Literature DB >> 1786487

History of abuse liability testing in humans.

D R Jasinski1.   

Abstract

Clinical testing for drug abuse liability began as part of a collaborative effort to develop non-addicting substitutes for morphine. Physical dependence capacity and euphorigenic potential were identified as the potent effects of morphine leading to abuse; quantitative measures were developed for these effects. Drugs were evaluated for morphine-like effects using principles of bioassay. In recent years, the alterations in mood, feeling, thinking, and perception induced by drugs (subjective effects) are viewed as the effects leading to reinforcement of drug-taking behavior and to abuse. The same procedures and methods developed for assessing these effects with opioids have subsequently been applied to other classes of drugs. At present, human drug abuse liability testing methods exist for opioids, stimulants, sedative hypnotics, serotonin agonist and antagonists, nicotine, alcohol, and caffeine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1786487     DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01748.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Addict        ISSN: 0952-0481


  15 in total

1.  Human behavioral pharmacology, past, present, and future: symposium presented at the 50th annual meeting of the Behavioral Pharmacology Society.

Authors:  Sandra D Comer; Warren K Bickel; Richard Yi; Harriet de Wit; Stephen T Higgins; Galen R Wenger; Chris-Ellyn Johanson; Mary Jeanne Kreek
Journal:  Behav Pharmacol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.293

2.  Emotional traits predict individual differences in amphetamine-induced positive mood in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Matthew G Kirkpatrick; Nicholas I Goldenson; Nahel Kapadia; Christopher W Kahler; Harriet de Wit; Robert M Swift; John E McGeary; Steve Sussman; Adam M Leventhal
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2015-10-02       Impact factor: 4.530

3.  Personality and the acute subjective effects of d-amphetamine in humans.

Authors:  Matthew G Kirkpatrick; Chris-Ellyn Johanson; Harriet de Wit
Journal:  J Psychopharmacol       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 4.153

4.  Pharmacogenetics of stimulant abuse liability: association of CDH13 variant with amphetamine response in a racially-heterogeneous sample of healthy young adults.

Authors:  Adam M Leventhal; Matthew G Kirkpatrick; Mollie S Pester; John E McGeary; Robert M Swift; Steve Sussman; Christopher W Kahler
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2016-10-22       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  Inattention, impulsive action, and subjective response to D-amphetamine.

Authors:  Jessica Weafer; Harriet de Wit
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 4.492

6.  Stress-induced changes in mood and cortisol release predict mood effects of amphetamine.

Authors:  Ajna Hamidovic; Emma Childs; Megan Conrad; Andrea King; Harriet de Wit
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2010-02-21       Impact factor: 4.492

Review 7.  Do initial responses to drugs predict future use or abuse?

Authors:  Harriet de Wit; Tamara J Phillips
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2012-04-21       Impact factor: 8.989

8.  Neural activation to monetary reward is associated with amphetamine reward sensitivity.

Authors:  Natania A Crane; Stephanie M Gorka; Jessica Weafer; Scott A Langenecker; Harriet de Wit; K Luan Phan
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 7.853

9.  Anhedonia as a key clinical feature in the maintenance and treatment of opioid use disorder.

Authors:  Brian D Kiluk; Sarah W Yip; Elise E DeVito; Kathleen M Carroll; Mehmet Sofuoglu
Journal:  Clin Psychol Sci       Date:  2019-09-23

10.  Sweet taste liking is associated with subjective response to amphetamine in women but not men.

Authors:  Jessica Weafer; Nicholas Lyon; Donald Hedeker; Harriet de Wit
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 4.530

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.