Abstract
Aim A key aim of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive DevelopmentSM (ABCD) Study is to document substance use onset, patterns, and sequelae across adolescent development. However, substance use misreporting obscures accurate drug use characterization. Hair toxicology tests provide objective historical substance use data, but are rarely investigated in youth. Here, we compare objective hair toxicology results with self-reported substance use in youth.
Methods A literature-based substance use risk algorithm identified 696 ABCD Study® participants for hair sample collections between baseline and 2-year follow-up (spanning ages 9-13) for laboratory analysis. Chi-square and t-tests assessed differences between participants’ demographics, positive and negative hair tests, risk algorithm scores, and self-reported substance use.
Results Hair testing confirmed that 17% of at-risk 9-13 year-olds had evidence of past 3-month use of one (n=99), two (n=17), three (n=3), or four (n=2) drug classes. After considering prescribed medication use, 11% had a positive test incongruent with self- or parent-report. No participant with a positive result self-reported substance use consistent with their toxicology results. Participants with positive tests under-reported use (p<.001), reported less sipping of alcohol (p<.001), and scored higher on the risk algorithm (p<.001) than those with negative hair toxicology.
Conclusions An alarming 11% of tested samples in at-risk 9-13 year-olds were positive for at least one unreported substance, suggesting underreporting in this population when participating in a national healthy development study. The degree of underreporting cannot yet be calculated, as at-risk samples were prioritized for assays. Expanded toxicology testing is key to characterize substance use in youth.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study (https://abcdstudy.org), held in the NIMH Data Archive (NDA). This is a multisite, longitudinal study designed to recruit more than 10,000 children age 9-10 and follow them over 10 years into early adulthood. The ABCD Study is supported by the National Institutes of Health and additional federal partners under award numbers U01DA041048, U01DA050989, U01DA051016, U01DA041022, U01DA051018, U01DA051037, U01DA050987, U01DA041174, U01DA041106, U01DA041117, U01DA041028, U01DA041134, U01DA050988, U01DA051039, U01DA041156, U01DA041025, U01DA041120, U01DA051038, U01DA041148, U01DA041093, U01DA041089, U24DA041123, U24DA041147. A full list of supporters is available at https://abcdstudy.org/federal-partners.html. A listing of participating sites and a complete listing of the study investigators can be found at https://abcdstudy.org/consortium_members/. ABCD consortium investigators designed and implemented the study and/or provided data but did not necessarily participate in analysis or writing of this report. This manuscript reflects the views of the authors and may not reflect the opinions or views of the NIH or ABCD consortium investigators. The ABCD data repository grows and changes over time. The ABCD data used in this report came from ABCD Release 3.0 (DOI: 10.15154/1519007). This work was also supported by K08 DA050779 (PI: Wade) and T32 AA013525 (PI: Riley/Tapert to Wade).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All study procedures were approved by the centralized institutional review board (IRB) at the University of California San Diego and by the local site IRBs
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data is available through NIMH data archive.
