Can the 'state-dependency' hypothesis explain prevention of amphetamine sensitization in rats by NMDA receptor antagonists?

Yong Li, Marina Wolf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Many laboratories have reported that coadministration of N-methyl-D- aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists with psychomotor stimulants prevents the development of behavioral sensitization and therefore concluded that NMDA receptor transmission is necessary for sensitization. According to an alternative 'state-dependency' interpretation, NMDA receptor antagonists do not prevent sensitization. Rather, they become a conditioned stimulus for the sensitized response, i.e., it is only elicited in response to combined administration of the NMDA receptor antagonist and the stimulant. This hypothesis is supported by progressive augmentation of the locomotor response to the drug combination during the induction phase, and expression of sensitization when challenged with the combination but not the stimulant alone. To test this hypothesis, rats were treated during a 6-day induction phase with amphetamine (Amph) alone or in combination with the competitive NMDA receptor antagonist CGS 19755 (10 mg/kg) or the non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 (0.05, 0.1 and 0.25 mg/kg). When CGS 19755 was coadministered with Amph, there was no progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination. When challenged with Amph alone, rats did not exhibit the hiphaste pattern of locomotor activity characteristic of Amph sensitization. No sensitization of stereotyped behaviors was evident, although the ambulatory response was greater than that exhibited by naive rats. Results with MK-801 were complex, but progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination appeared to in part reflect sensitization to MK-801 and could be dissociated from the ability of MK-801 to prevent the development of sensitization as assessed by response to challenge with Amph alone. Many of these findings are inconsistent with predictions of the 'state-dependency' hypothesis. Moreover, the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent biochemical and electrophysiological correlates of sensitization is difficult to reconcile with the idea that sensitization develops in the presence of NMDA receptor blockade but cannot be expressed. Together, these findings suggest that the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent Amph sensitization reflects a requirement for NMDA receptor transmission during its induction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)351-361
Number of pages11
JournalPsychopharmacology
Volume141
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 3 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Amphetamine
N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptors
Dizocilpine Maleate
selfotel
Aptitude
Drug Combinations
Dependency (Psychology)
Stereotyped Behavior
Locomotion

Keywords

  • Amphetamine
  • Behavioral sensitization
  • MK-801
  • NMDA receptor
  • Rat
  • State- dependency

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology

Cite this

Can the 'state-dependency' hypothesis explain prevention of amphetamine sensitization in rats by NMDA receptor antagonists? / Li, Yong; Wolf, Marina.

In: Psychopharmacology, Vol. 141, No. 4, 03.05.1999, p. 351-361.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7306179a4f7d4ff89910f5292337922c,
title = "Can the 'state-dependency' hypothesis explain prevention of amphetamine sensitization in rats by NMDA receptor antagonists?",
abstract = "Many laboratories have reported that coadministration of N-methyl-D- aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists with psychomotor stimulants prevents the development of behavioral sensitization and therefore concluded that NMDA receptor transmission is necessary for sensitization. According to an alternative 'state-dependency' interpretation, NMDA receptor antagonists do not prevent sensitization. Rather, they become a conditioned stimulus for the sensitized response, i.e., it is only elicited in response to combined administration of the NMDA receptor antagonist and the stimulant. This hypothesis is supported by progressive augmentation of the locomotor response to the drug combination during the induction phase, and expression of sensitization when challenged with the combination but not the stimulant alone. To test this hypothesis, rats were treated during a 6-day induction phase with amphetamine (Amph) alone or in combination with the competitive NMDA receptor antagonist CGS 19755 (10 mg/kg) or the non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 (0.05, 0.1 and 0.25 mg/kg). When CGS 19755 was coadministered with Amph, there was no progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination. When challenged with Amph alone, rats did not exhibit the hiphaste pattern of locomotor activity characteristic of Amph sensitization. No sensitization of stereotyped behaviors was evident, although the ambulatory response was greater than that exhibited by naive rats. Results with MK-801 were complex, but progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination appeared to in part reflect sensitization to MK-801 and could be dissociated from the ability of MK-801 to prevent the development of sensitization as assessed by response to challenge with Amph alone. Many of these findings are inconsistent with predictions of the 'state-dependency' hypothesis. Moreover, the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent biochemical and electrophysiological correlates of sensitization is difficult to reconcile with the idea that sensitization develops in the presence of NMDA receptor blockade but cannot be expressed. Together, these findings suggest that the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent Amph sensitization reflects a requirement for NMDA receptor transmission during its induction.",
keywords = "Amphetamine, Behavioral sensitization, MK-801, NMDA receptor, Rat, State- dependency",
author = "Yong Li and Marina Wolf",
year = "1999",
month = "5",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1007/s002130050844",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "141",
pages = "351--361",
journal = "Psychopharmacology",
issn = "0033-3158",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can the 'state-dependency' hypothesis explain prevention of amphetamine sensitization in rats by NMDA receptor antagonists?

AU - Li, Yong

AU - Wolf, Marina

PY - 1999/5/3

Y1 - 1999/5/3

N2 - Many laboratories have reported that coadministration of N-methyl-D- aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists with psychomotor stimulants prevents the development of behavioral sensitization and therefore concluded that NMDA receptor transmission is necessary for sensitization. According to an alternative 'state-dependency' interpretation, NMDA receptor antagonists do not prevent sensitization. Rather, they become a conditioned stimulus for the sensitized response, i.e., it is only elicited in response to combined administration of the NMDA receptor antagonist and the stimulant. This hypothesis is supported by progressive augmentation of the locomotor response to the drug combination during the induction phase, and expression of sensitization when challenged with the combination but not the stimulant alone. To test this hypothesis, rats were treated during a 6-day induction phase with amphetamine (Amph) alone or in combination with the competitive NMDA receptor antagonist CGS 19755 (10 mg/kg) or the non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 (0.05, 0.1 and 0.25 mg/kg). When CGS 19755 was coadministered with Amph, there was no progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination. When challenged with Amph alone, rats did not exhibit the hiphaste pattern of locomotor activity characteristic of Amph sensitization. No sensitization of stereotyped behaviors was evident, although the ambulatory response was greater than that exhibited by naive rats. Results with MK-801 were complex, but progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination appeared to in part reflect sensitization to MK-801 and could be dissociated from the ability of MK-801 to prevent the development of sensitization as assessed by response to challenge with Amph alone. Many of these findings are inconsistent with predictions of the 'state-dependency' hypothesis. Moreover, the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent biochemical and electrophysiological correlates of sensitization is difficult to reconcile with the idea that sensitization develops in the presence of NMDA receptor blockade but cannot be expressed. Together, these findings suggest that the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent Amph sensitization reflects a requirement for NMDA receptor transmission during its induction.

AB - Many laboratories have reported that coadministration of N-methyl-D- aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists with psychomotor stimulants prevents the development of behavioral sensitization and therefore concluded that NMDA receptor transmission is necessary for sensitization. According to an alternative 'state-dependency' interpretation, NMDA receptor antagonists do not prevent sensitization. Rather, they become a conditioned stimulus for the sensitized response, i.e., it is only elicited in response to combined administration of the NMDA receptor antagonist and the stimulant. This hypothesis is supported by progressive augmentation of the locomotor response to the drug combination during the induction phase, and expression of sensitization when challenged with the combination but not the stimulant alone. To test this hypothesis, rats were treated during a 6-day induction phase with amphetamine (Amph) alone or in combination with the competitive NMDA receptor antagonist CGS 19755 (10 mg/kg) or the non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 (0.05, 0.1 and 0.25 mg/kg). When CGS 19755 was coadministered with Amph, there was no progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination. When challenged with Amph alone, rats did not exhibit the hiphaste pattern of locomotor activity characteristic of Amph sensitization. No sensitization of stereotyped behaviors was evident, although the ambulatory response was greater than that exhibited by naive rats. Results with MK-801 were complex, but progressive augmentation of response to the drug combination appeared to in part reflect sensitization to MK-801 and could be dissociated from the ability of MK-801 to prevent the development of sensitization as assessed by response to challenge with Amph alone. Many of these findings are inconsistent with predictions of the 'state-dependency' hypothesis. Moreover, the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent biochemical and electrophysiological correlates of sensitization is difficult to reconcile with the idea that sensitization develops in the presence of NMDA receptor blockade but cannot be expressed. Together, these findings suggest that the ability of NMDA receptor antagonists to prevent Amph sensitization reflects a requirement for NMDA receptor transmission during its induction.

KW - Amphetamine

KW - Behavioral sensitization

KW - MK-801

KW - NMDA receptor

KW - Rat

KW - State- dependency

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032924484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032924484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s002130050844

DO - 10.1007/s002130050844

M3 - Article

C2 - 10090642

AN - SCOPUS:0032924484

VL - 141

SP - 351

EP - 361

JO - Psychopharmacology

JF - Psychopharmacology

SN - 0033-3158

IS - 4

ER -