Abstract

Adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) face two to five times the risk of developing substance use disorders compared to their neurotypical peers. This paper examines the multifaceted reasons behind this increased vulnerability through neurobiological, developmental and environmental perspectives. Key findings reveal that dopamine dysregulation in ADHD, underdeveloped prefrontal cortex functioning in adolescents and heightened social pressures create a convergence of risk factors that significantly increase addiction susceptibility in this population. Understanding these mechanisms is crucial for developing targeted prevention and intervention strategies. 

I. Introduction

Adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) face two to five times the risk for drug use/abuse compared to their neurotypical peers (Kousha et al., 2011; Sizoo et al., 2010). This concerning statistic suggests either an overlap in risk factors between ADHD and Substance Use Disorder (SUD) or that ADHD symptoms directly increase the likelihood of drug use and addiction. The neurobiology of ADHD may make individuals more likely to experiment with substances and, once exposed, more prone to developing addiction. Understanding this relationship requires examining how multiple factors contribute to the development of SUD to inform improved prevention and intervention strategies. Additionally, a deeper understanding is needed regarding relapse prevention and intervention for SUD patients with ADHD, since they have a higher risk of relapse compared to those without ADHD (Schellekens et al., 2020).   

ADHD is a developmental disorder characterised by persistent patterns of inattention, hyperactivity and/or impulsivity that interfere with functioning or development (Ringeisen et al., 2016). Beyond these core symptoms, neurobiological, environmental and developmental factors contribute to increased vulnerability to substance use disorder. SUD is defined as a “complex condition in which there is uncontrolled use of a substance despite harmful consequences” (American Psychiatric Association, 2024).  Together, ADHD and SUD represent two of the most common mental health disorders in adolescents, and their combination creates one of the most challenging comorbidities in adolescent mental health, one that extends well beyond the teenage years. 

The co-occurrence of these disorders significantly complicates treatment approaches. Traditional ADHD medication may pose abuse risk, while untreated ADHD symptoms can trigger substance use relapse or initiation. Additionally, the impulsivity and executive function deficits inherent in ADHD undermine treatment adherence and maintenance of therapeutic gains, contributing to a higher relapse rate in adolescents with ADHD.  

Research indicates that adolescents with ADHD begin using substances approximately 2.4 years earlier than those without ADHD (Kousha et al., 2011). Those with ADHD who start using substances early are more likely to develop serious addictions that are harder to treat and result in worse outcomes without proper intervention. Understanding why adolescents with ADHD face such a high risk requires examining the complex factors that create these vulnerabilities. The relationship between ADHD and SUD involves more than simple correlation; it includes mechanisms operating at biological, psychological and social levels. This paper argues that adolescents with ADHD demonstrate higher rates of substance use disorder due to: neurobiological vulnerability, including dysregulated dopamine pathways; developmental factors, such as prefrontal cortex development; and environmental pressures, including social influences. These combine to create the ideal combination for substance use initiation and progression.

II. Neurobiological Influence 

II.I DOPAMINE DYSREGULATION

Individuals with ADHD are more susceptible to developing a substance use disorder because their impaired reward system and motivation create a need to seek external dopamine stimulation to achieve normal functioning. The widespread misconception that adolescents with ADHD have “too much” dopamine fundamentally misrepresents both ADHD and SUD risk. According to research published in Behavioral Brain Research, the issue is not increased dopamine production, but rather an increase in dopamine transporters (DAT) (Solanto, 2002). This increase in DAT causes accelerated dopamine removal, creating dopamine deficiency. Combined with heightened impulsivity characteristic of ADHD, this neurobiological vulnerability contradicts the “excess dopamine” myth by revealing the underlying mechanisms that drive the ADHD and SUD comorbidity.  

Viggiano et al. (2004) explored dopamine system dysfunction in ADHD using animal models and mathematical modelling, focusing on key regions of the mesocorticolimbic pathways. Using spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR), which exhibit behavioural hyperactivity, a commonly found characteristic in individuals with ADHD, they discovered decreased levels of enzymes responsible for dopamine synthesis in the prefrontal cortex. Additionally, tyrosine hydroxylase, an enzyme responsible for synthesising catecholamines, including dopamine, showed dysregulated mRNA expression in the striatum of SHR (Viggiano et al., 2004). The striatum, another key structure in the mesocorticolimbic pathways, plays a crucial role in reward processing and motivation. These findings suggest that rather than increased dopamine removal, there is decreased dopamine production. Both hypotheses demonstrate that brains exhibiting ADHD-like symptoms have a dopamine deficiency through different mechanisms, disproving the “excess dopamine” theory and suggesting that teenagers with ADHD use substances to compensate for missing dopamine.

II.II Genetics of ADHD Vulnerability 

The LPHN3 gene has been consistently linked to both ADHD and substance use disorders, with multiple studies demonstrating its crucial role in SUD susceptibility among individuals with ADHD. An animal model study by Wallis et al. (2012) demonstrated the association between the LPHN3 gene and both SUD and ADHD. This study utilised LPHN3 null mutant mice, observed over five months, to investigate how normal functions were affected by gene deletion. Scientists found changes in gene expression, specifically increased activity of dopamine and serotonin systems (Wallis et al., 2012). This indicates that when neurotransmitter homeostasis and neuronal development are disrupted, they negatively impact motivation, attention and impulse control, impaired characteristics that make individuals more susceptible to both ADHD and SUD. This model provides crucial evidence for how genetic variations lead to behavioural vulnerabilities. 

Genetic factors appear predictive of the most severe ADHD cases. A 16-year follow-up study by Acosta et al. (2016) found that 14.6% of participants retained an ADHD-C diagnosis into adolescence. The study observed that the LPHN3 gene showed significant association with ADHD-C, especially in persistent and severe cases. While these results are promising, this represents early evidence that requires replication in larger and more diverse populations. However, LPHN3 testing could eventually become part of ADHD evaluation to provide more informed treatment decisions. While the mice study reveals biological mechanisms in an animal model, the human study confirms the gene’s role in actual ADHD cases. Both studies reveal that this genetic variant disrupts dopamine and serotonin regulation, resulting in impaired impulse control and motivation. These deficits increase the risk of substance initiation, necessary for addiction development, creating a pathway where the same genetic factor contributes to both ADHD symptoms and vulnerability to substance abuse.

III. Developmental Influence 

III.I Prefrontal Cortex Development

Adolescents without ADHD already experience impaired impulse control and elevated risk-taking behaviours. When these developmental characteristics combine with ADHD symptoms during adolescence, they create a particularly challenging combination that amplifies substance use risk through multiple developmental mechanisms. Sullivan and Brake’s (2003) rodent study, which examined prefrontal cortex function, revealed critical insights into ADHD pathophysiology, demonstrating that prefrontal cortex dysfunction, specifically in the right hemisphere, allows for disorder development. Their findings showed that early developmental events, including perinatal anoxia and harsh postnatal maternal environments, impair prefrontal cortex development and normal function. This dysfunction leads to stress and emotional dysregulation, creating maladaptive coping mechanisms where individuals resort to substance use as self-medication to alleviate their symptoms. This developmental vulnerability becomes pronounced during adolescence when the prefrontal cortex is still developing, creating conditions where ADHD-related deficits intersect with normal risk-taking tendencies, making teenagers more susceptible to substance use disorder. 

Poletti (2009) examines the relationship between adolescent brain development and cognitive function, demonstrating the critical role of prefrontal cortex development. Poletti emphasises that the prefrontal cortex is responsible for decision-making, impulse control and planning, all of which are affected in ADHD, and that additional damage to this region can lead to comorbid mental health disorders. These deficits create an increased vulnerability where adolescents with ADHD lack the neurological resources to navigate substance use risks effectively. Both studies reveal that those with ADHD face a disadvantage that increases their susceptibility to developing substance use disorder. 

IV. Environmental Influence    

IV.I Social Pressures

The intensity of social pressures during adolescence increases risk for adolescents with ADHD, who may turn to substance use in their desire to fit in. According to Dekkers et al. (2020), there is an increase in risk-taking behaviour in adolescents with ADHD under peer influence. The study used the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) in both solo and peer influence conditions to measure risk-taking and monitored autonomic nervous system activity. Results showed that all adolescents, with or without ADHD, demonstrated increased risk-taking when peers encouraged it (Dekkers et al., 2020). While peer influence affects all teenagers, it becomes additionally concerning for adolescents with ADHD, whose already compromised impulse control amplifies these effects. The situation is further complicated by stress from social pressure, as individuals with ADHD often struggle with stress regulation and may turn to substance use as a coping mechanism. This combination of peer influence with ADHD-specific vulnerabilities creates increased risk, making adolescents more susceptible to substance experimentation. 

In contrast, Hoorn et al. (2022) conducted a study with 113 boys aged 13-23 to examine whether peer feedback could decrease impulsive choice in adolescents with and without ADHD. Their findings revealed that peers can serve as protective factors by decreasing impulsivity (Hoorn et al., 2022). However, this positive potential is limited by the unpredictable nature of peer relationships and the reality that initial drug exposure typically occurs through friend networks and social circles. Neither parents nor adolescents can control which social influences they will encounter or predict when peers might introduce substances into the social dynamic. This highlights the gap between controlled research settings and the complex realities of adolescent social life, where the same peer relationships that could theoretically reduce impulsivity may simultaneously serve as pathways to substance experimentation. While peer influence can be harnessed positively as a prevention strategy, its effectiveness remains questionable in real-world applications where social networks often facilitate drug introduction. Ultimately, these contrasting peer effects illustrate that adolescents with ADHD remain at increased risk for developing substance use disorders due to their underlying executive function deficits, which influence their responses to all social situations, including their vulnerability to peer-mediated substance introduction.

V. Prevention/Intervention

Adolescents with ADHD face a significantly higher risk of developing substance use disorder, yet research on prevention strategies and early intervention treatments remains critically limited. This gap in evidence-based approaches leaves a vulnerable population without adequate support during a crucial developmental period when substance use patterns are often established. The most effective prevention strategies involve raising awareness at the time of diagnosis by educating parents and adolescents about controllable risk factors, including impulse control difficulties and social pressure vulnerability. Families can work together to make more informed decisions that reduce SUD risk. 

Given that ADHD is a genetic condition, parents may share similar risk factors with their adolescents, creating both challenges and opportunities within the family system. Parents can better understand their child’s experiences and model effective coping strategies while remaining mindful of their own vulnerabilities to impulsive decision-making. This shared understanding can strengthen family communication and create more supportive environments, though families may need additional support to break cycles of impulsive behaviours together. 

Therapies can also help prevent SUD. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and motivational interviewing (MI) offer support by developing impulse control and stress management skills. Early skill training can serve as a protective factor against substance use initiation. These approaches work by targeting the core ADHD symptoms that create specific vulnerabilities for developing substance use disorder.

Medication treatment for ADHD is explained by Zaso el al. (2015), including both stimulant and non-stimulant options that offer several treatment approaches with varying efficacy for individuals with ADHD at risk for substance use disorders. Extended-release stimulants represent the primary intervention, with methylphenidate demonstrating improvement in core ADHD symptoms and MPH-SOPAS showing similar ADHD symptoms reduction but no impact on SUD. Immediate-release stimulants, such as pemoline, initially showed promising results for both ADHD symptoms and substance use outcomes; however, this medication was withdrawn from the market due to serious liver toxicity concerns. Non-stimulant medications include atomoxetine, which shows no significant change in SUD, and bupropion, which demonstrates promising reduction in both ADHD symptoms and SUD risks (Zaso, 2015). These medications work by targeting the dysregulated neurotransmitter systems underlying ADHD, particularly dopamine and norepinephrine pathways that affect reward processing, impulse control and executive functioning. The varying success rates reflect the neurobiological complexity of ADHD and the difficulty of treating both symptoms and addiction risk together. This inconsistent success suggests that individual intervention strategies may be insufficient, but combining medication with therapeutic approaches could result in high success rates.

VI. Discussion

This analysis confirms that adolescents with ADHD demonstrate higher rates of substance use disorder due to neurobiological vulnerability, including dysregulated dopamine pathways, developmental factors such as prefrontal cortex development and environmental pressures, including social pressures, which combine to create the perfect condition for substance use initiation and progression. The combination of these critical factors creates a complex vulnerability that extends far beyond simple behavioural tendencies.

The neurobiological evidence reveals that ADHD brains operate with fundamental dopamine deficiencies, whether through increased DAT transporters or reduced dopamine synthesis, leading individuals to seek external stimulation through substance use. The LPHN3 gene research further demonstrates how genetic variations disrupt neurotransmitter homeostasis, creating inherent susceptibility to both ADHD symptoms and addictive behaviours. Developmentally, the delayed prefrontal cortex maturation during adolescence compounds these neurobiological vulnerabilities by impairing decision-making and impulse control when exposure risks are highest. Environmental pressures, particularly peer influences, exploit these existing deficits and transform typical adolescent experimentation into dangerous pathways toward addiction.

These findings have profound implications for understanding adolescent mental health and addiction prevention. The identification of specific mechanisms, ranging from genetic markers like LPHN3 to the developmental timing of prefrontal cortex maturation, suggests that early intervention strategies must be multifaceted, addressing biological, psychological and social factors simultaneously. This research challenges the traditional view of substance abuse as purely behavioural, instead revealing it as a complex combination of neurobiological predisposition and environmental triggers. These insights underscore that the alarming statistic of ADHD adolescents facing a two to five times higher risk of substance use is not merely correlational but represents a predictable outcome of interconnected vulnerabilities that demand comprehensive evidence-based prevention and intervention approaches. 

Acosta, M.T., Swanson, J., Stehli, A., Martinez, A.F., Arcos-Burgos, M. & Muenke, M. (2016). ADGRL3 (LPHN3) variants are associated with a refined phenotype of ADHD in the MTA study. Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine, 4(5), 540–547.

American Psychiatric Association (2024). What Is a Substance Use Disorder? [online]. https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/addiction-substance-use-disorders/what-is-a-substance-use-disorder 

Dekkers, T.J., Popma,A., Sonuga-Barke, E.J.S., Oldenhof, H., Bexkens, A. & Huizenga, H.M. (2020). Risk Taking by Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): a Behavioral and Psychophysiological Investigation of Peer Influence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48(9), 1129–1141.

Hoorn, J.V., Water, E.D., Dekkers, T.J., Pollak, Y., Popma, A. & Braams, B.R. (2022). Peer feedback decreases impulsive choice in adolescents with and without attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder. JCPP Advances, 2(1), e12065. 

Kousha, M., Shahrivar, Z. & Alaghband-rad, J. (2011). Substance Use Disorder and ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 16(4), 325–332.

Poletti, M. (2009). Adolescent brain development and executive functions: A prefrontal framework for developmental psychopathologies. Clinical Neuropsychiatry: Journal of Treatment Evaluation, 6(4), 155-165.

Schellekens, A.F.A., van den Brink, W., Kiefer, F. & Goudriaan, A.E. (2020). Often Overlooked and Ignored, but Do Not Underestimate Its Relevance: ADHD in Addiction – Addiction in ADHD. European Addiction Research, 26(4-5), 169–172.

Solanto, M.V. (2002). Dopamine dysfunction in AD/HD: integrating clinical and basic neuroscience research. Behavioural Brain Research, 130(1-2), 65–71.

Sullivan, R.M. & Brake, W.G. (2003). What the rodent prefrontal cortex can teach us about attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: the critical role of early developmental events on prefrontal function. Behavioural Brain Research, 146(1-2), 43–55.

Viggiano, D., Vallone, D. & Sadile, A. (2004). Dysfunctions in Dopamine Systems and ADHD: Evidence From Animals and Modeling. Neural Plasticity, 11(1-2), 97–114.

Wallis, D., Hill, D.S., Mendez, I.A., Abbott, L.C., Finnell, R.H., Wellman, P.J., & Setlow, B. (2012). Initial characterization of mice null for Lphn3, a gene implicated in ADHD and addiction. Brain Research, 1463, 85–92.

Zaso, M.J., Park, A. & Antshel, K.M. (2015). Treatments for Adolescents With Comorbid ADHD and Substance Use Disorder: A Systematic Review. Journal of Attention Disorders, 24(9), 1215–1226.