Effect of a selective dopamine D 1 agonist (ABT-431) on smoked cocaine self-administration in humans

Haney, Margaret; Collins, Eric D.; Ward, Amie S.; Foltin, Richard W.; Fischman, Marian W.

doi:10.1007/s002130050925

Cited by 115 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Choice procedures have also been used to study cocaine self-administration in humans (Haney et al, 1998(Haney et al, , 1999(Haney et al, , 2001Hart et al, 2000;Walsh et al, 2001) and to study choice maintained by other drugs of abuse, such as opiates and ethanol (Griffiths et al, 1976;de Wit and Chutuape, 1993;Heyman, 1993;Williams and Woods, 2000). The primary goal of the present study was to build on previous experience with choice procedures and identify conditions that would permit more rapid assessment of choice.…”

Section: Discussion Baseline Choice Between Cocaine and Foodmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Choice procedures are being used with increasing frequency to evaluate candidate pharmacotherapies in human studies (Haney et al, 1998(Haney et al, , 1999(Haney et al, , 2001Walsh et al, 2001), but to date, choice procedures have been used only sparingly for this purpose in preclinical research Balster, 1979, 1981). In the present study, the monoamine releaser damphetamine was tested as a candidate 'agonist' medication, because it produces many cocaine-like effects (Colpaert et al, 1979;Hoffman, 2001), and because several recent clinical studies reported promising results with d-amphetamine maintenance in the treatment of stimulant abuse (Fleming and Roberts, 1994;Charnaud and Griffiths, 1998;White, 2000;Grabowski et al, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rapid Assessment of Choice between Cocaine and Food in Rhesus Monkeys: Effects of Environmental Manipulations and Treatment with d-Amphetamine and Flupenthixol

Negus

2002

Neuropsychopharmacol

184

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study describes a procedure that permits rapid assessment of environmental and pharmacological factors that may influence the choice between cocaine and food in rhesus monkeys. Daily 2 h sessions were divided into five components. During each component, monkeys (N ¼ 4) chose between i.v. cocaine (0-0.1 mg/kg/injection) and food (0, 1, or 3 food pellets). Up to 10 reinforcers were available during each component, and different discriminative stimuli were associated with each magnitude of each reinforcer. Cocaine choice was directly related to cocaine dose, and a cocaine choice dose-effect curve could be determined in a single experimental session. The choice between cocaine and food was influenced by the schedules of cocaine and food reinforcement, the magnitude of the food reinforcer, and the amount of noncontingent food provided outside the experimental session. These results confirm and extend previous findings with other choice procedures and validate the sensitivity of the present procedure to environmental manipulations. The choice between cocaine and food could also be influenced by treatment with candidate pharmacotherapies for cocaine abuse and dependence. The 'agonist' medication d-amphetamine produced rightward shifts in the cocaine choice dose-effect curve and decreased cocaine choice, whereas the 'antagonist' medication flupenthixol had little effect on cocaine choice. Overall, these results suggest that this choice procedure may be useful for the evaluation of both environmental determinants of cocaine use and candidate pharmacotherapies for the treatment of cocaine abuse.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Baseline Choice Between Cocaine and Foodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Assessment of Choice between Cocaine and Food in Rhesus Monkeys: Effects of Environmental Manipulations and Treatment with d-Amphetamine and Flupenthixol

Negus

2002

Neuropsychopharmacol

184

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No effect (Haney 1999) No data No data Increase with low dose of cocaine; no effect with high dose of cocaine (Haney 2001) Subjective effects of cocaine in a laboratory setting Decrease (Haney 1999) No data Decrease (Romach 1999) Increase (Haney 2001) Craving for cocaine in a laboratory setting Decrease (trend) (Haney 1999) No data Decrease (Romach 1999) Decrease (with placebo cocaine) (Haney 2001) …”

Section: Alcoholmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, as shown in Table 3, cross-species comparison is impeded by differing administration schedules. For example, ABT-431 blocks reinstatement more effectively after chronic administration (Self et al 2000), but the one published human laboratory study used acute administration only, leaving open the possibility that chronic administration would be more effective (Haney et al 1999). Conversely, for ecopipam, human chronic-administration data are available (Haney 2001), but there are no chronic-administration reinstatement data with which they can be compared.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The reinstatement model and relapse prevention: a clinical perspective

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives-This commentary assesses the degree to which the reinstatement model is homologous to the human experience of relapse.Results-A review of the literature suggests that the relationship is less clear than is often assumed, largely due to a lack of prospective data on the precipitants and process of relapse (especially relapse to heroin or cocaine abuse). However, reinstatement does not need to resemble relapse to have immediate clinical value; predictive validity as a medication screen would be sufficient. Whether the model has predictive validity is unknown, because, to date, very few clinical trials have tested medications that are effective in the reinstatement model, and even fewer have used designs comparable to those of reinstatement experiments. A clinical trial comparable to a reinstatement experiment would enroll participants who are already abstinent, and its main outcome measure would be propensity to undergo a specific type of relapse (e.g., relapse induced by stress or cues).Conclusions-Until clinical and preclinical work are more comparable, criticisms of the reinstatement model's presumed shortcomings are premature.The reinstatement model has generated a body of preclinical data that grows increasingly substantial and impressive (Shaham et al. 2003). Yet opinions remain divided about its relation to clinical realities (Marlatt 1996;Bergman and Katz 1998). In this commentary, we address the issues of whether reinstatement resembles relapse, whether it can be useful without resembling relapse, and why neither of those questions can yet be answered satisfactorily. We have drawn on clinical literature and on our own experiences working with substance abusers. Does reinstatement resemble relapse? MaybeIn most published discussions of the reinstatement model, attention is drawn to the fact that the most widely studied precipitants of reinstatement in rats (drug priming, drug-associated cues, and stress) are provocatively similar to the precipitants of relapse in humans. This is typically taken as a point of commonality between the reinstatement model and the real-life experiences of recovered addicts. It is tempting to agree without further consideration; the assertion that priming, cues, and stress precipitate relapse is intuitively appealing and seems to accord with clinical experience. But how strong is the evidence that most relapses are precipitated by any of those three factors?No definitive answer can be found in the clinical literature. Relapse is usually described retrospectively, with weeks or months intervening between the event and its recollection. This leaves ample time for the introduction of recall bias and the formation of post hoc explanations for the reporter's behavior. As an only slightly tangential illustration of the problem, consider the intuitively plausible prediction that abused children are at increased risk for later addiction. The prediction is confirmed when adult addicts are asked retrospectively about their childhoods -but not when abused and nonabused c...

show abstract

“…In addition, pretreatment with D 1 and D 2 agonists produces opposite effects on cocaine's ability to reinstate this behavior, since D 1 agonists attenuate and D 2 agonists facilitate cocaine seeking induced by cocaine priming injections (Self et al, 1996;Alleweireldt et al, 2003). A similar D 1 /D 2 dichotomy regulates cocaine seeking in non-human primates (Khroyan et al, 2000), and also may suppress and stimulate craving responses in humans, respectively (Haney et al, 1998(Haney et al, , 1999. Together, these studies suggest that D 2 receptors could play a major role in eliciting relapse to cocaine seeking when environmental stimuli such as cocaine-related cues or stress activate the mesolimbic dopamine system (Phillips et al, 2003;Pruessner et al, 2004), while D 1 receptor tone may provide inhibitory regulation over cocaine seeking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addiction-Related Alterations in D1 and D2 Dopamine Receptor Behavioral Responses Following Chronic Cocaine Self-Administration

Edwards

Whisler

Fuller

et al. 2006

Neuropsychopharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cocaine-addicted phenotype can be modeled in rats based on individual differences in preferred levels of cocaine intake and a propensity for relapse in withdrawal. These cocaine-taking and -seeking behaviors are strongly but differentially regulated by postsynaptic D 1 and D 2 receptors in the mesolimbic dopamine system. Thus, we determined whether addiction-related differences in cocaine selfadministration would be related to differential sensitivity in functional D 1 and D 2 receptor responses. Using a population of 40 outbred Sprague-Dawley rats trained to self-administer cocaine for 3 weeks, we found that animals with higher preferred levels of cocaine intake exhibited a vertical and rightward shift in the self-administration dose-response function, and were more resistant to extinction from cocaine self-administration, similar to phenotypic changes reported in other models of cocaine addiction. After 3 weeks of withdrawal from cocaine self-administration, high intake rats were subsensitive to the ability of the D 1 agonist SKF 81297 to inhibit cocaine-seeking behavior elicited by cocaine priming, but supersensitive to cocaine seeking triggered by the D 2 agonist quinpirole, when compared to low intake rats. Additionally, high intake rats developed profound increases in locomotor responses to D 2 receptor challenge from early to late withdrawal times, whereas low intake rats developed increased responsiveness to D 1 receptor challenge. In a second experiment, responses to the mixed D 1 /D 2 agonist apomorphine and the NMDA glutamate receptor antagonist MK-801 failed to differ between low and high intake rats. These findings suggest that cocaine addiction is related specifically to differential alterations in functional D 1 and D 2 receptors and their ability to modulate cocaine-seeking behavior.

show abstract

Effect of a selective dopamine D 1 agonist (ABT-431) on smoked cocaine self-administration in humans

Abstract: These data suggest that D1 agonists may have potential utility for the treatment of cocaine abuse.

Cited by 115 publications

References 29 publications

Rapid Assessment of Choice between Cocaine and Food in Rhesus Monkeys: Effects of Environmental Manipulations and Treatment with d-Amphetamine and Flupenthixol

Rapid Assessment of Choice between Cocaine and Food in Rhesus Monkeys: Effects of Environmental Manipulations and Treatment with d-Amphetamine and Flupenthixol

The reinstatement model and relapse prevention: a clinical perspective

Addiction-Related Alterations in D1 and D2 Dopamine Receptor Behavioral Responses Following Chronic Cocaine Self-Administration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About