rere! jana of Obes (200 33, 549-53
2009 Macnian Pubs ied Mighs ed C507. 065/09_ $3200
Sisal
REVIEW
Psychobiological traits in the risk profile for overeating
and weight gain
C Davis!?
1343 Bethune College, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada and *The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health,
Toronto, Ontario, Carada
(Our dramatically changed food environment ~since petiods in our history when food sources were highly constrained has
presented new challenges for obesity research, For example, these alterations have strongly emphasized the physiological
differences between the homeostatic and the hedonic regulation of food intake the latter being largely responsible for the
pronounced increase in obesity in the past few decades, There is also increasing agreement that compulsive overeating shares
many patalels with addiction disorders such as drug abuse. These factors have also fostered a renewed interest in identifying
individual differences in personally and motivational systems that increase the risk for overeating and weight qain in our
population, Reward sensitivity has been the focus of a recent body of compelling research, with evidence favoring two seemingly
‘Opposite points of view. On the one hand, studies have found support for a link between low reivard sensitivity and obesity,
whereas other evidence suggests that a strong appetitive motivation feads to overeating and weight gain. Arguments are
provided to reconcile these apparently disparate theories, Finally, the role of impulsivity and is links with symptoms of attention
deficit/hyperactivity disorder are discussed, as well as their respective toles in the risk profile for obesity.
Interational journal of Obesity (2009) 33, $49-S$3; doi:10,1038/}jo.2009.72,
Keywords: psychobiolagy, reward sensitivity, impulsivity; ADHD
Introduction
“There is increasing ageoement that excessive food consump=
‘hon has many similatties to addiction disorders such as drag
abuse, in part, because both activate the same brain reward
mechanisms. ‘They also have comparable clinical features,
such as their escalating compulsion, he symptoms of
tolerance and withdrawal, and the overwhelming cravings
that contribute to repeated relapses after periods of restraint
fr abstinence. "The family transmission pattern of binge
cating and substance dependence disorders also indicates a
shared etiology unbke their respective associations with
other psychopathologies, which appear fo be transmitted
independently?
Different from arug abuise, however, the concept of food
addiction isa relatively recent phenomenon, and one whose
‘emergence roughly coincided with the dramatic al
‘our food environment over the past two generations. Human
‘energy sources are no longer constrained as they were
historically. Instead, we have a supertluty of relatively cheap
and energy-dense fod, with is nearly untimited availability,
ation in
Comespondence: 01 € Davis, 343 Bethune College, Yok Univeral, Trent,
nano, canal, M3} 7P3
alec
In addition, the food industry appears to have focused on
‘iF natural desire for sugar and fat by increasing many-fod
their ‘close’ in much of what we eat each day.* Such changes
hhave substantially exaggerated the physiologic distinction
between homeostatic hunger that which follows 2 period
fof relatively prolonged food deprivation..and hedonic
hunger, which occurs in the absence of privation. ‘he latter
‘ largely regulated by the palatability and rewarding
properties oF food, and Is believed to play a caltical sole In
‘woight gaint Although the prevalence of obesity has
doubled over the past few decades, its morbid! form (badly
mass index (BMI) >40} has seen an alanning fourfold
Increase,? Consequently, it is not unusual for curent
research samples to inchide obese participants with BMIS as
high as 60 or 70, The wiclening BMI range for obesity, and in.
some cases its early age of onset, suggests a condition that Is
likely to have causally relevant subtypes, It has even been
suggested that some cases of obesity should be included
as @ mental disorder In Plagnostic and Statistical Mamuial=
Version V." 1 behooves us, therefore, 10 focus our reseaicl
efforts an finding biologically based moderator variables that
distinguish one form of obesity from another. In addition,
and despite the unprecedented number of consumer temp=
lations facing all of us, thete Is great population variability in
daily food Intake with many individuals able to remain inintial ara of Obey
yc is re
CDs
‘energy balance and to malnsain & healthy amount of body
fat. Henee, another major challenge for obesity researchers,
is to identity the factors that foster one individual's prone
ness {0 Weight gain, oF buffer another from the same fate
Although 3 comprehensive risk facior profile for obesity
must consider the social and cultural parameters of an
individual
psychological tisk vatlables that have an established
biological and therefore heritable underpinning,
experience, this study will focus on cevtain
Reward sensitivity
Individual differences in the sensitivity oF reactivity of the
nnesocorticolimbie pathway have been steongly implicated
in the risk for drug addictions.” The research is divide
however, concerning. the
tion, One argument favors the view that a reward deficiency
synarome fsa key rik factor The premise is that addictive
substances are used as a form of ‘sellmedtication’ used to
boost a shuggish or fryo-funetioning. rewae syster and (6
increase heconie capacity. Recently, these same arguments
hhave boon extended tothe risk for obesity.” On account of the
ausal direction of this associa
central role of dopamine in the activation of the common
reward pathway, vulnerability research has lgely comee
trated on the funetional avallabity of this neurotransmitter
inv the Drain. Much of the obesity evidence supporting a
‘reward deficiency syndrome’ viewpoint has derived from
ber genet ng approaches. examining
dopamine D2 receptor levels and alleles of the DRD2 gene,
which regulate their expression." ‘The most frequently
studied polymorphism of the D2 receptor is the iw.
For many years, f/f was thought to be located nthe
Samntranslated region of DRD2. However, recently it was
shown that this singlemucteotide polymorphisi does not
reside In DRD2, but in a neighboring gene called Ankyr
containing kinase 1 {ANKKD.' It iy not known how this
marker influences DRD2. expression or whether the ANKK?
gene is biologieally connected to the DROZ
heen suggested that individuals with the TagiA + allele
Uthot is, AI/AT and A1/A2 genotypes) have seduced brain
dopamine function compared with those with the AI allele
{that is, the A2/A2 genotype) because of a 30-40% reduction
In D2 receptor density in the strlatal region of the former
group." On aecount of its. association with fewer D2
receptors, the AL allele has been elated to reduced
mesolimbic brain dopamine signaling, ancl deficient ability
{o experience naiural reward. Some studies have found a
higher frequency of he A allele and lower striatal receptor
densities. in obese Individuals."""* “These ndings are
typically explained by the speculation that an insensi
revvard system fosters the overcating of energy-