|
| ||
|
|
||
Cannabis Withdrawal (cannabis + withdrawal)
Selected AbstractsCannabis Withdrawal among Adolescent Cannabis Users in an Outpatient Research SettingTHE AMERICAN JOURNAL ON ADDICTIONS, Issue 6 2006Michael A. Dawes MD No abstract is available for this article. [source] Cannabis withdrawal predicts severity of cannabis involvement at 1-year follow-up among treated adolescentsADDICTION, Issue 5 2008Tammy Chung ABSTRACT Aims Controversy exists regarding the inclusion of cannabis withdrawal as an indicator of dependence in the next revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). This study contrasted the concurrent and predictive validity of three operational definitions of cannabis withdrawal in a sample of treated adolescents. Design Prospective study of treated adolescents with 1-year follow-up. Setting and participants Adolescents (n = 214) were recruited from intensive out-patient treatment programs for substance abuse, and followed at 1 year (92% retention). Youth who were included in the analyses reported regular cannabis use. Measurements The number of DSM-IV cannabis abuse and dependence symptoms at baseline and 1-year follow-up, past year frequency of cannabis use at baseline and follow-up, and periods of abstinence at 1-year follow-up. Cannabis withdrawal was defined based on (i) the presence of two or more cannabis withdrawal symptoms; (ii) a definition proposed by Budney and colleagues (2006) that requires four or more withdrawal symptoms (four-symptom definition); and (iii) the use of latent class analysis to identify subgroups with similar cannabis withdrawal symptom profiles. Findings and conclusions All three definitions of cannabis withdrawal demonstrated some concurrent validity. Only the four-symptom and latent class-derived definitions of withdrawal predicted severity of cannabis-related problems at 1-year follow-up. No cannabis withdrawal definition predicted frequency of use at follow-up. Further research is needed to determine the clinical utility and validity of the four-symptom definition, as well as alternative definitions of cannabis withdrawal, to inform revisions leading to DSM-V and ICD-11. [source] REVIEW: Self-administration of cocaine, cannabis and heroin in the human laboratory: benefits and pitfallsADDICTION BIOLOGY, Issue 1 2009Margaret Haney ABSTRACT The objective of this review is to describe self-administration procedures for modeling addiction to cocaine, cannabis and heroin in the human laboratory, the benefits and pitfalls of the approach, and the methodological issues unique to each drug. In addition, the predictive validity of the model for testing treatment medications will be addressed. The results show that all three drugs of abuse are reliably and robustly self-administered by non-treatment-seeking research volunteers. In terms of pharmacotherapies, cocaine use is extraordinarily difficult to disrupt either in the laboratory or in the clinic. A range of medications has been shown to significantly decrease cocaine's subjective effects and craving without decreasing either cocaine self-administration or cocaine abuse by patients. These negative data combined with recent positive findings with modafinil suggest that self-administration procedures are an important intermediary step between pre-clinical and clinical studies. In terms of cannabis, a recent study suggests that medications that improve sleep and mood during cannabis withdrawal decrease the resumption of marijuana self-administration in abstinent volunteers. Clinical data on patients seeking treatment for their marijuana use are needed to validate these laboratory findings. Finally, in contrast to cannabis or cocaine dependence, there are three efficacious Food and Drug Administration-approved medications to treat opioid dependence, all of which decrease both heroin self-administration and subjective effects in the human laboratory. In summary, self-administration procedures provide meaningful behavioral data in a small number of individuals. These studies contribute to our understanding of the variables maintaining cocaine, marijuana and heroin intake, and are important in guiding the development of more effective drug treatment programs. [source] | ||||||||||