4.4 Article

Naloxone attenuates incubated sucrose craving in rats

期刊

PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 194, 期 4, 页码 537-544

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-007-0868-y

关键词

addiction; eating; naltrexone; obesity; opiate; reinforcement; relapse

资金

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [R15 DA016285, DA016285-01-S2, R15 DA016285-01S2, DA016285-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale Cue- induced craving precedes drug relapse and contributes to eating disorders. Opiate antagonists have been demonstrated to be effective at reducing cravings for drugs and food. Craving, as defined as responding for a stimulus previously associated with a reward, increases, or incubates, over forced abstinence in an animal model of relapse. Objectives This paper aims to determine anticraving effects of the opiate antagonist, naloxone, on the incubation of sucrose craving. Methods 106 male Long- Evans rats lever pressed for 10% sucrose solution 2 h/ day for 10 days. On either day 1 or 30 of forced abstinence, rats responded in extinction for 6 h and then were injected ( ip) with either saline or naloxone ( 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, or 10 mg/ kg). The rats then responded for 1 h for presentation of a tone+ light cue previously presented with every sucrose delivery during self- administration training. Results The rats responded more in extinction and following saline on day 30 vs day 1 ( an incubation of craving). Except for a trend for a decrease in responding following 10 mg/ kg on day 1, naloxone was primarily effective on day 30. On day 30, naloxone significantly reduced responding at all doses except for 0.1 mg/ kg. Conclusions The time- dependent increase in sensitivity to an opiate antagonist is consistent with time- dependent changes in the opiate system following forced abstinence from sucrose. These changes may partly underlie the incubation of sucrose craving. In addition, these findings could be used to support the use of naloxone as an anticraving medication in protracted abstinence.

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

4.4
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