RATIONALE: Methamphetamine (MA) has been implicated in cognitive deficits in humans after chronic use. Animal models of neurotoxic MA exposure reveal persistent damage to monoaminergic systems but few associated cognitive effects. OBJECTIVES: Since questions have been raised about the typical neurotoxic dosing regimen used in animals and whether it adequately models human cumulative drug exposure, these experiments examined two different dosing regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Rats were treated with one of the two regimens: one based on the typical neurotoxic regimen (4 x 10 mg/kg every 2 h) and one based on pharmacokinetic modeling (Cho AK, Melega WP, Kuczenski R, Segal DS Synapse 39:161-166, 2001) designed to better represent accumulating plasma concentrations of MA as seen in human users (24 x 1.67 mg/kg once every 15 min) matched for total daily dose. In two separate experiments, dosing regimens were compared for their effects on markers of neurotoxicity or on behavior. RESULTS: On markers of neurotoxicity, MA showed decreased dopamine (DA) and 5-HT, increased glial fibrillary acidic protein, and increased corticosterone levels regardless of dosing regimen 3 days post-treatment. Behaviorally, MA-treated groups, regardless of dosing regimen, showed hypoactivity, increased initial hyperactivity to a subsequent MA challenge, impaired novel object recognition, impaired learning in a multiple T water maze test of path integration, and no differences on spatial navigation or reference memory in the Morris water maze. After behavioral testing, reductions of DA and 5-HT remained. CONCLUSIONS: MA treatment induces an effect on path integration learning not previously reported. Dosing regimen had no differential effects on behavior or neurotoxicity.
RATIONALE: Methamphetamine (MA) has been implicated in cognitive deficits in humans after chronic use. Animal models of neurotoxic MA exposure reveal persistent damage to monoaminergic systems but few associated cognitive effects. OBJECTIVES: Since questions have been raised about the typical neurotoxic dosing regimen used in animals and whether it adequately models human cumulative drug exposure, these experiments examined two different dosing regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Rats were treated with one of the two regimens: one based on the typical neurotoxic regimen (4 x 10 mg/kg every 2 h) and one based on pharmacokinetic modeling (Cho AK, Melega WP, Kuczenski R, Segal DS Synapse 39:161-166, 2001) designed to better represent accumulating plasma concentrations of MA as seen in human users (24 x 1.67 mg/kg once every 15 min) matched for total daily dose. In two separate experiments, dosing regimens were compared for their effects on markers of neurotoxicity or on behavior. RESULTS: On markers of neurotoxicity, MA showed decreased dopamine (DA) and 5-HT, increased glial fibrillary acidic protein, and increased corticosterone levels regardless of dosing regimen 3 days post-treatment. Behaviorally, MA-treated groups, regardless of dosing regimen, showed hypoactivity, increased initial hyperactivity to a subsequent MA challenge, impaired novel object recognition, impaired learning in a multiple T water maze test of path integration, and no differences on spatial navigation or reference memory in the Morris water maze. After behavioral testing, reductions of DA and 5-HT remained. CONCLUSIONS: MA treatment induces an effect on path integration learning not previously reported. Dosing regimen had no differential effects on behavior or neurotoxicity.
Authors: Michael T Williams; LaRonda L Morford; Anne E McCrea; Sandra L Wood; Charles V Vorhees Journal: Neurotoxicol Teratol Date: 2002 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.763
Authors: Michael T Williams; LaRonda L Morford; Sandra L Wood; Tanya L Wallace; Masao Fukumura; Harry W Broening; Charles V Vorhees Journal: Synapse Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 2.562
Authors: Matthew R Skelton; Jessica A Able; Curtis E Grace; Nicole R Herring; Tori L Schaefer; Gary A Gudelsky; Charles V Vorhees; Michael T Williams Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2008-07-12 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Devon L Graham; Nicole R Herring; Tori L Schaefer; Katherine D Holland; Charles V Vorhees; Michael T Williams Journal: Open Neuropsychopharmacol J Date: 2012
Authors: Amanda A Braun; Robyn M Amos-Kroohs; Arnold Gutierrez; Kerstin H Lundgren; Kim B Seroogy; Matthew R Skelton; Charles V Vorhees; Michael T Williams Journal: Neurobiol Learn Mem Date: 2014-11-13 Impact factor: 2.877
Authors: Matthew R Skelton; Devon L Graham; Tori L Schaefer; Curtis E Grace; Amanda A Braun; Lindsey N Burns; Robyn M Amos-Kroohs; Michael T Williams; Charles V Vorhees Journal: Int J Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2011-06-28 Impact factor: 5.176
Authors: Rose Mary Carvalho Pinheiro; Maria Noêmia Martins de Lima; Gabriel Rodrigo Fries; Vanessa Athaíde Garcia; Juliana Presti-Torres; Luis Henrique Hallmenschlager; Luisa Azambuja Alcalde; Rafael Roesler; Monica Levy Andersen; João Quevedo; Flávio Kapczinski; Nadja Schröder Journal: J Neural Transm (Vienna) Date: 2012-01-05 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Christopher D Howard; Elissa D Pastuzyn; Melissa L Barker-Haliski; Paul A Garris; Kristen A Keefe Journal: J Neurochem Date: 2013-04-01 Impact factor: 5.372