Scholarlink

<p>MDMA’s history spans military experimentation, recreational use, and clinical trials for PTSD treatment, reflecting both promise and controversy. While studies in heavy users suggested possible neurotoxicity, evidence remains inconclusive. Clinical trials show that one to three sessions of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy can alleviate PTSD symptoms, yet regulators have criticized inadequate reporting of (positive) adverse events. To clarify safety, this narrative review examines placebo-controlled single-dose studies in healthy volunteers, focusing on MDMA’s acute and subacute effects on subjective state and neurocognitive function relevant to therapeutic applications. Single doses of 75–125 mg enhance mood, empathy, trust, arousal, and prosocial feelings through monoamine reuptake inhibition and release. Post-acutely, transient monoamine depletion may cause fatigue and low mood. During intoxication, MDMA transiently impairs memory encoding via increased 5-HT signaling and 5-HT2A activation but does not heighten suggestibility. Inhibitory control and executive function are largely preserved, while motor coordination and cognitive flexibility decline modestly. These effects vary with metabolism, immune response, drug interactions, and context, underscoring the need for personalized monitoring. It is inferred that, acutely, positive affect may enhance therapeutic alliance and openness as well as susceptibility to boundary violations; amnestic effects may support trauma processing by facilitating fear extinction and disrupting negative memory reconsolidation; whereas temporary reductions in attention and cognitive flexibility may call for structured, emotionally focused therapeutic settings. MDMA’s distinct neurocognitive profile offers clinical promise but complicates trial design by compromising blinding and inflating expectancy, necessitating their quantitative assessments and inclusion of similar comparator drugs to ensure reliable evaluation of efficacy.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Subjective and neurocognitive profiling of clinical doses of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) in healthy volunteers: implications for therapeutic use

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月8日

查看全文
  • Johannes G. Ramaekers,
  • Kim P. C. Kuypers,
  • Franz X. Vollenweider

摘要

MDMA’s history spans military experimentation, recreational use, and clinical trials for PTSD treatment, reflecting both promise and controversy. While studies in heavy users suggested possible neurotoxicity, evidence remains inconclusive. Clinical trials show that one to three sessions of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy can alleviate PTSD symptoms, yet regulators have criticized inadequate reporting of (positive) adverse events. To clarify safety, this narrative review examines placebo-controlled single-dose studies in healthy volunteers, focusing on MDMA’s acute and subacute effects on subjective state and neurocognitive function relevant to therapeutic applications. Single doses of 75–125 mg enhance mood, empathy, trust, arousal, and prosocial feelings through monoamine reuptake inhibition and release. Post-acutely, transient monoamine depletion may cause fatigue and low mood. During intoxication, MDMA transiently impairs memory encoding via increased 5-HT signaling and 5-HT2A activation but does not heighten suggestibility. Inhibitory control and executive function are largely preserved, while motor coordination and cognitive flexibility decline modestly. These effects vary with metabolism, immune response, drug interactions, and context, underscoring the need for personalized monitoring. It is inferred that, acutely, positive affect may enhance therapeutic alliance and openness as well as susceptibility to boundary violations; amnestic effects may support trauma processing by facilitating fear extinction and disrupting negative memory reconsolidation; whereas temporary reductions in attention and cognitive flexibility may call for structured, emotionally focused therapeutic settings. MDMA’s distinct neurocognitive profile offers clinical promise but complicates trial design by compromising blinding and inflating expectancy, necessitating their quantitative assessments and inclusion of similar comparator drugs to ensure reliable evaluation of efficacy.