3294 HIGH INTENSITY BINGE DRINKING AND STIMULATING EFFECTS IN HUMAN LABORATORY STUDIES OF ALCOHOL SELF-ADMINISTRATION

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Alcohol use disorder (AUD) has previously been studied using Timeline Followback (TLFB) interview measures and administration of alcohol within laboratory sessions. However, most of those studies supplied alcohol orally and analyzed drinking across a range of drinking intensity and frequency measures. High intensity binge drinking, i.e., drinking alcohol at multiple levels of the binge threshold (5+ drinks for males, 4+ drinks for females) has been identified as a significant risk factor for developing AUD. In the present study, we examined the relationship between high intensity binge drinking with the behavioral and subjective response to intravenous alcohol in a lab study. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Two hundred participants completed a 90-Day TLFB interview, wherein the maximum number of drinks in a day established the participant’s binge level status as a Non-Binger (N = 37), Binge Level 1 (N = 96), Binge Level 2 (N = 44), or Binge Level 3 (N = 22). Binge Level 1 corresponds with at least one binge (4-7 drinks for women, 5-9 drinks for men); Binge Level 2 requires at least twice the binge level (8-11 drinks for women, 10-14 drinks for men); and Level 3 necessitates a participant to drink at least three times the binge level (12+ drinks for women, 15+ drinks for men) on one day. Non-Bingers had no binge level drinking in the 90-day interview. Participants also underwent a 150-minute intravenous-alcohol self-infusion, where participants would press a button to receive an infusion of an ethanol solution. During this, participants also completed subjective questionnaires including the Alcohol Urge Questionnaire (AUQ), Biphasic Alcohol Effects Scale (BAES), and Drug Effects Questionnaire (DEQ). Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests were used to examine the effect of group on alcohol infusion and subjective response measures. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: A chi-square test for association showed significant statistical differences by groups in reaching binge level status (0.08% breath alcohol content) during the alcohol infusion session in the lab, X2 (3) = 23.321, p < 0.001. However, mean difference was not significantly different between Binge Level 2 and Binge Level 3 (0 < 1 < 2 = 3). Binge level groups showed significant differences in the number of button presses during the lab session (H(3) = 36.955, p < 0.001), peak breath alcohol concentration in the lab session (H(3) = 19.870, p < 0.001), and total binges in the TLFB (H(3) = 90.296, p < 0.001). Increased self-administration measures were proportional to the binge intensity level across groups, with no differences between Binge Level 2 and Binge Level 3 (0 < 1 < 2 = 3). For subjective measures, a Kruskal-Wallis H median test showed statistically significant differences between groups in the AUQ score following the priming infusion, H(3) = 11.489, p = 0.009, with bingers at all levels reporting higher scores compared to non-bingers (0 < 1 = 2 = 3). There was also a statistically significant difference between groups in the BAES Stimulation score following the priming infusion, H(3) = 9.023, p = 0.029, with differences seen between non-bingers and level 2 and level 3 bingers (0 = 1 < 2 = 3). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This study demonstrated that high intensity binge drinkers were more likely to reach binge level and overall greater alcohol consumption during a human lab alcohol administration study. Binge intensity level was also associated with higher stimulation and urge for alcohol following priming exposures, which may in turn drive the consumption of greater amounts of alcohol, which we know to be associated with greater risk for AUD.