4.5 Article

In Vivo Effects of Amphetamine Analogs Reveal Evidence for Serotonergic Inhibition of Mesolimbic Dopamine Transmission in the Rat

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC PHARMACOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
DOI: 10.1124/jpet.110.176271

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse [5R01DA012970-10]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Evidence suggests that elevations in extracellular serotonin (5-HT) in the brain can diminish stimulant effects of dopamine (DA). To assess this proposal, we evaluated the pharmacology of amphetamine analogs (m-fluoroamphetamine, p-fluoroamphetamine, m-methylamphetamine, p-methylamphetamine), which display similar in vitro potency as DA releasers (EC50 = 24-52 nM) but differ in potency as 5-HT releasers (EC50 = 53-1937 nM). In vivo microdialysis was used to assess the effects of drugs on extracellular DA and 5-HT in rat nucleus accumbens, while simultaneously measuring ambulation (i.e., forward locomotion) and stereotypy (i.e., repetitive movements). Rats received two intravenous injections of drug, 1 mg/kg at time 0 followed by 3 mg/kg 60 min later. All analogs produced dose-related increases in dialysate DA and 5-HT, but the effects on DA did not agree with in vitro predictions. Maximal elevation of dialysate DA ranged from 5- to 14-fold above baseline and varied inversely with 5-HT response, which ranged from 6- to 24-fold above baseline. All analogs increased ambulation and stereotypy, but drugs causing greater 5-HT release (e. g., p-methylamphetamine) were associated with significantly less forward locomotion. The magnitude of ambulation was positively correlated with extracellular DA (p < 0.001) and less so with the ratio of DA release to 5-HT release (i.e., percentage DA increase divided by percentage 5-HT increase) (p < 0.029). Collectively, our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that 5-HT release dampens stimulant effects of amphetamine-type drugs, but further studies are required to address the precise mechanisms underlying this phenomenon.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据