Research News Roundup: September 10, 2026

Journal: Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 2026, doi: 10.15288/ jsads.26-00035

Authors: Barbara Andraka-Christou, Jae Park, Fatema Z. Ahmed, Suhas Shewale, Tahira Yeasmeen, & Thuy D. Nguyen

Abstract:

Objective: Policy surveillance typically involves detailed, time-consuming manual screening of policies for inclusion in a final dataset. This screening process involves risks of human error and inconsistent application of inclusion/exclusion criteria, especially in complicated legal landscapes like the US opioid treatment landscape. Large language models (LLMs) could assist human subject matter experts (SMEs) during screening, but LLMs have been understudied for policy surveillance. Therefore, we conducted a test comparing opioid treatment policy screening decisions between SMEs and an LLM.

Methods: Using a Boolean search string in legal software, we identified 99 potentially relevant Massachusetts policies for emergency department opioid addiction treatment, and we downloaded text from government websites. Next, we compared two approaches to screening those policies using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria: (a) manual screening by three SMEs, and (b) an LLM approach. We assessed the overall percentage of inclusion/exclusion decisions where the LLM made the same decision as the SMEs. We also identified the percentage of policies selected for inclusion by the SMEs with which the LLM agreed and potential reasons for discrepancies.

Results: The LLM made the same decision for 96 of 99 policies (97% of the time). All policies that SMEs chose to include (n=2) were also included by the LLM. Discrepancies reflected implicit inclusion and exclusion criteria used by SMEs but not provided to LLMs.

Conclusion: LLMs could serve as a quality control check during opioid policy surveillance research, supplementing human review. The policy surveillance field would benefit from best practices and technical guidelines for LLM utilization.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.

Journal: Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 2026, doi: 10.1080/19585969. 2026.2719512

Authors: Chelsea E. Smith, Charlotte B. Luster, Sarah E. Kimmel, Maureen D. Reynolds, Marc N. Potenza, & Zu Wei Zhai

Abstract:

Introduction: Stress contributes to substance use (SU) involvement (SUI) and differences in brain white matter (WM). However, longitudinal relationships involving SUI, stress hormones, and WM are not well understood. This study examined the moderating role of SUI on the prospective association between cortisol response (CR) and WM microstructure.

Methods: Data were drawn from a larger longitudinal study on SU disorder (SUD) aetiology. Participants were enrolled at ages 10-12 years when salivary cortisol was assayed. The Drug Use Chart assessed cumulative involvement with 10 substance categories by age 18 years. Diffusion-weighted data were acquired from sixty-nine participants after reaching age 18 years and were used to compute crossing-fibre measures. Analyses were conducted in a priori regions of interest linked to SU and stress.

Results: CR levels were related to secondary- and tertiary-fibre anisotropy in the cingulum. SUI moderated associations between CR and right cingulum secondary-fibre anisotropy wherein CR levels associated with greater anisotropy at heightened SUI levels.

Conclusions: This study identified stress-linked differences in distinct cingulum WM fibres among individuals with greater SUI. Involvement with SU overall, may modulate stress effects and enhance WM anisotropy in region- and fibre-specific manners. Potential biomarkers associated with SUI in WM among vulnerable stress-exposed youth require further investigation with respect to SUD aetiology.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.

Journal: The Lancet Regional Health – Americas, 2026, doi: 10.1016/ j.lana.2026.101599

Authors: Chinmay T. Jani, Kyle Edwards, Rajesh Sharma, Ruchi T. Jani, Ali Al Sbihi, Jose Noy, … Gilberto Lopes

Abstract:

Background: Alcohol consumption is known to be a significant risk factor for cancer. In 2025, the US Surgeon General recommended adding cancer risk warning labels to alcoholic beverages, emphasizing the need for increased awareness. However, national-level data describing long-term trends in alcohol-attributable cancer mortality, including variation by age, sex, and geographic region, remain limited. This study aims to evaluate trends in alcohol-attributable cancer mortality in the USA.

Methods: This was a population-based observational trend analysis using data from the Global Burden of Disease database. We analyzed age-standardized mortality rates (ASMRs) and the percentage of ASMR attributable to heavy alcohol use–defined as consumption exceeding the theoretical minimum risk exposure level, in the USA from 1990 to 2023. We evaluated ASMR for all cancers combined, followed by ten specific cancers. Results (per 100,000 population) were stratified by sex, location (50 states and Washington DC), and age-groups (20–54, 55 years and older). Joinpoint regression was performed using Monte Carlo permutation testing to select the optimal model; EAPCs were reported with 95% confidence intervals and two-sided p values. All rates are reported per 100,000 population.

Findings: Alcohol-attributable cancer deaths in the USA doubled from 1990 (11,361) to 2023 (23,126). Mortality rates were higher in the 55 years and older age-group (19.2; 95% CI, 12.8–28.7) versus 20–54 years (2.4; 1.4–3.4), and in males (6.4; 3.8–9.7) versus females (2.1; 1.4–3.0). The percentage of mortality attributable to alcohol increased across most cancer types, age groups, and sexes, with liver cancer demonstrating the greatest increase in alcohol-attributable (113.9%). In 2023, liver (12.7; 11.2–14.4) and breast (2.4; 0.9–5.9) cancers had the highest alcohol-related mortality rates in 55 years and older males and females, respectively; in ages 20–54, colorectal (0.9; 0.4–1.4) in males and breast (0.9; 0.5–1.4) in females were highest. State-wise, the District of Columbia recorded the highest (M: 9.8; 6.0–14.1; F: 3.5; 2.2–5.2), while Utah had the lowest (M: 3.9; 2.4–5.9; F: 1.4; 0.9–2.0) ASMR.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.

Journal: Frontiers in Public Health, 2026, doi: 10.3389/ fpubh .2026.1640624

Authors: Jenna van Draanen, David L. Perlmutter, Jazmin Higuera Banos, Brenda Y. Goh, Cece Wettemann, Grover Will Williams, … Tessa Frohe

Abstract:

Introduction: Research with Expert Advisors on Drug Use (READU) is a community-engaged research collaborative of people with lived and living experience, clinicians, and academic researchers. We sought to evaluate the challenges and rewards of the partnership model.

Materials and methods: Using the Peer Engagement Process Evaluation framework, the READU team collaborated on generating a list of focus group topics. All (n = 8) active team members participated in a focus group. Thematic analysis was used to identify key ideas.

Results: Five main themes were identified. “Collaborative Research Model” relates to the importance of a shared set of values, power dynamics, and the importance of centering community in research. “Group Dynamics” describes occasionally getting side-tracked in the work, as well as closeness among team members. “Individual Growth and Skill Development” concerns personal and intellectual development, as well as the benefits and opportunities for bi-directional training. “Institutional Structure,” encompasses the logistics of a hybrid working model and compensation issues. “Moving Forward and Future Work” involves the process of ending a research project in a positive way and envisioning future opportunities.

Discussion: READU’s partnership model is generally positive and mutually beneficial for all team members. All partners feel a sense of satisfaction and closeness, and that the relevance and impact of research is enhanced. Although some challenges have been identified, particularly related to compensation and the physical workplace, these are not intractable. The evaluation of this partnership should motivate researchers considering partnership with peer researchers and highlight practical considerations.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.