The involvement of cannabinoid processes in positive reinforcement was studied using an unbiased, one-compartment, conditioned place preference (CPP) procedure in rats. This was achieved by examining the ability of the selective antagonist of the CB1 cannabinoid receptor subtype, SR 141716, to counteract the CPP supported by classical reinforcers. The acquisition of CPP induced by cocaine (2 mg/kg), morphine (4 mg/kg) and food (standard chow and sucrose pellets) was dose-dependently blocked by pre-pairing administration of SR 141716 (0.03-3 mg/kg). However, SR 141716 (up to 10 mg/kg) did not significantly counteract the expression of cocaine-induced CPP. On the other hand, the synthetic CB receptor agonist, WIN 55212-2 (0.3-1 mg/kg), established a robust place aversion (CPA), as already described with other agonists, and CPP was never observed, even at 100-fold lower doses. The aversive effect of WIN 55212-2 was reversed by SR 141716 (0.3-1 mg/kg), suggesting that it was accounted for by the stimulation of CB1 receptors. These findings indicate that, on their own, CB receptor agonists are unable to generate the processes necessary to induce a pleasurable state in animals, as assessed in place conditioning procedures. Nevertheless, a cannabinoid link may be involved in the neurobiological events, allowing the perception of the rewarding value of various kinds of reinforcers. However, a permanent endogenous cannabinoid tone seems unlikely to be necessary to ensure the organism a basal hedonic level since, given alone, SR 141716 supported neither CPP nor CPA.

These effects on tolerance to delay may be accounted for by a subtle balance between the opposing functional consequences of pre- versus post-synaptic 5-HT(1A) receptor activation or blockade. Overall, the present results provide further support to the idea that 5-HT processes participate in the control of impulsive-related behaviour, as assessed from tolerance to delay of reward in this particular T-maze procedure.

This 4-week, double-blind, randomized study was undertaken to determine the dose-response relationship of amisulpride in 319 patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Fixed doses of amisulpride (400, 800 and 1200 mg/day) and haloperidol (16 mg/day) were compared to amisulpride, 100 mg/day, as a potentially subtherapeutic dose. Efficacy data (BPRS total score and PANSS positive subscale) in the amisulpride groups generated a bell-shaped dose-response curve, with 400 mg/day and 800 mg/day being the most effective treatments for positive symptoms. Parkinsonism did not increase significantly between baseline and endpoint with amisulpride 400, 800 and 1200 mg/day compared to the amisulpride 100 mg/day group, whereas the difference was significant for haloperidol (P<0.05). It is concluded that amisulpride 400 mg and 800 mg/day is highly effective in treating the positive symptoms of schizophrenia, with less extrapyramidal side-effects than haloperidol 16 mg/day.

No abstract