Some thoughts about endogenous opioids and addiction

Tolerance to alcohol: A critical yet understudied factor in alcohol addiction

Alcohol tolerance refers to a lower effect of alcohol with repeated exposure. Although alcohol tolerance has been historically included in diagnostic manuals as one of the key criteria for a diagnosis of alcohol use disorder (AUD), understanding its neurobiological mechanisms has been neglected in preclinical studies. In this mini-review, we provide a theoretical framework for alcohol tolerance. We then briefly describe chronic tolerance, followed by a longer discussion of behavioral and neurobiological aspects that underlie rapid tolerance in rodent models. Glutamate/nitric oxide, γ-aminobutyric acid, opioids, serotonin, dopamine, adenosine, cannabinoids, norepinephrine, vasopressin, neuropeptide Y, neurosteroids, and protein kinase C all modulate rapid tolerance. Most studies have evaluated the ability of pharmacological manipulations to block the development of rapid tolerance, but only a few studies have assessed their ability to reverse already established tolerance. Notably, only a few studies analyzed sex differences. Neglected areas of study include the incorporation of a key element of tolerance that involves opponent process-like neuroadaptations. Compared with alcohol drinking models, models of rapid tolerance are relatively shorter in duration and are temporally defined, which make them suitable for combining with a wide range of classic and modern research tools, such as pharmacology, optogenetics, calcium imaging, in vivo electrophysiology, and DREADDs, for in-depth studies of tolerance. We conclude that studies of the neurobiology of alcohol tolerance should be revisited with modern conceptualizations of addiction and modern neurobiological tools. This may contribute to our understanding of AUD and uncover potential targets that can attenuate hazardous alcohol drinking.

The development and maintenance of drug addiction

What is the defining property of addiction? We dust off a several-decades-long debate about the relative importance of two forms of reinforcement—positive reinforcement, subjectively linked to drug-induced euphoria, and negative reinforcement, subjectively linked to the alleviation of pain—both of which figure importantly in addiction theory; each of these forms has dominated addiction theory in its time. We agree that addiction begins with the formation of habits through positive reinforcement and that drug-opposite physiological responses often establish the conditions for negative reinforcement to come into play at a time when tolerance, in the form of increasing reward thresholds, appears to develop into positive reinforcement. Wise’s work has tended to focus on positive-reinforcement mechanisms that are important for establishing drug-seeking habits and reinstating them quickly after periods of abstinence, whereas Koob’s work has tended to focus on the negative-reinforcement mechanisms that become most obvious in the late stages of sustained addiction. While we tend to agree with each other about the early and late stages of addiction, we hold different views as to (i) the point between early and late at which the diagnosis of ‘addiction’ should be invoked, (ii) the relative importance of positive and negative reinforcement leading up to this transition, and (iii) the degree to which the specifics of negative reinforcement can be generalized across the range of addictive agents.

Opioid reward mechanisms: a key role in drug abuse?

There is increasing evidence to implicate the mesolimbic dopamine system in the rewarding effects of drugs of abuse such as opioids, psychostimulants, and alcohol, and in addition endogenous opioids may play a key role in the underlying adaptive mechanisms. Opioid agonists with affinity for µ and delta opioid receptors are rewarding, whereas opioid agonists with affinity for kappa receptors are aversive. These opposing motivational effects are paralleled by an increase and decrease, respectively, of dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens. Opposite effects are induced in response to selective antagonists for these different receptor types, pointing to tonically active endogenous opioid reward mechanisms. Withdrawal from chronic morphine results in sensitization for opioid reward; an effect that is counteracted by kappa opioid agonists. The rewarding effects of psychostimulants such as cocaine and amphetamine, mediated by the mesolimbic dopamine pathway, are modulated by opioid mechanisms in both directions: sensitization by morphine pretreatment, inhibition by kappa receptor agonists. A modulatory role of endogenous opioids is also suggested from biochemical data, showing increased dynorphin and kappa receptor expression after chronic cocaine treatment. Alcohol reward involves the mesolimbic reward system also, and opioids modulate this behaviour. Naltrexone as well as selective µ and delta opioid receptor antagonists decrease alcohol consumption in operant conditioning models. Biochemical approaches point to a functional deficit of endogenous opioids in genetic models exhibiting high prevalence for alcohol intake. The therapeutic implications of these data are discussed.Key words: reward mechanisms, endogenouos opioid systems, psychostimulants, alcohol.

Effects of ethanol withdrawal on beta-endorphin levels in rat brain and pituitary

Rats which received a liquid diet containing 6.5% (w/v) ethanol for three weeks became tolerant to the hypothermic effect of an acute dose of ethanol. Withdrawal of this diet was followed by loss of the tolerance within 3 days, and by an accompanying pattern of changes in levels of immunoreactive-ir-beta-endorphin in several brain regions. An initial decrease in levels on days 1 and 3 of withdrawal was followed by recovery to control levels on days 8 and 15. This pattern was found in the arcuate nucleus, amygdala, septum, periventricular thalamus and pre-optic periventricular hypothalamus (POPH), but was statistically significant only in the POPH. A different pattern of change in ir-beta-endorphin levels was found in the pituitary. The anterior lobe showed a significant depletion of ir-beta-endorphin levels before alcohol withdrawal, which recovered by day 8 of withdrawal. This depletion was probably not related to the loss of tolerance to ethanol but was a response to a perturbation of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis of hormonal control.

Sedative drug interactions of clinical importance

In an age of widespread availability of psychoactive drugs, use of multiple sedatives is very common. Why such multiple drug use prevails is poorly understood. Sequential drug use may leave sequential problems. Concomitant use of several drugs can produce a host of interactions. Increasingly, the metabolic basis of sedative interactions are becoming known. Cross-tolerance between sedatives permit substitution of one for another and reduced sedation when combined. Metabolic interactions at the hepatic oxidation enzyme level may greatly affect drug disposal rates. Recognition of polysubstance abuse can assist in management. Treatment ranges from urgent life support to abrupt or slow withdrawal, to substitution long-term treatment usually requiring specialized care, with abstinence the preferred goal. However, polysubstance abusers seem to have low probabilities of achieving lasting abstinence.

Toward understanding ethanol's capacity to be reinforcing: a conditioned place preference following injections of ethanol

Rats that had previously consumed a 6% ethanol (ETOH) solution daily for 26 days and rats without such a history served as subjects in a test for the ability of ETOH to establish a conditioned place preference. The time of putative conditioning was from 4 to 8 min after injections of ETOH, 1 g/kg. The combination of programming the period of putative conditioning to be shortly after injections and using rats habituated to drinking ETOH allowed a conditioned place preference to emerge after only a few conditioning trials. Such a result potentially reveals features of the way ETOH achieves its reinforcing capability and sets the stage for understanding the mechanism of that reinforcement.