Elsevier

Alcohol

Volume 23, Issue 2, February 2001, Pages 117-122
Alcohol

Stress as a mediating factor in the association between the DRD2 TaqI polymorphism and alcoholism

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0741-8329(00)00138-5Get rights and content

Abstract

Results of earlier studies have shown that rating of prior stress exposure in preadolescent boys influenced the association between DRD2 genotypes and alcoholism risk factors, suggesting that variability in stress exposure, either in patient or control samples, could readily account for at least part of the confusion in DRD2 study outcomes. In order to test the hypothesis that the DRD2 A1 allele is only associated with alcoholism in subjects with elevated stress exposure, we examined the gene–stress interactional model in a sample of males of Mayan descent in the Olancho district of Honduras. Ascertainment was based on an epidemiologic, observational cross-sectional design, and the study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. A total of 309 adult males (age range 18–87 years) were interviewed by a physician or a public health nurse, blood samples were obtained for genetic studies, and participants were administered the short version of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (S-MAST) and the Hispanic Stress Inventory (HSI). Three explanatory models were evaluated. The first model tested the effect of the demographic variables alone as predictors of MAST scores, the second tested the effects of stress and DRD2 genotypes separately, and the third tested the effect of the interaction between stress and the DRD2 genotypes. Neither model 1 nor model 2 yielded significant results; neither MAST scores nor HSI scores were found to be associated with DRD2 genotypes. However, Model 3 was confirmed reflecting a significant (P<.05) interaction between DRD2 genotype and stress score as a predictor of MAST score. Additionally, this difference was found to be largely accounted by the HSI occupational/economic stress score, which had a highly significant (P=.003) interaction with DRD2 genotype as a predictor of MAST score. This stress score was the only one of four that showed levels of stress as high as HSI scores in a US population. The MAST scores of A2A2 genotype participants were found to be nearly identical in low stress and high stress participants, whereas the MAST scores of A1A2 participants increased modestly with stress (P=.01) and that of A1A1 participants increased markedly with stress (P=.001). These findings support the hypothesis that DRD2 genotype–phenotype associations depend on the magnitude of stress exposure, and they lend support to the view that variability in DRD2 study outcomes may in part be explained by this gene–environment interaction.

Introduction

Marked variability in the outcome of association studies has become an important issue in psychiatric genetics. Moreover, while such variability in results has been observed with all psychiatrically relevant polymorphisms that have been extensively studied, none have generated the level of debate and controversy that has been attached to studies of the association between the DRD2 TaqI polymorphism and alcoholism. To date, more than 20 DRD2/alcoholism association studies have been reported, with about half supporting and half not supporting the association. Noble (1998) published the most recent meta-analysis of DRD2/alcoholism studies, evaluating the results of 15 US and international reports, consisting of 1,015 alcoholics and 898 controls. Noble reported that, overall, alcoholics had a higher prevalence of the A1 allele than controls (P<10−6). Additionally, the prevalence of the A1 allele was 1.5-fold higher in more severe than in less severe alcoholics (P<10−4) and the prevalence was two-fold higher in unassessed than in Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST)-assessed controls (P<10−4). These findings suggest that study-to-study variability in the type of alcoholics and the nature of controls used by different investigators would probably alter the outcome of DRD2 TaqI association studies of alcoholism.

Despite the appeal of Noble's (1998) conclusions as an explanation for variability in the outcome of DRD2 studies, a recent study by Gelernter and Kranzler (1999) suggested that neither differences in alcoholism severity nor use of unassessed vs. MAST-assessed controls were, at least in their hands, viable mediators of outcome. In a study of 160 alcohol-dependent subjects, segregated by severity, and 136 screened control subjects, they found no differences in DRD2 TaqI allelic frequencies between cases and controls, and analysis based on severity of alcohol dependence also yielded no significant association. Indeed, Gelernter et al. (1993) suggested that, in view of the marked differences in DRD2 TaqI allelic frequencies between ethnic groups, those DRD2 studies that report positive findings may be flawed by hidden ethnic stratification sampling biases. However, although there is certainly merit to the notion that subtle differences in ethnic background may contaminate the veracity of outcome in these studies, this concept alone is an insufficient explanation for the observed variability in all studies. For one thing, there have been separate reports of a positive association between the DRD2 A1 allele and alcoholism in Japanese samples Arinami et al., 1993, Ishiguro et al., 1997, Kono et al., 1997, as well as in Finnish (Hietala et al., 1997) and French (Amadeo et al., 1993) samples, where both cases and controls are presumably ethnically homogeneous.

An alternative view, put forth by Comings (1998) proposes that study-to-study variability in the outcome of psychiatric association studies is to be expected because these are polygenic disorders, involving many different risk-associated genetic markers, each accounting for only 1%–3% of the variance in the phenotype. As a result, a given phenotype, such as alcoholism, may in one individual or group tend to be linked to one set of gene variations, whereas in the next individual the phenotype may derive from a different set of gene variations. Therefore, within such a polygenic context, true risk may only be reliably assessed by the cumulative number of risk alleles carried by individuals.

A fourth explanatory model for understanding variability in genotype–phenotype associations is provided by studies that have demonstrated gene–environment interactions. The potential relevance of this argument to the DRD2/alcoholism debate resides in the established role of the dopaminergic system in the mediation of stress and, conversely, the ability of stress to modify dopaminergic response. The dopaminergic system has been implicated in reactivity to perturbation in environmental conditions and for general emotional responses (Pani et al., 2000). Stress of social subordination in female cynomolgus monkeys has been shown to be associated with decreased D2 receptor function, and stress exposure has been found to decrease D2 receptor mRNA in the nucleus accumbens, substantia nigra, and ventral tegmental areas (Shively, 1998). Collectively, these studies suggest the possibility that stress exposure may act to modify the nature of the association between DRD2 genotype and any or all dopamine D2 receptor-related phenotypic expressions. Thus, in a little referenced but theoretically important study, Berman and Noble (1997) examined the role of childhood stress exposure in the mediation of the association between the DRD2 TaqI polymorphism and two measures that have been linked to alcoholism: impairments in the Line Orientation score (a measure of visuospatial ability) (Berman & Noble, 1995) and reductions in the amplitude of the P300 EEG-evoked potential (Hill et al., 2000). In their study of preadolescent boys, Berman and Noble (1997) divided subjects into low vs. high childhood family stress exposure and found that among low stress subjects there were no differences in performance scores between A1+ subjects (A1A1 and A1A2) and A1− subjects (A2A2). However, they also found that in the presence of the DRD2 A1 allele, the Family Stress score was negatively correlated both with reductions in visuospatial ability and P300 amplitude, whereas in A2A2 boys Family Stress was not correlated with either measure.

The findings reported by Berman and Noble (1997) suggest that stress exposure has no discernible effect on alcoholism-risk measures in A1− subjects, but is associated with significant performance decrements in A1+ subjects. It is therefore reasonable to assume that carriers of the DRD2 A1 allele may be more stress sensitive or reactive, than A2A2 individuals, at least with respect to the expression of alcoholism-related phenotypes. Furthermore, if Berman and Noble's observations in preadolescent boys have relevance for adult behavior, we should be able to expect that variability in stress exposure may interact with the DRD2 TaqI genotypes in predicting risk of developing alcoholism. In order to test this hypothesis, we sought to examine the gene–stress interactional model in a sample of ethnically homogeneous adult male Mayan descendants resident in the Olancho district of Honduras.

Section snippets

The setting

The present study was undertaken in Catacamas, located in the Olancho district in the Eastern part of Honduras. The majority of the population in Catacamas are descendants of the indigenous Mayan population and Spanish conquistadors. The average educational level is 5.2 years, and the majority of the population are engaged in agriculture (beans, corn, and rice). The unemployment rate is commonly 40%, and underemployment is even higher (Pan American Health Organization [PAHO], 1998). In 1994,

Results

The age range of participants was 18 to 87 years, with a mean age of 37.8 years. Subjects had an average of 5.9 people living in the household, an average of 2.9 children, and an average of 5.2 years of education. The demographic characteristics for categorical variables are shown in Table 1.

DRD2 TaqI genotyping revealed that in this sample 23 subjects (7.6%) were A1A1, 128 (42.1%) were A1A2, and 153 (49.5%) were A2A2, generating an overall prevalence of A1+ carriers at 49.7%. Thus, the

Discussion

The findings of the present study support the gene–stress interactional model first proposed by Berman and Noble (1997). Moreover, while demonstrating that DRD2 A1+ individuals may only have an increased risk of alcoholism when exposed to a “culturally salient” stressor (in this case, occupational/economic stress), these results also suggest that in unstressed subjects (or groups) rates of alcoholism may actually be higher in A1− individuals. This gene–stress interactional phenomenon may help

References (25)

  • R.C. Cervantes et al.

    The Hispanic Stress Inventory: a culturally relevant approach to psychosocial assessment

    Psychological Assessment: J Con Clin Psych

    (1991)
  • D.E. Comings et al.

    Polygenic inheritance of Tourette syndrome, stuttering, attention deficit hyperactivity, conduct, and oppositional defiant disorder: the additive and subtractive effect of the three dopaminergic genes — DRD2, D beta H, and DAT1

    Am J Med Genet

    (1996)
  • Cited by (78)

    • ADHD co-morbidities: A review of implication of gene × environment effects with dopamine-related genes

      2022, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
      Citation Excerpt :

      In meta-analysis, the DRD2/ANKK1 Taq I is also associated also with smoking initiation (Munafò et al., 2004) but not with several other measures of tobacco smoking (Munafò et al., 2009). As to the G × E interactions, these come from rather mixed environments and have used quite different measures, either not finding interactions of DRD2/ANKK1 Taq1A and childhood adversity (Schellekens et al., 2013), or demonstrating that alcohol consumption levels were higher only in case of more occupational/home/monetary stress in male DRD2/ANKK1 A1 allele carriers of Mayan descent (Madrid et al., 2001). Another finding was that interaction with past home environment smoking and self-reported craving in adolescent smokers was more pronounced in DRD2/ANKK1 Taq I A2 homozygotes with high exposure to tobacco smoke (Kleinjan et al., 2015).

    • Administration of a putative pro-dopamine regulator, a neuronutrient, mitigates alcohol intake in alcohol-preferring rats

      2020, Behavioural Brain Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Nonetheless, males exhibited statistically significant anxiety-like behavior compared to females regardless of treatment. It is noteworthy, that the inability to cope with stress has been shown to load onto lower DRD2 receptors as shown in the work of the Comings group [71,72] and others who implicate dopaminergic activity and stress related events including coping abilities [73,74]. The anatomically distinct NAc core and shell regions modulate different aspects of reward seeking behavior and alcohol abuse [75,76].

    • Association study of DRD2 and MAOA genes with subtyped alcoholism comorbid with bipolar disorder in Han Chinese

      2013, Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
      Citation Excerpt :

      Third, because only men were recruited in our study, we could not assess gender effects. Fourth, other studies (Eitle, 2005; Madrid et al., 2001; White et al., 2000) have suggested that environmental factors and life stresses are important in the etiology and pathogenesis of alcoholism. The modification effect of psychosocial factors on alcoholism may also be examined in further studies.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text