The Interplay Between Subjective Response to Alcohol, Craving, and Alcohol Self-Administration in the Human Laboratory

摘要

Background: Despite a rich literature on human laboratory paradigms of subjective response (SR) to alcohol, craving for alcohol, and alcohol self-administration, few studies have examined the interplay across these 3 constructs. The present study addresses this gap in the literature by examining the interplay between SR, craving, and self-administration in the human laboratory. Methods: Data were culled from a medication study (NCT02026011) in which heavy drinking participants of East Asian ancestry completed 2 double-blinded and counterbalanced experimental sessions. In each experimental session, participants received a priming dose of intravenous (IV) alcohol to a target breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) of 0.06 g/dl and measures of SR (stimulation and sedation) and alcohol craving were collected across rising BrACs. The IV alcohol challenge was immediately followed by a 1-hour alcohol self-administration period. Results: Mixed model analyses found a positive and significant relationship between the slope of stimulation and the slope of craving during the alcohol challenge. The relationship between sedation and craving, however, was not significant. The slope of craving during the alcohol challenge significantly predicted a higher number of mini-drinks consumed and lower latency to first drink. Further, mediation analyses found that craving was a significant mediator of the relationship between stimulation and total number of mini-drinks consumed, but the same pattern was not found for sedation. Conclusions: Insofar as alcohol self-administration represents the end point of interest for a host of experimental and clinical research questions, the present study suggests that alcohol craving represents a more proximal predictor of self-administration than measures of alcohol-induced stimulation. It is recommended that human laboratory models interpret measures of SR and craving in light of their relative predictive utility for drinking outcomes. ? 2019 by the Research Society on Alcoholism