CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 53Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorSchizophrenia research and treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

COMT val158met and 5-HTTLPR Genetic Polymorphisms Moderate Executive Control in Cannabis Users

Open access
Verdejo-García, Antonio, Fagundo, Ana Beatriz, Cuenca, Aida, Rodriguez, Joan, Cuyás, Elisabet, Langohr, Klaus, de Sola Llopis, Susana, Civit, Ester, Farré, Magí, Peña-Casanova, Jordi, de la Torre, Rafael·2013·Neuropsychopharmacology
DOI 10.1038/npp.2013.59PMC PMC3682154
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The adverse effects of cannabis use on executive functions are still controversial, fostering the need for novel biomarkers able to unveil individual differences in the cognitive impact of cannabis consumption. Two common genetic polymorphisms have been linked to the neuroadaptive impact of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) exposure and to executive functions in animals: the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene val158met polymorphism and the SLC6A4 gene 5-HTTLPR polymorphism. We aimed to test if these polymorphisms moderate the harmful effects of cannabis use on executive function in young cannabis users. We recruited 144 participants: 86 cannabis users and 58 non-drug user controls. Both groups were genotyped and matched for genetic makeup, sex, age, education, and IQ. We used a computerized neuropsychological battery to assess different aspects of executive functions: sustained attention (CANTAB Rapid Visual Information Processing Test, RVIP), working memory (N-back), monitoring/shifting (CANTAB ID/ED set shifting), planning (CANTAB Stockings of Cambridge, SOC), and decision-making (Iowa Gambling Task, IGT). We used general linear model-based analyses to test performance differences between cannabis users and controls as a function of genotypes. We found that: (i) daily cannabis use is not associated with executive function deficits; and (ii) COMT val158met and 5-HTTLPR polymorphisms moderate the link between cannabis use and executive performance. Cannabis users carrying t…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/npp.2013.59

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Similar items querying estimates of lifetime number of cannabis use occasions, lifetime number of joints, and lifetime number of cannabis use days have been used to estimate lifetime cannabis consumption in young adult samples.

    “Similar items querying estimates of lifetime number of cannabis use occasions (O'Donnell et al., 2021), lifetime number of joints (Gonzalez et al., 2012; Verdejo-Garcia et al., 2013), and lifetime number of cannabis use days (Pacheco-Colón et al., 2019) have been used to estimate lifetime cannabis consumption in young adult samples.”

    From Cannabis Use and Academic Performance in College Students: The Role of Procrastination (2024) · cites this paper as Verdejo-Garcia et al., 2013

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Barnes JJ, Dean AJ, Nandam LS, O’Connell RG, Bellgrove MA (2011). The molecular genetics of executive function: role of monoamine system genes. Biol Psychiatry 69: e127–e143. · DOI
  2. Barnes SA, Young JW, Neill JC (2012). D1 receptor activation improves vigilance in rats as measured by the 5-choice continuous performance test. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 220: 129–141. · DOI
  3. (158) Met polymorphism in chronic cannabis users. Addict Biol advance online publication on 14 January 2013. doi:10.1111/adb.12027. · DOI
  4. Bechara A, Damasio H, Tranel D, Damasio AR (2005). The Iowa Gambling Task and the somatic marker hypothesis: some questions and answers. Trends Cogn Sci 9: 159–162. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bechara A, Tranel D, Damasio H (2000). Characterization of the decision-making deficit of patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions. Brain 123: 2189–2202. · DOI
  6. Behan AT, Hryniewiecka M, O'Tuathaigh CM, Kinsella A, Cannon M, Karayiorgou M et al (2012). Chronic adolescent exposure to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in COMT mutant mice: impact on indices of dopaminergic, endocannabinoid and GABAergic pathways. Neuropsychopharmacology 37: 1773–1783. · DOI
  7. Bevilacqua L, Goldman D (2011). Genetics of emotion. Trends Cogn Sci 15: 401–408.
  8. Bolla KI, Brown K, Eldreth D, Tate K, Cadet JL (2002). Dose-related neurocognitive effects of marijuana use. Neurology 59: 1337–1343. · DOI
  9. Chamberlain SR, Robbins TW, Winder-Rhodes S, Muller U, Sahakian BJ, Blackwell AD et al (2011). Translational approaches to frontostriatal dysfunction in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder using a computerized neuropsychological battery. Biol Psychiatry 69: 1192–1203. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Cuyas E, Verdejo-Garcia A, Fagundo AB, Khymenets O, Rodriguez J, Cuenca A et al (2011). The influence of genetic and environmental factors among MDMA users in cognitive performance. PLoS One 6: e27206. · DOI
  11. de la Torre R, Civit E, Svaizer F, Lotti A, Gottardi M, Miozzo M (2010). High throughput analysis of drugs of abuse in hair by combining purposely designed sample extraction compatible with immunometric methods used for drug testing in urine. Forensic Sci Int 196: 18–21. · DOI
  12. Falcon M, Pichini S, Joya J, Pujadas M, Sanchez A, Vall O et al (2011). Maternal hair testing for the assessment of fetal exposure to drug of abuse during early pregnancy: comparison with testing in placental and fetal remains. Forensic Sci Int 218: 92–96. · DOI
  13. Fontes MA, Bolla KI, Cunha PJ, Almeida PP, Jungerman F, Laranjeira RR et al (2011). Cannabis use before age 15 and subsequent executive functioning. Br J Psychiatry 198: 442–447. · DOI
  14. Gennatas ED, Cholfin JA, Zhou J, Crawford RK, Sasaki DA, Karydas A et al (2012). COMT Val158Met genotype influences neurodegeneration within dopamine-innervated brain structures. Neurology 68: 1663–1669. · DOI
  15. Grant I, Gonzalez R, Carey CL, Natarajan L, Wolfson T (2003). Non-acute (residual) neurocognitive effects of cannabis use: a meta-analytic study. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 9: 679–689. · DOI
  16. Greenberg BD, Tolliver TJ, Huang SJ, Li Q, Bengel D, Murphy DL (1999). Genetic variation in the serotonin transporter promoter region affects serotonin uptake in human blood platelets. Am J Med Genet 88: 83–87. · DOI
  17. Hamidovic A, Dlugos A, Palmer AA, de Wit H (2010). Catechol-O-methyltransferase val158met genotype modulates sustained attention in both the drug-free state and in response to amphetamine. Psychiatric Genet 20: 85–92. · DOI
  18. He Q, Xue G, Chen C, Lu Z, Dong Q, Lei X et al (2010). Serotonin transporter gene-linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) influences decision making under ambiguity and risk in a large Chinese sample. Neuropharmacology 59: 518–526. · DOI
  19. Henquet C, Rosa A, Krabbendam L, Papiol S, Fananás L, Drukker M et al (2009). An experimental study of catechol-o-methyltransferase Val158Met moderation of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced effects on psychosis and cognition. Neuropsychopharmacology 31: 2748–2757. · DOI
  20. Hermann D, Leménager T, Gelbke J, Welzel H, Skopp G, Mann K (2009). Decision making of heavy cannabis users on the Iowa Gambling Task: stronger association with THC of hair analysis than with personality traits of the Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire. Eur Addict Res 15: 94–98. · DOI
  21. Homberg JR, Lesch KP (2011). Looking on the bright side of serotonin transporter gene variation. Biol Psychiatry 69: 513–519. · DOI
  22. Homberg JR, van den Bos R, den Heijer E, Suer R, Cuppen E (2008). Serotonin transporter dosage modulates long-term decision-making in rat and human. Neuropharmacology 55: 80–84. · DOI
  23. Jager G, Block RI, Luijten M, Ramsey NF (2010). Cannabis use and memory brain function in adolescent boys: a cross-sectional multicenter functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 49: 561–572.
  24. Jager G, Kahn RS, Van Den Brink W, Van Ree JM, Ramsey NF (2006). Long-term effects of frequent cannabis use on working memory and attention: an fMRI study. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 185: 358–368. · DOI
  25. Lyons MJ, Bar JL, Panizzon MS, Toomey R, Eisen S, Xian H et al (2004). Neuropsychological consequences of regular marijuana use: a twin study. Psychol Med 34: 1239–1250. · DOI
  26. Nolan KA, Bilder RM, Lachman HM, Volavka J (2004). Catechol O-methyltransferase Val158Met polymorphism in schizophrenia: differential effects of Val and Met alleles on cognitive stability and flexibility. Am J Psychiatry 161: 359–361. · DOI
  27. O'Tuathaigh CM, Hryniewiecka M, Behan A, Tighe O, Coughlan C, Desbonnet L et al (2010). Chronic adolescent exposure to Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in COMT mutant mice: impact on psychosis-related and other phenotypes. Neuropsychopharmacology 35: 2262–2273. · DOI
  28. Pattij T, Wiskerke J, Schoffelmeer AN (2008). Cannabinoid modulation of executive functions. Eur J Pharmacol 585: 458–463. · DOI
  29. Pichini S, Poudevida S, Pujadas M, Menoyo E, Pacifici R, Farre M et al (2006). Assessment of chronic exposure to MDMA in a group of consumers by segmental hair analysis. Therap Drug Monit 28: 106–109. · DOI
  30. Robbins TW (2007). Shifting and stopping: fronto-striatal substrates, neurochemical modulation and clinical implications. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B 362: 917–932. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Robbins TW, James M, Owen AM, Sahakian BJ, Lawrence AD, McInnes L et al (1998). A study of performance on tests from the CANTAB battery sensitive to frontal lobe dysfunction in a large sample of normal volunteers: implications for theories of executive functioning and cognitive aging. Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 4: 474–490. · DOI
  32. Robbins TW, James M, Owen AM, Sahakian BJ, McInnes L, Rabbitt P (1994). Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB): a factor analytic study of a large sample of normal elderly volunteers. Dementia 5: 266–281.
  33. Robertson IH, Garavan H (2000). Vigilant attention. In: Gazzaniga M, (ed) The New Cognitive Neurosciences. MA: MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 563–578.
  34. Roiser JP, Cook LJ, Cooper JD, Rubinsztein DC, Sahakian BJ (2005). Association of a functional polymorphism in the serotonin transporter gene with abnormal emotional processing in ecstasy users. Am J Psychiatry 162: 609–612. · DOI
  35. Sonuga-Barke EJ, Kumsta R, Schlotz W, Lasky-Su J, Marco R, Miranda A et al (2011). A functional variant of the serotonin transporter gene (SLC6A4) moderates impulsive choice in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder boys and siblings. Biol Psychiatry 70: 230–236. · DOI
  36. Tan HY, Chen Q, Goldberg TE, Mattay VS, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Weinberger DR et al (2007). Catechol-O-methyltransferase Val158Met modulation of prefrontal-parietal-striatal brain systems during arithmetic and temporal transformations in working memory. J Neurosci 27: 13393–13401. · DOI · Paper page
  37. Torrens M, Serrano D, Astals M, Perez-Dominguez G, Martin-Santos R (2004). Diagnosing comorbid psychiatric disorders in substance abusers: validity of the Spanish versions of the Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. Am J Psychiatry 161: 1231–1237. · DOI
  38. Tunbridge EM, Bannerman DM, Sharp T, Harrison PJ (2004). Catechol-o-methyltransferase inhibition improves set-shifting performance and elevates stimulated dopamine release in the rat prefrontal cortex. J Neurosci 24: 5331–5335. · DOI
  39. Vaidya JG, Block RI, O'Leary DS, Ponto LB, Ghoneim MM, Bechara A (2011). Effects of chronic marijuana use on brain activity during monetary decision-making. Neuropsychopharmacology 37: 618–629. · DOI
  40. van den Bos R, Homberg J, Gijsbers E, den Heijer E, Cuppen E (2009). The effect of COMT Val158 Met genotype on decision-making and preliminary findings on its interaction with the 5-HTTLPR in healthy females. Neuropharmacology 56: 493–498. · DOI
  41. Velenovská M, Fisar Z (2007). Effect of cannabinoids on platelet serotonin uptake. Addict Biol 12: 158–166. · DOI
  42. Verdejo-Garcia A, Benbrook A, Funderburk F, David P, Cadet JL, Bolla KI (2007). The differential relationship between cocaine use and marijuana use on decision-making performance over repeat testing with the Iowa Gambling Task. Drug Alcohol Depend 90: 2–11. · DOI
  43. Verdejo-García A, Pérez-García M (2007). Profile of executive deficits in cocaine and heroin polysubstance users: common and differential effects on separate executive components. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 190: 517–530. · DOI
  44. Watter S, Geffen GM, Geffen LB (2001). The n-back as a dual-task: P300 morphology under divided attention. Psychophysiology 38: 998–1003. · DOI
  45. Weinstein AM, Gorelick DA (2011). Pharmacological treatment of cannabis dependence. Curr Pharm Des 17: 1351–1358. · DOI
  46. Yücel M, Solowij N, Respondek C, Whittle S, Fornito A, Pantelis C et al (2008). Regional brain abnormalities associated with long-term heavy cannabis use. Arch Gen Psychiatry 65: 694–701. · DOI
  47. Zalesky A, Solowij N, Yücel M, Lubman DI, Takagi M, Harding IH et al (2012). Effect of long-term cannabis use on axonal fibre connectivity. Brain 135: 2245–2255. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Verdejo-García, A., Fagundo, A. B., Cuenca, A., Rodriguez, J., Cuyás, E., Langohr, K., de Sola Llopis, S., Civit, E., Farré, M., Peña-Casanova, J., & de la Torre, R.
Affiliations
  • Parc de Salut (ES)
  • Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES)
ORCID
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2013-02-28
Volume
38
Issue
8
Pages
1598-1606
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
DOI
10.1038/npp.2013.59
PMC
PMC3682154
OpenAlex
W2037187481
Cited by
53
References
5
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Generalitat de Catalunya
  • Departament d'Innovació, Universitats i Empresa, Generalitat de Catalunya
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01da017987-05)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (1 R01 DA017987, R01 DA017987)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
cannabis use, executive function, COMT Val158Met polymorphism, 5-HTTLPR polymorphism, serotonin transporter, drug-gene interactions, sustained attention, set-shifting, decision-making, working memory, response bias, daily cannabis use, biomarkers
MeSH terms
Adult, Catechol O-Methyltransferase, Female, Humans, Male, Marijuana Smoking, Methionine, Polymorphism, Genetic, Psychomotor Performance, Valine, Serotonin Plasma Membrane Transport Proteins, Young Adult, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review