ABSTRACT
As a neurobiological process, addiction involves pathological patterns of engagement with substances and a range of behaviors with a chronic and relapsing course. Neuroimaging technologies assess brain activity, structure, physiology, and metabolism at scales ranging from neurotransmitter receptors to large-scale brain networks, providing unique windows into the core neural processes implicated in substance use disorders. Identified aberrations in the neural substrates of reward and salience processing, response inhibition, interoception, and executive functions with neuroimaging can inform the development of pharmacological, neuromodulatory, and psychotherapeutic interventions to modulate the disordered neurobiology. Based on our systematic search, 409 protocols registered on ClinicalTrials.gov include the use of one or more neuroimaging paradigms as an outcome measure in addiction, with the majority (N=268) employing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), followed by positron emission tomography (PET) (N=71), electroencephalography (EEG) (N=50), structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (N=35) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) (N=35). Furthermore, in a PubMed systematic review, we identified 61 meta-analyses including 30 fMRI, 22 structural MRI, 8 EEG, 7 PET, and 3 MRS meta-analyses suggesting potential biomarkers in addictions. These studies can facilitate the development of a range of biomarkers that may prove useful in the arsenal of addiction treatments in the coming years. There is evidence that these markers of large-scale brain structure and activity may indicate vulnerability or separate disease subtypes, predict response to treatment, or provide objective measures of treatment response or recovery. Neuroimaging biomarkers can also suggest novel targets for interventions. Closed or open loop interventions can integrate these biomarkers with neuromodulation in real-time or offline to personalize stimulation parameters and deliver the precise intervention. This review provides an overview of neuroimaging modalities in addiction, potential neuroimaging biomarkers, and their physiologic and clinical relevance. Future directions and challenges in bringing these putative biomarkers from the bench to the bedside are also discussed.
Competing Interest Statement
O.C. has received grant funding from Eli Lilly, Inc, and Nestle, Inc. He has provided paid consulting to Novo Nordisk. Dr. Paulus is an advisor to Spring Care, Inc., a behavioral health startup, he has received royalties for an article about methamphetamine in UpToDate. M.P.P. has a consulting agreement with and receives compensation from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. P.O. is an employee and shareholder of Sage Therapeutics.
Funding Statement
H.E. is supported by funds from the Laureate Institute for Brain Research and Medical Discovery Team on Addiction and Brain Behavior Foundation (NARSAD Young Investigator Award 27305). O.C. is funded by NIH grants AG07425801, AG077497, AG077000, AG067765, AG041200, AG062309, AG062200, and AG069476, William K. Warren Foundation and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences Center Grant Award Number (1P20GM121312) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (U01DA050989). A.R.C. is funded by NIH/NIDA mechanisms UG1 DA050209, R01DA039215,T32-DA-028874, P30 DA046345, and U01DA048517. T.R. was substantially involved in UG1DA050209 and U01DA048517 consistent with her role as Scientific Officer. She has no substantial involvement in the other cited grants.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The protocol and data for this systematic review are available on the open science framework (OSF) website (https://osf.io/79uc3/?view_only=1d92a6fd769f40119464b156f0c88912). The ClinicalTrials.gov search engine was used through the Study Fields query URL (https://ClinicalTrials.gov/api/gui/ref/api_urls) for searching the clinical trial protocols. For full-text screening, all available records were downloaded from the Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT) Database, Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) database 217 (https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/) for the second stage. For searching the systematic reviews and meta-analyses, studies were identified using the Medline/PubMed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) database.
https://osf.io/79uc3/?view_only=1d92a6fd769f40119464b156f0c88912
