4.3 Article

Prevention of the stress-induced increase in the concentration of neuroactive steroids in rat brain by long-term administration of mirtazapine but not of fluoxetine

Journal

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
Volume 16, Issue 2, Pages 133-138

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/026988110201600203

Keywords

fluoxetine; mirtazapine; neuroactive steroids; rat; stress

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effects of acute and chronic administration of fluoxetine on the basal and stress-induced increases in cerebrocortical and plasma concentrations of allopregnanolone (3alpha,5alpha-tetrahydroprogesterone; 3alpha,5alpha-TH PROG). and tetrahydrodeoxycorticosterone (3alpha,5alpha-TH DOC) were compared with those of mirtazapine, an antidepressant that (unlike fluoxetine) is not a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. A single injection (20 mg/kg i.p.) of fluoxetine or mirtazapine resulted in significant increases in the cerebrocortical and plasma concentrations of 3alpha,5alpha-TH PROG and 3alpha,5alpha-TH DOC. In contrast, long-term administration (10 mg/kg i.p., once daily for 2 weeks) of fluoxetine; but not. that of mirtazapine, induced marked decreases in the cortical and plasma concentrations of these neuroactive steroids. Chronic treatment with fluoxetine, however, did not inhibit the increases in the cortical and plasma concentrations of 3alpha,5alpha-TH PROG and 3alpha,5alpha-TH DOC induced by acute foot-shock stress. In contrast; chronic treatment with mirtazapine prevented or significantly reduced the stress-induced increases in neurosteroid concentrations in the cerebral cortex and plasma, respectively: These results show that mirtazapine, similar to fluoxetine, initially increases the cortical concentration of neuroactive steroids; however; chronic administration of this drug modulates the plasma and brain availability of these hormones in a manner distinct from that of fluoxetine.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available