%) do report experiencing symptoms and consequences consistent with a CUD. Treatment seeking for CUD comprises a substantial proportion of all substance use treatment admissions, yet treatment response rates show much room for improvement. Changing cannabis policies related to its therapeutic and recreational use are likely to impact the development of CUD and its course; however, definitive data on such effects are not yet available. Clearly, the development of more effective prevention and treatment strategies is needed for those vulnerable to developing a CUD and for those with a CUD.

Chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment, known also as “chemobrain”, is a medical complication of cancer treatment that is characterized by a general decline in cognition affecting visual and verbal memory, attention, complex problem solving skills, and motor function. It is estimated that one-third of patients who undergo chemotherapy treatment will experience cognitive impairment. Alterations in the release and uptake of dopamine and serotonin, central nervous system neurotransmitters that play important roles in cognition, could potentially contribute to impaired intellectual performance in those impacted by chemobrain. To investigate how chemotherapy treatment affects these systems, fast-scan cyclic voltammetry (FSCV) at carbon-fiber microelectrodes was used to measure dopamine and serotonin release and uptake in coronal brain slices containing the striatum and dorsal raphe nucleus, respectively. Measurements were taken from rats treated weekly with selected doses of carboplatin and from control rats treated with saline. Modeling the stimulated dopamine release plots revealed an impairment of dopamine release per stimulus pulse (80% of saline control at 5 mg/kg and 58% at 20 mg/kg) after 4 weeks of carboplatin treatment. Moreover, Vmax, the maximum uptake rate of dopamine, was also decreased (55% of saline control at 5 mg/kg and 57% at 20 mg/kg). Nevertheless, overall dopamine content, measured in striatal brain lysates by high performance liquid chromatography, and reserve pool dopamine, measured by FSCV after pharmacological manipulation, did not significantly change, suggesting that chemotherapy treatment selectively impairs the dopamine release and uptake processes. Similarly, serotonin release upon electrical stimulation was impaired (45% of saline control at 20 mg/kg). Measurements of spatial learning discrimination were taken throughout the treatment period and carboplatin was found to alter cognition. These studies support the need for additional neurochemical and behavioral analyses to identify the underlying mechanisms of chemotherapy-induced cognitive disorders.

Episodic future thinking (EFT), a brief intervention involving mental simulation of positive future events, improves delay discounting (DD) in nicotine and alcohol dependent individuals. This study is the first to assess effects of a single-session, online episodic training (ET) on constructs that might impact cannabis use and cannabis use disorder. A sample of 200 active cannabis users recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk were randomized to an EFT group (n ϭ 102) or an episodic recent thinking control group (ERT; n ϭ 98). A novel episodic specificity induction (ES) was included to enhance quality of episodic thinking for the ET group, and an ES attention control was provided to the ERT group (control training group; CT). Quality and manipulation ratings of event excitement, vividness, importance, and enjoyment of trainings were collected in addition to DD tasks (gains and losses) and readiness to change cannabis use. The ET group reported higher overall quality and manipulation ratings than did the CT group (p Ͻ .001, d ϭ 0.79). DD of gains was lower in the ET relative to those of the CT group after controlling for relevant variables (p ϭ .003, d ϭ 0.48), unlike DD of losses (p ϭ .50, d ϭ 0.11). The ET group showed larger pre/post increases in readiness to change, but they were not statistically significant (p ϭ .069, d ϭ 0.26). These effects, following a session of online ET, suggests that ET may positively impact factors related to reduction in cannabis use. Differential effects of EFT and ES components on DD and the development of ET as an adjunctive mHealth intervention targeting reduction in cannabis use appears warranted.

Those who discount the subjective value of delayed rewards less steeply are more likely to engage in physical activity. There is limited research, however, showing whether physical activity can change rates of delay discounting. In a two-experiment series, treatment and maintenance effects of a novel, effort-paced physical activity intervention on delay discounting were evaluated with multiple baseline designs. Using a lap-based method, participants were instructed to exercise at individualized high and low effort levels and to track their own perceived effort. The results suggest that treatment-induced changes in discounting were maintained at follow-up for 13 of 16 participants. In Experiment 2, there were statistically significant group-level improvements in physical activity and delay discounting when comparing baseline with both treatment and maintenance phases. Percentage change in delay discounting was significantly correlated with session attendance and relative pace (min/mile) improvement over the course of the 7-week treatment. Implications for future research are discussed.

Background: Self-regulation deficits expressed through a decreased ability to value future rewards (delay discounting (DD)) and impaired emotion regulation (negative urgency (NU), cannabis coping motives (CCM), and anxiety sensitivity (AS)) relate to more frequent or problematic cannabis use. However, there is a need to better understand how self-regulation and emotion regulation constructs reflect competition between deliberative and reactive systems that drive individual differences in cannabis use patterns. Further, few studies assess frequency of cannabis use within and across days of use, which may obscure differentiation of individual differences. Methods:In a large national sample of 2545 cannabis users, Latent Class Analysis was used to derive participant sub-classes based on two frequency indices, self-reported cannabis use days and times cannabis was used per day. Three classes emerged: Low (1-9 days/month, 1 time/day; 23 %), moderate (10-29 days/month, 2-3 times/day; 41 %), and high (30 days/month, ≥4 times/day; 36 %). Relationships among frequency classes and emotional regulation and impulsivity were assessed with a multinomial logistic regression.Results: Higher frequency use was associated with greater DD (χ 2 = 6.0, p = .05), greater CCM (χ 2 = 73.3, p < .001), and lower cognitive AS (χ 2 = 12.1, p = .002), when controlling for *

Episodic Future Thinking (EFT), mental simulation of personally relevant and positive future events, may modulate delay discounting (DD) in cannabis users. Whether EFT impacts cannabis use, whether DD mediates this effect, and whether EFT can be enhanced by prompting future events across specific life domains is unknown. Active, adult cannabis users (n = 90) recruited from Amazon mTurk and Qualtrics Panels were administered an Episodic Specificity Induction (ESI) to enhance quality of imagined events before being randomized to EFT, domain-specific-EFT (DS-EFT), or Episodic Recent Thinking (ERT). All participants created four, positive life events; DS-EFT participants imagined social, leisure, health, and financial events. Event-quality ratings were assessed (e.g., enjoyment). DD was assessed at baseline (Day 1), post-intervention (Days 2-4), and follow-up (Days 9-12). Cannabis use was assessed at baseline and follow-up. Differences in change in days and grams of cannabis use between conditions and mediation of changes in use by DD were examined. No differences in DD were observed between conditions. DS-EFT, but not EFT, showed significantly greater reductions in grams (d = .54) and days of cannabis use (d = .50) than ERT. DS-EFT and EFT demonstrated significantly greater event-quality ratings than ERT (ds > .55). EFT-based interventions showed potential for reducing cannabis use. Unexpectedly, effects on DD did not mediate this effect. Further testing with larger samples of cannabis users is needed to better understand EFT's mechanisms of action and determine optimal implementation strategies. Public Significance StatementParticipation in a brief online intervention that prompts the creation and imagination of positive future events across life domains may help reduce frequent cannabis use.

No abstract

The current study developed and tested a multiple-stimulus-without-replacement (MSWO) assessment for potential sexual partners for use in research on human immunodeficiency virus. College students (N = 41) first completed an MSWO assessment and then completed a hypothetical purchase task for encounters with partners identified by the MSWO as high, median, and low preference. Overall, hypothetical purchase task responding was consistent with that from the MSWO, in that the highest valuation was observed for the high-preference partner and the lowest for the low-preference partner. Potentially interesting individual differences in purchase task responding, however, were obtained; some subjects showed differentiated responding among the 3 preference levels (n = 15), whereas others similarly valued high- and median-preference partners (n = 5), and others similarly valued low- and median-preference partners (n = 18).