4.6 Article

The selective κ-opioid receptor agonist U50,488H attenuates voluntary ethanol intake in the rat

期刊

BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 120, 期 2, 页码 137-146

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-4328(00)00368-5

关键词

kappa; opioid receptor; dynorphin; nor-binaltorphimine; U50,488H; ethanol intake; Lewis rat

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-selective opioid receptor antagonists are increasingly used in the treatment of alcohol dependence. The clinical effects are significant but the effect size is rather small and unpleasant side effects may limit the benefits of the compounds. Ligands acting at mu- and or delta- receptors can alter the voluntary intake of ethanol in various animal models. Therefore, the attenuating effects of selective opioid receptor ligands on ethanol intake may be of clinical interest in the treatment of alcoholism. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of a selective K-receptor agonist, U50,488H on voluntary ethanol intake in the rat. We used a restricted access model with a free choice between an ethanol solution (10%, v/v) and water. During the 3-days baseline period, the rats received a daily saline injection (1 ml/kg, i.p.) 15 min before the 2 h access to ethanol. The animals had free access to water at all times. The control group received a daily saline injection during the 4-days treatment-period, whereas the treatment groups received a daily dose of U50,488H (2.5, 5.0 or 10 mg/kg per day). Animals treated with U50,488H dose-dependently decreased their ethanol intake. The effect of the highest dose of U50,488H was reduced by pre-treatment with the selective tc-antagonist nor-binaltorphimine (nor-BNI). These results demonstrate that activation of kappa -opioid receptors can attenuate voluntary ethanol intake in the rat, and the data suggest that the brain dynorphin/kappa -receptor systems may represent a novel target for pharmacotherapy in the treatment of alcohol dependence. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science 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