Light Cannabis Use and the Adolescent Brain: An 8-years Longitudinal Assessment of Mental Health, Cognition, and Reward Processing.

RATIONALE: For decades, cannabis has been the most widely used illicit substance in the world, particularly among youth. Research suggests that mental health problems associated with cannabis use may result from its effect on reward brain circuit, emotional processes, and cognition. However, findings are mostly derived from correlational studies and inconsistent, particularly in adolescents. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Using data from the IMAGEN study, participants (non-users, persistent users, abstinent users) were classified according to their cannabis use at 19 and 22 years-old. All participants were cannabis-naïve at baseline (14 years-old). Psychopathological symptoms, cognitive performance, and brain activity while performing a Monetary Incentive Delay task were used as predictors of substance use and to analyze group differences over time. RESULTS: Higher scores on conduct problems and lower on peer problems at 14 years-old (n = 318) predicted a greater likelihood of transitioning to cannabis use within 5 years. At 19 years of age, individuals who consistently engaged in low-frequency (i.e., light) cannabis use (n = 57) exhibited greater conduct problems and hyperactivity/inattention symptoms compared to non-users (n = 52) but did not differ in emotional symptoms, cognitive functioning, or brain activity during the MID task. At 22 years, those who used cannabis at both 19 and 22 years-old n = 17), but not individuals that had been abstinent for ≥ 1 month (n = 19), reported higher conduct problems than non-users (n = 17). CONCLUSIONS: Impairments in reward-related brain activity and cognitive functioning do not appear to precede or succeed cannabis use (i.e., weekly, or monthly use). Cannabis-naïve adolescents with conduct problems and more socially engaged with their peers may be at a greater risk for lighter yet persistent cannabis use in the future.

Cognitive and brain development is independently influenced by socioeconomic status and polygenic scores for educational attainment.

Genetic factors and socioeconomic status (SES) inequalities play a large role in educational attainment, and both have been associated with variations in brain structure and cognition. However, genetics and SES are correlated, and no prior study has assessed their neural associations independently. Here we used a polygenic score for educational attainment (EduYears-PGS), as well as SES, in a longitudinal study of 551 adolescents to tease apart genetic and environmental associations with brain development and cognition. Subjects received a structural MRI scan at ages 14 and 19. At both time points, they performed three working memory (WM) tasks. SES and EduYears-PGS were correlated (r = 0.27) and had both common and independent associations with brain structure and cognition. Specifically, lower SES was related to less total cortical surface area and lower WM. EduYears-PGS was also related to total cortical surface area, but in addition had a regional association with surface area in the right parietal lobe, a region related to nonverbal cognitive functions, including mathematics, spatial cognition, and WM. SES, but not EduYears-PGS, was related to a change in total cortical surface area from age 14 to 19. This study demonstrates a regional association of EduYears-PGS and the independent prediction of SES with cognitive function and brain development. It suggests that the SES inequalities, in particular parental education, are related to global aspects of cortical development, and exert a persistent influence on brain development during adolescence.

Biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: academic, industry and regulatory perspectives.

Advances in therapeutic strategies for Alzheimer's disease that lead to even small delays in onset and progression of the condition would significantly reduce the global burden of the disease. To effectively test compounds for Alzheimer's disease and bring therapy to individuals as early as possible there is an urgent need for collaboration between academic institutions, industry and regulatory organizations for the establishment of standards and networks for the identification and qualification of biological marker candidates. Biomarkers are needed to monitor drug safety, to identify individuals who are most likely to respond to specific treatments, to stratify presymptomatic patients and to quantify the benefits of treatments. Biomarkers that achieve these characteristics should enable objective business decisions in portfolio management and facilitate regulatory approval of new therapies.