RATIONALE: Group I metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonists, which block both the mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptors, have been shown to have anxiolytic effects in the lick suppression test in rats. OBJECTIVE: The anxiolytic potential of the selective mGlu1 antagonist 3,4-dihydro-2H-pyrano[2,3]beta-quinolin-7-yl)(cis-4-methoxycyclohexyl)methanone (JNJ16259685) was investigated and compared with the mGlu5 antagonist MPEP. METHODS: Anxiety-related behaviour was assessed in lick suppression and in the elevated zero maze in rats. Non-specific effects on pain threshold, water intake and locomotor activity were also measured. RESULTS: Acute administration of JNJ16259685 or MPEP increased the number of licks (lowest active dose 2.5 mg/kg IP for each compound). JNJ16259685 did not increase water intake or reduce acute pain threshold, suggesting that the anxiolytic-like properties are specific. However, acute administration decreased locomotor activity. The effects of chronic administration of JNJ16259685 over 14 days (5 mg/kg bid) on lick suppression were comparable to those seen after acute administration, arguing against development of behavioural tolerance or sensitisation. Yet, there was a tendency for an increase in locomotor activity after cessation of chronic treatment. Acute co-administration of both JNJ16259685 and MPEP had additive effects on the number of licks. No anxiolytic-like properties of JNJ16259685 were observed in the elevated zero maze. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the anxiolytic-like effects induced by group I metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonists are mediated through both mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptors. Rather than producing a general anxiolytic-like effect, the effects seen following mGlu1 antagonism seem task-dependent, as prominent effects were seen in a conflict procedure, but not in a task based on spontaneous exploration.
RATIONALE: Group I metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonists, which block both the mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptors, have been shown to have anxiolytic effects in the lick suppression test in rats. OBJECTIVE: The anxiolytic potential of the selective mGlu1 antagonist 3,4-dihydro-2H-pyrano[2,3]beta-quinolin-7-yl)(cis-4-methoxycyclohexyl)methanone (JNJ16259685) was investigated and compared with the mGlu5 antagonist MPEP. METHODS:Anxiety-related behaviour was assessed in lick suppression and in the elevated zero maze in rats. Non-specific effects on pain threshold, water intake and locomotor activity were also measured. RESULTS: Acute administration of JNJ16259685 or MPEP increased the number of licks (lowest active dose 2.5 mg/kg IP for each compound). JNJ16259685 did not increase water intake or reduce acute pain threshold, suggesting that the anxiolytic-like properties are specific. However, acute administration decreased locomotor activity. The effects of chronic administration of JNJ16259685 over 14 days (5 mg/kg bid) on lick suppression were comparable to those seen after acute administration, arguing against development of behavioural tolerance or sensitisation. Yet, there was a tendency for an increase in locomotor activity after cessation of chronic treatment. Acute co-administration of both JNJ16259685 and MPEP had additive effects on the number of licks. No anxiolytic-like properties of JNJ16259685 were observed in the elevated zero maze. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the anxiolytic-like effects induced by group I metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonists are mediated through both mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptors. Rather than producing a general anxiolytic-like effect, the effects seen following mGlu1 antagonism seem task-dependent, as prominent effects were seen in a conflict procedure, but not in a task based on spontaneous exploration.
Authors: M E Fundytus; K Yashpal; J G Chabot; M G Osborne; C D Lefebvre; A Dray; J L Henry; T J Coderre Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: F Gasparini; K Lingenhöhl; N Stoehr; P J Flor; M Heinrich; I Vranesic; M Biollaz; H Allgeier; R Heckendorn; S Urwyler; M A Varney; E C Johnson; S D Hess; S P Rao; A I Sacaan; E M Santori; G Veliçelebi; R Kuhn Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Hilde Lavreysen; Emmanuel Le Poul; Paul Van Gompel; Lieve Dillen; Josée E Leysen; Anne S J Lesage Journal: Mol Pharmacol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.436
Authors: O El-Kouhen; S G Lehto; J B Pan; R Chang; S J Baker; C Zhong; P R Hollingsworth; J P Mikusa; E A Cronin; K L Chu; S P McGaraughty; M E Uchic; L N Miller; N M Rodell; M Patel; P Bhatia; M Mezler; T Kolasa; G Z Zheng; G B Fox; A O Stewart; M W Decker; R B Moreland; J D Brioni; P Honore Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2006-10-03 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Hyekyung P Cho; Darren W Engers; Daryl F Venable; Colleen M Niswender; Craig W Lindsley; P Jeffrey Conn; Kyle A Emmitte; Alice L Rodriguez Journal: ACS Chem Neurosci Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 4.418
Authors: Alexia M Thomas; Nghiem Bui; Deanna Graham; Jennifer R Perkins; Lisa A Yuva-Paylor; Richard Paylor Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2011-05-06 Impact factor: 3.332