Table 3.
Studies investigating brain functional alterations using functional magnetic resonance imaging in adolescent cannabis users.
| Study | fMRI paradigm | CU (n) | NU 9n) | Age of CU (years) | Age of NU (years) | Summary Results | Study Design |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acheson et al. (84) | Win/lose gambling task | 14 | 14 | 17.3 (1.3) | 17.6 (1.0) | CU>NU MFG, caudate claustrum; CU>NU R MFG, R posterior &anterior cingulate, L insula, Bi. claustrum and declive. | CU vs NU |
| Behan et al. (85) | Go/no go task | 17 | 18 | 16.5 (0.2) | 16.1 (0.4) | NU>CU Bi. white matter adjacent to anterior cingulate. | CU vs NU |
| De Bellis et al. (86) | Decision-reward uncertainty task | 15 | 23 | 16.4 (0.73) | 15.4 | CU>NU L SPL, L LOC< L. precuneus, R precuneus. | CU vs non-cannabis using controls with psychopathology |
| Jager et al. (87) | Monetary incentive delay task | 21 | 24 | 17.2 (1.0) | 16.8 (1.3) | No significant difference. | CU vs NU |
| Lopez-Larson et al. (88) | Finger Tapping | 34 | 24 | 18.2 (0.7) | 18.0 (1.9) | NU>CU R cingulate gyrus | CU vs NU |
| Schweinsburg et al. (89) | Spacial working memory task | 15 | 17 | 18.1 (0.7) (SD) |
17.9 (1.0) (SD) |
CU>NU R SPL, NU>CU R dorsolateral PFC; CU>NU inferior cuneus. | CU vs NU |
| Schweinsburg et al. (90) | Verbal Encoding Task | 36 | 38 | 18.1 (0.9) 18.0 (1.0) |
17.6 (0.8) 18.1 (0.7) |
No significant difference. | CU vs NU (also included binge drinking CU and NU groups) |
| Tapert et al. (91) | Go/NoGo Task | 16 | 17 | 18.1 (0.7) (SD) |
17.9 (1.0) (SD) |
CU>NU Bi. SFG, Bi. MFG, R Insula, Bi. MFC, Bi. IPL, Bi. SPL, R lingual OG, R middle OG; CU>NU R IFG, R insula, R SFG, R MFG, R SPL, R IPL, R medial precuneus. | CU vs NU |
| Becker et al. (92) | Verbal Memory n-back task | Early: 26 Late:17 |
Early: 21.0 (2.8); Late: 24.5 (3.4) |
No significant difference in cerebellum and DLPFC. Early > Late increased activation in the L.SPL | Early (<16 years) vs Late (>16 years) onset cannabis use | ||
| Gruber et al. (93) | Multi-Source Interference Task | Early: 9 Late: 14 |
Early: 21.44 (3.57); Late: 23.07 (6.20) |
Early > Late onset increased activation in the mid R cingulum. Late > Early increased anterior L cingulum. | Early (<16 years) vs Late (>16 years) onset cannabis use | ||
| Sagar et al. (94) | Stroop Colour Word Test | Early: 24 Late: 26 |
34 | Early: 23.67 (7.26); Late: 24.27 (6.79) |
24.47 (6.49) | Early had activation pattern that included the L. anterior cingulate. Late had similar pattern to NU group. | Early (<16 years) vs Late (>16 years) onset cannabis users vs NU |
| Blanco-Hinojo et al. (95) | Resting-State Functional Connectivity | 28 | 29 | 21 (2) | 22 (3) | Abnormal FC between striatum and cortical area; striatum and ACC; striatum and fusiform gyrus. | CU vs NU |
| Orr et al. (96) | Resting-State Functional Connectivity | 17 | 18 | 16.5 (0.2) | 16.1 (0.4) | CU>NU Increased fALFF in SFG, RSPG, cerebellum. Decreased interhemispheric R SF, R SFG, pyramis of Cerebellum. | CU vs NU |
| Camchong et al. (97) | Resting-State Functional Connectivity | 22 | 43 | 17.6 (2.4) | 16.5 (2.7) | NU increased FC between ACC and SFG. CU decreased FC in caudal ACC and dorsolateral and orbitofrontal cortex. | Longitudinal design; CU vs NU |
| Thijssen et al. (98) | Resting-State Functional Connectivity | 130 | 47 | 17.31 (1.09) | 16.90 (1.19) | CU associated with decreased connectivity in precuneus network, auditory network, primary visual network. Increased connectivity between, R frontal-parietal and sensorimotor network. | Cohort of adolescence with (CU) and without cannabis use dependence (NU). |
CU, cannabis users; NU, non-cannabis using healthy controls; M, male; F, female; R, right; L, left, Bi., bilateral; SFG, superior frontal gyrus; MFG, middle frontal gyrus; IFG, inferior frontal gyrus; MFC, medial frontal cortex; IPL, inferior parietal lobe; SPL, superior parietal lobule; OG, occipital gyrus; FC, functional connectivity.