Discriminative stimulus properties of amphetamine and other stimulants in lead-exposed and normal rats

Rosen, Jeffrey B.; Young, Alice M.; Beuthin, Frederic C.; Louis-Ferdinand, Robert T.

doi:10.1016/0091-3057(86)90340-0

Cited by 28 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Aside from the differences noted above, the subject-rated effects of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine were generally comparable, which is concordant with previous drug-discrimination studies conducted in non-human laboratory animals (Huang and Ho, 1974;Silverman and Ho, 1980;Rosen et al, 1985;de la Garza and Johanson, 1987;Evans and Johanson, 1987). The discriminative-stimulus effects of drugs are thought to be a model of the subject-rated effects of drugs in humans (Schuster and Johanson, 1988).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Consistent with these neuropharmacological data, the results of studies in non-human animals suggest that methylphenidate and d-amphetamine produce a similar constellation of behavioural effects (Huang and Ho, 1974; Jones, 1975, 1976;Silverman and Ho, 1980;Rosen et al, 1985; de la Garza and Johanson, 1987;Evans and Johanson, 1987). For example, in one set of studies, dogs were allowed to freely self-administer either methylphenidate (0.05-0.4 mg/kg and 0.2-0.4 mg/kg, respectively) or d-amphetamine (0.25-2.0 mg/kg and 0.05-0.10 mg/kg, respectively) Jones, 1975, 1976).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Methylphenidate acts by blocking the dopamine transporter, and similar to d-amphetamine and cocaine, increases extracellular dopamine levels (Hoffman and Lefkowitz, 1996;Ritz et al, 1987). Analysis of whole-brain metabolic activity using c-fos expression suggests that methylphenidate and d-amphetamine have similar effects on global neuronal functioning and act in similar brain nuclei (Lin et al, 1996).Consistent with these neuropharmacological data, the results of studies in non-human animals suggest that methylphenidate and d-amphetamine produce a similar constellation of behavioural effects (Huang and Ho, 1974; Jones, 1975, 1976;Silverman and Ho, 1980;Rosen et al, 1985; de la Garza and Johanson, 1987;Evans and Johanson, 1987). For example, in one set of studies, dogs were allowed to freely self-administer either methylphenidate (0.05-0.4 mg/kg and 0.2-0.4 mg/kg, respectively) or d-amphetamine (0.25-2.0 mg/kg and 0.05-0.10 mg/kg, respectively) Jones, 1975, 1976).…”

mentioning

confidence: 67%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reinforcing, subject-rated, performance and physiological effects of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine in stimulant abusing humans

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methylphenidate has potential for abuse because it produces behavioural effects similar to those observed with other abused stimulants, such as d-amphetamine and cocaine. The aim of this study was to further characterize the abuse potential of oral methylphenidate relative to oral d-amphetamine. Ten drug-abusing volunteers were recruited to participate in this study, which consisted of seven dose conditions: methylphenidate (16, 32 and 48 mg), d-amphetamine (8, 16 and 24 mg) and placebo. The reinforcing effects of these drugs were assessed during a self-administration session (preceded by a sampling session for each condition) with a modified progressive-ratio procedure. Subject-rated, performance and physiological effects were assessed concurrently during both the sampling and self-administration sessions. The intermediate dose of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine increased responding significantly above placebo levels. Both methylphenidate and d-amphetamine produced dose-dependent increases in stimulant-like subject ratings (e.g. Active, Alert, or Energetic and High), but the effects of these drugs were not isomorphic. These findings are consistent with epidemiological data and previous findings from laboratory studies that suggest methylphenidate has at least some abuse potential.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

mentioning

confidence: 67%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reinforcing, subject-rated, performance and physiological effects of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine in stimulant abusing humans

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1). Previous studies have also reported a dissociation of the discriminative and rate-altering potencies of drug stimuli across different training conditions (Rosen et al 1986;Beardsley et al 1987;Young et al 1992), suggesting that rate-altering effects may depend more on characteristics of the drug tested and less on training conditions than do stimulus effects (Young and Sannerud 1989). The co-variation of TO duration and rate-altering potency may have reflected pharmacokinetic factors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Discriminative stimulus effects of two doses of fentanyl in rats: pharmacological selectivity and effect of training dose on agonist and antagonist effects of mu opioids

Zhang¹,

Walker²,

Sutherland³

et al. 2000

Psychopharmacology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both the locomotor stimulating and the discriminative properties of amphetamine have been found to be attenuated by chronic lead exposure (Rosen et al 1986;Silbergeld and Goldberg 1980;Zenick and Goldsmith 1981). Collectively, then, the emergent pattern is one of lead-based antagonism of psychostimulant sensitivity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental Lead Exposure Alters the Stimulatory Properties of Cocaine at PND 30 and PND 90 in the Rat

Nation

Miller

Bratton

2000

Neuropsychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of perinatal lead exposure on locomotor responding following acute and repeated cocaine challenges (sensitization).Lead poisoning continues to present major health concerns nationwide, and this situation is especially problematic among children. Recent sociodemographic data indicate the threat of lead toxicity is especially great among economically disadvantaged, nonwhite, and inner-city children (Goldman and Carra 1994;Pirkle et al. 1994). Along these lines, a 1999 report alarmingly places the "at risk" figure for children suffering from excessive lead exposure at around 70% in major metropolitan areas of the United States (cf., Mielke 1999).The sizable literature on developmental lead poisoning understandably has focused on global disturbances produced by early contaminant exposure that may have an enduring impact on the quality of life. In this sense, the data are compelling with respect to showing that even low-level lead exposure during development can occasion long-lasting neurobehavioral disturbances that compromise adult adaptive abilities and threaten stability. In this regard, functional deficits in cognitive and intellectual processing have been shown to persist well into the adult cycle of humans, rodents, and nonhuman primates (e.g., Bellinger et al. 1987). In addition, it seems that even emotional expression and attendant psychosocial phenomena may be influenced by lead ex- N EUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY 2000 -VOL . 23 , NO . 4 Developmental Lead Exposure and Cocaine 445 posure during early development (Needleman et al. 1996).In the present report, our objective was to investigate interactive relations between developmental lead exposure and drug sensitivity later in the life cycle. This is an especially pertinent issue given that lead uniquely threatens sub-populations where drug abuse is more common, i.e., urban minorities . Clearly, experiential elements, availability, drug history, poverty, etc., must be considered in the list of dispositional factors that determine drug habits in humans. But it also must be considered that other types of environmental events may contribute to the abuse potential of selective drugs. That is, to the extent that lead or any other xenobiotic chemical alters the impact of a set delivery of a drug, motivational features related to drug seeking and taking may be redefined and therein influence maintenance responding and/or the effectiveness of certain pharmacotherapies for drug abuse (Mello et al. 1995).The development of behavioral sensitization during repeated administration of psychomotor stimulants is a well-characterized phenomenon which has received considerable attention because of its proposed relevance to drug addiction (Robinson and Berridge 1993;Wise and Bozarth 1987;Wolf et al. 1995) and psychosis (Post et al. 1992;Segal and Schuckit 1983). Therefore, the procedure was employed here in an effort to determine the effects of lead exposure during lactation and gestation on cocaine-induced changes in locomotor re...

show abstract

Discriminative stimulus properties of amphetamine and other stimulants in lead-exposed and normal rats

Cited by 28 publications

References 17 publications

Reinforcing, subject-rated, performance and physiological effects of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine in stimulant abusing humans

Reinforcing, subject-rated, performance and physiological effects of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine in stimulant abusing humans

Discriminative stimulus effects of two doses of fentanyl in rats: pharmacological selectivity and effect of training dose on agonist and antagonist effects of mu opioids

Developmental Lead Exposure Alters the Stimulatory Properties of Cocaine at PND 30 and PND 90 in the Rat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About