Dopaminergic dysfunction: Role for genetic & epigenetic testing in the new psychiatry.

Reward Deficiency Syndrome (RDS), particularly linked to addictive disorders, costs billions of dollars globally and has resulted in over one million deaths in the United States (US). Illicit substance use has been steadily rising and in 2021 approximately 21.9% (61.2 million) of individuals living in the US aged 12 or older had used illicit drugs in the past year. However, only 1.5% (4.1 million) of these individuals had received any substance use treatment. This increase in use and failure to adequately treat or provide treatment to these individuals resulted in 106,699 overdose deaths in 2021 and increased in 2022. This article presents an alternative non-pharmaceutical treatment approach tied to gene-guided therapy, the subject of many decades of research. The cornerstone of this paradigm shift is the brain reward circuitry, brain stem physiology, and neurotransmitter deficits due to the effects of genetic and epigenetic insults on the interrelated cascade of neurotransmission and the net release of dopamine at the Ventral Tegmental Area -Nucleus Accumbens (VTA-NAc) reward site. The Genetic Addiction Risk Severity (GARS) test and pro-dopamine regulator nutraceutical KB220 were combined to induce "dopamine homeostasis" across the brain reward circuitry. This article aims to encourage four future actionable items: 1) the neurophysiologically accurate designation of, for example, "Hyperdopameism /Hyperdopameism" to replace the blaming nomenclature like alcoholism; 2) encouraging continued research into the nature of dysfunctional brainstem neurotransmitters across the brain reward circuitry; 3) early identification of people at risk for all RDS behaviors as a brain check (cognitive testing); 4) induction of dopamine homeostasis using "precision behavioral management" along with the coupling of GARS and precision Kb220 variants; 5) utilization of promising potential treatments include neuromodulating modalities such as Transmagnetic stimulation (TMS) and Deep Brain Stimulation(DBS), which target different areas of the neural circuitry involved in addiction and even neuroimmune agents like N-acetyl-cysteine.

A Proposed Brain-, Spine-, and Mental- Health Screening Methodology (NEUROSCREEN) for Healthcare Systems: Position of the Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated neurological, mental health disorders, and neurocognitive issues. However, there is a lack of inexpensive and efficient brain evaluation and screening systems. As a result, a considerable fraction of patients with neurocognitive or psychobehavioral predicaments either do not get timely diagnosed or fail to receive personalized treatment plans. This is especially true in the elderly populations, wherein only 16% of seniors say they receive regular cognitive evaluations. Therefore, there is a great need for development of an optimized clinical brain screening workflow methodology like what is already in existence for prostate and breast exams. Such a methodology should be designed to facilitate objective early detection and cost-effective treatment of such disorders. In this paper we have reviewed the existing clinical protocols, recent technological advances and suggested reliable clinical workflows for brain screening. Such protocols range from questionnaires and smartphone apps to multi-modality brain mapping and advanced imaging where applicable. To that end, the Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics (SBMT) proposes the Brain, Spine and Mental Health Screening (NEUROSCREEN) as a multi-faceted approach. Beside other assessment tools, NEUROSCREEN employs smartphone guided cognitive assessments and quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG) as well as potential genetic testing for cognitive decline risk as inexpensive and effective screening tools to facilitate objective diagnosis, monitor disease progression, and guide personalized treatment interventions. Operationalizing NEUROSCREEN is expected to result in reduced healthcare costs and improving quality of life at national and later, global scales.

Neuroscience20 (BRAIN20, SPINE20, and MENTAL20) Health Initiative: A Global Consortium Addressing the Human and Economic Burden of Brain, Spine, and Mental Disorders Through Neurotech Innovations and Policies.

Neurological disorders significantly impact the world's economy due to their often chronic and life-threatening nature afflicting individuals which, in turn, creates a global disease burden. The Group of Twenty (G20) member nations, which represent the largest economies globally, should come together to formulate a plan on how to overcome this burden. The Neuroscience-20 (N20) initiative of the Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics (SBMT) is at the vanguard of this global collaboration to comprehensively raise awareness about brain, spine, and mental disorders worldwide. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the various brain initiatives worldwide and highlight the need for cooperation and recommend ways to bring down costs associated with the discovery and treatment of neurological disorders. Our systematic search revealed that the cost of neurological and psychiatric disorders to the world economy by 2030 is roughly $16T. The cost to the economy of the United States is $1.5T annually and growing given the impact of COVID-19. We also discovered there is a shortfall of effective collaboration between nations and a lack of resources in developing countries. Current statistical analyses on the cost of neurological disorders to the world economy strongly suggest that there is a great need for investment in neurotechnology and innovation or fast-tracking therapeutics and diagnostics to curb these costs. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, SBMT, through this paper, intends to showcase the importance of worldwide collaborations to reduce the population's economic and health burden, specifically regarding neurological/brain, spine, and mental disorders.

Effect of interelectrode distance on sural nerve action potential parameters.

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in amplitude, latency, and duration, using a 3-cm vs. 4-cm distance between the active and reference electrodes when performing sural nerve conduction studies (NCS). Current normative data in lower-limb studies are generally based on 3-cm interelectrode differences, although 4-cm differences have been reported to be optimal in the upper limb. DESIGN: Prospective study comparing the onset latency, peak latency, duration, and amplitude for the sural sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) recording at two interelectrode distances in adult volunteers. RESULTS: Forty-three sural nerves were studied in 22 normal subjects. Peak latencies recorded with a 4-cm interelectrode distance were significantly longer than those recorded with a 3-cm distance (mean difference = 0.06 msecs [SD = 0.09, P = 0.0073]). Duration was significantly longer (mean difference = 0.03 msecs [SD = 0.07, P = 0.0270]), conduction velocities were significantly slower (mean difference = -0.7 msecs [SD 1.0, P = 0.0012]), and onset latency and amplitude were not found to differ significantly. Average differences in peak latencies, duration, velocity, onset latency, and amplitude were not correlated with gender, age, or BMI. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to studies of upper-limb sensory NCS, sural SNAP parameters obtained with 3- and 4-cm interelectrode distances did not differ for onset latencies and amplitude. Peak latencies, duration, and conduction velocity differences, though statistically significant, were of insufficient magnitude to be clinically meaningful. By using a 4-cm instead of a 3-cm interelectrode difference for sural nerve studies, the small prolongation of 0.06 msecs in peak latency and tiny increment of 0.27 muV observed in our investigation is unlikely to influence the electrodiagnostician's interpretation of the study.