Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712, USA.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2011 Oct;35(10):1759-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2011.01521.x. Epub 2011 Jul 20.
Individual differences in subjective response to alcohol, as measured by laboratory-based alcohol challenge, have been identified as a candidate phenotypic risk factor for the development of alcohol-use disorders (AUDs). Two models have been developed to explain the role of subjective response to alcohol, but predictions from the 2 models are contradictory, and theoretical consensus is lacking.
This investigation used a meta-analytic approach to review the accumulated evidence from alcohol-challenge studies of subjective response as a risk factor. Data from 32 independent samples (total N = 1,314) were aggregated to produce quantitative estimates of the effects of risk-group status (i.e., positive family history of AUDs or heavier alcohol consumption) on subjective response.
As predicted by the Low Level of Response Model (LLRM), family history-positive groups experienced reduced overall subjective response relative to family history-negative groups. This effect was most evident among men, with family history-positive men responding more than half a standard deviation less than family history-negative men. In contrast, consistent with the Differentiator Model (DM), heavier drinkers of both genders responded 0.4 standard deviations less on measures of sedation than did the lighter drinkers but nearly half a standard deviation more on measures of stimulation, with the stimulation difference appearing most prominent on the ascending limb of the blood alcohol concentration curve.
The accumulated results from 3 decades of family history comparisons provide considerable support for the LLRM. In contrast, results from typical consumption comparisons were largely consistent with predictions of the DM. The LLRM and DM may describe 2 distinct sets of phenotypic risk, with importantly different etiologies and predictions for the development of AUDs.
通过实验室酒精挑战来衡量的个体对酒精的主观反应差异,已被确定为发展为酒精使用障碍(AUDs)的候选表型风险因素。已经开发了两种模型来解释对酒精的主观反应的作用,但这两种模型的预测是矛盾的,缺乏理论共识。
本研究使用荟萃分析方法回顾了酒精挑战研究中作为风险因素的主观反应的累积证据。来自 32 个独立样本(总 N = 1314)的数据被汇总,以产生风险组状态(即 AUDs 的阳性家族史或更高的酒精摄入量)对主观反应的影响的定量估计。
正如低反应水平模型(LLRM)所预测的那样,家族史阳性组的总体主观反应低于家族史阴性组。这种影响在男性中最为明显,家族史阳性男性的反应比家族史阴性男性低半个标准差以上。相比之下,与差异化模型(DM)一致,两性的重度饮酒者在镇静测量上的反应比轻度饮酒者低 0.4 个标准差,但在兴奋测量上的反应比轻度饮酒者高近半个标准差,兴奋差异在血液酒精浓度曲线的上升支上最为明显。
30 年来的家族史比较结果为 LLRM 提供了大量支持。相比之下,典型消费比较的结果在很大程度上符合 DM 的预测。LLRM 和 DM 可能描述了两种不同的表型风险,具有重要的不同病因和 AUDs 发展的预测。