Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-4hvwz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T18:16:56.485Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Staging & profiling in addiction, can we cross the gap from bench to bedside?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2020

A. Schellekens*
Affiliation:
Nijmegen, The NetherlandsNijmegen, The Netherlands

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Addictive behaviours are highly common (prevalence worldwide about 10%), with major impact on the individual and society (contributing to 5% of overall DALYs and mortality) [1,2]. Though a number of evidence-based treatments are available, relapse rates remain high, up to 50% within one year of treatment [3,4]. Staging of addictive behaviors might contribute to improve this prognosis by indicating which patient could benefit most from which treatment modality.

In DSM-5 clinical staging of addictive disorders is limited to grading the severity of the disorder, based on criterion counts [5]. However, addictive disorders are highly heterogeneous, with distinct clinical profiles and neurobiological underpinnings of the disorder. Reward-processing deficits are considered a hallmark of addiction. Several additional neurobiological deficits have been identified in addicted individuals, such as dysfunction of brain stress systems, anterior cingulate cortex and habenula.

These neurobiological deficits may identify clinical subgroups of patients with distinct pathophysiology (profiling), or be related to progression of the disorder (staging). This presentation will focus on clinical staging and profiling of addictive behaviors combining neurobiological findings and clinical practice [6].

Disclosure of interest

The author has not supplied his declaration of competing interest.

Type
Symposium: Staging of psychiatric disorders: Integrating neurobiological findings
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2017

References

Lancet 2015;386(9995):743–800.Google Scholar
Lancet 2013;382(9904):1575–86.Google Scholar
European Psychiatry 2015;30(1).10.1016/S0924-9338(15)30259-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Addiction 2015;110(6):920–30.Google Scholar
Tijdschr Psychiatr 2014;56(3):206–10.Google Scholar
Tijdschr Psychiatr 2012;54(11):941–8.10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70254-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.