Next Article in Journal
Extended Phylogeny and Extraintestinal Virulence Potential of Commensal Escherichia coli from Piglets and Sows
Next Article in Special Issue
Health Professionals’ Counseling about Electronic Cigarettes for Smokers and Vapers in a Country That Bans the Sales and Marketing of Electronic Cigarettes
Previous Article in Journal
Relationship of Changes in Physical Fitness and Anthropometric Characteristics over One Season, Biological Maturity Status and Injury Risk in Elite Youth Ski Racers: A Prospective Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Are E-Cigarette Flavors Associated with Exposure to Nicotine and Toxicants? Findings from Wave 2 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Personality Traits or Genetic Determinants—Which Strongly Influences E-Cigarette Users?

1
Independent Laboratory of Health Promotion of the Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 11 Chlapowskiego St., 70-204 Szczecin, Poland
2
Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Collegium Medicum, University of Zielona Góra, 28 Zyty St., 65-046 Zielona Góra, Poland
3
Department of Physiology, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Powstańców Wlkp.72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland
4
Neurophysiological Independent Unit, Department of Psychiatry, Medical University of Lublin, 20-093 Lublin, Poland
5
Department of Public Health and Social Medicine, Medical University of Gdansk, 42A Zwyciestwa St., 80-210 Gdansk, Poland
6
Faculty of Physical Culture, Gdańsk University of Physical Education and Sport, 80-853 Gdańsk, Poland
7
Department of Oral Surgery, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 72 Powstańców Wlkp. St., 70-111 Szczecin, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(1), 365; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17010365
Submission received: 29 November 2019 / Revised: 2 January 2020 / Accepted: 3 January 2020 / Published: 5 January 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Electronic Cigarettes: Good and Bad Impacts)

Abstract

:
Presently, a growing popularity of electronic cigarettes may be observed. Used as a means of obtaining nicotine they allow to substitute traditional cigarettes. The origins of substance use disorders are conditioned by dopaminergic signaling which influences motivational processes being elementary factors conditioning the process of learning and exhibiting goal-directed behaviors. The study concentrated on analysis of three polymorphisms located in the dopamine receptor 2 (DRD2) gene—rs1076560, rs1799732 and rs1079597 using the PCR method, personality traits determined with the Big Five Questionnaire, and anxiety measured with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. The study was conducted on a group of 394 volunteers, consisting e-cigarette users (n = 144) and controls (n = 250). Compared to the controls the case group subjects achieved significantly higher scores in regard to the STAI state and the trait scale, as well as the NEO-FFI Neuroticism and Openness scale. Likewise, in the case of the STAI state for DRD2 rs1076560 significant differences were found. Furthermore, while comparing the groups (e-cigarette users vs. controls) we noticed interactions for the NEO FFI Neuroticism and DRD2 rs1076560. The same was observed in the case of interactions significance while comparing groups (e-cigarette users vs. controls) for the STAI trait/scale and DRD2 rs1799732. Findings from this study demonstrate that psychological factors and genetic determinants should be analyzed simultaneously and comprehensively while considering groups of addicted patients. Since the use, and rapid increase in popularity, of electronic cigarettes has implications for public health, e-cigarette users should be studied holistically, especially younger groups of addicted and experimenting users.

1. Introduction

Currently, a growing popularity of electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) [1,2] may be observed, which may result in serious worries for the society of lawmakers, healthcare providers, and smokers [3]. E-cigs may be treated as a special tobacco product since they are smoke-free. The Internet is the main platform for their increasing sales (30–50%) [4]. Recently, the expected overall annual growth has reached 16.6%, which allows to estimate that the e-cig market will have reached $28 billion by 2022. The first generation of e-cigs was introduced in the European Union in 2006 and in the United States in 2007. Now, in the United States e-cigs are treated as a smoke-free tobacco/nicotine alternative used as an aid to smoke cessation and are presented as tobacco “harm reduction” products. Nonetheless, they are used more often as another source of nicotine, which may lead to the development and maintenance of nicotine dependence. Another important fact, the same like in the case of other abusive drugs, is that the rate and magnitude of the brain nicotine accumulation may significantly influence its acute reinforcing effects [5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. When the continuum of abuse liability in connection with nicotine-containing products is analyzed, it may be noticed that it is quite similar to the continuum of rapidity of nicotine distribution to the brain (which means that it is the highest for cigarettes and the lowest for nicotine patches). Moreover, the studies of experienced e-cig users emphasized that concentration of nicotine in venous blood was comparable to those observed after cigarette smoking [12,13,14] with a rapid delivery to the brain. That fact allows to conclude that a rapid brain uptake promotes a smoking reward. Therefore, e-cigarettes might support a degree of nicotine dependence and serve as non-combustible substitutes for cigarettes [15]. However, various addictions are emerging in our time, including behavioral addictions that pose a public health threat. That is why in our study we decided to analyze three DRD2 gene polymorphisms in connection with personality traits and anxiety, bearing in mind the fact that nicotine addiction is multi-factorial and multigenic, and that psychological factors may affect not only the addiction or its absence, but also determine the form and type of addiction.
In the literature we may find multiple examples of association between genetics and addiction. Motivational processes enhancing learning and exhibition of goal-directed behaviors are influenced by dopaminergic signaling—a system influencing substance use disorders. The evidence for it is discussed in the study concerning electrophysiological recordings from midbrain dopamine neurons in monkeys [16,17]. Numerous studies on animal models have analyzed striatal dopamine D2-type receptors as elements conditioning vulnerability and resilience to addiction [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25]. They include these findings which say that the striatal D2-type receptor availability influences subsequent cocaine self-administration and that the striatal D2-type receptors and dopamine transporters show long-lasting neuroadaptations to stimulant administration in nonhuman primates [26,27]. Human studies also concluded that a below control striatal dopamine D2-type receptor availability in addicted individuals makes them prone to various substances such as stimulants, heroin, alcohol, and tobacco [28,29,30].
The dopamine receptor D2 gene (DRD2) is located in the chromosome 11q23 and spans 6556 kb. The DRD2 gene includes 8 exons that undergo transcription to mRNA of 2713 kb that is translated to protein of 443 AA. Skipping the sixth exon leads to production of a short form of receptor in opposition to a 29 AA longer form of receptor protein. The two isoforms of D2 receptors differ in their affinities for inhibitory G-proteins [31]. The D2 receptor is engaged in sending reward feelings connected with addictive substances. Polymorphic variants in the DRD2 gene and D2 receptor may be linked with substance use disorders, dependence and its endophenotypes [32,33,34,35]. The area of genetics of behavior and psychiatry is concentrated on the analysis of certain polymorphisms, including the DRD2 gene re1076550 located in intron 6. The occurrence of the T allele of rs1076560 results in a lower expression of the short isoform (D2S) in relation to the long one (D2L) in the caudate putamen and prefrontal cortex [36]. The other polymorphism analyzed in the context is rs1079597 (Taq1B) located in intron 1 of the DRD2 gene and it is noticeably associated with alcohol dependence [37], as well as other substance dependencies [38,39], including nicotine [40]. Another example of a genetic influence on nicotine dependence [41,42,43,44] is demonstrated by rs1799732 (−141C Ins/Del) located in the 5’ region of the DRD2 gene.
Following the reports from the literature, one could say that personality traits may become a predisposing addiction factor. One which is popularly described is impulsivity, which we define, according to Baratt, as “acting under the pressure of the moment”. This is a psychological characteristic which describs a patient, which may become the starting point for defining the endophenotype [45]. What is also popularly described is the so-called “novelty seeking” a characteristic quality of addicts, which shows strong correlations with another dopaminergic system polymorphism, i.e. DRD4, where a number of tandem repeats are connected by a functional polymorphism with the need for adventure seeking and linked with receptor sensitivity to dopamine uptake [46]. Therefore, research combining these features may enrich the search area at the level of basic research into addiction. Changes in the dopaminergic system may be a determinant of “search” in the case of addicts.
Behavior, lifestyle and maintenance of proper functions in a lifetime is influenced by personality. The Big Five [47,48,49], is a factor model which is most often used in personality research. It consists of five traits: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism. The differences among people are conditioned by these traits and associated with behavior, emotions, motivation and cognition [50]. People with high neuroticism show a high tendency towards mood changes, and often experience feelings of anxiety, worrying, anger, fear, frustration, jealousy, guilt, envy, depressive moods and loneliness. [51,52]. Openness is a personality trait associated with intelligence and divergent thinking. It was found that openness depends on the function of dopamine, especially in the prefrontal cortex [53]. Conscientiousness is a quality defined as a tendency to control impulses and acts in a way which is socially acceptable [54]. Extraversion is characterized by sociability, assertiveness and excitability. Extraverted people may seem more dominant in the social environment, as opposed to people who are locked in it [55]. Agreeableness, however, is a tendency towards compassion and cooperation, and also includes attributes such as altruism, trust and other pro-social behaviors. Higher anxiety levels are associated with susceptibility to substance dependence. A number of studies describe the correlation of addiction with drug traits measured using the STAI questionnaire [56].
To analyze these personality traits the revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-FFI) is used most frequently [47]. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) is another tool that is used in addiction research. It allows measurement of both, the state—reaction to a particular situation, and the trait—general tendency to react in a certain way while being anxious [57]. As described above both genetics and personality are factors influencing addiction. Therefore, the aim of our current study was to evaluate the impact of both of these components on e-cigarettes usage, and also the impact of interaction of specific genetic variants with personality traits and anxiety. The analysis was performed by comparing three polymorphisms located in the DRD2 gene—rs1076560, rs1799732 and rs1079597 (Taq1B) and personality traits measured with the Big Five Questionnaire (NEO FFI), as well as anxiety measured with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) in two groups of subjects—e-cigarette users and the non-smoking/ non-vaping control group.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Group and Control Group

The study was carried out in the Independent Laboratory of Health Promotion, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, after receiving approval from the Bioethics Committee of the Pomeranian Medical University (KB-0012/106/16) and the informed, written consent of the subjects. The study was conducted on the group of 394 volunteers of Caucasian origin, including e-cigarette users exclusively (n = 144; mean age = 26.82, SD = 9.26, men constituted 52% and women 48%) and healthy controls (n = 250; mean age = 21.84 SD = 3.98, men constituted 61% and women 39%). The study group included volunteers who self-reported the use of e-cigarettes for at least two years, whereas the controls were grouped from healthy subjects, without a history of mental disorders, not using nicotine. The examined group was recruited in the West Pomeranian and Lubuskie Voivodships. The examined participants volunteered in response to advertisements posted on the Internet and in the form of posters and leaflets. Background differences between groups have not been adjusted for.
All subjects expressed their informed consent in writing to participate in the study.

DNA Isolation and Genotyping

A standard procedure of collecting venous blood was applied to obtain genomic DNA that was used for genotyping in accordance with the real-time PCR method. Genotyping of rs1079597, rs1076560, rs1799732 in DRD2 gene was performed with the fluorescence resonance energy transfer in the LightCycler ® 480 II System (Roche Diagnostic, Basel, Switzerland) according to the standard manufacturer’s protocols.

2.2. Psychometric Tests

The following psychometric tests were also performed. The NEO Five-Factor Personality Inventory (NEO-FF) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaires were applied for testing both the research group and the controls. The Personality Inventory (NEO Five-Factor Inventory, NEO-FFI) includes 6 components for each of the five traits—Neuroticism (Anxiety, Hostility, Depression, Self-consciousness, Impulsiveness, Vulnerability to stress), Extraversion (Warmth, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity, Excitement Seeking, Positive Emotion), Openness to experience (Fantasy, Aesthetics, Feelings, Actions, Ideas, Values), Agreeableness (Trust, Straightforwardness, Altruism, Compliance, Modesty, Tendermindedness), Conscientiousness (Competence, Order, Dutifulness, Achievement striving, Self-discipline, Deliberation) [47]. The STAI measures anxiety as a state (A-state) including fear, discomfort, and arousal of the autonomic nervous system occurring temporarily in relation to a particular situation as well as the trait of anxiety (A-Trait), which may be described as a permanent and enduring disposition to experience stress, worries, and discomfort. To show the results of the NEO-FFI and STAI tests the sten scale was applied. We also analyzed the history of substance dependence and psychosis using the medical records and authors’ own survey. The Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaire, is the tool frequently used for evaluating anxiety, a state that is mainly determined as a conditionally and transiently conditioned psychological state of an individual. What is more, anxiety may be treated as a relatively constant personality trait. The STAI questionnaire is based on two independent subscales, containing 20 statements each, which makes it more valuable in a personality traits assessment. One of them measures the anxiety trait X-1, whereas the other measures the anxiety trait X-2. Personality traits defined with the Big Five model (neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness and agreeableness) are components which may be discussed on the basis of the NEO Five Factor Inventory questionnaire which includes 60 statements (self-reported) requiring from the participant to assess themselves with research approach. The results of the tests NEO-FFI and STAI were provided as sten scores. The conversion of raw scores into the sten scale was performed according to the Polish norms for adults, in which it was assumed that stens 1–2 meant very low scores; 3–4 meant low scores, 5–6 meant average scores; 7–8 were high scores, 9–10 were very high scores.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Concordance between the genotype frequency distribution and the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) was tested with the HWE software (http://www.oege.org/software/hwe-mr-calc.html). The differences in frequencies of genotypes and alleles of the studied polymorphisms between e-cigarette users and control subjects were tested using the chi square test. The differences in mean scores of the NEO Five Factor Inventory traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeability and Conscientiousness) and STAI (state and trait) between the analyzed groups were measured and compared using the U Mann-Whitney test. In order to analyze the interaction between genetic and personality features a multivariate ANOVA was performed. A multivariate analysis of factor effects ANOVA (NEO-FFI/ scale STAI/ × genetic feature × control and e-smokers subjects × (genetic feature × control and e-cig subjects)) was applied to analyze the relation between DRD2 variants, e-cigarette users and control subjects and the NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) and STAI. The condition of homogeneity of variance was satisfied (Levene test p > 0.05). A normal distribution was not observed in the case of analyzed variables. All computations were performed using STATISTICA 13 (Tibco Software Inc, Palo Alto, CA, USA) for Windows (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA).

3. Results

The observed DRD2 polymorphisms frequencies differed from expectations based on the Hardy-Weinberg theorem in the e-cigarette users and in the control group. There were no statistically significant differences between the e-cigarette users and the control group in the frequency of DRD2 rs1076560, rs1079597 and rs1799732 genotypes and alleles (Table 1). While comparing the controls and the case group subjects, we noticed significantly higher scores on the STAI state scale (M = 5.43 vs. M = 4.74, p < 0.0001), STAI trait scale (M = 5.82 vs. M = 5.20, p < 0.02), Neuroticism scale (M = 5.71 vs. M = 4.64, p < 0.01), Openness scale (M = 5.03 vs. M = 4.52, p < 0.01), (Table 2).
Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5 present the results of our tests for interaction between genetic determinants and personality traits. These results are for 2 × 3 factorial ANOVA of the NEO Five-Factor Personality Inventory (NEO-FFI) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) shown in sten scales. The STAI state scale compared for DRD2 rs1076560 (F2388 = 3.65 p < 0.05), which accounted for 1.8% of the variance, showed to be a significant result. Comparison of the groups (e-cigarette users vs. controls) for NEO FFI Neuroticism and DRD2 rs1076560 (Figure 1, F2388 = 4.11 p < 0.05), which accounted for 2.1% of the variance, demonstrated significant results for interaction. A similar situation was observed in the case of the STAI trait scale and DRD2 rs1799732 (Figure 2, F2388 = 4.66 (p < 0.05)), which accounted for 2.3% of the variance. Post-hoc analysis is shown in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5.
In Figure 1 we observe that e-cigarette users who are carriers of the C/C and A/C genotypes show a higher level of neuroticism as measured by the NEO FFI test compared to the carriers of these genotypes in the non-smoking control group. In contrast, e-cigarette users who are carriers of the A/A genotype show a lower level of neuroticism compared to carriers of the A/A genotype in the control group.
In Figure 2, we observe that e-cigarette users who are carriers of the ins/del and del/del genotypes show a higher level of anxiety measured by the STAI test compared to those carriers in the non-smoking control group.

4. Discussion

As demonstrated in the previous studies and in the deliberations cited in the Introduction, the dopaminergic system plays a role in nicotine addiction. However, there are scarce reports in the literature about e-cigarette users or other modern nicotine delivering systems. By examining the genetics of addiction, we have repeatedly proved the impact of selected DRD2 polymorphisms on addiction [58,59,60] whether in alcoholics or patients addicted to psychoactive substances. The first question that arises is whether it makes sense to study e-cigarette users as a separate group of addicts—will they develop a specific genotype (will it be the same as in other addictions)? One could say that only nicotine addiction as a genetic determinant should be studied. During the recruitment and examination of the patients, it was observed that e-cigarettes were chosen by young people, the majority of whom were under-age, particularly as a result of their easier accessibility and greater comfort of use (no unpleasant smell, conviction of lesser harmfulness, etc.) [61]. However, in our study we only show a group of young adults using electronic cigarettes.
The psychometric tests are a reference and a variable that is an important element in the analysis.
We have found that there is an interaction between the groups compared (e-cigarette users vs. controls) with DRD2 rs1076560 which affects the NEO FFI neuroticism score. Higher values on the NEO FFI neuroticism scale were obtained by e-cigarette users for C/C and A/C polymorphisms compared to the control group. In contrast, lower values were found for A/A polymorphism compared to the control group.
In scientific studies it has already been found that personality traits displayed by a patient are a clear factor that predisposes to addiction. Impulsivity should be mentioned first. Baratt describes this feature as “acting under pressure of the moment”, thus making prompt decisions. Thanks to the impulsivity analysis, it is possible to define subgroups of patients, and it may even become a start to isolate the endophenotype [45] It should be noted that the division of this characteristic is related to the motor quality and the quality of making choices. Choosing addictive substances (including illegal substances) and attempting to experiment with new substances or behaviors may lead to the development of addiction [62]. “Novelty seekers” are known in scientific reports as people with a greater predisposition to developing addiction. This search for new things (as a personality trait) may also be seen here in the context of looking for new addictive substances, new products on the market, as well as a desire to try something that is unknown and inaccessible. And here one should refer to the connection of this trait with the dopaminergic system. “Novelty seeking” correlates with the polymorphic variant of the DRD4 gene. Those who possess long alleles (over 5 VNTRs) in the functional polymorphism of that gene experience pleasure while looking for adventures, which, in turn, is associated with the receptor’s sensitivity to dopamine uptake [46]. In our study, e-cigarette users had higher values on the neuroticism scale for the C/C and A/C genotypes for the DRD2 rs1076560 gene polymorphism.
The rs1076560 polymorphism was previously described as significant for the functioning of the dopaminergic system. Zhang also noticed that the SNPs rs1076560 and rs2283265, that are located in the fifth and sixth introns of DRD2, are significantly associated with decreased expression of D2S in comparison to D2L and D2 receptor density. The working memory and attention control test, based on an fMRI analysis, demonstrated a brain activity-modulating effect in correlation with variants in healthy participants [63]. Our previous study covered the element of openness to new experience in this context, in association with the ANKK1 Taq1A gene polymorphism. The increased effects of addicted subjects and control subjects were observed for the following parameters: STAI trait, Neuroticism scale, Extraversion scale and Agreeability scale. The highest effects for the ANKK1 Taq1A were observed for the STAI trait and they approximated to the statistical significance for the STAI state and Neuroticism [64].
What is also worth noting is the fact that the present study demonstrated correlations related to the results regarding anxiety. We found a significant effect on the STAI sten scale score for DRD2 rs1076560. We found that there was an interaction between the groups compared (e-cigarette users vs. controls) and DRD2 rs1799732 on the STAI trait scale. Higher values on the STAI trait scale were obtained by e-cigarette users for the ins/del and del/del polymorphisms compared to the control group. However, they did not differ for ins/ins polymorphism between e-cigarette users and the control group.
We found a relationship of anxiety symptoms lasting from early childhood with the influence on the availability of D2 in the striatum, which in turn is conditioned by the A1 allele of the ANKK1 gene [65].
A meta-analysis of 17 twin studies [66] showed a weighted mean heritability for nicotine dependence of 59% in male smokers and 46% in female smokers (average 56% for all smokers). Different analysis [67,68,69,70] resulted in a similar degree of heritability in smoking-related behaviors, including cessation and initiation. rs17999732 has been associated with many substance dependencies—nicotine [43], heroin [71] and opiates [72]. The above-mentioned polymorphism is located in the 5’ flanking region of the DRD2 gene. It was demonstrated that this region is extremely important in regulating gene expression [73,74]. However, the results of the studies in this regard are not uniform [75,76,77].

Limitations and Future Directions

This study is not free from some limitations—it was conducted on the subjects of Caucasian origin, so we strongly feel that it should be repeated on subjects of different ethnicities. As we see the topic remains open. We still do not have an explicit answer to the question what determines e-smokers. On the basis of our study we can conclude positive initial results of correlation, however it is only a preliminary study. Therefore, we are cautious in drawing conclusions that would translate into a clinical image of the studied people. Translational research will take place when a larger group of people is studied. The group is still being recruited, subsequent genes are going to be examined, and in the future a GWAS study is going to be conducted. However, we should emphasize the fact, that psychological factors, simultaneously with a genetic component, may play a significant role in addiction.

5. Conclusions

We have not found statistically significant differences observed in two groups on genetic test alone. We noticed an interaction in the case of DRD2 rs1799732 polymorphism on the STAI trait scale. An increased level of anxiety was characteristic for the group of e-cigarette users with an ins/del genotype and del/del homozygotes in the control group. It may be related to the fact that coping with stress and negative emotional states are often motivational for addicted individuals to use drugs. Findings from this study demonstrate that psychological factors and genetic determinants should be analyzed simultaneously and comprehensively while considering groups of addicted patients. Since the use, and rapid increase in popularity, of electronic cigarettes has implications for public health, e-cigarette users should be studied holistically, especially younger groups of addicted and experimenting users.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.G., G.T., Ł.B. and K.C.; methodology, A.S., K.S., K.C., J.C.; software, K.C.; validation, A.S., and J.M.; formal analysis, A.G.; investigation, A.G., Ł.B., A.S., J.M., J.C.; resources, J.C.; data curation, K.C.; writing—original draft preparation, A.G., A.S., M.M.-S., K.S.; writing—review and editing A.G., A.S., M.M.-S., K.S.; visualization, A.G.; supervision, A.G.; project administration, A.G.; funding acquisition, A.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The project is financed by the program of the Minister of Science and Higher Education under the name “Regional Initiative of Excellence” in 2019-2022, project number 002/RID/2018/19, at an amount of 12,000,000 PLN.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bao, W.; Xu, G.; Lu, J.; Snetselaar, L.G.; Wallace, R.B. Changes in Electronic Cigarette Use Among Adults in the United States, 2014–2016. JAMA 2018, 319, 2039–2041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Mirbolouk, M.; Charkhchi, P.; Kianoush, S.; Uddin, S.M.I.; Orimoloye, O.A.; Jaber, R.; Bhatnagar, A.; Benjamin, E.J.; Hall, M.E.; DeFilippis, A.P.; et al. Prevalence and Distribution of E-Cigarette Use Among, U.S. Adults: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2016. Ann. Intern. Med. 2018, 169, 429–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Zvolensky, M.J.; Mayorga, N.A.; Garey, L. Worry, Anxiety Sensitivity, and Electronic Cigarettes among Adults. Psychiatry Res 2018, 269, 321–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Rom, O.; Pecorelli, A.; Valacchi, G.; Reznick, A.Z. Are E-Cigarettes a Safe and Good Alternative to Cigarette Smoking? Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2015, 1340, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Benowitz, N.L. Clinical Pharmacology of Inhaled Drugs of Abuse: Implications in Understanding Nicotine Dependence. NIDA Res. Monogr. 1990, 99, 12–29. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Henningfield, J.E.; Keenan, R.M. Nicotine Delivery Kinetics and Abuse Liability. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1993, 61, 743–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Schneider, N.G.; Olmstead, R.E.; Franzon, M.A.; Lunell, E. The Nicotine Inhaler: Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Comparison with Other Nicotine Treatments. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 2001, 40, 661–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Caldwell, B.; Sumner, W.; Crane, J. A Systematic Review of Nicotine by Inhalation: Is there a Role for the Inhaled Route? Nicotine Tob. Res. 2012, 14, 1127–1139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Samaha, A.N.; Yau, W.Y.; Yang, P.; Robinson, T.E. Rapid Delivery of Nicotine Promotes Behavioral Sensitization and Alters Its Neurobiological Impact. Biol. Psychiatry 2005, 57, 351–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wing, V.C.; Shoaib, M. Effect of Infusion Rate on Intravenous Nicotine Self-Administration in Rats. Behav. Pharmacol. 2013, 24, 517–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Allain, F.; Minogianis, E.A.; Roberts, D.C.; Samaha, A.N. How Fast and How Often: The Pharmacokinetics of Drug Use are Decisive in Addiction. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2015, 56, 166–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Vansickel, A.R.; Eissenberg, T. Electronic Cigarettes: Effective Nicotine Delivery after Acute Administration. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2013, 15, 267–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Farsalinos, K.E.; Spyrou, A.; Stefopoulos, C.; Tsimopoulou, K.; Kourkoveli, P.; Tsiapras, D.; Kyrzopoulos, S.; Poulas, K.; Voudris, V. Nicotine Absorption from Electronic Cigarette Use: Comparison between Experienced Consumers (Vapers) and Naive Users (Smokers). Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 11269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. St Helen, G.; Havel, C.; Dempsey, D.A.; Jacob, P., 3rd; Benowitz, N.L. Nicotine Delivery, Retention and Pharmacokinetics from Various Electronic Cigarettes. Addiction 2016, 111, 535–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Solingapuram Sai, K.K.; Zuo, Y.; Rose, J.E.; Garg, P.; Garg, S.; Nazih, R.; Mintz, A.; Mukhin, A. Rapid Brain Nicotine Uptake from Electronic Cigarettes. J. Nucl. Med. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Schultz, W. Behavioral Theories and the Neurophysiology of Reward. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2006, 57, 87–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Schultz, W. Neuronal Reward and Decision Signals: From Theories to Data. Physiol. Rev. 2015, 95, 853–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Dalley, J.W.; Fryer, T.D.; Brichard, L.; Robinson, E.S.; Theobald, D.E.; Laane, K.; Pena, Y.; Murphy, E.R.; Shah, Y.; Probst, K.; et al. Nucleus Accumbens D2/3 Receptors Predict Trait Impulsivity and Cocaine Reinforcement. Science 2007, 315, 1267–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Dobbs, L.K.; Lemos, J.C.; Alvarez, V.A. Restructuring of Basal Ganglia Circuitry and Associated Behaviors Triggered by Low Striatal D2 Receptor Expression: Implications for Substance Use Disorders. Genes Brain Behav. 2017, 16, 56–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Maldonado, R.; Saiardi, A.; Valverde, O.; Samad, T.A.; Roques, B.P.; Borrelli, E. Absence of Opiate Rewarding Effects in Mice Lacking Dopamine D2 Receptors. Nature 1997, 388, 586–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Nader, M.A.; Czoty, P.W. PET Imaging of Dopamine D2 Receptors in Monkey Models of Cocaine Abuse: Genetic Predisposition Versus Environmental Modulation. Am. J. Psychiatry 2005, 162, 1473–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Nader, M.A.; Morgan, D.; Gage, H.D.; Nader, S.H.; Calhoun, T.L.; Buchheimer, N.; Ehrenkaufer, R.; Mach, R.H. PET Imaging of Dopamine D2 Receptors during Chronic Cocaine Self-Administration in Monkeys. Nat. Neurosci. 2006, 9, 1050–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Phillips, T.J.; Brown, K.J.; Burkhart-Kasch, S.; Wenger, C.D.; Kelly, M.A.; Rubinstein, M.; Grandy, D.K.; Low, M.J. Alcohol Preference and Sensitivity are Markedly Reduced in Mice Lacking Dopamine D2 Receptors. Nat. Neurosci. 1998, 1, 610–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Spealman, R.D. Antagonism of Behavioral Effects of Cocaine by Selective Dopamine Receptor Blockers. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1990, 101, 142–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Thanos, P.K.; Volkow, N.D.; Freimuth, P.; Umegaki, H.; Ikari, H.; Roth, G.; Ingram, D.K.; Hitzemann, R. Overexpression of Dopamine D2 Receptors Reduces Alcohol Self-Administration. J. Neurochem. 2001, 78, 1094–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Gould, R.W.; Duke, A.N.; Nader, M.A. PET Studies in Nonhuman Primate Models of Cocaine Abuse: Translational Research Related to Vulnerability and Neuroadaptations. Neuropharmacology 2014, 84, 138–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Groman, S.M.; Lee, B.; Seu, E.; James, A.S.; Feiler, K.; Mandelkern, M.A.; London, E.D.; Jentsch, J.D. Dysregulation of D(2)-Mediated Dopamine Transmission in Monkeys after Chronic Escalating Methamphetamine Exposure. J. Neurosci. 2012, 32, 5843–5852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Volkow, N.D.; Fowler, J.S.; Wang, G.J. The Addicted Human Brain: Insights from Imaging Studies. J. Clin. Investig. 2003, 111, 1444–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Volkow, N.D.; Fowler, J.S.; Wang, G.J.; Swanson, J.M. Dopamine in Drug Abuse and Addiction: Results from Imaging Studies and Treatment Implications. Mol. Psychiatry 2004, 9, 557–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Volkow, N.D.; Fowler, J.S.; Wang, G.J.; Swanson, J.M.; Telang, F. Dopamine in Drug Abuse and Addiction: Results of Imaging Studies and Treatment Implications. Arch. Neurol. 2007, 64, 1575–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Dal Toso, R.; Sommer, B.; Ewert, M.; Herb, A.; Pritchett, D.B.; Bach, A.; Shivers, B.D.; Seeburg, P.H. The Dopamine D2 Receptor: Two Molecular Forms Generated by Alternative Splicing. EMBO J. 1989, 8, 4025–4034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Karpyak, V.M.; Biernacka, J.M.; Weg, M.W.; Stevens, S.R.; Cunningham, J.M.; Mrazek, D.A.; Black, J.L. Interaction of SLC6A4 and DRD2 Polymorphisms is Associated with a History of Delirium Tremens. Addict. Biol. 2010, 15, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Kohno, M.; Okita, K.; Morales, A.M.; Robertson, C.L.; Dean, A.C.; Ghahremani, D.G.; Sabb, F.W.; Rawson, R.A.; Mandelkern, M.A.; Bilder, R.M.; et al. Midbrain Functional Connectivity and Ventral Striatal Dopamine D2-Type Receptors: Link to Impulsivity in Methamphetamine Users. Mol. Psychiatry 2016, 21, 1554–1560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Wang, N.; Zhang, J.B.; Zhao, J.; Cai, X.T.; Zhu, Y.S.; Li, S.B. Association between Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene Polymorphisms and the Risk of Heroin Dependence. Genet. Mol. Res. 2016, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Steiger, H.; Thaler, L.; Gauvin, L.; Joober, R.; Labbe, A.; Israel, M.; Kucer, A. Epistatic Interactions Involving DRD2, DRD4, and COMT Polymorphisms and Risk of Substance Abuse in Women with Binge-Purge Eating Disturbances. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2016, 77, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Moyer, R.A.; Wang, D.; Papp, A.C.; Smith, R.M.; Duque, L.; Mash, D.C.; Sadee, W. Intronic Polymorphisms Affecting Alternative Splicing of Human Dopamine D2 Receptor are Associated with Cocaine Abuse. Neuropsychopharmacology 2011, 36, 753–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Blum, K.; Noble, E.P.; Sheridan, P.J.; Montgomery, A.; Ritchie, T.; Ozkaragoz, T.; Fitch, R.J.; Wood, R.; Finley, O.; Sadlack, F. Genetic Predisposition in Alcoholism: Association of the D2 Dopamine Receptor TaqI B1 RFLP with Severe Alcoholics. Alcohol 1993, 10, 59–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Noble, E.P.; Blum, K.; Khalsa, M.E.; Ritchie, T.; Montgomery, A.; Wood, R.C.; Fitch, R.J.; Ozkaragoz, T.; Sheridan, P.J.; Anglin, M.D.; et al. Allelic Association of the D2 Dopamine Receptor Gene with Cocaine Dependence. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1993, 33, 271–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Smith, J.W.; Fetsko, L.A.; Xu, R.; Wang, Y. Dopamine D2L Receptor Knockout Mice Display Deficits in Positive and Negative Reinforcing Properties of Morphine and in Avoidance Learning. Neuroscience 2002, 113, 755–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Robinson, J.D.; Lam, C.Y.; Minnix, J.A.; Wetter, D.W.; Tomlinson, G.E.; Minna, J.D.; Chen, T.T.; Cinciripini, P.M. The DRD2 TaqI-B Polymorphism and Its Relationship to Smoking Abstinence and Withdrawal Symptoms. Pharm. J. 2007, 7, 266–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Wernicke, C.; Reese, J.; Kraschewski, A.; Winterer, G.; Rommelspacher, H.; Gallinat, J. Distinct Haplogenotypes of the Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene are Associated with Non-Smoking Behaviour and Daily Cigarette Consumption. Pharmacopsychiatry 2009, 42, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Lerman, C.; Jepson, C.; Wileyto, E.P.; Epstein, L.H.; Rukstalis, M.; Patterson, F.; Kaufmann, V.; Restine, S.; Hawk, L.; Niaura, R.; et al. Role of Functional Genetic Variation in the Dopamine D2 Receptor (DRD2) in Response to Bupropion and Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Tobacco Dependence: Results of Two Randomized Clinical Trials. Neuropsychopharmacology 2006, 31, 231–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Gelernter, J.; Yu, Y.; Weiss, R.; Brady, K.; Panhuysen, C.; Yang, B.Z.; Kranzler, H.R.; Farrer, L. Haplotype Spanning TTC12 and ANKK1, Flanked by the DRD2 and NCAM1 Loci, is Strongly Associated to Nicotine Dependence in Two Distinct American Populations. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2006, 15, 3498–3507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Voisey, J.; Swagell, C.D.; Hughes, I.P.; van Daal, A.; Noble, E.P.; Lawford, B.R.; Young, R.M.; Morris, C.P. A DRD2 and ANKK1 Haplotype is Associated with Nicotine Dependence. Psychiatry Res. 2012, 196, 285–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Urcelay, G.P.; Dalley, J.W. Linking ADHD, Impulsivity, and Drug Abuse: A Neuropsychological Perspective. Curr. Top. Behav. Neurosci. 2012, 9, 173–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ball, S.A.; Carroll, K.M.; Rounsaville, B.J. Sensation Seeking, Substance Abuse, and Psychopathology in Treatment-Seeking and Community Cocaine Abusers. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1994, 62, 1053–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Costa, P.; McCrae, R.R. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). In The SAGE Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment; Sage Publication, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2008; pp. 179–198. [Google Scholar]
  48. Sutin, A.R.; Terracciano, A.; Deiana, B.; Uda, M.; Schlessinger, D.; Lakatta, E.G.; Costa, P.T., Jr. Cholesterol, Triglycerides, and the Five-Factor Model of Personality. Biol. Psychol. 2010, 84, 186–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Terracciano, A.; Esko, T.; Sutin, A.R.; de Moor, M.H.; Meirelles, O.; Zhu, G.; Tanaka, T.; Giegling, I.; Nutile, T.; Realo, A.; et al. Meta-Analysis of Genome-Wide Association Studies Identifies Common Variants in CTNNA2 Associated with Excitement-Seeking. Transl. Psychiatry 2011, 1, e49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. DeYoung, C.G.; Hirsh, J.B.; Shane, M.S.; Papademetris, X.; Rajeevan, N.; Gray, J.R. Testing Predictions from Personality Neuroscience. Brain Structure and the Big Five. Psychol. Sci. 2010, 21, 820–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Thompson, E.R. Development and Validation of an International English Big-Five Mini-Markers. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2008, 45, 542–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Matthews, G.; Deary, I.J. Personality Traits; University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  53. DeYoung, C.G.; Peterson, J.B.; Higgins, D.M. Sources of Openness/Intellect: Cognitive and Neuropsychological Correlates of the Fifth Factor of Personality. J. Pers. 2005, 73, 825–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. John, O.P.; Srivastava, S. The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Theoretical Perspectives; University of California: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  55. Friedman, H.S.; Schustack, M.W. Personality: Classic Theories and Modern Research; Allyn & Bacon: Boston, MA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  56. Pietras, T.; Witusik, A.; Panek, M.; Szemraj, J.; Gorski, P. Anxiety, Depression and Methods of Stress Coping in Patients with Nicotine Dependence Syndrome. Med. Sci. Monit. 2011, 17, Cr272–Cr276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  57. Spielberger, C.D.; Sydeman, S. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory. In The Use of Psychological Tests for Treatment Planning and Outcome Assessment; Maruish, M.E., Ed.; LEA: Hillsdale, MI, USA, 1994; pp. 292–321. [Google Scholar]
  58. Grzywacz, A.; Jasiewicz, A.; Malecka, I.; Suchanecka, A.; Grochans, E.; Karakiewicz, B.; Samochowiec, A.; Bienkowski, P.; Samochowiec, J. Influence of DRD2 and ANKK1 Polymorphisms on the Manifestation of Withdrawal Syndrome Symptoms in Alcohol Addiction. Pharmacol. Rep. 2012, 64, 1126–1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Jasiewicz, A.; Samochowiec, A.; Samochowiec, J.; Malecka, I.; Suchanecka, A.; Grzywacz, A. Suicidal Behavior and Haplotypes of the Dopamine Receptor Gene (DRD2) and ANKK1 Gene Polymorphisms in Patients with Alcohol Dependence-Preliminary Report. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e111798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Sznabowicz, M.; Jasiewicz, A.; Iskra-Trifunovic, J.; Malecka, I.; Karakiewicz, B.; Kotwas, A.; Samochowiec, J.; Grzywacz, A. Case-Control Study Analysis of DRD2 Gene Polymorphisms in Drug Addicted Patients. Psychiatr. Pol. 2018, 52, 1013–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Smith, D.M.; Gawron, M.; Balwicki, L.; Sobczak, A.; Matynia, M.; Goniewicz, M.L. Exclusive Versus Dual Use of Tobacco and Electronic Cigarettes among Adolescents in Poland, 2010–2016. Addict. Behav. 2019, 90, 341–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Le Bon, O.; Basiaux, P.; Streel, E.; Tecco, J.; Hanak, C.; Hansenne, M.; Ansseau, M.; Pelc, I.; Verbanck, P.; Dupont, S. Personality Profile and Drug of Choice; a Multivariate Analysis Using Cloninger’s TCI on Heroin Addicts, Alcoholics, and a Random Population Group. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2004, 73, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhang, Y.; Bertolino, A.; Fazio, L.; Blasi, G.; Rampino, A.; Romano, R.; Lee, M.L.; Xiao, T.; Papp, A.; Wang, D.; et al. Polymorphisms in Human Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene Affect Gene Expression, Splicing, and Neuronal Activity during Working Memory. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 20552–20557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Grzywacz, A.; Chmielowiec, J.; Chmielowiec, K.; Mroczek, B.; Masiak, J.; Suchanecka, A.; Sipak-Szmigiel, O.; Szumilas, K.; Trybek, G. The Ankyrin Repeat and Kinase Domain Containing 1 Gene Polymorphism (ANKK1 Taq1A) and Personality Traits in Addicted Subjects. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Hayden, E.P.; Klein, D.N.; Dougherty, L.R.; Olino, T.M.; Laptook, R.S.; Dyson, M.W.; Bufferd, S.J.; Durbin, C.E.; Sheikh, H.I.; Singh, S.M. The Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene and Depressive and Anxious Symptoms in Childhood: Associations and Evidence for Gene-Environment Correlation and Gene-Environment Interaction. Psychiatr. Genet. 2010, 20, 304–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Li, M.D.; Cheng, R.; Ma, J.Z.; Swan, G.E. A Meta-Analysis of Estimated Genetic and Environmental Effects on Smoking Behavior in Male and Female Adult Twins. Addiction 2003, 98, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Hamilton, A.S.; Lessov-Schlaggar, C.N.; Cockburn, M.G.; Unger, J.B.; Cozen, W.; Mack, T.M. Gender Differences in Determinants of Smoking Initiation and Persistence in California Twins. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2006, 15, 1189–1197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Hardie, T.L.; Moss, H.B.; Lynch, K.G. Genetic Correlations between Smoking Initiation and Smoking Behaviors in a Twin Sample. Addict. Behav. 2006, 31, 2030–2037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Li, M.D. The genetics of Smoking Related Behavior: A Brief Review. Am. J. Med. Sci. 2003, 326, 168–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Sullivan, P.; Kendler, K. The Genetic Epidemiology of Smoking. Nicotine Tob. Res. 1999, 1, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Li, T.; Liu, X.; Zhao, J.; Hu, X.; Ball, D.M.; Loh, E.W.; Sham, P.C.; Collier, D.A. Allelic Association Analysis of the Dopamine D2, D3, 5-HT2A, and GABA(A)Gamma2 Receptors and Serotonin Transporter Genes with Heroin Abuse in Chinese Subjects. Am. J. Med. Genet. 2002, 114, 329–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Al-Eitan, L.N.; Jaradat, S.A.; Hulse, G.K.; Tay, G.K. Custom Genotyping for Substance Addiction Susceptibility Genes in Jordanians of Arab descent. BMC Res. Notes 2012, 5, 497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Bontempi, S.; Fiorentini, C.; Busi, C.; Guerra, N.; Spano, P.; Missale, C. Identification and Characterization of Two Nuclear Factor-Kappab Sites in the Regulatory Region of the Dopamine D2 Receptor. Endocrinology 2007, 148, 2563–2570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Fiorentini, C.; Guerra, N.; Facchetti, M.; Finardi, A.; Tiberio, L.; Schiaffonati, L.; Spano, P.; Missale, C. Nerve Growth Factor Regulates Dopamine D(2) Receptor Expression in Prolactinoma Cell Lines Via p75(NGFR)-Mediated Activation of Nuclear Factor-KappaB. Mol. Endocrinol. 2002, 16, 353–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Arinami, T.; Gao, M.; Hamaguchi, H.; Toru, M. A Functional Polymorphism in the Promoter Region of the Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene is Associated with Schizophrenia. Hum. Mol. Genet. 1997, 6, 577–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Jonsson, E.G.; Nothen, M.M.; Grunhage, F.; Farde, L.; Nakashima, Y.; Propping, P.; Sedvall, G.C. Polymorphisms in the Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene and Their Relationships to Striatal Dopamine Receptor Density of Healthy Volunteers. Mol. Psychiatry 1999, 4, 290–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  77. Pohjalainen, T.; Nagren, K.; Syvalahti, E.K.; Hietala, J. The Dopamine D2 Receptor 5’-Flanking Variant,-141C Ins/Del, is not Associated with Reduced Dopamine D2 Receptor Density In Vivo. Pharmacogenetics 1999, 9, 505–509. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
Figure 1. The group (e-cigarette users vs. controls) DRD2 rs1076560 polymorphism interaction for the NEO FFI Neuroticism.
Figure 1. The group (e-cigarette users vs. controls) DRD2 rs1076560 polymorphism interaction for the NEO FFI Neuroticism.
Ijerph 17 00365 g001
Figure 2. The group (e-cigarette users vs. controls) DRD2 rs1799732 polymorphism interaction for the STAI trait.
Figure 2. The group (e-cigarette users vs. controls) DRD2 rs1799732 polymorphism interaction for the STAI trait.
Ijerph 17 00365 g002
Table 1. Frequency of genotypes and alleles of the DRD2 rs1076560, rs1079597 and rs1799732 polymorphisms in e-cigarette users and controls.
Table 1. Frequency of genotypes and alleles of the DRD2 rs1076560, rs1079597 and rs1799732 polymorphisms in e-cigarette users and controls.
Genotypes/(Alleles)E-Cig Users
N = 144
Controls
N = 250
χ2p Value
DRD2 rs1076560
C/C105 (72.9%)179 (71.6%)0.112>0.05
A/C34 (23.6%)61 (24.4%)
A/A5 (3.5%)10 (4%)
(C)244 (84.7%)419 (83.8%)0.120>0.05
(A)44 (15.3%)81 (16.2%)
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597
G/G104 (72.2%)178 (71.2%)0.089>0.05
A/G35 (24.3%)62 (24.8%)
A/A5 (3.5%)10 (4%)
(G)243 (84.4%)418 (83.6%)0.080>0.05
(A)45 (15.6%)82 (16.4%)
DRD2 rs1799732
ins/ins109 (75.7%)197 (78.8%)1.402>0.05
ins/del34 (23.6%)49 (19.6%)
del/del1 (0.7%)4 (1.6%)
(ins)252 (87.5%)443 (88.6%)0.210>0.05
(del)36 (12.5%)57 (11.4%)
p-statistical significance χ2 test, N—number of subjects.
Table 2. STAI and NEO Five Factor Inventory results in controls and e-cigarette users.
Table 2. STAI and NEO Five Factor Inventory results in controls and e-cigarette users.
STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory/
(Sten Scale)
E-Cig Users
(N = 144)
Control
(N = 250)
Z
(p Value)
STAI state/scale5.43 ± 2.354.74 ± 2.144.64 (<0.0001)
STAI trait/scale5.82 ± 2.275.20 ± 2.212.51 (<0.02)
Neuroticism/scale5.71 ± 2.034.64 ± 2.042.70 (<0.01)
Extraversion/scale6.14 ± 2.116.38 ± 1.91−0.89 (>0.05)
Openness/scale5.03 ± 1.794.52 ± 1.552.83 (<0.01)
Agreeability/scale5.59 ± 2.295.52 ± 2.090.34 (>0.05)
Conscientiousness/scale5.97 ± 2.206.23 ± 2.11−1.32 (>0.05)
p-statistical significance U Mann’s test, N—number of subjects, M ± SD, Significances between-group differences are marked in bold print.
Table 3. Differences in DRD2 rs1076560 and STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory between control subjects and e-cigarette users.
Table 3. Differences in DRD2 rs1076560 and STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory between control subjects and e-cigarette users.
STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory
(Sten Scale)
DRD2 rs1076560Factor Effects ANOVA
E-Cig Users
(N = 144)
Control
(N = 250)
C/C
(N = 284)
A/C
(N = 95)
A/A
(N = 15)
FactorF (p Value)ɳ2Power
(alfa = 0.05)
STAI state/scale5.43 ± 2.354.74 ± 2.144.94 ± 2.194.87 ± 2.286.87 ± 2.23interceptF1388 = 641.4 (p < 0.0001)0.6231.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.0001 (p > 0.05)1 × 10−80.050
DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 3.65 (p < 0.05)0.0180.672
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 1.81 (p > 0.05)0.0010.377
STAI trait
/scale
5.82 ± 2.275.20 ± 2.215.42 ± 2.235.25 ± 2.256.73 ± 2.37interceptF1388 = 676.3 (p < 0.0001)0.6351.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.12 (p > 0.05)1 × 10−60.064
DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 1.24 (p > 0.05)0.0060.271
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 2.48 (p < 0.10)0.0130.498
NEO FFI
Neuroticism/scale
5.71 ± 2.034.64 ± 2.045.04 ± 2.094.89 ± 2.105.87 ± 2.10interceptF1388 = 688.9 (p < 0.0001)0.6401.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.84 (p > 0.05)0.0020.149
DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 0.31 (p > 0.05)0.0020.100
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 4.11 (p < 0.05)0.0210.726
NEO FFI
Extraversion/scale
6.14 ± 2.116.38 ± 1.916.39 ± 1.956,15 ± 2.095.40 ± 1.76interceptF1388 = 880.2 (p < 0.0001)0.6941.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 2.42 (p > 0.05)0.0060.341
DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 2.76 (p < 0.10)0.0140.543
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 0.82 (p > 0.05)0.0040.191
NEO FFI
Openness/scale
5.03 ± 1.794.52 ± 1.554.69 ± 1.664.78 ± 1.674.53 ± 1.64interceptF1388 = 834 (p < 0.0001)0.6821.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 3.41 (p < 0.10)0.0090.453
DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 0.05 (p > 0.05)0.00020.057
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 0.46 (p > 0.05)0.0020.125
NEO FFI
Agreeability/scale
5.59 ± 2.295.52 ± 2.095.61 ± 2.175.38 ± 2.175.47 ± 1.99interceptF1388 = 646.5 (p < 0.0001)0.6251.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.34 (p > 0.05)0.0010.089
DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 0.48 (p > 0.05)0.0020.128
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 0.29 (p > 0.05)0.0010.095
NEO FFI
Conscientiousness/scale
5.97 ± 2.206.23 ± 2.116.08 ± 2.146.41 ± 2.075.07 ± 2.46interceptF1388 = 765 (p < 0.0001)0.6631.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.51 (p > 0.05)0.0010.110
DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 1.91 (p > 0.05)0.0100.397
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1076560F2388 = 1.20 (p > 0.05)0.0060.262
N—number of subjects, M ± SD. Significances between-group differences are marked in bold print.
Table 4. Differences in DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597 and STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory between control subjects and e-cigarette users.
Table 4. Differences in DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597 and STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory between control subjects and e-cigarette users.
STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory
(Sten Scale)
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597Factor Effects ANOVA
E-Cig Users
(N = 144)
Control
(N = 250)
G/G
(N = 282)
A/G
(N = 97)
A/A
(N = 15)
FactorF (p Value)ɳ2Power
(alfa = 0.05)
STAI state/scale5.43 ± 2.354.74 ± 2.144.96 ± 2.194.96 ± 2.305.87 ± 2.67interceptF1388 = 575.8 (p < 0.0001)0.5971.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 1.06 (p > 0.05)0.0030.177
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.96 (p > 0.05)0.0050.217
e-cig users/control × DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.52 (p > 0.05)0.0030.135
STAI trait
/scale
5.82 ± 2.275.20 ± 2.215.44 ± 2.235.30 ± 2.246.07 ± 2.71interceptF1388 = 632.3 (p < 0.0001)0.6201.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.14 (p > 0.05)0.00040.066
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.28 (p > 0.05)0.0010.094
e-cig users/control × DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 1.02 (p > 0.05)0.0050.228
NEO FFI
Neuroticism/scale
5.71 ± 2.034.64 ± 2.045.05 ± 2.094.96 ± 2.115.13 ± 2.36interceptF1388 = 637.9 (p < 0.0001)0.6221.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 2.99 (p < 0.10)0.0080.407
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.03 (p > 0.05)0.00010.054
e-cig users/control × DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 2.12 (p > 0.05)0.0110.434
NEO FFI
Extraversion/scale
6.14 ± 2.116.38 ± 1.916.33 ± 1.956.22 ± 2.086.00 ± 2.14interceptF1388 = 928.8 (p < 0.0001)0.7051.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 5.52 (p < 0.05)0.0140.649
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 1.04 (p > 0.05)0.0050.232
e-cig users/control × DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 2.57 (p < 0.10)0.0130.512
NEO FFI
Openness/scale
5.03 ± 1.794.52 ± 1.554.69 ± 1.644.78 ± 1.734.33 ± 1.63interceptF1388 = 822.7 (p < 0.0001)0.6791.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 4.95 (p < 0.05)0.0130.603
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.19 (p > 0.05)0.0010.080
e-cig users/control × DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.45 (p > 0.05)0.0020.123
NEO FFI
Agreeability/scale
5.59 ± 2.295.52 ± 2.095.60 ± 2.155.33 ± 2.215.93 ± 2.05interceptF1388 = 672.6 (p < 0.0001)0.6341.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.0003 (p > 0.05)1 × 10−60.050
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 1.00 (p > 0.05)0.0050.224
e-cig users/control × DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.31 (p > 0.05)0.0020.010
NEO FFI
Conscientiousness/scale
5.97 ± 2.206.23 ± 2.116.06 ± 2.136.36 ± 2.095.87 ± 2.80interceptF1388 = 802.5 (p < 0.0001)0.6741.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.02 (p > 0.05)1 × 10−50.052
DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.92 (p > 0.05)0.0050.209
e-cig users/control × DRD2 Tag1B rs1079597F2388 = 0.26 (p > 0.05)0.0010.091
N—number of subjects, M ± SD. Significances between-group differences are marked in bold print.
Table 5. Differences in DRD2 rs1799732 and STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory between control subjects and e-cigarette users.
Table 5. Differences in DRD2 rs1799732 and STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory between control subjects and e-cigarette users.
STAI/NEO Five Factor Inventory
(Sten Scale)
DRD2 rs1799732Factor Effects ANOVA
E-Cig Users
(N = 144)
Control
(N = 250)
ins/ins
(N = 306)
ins/del
(N = 83)
del/del
(N = 5)
FactorF (p Value)ɳ2Power
(alfa = 0.05)
STAI state/scale5.43 ± 2.354.74 ± 2.145.06 ± 2.264.77 ± 2.154.60 ± 2.30interceptF1388 = 156.7 (p < 0.0001)0.2881.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 5.56 (p < 0.05)0.0140.653
DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 0.61 (p > 0.05)0.0030.151
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 1.89 (p > 0.05)0.0100.393
STAI trait
/scale
5.82 ± 2.275.20 ± 2.215.51 ± 2.215.14 ± 2.405.40 ± 2.61interceptF1388 = 192.9 (p < 0.0001)0.3321.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 6.64 (p < 0.01)0.0170.729
DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 0.89 (p > 0.05)0.0050.204
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 4.66 (p < 0.05)0.0230.782
NEO FFI
Neuroticism/scale
5.71±2.034.64 ± 2.045.08 ± 2.094.93 ± 2.124.00 ± 2.45interceptF1388 = 174.3 (p < 0.0001)0.3101.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 7.00 (p < 0.010.00180.751
DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 0.16 (p > 0.05)0.0010.074
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 1.41 (p > 0.05)0.0070.302
NEO FFI
Extraversion/scale
6.14 ± 2.116.38 ± 1.916.24 ± 2.026.46 ± 1.876.80 ± 2.17interceptF1388 = 251.8 (p < 0.0001)0.3941.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 5.57 (p < 0.05)0.0140.653
DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 0.62 (p > 0.05)0.0030.154
e-cig users/control × DRD2 PROM. rs1799732F2388 = 2.33 (p < 0.10)0.0110.471
NEO FFI
Openness/scale
5.03 ± 1.794.52 ± 1.554.75 ± 1.604.58 ± 1.793.80 ± 2.77interceptF1388 = 179.3 (p < 0.0001)0.3161.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.53 (p > 0.05)0.0010.113
DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 2.29 (p > 0.05)0.0110.465
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 1.50 (p > 0.05)0.0080.319
NEO FFI
Agreeability/scale
5.59 ± 2.295.52 ± 2.095.51 ± 2.155.54 ± 2.147.80 ± 2.28interceptF1388 = 219.6 (p < 0.0001)0.3611.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.99 (p > 0.05)0.0050.221
DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 0.36 (p > 0.05)0.0010.092
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 2.13 (p > 0.05)0.0110.436
NEO FFI
Conscientiousness/scale
5.97 ± 2.206.23 ± 2.116.07 ± 2.176.22 ± 2.017.60 ± 2.70interceptF1388 = 273.6 (p < 0.0001)0.4141.000
e-cig users/controlF1388 = 0.18 (p > 0.05)0.00050.071
DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 1.55 (p > 0.05)0.0080.328
e-cig users/control × DRD2 rs1799732F2388 = 0.53 (p > 0.05)0.0030.137
N—number of subjects, M ± SD. Significances between-group differences are marked in bold print.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Grzywacz, A.; Suchanecka, A.; Chmielowiec, J.; Chmielowiec, K.; Szumilas, K.; Masiak, J.; Balwicki, Ł.; Michałowska-Sawczyn, M.; Trybek, G. Personality Traits or Genetic Determinants—Which Strongly Influences E-Cigarette Users? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 365. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17010365

AMA Style

Grzywacz A, Suchanecka A, Chmielowiec J, Chmielowiec K, Szumilas K, Masiak J, Balwicki Ł, Michałowska-Sawczyn M, Trybek G. Personality Traits or Genetic Determinants—Which Strongly Influences E-Cigarette Users? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(1):365. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17010365

Chicago/Turabian Style

Grzywacz, Anna, Aleksandra Suchanecka, Jolanta Chmielowiec, Krzysztof Chmielowiec, Kamila Szumilas, Jolanta Masiak, Łukasz Balwicki, Monika Michałowska-Sawczyn, and Grzegorz Trybek. 2020. "Personality Traits or Genetic Determinants—Which Strongly Influences E-Cigarette Users?" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 1: 365. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17010365

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop