4.0 Article

The effect of nicotine on striatal dopamine release in man:: A [11C]raclopride PET study

期刊

SYNAPSE
卷 61, 期 8, 页码 637-645

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/syn.20419

关键词

nicotine; PET; [C-11] raclopride; man

资金

  1. Medical Research Council [G0400575] Funding Source: Medline
  2. MRC [G0400575] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [G0400575] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In common with many addictive substances and behaviors nicotine activates the mesolimbic dopaminergic system. Brain microdialysis studies in rodents have consistently shown increases in extrasynaptic DA levels in the striatum after administration of nicotine but PET experiments in primates have given contradicting results. A recent PET study assessing the effect of smoking in humans showed no change in [C-11]raclopride binding in the brain, but did find that hedonia correlated with a reduction in [C-11]raclopride binding suggesting that DA may mediate the positive reinforcing effects of nicotine. In this experiment we measured the effect of nicotine, administered via a nasal spray, on DA release using [C-11]raclopride PET, in 10 regular smokers. There was no overall change in [C-11]raclopride binding after nicotine administration in any of the striatal regions examined. However, the individual change in [C-11]raclopride binding correlated with change in subjective measures of amused and happiness in the associative striatum (AST) and sensorimotor striatum (SMST). Nicotine concentration correlated negatively with change in BP in the limbic striatum. Nicotine had significant effects on cardiovascular measures including pulse rate, systolic blood pressure (BPr), and diastolic BPr. Baseline [C-11]raclopride binding potential (BP) in the AST correlated negatively with the Fagerstrom score, an index of nicotine dependence. These results support a role for the DA system in nicotine addiction, but reveal a more complex relationship than suggested by studies in animals.

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

4.0
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