The effects of alprazolam on conditioned place preferences produced by intravenous heroin

Heroin and its metabolites: relevance to heroin use disorder

Heroin is an opioid agonist commonly abused for its rewarding effects. Since its synthesis at the end of the nineteenth century, its popularity as a recreational drug has ebbed and flowed. In the last three decades, heroin use has increased again, and yet the pharmacology of heroin is still poorly understood. After entering the body, heroin is rapidly deacetylated to 6-monoacetylmorphine (6-MAM), which is then deacetylated to morphine. Thus, drug addiction literature has long settled on the notion that heroin is little more than a pro-drug. In contrast to these former views, we will argue for a more complex interplay among heroin and its active metabolites: 6-MAM, morphine, and morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G). In particular, we propose that the complex temporal pattern of heroin effects results from the sequential, only partially overlapping, actions not only of 6-MAM, morphine, and M6G, but also of heroin per se, which, therefore, should not be seen as a mere brain-delivery system for its active metabolites. We will first review the literature concerning the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of heroin and its metabolites, then examine their neural and behavioral effects, and finally discuss the possible implications of these data for a better understanding of opioid reward and heroin addiction. By so doing we hope to highlight research topics to be investigated by future clinical and pre-clinical studies.

Self-Administration of Fentanyl-Alprazolam Combinations by Rhesus Monkeys Responding under a Progressive-Ratio Schedule

This study evaluated the reinforcing effects of fentanyl, alone or in combination with the benzodiazepine alprazolam, in rhesus monkeys (3 females, 3 males). Subjects were trained to self-administer the opioid remifentanil (0.3 µg/kg/injection) under a progressive-ratio schedule of reinforcement. The reinforcing effects of fentanyl (0.1-10 µg/kg/injection) or alprazolam (1.0-100 µg/kg/injection) alone, or in combinations of fixed proportions (1:1, 1:3, and 3:1 fentanyl:alprazolam, with 1:1 based on the potencies of drugs alone) were evaluated in single-day test sessions (with double determinations). Dose-equivalence analysis was used to determine the extent to which fentanyl and alprazolam combinations differed from additivity. Fentanyl functioned as a positive reinforcer in all monkeys, while alprazolam was a reinforcer in 3 of 6 monkeys only. Therefore, drug combination data were grouped as "alprazolam-taking" and "non-alprazolam-taking" monkeys. For alprazolam-taking monkeys, we observed additive effects for the 3:1 and 1:3 combinations, and a significant supra-additive interaction for the 1:1 combination of fentanyl and alprazolam. For 2 of the 3 non-alprazolam-taking monkeys, the combination of fentanyl and alprazolam resulted in enhanced reinforcing effects relative to either drug alone. However, the one monkey showed primarily inhibitory, or suppressive effects, with the 3:1 dose combination resulting in a relatively modest rightward shift in the fentanyl dose-response function. In summary, our findings show that combining fentanyl and alprazolam generally result in proportion-dependent additive or supra-additive enhancements. These data raise the possibility that the prevalence of opioid-benzodiazepine polydrug abuse may reflect a unique enhancement of these drugs' reinforcing effects, although individual differences may exist. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Addressing the critical question of the degree to which benzodiazepines can modulate the abuse-related effects of opioids may provide improved pathways to treatment of this common form of polydrug addiction. In the present study, we show that combinations of the opioid fentanyl and the benzodiazepine alprazolam can be more reinforcing than either drug alone in a rhesus monkey model, suggesting that enhancement of reinforcement processes may underlie this prevalent form of polydrug use disorder.

Reinforcing effectiveness of midazolam, ethanol, and sucrose: behavioral economic comparison of a mixture relative to its component solutions

Benzodiazepines (BZs) are relatively safe when administered alone. However, these drugs can produce severe side effects when coadministered with ethanol. Despite these adverse consequences, rates of concurrent BZ and ethanol misuse are increasing, and it is unclear whether this behavior is maintained by an enhanced reinforcing effect of the mixture. To address this issue, the current study compared the reinforcing effectiveness of sucrose solutions mixed with midazolam, ethanol, or both. Eight male rats were trained to orally self-administer solutions of either sucrose (S), sucrose+midazolam (SM), sucrose+ethanol (SE), or sucrose+midazolam+ethanol (SME). The response requirement was increased between sessions until the number of reinforcers earned was zero and the relationship between response requirement and reinforcers earned was analyzed using the exponential model of demand. Although baseline intake was similar across drug conditions, consumption of SM was least affected by increases in cost, indicating that it possessed the highest reinforcing effectiveness (i.e. least elastic). The reinforcing effectiveness of S, SE, and SME did not differ significantly. The finding that the reinforcing effectiveness of the SME was less than that of SM does not support the supposition that BZ and ethanol coadministration is maintained by a higher reinforcing effectiveness of the mixture.

Effects of propofol on conditioned place preference in male rats: Involvement of nitrergic system

BACKGROUND

Drug-induced conditioned place preference (CPP) is linked to the addictive properties of the drug used. The number of studies that have investigated the effects of propofol on CPP is limited. Research findings suggest that nitric oxide (NO) might play an important role in substance use disorders.

OBJECTIVES

The present study sought to investigate the role of the nitrergic system on the rewarding effects of propofol by using the CPP protocol in rats.

METHODS

The experiment followed habituation, pre-conditioning, conditioning, and post conditioning sessions. Male Wistar albino rats weighing 240-290 g were divided into eight groups: control (saline), propofol (10, 20, and 40 mg/kg), the NO synthase (NOS) inhibitor N^G-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME) alone (30 and 60 mg/kg), and in combination with propofol (30 and 60 mg/kg L-NAME plus 40 mg/kg propofol) (n = 8 for each group). The CPP effects of propofol, L-NAME, saline, and their combinations were evaluated. All the drug and saline administrations were performed by intraperitoneal (ip) injections.

RESULTS

Propofol (10-40 mg/kg) produced CPP that was statistically significant relative to saline. Propofol-induced CPP was significantly reversed by pretreatment with L-NAME. When administered alone, L-NAME did not produce CPP and also did not produce any significant change on locomotor activity of naïve rats.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that propofol produces CPP effects in rats and that NO-related mechanisms may be responsible for propofol-induced CPP. Thus, propofol might have the potential to be addictive, and this possibility should be considered during clinical applications of this drug.

Anxiety sensitivity and nonmedical benzodiazepine use among adults with opioid use disorder

Nonmedical benzodiazepine use is common among adults with opioid use disorder; however, little is known about this co-occurrence. Anxiety sensitivity-the fear of anxiety symptoms and sensations-motivates behaviors to escape and avoid distressing states, and accordingly is associated with coping motives for substance use. This might be particularly relevant among women, who report using substances to cope with negative emotions more often than men. The aim of the current study was to examine whether nonmedical benzodiazepine use was associated with higher anxiety sensitivity among treatment-seeking adults diagnosed with opioid use disorder, and to investigate whether gender moderated this association. A sample of adults (ranging in age from 18 to 81years) receiving inpatient treatment for opioid use disorder (N=257) completed measures of anxiety, anxiety sensitivity, and benzodiazepine use frequency. Results of an analysis of variance indicated that frequency of past-month nonmedical benzodiazepine use was associated with significantly higher anxiety sensitivity. This effect remained when controlling for the effect of anxiety symptoms (F[1, 251]=3.91, p=0.049, η_p²=0.02). Gender moderated this association, and post-hoc analyses found a strong association between nonmedical benzodiazepine use and anxiety sensitivity in women, and not men. Anxiety sensitivity, which can be reduced with treatment, might be a candidate therapeutic target in this population, particularly in women.

Polydrug abuse: a review of opioid and benzodiazepine combination use

This paper reviews studies examining the pharmacological interactions and epidemiology of the combined use of opioids and benzodiazepines (BZDs). A search of English language publications from 1970 to 2012 was conducted using PubMed and PsycINFO(®). Our search found approximately 200 articles appropriate for inclusion in this paper. While numerous reports indicate that the co-abuse of opioids and BZDs is ubiquitous around the world, the reasons for the co-abuse of these medications are not entirely clear. Though the possibility remains that opioid abusers are using BZDs therapeutically to self-medicate anxiety, mania or insomnia, the data reviewed in this paper suggest that BZD use is primarily recreational. For example, co-users report seeking BZD prescriptions for the purpose of enhancing opioid intoxication or "high," and use doses that exceed the therapeutic range. Since there are few clinical studies investigating the pharmacological interaction and abuse liability of their combined use, this hypothesis has not been extensively evaluated in clinical settings. As such, our analysis encourages further systematic investigation of BZD abuse among opioid abusers. The co-abuse of BZDs and opioids is substantial and has negative consequences for general health, overdose lethality, and treatment outcome. Physicians should address this important and underappreciated problem with more cautious prescribing practices, and increased vigilance for abusive patterns of use.

Benzodiazepines revisited--will we ever learn?

AIMS

To re-examine various aspects of the benzodiazepines (BZDs), widely prescribed for 50 years, mainly to treat anxiety and insomnia. It is a descriptive review based on the Okey Lecture delivered at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, in November 2010.

METHODS

A search of the literature was carried out in the Medline, Embase and Cochrane Collaboration databases, using the codeword 'benzodiazepine(s)', alone and in conjunction with various terms such as 'dependence', 'abuse', etc. Further hand-searches were made based on the reference lists of key papers. As 60,000 references were found, this review is not exhaustive. It concentrates on the adverse effects, dependence and abuse.

RESULTS

Almost from their introduction the BZDs have been controversial, with polarized opinions, advocates pointing out their efficacy, tolerability and patient acceptability, opponents deprecating their adverse effects, dependence and abuse liability. More recently, the advent of alternative and usually safer medications has opened up the debate. The review noted a series of adverse effects that continued to cause concern, such as cognitive and psychomotor impairment. In addition, dependence and abuse remain as serious problems. Despite warnings and guidelines, usage of these drugs remains at a high level. The limitations in their use both as choice of therapy and with respect to conservative dosage and duration of use are highlighted. The distinction between low-dose 'iatrogenic' dependence and high-dose abuse/misuse is emphasized.

CONCLUSIONS

The practical problems with the benzodiazepines have persisted for 50 years, but have been ignored by many practitioners and almost all official bodies. The risk-benefit ratio of the benzodiazepines remains positive in most patients in the short term (2-4 weeks) but is unestablished beyond that time, due mainly to the difficulty in preventing short-term use from extending indefinitely with the risk of dependence. Other research issues include the possibility of long-term brain changes and evaluating the role of the benzodiazepine antagonist, flumazenil, in aiding withdrawal.

Abuse and dependence liability of benzodiazepine-type drugs: GABA(A) receptor modulation and beyond

Over the past several decades, benzodiazepines and the newer non-benzodiazepines have become the anxiolytic/hypnotics of choice over the more readily abused barbiturates. While all drugs from this class act at the GABA(A) receptor, benzodiazepine-type drugs offer the clear advantage of being safer and better tolerated. However, there is still potential for these drugs to be abused, and significant evidence exists to suggest that this is a growing problem. This review examines the behavioral determinants of the abuse and dependence liability of benzodiazepine-type drugs. Moreover, the pharmacological and putative biochemical basis of the abuse-related behavior is discussed.

Measuring reward with the conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm: update of the last decade

Conditioned place preference (CPP) continues to be one of the most popular models to study the motivational effects of drugs and non-drug treatments in experimental animals. This is obvious from a steady year-to-year increase in the number of publications reporting the use this model. Since the compilation of the preceding review in 1998, more than 1000 new studies using place conditioning have been published, and the aim of the present review is to provide an overview of these recent publications. There are a number of trends and developments that are obvious in the literature of the last decade. First, as more and more knockout and transgenic animals become available, place conditioning is increasingly used to assess the motivational effects of drugs or non-drug rewards in genetically modified animals. Second, there is a still small but growing literature on the use of place conditioning to study the motivational aspects of pain, a field of pre-clinical research that has so far received little attention, because of the lack of appropriate animal models. Third, place conditioning continues to be widely used to study tolerance and sensitization to the rewarding effects of drugs induced by pre-treatment regimens. Fourth, extinction/reinstatement procedures in place conditioning are becoming increasingly popular. This interesting approach is thought to model certain aspects of relapse to addictive behavior and has previously almost exclusively been studied in drug self-administration paradigms. It has now also become established in the place conditioning literature and provides an additional and technically easy approach to this important phenomenon. The enormous number of studies to be covered in this review prevented in-depth discussion of many methodological, pharmacological or neurobiological aspects; to a large extent, the presentation of data had to be limited to a short and condensed summary of the most relevant findings.

Intra-ventral tegmental area heroin-induced place preferences in rats are potentiated by peripherally administered alprazolam

The present experiment was designed to replicate and extend previous results of an opiate+benzodiazepine interaction in which peripherally administered alprazolam was observed to modulate behavior resulting from intravenous injections of heroin. As a first step in determining the role of central sites in this drug interaction, changes in drug reward (measured by conditioned place preference; CPP) were assessed in rats given systemic administration of alprazolam coupled with intracranially infused heroin (into the ventral tegmental area; VTA). Sprague-Dawley rats were implanted with guide cannula targeting the VTA, after which a heroin-induced CPP dose-response curve was determined (2.5-40 ng administered bilaterally in 0.5 microl/side). In other animals, intra-VTA heroin-induced place preferences were challenged with systemically applied alprazolam (0.125 mg/kg i.p.). The data confirm that rats dose-dependently develop reliable place preferences for a distinct environment paired with bilateral VTA-infusions of heroin. Additionally, when a non-rewarding dose of alprazolam was combined with a non-rewarding bilateral intra-VTA heroin dose (5 ng), a significant CPP was produced. These data extend earlier results by demonstrating that a systemically applied benzodiazepine can enhance the rewarding effects produced by central opiate administration. The results suggest that the VTA might be a site where this opiate+benzodiazepine interaction occurs.

Lorazepam reinstates punishment-suppressed remifentanil self-administration in rats

RATIONALE

We recently described a reinstatement procedure that models relapse to drug abuse in cases where abstinence results from aversive consequences of drug use. The potential value of this punishment-based model of relapse depends on its sensitivity to relapse-inducing events that are ineffective in the widely used extinction-based model.

OBJECTIVES

It is known that certain drugs can have anti-punishment effects, but these drugs have not been tested in the punishment-based reinstatement procedure. Therefore, the effects of the benzodiazepine, lorazepam, were examined using punishment-based and extinction-based reinstatement procedures.

METHODS

Rats self-administered the opioid, remifentanil (4 microg/kg per infusion). Two punishment groups were trained with response-contingent footshock that suppressed baseline rates of responding to zero. In an extinction group, remifentanil delivery was discontinued, and baseline responding stabilized at a low rate (mean=0.06 responses/min). Lorazepam (0.08-10 mg/kg, IP) was given during test sessions with the shock contingency discontinued for both punishment groups. Remifentanil delivery was maintained during testing in one punishment group but not the other.

RESULTS

Lorazepam reinstated self-administration responding in both punishment groups but not in the extinction group. Priming injections of heroin reinstated responding in both the punishment and extinction groups, but combining heroin and lorazepam did not enhance reinstatement.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first demonstration that a trigger for relapse may have different effects depending on whether aversive conditioning contributed to the achievement of abstinence. It may be important to consider potential anti-punishment effects of both abused drugs and therapeutic agents in the treatment of individuals with a history of drug abuse.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2003

This paper is the 26th consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, now spanning over a quarter-century of research. It summarizes papers published during 2003 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurologic disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); and immunological responses (Section 17).