Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome

Logan, Beth A.; Brown, Mark S.; Hayes, Marie J.

doi:10.1097/grf.0b013e31827feea4

Cited by 116 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A clinical diagnosis of depression or anxiety is often preceded by motor, cognitive, sleep and behavioral problems in early childhood and adolescence (Kelly, Day, & Streissguth, 2000; Logan, Brown, & Hayes, 2013a; Nanson & Hiscock, 1990; Streissguth et al, 2004). These behavioral issues, including attention and social deficits, impulsivity, hyperactivity, and anxiety, may be associated with stress hyper-responsiveness and circadian disruptions (Gruber, Sadeh, & Raviv, 2000; McClung, 2013; Sher, 2003; Verma, Hellemans, Choi, Yu, & Weinberg, 2010).…”

Section: The Effects Of Drugs Of Abuse On Circadian Rhythms and Circamentioning

confidence: 99%

Circadian rhythms and addiction: Mechanistic insights and future directions.

Logan

Williams

McClung

2014

Behavioral Neuroscience

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Circadian rhythms are prominent in many physiological and behavioral functions. Circadian disruptions either by environmental or molecular perturbation can have profound health consequences, including the development and progression of addiction. Both animal and humans studies indicate extensive bidirectional relationships between the circadian system and drugs of abuse. Addicted individuals display disrupted rhythms, and chronic disruption or particular chronotypes, may increase the risk for substance abuse and relapse. Moreover, polymorphisms in circadian genes and an evening chronotype have been linked to mood and addiction disorders, and recent efforts suggest an association with the function of reward neurocircuitry. Animal studies are beginning to determine how altered circadian gene function results in drug induced neuroplasticity and behaviors. Many studies suggest a critical role for circadian rhythms in reward-related pathways in the brain and indicate that drugs of abuse directly affect the central circadian pacemaker. In this review, we highlight key findings demonstrating the importance of circadian rhythms in addiction, and how future studies will reveal important mechanistic insights into the involvement of circadian rhythms in drug addiction.

show abstract

Section: The Effects Of Drugs Of Abuse On Circadian Rhythms and Circamentioning

confidence: 99%

Circadian rhythms and addiction: Mechanistic insights and future directions.

Logan

Williams

McClung

2014

Behavioral Neuroscience

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Morphine and methadone are considered the two standard of care options for first-line treatment, with on-going clinical trials to determine best practice and long-term outcomes (Backes et al, 2012; Brown et al, 2014; Hall et al, 2014; Hudak et al, 2012; Lee et al, 2015; Sarkar et al, 2006). Approximately 25% of infants have a particularly severe course of withdrawal, requiring adjunctive medication therapy in addition to first-line opioid replacement – most typically a barbiturate (phenobarbital) or a sympatholytic (clonidine; Jansson et al, 2009; Jones et al, 2010; Logan et al, 2013). Infants with this more severe phenotype of NAS typically have a longer duration of pharmacologic treatment with associated longer inpatient hospitalization (Wachman et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variations in opioid receptor genes in neonatal abstinence syndrome

Wachman

Hayes

Sherva

et al. 2015

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is significant variability in the severity of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to in-utero opioid exposure. We wanted to determine if single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in key candidate genes contribute to this variability. Methods Full-term opioid-exposed newborns and their mothers (n=86 pairs) were studied. DNA was genotyped for 80 SNPs from 14 genes utilizing a custom designed microarray. The association of each SNP with NAS outcomes was evaluated. Results SNPs in two opioid receptor genes in the infants were associated with worse NAS severity: 1) The PNOC rs732636 A allele (OR=3.8, p=0.004) for treatment with 2 medications and a longer hospital stay (LOS) of 5.8 days (p=0.01), and 2) The OPRK1 rs702764 C allele (OR=4.1, p=0.003) for treatment with 2 medications. The OPRM1 rs1799971 G allele (β= −6.9 days, p=0.02) and COMT rs740603 A allele (β= −5.3 days, p=0.01) were associated with shorter LOS. The OPRD1 rs204076 A allele in the mothers was associated with a longer LOS by 6.6 days (p=0.008). Results were significant point-wise but did not meet the experiment-wide significance level. Conclusions These findings suggest that SNPs in opioid receptor and the PNOC genes are associated with NAS severity. However, further testing in a large sample is warranted. This has important implications for prenatal prediction and personalized treatment regimens for infants at highest risk for severe NAS.

show abstract

“…These studies have found that prenatal cocaine exposure is related to problems with sustained attention and behavioral self-regulation even after controlling for covariates (Ackerman et al, 2010). However, there have been relatively few studies of opioid and poly-substance exposure (Lester & Lagasse, 2010;Logan, Brown, & Hayes, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies find that young children who have been exposed to opioids and multiple substances have greater impairments in general cognitive abilities than non-exposed children (Bunikowski et al, 1998;Hunt et al, 2008;Johnson, Diano, & Rosen, 1984;Logan et al, 2013;Moe, 2002a;Moe & Slinning, 2001;Salo et al, 2009;van Baar & de Graaff, 1994;Wahlsten & Sarman, 2013;Wilson, 1989;Wilson, McCreary, Kean, & Baxter, 1979), whereas others do not find such differences either before (de Cubas & Field, 1993;Kaltenbach & Finnegan, 1989;Melinder et al, 2013;Rosen & Johnson, 1985;Strauss, Lessen-Firestone, Chavez, & Stryker, 1979) or after controlling for covariates (Bauman & Levine, 1986;Lifschitz, Wilson, Smith, & Desmond, 1985;Messinger et al, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%