Racial inequities and addiction research.

What accounts for variation across racial and ethnic groups in drug use and harms related to substance use? While explanatory mechanisms for racial and ethnic disparities include differential access to and use of health services, a myriad of other factors, including racism and historical trauma, contribute to drug-related disparities. Furthermore, the addiction scientific workforce, like the full biomedical research enterprise, lacks diversity. This deficit undercuts U.S. scientific leadership and is a major challenge for the field. To address these entrenched problems, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) is prioritizing research on health disparities and supporting multiple efforts to enhance scientific workforce diversity. Studies on substance use trends and emerging threats must measure disparities and track progress in reducing disparities, but also acknowledge the limitations of race and ethnicity-based data. Researchers must take the bold step of proposing studies that elucidate causal mechanisms which have the potential to be ameliorated by novel policies and practices. Critically, the impact of racism on all aspects of the substance use trajectory must be assessed to better tailor prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery-support interventions to the specific circumstances of those who need them. Particular attention should be given to people who are incarcerated, who are experiencing homelessness, and who have a history of adverse childhood experiences. Training the next generation of the addiction science workforce needs to address structural barriers to participation with partnerships between funders, such as NIDA, and grantee organizations.

Psychedelics as Therapeutics-Potential and Challenges.

This Viewpoint discusses the potential promise of the therapeutic use of psychedelics for mental illness and substance use disorders, acknowledging many open research questions and unique challenges with these substances.

Neuropsychiatric Model of Addiction Simplified.

While substance experimentation typically begins in adolescence, substance use disorders (SUDs) usually develop in late teens or early adulthood, often in individuals who are vulnerable because of biological and socioeconomic risk factors. Severe SUDs-synonymous with addiction-involve changes in limbic and prefrontal brain areas after chronic drug exposure. These changes involve learned associations between drug reward and cues that trigger the anticipation of that reward (known as incentive salience), as well as heightened dysphoria during withdrawal and weakened prefrontal circuits needed for inhibiting habitual responses.

Targeting Youth to Prevent Later Substance Use Disorder: An Underutilized Response to the US Opioid Crisis.

The evolving US opioid crisis is complex and requires myriad different interventions. These include reducing opioid overprescribing and curtailing the supply of illicit opioids, overdose rescue interventions, and treatment and recovery support services for those with opioid use disorders. To date, more distal primary prevention strategies that have an evidence base are underutilized. Yet, the impact of early environments on later substance use disorder risk is increasingly well understood, including knowledge of the mechanistic linkages between brain development and subsequent risk behaviors. Applying this developmental framework to prevention shows promise, and some middle-school interventions have demonstrated significant reductions in prescription opioid misuse. Reducing these risks of initial misuse of opioids may be the "ounce of prevention" that makes a substantial difference in a society now reeling from the worst drug crisis our country has seen. The challenge is to continue to develop and test promising distal interventions and to support implementation fidelity through frameworks that ensure their cultural appropriateness and sustainability. In addition, research is needed to develop new prevention strategies for adults, including patients with pain at risk for transitioning from prescription to illicit opioids.

Promising roles for pharmacists in addressing the U.S. opioid crisis.

Overdoses of prescription or illicit opioids claimed the lives of 116 Americans each day in 2016, and the crisis continues to escalate. As healthcare systems evolve to address the crisis, the potential of pharmacists to make a positive difference is significant. In addition to utilizing available prescription drug monitoring programs to help prevent diversion of opioids, practicing pharmacists can be alert for signs of opioid misuse by patients (e.g., multiple prescriptions from different physicians) as well as inappropriate prescribing or hazardous drug combinations that physicians may not be aware of (e.g., opioid analgesics combined with benzodiazepines). They can also supply patients with information on risks of opioids, proper storage and disposal of medications, and the harms (and illegality) of sharing medications with other people. Increasingly, pharmacies are sites of distribution of the opioid antagonist naloxone, which has been shown to save lives when made available to opioid users and their families or other potential bystanders to an overdose; and pharmacists can provide guidance about its use and even legal protections for bystanders to an overdose that customers may not be aware of. Pharmacists can also recommend addiction treatment to patients and be a resource for information on addiction treatment options in the community. As addiction treatment becomes more integrated with general healthcare, pharmacies are also increasingly dispensing medications like buprenorphine and, in the future, possibly methadone. Pharmacists in private research labs and at universities are helping to develop the next generation of addiction treatments and safer, non-addictive pain medications; they can also play a role in implementation research to enhance the delivery of addiction interventions and medications in pharmacy settings. Meanwhile, pharmacists in educational settings can promote improved education about the neurobiology and management of pain and its links to opioid misuse and addiction.

Prevention and Treatment of Opioid Misuse and Addiction: A Review.

Importance: More than 42 000 Americans died of opioid overdoses in 2016, and the fatalities continue to increase. This review analyzes the factors that triggered the opioid crisis and its further evolution, along with the interventions to manage and prevent opioid use disorder (OUD), which are fundamental for curtailing the opioid crisis. Observations: Opioid drugs are among the most powerful analgesics but also among the most addictive. The current opioid crisis, initially triggered by overprescription of opioid analgesics, which facilitated their diversion and misuse, has now expanded to heroin and illicit synthetic opioids (fentanyl and its analogues), the potency of which further increases their addictiveness and lethality. Although there are effective medications to treat OUD (methadone hydrochloride, buprenorphine, and naltrexone hydrochloride), these medications are underused, and the risk of relapse is still high. Strategies to expand medication use and treatment retention include greater involvement of health care professionals (including psychiatrists) and approaches to address comorbidities. In particular, the high prevalence of depression and suicidality among patients with OUD, if untreated, contributes to relapse and increases the risk of overdose fatalities. Prevention interventions include screening and early detection of psychiatric disorders, which increase the risk of substance use disorders, including OUD. Conclusions and Relevance: Although overprescription of opioid medications triggered the opioid crisis, improving opioid prescription practices for pain management, although important for addressing the opioid crisis, is no longer sufficient. In parallel, strategies to expand access to medication for OUD and improve treatment retention, including a more active involvement of psychiatrists who are optimally trained to address psychiatric comorbidities, are fundamental to preventing fatalities and achieving recovery. Research into new treatments for OUD, models of care for OUD management that include health care, and interventions to prevent OUD may further help resolve the opioid crisis and prevent it from happening again.

Medication development in opioid addiction: Meaningful clinical end points.

The FDA's "abstinence" outcome measure for approval of new medications to treat opioid-use disorders has been difficult to achieve; developing and validating alternative meaningful outcomes could facilitate drug development.

The conception of the ABCD study: From substance use to a broad NIH collaboration.

Adolescence is a time of dramatic changes in brain structure and function, and the adolescent brain is highly susceptible to being altered by experiences like substance use. However, there is much we have yet to learn about how these experiences influence brain development, how they promote or interfere with later health outcomes, or even what healthy brain development looks like. A large longitudinal study beginning in early adolescence could help us understand the normal variability in adolescent brain and cognitive development and tease apart the many factors that influence it. Recent advances in neuroimaging, informatics, and genetics technologies have made it feasible to conduct a study of sufficient size and scope to answer many outstanding questions. At the same time, several Institutes across the NIH recognized the value of collaborating in such a project because of its ability to address the role of biological, environmental, and behavioral factors like gender, pubertal hormones, sports participation, and social/economic disparities on brain development as well as their association with the emergence and progression of substance use and mental illness including suicide risk. Thus, the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study was created to answer the most pressing public health questions of our day.

Commentary: Navigating the complexities of marijuana.

Science needs to drive our thinking as we navigate a new legislative environment in which many Americans have access to marijuana for therapeutic or recreational use. With the responsibility to fund, conduct, and make use of the research on marijuana, and understand the impacts of new policies, comes the obligation of not thinking in simplistic, black-and-white terms about this substance. The drug's unique harms include neurodevelopmental impacts that may be long lasting or permanent, yet some evidence suggests the drug may benefit people with certain medical conditions (e.g., chronic pain). Marijuana use is also entangled with other substance use and should not be considered in isolation. Finally, policy options are not limited to the extremes of prohibition vs. full commercialization; a spectrum of intermediate options can and should be considered and evaluated as states create new policies around this drug.