Dutta Cintya Nirvana, Christov-Moore Leonardo, Ombao Hernando, Douglas Pamela K
Biostatistics Group, Computer, Electrical and Mathematical Sciences and Engineering Division, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Saudi Arabia.
School of Modeling, Simulation, and Training, and Computer Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, United States.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2022 Sep 26;16:938501. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.938501. eCollection 2022.
For decades, psychostimulants have been the gold standard pharmaceutical treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In the United States, an astounding 9% of all boys and 4% of girls will be prescribed stimulant drugs at some point during their childhood. Recent meta-analyses have revealed that individuals with ADHD have reduced brain volume loss later in life (>60 y.o.) compared to the normal aging brain, which suggests that either ADHD or its treatment may be neuroprotective. Crucially, these neuroprotective effects were significant in brain regions (e.g., hippocampus, amygdala) where severe volume loss is linked to cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease. Historically, the ADHD diagnosis and its pharmacotherapy came about nearly simultaneously, making it difficult to evaluate their effects in isolation. Certain evidence suggests that psychostimulants may normalize structural brain changes typically observed in the ADHD brain. If ADHD itself is neuroprotective, perhaps exercising the brain, then psychostimulants may not be recommended across the lifespan. Alternatively, if stimulant drugs are neuroprotective, then this class of medications may warrant further investigation for their therapeutic effects. Here, we take a bottom-up holistic approach to review the psychopharmacology of ADHD in the context of recent models of attention. We suggest that future studies are greatly needed to better appreciate the interactions amongst an ADHD diagnosis, stimulant treatment across the lifespan, and structure-function alterations in the aging brain.
几十年来,精神兴奋剂一直是治疗注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)的金标准药物。在美国,令人震惊的是,所有男孩中有9%、女孩中有4%在童年的某个阶段会被开处方使用兴奋剂药物。最近的荟萃分析表明,与正常衰老的大脑相比,患有ADHD的个体在晚年(>60岁)时脑容量损失减少,这表明ADHD或其治疗可能具有神经保护作用。至关重要的是,这些神经保护作用在脑容量严重损失与认知障碍和阿尔茨海默病相关的脑区(如海马体、杏仁核)中非常显著。从历史上看,ADHD的诊断及其药物治疗几乎是同时出现的,因此很难单独评估它们的效果。某些证据表明,精神兴奋剂可能会使ADHD大脑中通常观察到的大脑结构变化正常化。如果ADHD本身具有神经保护作用,也就是对大脑有锻炼作用,那么可能不建议在整个生命周期都使用精神兴奋剂。或者,如果兴奋剂药物具有神经保护作用,那么这类药物的治疗效果可能值得进一步研究。在这里,我们采用自下而上的整体方法,在最近的注意力模型背景下回顾ADHD的精神药理学。我们认为,非常需要未来的研究来更好地理解ADHD诊断、整个生命周期的兴奋剂治疗以及衰老大脑的结构 - 功能改变之间的相互作用。