Evaluation of the cocaine like discriminative stimulus effects and reinforcing effects of modafinil

被引:114
作者
Gold, LH [1 ]
Balster, RL [1 ]
机构
[1] VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIV,MED COLL VIRGINIA,DEPT PHARMACOL & TOXICOL,RICHMOND,VA 23298
关键词
modafinil; ephedrine; cocaine; amphetamine; self-administration; drug discrimination; rhesus monkey; rat;
D O I
10.1007/BF02247379
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Modafinil [(diphenyl-methyl)sulphinyl-2-acetamide] is a novel psychostimulant drug which is effective in the treatment of narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia. It also has neuroprotective effects in animal models of striatal neuropathology. Although the cellular mechanisms of action of modafinil are poorly understood, it has been shown to have a profile of phar macological effects that differs considerably from that of amphetamine-like stimulants. There is some evidence that modafinil has central alpha(1)-adrenergic agonist effects. In the present study modafinil was evaluated for cocaine-like discriminative stimulus effects in rats and for reinforcing effects in rhesus monkeys maintained on intravenous cocaine self-administration. Modafinil, l-ephectrine and d-amphetamine all produced dose dependent increases in cocaine-lever responding, with maximal levels of 67%, 82% and 100%, respectively. Modafinil produced full substitution in four out of the six rats tested while the highest levels of substitution were associated with substantial response rate decreasing effects. Little evidence was obtained that the discriminative stimulus effects of modafinil were produced by alpha(1)-adrenergic activation, based upon results of tests performed in combination with prazosin. In the self-administration procedure, modafinil and l-ephedrine functioned as reinforcers in rhesus monkeys. The reinforcing and discriminative stimulus effects of modafinil required very high doses: modafinil was over 200 times less potent than d-amphetamine and was also less potent than d-ephedrine. These results show that modafinil has some cocaine-like discriminative stimulus effects and, like other abused stimulants, can serve as a reinforcer at high doses.
引用
收藏
页码:286 / 292
页数:7
相关论文
共 41 条
[31]   MODAFINIL BINDS TO THE DOPAMINE UPTAKE CARRIER SITE WITH LOW-AFFINITY [J].
MIGNOT, E ;
NISHINO, S ;
GUILLEMINAULT, C ;
DEMENT, WC .
SLEEP, 1994, 17 (05) :436-437
[32]   Modafinil, d-amphetamine and placebo during 64 hours of sustained mental work .1. Effects on mood, fatigue, cognitive performance and body temperature [J].
Pigeau, R ;
Naitoh, P ;
Buguet, A ;
McCann, C .
JOURNAL OF SLEEP RESEARCH, 1995, 4 (04) :212-228
[33]   MODAFINILPHENIDATE, AMPHETAMINEPHENIDATE AND METHYLPHENIDATE-INDUCED HYPERACTIVITIES IN MICE INVOLVE DIFFERENT MECHANISMS [J].
RAMBERT, FA ;
PESSONNIER, J ;
DUTEIL, J .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY, 1990, 183 (02) :455-456
[34]   THE STIMULANT EFFECT OF MODAFINIL ON WAKEFULNESS IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH AN INCREASE IN ANXIETY IN MICE - A COMPARISON WITH DEXAMPHETAMINE [J].
SIMON, P ;
PANISSAUD, C ;
COSTENTIN, J .
PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 1994, 114 (04) :597-600
[35]   NISOXETINE AND AMPHETAMINE SHARE DISCRIMINATIVE STIMULUS PROPERTIES IN MICE [J].
SNODDY, AM ;
TESSEL, RE .
PHARMACOLOGY BIOCHEMISTRY AND BEHAVIOR, 1983, 19 (02) :205-210
[36]  
TERRY P, 1994, J PHARMACOL EXP THER, V270, P1041
[37]   AWAKENING PROPERTIES OF MODAFINIL WITHOUT PARADOXICAL SLEEP REBOUND - COMPARATIVE-STUDY WITH AMPHETAMINE IN THE RAT [J].
TOURET, M ;
SALLANONMOULIN, M ;
JOUVET, M .
NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS, 1995, 189 (01) :43-46
[38]  
UEKI A, 1993, EXP BRAIN RES, V93, P259
[39]   EVIDENCE FOR A PREVENTIVE ACTION OF THE VIGILANCE-PROMOTING DRUG MODAFINIL AGAINST STRIATAL ISCHEMIC-INJURY INDUCED BY ENDOTHELIN-1 IN THE RAT [J].
UEKI, A ;
ROSEN, L ;
ANDBJER, B ;
AGNATI, LF ;
HALLSTROM, A ;
GOINY, M ;
TANGANELLI, S ;
UNGERSTEDT, U ;
FUXE, K .
EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH, 1993, 96 (01) :89-99
[40]   COCAETHYLENE INHIBITS DOPAMINE UPTAKE AND PRODUCES COCAINE-LIKE ACTIONS IN DRUG DISCRIMINATION STUDIES [J].
WOODWARD, JJ ;
MANSBACH, R ;
CARROLL, FI ;
BALSTER, RL .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY, 1991, 197 (2-3) :235-236