RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: Performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), which requires patients to 'shift attention' between stimulus dimensions (sorting categories), is impaired in diseases such as schizophrenia. The rat attentional set shifting task is an analogue of the WCST. Given that 5-HT(6) receptor antagonists improve cognitive performance and influence cortical neurochemistry in rats, the present study investigated the effects of 5-HT(6) receptor antagonists upon attentional set shifting in rats. METHODS: Rats were tested in this paradigm following sub-chronic SB-399885-T or SB-271046-A (both 10 mg kg(-1) bid, p.o. for 8 days prior to testing and either 4 or 2 h prior to testing on day 9, respectively). Rats were trained to dig in baited bowls for a food reward and to discriminate based on odour or digging media (Habituation, day 8). In a single session (day 9), rats performed a series of discriminations, including reversals (REV), intra-dimensional (ID) and extra-dimensional (ED) shifts. RESULTS: Neither compound altered performance during Habituation. On the test day, both SB-399885-T and SB-271046-A reduced the total trials to reach criterion and the total errors made when data were collapsed across all discriminations (P<0.05-0.01). Further, both compounds significantly reduced the trials to criterion for REV-1 (P<0.05-0.01) and abolished the ID/ED shift. SB-399885-T, but not SB-271046-A, reduced trials required to complete the ED shift (P<0.05) and the number of errors made during completion of the ID (P<0.05) and ED shifts (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: 5-HT(6) receptor antagonists improved performance in the attentional set shifting task and may have therapeutic potential in the treatment of disorders where cognitive deficits are a feature, including schizophrenia.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: Performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), which requires patients to 'shift attention' between stimulus dimensions (sorting categories), is impaired in diseases such as schizophrenia. The rat attentional set shifting task is an analogue of the WCST. Given that 5-HT(6) receptor antagonists improve cognitive performance and influence cortical neurochemistry in rats, the present study investigated the effects of 5-HT(6) receptor antagonists upon attentional set shifting in rats. METHODS:Rats were tested in this paradigm following sub-chronic SB-399885-T or SB-271046-A (both 10 mg kg(-1) bid, p.o. for 8 days prior to testing and either 4 or 2 h prior to testing on day 9, respectively). Rats were trained to dig in baited bowls for a food reward and to discriminate based on odour or digging media (Habituation, day 8). In a single session (day 9), rats performed a series of discriminations, including reversals (REV), intra-dimensional (ID) and extra-dimensional (ED) shifts. RESULTS: Neither compound altered performance during Habituation. On the test day, both SB-399885-T and SB-271046-A reduced the total trials to reach criterion and the total errors made when data were collapsed across all discriminations (P<0.05-0.01). Further, both compounds significantly reduced the trials to criterion for REV-1 (P<0.05-0.01) and abolished the ID/ED shift. SB-399885-T, but not SB-271046-A, reduced trials required to complete the ED shift (P<0.05) and the number of errors made during completion of the ID (P<0.05) and ED shifts (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: 5-HT(6) receptor antagonists improved performance in the attentional set shifting task and may have therapeutic potential in the treatment of disorders where cognitive deficits are a feature, including schizophrenia.
Authors: Claus Riemer; Edilio Borroni; Bernard Levet-Trafit; James R Martin; Sonia Poli; Richard H P Porter; Michael Bös Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2003-03-27 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Mark D Lindner; Donald B Hodges; John B Hogan; Anitra F Orie; Jason A Corsa; Donna M Barten; Craig Polson; Barbara J Robertson; Valerie L Guss; Kevin W Gillman; John E Starrett; Valentin K Gribkoff Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2003-09-15 Impact factor: 4.030
Authors: Andrew G Foley; Keith J Murphy; Warren D Hirst; Helen C Gallagher; Jim J Hagan; Neil Upton; Frank S Walsh; Ciaran M Regan Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: M Ruat; E Traiffort; J M Arrang; J Tardivel-Lacombe; J Diaz; R Leurs; J C Schwartz Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 1993-05-28 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: S M Bromidge; A M Brown; S E Clarke; K Dodgson; T Gager; H L Grassam; P M Jeffrey; G F Joiner; F D King; D N Middlemiss; S F Moss; H Newman; G Riley; C Routledge; P Wyman Journal: J Med Chem Date: 1999-01-28 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: M L Woolley; K A Waters; J E Gartlon; L P Lacroix; C Jennings; F Shaughnessy; A Ong; D J Pemberton; M H Harries; E Southam; D N C Jones; L A Dawson Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2008-09-16 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Katherine E Burnham; Mark G Baxter; John R Bainton; Eric Southam; Lee A Dawson; David M Bannerman; Trevor Sharp Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2009-11-10 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: M D S Lapiz-Bluhm; C O Bondi; J Doyen; G A Rodriguez; T Bédard-Arana; D A Morilak Journal: J Neuroendocrinol Date: 2008-07-30 Impact factor: 3.627
Authors: Hugh M Marston; Jared W Young; Frederic D C Martin; Kevin A Serpa; Christopher L Moore; Erik H F Wong; Lisa Gold; Leonard T Meltzer; Marc R Azar; Mark A Geyer; Mohammed Shahid Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2009-05-22 Impact factor: 4.530