Scientists have identified a relationship between two proteins in the brain that has links to both nicotine addiction and autism. The finding has led to speculation that existing drugs used to curb nicotine addiction might serve as the basis for potential therapies to alleviate the symptoms of autism.Researchers' thinking begins with previous findings, which shows that "people with autism have a shortage of these nicotinic receptors in their brains. Meanwhile, scientists also know that people who are addicted to nicotine have too many of these receptors in their brains."
“If we were to use drugs that mimic the actions of nicotine at an early time in human brain development, would we begin to help those and other circuits develop properly and thus significantly mitigate the deficits in autism? This is a novel way of thinking about how we might be able to use drugs to approach autism treatment,” said Rene Anand, associate professor of pharmacology in Ohio State University’s College of Medicine and principal investigator of the research.What makes this particular study of real interest to the autism community is the availability of FDA-approved drugs which can be put to the test relatively quickly. In other words, if Anand's theory does hold water, treatment could be within reach.“It would not be a complete cure, but right now we know very little and have no drugs that tackle the primary causes of autism.”
Another point of interest - about which we need to learn more - is what, exactly, a stop-smoking drug is likely to do for (or to) individuals with autism. Is it likely to relieve painful symptoms such as sensory dysfunction? Or is it more likely to change the way people with autism think and reason? If the former, it's likely that the autism community as a whole will be thrilled. If the latter, there will be real controversy over its use.
I've written to Dr. Anand, asking for more details about precisely which symptoms he hopes will be alleviated by the drug, and how he plans to proceed with his research.
Lisa this has been out for a while.
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/36/14/19-a
I’ve heard of a few ped neuros using nicotine patches off label for a few years now.
This is a very preliminary finding. Animal model work is needed to get some idea whether these drugs have any value and how long the developmental window stays open to intervene. Could present huge problems if the window is gestational or during infancy before diagnosis is possible. Lots of work needed before FDA is going to grant okay for clinical trials. Clinical trials would have to recruit patients with this genotype. How common is the finding? Predicting what effects the drug might have much less whether the drug is even viable seems a bit hasty.
A key phrase from the Science Daily article: “If we were to use drugs that mimic the actions of nicotine at an early time in human brain development, would we begin to help those and other circuits develop properly and thus significantly mitigate the deficits in autism?”
This is not the same as saying that “FDA-approved drugs” are already available to treat the symptoms of autism by mimicking the actions of nicotine. Only someone with a tenuous grasp of the science could believe such a thing.
I also question your use of “the autism community”, as it implies a group cohesion that is simply not there. As your readers are well aware, some members of that ad-hoc community are already buying up Nicorette Gum for their little ones. Hey, it can’t hurt, right? And every kid is different. Meanwhile, more evidence-based community members are amazed that this kind of reckless speculation is found on a New York Times website.
To requote from the article as per my blog post:
“The finding has led to speculation that existing drugs used to curb nicotine addiction might serve as the basis for potential therapies to alleviate the symptoms of autism.”
These existing drugs are approved, though not for this off-label use. The fact of their existence gives this particular research a head start on the process of researching the actual impact and effectiveness of a potential treatment. Will the existing drugs do what the researchers hope they will do? Would the drugs have to be modified? To what degree? Of course, no one knows for sure.
Once again, for 1,000th time ANewsBeat, this is About.com, NOT The New York Times. About.com is OWNED by the New York Times Company, but it is NOT The New York Times.
Content in ARTICLES on the About.com health sites is reviewed by a medical editor. If you are looking for definitive articles on this site, which have been researched and edited, you must go to the labeled tabs or left-hand navigational links and explore the CONTENT of this site.
And, for the 10,000th time, the blog is here to provide a variety of resources and opportunities to readers, but it IS NOT intended to be more than that. The polls are just polls, not scientific surveys. The invitations to share opinions and resources are invitations to the general public, and should be read as such.
If, at some point, I do interview the researcher cited in the article, I will write a carefully researched article on the subject – and I will also cite the researcher himself relative to the details of his work. THAT ARTICLE will go through medical review, and will be a permanent part of this site.
Lisa (autism guide)
I think some major newspaper referenced that article a week or so ago… I remember discussing it with my husband.
Anyway, I found it particularly interesting. Especially considering my husband, the father of our autistic son, is a smoker.
Your article covered concerns about how the drugs would affect autistic people, so I’m really not sure what the objection to it is.
It seems that the incidence of autism has increased in recent years, at the same time that pre-natal and childhood exposure to nicotine has decreased. Could this be related?
In other words, if a child is born with a predisposition to autism, but is exposed to nicotine through 1) mother’s milk, 2) secondhand smoke, or 3) firsthand smoking, could the child develop normally without symptoms of autism, or perhaps with milder symptoms than without exposure?
I realize that no studies have been done in which children are intentionally exposed to smoke, but anecdotally … when I was a kid, lots of parents smoked and even let their kids have an occasional puff, and autism was entirely unknown.
Perfect work, coach handbags for you [url=http://connect.al.com/user/coachhandbags/index.html#1]coach handbags for you[/url], 2946,
I smoke cigarettes because it helps with my autism. The tobacco and nictoine helps me focus. The liberal media has not gotten any clue to the obivious. Like High Fructose Corn Syrup your in for a sweet suprise.
When they started replacing trans fat, and restructuring fat content in foods, more people have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Banning stuff doesn’t work.
I am on a crusade to tell the world that cigarettes do have value.
By the way I don’t work in any way shape of form for a tobacco company.
I remember speaking about this at the transit agency in Austin Texas, and the narrow minded John David Cowman Mayor of Leander, Texas started become overly rude, agressive, argumentive, and defiant.
Repeal Smoking Bans, Legalize Marijuana, End the War on Drugs.
You enviromentalists want to save algae in our aquifers in San Antonio, but we want to save medinical products and remedies
that don’t come in pill form, or make a pharmachutical company super rich from it.
Food for thought.