1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0376-8716(98)00164-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Acute physiological and behavioral effects of oral cocaine in humans: a dose-response analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
29
1
2

Year Published

2000
2000
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
11
29
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The present study is the first to demonstrate the reinforcing effects of oral cocaine in humans. Although a number of previous studies have demonstrated the reinforcing effects of cocaine via smoked, intranasal, and intravenous routes of administration (see, for example, Fischman et al 1990;Fischman 1992, 1994;Hatsukami et al 1994;Higgins et al 1994Higgins et al , 1996, the one previous study to examine oral cocaine did not demonstrate significant drug reinforcement (Rush et al 1999). That study, which used a drug vs money multiple-choice procedure (Griffiths et al 1993, showed that although the average "cross-over point" (i.e., maximum dollar value at which volunteers chose drug over money) on the multiple choice procedure increased as a function of dose, the effect was not statistically significant.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The present study is the first to demonstrate the reinforcing effects of oral cocaine in humans. Although a number of previous studies have demonstrated the reinforcing effects of cocaine via smoked, intranasal, and intravenous routes of administration (see, for example, Fischman et al 1990;Fischman 1992, 1994;Hatsukami et al 1994;Higgins et al 1994Higgins et al , 1996, the one previous study to examine oral cocaine did not demonstrate significant drug reinforcement (Rush et al 1999). That study, which used a drug vs money multiple-choice procedure (Griffiths et al 1993, showed that although the average "cross-over point" (i.e., maximum dollar value at which volunteers chose drug over money) on the multiple choice procedure increased as a function of dose, the effect was not statistically significant.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The present study uses this same approach to investigate oral cocaine. The behavioral and physiological effects of oral cocaine administration have been reported (Post et al 1974;Van Dyke et al 1978;Wilkinson et al 1980;Oliveto et al 1995;Epstein et al 1999;Rush et al 1999). Although oral cocaine has been shown to serve as a discriminative stimulus (Oliveto et al 1995;Epstein et al 1999) and to produce dose-related physiological and subjective effects (see, for example, Rush et al 1999), its reinforcing effects have not been demonstrated (Rush et al 1999) and the effects of manipulating behavioral requirement following drug ingestion have not been examined.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The stimulant-sensitive adjective-rating scale consisted of 21 items, and has been shown to be sensitive to the effects of stimulants (Di Marino et al 1998;Rush et al 1999). Volunteers rated each item using a five-point scale identical to the one described above.…”
Section: Stimulant-sensitive Adjective Rating Scalementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Norcocaine was also identified in humans after oral cocaine administration (Inaba et al 1978) and its formation increased with repeated oral dosing (Jufer et al 1998). Therefore, defining norcocaine's influence is not only essential to delineate cocaine's effects in animal research, but also clinically relevant to the understanding of norcocaine's contribution to the physiological and behavioral effects of oral cocaine observed in humans (Epstein et al 1999;Rush et al 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%