↓ Skip to main content

Associations of Cigarette Smoking and Polymorphisms in Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor and Catechol-O-Methyltransferase with Neurocognition in Alcohol Dependent Individuals during Early Abstinence

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Associations of Cigarette Smoking and Polymorphisms in Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor and Catechol-O-Methyltransferase with Neurocognition in Alcohol Dependent Individuals during Early Abstinence
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2012.00178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy C. Durazzo, Kent E. Hutchison, Susanna L. Fryer, Anderson Mon, Dieter J. Meyerhoff

Abstract

Chronic cigarette smoking and polymorphisms in brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) are associated with neurocognition in normal controls and those with various neuropsychiatric conditions. The influence of BDNF and COMT on neurocognition in alcohol dependence is unclear. The primary goal of this report was to investigate the associations of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in BDNF Val66Met (rs6265) and COMT Val158Met (rs4680) with neurocognition in a treatment-seeking alcohol dependent cohort and determine if neurocognitive differences between non-smokers and smokers previously observed in this cohort persist when controlled for these functional SNPs. Genotyping was conducted on 70 primarily male treatment-seeking alcohol dependent participants (ALC) who completed a comprehensive neuropsychological battery after 33 ± 9 days of monitored abstinence. After controlling for COMT and BDNF genotypes, smoking ALC performed significantly worse than non-smoking ALC on the domains of auditory-verbal and visuospatial learning and memory, cognitive efficiency, general intelligence, processing speed, and global neurocognition. In smoking ALC, greater number of years of smoking over lifetime was related to poorer performance on multiple domains after controlling for genotypes and alcohol consumption. In addition, COMT Met homozygotes were superior to Val homozygotes on measures of executive skills and showed trends for higher general intelligence and visuospatial skills, while COMT Val/Met heterozygotes showed significantly better general intelligence than Val homozygotes. COMT Val homozygotes performed better than heterozygotes on auditory-verbal memory. BDNF genotype was not related to any neurocognitive domain. The findings are consistent with studies in normal controls and neuropsychiatric cohorts that reported COMT Met carriers demonstrated better performance on measures of executive skills and general intelligence. Results also indicated that the poorer performance of smoking compared to non-smoking ALC across multiple neurocognitive domains was not mediated by COMT or BDNF genotype. Overall, the findings lend support to the expanding clinical movement to make smoking cessation programs available to smokers at the inception of treatment for alcohol/substance use disorders.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Denmark 1 4%
Unknown 24 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 5 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Psychology 4 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 8 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2012.
All research outputs
#2,634,544
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#983
of 15,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,404
of 244,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#17
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,861 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,101 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.