This study examined mechanisms by which nicotine (1.78 mg/kg base s.c.) produces discriminative stimulus effects in rhesus monkeys. In addition to nicotine, various test compounds were studied including other nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists (varenicline and cytisine), antagonists [mecamylamine and the ␣4␤2 receptor-selective antagonist dihydro-␤-erythroidine (DH␤E)], a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist/indirect-acting catecholamine agonist (bupropion), and non-nicotinics (cocaine and midazolam). Nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine dose-dependently increased drug-lever responding; the ED 50 values were 0.47, 0.53, and 39 mg/kg, respectively. Bupropion and cocaine produced 100% nicotine-lever responding in a subset of monkeys, whereas mecamylamine, DH␤E, and midazolam produced predominantly vehicle-lever responding. The training dose of nicotine resulted in 1128 ng/ml cotinine in saliva. Mecamylamine antagonized the discriminative stimulus effects of nicotine and varenicline, whereas DH␤E was much less effective. Nicotine and varenicline had synergistic discriminative stimulus effects. In monkeys responding predominantly on the vehicle lever after a test compound (bupropion, cocaine, and midazolam), that test compound blocked the nicotine-discriminative stimulus, perhaps reflecting a perceptual-masking phenomenon. These results show that nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine produce discriminative stimulus effects through mecamylamine-sensitive receptors (i.e., nicotinic acetylcholine) in primates, whereas the involvement of DH␤E-sensitive receptors (i.e., ␣4␤2) is unclear. The current nicotinediscrimination assay did not detect a difference in agonist efficacy between nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine, but did show evidence of involvement of dopamine. The control that nicotine has over choice behavior can be disrupted by non-nicotinic compounds, suggesting that non-nicotinics could be exploited to decrease the control that tobacco has over behavior.

Rationale Receptor mechanisms underlying the behavioral effects of clinically used nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists have not been fully established. Objective Drug discrimination was used to compare receptor mechanisms underlying the effects of smoking cessation aids. Methods Separate groups of male C57BL/6J mice discriminated 0.56, 1, or 1.78 mg/kg of nicotine base. Nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine were administered alone, in combination with each other, and in combination with mecamylamine and dihydro-β-erythroidine (DHβE). Midazolam and morphine were tested to examine sensitivity to non-nicotinics. Results The ED50 value of nicotine to produce discriminative stimulus effects systematically increased as training dose increased. Varenicline and cytisine did not fully substitute for nicotine and, as compared with nicotine, their ED50 values varied less systematically as a function of nicotine training dose. Morphine did not substitute for nicotine, whereas midazolam substituted for the low and not the higher training doses of nicotine. As training dose increased, the dose of mecamylamine needed to produce a significant rightward shift in the nicotine dose-effect function also increased. DHβE antagonized nicotine in animals discriminating the smallest dose of nicotine. Varenicline did not antagonize the effects of nicotine, whereas cytisine produced a modest though significant antagonism of nicotine. Conclusions These results suggest that differences in pharmacologic mechanism between nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine include not only differences in efficacy at a common subtype of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, but also differential affinity and/or efficacy at multiple receptor subtypes.

No abstract

Nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine are pharmacotherapies for tobacco dependence; the extent to which their in vivo effects vary as a function of differences in nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonism is not clear. Male C57BL/6J mice responding under a fixed ratio 30 schedule of food delivery were used to establish the potency and time course of nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine; antagonism was examined with the non-competitive, non-selective antagonist mecamylamine and the competitive, α4β2 nicotinic receptor antagonist dihydro-β-erythroidine (DHβE). Intraperitoneal nicotine, varenicline, and cytisine dose-dependently decreased responding; nicotine was more potent (ED50 value = 0.83 mg/kg) than varenicline (ED50 value = 2.51 mg/kg) and cytisine (ED50 value = 2.97 mg/kg). The agonists had a similar time course including a rapid onset (5 min or less) and relatively short duration of action (30 min). Mecamylamine dose-dependently attenuated the rate-decreasing effects of a fixed dose of nicotine (1.78 mg/kg), varenicline (5.6 mg/kg), and cytisine (5.6 mg/kg). Mecamylamine (1 mg/kg) produced parallel rightward shifts in the dose- response curves for nicotine (3.3-fold), varenicline (3.1-fold), and cytisine (2.3-fold). In contrast, DHβE (3.2 mg/kg) produced 2-fold antagonism of nicotine and did not antagonize varenicline or cytisine. The data strongly suggest that nicotinic acetylcholine receptors mediate the effects of the agonists to decrease operant responding in mice. However, α4β2 receptor agonism appears to contribute partially to the rate-decreasing effects of nicotine but not to the rate-decreasing effects of varenicline and cytisine. Differential activation of α4β2 receptors in vivo might contribute to differences in the effectiveness of these smoking cessation aids.

No abstract