Differential Associations of Dopamine and Serotonin With Reward and Punishment Processes in Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 22.5 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Anahit Mkrtchian, Zeguo Qiu, Yaniv Abir, Tore Erdmann, Quentin Dercon, Terezie Sedlinska, Michael Browning, Harry Costello, Quentin J M Huys
{"title":"Differential Associations of Dopamine and Serotonin With Reward and Punishment Processes in Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Anahit Mkrtchian, Zeguo Qiu, Yaniv Abir, Tore Erdmann, Quentin Dercon, Terezie Sedlinska, Michael Browning, Harry Costello, Quentin J M Huys","doi":"10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.0839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Mechanistic biomarkers for guiding treatment selection require selective sensitivity to specific pharmacological interventions. Reinforcement learning processes show potential, but there have been conflicting and sometimes inconsistent reports on how dopamine and serotonin-2 key targets in treating common mental illnesses-affect reinforcement learning in humans.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To perform a meta-analysis of pharmacological manipulations of dopamine and serotonin and examine whether they show distinct associations with reinforcement learning components in humans.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and PsycInfo databases were searched for studies published between January 1, 1946, and January 19, 2023 (repeated April 9, 2024, and October 15, 2024), investigating dopaminergic or serotonergic effects on reward and punishment processes in humans according to PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Studies reporting randomized, placebo-controlled, dopaminergic or serotonergic manipulations on a behavioral outcome from a reward or punishment processing task in healthy humans were included.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Standardized mean difference (SMD) scores were calculated for the comparison between each drug (dopamine or serotonin) and placebo on a behavioral reward or punishment outcome and quantified in random-effects models for overall reward or punishment processes and 4 main subcategories. Study quality (Cochrane Collaboration tool), moderators, heterogeneity, and publication bias were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Performance on reward or punishment processing tasks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 102 studies conducted among healthy volunteers were included (2291 participants receiving dopamine vs 2284 receiving placebo and 1491 receiving serotonin vs 1523 receiving placebo). Dopamine was associated with an increase in overall reward (SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.28) but not punishment function (SMD, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.13). Serotonin was not meaningfully associated with overall punishment (SMD, 0.22; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.49) or reward (SMD, 0.02; 95% CI, -0.33 to 0.36). Dopaminergic and serotonergic manipulations had distinct associations with subcomponents. Dopamine was associated with reward learning or sensitivity (SMD, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.40), reward discounting (SMD, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.14 to -0.01), and reward vigor (SMD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.54). By contrast, serotonin was associated with punishment learning or sensitivity (SMD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.59), reward discounting (SMD, -0.35; 95% CI, -0.67 to -0.02), and aversive pavlovian processes (within-participant studies only; SMD, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.53).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this study, pharmacological manipulations of both dopamine and serotonin had measurable associations with reinforcement learning in humans. The selective associations with different components suggest that reinforcement learning tasks could form the basis of selective, mechanistically interpretable biomarkers to support treatment assignment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14800,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12159863/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.0839","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Mechanistic biomarkers for guiding treatment selection require selective sensitivity to specific pharmacological interventions. Reinforcement learning processes show potential, but there have been conflicting and sometimes inconsistent reports on how dopamine and serotonin-2 key targets in treating common mental illnesses-affect reinforcement learning in humans.

Objective: To perform a meta-analysis of pharmacological manipulations of dopamine and serotonin and examine whether they show distinct associations with reinforcement learning components in humans.

Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and PsycInfo databases were searched for studies published between January 1, 1946, and January 19, 2023 (repeated April 9, 2024, and October 15, 2024), investigating dopaminergic or serotonergic effects on reward and punishment processes in humans according to PRISMA guidelines.

Study selection: Studies reporting randomized, placebo-controlled, dopaminergic or serotonergic manipulations on a behavioral outcome from a reward or punishment processing task in healthy humans were included.

Data extraction and synthesis: Standardized mean difference (SMD) scores were calculated for the comparison between each drug (dopamine or serotonin) and placebo on a behavioral reward or punishment outcome and quantified in random-effects models for overall reward or punishment processes and 4 main subcategories. Study quality (Cochrane Collaboration tool), moderators, heterogeneity, and publication bias were also assessed.

Main outcomes and measures: Performance on reward or punishment processing tasks.

Results: In total, 102 studies conducted among healthy volunteers were included (2291 participants receiving dopamine vs 2284 receiving placebo and 1491 receiving serotonin vs 1523 receiving placebo). Dopamine was associated with an increase in overall reward (SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.28) but not punishment function (SMD, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.13). Serotonin was not meaningfully associated with overall punishment (SMD, 0.22; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.49) or reward (SMD, 0.02; 95% CI, -0.33 to 0.36). Dopaminergic and serotonergic manipulations had distinct associations with subcomponents. Dopamine was associated with reward learning or sensitivity (SMD, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.40), reward discounting (SMD, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.14 to -0.01), and reward vigor (SMD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.54). By contrast, serotonin was associated with punishment learning or sensitivity (SMD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.59), reward discounting (SMD, -0.35; 95% CI, -0.67 to -0.02), and aversive pavlovian processes (within-participant studies only; SMD, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.53).

Conclusions and relevance: In this study, pharmacological manipulations of both dopamine and serotonin had measurable associations with reinforcement learning in humans. The selective associations with different components suggest that reinforcement learning tasks could form the basis of selective, mechanistically interpretable biomarkers to support treatment assignment.

多巴胺和血清素与人类奖惩过程的差异关联:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
重要性:指导治疗选择的机械生物标志物需要对特定药物干预具有选择性敏感性。强化学习过程显示出潜力,但关于多巴胺和血清素(治疗常见精神疾病的关键目标)如何影响人类的强化学习,一直存在矛盾,有时甚至不一致的报道。目的:对多巴胺和血清素的药理学操作进行荟萃分析,并检查它们是否与人类强化学习成分有明显的关联。数据来源:检索了Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase和PsycInfo数据库,检索了1946年1月1日至2023年1月19日(2024年4月9日和2024年10月15日重复)之间发表的研究,根据PRISMA指南调查了多巴胺能或血清素能对人类奖惩过程的影响。研究选择:包括报告随机、安慰剂对照、多巴胺能或血清素能对健康人奖惩处理任务的行为结果的操纵的研究。数据提取和合成:计算标准平均差(SMD)分数,比较每种药物(多巴胺或血清素)和安慰剂在行为奖惩结果上的比较,并在总体奖惩过程和4个主要子类别的随机效应模型中量化。研究质量(Cochrane协作工具)、调节因子、异质性和发表偏倚也被评估。主要结果和衡量标准:奖惩处理任务的表现。结果:总共包括102项在健康志愿者中进行的研究(2291名参与者接受多巴胺治疗,2284名接受安慰剂治疗,1491名接受血清素治疗,1523名接受安慰剂治疗)。多巴胺与总体奖励增加相关(SMD, 0.18;95% CI, 0.09 ~ 0.28),但没有惩罚函数(SMD, -0.06;95% CI, -0.26 ~ 0.13)。血清素与总体惩罚没有显著相关性(SMD, 0.22;95% CI, -0.04至0.49)或奖励(SMD, 0.02;95% CI, -0.33至0.36)。多巴胺能和血清素能操纵与亚成分有明显的关联。多巴胺与奖励学习或敏感性相关(SMD, 0.26;95% CI, 0.11 - 0.40),奖励折扣(SMD, -0.08;95% CI, -0.14至-0.01)和奖励活力(SMD, 0.32;95% CI, 0.11 ~ 0.54)。相比之下,血清素与惩罚学习或敏感性相关(SMD, 0.32;95% CI, 0.05 ~ 0.59),奖励折扣(SMD, -0.35;95% CI, -0.67至-0.02)和厌恶巴甫洛夫过程(仅在参与者研究中;SMD, 0.36;95% CI, 0.20 ~ 0.53)。结论和相关性:在本研究中,多巴胺和血清素的药理学操作与人类强化学习具有可测量的关联。与不同成分的选择性关联表明,强化学习任务可以形成选择性的、机械可解释的生物标志物的基础,以支持治疗分配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA Psychiatry
JAMA Psychiatry PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
30.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
233
期刊介绍: JAMA Psychiatry is a global, peer-reviewed journal catering to clinicians, scholars, and research scientists in psychiatry, mental health, behavioral science, and related fields. The Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry originated in 1919, splitting into two journals in 1959: Archives of Neurology and Archives of General Psychiatry. In 2013, these evolved into JAMA Neurology and JAMA Psychiatry, respectively. JAMA Psychiatry is affiliated with the JAMA Network, a group of peer-reviewed medical and specialty publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信