Carmela M Reichel1, Meghin G Gilstrap2, Lauren A Ramsey2, Ronald E See2. 1. Department of Neurosciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: reichel@musc.edu. 2. Department of Neurosciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic methamphetamine (meth) abuse in humans can lead to various cognitive deficits, including memory loss. We previously showed that chronic meth self-administration impairs memory for objects relative to their location and surrounding objects. Here, we demonstrate that the cognitive enhancer, modafinil, reversed this cognitive impairment independent of glutamate N-methyl-d-aspartate (GluN) receptor expression METHODS: Male, Long-Evans rats underwent a noncontingent (Experiment 1) or contingent (Experiment 2) meth regimen. After one week of abstinence, rats were tested for object-in-place recognition memory. Half the rats received either vehicle or modafinil (100mg/kg) immediately after object familiarization. Rats (Experiment 2) were sacrificed immediately after the test and brain areas that comprise the key circuitry for object in place performance were manually dissected. Subsequently, glutamate receptor expression was measured from a crude membrane fraction using Western blot procedures. RESULTS: Saline-treated rats spent more time interacting with the objects in changed locations, while meth-treated rats distributed their time equally among all objects. Meth-treated rats that received modafinil showed a reversal in the deficit, whereby they spent more time exploring the objects in the new locations. GluN2B receptor subtype was decreased in the perirhinal cortex, yet remained unaffected in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus of meth rats. This meth-induced down regulation occurred whether or not meth experienced rats received vehicle or modafinil. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of modafinil for memory impairment in meth addiction. Further studies are needed to elucidate the neural mechanisms of modafinil reversal of cognitive impairments.
BACKGROUND: Chronic methamphetamine (meth) abuse in humans can lead to various cognitive deficits, including memory loss. We previously showed that chronic meth self-administration impairs memory for objects relative to their location and surrounding objects. Here, we demonstrate that the cognitive enhancer, modafinil, reversed this cognitive impairment independent of glutamate N-methyl-d-aspartate (GluN) receptor expression METHODS: Male, Long-Evans rats underwent a noncontingent (Experiment 1) or contingent (Experiment 2) meth regimen. After one week of abstinence, rats were tested for object-in-place recognition memory. Half the rats received either vehicle or modafinil (100mg/kg) immediately after object familiarization. Rats (Experiment 2) were sacrificed immediately after the test and brain areas that comprise the key circuitry for object in place performance were manually dissected. Subsequently, glutamate receptor expression was measured from a crude membrane fraction using Western blot procedures. RESULTS:Saline-treated rats spent more time interacting with the objects in changed locations, while meth-treated rats distributed their time equally among all objects. Meth-treated rats that received modafinil showed a reversal in the deficit, whereby they spent more time exploring the objects in the new locations. GluN2B receptor subtype was decreased in the perirhinal cortex, yet remained unaffected in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus of methrats. This meth-induced down regulation occurred whether or not meth experienced rats received vehicle or modafinil. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of modafinil for memory impairment in meth addiction. Further studies are needed to elucidate the neural mechanisms of modafinil reversal of cognitive impairments.
Authors: J Cobb Scott; Steven Paul Woods; Georg E Matt; Rachel A Meyer; Robert K Heaton; J Hampton Atkinson; Igor Grant Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 7.444
Authors: James Shearer; Shane Darke; Craig Rodgers; Tim Slade; Ingrid van Beek; John Lewis; Donna Brady; Rebecca McKetin; Richard P Mattick; Alex Wodak Journal: Addiction Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Dorota Zolkowska; Raka Jain; Richard B Rothman; John S Partilla; Bryan L Roth; Vincent Setola; Thomas E Prisinzano; Michael H Baumann Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2009-02-05 Impact factor: 4.030
Authors: Jeffrey W Dalley; Kristjan Lääne; David E H Theobald; Yolanda Peña; Charlotte C Bruce; Anthony C Huszar; Michael Wojcieszek; Barry J Everitt; Trevor W Robbins Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2006-10-11 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Mariana Raineri; Betina González; Celeste Rivero-Echeto; Javier A Muñiz; María Laura Gutiérrez; Carolina I Ghanem; Jean Lud Cadet; Edgar García-Rill; Francisco J Urbano; Veronica Bisagno Journal: Neurotox Res Date: 2014-09-27 Impact factor: 3.911
Authors: Michael D Scofield; Heather Trantham-Davidson; Marek Schwendt; Kah-Chung Leong; Jamie Peters; Ronald E See; Carmela M Reichel Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2015-04-13 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Jamie Peters; Michael D Scofield; Shannon M Ghee; Jasper A Heinsbroek; Carmela M Reichel Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: A Meneses; G Perez-Garcia; G Liy-Salmeron; T Ponce-López; E Lacivita; M Leopoldo Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2014-07-31 Impact factor: 4.530