The NeXT Study

This prospective study on young adults (n=225) in The Netherlands investigates the claims that MDMA is neurotoxic. It uses the prospective study design, which means that the young adults are being followed before (potentially) using MDMA and measured after.

Several other small studies are part of the NeXT study (see details below).

The results of the study reported state that: “Compared to persistent ecstasy-naives, novel low-dose ecstasy users (mean 6.0, median 2.0 tablets) showed decreased rrCBV in the globus pallidus and putamen; decreased FA in thalamus and frontoparietal white matter; increased FA in globus pallidus; and increased apparent diffusion coefficient in the thalamus. No changes in serotonin transporter densities and brain metabolites were observed. These findings suggest sustained effects of ecstasy on brain microvasculature, white matter maturation and possibly axonal damage due to low dosages of ecstasy. Although we do not know yet whether these effects are reversible or not, we cannot exclude that ecstasy even in low doses is neurotoxic to the brain.

Status Completed
Results Published
Start date 01 April 2002
End date 10 July 2005
Chance of happening 100%
Phase Not Applicable
Design Open
Type Observational
Generation First
Participants 225
Sex All
Age 18- 35
Therapy No

Trial Details

The study aims to investigate the causality, course and clinical relevance of the observed neurotoxicity in the human brain among users of the popular recreational drug 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). Studies in animals and non-human primates suggest that MDMA is toxic toward brain serotonin neurons at doses that overlap those used by humans. Much less is known about the effects of this drug on the human brain. Recent studies, however, suggest that MDMA might also be neurotoxic to 5-HT neurons in humans, and that it is associated with functional consequences, such as memory impairment and depression. However, these studies have been retrospective and potentially vulnerable to selection bias and confounding. Clearly, only a prospective study can ascertain that recreational XTC is neurotoxic in humans. However, given the existing data such a study is ethically not acceptable. In the present project, therefore, we have chosen a naturalistic study using a combination of prospective and retrospective approaches: a prospective study among 200 XTC naive subjects with a high-risk profile for first XTC use with a two-year follow up of 50 incident-, and 50 continuously XTC naive subjects, and a retrospective design of 25 subjects with and 25 subjects without prior exposure to XTC selected from a large representative cohort (N=1600) that was prospectively followed from the age of 12. In addition, a cross sectional design is used of 70 subjects with variation in type and amount of drugs used, besides a history of frequent XTC use. Among the 50 incident cases and the sample of 50 continuously XTC-naive subjects in the prospective cohort, indicators of neurotoxicity (SPECT,1H-MRS), markers of neuronal injury (fMRI, Perfusion MRI), and clinical assessments of memory, mood and personality prior to any XTC use will be compared with the same parameters two years later, i.e. after XTC user has taken place in the incident cases. In the retrospective cohort, subjects with lifetime XTC exposure will be compared with XTC naive subjects on the same neurotoxicity, neural injury and psychopathology parameters, controlling for potential confounders that were assessed prior to the first use of XTC. In the cross sectional cohort, all subjects will be assessed on the same neurotoxicity, neural injury and psychopathology parameters, controlling for the confounding effects of the use of other psychoactive drugs besides XTC. The combined results will result in conclusions that can be validly used in prevention messages, clinical decision making and the development op a national XTC policy.

NCT Number NCT00235768

Sponsors & Collaborators

Utrecht University
Some researchers at Utrecht University are working on a large psychedelics study with colleagues from Leiden University, but this university hasn't set up any department specifically for psychedelic studies.

Data attribution

A large set of the trials in our database are sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (CTG). We have modified these post to display the information in a more clear format or to correct spelling mistakes. Our database in actively updated and may show a different status (e.g. completed) if we have knowledge of this update (e.g. a published paper on the study) which isn't reflected yet on CTG. If a trial is not sourced from CTG, this is indicated on this page and you can follow the link to the alternative source of information.