RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Substance Use Onset in High-Risk 9-13 Year-Olds in the ABCD Study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.08.10.21261808
DO 10.1101/2021.08.10.21261808
A1 Wade, Natasha E.
A1 Tapert, Susan F.
A1 Lisdahl, Krista M.
A1 Huestis, Marilyn A.
A1 Haist, Frank
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/16/2021.08.10.21261808.abstract
AB Aim A key aim of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development□ (ABCD) Study is to document substance use onset, patterns, and sequelae across adolescent development. However, substance use misreporting can obscure accurate drug use characterization. Hair toxicology provides objective historical substance use data but is rarely used in studies of youth. Here, we compare objective hair toxicology results with self-reported substance use in high-risk youth.Methods A literature-based substance use risk algorithm prioritized 696 ABCD Study® participants for hair sample analysis at baseline, and 1 and 2-year follow-ups (spanning ages 9-13). Chi-square and t-tests assessed differences between participants’ demographics, positive and negative hair tests, risk-for-use 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=97), two (n=14), three (n=2), or four (n=2) drug classes. After considering prescribed medication use, 10.3% had a positive test incongruent with self-report. No participant with a positive result self-reported recreational substance use that was consistent with their toxicology results. They also reported less sipping of alcohol (p < 0.001) and scored higher on the risk-for-use algorithm (p < 0.001) than those with negative toxicology results.Conclusions 10% of at-risk 9-13 year-olds tested positive for at least one unreported substance, suggesting underreporting in this age range when participating in a research study. As hair testing prioritized youth with risk characteristics, the overall extent of underreporting will be calculated in future studies. Nonetheless, hair toxicology was key to characterizing substance use in high-risk youth.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementData 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 DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe 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 IRBsAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data is available through NIMH data archive.