Age differences in patterns of cannabis use among an online US sample of adults who consume cannabis frequently.

Background: Cannabis use is increasing among middle-aged and older US adults, populations that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of cannabis. Risks for adverse effects differ by cannabis use patterns, which have become increasingly heterogeneous. Nevertheless, little is known about age differences in such patterns.Objective: To investigate age differences in cannabis use patterns, comparing younger (age 18-49), middle-aged (age 50-64), and older adults (age ≥65).Methods: A total of 4,151 US adults with past 7-day cannabis consumption completed an online survey (35.1% male; 60.1% female; 4.8% identified as "other"). Regression models examined age differences in cannabis use patterns.Results: Compared to younger adults, middle-aged and older adults were more likely to consume cannabis during evening hours (50-64: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.98, 95% CI 2.24-3.96; ≥65: aOR = 4.23, 95 CI 2.82-6.35); by only one method (50-64: aOR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.34-2.09; ≥65: aOR = 3.38, 95 CI 2.24-5.09); primarily by smoking as the only method (50-64: aOR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.29-1.78; ≥65: aOR = 2.12, 95 CI 1.64-2.74); but less likely to consume concentrated cannabis products (concentrates) with extremely high %THC (50-64: aOR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.54-0.93; ≥65: aOR = 0.30, 95 CI 0.16-0.55). Age differences in cannabis use patterns were also observed between middle-aged and older adults.Conclusion: Findings suggest that middle-aged and older adults may engage in less risky cannabis use patterns compared to younger groups (e.g. lower likelihood of consuming highly potent concentrates). However, findings also underscore the importance of recognizing risks unique to these older demographics, such as smoking-related health events. Consequently, prevention strategies targeting such use patterns are needed.

Test characteristics of shorter versions of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) for brief screening for problematic substance use in a population sample from Israel.

BACKGROUND: Substance use is a leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality worldwide. Population-wide screening for problematic substance use in primary health care may mitigate the serious health and socio-economic consequences of such use, but the standard Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST 3.1) may be too long for wide-scale screening. How well validated shorter versions (ASSIST-Lite, ASSIST-FC) perform in identifying those with ASSIST 3.1 problematic use in different settings is unclear. METHODS: General population Jewish adults in Israel (N = 2,474) responded to an online survey that included the ASSIST 3.1 and sociodemographics. Across substances (alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, sedatives, prescription stimulants, prescription painkillers), receiver operator characteristic curve analysis determined that ASSIST-FC scores performed better than ASSIST-Lite at identifying those with problematic use, and evaluated differential ASSIST-FC performance by gender or age. Test characteristics and agreement were evaluated for binary ASSIST-FC versions, with ASSIST 3.1 problematic use as the gold standard. RESULTS: ASSIST-FC scores showed high ability to identify ASSIST 3.1 problematic use, with minimal differences by gender or age. Binary ASSIST-FC (most substances: threshold 3+; alcohol: 5+) showed high specificity and positive predictive value, acceptable sensitivity, and good agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The ASSIST-FC, which assesses frequency of use and other's concerns about use, appears useful for very brief screening in primary care to identify patients who may benefit from intervention. Early identification of those at-risk may prevent more severe consequences and ultimately decrease the significant costs of problematic substance use on the individual and population level.

Extending Gender- and Sex-Based Analyses in Cannabis Research: Findings from an Online Sample of Gender Diverse Young Adult Consumers.

Background: Gender and sex can influence cannabis behaviors and consequences (Cannabis Use Disorder [CUD]). Research typically examines sex and gender independently. Gender analyses often exclude transgender and gender diverse (TGD) populations. The objectives of this study were to (a) replicate less frequent cannabis use among TGD young adults compared to cisgender counterparts (b) compare severity of CUD, and (c) examine the role of sex on cannabis outcomes. Method: Online survey participants between 18 and 34 (N=1213) from the United States who reported past-week cannabis consumption provided information on cannabis practices and CUD from February to April 2022. Bivariate analyses explored gender differences across frequency (daily frequency across routes of administration [ROAs]; daily use of 2+ ROAs, use throughout the day) and CUD. Adjusted regression models provided model-estimated marginal probabilities and means to examine differences across four gender-by-sex categories (cisgender men: n=385; cisgender women: n=681; male-at-birth TGD: n=26; female-at-birth TGD: n=121). Benjamini-Hochberg adjustments (10% false discovery rate) were applied. Results: Among past-week consumers, female-at-birth TGD participants demonstrated lower probability of daily flower smoking compared to cisgender men (0.54 vs. 0.67). Cisgender men reported greater probability of daily concentrate vaping (0.55) compared to cisgender women (0.45) and female-at-birth TGD participants (0.27); they were also more likely to report daily use of 2+ ROAs (cisgender men: 0.51 vs. cisgender women: 0.39 and female at-birth TGD: 0.27). TGD participants reported greater CUD severity compared to cisgender counterparts, t(1096)=-3.69, p=0.002. Model-estimated means found lower severity among cisgender women compared to cisgender men and female-at-birth TGD participants. Stratified regression models support positive associations between daily cannabis use and CUD in both TGD in cisgender groups. Among cisgender participants, greater severity was predicted by male sex, younger age, and younger age of onset. Conclusions: The present study replicates and extends a prior finding that among past-week cannabis consumers, TGD young adults report less frequent use than cisgender counterparts. Despite this, TGD participants demonstrated greater severity of CUD. While analyses were limited by the small sample of male-at-birth TGD participants, the article highlights the importance of expanding sex- and gender-focused analyses. Future work is expanding efforts to target hard-to-reach consumers.

Delta-8 THC use in US adults: Sociodemographic characteristics and correlates.

BACKGROUND: Use of novel cannabis products whose primary active compound is Delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta-8 THC), an isomer of Delta-9 THC has recently surged. While Delta-8 THC has psychoactive effects and is potentially harmful, little is known about its use. We examined sociodemographic characteristics, motivations, and consumption patterns of Delta-8 THC in US adult cannabis users. METHODS: Cannabis-using adult online survey participants (N = 4,348) provided information on Delta-8 use, and other characteristics. We assessed frequencies of sociodemographics, patterns, and correlates of Delta-8 THC use. Regression models estimated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of associations between past 30-day Delta-8 THC use, sociodemographic and other characteristics. FINDINGS: Among past 30-day cannabis users, 16.7% reported Delta-8 THC use. The most common consumption method was vaping concentrated formulations of Delta-8 THC (41.2%). Primary motivations for use were its legal status and perceived therapeutic benefits. Males were more likely than females to report Delta-8 THC use (aOR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.2, 1.7). Respondents residing in states with restrictions on sales of Delta-8 THC products had lower odds of Delta-8 THC use (aOR = 0.7, 95% CI 0.57, 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide initial insight into the current state of Delta-8 THC use in the US. Given the limited knowledge on use of Delta-8 THC, and considering emergence of reports indicating its harmful effects, there is urgent need for nationally representative data to investigate correlates of Delta-8 THC use (e.g., effectiveness of state-specific restrictions on its products). Such information can guide public-health policy around Delta-8 THC use.

Validity of the DSM-5 tobacco use disorder diagnostics in adults with problematic substance use.

BACKGROUND: DSM-5 tobacco use disorder (TUD) nosology differs from DSM-IV nicotine dependence (ND) by including craving and DSM-IV abuse criteria, a lower threshold (≥ 2 criteria), and severity levels (mild; moderate; severe). We assessed concurrent and prospective validity of the DSM-5 TUD diagnosis and severity and compared validity with DSM-IV ND diagnosis. METHODS: The sample included U.S. adults with current problematic substance use and past year cigarette smoking (N = 396). Baseline assessment collected information on DSM-IV ND and DSM-5 TUD criteria, smoking-related variables, and psychopathology. Over the following 90 days, electronic daily assessments queried smoking and cigarette craving. Variables expected to be related to TUD were validators: cigarette consumption, cigarette craving scale, Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence, and psychiatric disorders. Regression models estimated the association of each validator with DSM-5 TUD and severity levels, and differential association between DSM-5 TUD and DSM-IV ND diagnoses. RESULTS: DSM-5 TUD and DSM-IV ND were associated with most baseline validators (p-values < 0.05), with significantly stronger associations with DSM-5 TUD for number of days smoked (p = 0.023) and cigarette craving scale (p = 0.007). Baseline DSM-5 TUD and DSM-IV ND predicted smoking and craving on any given day during follow-up, with stronger associations for DSM-5 TUD (association difference [95% CI%]: any smoking, 0.53 [0.27, 0.77]; number of cigarettes smoked, 1.36 [0.89, 1.78]; craving scale, 0.19 [0.09, 0.28]). Validators were associated with TUD severity in a dose-dependent manner. CONCLUSION: DSM-5 TUD diagnostic measures as operationalized here demonstrated concurrent and prospective validity. Inclusion of new criteria, particularly craving, improved validity and clinical relevance.

Agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV measures of substance use disorders in a sample of adult substance users.

BACKGROUND: In DSM-5, definitions of substance use disorders (SUD) were changed considerably from DSM-IV, yet little is known about how well DSM-IV and DSM-5 SUD diagnoses agree among substance users. Because data from many studies are based on DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, understanding the agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV SUD diagnoses and reasons for discordance between these diagnoses is crucial for comparing results across studies. MEASUREMENTS: Prevalences and chance-corrected agreement of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence were evaluated in 588 substance users in a suburban inpatient addiction program and an urban medical center, using a semi-structured interview (PRISM-5). Alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, opioid, sedative, and stimulant use disorders were examined. Cohen's kappa was used to assess agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV SUD (abuse or dependence), DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV dependence, and DSM-5 moderate/severe SUD and DSM-IV dependence. RESULTS: Agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV SUD was excellent for all substances (κ = 0.84-0.99), except for cannabis and tobacco (κ = 0.75; 0.80, respectively). The most common reason for diagnostic discrepancies was a positive DSM-5 SUD diagnosis but no DSM-IV diagnosis, due to the lowered DSM-5 SUD threshold. Agreement between DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV dependence was excellent for all substances (κ = 0.88-0.94), except for alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis (κ = 0.63-0.75). Agreement between moderate/severe DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV dependence was excellent across all substances. CONCLUSION: While care should be used in interpreting results of studies using different methods, studies relying on DSM-IV or DSM-5 SUD diagnostic criteria offer similar information and thus can be compared when accumulating a body of evidence.

Religiosity and substance use in U.S. adults: Findings from a large-scale national survey.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, the US religious landscape has undergone considerable change such as a decline in religious service attendance. These changes may indicate that religious social support structures have deteriorated, possibly leading to a decrease in strengths of associations with substance use. Considering this, and given limitations of past studies (e.g., limited control for potential confounders), large-scale general population studies are needed to reexamine associations between religiosity domains and substance use. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data from the 2012-2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (N = 36,309). In unadjusted and adjusted models, controlling for religiosity domains and other covariates, we examined associations between three religiosity domains (importance of religiosity/spirituality, service attendance, and religious affiliation) and DSM-5 SUD. Focusing on service attendance, we also examined associations with other substance use-related outcomes. RESULTS: Among religiosity domains, only frequency of service attendance was associated with SUD across most substances. Frequent service attendees had lower odds of alcohol use disorder (adjusted OR [aOR] = 0.4, 95 % CI 0.33,0.51), tobacco use disorder (aOR = 0.3, 95 % CI 0.22,0.33) and cannabis use disorder (aOR = 0.4, 95 % CI 0.24,0.68), compared to non-service attendees. For alcohol and tobacco, the protective effect of frequent service attendance was more robust for SUD than for respective substance use. CONCLUSIONS: Despite decreasing rates of religious belief and practice in the US, service attendance independently lowered the odds of substance use and SUD across multiple substances. Results may inform religious leaders and clinicians about the value of utilizing religious social support structures in the prevention and treatment of substance use and SUD.

Test-retest reliability of DSM-5 substance disorder measures as assessed with the PRISM-5, a clinician-administered diagnostic interview.

AIM: In DSM-5, the definitions of substance use disorders (SUD) were changed considerably, yet little is known about the reliability of DSM-5 SUD and its new features. METHODS: The test-retest reliability of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence (SD) was evaluated in 565 adult substance users, each interviewed twice by different clinician interviewers using the semi-structured Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders, DSM-5 version (PRISM-5). DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV SD criteria were assessed for past year and lifetime, yielding diagnoses and severity levels for alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, opioids, sedatives, hallucinogen, and stimulant use disorders. Cohen's and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) assessed reliability for categorical and graded outcomes, respectively. Factors potentially influencing reliability were explored, including inpatient vs. community participant, days between interviews gender, age, race/ethnicity, and SUD severity. RESULTS: DSM-5 SUD diagnoses had substantial to excellent reliability for most substances (κ = 0.63-0.94), and moderate for others (hallucinogens, stimulants, sedatives; κ = 0.50-0.59). For graded outcomes (DSM-5 SUD mild, moderate, severe; criteria count 0-11), reliability was substantial to excellent (ICC = 0.74-0.99). Comparisons of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV SD reliability showed few significant differences. Reliability of the DSM-5 craving criterion was excellent for heroin (κ = 0.84-0.95) and moderate to substantial for other substances (κ = 0.49-0.76). The only factor influencing reliability of SUD was severity, with milder disorders significantly more likely to be discordant between the interviews. CONCLUSION: Reproducibility is crucial to good measurement. In a large sample using rigorous methodology, diagnoses and dimensional measures from clinician-administered interviews for DSM-5 SUD were generally highly reliable.

Nicotine Use and DSM-IV Nicotine Dependence in the United States, 2001-2002 and 2012-2013.

OBJECTIVE: Nationally representative data on changes in 12-month prevalences of nicotine use, DSM-IV nicotine dependence, and DSM-IV nicotine dependence among users were analyzed to test the "hardening hypothesis," which proposes that declines in nicotine use resulting from population-level control measures leave a growing proportion of highly dependent users. METHODS: Data were derived from two nationally representative surveys of U.S. adults: the 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC, N=43,093) and the 2012-2013 NESARC-III (N=36,309). Weighted estimates of nicotine use, DSM-IV nicotine dependence, and an approximation of the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence were compared for the 2001-2002 NESARC and 2012-2013 NESARC-III among the overall population and among nicotine users. Adjusted risk differences were obtained from logistic regression analyses using the predicted marginal approach. RESULTS: Between the 2001-2002 and 2012-2013 surveys, rates of 12-month nicotine use declined slightly (from 27.7% to 26.9%), but increased slightly but significantly when adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics (adjusted risk difference=1.4%). Larger significant increases were seen in 12-month nicotine dependence (adjusted risk difference=2.6%) and nicotine dependence among users (adjusted risk difference=6.4%). With few exceptions, increases in nicotine use, nicotine dependence, and nicotine dependence among users were statistically significant across most sociodemographic subgroups. Notable increases were seen among men; middle and older age groups; whites, blacks, and Hispanics; and the socioeconomically disadvantaged. CONCLUSIONS: Smaller increases in 12-month nicotine use relative to larger increases in 12-month nicotine dependence and nicotine dependence among users suggests that increases in nicotine dependence between the 2001-2002 and 2012-2013 surveys are findings that support the hardening hypothesis. Vulnerable subgroups of the population in terms of hardening were identified who would benefit from targeted nicotine dependence intervention programs to help them in overcoming dependence and quitting nicotine use.

Item Response Theory analyses of DSM-5 substance use disorder criteria in French outpatient addiction clinic participants. How much is craving special?

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the dimensionality and psychometric validity of the 11 DSM-5 criteria for 5 substance use disorders, with a focus on craving, and taking into account age, gender and psychiatric comorbidities in a French sample of subjects seeking addiction treatment. METHODS: This cross-sectional study, included participants with DSM-5 substance use disorders that sought treatment for at least one addiction from outpatient clinics. Diagnostic criteria were evaluated with the Mini international Neuropsychiatric Interview. In Current regular user (2 times per week), factor and 2-parameter IRT analysis was used to investigate the dimensionality and psychometric properties of the 11 DSM-5 SUD criteria. Differential Item and Test functioning (DIF and DTF) analysis were performed across sociodemographic characteristics and psychiatric disorders. RESULTS: 1359 participants (alcohol n = 787, opiates n = 131, cocaine n = 141, tobacco n = 1014, cannabis n = 504), were included (68% male; mean age 38.7). One-factor dimensionality was confirmed, except for tobacco. Craving criterion had the strongest factor loadings, lower difficulty (range, -1.29 to -0.67) and higher discrimination (range, 2.11-3.05), and no DIF compared to other criteria. The tobacco criteria set functioned differently by mood and anxiety disorders. CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed the unidimensionality of the 11 SUD DSM-5 criteria and furthermore that craving was the most selective criterion because of its psychometric properties and no DIF compared to other criteria, regardless of the substance in this adult clinical sample. Unidimensionality of tobacco criteria was not confirmed, suggesting DSM-IV abuse criteria limitations as indicators of the construct.

U.S. Adults With Pain, a Group Increasingly Vulnerable to Nonmedical Cannabis Use and Cannabis Use Disorder: 2001-2002 and 2012-2013.

OBJECTIVE: Given changes in U.S. marijuana laws, attitudes, and use patterns, individuals with pain may be an emerging group at risk for nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder. The authors examined differences in the prevalence of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder among U.S. adults with and without pain, as well as whether these differences widened over time. METHODS: Data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC, 2001-2002; N=43,093) and NESARC-III (2012-2013; N=36,309) were analyzed using logistic regression. Risk differences of past-year nonmedical cannabis use, frequent (at least three times a week) nonmedical use, and DSM-IV cannabis use disorder were estimated for groups with and without moderate to severe pain, and these risk differences were tested for change over time. RESULTS: Any nonmedical cannabis use was more prevalent in respondents with than without pain (2001-2002: 5.15% compared with 3.74%; 2012-2013: 12.42% compared with 9.02%), a risk difference significantly greater in the 2012-2013 data than in the 2001-2002 data. The prevalence of frequent nonmedical cannabis use did not differ by pain status in the 2001-2002 survey, but was significantly more prevalent in those with than without pain in the 2012-2013 survey (5.03% compared with 3.45%). Cannabis use disorder was more prevalent in respondents with than without pain (2001-2002: 1.77% compared with 1.35%; 2012-2013: 4.18% compared with 2.74%), a significantly greater risk difference in the data from 2012-2013 than from 2001-2002. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that adults with pain are a group increasingly vulnerable to adverse cannabis use outcomes, warranting clinical and public health attention to this risk. Psychiatrists and other health care providers treating patients with pain should monitor such patients for signs and symptoms of cannabis use disorder.

Risk factors for alcohol use among pregnant women, ages 15-44, in the United States, 2002 to 2017.

Fetal alcohol exposure can lead to severe birth and developmental defects. Determining which pregnant women are most likely to drink is essential for targeting interventions. In National Survey on Drug Use and Health data on pregnant women from 2002 to 2017 (N = 13,488), logistic regression was used to produce adjusted odds ratios (aOR) indicating characteristics associated with two past-month outcomes: any alcohol use and binge drinking. Risk factors were sociodemographic (age, race/ethnicity, marital status, education level, income) and clinical (trimester, substance use, alcohol use disorder, major depression). Where associations differed by pregnancy stage (trimester 1 vs. trimesters 2 and 3), association was evaluated by stage. Overall, higher risk for any and binge drinking was observed among those with other substance use (aORs 2.9-25.9), alcohol use disorder (aORs 4.5-7.5), depression (aORs = 1.6), and unmarried women (aORs 1.6-3.2). For any drinking, overall, higher risk was observed in adolescents (aOR = 1.5) and those with higher education (aOR = 1.4), while lower risk was observed in those with lower income (aORs = 0.7). For binge drinking, associations differed by pregnancy stage. In trimester 1, lower risk was observed in middle ages (aOR = 0.4). In trimesters 2/3, higher risk was observed in Blacks (aOR = 3.3) and those with lower income (aORs 3.5-3.9), while lower risk was observed in those with higher education (aOR = 0.3). To prevent severe prenatal harm, health care providers should focus on women at higher risk for binge drinking during pregnancy: women with tobacco or drug use, alcohol use disorder, or depression, and women who are unmarried, Black, or of lower socioeconomic status.

DSM-5 cannabis withdrawal syndrome: Demographic and clinical correlates in U.S. adults.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis withdrawal syndrome (CWS) was newly added to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in its most recent edition, DSM-5. With cannabis use increasing among U.S. adults, information is needed about the prevalence and correlates of DSM-5 CWS in the general population. This study presents nationally representative findings on the prevalence, sociodemographic and clinical correlates of DSM-5 CWS among U.S. adults. METHOD: Participants ≥18 years were interviewed in the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III) in 2012-2013. Among the sub-sample of frequent cannabis users in the prior 12 months (≥3 times a week; N = 1527), the prevalence and demographic and clinical correlates of DSM-5 CWS were examined. RESULTS: In frequent cannabis users, the prevalence of CWS was 12.1%. The most common withdrawal symptoms among those with CWS were nervousness/anxiety (76.3%), hostility (71.9%), sleep difficulty (68.2%) and depressed mood (58.9%). CWS was associated with significant disability (p < 0.001), and with mood disorders (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 1.9-2.6), anxiety disorders (aOR = 2.4-2.5), personality disorders (aOR = 1.7-2.2) and family history of depression (aOR = 2.5) but not personal history of other substance use disorders or family history of substance use problems. CONCLUSIONS: CWS is highly comorbid and disabling. Its shared symptoms with depressive and anxiety disorders call for clinician awareness of CWS and the factors associated with it to promote more effective treatment among frequent cannabis users.

Age Differences in Daily and Nondaily Cannabis Use in the United States, 2002-2014.

OBJECTIVE: Adult cannabis use has increased in the United States since 2002, particularly after 2007, contrasting with stable/declining trends among youth. We investigated whether specific age groups disproportionately contributed to changes in daily and nondaily cannabis use trends. METHOD: Participants ages 12 and older (N = 722,653) from the 2002-2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported past-year cannabis use frequency (i.e., daily = ≥300 days/year; nondaily = 1-299 days/year; none). Multinomial logistic regression was used to model change in past-year daily and nondaily cannabis use prevalence by age group (i.e., 12-17, 18-25, 26-34, 35-49, 50-64, ≥65), before and after 2007. Multinomial logistic regressions estimated change in relative odds of cannabis use frequency over time by age, adjusting for other sociodemographics. RESULTS: Daily cannabis use prevalence decreased in ages 12-17 before 2007 and increased significantly across adult age categories only after 2007. Increases did not differ significantly across adult ages 18-64 and ranged between 1 and 2 percentage points. Nondaily cannabis use decreased among respondents ages 12-25 and 35-49 before 2007 and increased across adult age categories after 2007, particularly among adults 26-34 (i.e., 4.5 percentage points). Adjusted odds of daily versus nondaily cannabis use increased after 2007 for ages 12-64. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in daily and nondaily cannabis use prevalence after 2007 were specific to adult age groups in the context of increasingly permissive cannabis legislation, attitudes, and lower risk perception. Although any cannabis use may be decreasing among teens, relative odds of more frequent use among users increased in ages 12-64 since 2007. Studies should assess not only any cannabis use, but also frequency of use, to target prevention efforts of adverse effects of cannabis that are especially likely among frequent users.

Self-reported cognitive scales in a US National Survey: reliability, validity, and preliminary evidence for associations with alcohol and drug use.

AIMS: To evaluate relationships between measures of cognitive functioning and alcohol or drug use among adults (≥ 18 years) in the US general population. DESIGN: Two cognitive scales were created based on dimensionality and reliability of self-reported Executive Function Index items. Relationships between the two scales and validators were evaluated. Associations between the cognitive scales and past-year frequency of alcohol or drug use were estimated with adjusted odds ratios (aOR). SETTING: United States, using the 2012-13 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III, a nationally representative adult sample selected by multi-stage probability sampling. PARTICIPANTS: 36 085 respondents. MEASUREMENTS: Past-year substance use outcome variables categorized binge drinking, marijuana, cocaine, opioid, sedative/tranquilizer and stimulant use as frequent (at least weekly to daily), infrequent (any to two to three times/month) or no use, assessed by the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-5. Key predictors were the two cognitive scales. Construct validators included education and functional impairment. Covariates included age, gender, income and race/ethnicity. FINDINGS: Nine cognitive items fitted a two-factor model (comparative fit index = 0.973): attention (five items) and executive functioning (four items). Both scales were associated positively with higher education (Ps < 0.001) and negatively with functional impairment (Ps < 0.001), demonstrating construct validity. Poorer attention was associated with frequent and infrequent binge drinking and use of drugs [aOR range = 1.07 (binge drinking) to 1.72 (stimulants), Ps ≤ 0.01]. Poorer executive functioning was associated with frequent binge drinking and use of drugs [aOR range = 1.22 (binge drinking) to 2.03 (cocaine), Ps < 0.001] and infrequent use of all drugs [aOR range = 1.19 (marijuana) to 1.63 (cocaine), Ps < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Impairments in attention and executive functioning are positively associated with substance use in the US general population.

The widening gender gap in marijuana use prevalence in the U.S. during a period of economic change, 2002-2014.

AIM: Concurrently with increasingly permissive attitudes towards marijuana use and its legalization, the prevalence of marijuana use has increased in recent years in the U.S. Substance use is generally more prevalent in men than women, although for alcohol, the gender gap is narrowing. However, information is lacking on whether time trends in marijuana use differ by gender, or whether socioeconomic status in the context of the Great Recession may affect these changes. METHODS: Using repeated cross-sectional data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2002-2014), we examined changes over time in prevalence of past-year marijuana use by gender, and whether gender differences varied across income levels. After empirically determining a change point in use in 2007, we used logistic regression to test interaction terms including time, gender, and income level. RESULTS: Prevalence of marijuana use increased for both men (+4.0%) and women (+2.7%) from 2002 to 2014, with all of the increase occurring from 2007 to 2014. Increases were greater for men, leading to a widening of the gender gap over time (p<0.001). This divergence occurred primarily due to increased prevalence among men in the lowest income level (+6.2%) from 2007 to 2014. CONCLUSION: Our findings are consistent with other studies documenting increased substance use during times of economic insecurity, especially among men. Corresponding with the Great Recession and lower employment rate beginning in 2007, low-income men showed the greatest increases in marijuana use during this period, leading to a widening of the gender gap in prevalence of marijuana use over time.

Effects of State-Level Tobacco Environment on Cigarette Smoking are Stronger Among Those With Individual-Level Risk Factors.

INTRODUCTION: To better understand the impact of the state-level tobacco environment (eg, tobacco control policies, attitudes towards smoking) on cigarette smoking, we examined whether the relationship of state tobacco environments to smoking is modified by individual-level vulnerability factors. METHODS: In a nationally representative sample of US adults (N = 34 638), past-year smoking and heavy smoking were examined. State-level tobacco environment was defined by tobacco-related control policies and attitudes, ranging from permissive to restrictive; individual vulnerability was defined by childhood maltreatment and/or parental substance problems. Additive interaction tested differences in state-level tobacco environment effects on smoking and heavy smoking by individual-level vulnerability. RESULTS: Significant interactions (P values < .01) indicated that the state tobacco environment had the strongest relationship to smoking outcomes among individuals with greatest individual vulnerability. For example, among respondents with childhood maltreatment and parental substance problems, those in states with permissive tobacco environments had 13.3% greater prevalence of smoking than those in restrictive states. Among respondents with neither individual-level risk factor, those in permissive states had 2.8% greater prevalence than those in restrictive states (interaction P value = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: Further restricting states' smoking environments could help reduce the prevalence of smoking and heavy smoking, particularly among those at increased individual risk in the general population. IMPLICATIONS: This study shows that the protective effect of restrictive state-level tobacco environments on smoking or heavy smoking was stronger among those especially vulnerable due to individual-level risk factors (parental substance problems, childhood maltreatment). Thus, public health campaigns to influence attitudes towards smoking or legislation to strengthen tobacco control could have a broad effect, particularly impacting those with vulnerability to smoking, which may help decrease smoking prevalence and reduce the massive public health burden of tobacco-related morbidity and mortality.

CHRNA5/A3/B4 Variant rs3743078 and Nicotine-Related Phenotypes: Indirect Effects Through Nicotine Craving.

OBJECTIVE: Nicotine craving is considered an important element in the persistence of cigarette smoking, but little is known about the role of craving in the widely recognized association between variants mapped to the neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (CHRN) genes on chromosome 15 and nicotine phenotypes. METHOD: The associations between CHRNA5-CHRNA3-CHRNB4 variants and cigarettes per day (CPD), the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND), and craving were analyzed in data from 662 lifetime smokers from an Israeli adult Jewish household sample. Indirect effects of genotype on nicotine phenotypes through craving were formally tested using regression and bootstrapping procedures. RESULTS: At CHRNA3, allele G of rs3743078 was associated with increased craving, CPD, and FTND scores: Participants with one or two copies of the G allele had, on average, higher scores on the craving scale (p = .0025), more cigarettes smoked (p = .0057), and higher scores on the FTND (p =.0024). With craving in the model, variant rs3743078 showed a significant indirect effect through craving on CPD (p = .0026) and on FTND score (p = .0024). A sizeable proportion of the total rs3743078 effect on CPD (56.4%) and FTND (65.2%) was indirect through craving. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that nicotine craving may play a central role in nicotine use disorders and may have utility as a therapeutic target.

Childhood maltreatment, personality disorders and 3-year persistence of adult alcohol and nicotine dependence in a national sample.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Persistent cases of alcohol and nicotine dependence are associated with considerable morbidity and mortality, and are predicted by childhood maltreatment and personality disorders. Our aim was to test whether personality disorders (individually or conjointly) mediate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and the persistence of dependence. DESIGN: Personality disorders, modeled dimensionally, were tested as mediators of the relationship between childhood maltreatment and the 3-year persistence of alcohol and nicotine dependence in participants in the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) who had current alcohol and nicotine dependence in their baseline interview. Individual personality disorders were assessed in separate models. Then, those that were significant were examined jointly in multiple mediator models to determine their total and unique effects. SETTING: A large, nationally representative US survey. PARTICIPANTS: Participants ≥ 18 years who completed baseline and 3-year follow-up NESARC interviews who had baseline alcohol dependence (n = 1172; 68% male) or nicotine dependence (n = 4017; 52.9% male). MEASUREMENTS: Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule (AUDADIS-IV) measures of childhood maltreatment, personality disorders and alcohol/nicotine dependence. FINDINGS: Individual models indicated that many personality disorders mediated the relationship between childhood maltreatment and the 3-year persistence of alcohol and nicotine dependence (each explaining 6-46% of the total effect, Ps < 0.05). In multiple mediator models, borderline and antisocial symptoms remained significant mediators, each explaining 20-37% of the total effect (Ps < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Personality disorder symptoms (especially borderline and antisocial) help explain the association between childhood maltreatment and persistent alcohol and nicotine dependence.

Commonalities and Differences Across Substance Use Disorders: Phenomenological and Epidemiological Aspects.

BACKGROUND: Although psychoactive substances vary in many ways, they have important commonalties, particularly in their ability to lead to an addiction syndrome. The field lacks an updated review of the commonalities and differences in the phenomenology of alcohol, cannabis, tobacco, stimulants, opioids, hallucinogens, sedatives/tranquilizers, and inhalants and their related substance use disorders (SUDs). METHODS: DSM-IV and DSM-5 SUD diagnostic criteria were reviewed, as was evidence from recent epidemiological and clinical research: psychometric studies (test-retest reliability, latent trait analysis); physiological indicators (tolerance, withdrawal); prevalence and age of onset. Information was incorporated from previous reviews, PubMed and Scopus literature searches, and data from large U.S. national surveys. RESULTS: Empirical evidence in the form of test-retest reliability and unidimensionality supports use of the same DSM-IV dependence or DSM-5 SUD diagnostic criteria across substances. For most substances, the criteria sets were generally most informative in general population samples at moderate-to-severe levels of SUD. Across substances, 2 criteria (tolerance and use in hazardous situations) were identified as functioning differently in population subgroups. Since substances have different pharmacological effects, withdrawal is assessed using substance-specific symptoms, while tolerance is not; issues remain with the assessment of tolerance. Alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis were consistently identified as the substances with earliest onset of use, highest prevalence of lifetime use, and highest prevalence of lifetime disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences between psychoactive substances, the generic DSM criteria set appears equally applicable across substances. Additional studies of tolerance and hazardous use will be useful for future nosologies. Alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco are the substances with the greatest public health impact due to the high prevalence and early onset of their use, and the potential all 3 substances have to lead to addiction.