4.7 Article

Cerebral blood flow changes after treatment of social phobia with the neurokinin-1 antagonist GR205171, citalopram, or placebo

Journal

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY
Volume 58, Issue 2, Pages 132-142

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.03.029

Keywords

brain; NK1 antagonist; rCBF; social anxiety; SSRI; substance P

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Evidence is accumulating that pharmacological blockade of the substance P preferring neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor reduces anxiety. This study compared the effects of an NK1 receptor antagonist, citalopram, and placebo on brain activity and anxiety symptoms in social phobia. Methods: Thirty-six patients diagnosed with social phobia were treated for 6 weeks with the NK1 antagonist GR205171 (5 mg), citalopram (40 mg), or matching placebo under randomized double-blind conditions. GR205171 was administered for 4 weeks preceded by 2 weeks of placebo. Before and after treatment, regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) during a stressful public speaking task was assessed using oxygen-15 positron emission tomography. Response rate was determined by the Clinical Global Impression Improvement Scale. Results: Patients improved to a larger extent with the NK1 antagonist (41.7% responders) and citalopram (50% responders), compared with placebo (8.3% responders). Within- and between-group comparisons showed that symptom improvement was paralleled by a significantly reduced rCBF response to public speaking in the rhinal cortex, amygdala, and parahippocampal-hippocampal regions. The rCBF pattern was corroborated in follow-up analyses of responders and subjects showing large state anxiety reduction. Conclusions: Short-term administration of GR205171 and citalopram alleviated social anxiety. Neurokinin-1 antagonists may act like serotonin reuptake inhibitors by attenuating neural activity in a medial temporal lobe network.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available