Joshua L. Karelitz

Acute Negative Affect Relief from Smoking Depends on the Affect Situation and Measure but Not on Nicotine

BACKGROUND Smoking acutely relieves negative affect (NA) due to smoking abstinence but may not relieve NA from other sources, such as stressors. METHODS Dependent smokers (n = 104) randomly assigned to one of three smoking conditions (nicotine or denicotinized cigarettes, or no smoking) completed four negative mood induction procedures (one per session): 1) overnight smoking abstinence, 2) challenging computer task, 3) public speech preparation, and 4) watching negative mood slides. A fifth session involved a neutral mood control. The two smoking groups took four puffs on their assigned cigarette and then smoked those same cigarettes ad libitum during continued mood induction. All subjects rated their level of NA and positive affect on several measures (Mood Form, Positive and Negative Affect Scale, Stress-Arousal Checklist, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-state). They also rated craving and withdrawal. RESULTS Negative affect relief from smoking depended on the NA source (i.e., mood induction procedure) and the affect measure. Smoking robustly relieved NA due to abstinence on all four measures but only modestly relieved NA due to the other sources and typically on only some measures. Smokings effects on positive affect and withdrawal were similar to effects on NA, but relief of craving depended less on NA source. Smoking reinforcement only partly matched the pattern of NA relief. Few responses differed between the nicotine and denicotinized smoking groups. CONCLUSIONS Acute NA relief from smoking depends on the situation and the affect measure used but may not depend on nicotine intake. These results challenge the common assumption that smoking, and nicotine in particular, broadly alleviates NA.

Differences in negative mood-induced smoking reinforcement due to distress tolerance, anxiety sensitivity, and depression history

RationaleNegative mood increases smoking reinforcement and may do so to a greater degree in smokers vulnerable to negative mood dysregulation.MethodsAdult smokers (N = 71) without current depression were randomly assigned to one of two smoking conditions (nicotine or denic cigarettes, presented blind) maintained across all sessions. Subjects completed one neutral mood session and four negative mood induction sessions. Negative mood inductions included one each of the following: 1) overnight smoking abstinence, 2) challenging computer task, 3) public speech preparation, 4) watching negative mood slides. In each session, subjects took 4 puffs on their assigned cigarette, rated it for “liking” (reward), and then smoked those cigarettes ad libitum (reinforcement) during continued mood induction. Affect was assessed intermittently before and after smoking. Differences in responses were examined as functions of self-reported history of major depression and levels of distress tolerance and anxiety sensitivity.ResultsSmoking reinforcement, but not reward or negative affect relief, was greater in all sessions in those with a history of depression and greater after overnight abstinence in those with lower distress tolerance. Reward and affect relief, but not reinforcement, were greater during speech preparation among those high in anxiety sensitivity.ConclusionsLow distress tolerance may enhance acute smoking reinforcement due to abstinence, while depression history may broadly increase acute smoking reinforcement regardless of mood. Neither smoking reward nor affect help explain these individual differences in smoking reinforcement.

Gene and gene by sex associations with initial sensitivity to nicotine in nonsmokers.

Genetic variation may influence initial sensitivity to nicotine (i.e. during early tobacco exposure), perhaps helping to explain differential vulnerability to nicotine dependence. This study explored associations of functional candidate gene polymorphisms with initial sensitivity to nicotine in 101 young adult nonsmokers of European ancestry. Nicotine (0, 5, 10 μg/kg) was administered through nasal spray followed by mood, nicotine reward (e.g. ‘liking’) and perception (e.g. ‘feel effects’) measures, physiological responses, sensory processing (prepulse inhibition of startle), and performance tasks. Nicotine reinforcement was assessed in a separate session using a nicotine versus placebo spray choice procedure. For the dopamine D4 receptor [DRD4 variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR)], presence of the 7-repeat allele was associated with greater aversive responses to nicotine (decreases in ‘vigor’, positive affect, and rapid information processing; increased cortisol) and reduced nicotine choice. Individuals with at least one DRD4 7-repeat allele also reported increased ‘feel effects’ and greater startle response, but in men only. Other genetic associations were also observed in men but not women, such as greater ‘feel effects’ and anger, and reduced fatigue, in the dopamine D2 receptor (DRD2 C957T single nucleotide polymorphism) TT versus CT or CC genotypes. Very few or no significant associations were seen for the DRD2/ANKK1 TaqIA polymorphism, the serotonin transporter promoter VNTR or 5HTTLPR (SLC6A4), the dopamine transporter 3′ VNTR (SLC6A3), and the μ opioid receptor A118G single nucleotide polymorphism (μ opioid receptor polymorphism 1). Although these results are preliminary, this study is the first to suggest that genetic polymorphisms related to function in the dopamine D4, and perhaps D2, receptor may modulate initial sensitivity to nicotine before the onset of dependence and may do so differentially between men and women.

Variability in initial nicotine sensitivity due to sex, history of other drug use, and parental smoking

Initial sensitivity to nicotines effects during early exposure to tobacco may relate to dependence vulnerability. We examined the association of initial nicotine sensitivity with individual difference factors of sex, other drug use history (i.e. cross-tolerance or cross-sensitization), and parental smoking status in young adult nonsmokers (N=131). Participants engaged in 4 sessions, the first 3 to assess the dose-response effects of nasal spray nicotine (0, 5, 10 microg/kg) on rewarding, mood, physiological, sensory processing, and performance effects, and the fourth to assess nicotine reinforcement using a choice procedure. Men had greater initial sensitivity than women to some self-reported effects of nicotine related to reward and incentive salience and to impairment in sensory processing, but men and women did not differ on most other effects. Prior marijuana use was associated with greater nicotine reward, nicotine reinforcement was greater in men versus women among those with prior marijuana use, and having parents who smoked was related to increased incentive salience. However, history of other drug use and parental smoking were not otherwise associated with initial nicotine sensitivity. These findings warrant replication with other methods of nicotine administration, especially cigarette smoking, and in more diverse samples of subjects naïve to nicotine. Yet, they suggest that sex differences in initial sensitivity to nicotine reward occur before the onset of dependence. They also suggest that parental smoking may not increase risk of nicotine dependence in offspring by altering initial nicotine sensitivity, and that cross-tolerance between other drugs and nicotine may not be robust in humans.

Sex Differences in Acute Relief of Abstinence-Induced Withdrawal and Negative Affect due to Nicotine Content in Cigarettes

INTRODUCTION Acute cigarette smoking may relieve withdrawal and negative affect due to tobacco abstinence to a greater extent in women versus men. Yet, the relative contribution of the cigarettes nicotine content to this sex difference is not clear. METHODS Non-quitting dependent adult smokers (N = 44; 21 males, 23 females) participated in 2 virtually identical sessions, each after abstaining overnight (CO < 10 ppm) and differing only in the nicotine content of the designated cigarette. While blind to brand markings, they consumed a total of 24 puffs in controlled fashion for 2 hr in each session, either from a nicotine (Quest 1, 0.6 mg) or denicotinized (Quest 3, 0.05 mg) cigarette. Withdrawal symptoms were obtained before and after smoking, and negative affect was assessed after each period of cigarette exposure consisting of 6 puffs every 25 min. RESULTS Men and women did not differ in baseline withdrawal and negative affect due to overnight abstinence, but reductions in each symptom were significantly influenced by the interaction of sex × nicotine/denicotinized cigarette (both p < .05). In men, but not in women, each symptom was generally decreased more by the nicotine versus denicotinized cigarette, and the nicotine cigarette reduced each to a greater degree in men versus women. CONCLUSIONS Sex differences in relief of abstinence-induced withdrawal and negative affect due to the nicotine content in cigarettes are consistent with prior research indicating that nicotine per se, compared to non-nicotine smoke stimuli, is less rewarding in women versus men.

Effects of bupropion on cognitive performance during initial tobacco abstinence

BACKGROUND Bupropion may aid tobacco abstinence by quickly relieving symptoms of nicotine withdrawal, perhaps including impaired cognitive performance. We examined whether bupropion would attenuate abstinence-induced cognitive deficits on the first day of a brief quit attempt, when smokers are most likely to relapse. METHODS Smokers (N=24) with high quit interest were recruited for within-subjects cross-over test of bupropion vs placebo on ability to abstain during separate short-term practice quit smoking attempts. After introduction to working memory (N-back) and sustained attention (continuous performance task; CPT) tasks during the pre-quit smoking baseline, performance on these tasks was assessed after abstaining overnight (CO<10 ppm) on the first day of each quit attempt, while on bupropion and on placebo. RESULTS Compared to placebo, bupropion after abstinence improved correct response times for working memory (p=.01 for medication by memory load interaction) and for one measure of sustained attention (numbers, but not letters; p<.05). DISCUSSION Bupropion may attenuate some features of impaired cognitive performance due to withdrawal on the first day of a quit attempt. Future studies could examine whether this effect of bupropion contributes to its efficacy for longer-term smoking cessation.

Possible reinforcement enhancing effects of bupropion during initial smoking abstinence.

INTRODUCTION Due to a drop in nicotine, smoking cessation may attenuate reinforcement from sensory stimuli unrelated to nicotine intake. Recent rodent research suggests that bupropion may reverse this attenuation, perhaps helping explain its efficacy in aiding cessation. METHODS In a within-subjects, crossover study, smokers responded on a simple computer task for brief music reward available on a progressive ratio 50% schedule. Testing was done on three separate occasions: after ad lib smoking during prequit baseline and on the first day of two brief quit attempts while taking bupropion or placebo, in counter-balanced order. Number of operant responses was the measure of reinforcement. To more clearly assess abstinence and medication effects, those meeting 24-hr abstinence criteria (CO < 5 ppm; n = 5) or clearly failing to abstain (CO > 10 ppm; n = 5) during both medication conditions were compared. RESULTS Among abstainers, repeated measures ANOVA showed that reinforced responding decreased by nearly 50% from baseline after quitting on placebo (p = .03), while responding after quitting on bupropion was similar to that during baseline (-17%; p = .20). In contrast, those unable to abstain showed virtually identical reinforced responding due to either medication or baseline. CONCLUSIONS These exploratory findings confirm that responding for a reward unrelated to smoking decreases after abstinence and are consistent with animal research showing bupropion effects on enhancing reinforced responding.

Sensitivity and specificity of a procedure for early human screening of novel smoking cessation medications

BACKGROUND AND AIM It is important to find economical methods in early Phase 2 studies to screen drugs potentially useful to aid smoking cessation. A method has been developed that detects efficacy of varenicline and nicotine patch. This study aimed to evaluate whether the method would detect the efficacy of bupropion and identify correctly the lack of efficacy of modafinil. DESIGN Using a within-subject double cross-over design, smokers attempted to quit during each treatment, with bupropion (150 mg b.i.d.), modafinil [100 mg twice daily (b.i.d.)] or placebo (double-blind, counterbalanced order). In each of three medication periods, all smoked with no drug on week 1 (baseline or washout), began dose run-up on week 2, and tried to quit every day during week 3. SETTING A university research center in the United States. PARTICIPANTS Forty-five adult smokers high in quit interest. MEASUREMENTS Abstinence was verified daily each quit week by self-report of no smoking over the prior 24 hours and carbon monoxide (CO) < 5 parts per million. FINDINGS Compared with placebo, bupropion did (F(1,44)  = 6.98, P = 0.01), but modafinil did not (F(1,44)  = 0.29, P = 0.60), increase the number of abstinent days. Also, bupropion (versus placebo) significantly increased the number of those able to maintain continuous abstinence on all 5 days throughout the quit week (11 versus four), Z = 2.11, P < 0.05, while modafinil did not (six). CONCLUSIONS Assessing days abstinent during 1 week of use of medication versus placebo in a cross-over design could be a useful early Phase 2 study design for discriminating between medications useful versus not useful in aiding smoking cessation.

Nicotine Acutely Enhances Reinforcement from Non-Drug Rewards in Humans

Preclinical research documents that, aside from the primary and secondary reinforcing effects of nicotine intake itself, nicotine also acutely enhances the reinforcing efficacy of non-drug reinforcers (“rewards”). Study of these effects in humans has largely been overlooked, but very recent findings suggest they may have clinical implications for more fully understanding the persistence of tobacco dependence. This overview first outlines the topic and notes some recent human studies indirectly addressing nicotine effects on related responses (e.g., subjective ratings), explaining why those findings do not directly confirm enhancement of behavioral reinforcement per se due to nicotine. Then, the methodology used in the subsequently presented studies is described, demonstrating how those studies specifically did demonstrate enhancement of reinforced responding for non-drug rewards. The main section focuses on the limited controlled research to date directly assessing nicotine’s acute reinforcement-enhancing effects in humans, particularly as it relates to reinforced behavioral responding for non-drug rewards in non-human animal models. After detailing those few existing human studies, we address potential consequences of these effects for dependence and tobacco cessation efforts and then suggest directions for future research. This research indicates that nicotine per se increases responding in humans that is reinforced by some rewards (auditory stimuli via music, visual stimuli via video), but perhaps not by others (e.g., money). These reinforcement-enhancing effects in smokers are not due to dependence or withdrawal relief and can be restored by a small amount of nicotine (similar to a smoking lapse), including from e-cigarettes, a non-tobacco nicotine product. Future clinical research should examine factors determining which types of rewards are (or are not) enhanced by nicotine, consequences of the loss of these nicotine effects after quitting smoking, potential individual differences in these effects, and the possibility that nicotine via nicotine replacement therapy and non-nicotine quit medications may attenuate loss of these effects upon quitting. Further study with humans of nicotine’s reinforcement-enhancing effects may provide a more complete understanding of smoking persistence and added mechanisms of cessation medication efficacy.

Initial Evaluation of Fenofibrate for Efficacy in Aiding Smoking Abstinence

INTRODUCTION Primate and rodent models show that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-alpha (PPAR-α) ligands, including fibrate medications, reduce nicotine reinforcement, reward, and related effects. We tested fenofibrate, the most common U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved fibrate for lipid control versus placebo for initial evidence of efficacy in smoking cessation using a validated cross-over procedure for early Phase 2 evaluations. METHODS Adult dependent smokers (N = 38) in this 4-week within-subjects study were those already intending to try to quit in the next 2 months. All smoked ad libitum during weeks 1 (baseline) and 3 (washout) and began fenofibrate (160 mg/d; dosing approved for lipid control) or placebo near the end of weeks 1 and 3. Following each 4-day dose run-up, they were then instructed to try to quit for 4 days (Tuesday-Friday) during weeks 2 and 4, with the order of medication conditions counter-balanced and administered double-blind. Abstinence was verified daily in each 4-day quit period by self-report of no smoking in the prior 24 hours and carbon monoxide < 5 ppm. Secondary measures of acute smoking reinforcement and cue reactivity prior to quitting, and smoking reduction when trying to quit, were also assessed. RESULTS No differences between fenofibrate versus placebo were found on days quit (means ± SEM of 1.8±0.3 vs. 1.9±0.3, respectively). Similarly, there were no differences in any of the secondary measures (all P > .20). CONCLUSIONS Although higher dosing or other proliferator-activated receptor-alpha agonists may show efficacy, this study indicates that fenofibrate does not aid ability to stop smoking during a brief practice quit period in dependent smokers high in current quit interest.