4.6 Article

GABA system changes in methylphenidate sensitized female rats

期刊

BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 231, 期 1, 页码 181-186

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2012.03.017

关键词

-

资金

  1. CNPq
  2. CAPES

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Methylphenidate (MPD) is a psychostimulant that is prescribed to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and has been used as a recreational drug. In animal models, repetitive exposure to methylphenidate can induce a behavioral sensitization. Stimulants are able to change neuronal circuits in the mesolimbic pathway, and the GABA system is one of the most involved neurotransmitter systems in this process. Women represent a risk group for psychostimulant abuse because they respond more strongly, which is probably due to the influence of sex hormones. The objective of the present study was to investigate the influence of sex hormones on behavioral sentsitization and changes to glutamic acid decarboxylase (GDA65 and GDA67) isoenzymes and alpha 2 GABAA receptor subunit mRNA expression in the prefrontal cortex and the striatum of rats, as induced by methylphenidate administration (2.5 mg/kg, i.p.). Female rats were divided into 2 hormonal conditions: ovariectomized and intact group. Repeated methylphenidate treatment led to behavioral sensitization, which was stronger in females with circulating hormones (intact group). The analysis of mRNA levels in the striatum, in both groups, showed a decline in GAD65, but not GAD67, transcription after repeated methylphenidate treatment. In the prefrontal cortex, both GAD65 and GAD67 showed an increase in transcription with repeated methylphenidate treatment. There was no change in the transcription level of alpha 2 GABAA receptor subunits. In conclusion, it was shown that sex hormones were able to modify behavioral sensitization to methylphenidate and the drug affected the GABA system in brain areas known to be involved in the development of drug dependence. (c) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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