Interaction of apomorphine and amantadine with ethanol in men

Behavioral effects of aminoadamantane class NMDA receptor antagonists on schedule-induced alcohol and self-administration of water in mice

RATIONALE

Aminoadamantanes represent a class of NMDA glutamate receptor antagonists that reduce alcohol consumption and may prevent alcohol-induced neuronal adaptations and side effects.

OBJECTIVE

Behavioral specificity of memantine and amantadine on alcohol drinking in a schedule-induced polydipsia (SIP) task was investigated in mice.

METHODS

Male C57BL/6J mice were food-deprived and divided into four groups: 5% alcohol SIP, water SIP, 1 h limited access regulatory water drinking, and a control group to determine if either drug altered ethanol drinking. Behavioral specificity of memantine (5, 10, and 25 mg/kg, ip) and amantadine (20, 40, and 60 mg/kg, ip) was determined by comparing alterations in alcohol or water consumption in SIP and regulatory water drinking. Drug effects on SIP drinking-specific measures (grams per kilogram consumption) were also compared to nondrinking measures (locomotion, head-entries for food, and lick efficiency).

RESULTS

Compared to saline, memantine reduced alcohol SIP drinking (10 and 25 mg/kg). Memantine increased locomotion during alcohol SIP (25 mg/kg) and during water SIP (5 and 25 mg/kg). In contrast, amantadine reduced both alcohol SIP (40 mg/kg) and water SIP (40 and 60 mg/kg). Both drugs reduced regulatory water consumption over the entire dose range tested. Blood alcohol concentrations indicated consumption of physiologically meaningful amounts of alcohol during SIP, and that changes in alcohol metabolism did not account for drug-induced reductions in alcohol drinking.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to reducing alcohol drinking, both drugs had other behavioral effects that included reductions in regulatory drinking. These results suggest that the therapeutic utility of these drugs for ameliorating human alcohol addiction remains questionable.

Prefrontal levels of 5-HIAA, but not dopamine, predict alcohol consumption in male Wistar rats following 6-OHDA lesions

To examine the effects of dopamine (DA) on alcohol consumption, male Wistar rats were subjected either to 6-OHDA lesions of the frontal cortex (MPFC) or to a sham lesion/no lesion. Following surgery, rats were trained to drink alcohol on a sucrose-fading paradigm over the course of 6 weeks, at the completion of which they consumed a solution of 3% sucrose/10% alcohol. Daily consumption of alcohol was computed for each rat. Animals were sacrificed and the MPFC, nucleus accumbens (NA), and ventral tegmentum (VTA) were removed. Levels of DA and its metabolites (i.e., HVA and DOPAC), norepinephrine (NE), and serotonin (5-HT) and its metabolite (i.e., 5-HIAA) were measured for each brain region using HPLC with electrochemical detection. Post hoc analyses were run examining the relationship of DA and its metabolites, 5-HT and its metabolite (5-HIAA), and norepinephrine (NE) in the MPFC, NA, and VTA with alcohol consumption. The 6-OHDA lesions depleted DA to 74.5% of control levels in the MPFC, but did not significantly affect alcohol consumption. Post hoc analyses found that the "high" alcohol consumption group had significantly reduced levels of MPFC 5-HIAA in comparison to the "low" consumption group, but that there was no relationship of 5-HIAA levels in the VTA or NA to alcohol consumption. These findings suggest that MPFC DA is not critically involved in the regulation of alcohol consumption. They further suggest that MPFC serotonergic systems may play an important role in the regulation of alcohol consumption, although future experimentation directly manipulating 5-HT systems in the MPFC will be required to fully assess these findings.

Recent Advances in Pharmacological Research on Alcohol

Alcohol dependence is a major public health problem. Studies have shown that a person dependent on alcohol often coabuses other substances, such as cocaine. Cocaine is a powerful stimulant whereas ethanol is generally considered to be a depressant, with some stimulating properties. The subjective effects of these two substances in a dependent individual may often appear to be more similar than they are different. Animals also self-administer both substances. Basically, although both substances have anesthetic properties and both act to functionally increase catecholaminergic function, especially that of dopamine, there are some differences in their actions. Both alcohol and cocaine have various effects on several neurotransmitters and systems, which ultimately interact to produce the feeling of well-being avidly sought by many individuals today. This drive often eventually produces a dependence which has associated social and medical consequences. It seems likely that the neurochemical changes that ensue following abuse of these substances underlie the phenomena of dependence, tolerance, and subsequent withdrawal. The apparent similarities and differences between these two substances will be reviewed in this chapter.

The role of dopamine and serotonin receptors in the mediation of the ethanol interoceptive cue

The drug discrimination paradigm was used to evaluate the contribution of dopamine or serotonin receptors in the mediation of the stimulus properties of ethanol. Briefly, rats were trained to discriminate between ethanol (600 mg/kg, IP) and water vehicle. Dose-response relationships were observed for ethanol and rats were tested with various dopamine and serotonin receptor agonists and antagonists. The specific dopamine receptor agonists SKF 38393 (DA1) and LY 171555 (DA2) failed to produce appreciable ethanol-like stimulus effects. Furthermore, the dopamine receptor antagonists SCH 23390 (DA1) and haloperidol (DA2) did not affect ethanol-appropriate responding when administered in combination with the training dose of ethanol. A number of specific serotonergic receptor ligands were also tested. Quipazine, 5-MeODMT, buspirone, 8-OH-DPAT elicited intermediate ethanol-like stimulus properties in rats. The serotonin receptor blockers pizotifen, pirenperone and (-)propranolol were ineffective in blocking the interoceptive cue produced by 600 mg/kg ethanol. However, TFMPP produced strong ethanol-like discriminative properties and completely substituted for the training dose of ethanol. These results indicate that the stimulus properties of TFMPP are similar to those of a low dose of ethanol.

Modification of certain pharmacological effects of ethanol by lipophilic alpha-1 adrenergic agonists

The influence of four centrally-acting alpha-1 adrenoceptor agonists, namely, 2(2-chloro-5-trifluoromethylphenylimino) imidazolidine (St 587), cirazoline, (-) 1,2,3,4-tetrahydro-8-methoxy-5-methylthio-2-naphthalenamine ((-)SKF 89748A) and 2-(2-methylindazol-4-imino)imidazolidine (Sgd 101/75) on the pharmacological effects of ethanol was investigated. All four drugs reduced the duration of ethanol-induced hypnosis in C57B1/6 mice, this effect being proportional to their relative potencies to exert central alpha-1 agonism. In prazosin-pretreated mice, St 587 failed to reduce the hypnotic effect of ethanol, which provided strong evidence for the role of alpha-1 agonism for the hypnosis reducing effect of St 587. Hyperactivity induced in C57B1/6 mice by a subhypnotic dose of ethanol and St 587 was reported earlier. In the present study, St 587, cirazoline and (-)SKF 89748A produced similar response, but no correlation between this effect and ethanol hypnosis blockade could be established. Interestingly, this hyperactivity response was not exhibited by Swiss-Webster, BALB/c or DBA-2 mice--strains in which St 587 exerted little or no antagonism to ethanol-induced hypnosis. Of the alpha-1 agonists, only St 587 reduced the ethanol-induced hypothermia in C57B1/6 mice. St 587 also blocked this effect of ethanol in BALB/c mice in which this drug failed to reduce the ethanol-induced hypnosis. It was concluded that ethanol-induced hypothermia and hypnosis are not interrelated. None of the alpha-1 agonists modified the pentobarbitone-induced hypnosis or the rate of elimination of ethanol in C57B1/6 mice. In this strain, the reduction of the duration of ethanol-induced hypnosis by the alpha-1 agonists is a selective and centrally-mediated response.

Studies on the interaction between ethanol and amfonelic acid

Amfonelic acid (AFA), a non-amphetamine central stimulant dose-dependently reduced the hypnotic effect of ethanol in C57B1/6 mice. It did not enhance the elimination of ethanol. Amfonelic acid failed to modify the duration of pentobarbitone-induced hypnosis or the ethanol-induced hypothermia in these animals. Combined treatment with amfonelic acid and a lipophilic alpha 1-adrenoceptor agonist was not more effective than amfonelic acid alone in blocking ethanol hypnosis. The stimulation of locomotor activity by amfonelic acid in C57B1/6 mice was more sensitive to the blocking effect of ethanol than stimulation induced by d-amphetamine. The blocking effect of amfonelic acid, but not that of d-amphetamine, on the effects of ethanol developed tolerance. In pimozide-pretreated mice, amfonelic acid failed to reduce the ethanol-induced hypnosis. Hence it appears that dopamine (DA) released by amfonelic acid is responsible for its antagonism of ethanol. However, though amfonelic acid acted as a strong releaser of DA in Swiss-Webster, CD-1, DBA-2 and BALB/c mice, in these strains it failed to reduce the effect of ethanol. Moreover, methylphenidate, a dopaminergic stimulant, which acts by a mechanism similar to that of amfonelic acid was not effective in reducing the hypnotic effect of ethanol in C57B1/6 mice. For these reasons, additional mechanisms may have to be considered to explain this strain-dependent effect of amfonelic acid.

Further studies on the ethanol antagonism exhibited by 2(2-chloro-5-trifluoromethyl phenylimino) imidazolidine (St 587)

A lipid soluble alpha 1-adrenoceptor agonist 2-(2-chloro-5-trifluoromethyl phenylimino) imidazolidine (St 587) dose-dependently antagonized the hypnotic, hypothermic and respiratory depressant effects of ethanol in C57B1/6 mice. This effect was present whether St 587 was given before or after ethanol. St 587 did not block the pentobarbitone-induced hypnosis. It also did not influence the elimination of ethanol. Combined treatment with a subhypnotic dose of ethanol and St 587 resulted in marked hyperactivity in mice. This effect was completely abolished by pimozide pretreatment. It was inferred that the dopamine released from brain areas by this dose of ethanol together with the norepinephrine receptor activation offered by St 587 resulted in this hyperactivity. Cirazoline, a more potent alpha 1-adrenoceptor agonist than St 587 was relatively more effective than the latter in blocking the ethanol-induced hypnosis in mice. It seems that alpha 1-adrenoceptor stimulation is a major contributing factor to the ethanol antagonism exerted by St 587. This drug might prove to be useful in the treatment of acute ethanol intoxication and in understanding the mode of action of ethanol.

Apomorphine increases ethanol discrimination

Rats were trained to discriminate between the stimulus properties of 600 mg/kg ethanol and saline in a two-lever, food-motivated operant task. Once trained, rats showed a dose-related decrease in discriminative performance with lower ethanol doses and analysis of the dose-response curve indicated an ED50 of 372 mg/kg. Pretreatment with 0.16 mg/kg apomorphine produced increased discriminative performance at each ethanol dose and the combination generated a dose-response curve parallel to ethanol administered alone with an ED50 of 232 mg/kg. This significant shift to the left of the ethanol dose-response curve after apomorphine administration is discussed in relation to dopaminergic neuronal systems and the clinical use of apomorphine alcoholics.