The influence of nicotine metabolic rate on working memory over 6 hours of abstinence from nicotine.
Cognition
NMR
Nicotine
Nicotine metabolite ratio
Smoking
Working memory
Journal
Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior
ISSN: 1873-5177
Titre abrégé: Pharmacol Biochem Behav
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0367050
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2020
01 2020
Historique:
received:
23
01
2019
revised:
11
10
2019
accepted:
04
12
2019
pubmed:
10
12
2019
medline:
1
1
2021
entrez:
9
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A faster rate of nicotine metabolism has been associated with smoking more cigarettes, greater nicotine withdrawal symptoms, and lower smoking quit rates. However, the association between nicotine metabolic rate (NMR) and cognitive functioning during withdrawal has not been determined. We compared cognitive function in 121 fast or slow nicotine metabolizers after smoking, and at 3 and 6 h of nicotine abstinence. Cognitive functioning was assessed using N-back working memory tests with outcomes of accuracy and processing speed. Participants smoked two cigarettes and then abstained from smoking for 6 h. N-back tests were administered after smoking (0 h) and at 3 and 6 h of nicotine abstinence. An effect of processing speed was found over time on the 2-back, in that participants had significantly longer average reaction times when the stimuli presented did not match the target letter. NMR was not significantly associated with the processing speed change over time. Within-race differences in working memory were evident in that Caucasian fast metabolizers had significantly poorer accuracy and processing speed. Minimal change in working memory over 6 h of nicotine abstinence was observed. Overall, NMR was not significantly associated with the change in processing speed, however Caucasian fast metabolizers displayed poorer accuracy and processing speed at discrete time points.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A faster rate of nicotine metabolism has been associated with smoking more cigarettes, greater nicotine withdrawal symptoms, and lower smoking quit rates. However, the association between nicotine metabolic rate (NMR) and cognitive functioning during withdrawal has not been determined.
METHODS
We compared cognitive function in 121 fast or slow nicotine metabolizers after smoking, and at 3 and 6 h of nicotine abstinence. Cognitive functioning was assessed using N-back working memory tests with outcomes of accuracy and processing speed. Participants smoked two cigarettes and then abstained from smoking for 6 h. N-back tests were administered after smoking (0 h) and at 3 and 6 h of nicotine abstinence.
RESULTS
An effect of processing speed was found over time on the 2-back, in that participants had significantly longer average reaction times when the stimuli presented did not match the target letter. NMR was not significantly associated with the processing speed change over time. Within-race differences in working memory were evident in that Caucasian fast metabolizers had significantly poorer accuracy and processing speed.
CONCLUSIONS
Minimal change in working memory over 6 h of nicotine abstinence was observed. Overall, NMR was not significantly associated with the change in processing speed, however Caucasian fast metabolizers displayed poorer accuracy and processing speed at discrete time points.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31812759
pii: S0091-3057(19)30039-5
doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2019.172836
pmc: PMC7009742
mid: NIHMS1546960
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Nicotine
6M3C89ZY6R
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01627392']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
172836Subventions
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : R01 DA031193
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Pediatrics. 2008 Sep;122(3):e643-7
pubmed: 18762498
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2006 May;79(5):480-8
pubmed: 16678549
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003 Oct;4(10):829-39
pubmed: 14523382
Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2016 Sep;148:1-7
pubmed: 27180107
Addict Behav. 2015 Dec;51:93-9
pubmed: 26240944
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Mar;105(3):641-651
pubmed: 30242831
Drug Alcohol Depend. 1989 Jun;23(3):259-66
pubmed: 2752917
Br J Addict. 1991 Sep;86(9):1119-27
pubmed: 1932883
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2004 Jul;76(1):64-72
pubmed: 15229465
Addict Biol. 2019 Sep;24(5):1087-1095
pubmed: 30307083
JAMA. 1998 Jul 8;280(2):152-6
pubmed: 9669788
Curr Top Behav Neurosci. 2015;23:37-86
pubmed: 25655887
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2006 Jun;79(6):600-8
pubmed: 16765148
Vision Res. 2012 May 15;61:107-14
pubmed: 21958757
Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2009;(192):29-60
pubmed: 19184645
J Cogn Neurosci. 1997 Jul;9(4):462-75
pubmed: 23968211
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012 May;37(6):1509-16
pubmed: 22334123
Behav Pharmacol. 1992 Aug;3(4):375-378
pubmed: 11224139
Clin Neurophysiol. 2008 Jul;119(7):1546-59
pubmed: 18448388
Biol Mass Spectrom. 1991 May;20(5):247-52
pubmed: 1883864
Intelligence. 2009 May 1;37(3):283
pubmed: 20161647
Nicotine Tob Res. 2007 Mar;9(3):315-27
pubmed: 17365764
J Exp Psychol. 1958 Apr;55(4):352-8
pubmed: 13539317
Neuroimage. 2012 May 1;60(4):2136-43
pubmed: 22342802
Lancet Respir Med. 2015 Feb;3(2):131-138
pubmed: 25588294
J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2011 Feb 1;879(3-4):267-76
pubmed: 21208832
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2015 Jul;232(14):2491-501
pubmed: 25721074
Nicotine Tob Res. 2011 Sep;13(9):772-83
pubmed: 21546441
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Jun;85(6):635-43
pubmed: 19279561
Addict Behav. 2006 May;31(5):833-44
pubmed: 16009504