Kerry A Kerstetter1, Kathleen M Kantak. 1. Laboratory of Behavioral Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, Boston University, 64 Cummington St., Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Adult cocaine addicts, abstinent at the time of testing, show a variety of neurocognitive impairments. Less clear is whether there are differences in the degree of impairment if cocaine use is initiated during adolescence rather than adulthood. OBJECTIVES: Using a preclinical model, we evaluated if stimulus-reward learning was impacted differently in rats exposed to cocaine during adolescence (beginning on postnatal day 37) vs adulthood (beginning on postnatal days 74-79) and then tested after a drug-free period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A yoked-triad design of intravenous cocaine self-administration in adult (n = 8 triads) and adolescent (n = 8 triads) rats was used. Sets of three animals either contingently self-administered cocaine or received cocaine or saline in a noncontingent manner. Rats self-administering 1-mg/kg doses of cocaine responded under a fixed-ratio 5, timeout 20-s schedule of reinforcement. After 18 2-h drug or saline sessions, all rats (now adults) began the drug-free period in their home environments. Testing in a stimulus-reward learning task (conditioned cue preference) began 19 days later. RESULTS: Self-administration behavior was similar in adolescent and adult rats. Lever responses were not significantly different, and both age groups averaged approximately 20 infusions per session. Rats contingently self-administering cocaine or passively exposed to cocaine during adulthood showed stimulus-reward learning deficits in the conditioned cue preference task. Rats exposed to contingent or noncontingent cocaine during adolescence had normal learning, showing strong preferences for a Froot Loops-paired cue. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that adolescents are insensitive to cocaine-induced impairment of learning related to amygdala memory system functioning.
RATIONALE: Adult cocaine addicts, abstinent at the time of testing, show a variety of neurocognitive impairments. Less clear is whether there are differences in the degree of impairment if cocaine use is initiated during adolescence rather than adulthood. OBJECTIVES: Using a preclinical model, we evaluated if stimulus-reward learning was impacted differently in rats exposed to cocaine during adolescence (beginning on postnatal day 37) vs adulthood (beginning on postnatal days 74-79) and then tested after a drug-free period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A yoked-triad design of intravenous cocaine self-administration in adult (n = 8 triads) and adolescent (n = 8 triads) rats was used. Sets of three animals either contingently self-administered cocaine or received cocaine or saline in a noncontingent manner. Rats self-administering 1-mg/kg doses of cocaine responded under a fixed-ratio 5, timeout 20-s schedule of reinforcement. After 18 2-h drug or saline sessions, all rats (now adults) began the drug-free period in their home environments. Testing in a stimulus-reward learning task (conditioned cue preference) began 19 days later. RESULTS: Self-administration behavior was similar in adolescent and adult rats. Lever responses were not significantly different, and both age groups averaged approximately 20 infusions per session. Rats contingently self-administering cocaine or passively exposed to cocaine during adulthood showed stimulus-reward learning deficits in the conditioned cue preference task. Rats exposed to contingent or noncontingent cocaine during adolescence had normal learning, showing strong preferences for a Froot Loops-paired cue. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that adolescents are insensitive to cocaine-induced impairment of learning related to amygdala memory system functioning.
Authors: Kathleen M Kantak; Yolanda Black; Eric Valencia; Kristen Green-Jordan; Howard B Eichenbaum Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2002-02-01 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: James E McCutcheon; Kelly L Conrad; Steven B Carr; Kerstin A Ford; Daniel S McGehee; Michela Marinelli Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2012-06-20 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Kathleen M Kantak; Nicole Barlow; David H Tassin; Madeline F Brisotti; Chloe J Jordan Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Roxann C Harvey; Kimberly A Dembro; Kiran Rajagopalan; Michael M Mutebi; Kathleen M Kantak Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2009-06-10 Impact factor: 4.530