Review reveals barriers in translating preclinical addiction models into clinical treatments, highlighting bidirectional neuroimaging approaches to improve substance use therapeutics.
Translational research is essential to bridge the gap between basic neuroscience and clinical practice, particularly in psychiatry, where the complexity of brain function and the heterogeneity of disorders hinder therapeutic progress. Substance use disorders (SUDs) represent a compelling model for translational approaches due to the possibility of reproducing key aspects of addictive behaviors in animals. Preclinical models, especially operant drug self-administration paradigms, have been refined to capture core diagnostic criteria of addiction defined in DSM-5, including persistence, motivation, compulsivity, and relapse. These models have significantly contributed to identifying neurobiological mechanisms and potential therapeutic targets across various substances, including opioids, cocaine, cannabis, and even non-drug addictions such as food addiction. Despite these advances, translation into effective clinical treatments remains limited, as evidenced by the lack of approved medications for several SUDs. This gap highlights the need to improve the predictive validity of preclinical models and refine the selection of candidate compounds for clinical trials. Emerging tools such as rodent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) offer promising avenues to align preclinical findings with human neuroimaging data, enabling the identification of robust biomarkers and fostering personalized medicine approaches. A bidirectional framework integrating clinical observations and preclinical experimentation is crucial to enhance translational success. Strengthening this dialogue will facilitate biomarker discovery, validate mechanistic hypotheses in patients, and optimize therapeutic strategies. Promoting translational research at institutional and policy levels is therefore critical to accelerate innovation and ultimately improve outcomes for individuals affected by SUDs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lalanne et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: