S M Aarde1, P K Huang, T J Dickerson, M A Taffe. 1. Committee on the Neurobiology of Addictive Disorders, The Scripps Research Institute, SP30-2400, 10550 North Torrey Pines Road, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Lack of access to conventional sources of reinforcement has been proposed as a risk factor for substance abuse in lower socioeconomic populations. There is laboratory evidence that behavioral alternatives (enrichment or exercise) and alternative reinforcers (e.g., sweetened solutions) can reduce self-administration of a variety of drugs. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to determine if drug self-administration could devalue wheel activity in an animal model. METHODS: Male Wistar rats were trained to self-administer 3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV; "bath salts"), 0.05 mg/kg/infusion, i.v., with concurrent access to a running wheel that was either locked (LW) or unlocked (UW). RESULTS: MDPV intake steadily increased across the 20-session acquisition interval but did not differ significantly between UW and LW groups. Mean wheel rotations declined significantly across the acquisition interval in the UW group. Of the rats that acquired self-administration, 60 % engaged in a binge-like behavior at the initiation of acquisition; intake was limited only by post-reinforcement time-out. The binge rats had higher post-acquisition levels of drug intake (even after excluding the binge session), and the UW binge rats showed a precipitous post-acquisition drop in wheel activity that was not observed in the UW no-binge rats. CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm that MDPV is a powerful reward/reinforcer and show that a relatively high rate of intake at the onset of drug taking can devalue natural rewards (wheel activity) and can predict higher subsequent drug intake levels. Thus, limiting the intensity of initial drug exposure may attenuate subsequent drug abuse/addiction by preventing the devaluation of natural alternative rewards/reinforcers.
RATIONALE: Lack of access to conventional sources of reinforcement has been proposed as a risk factor for substance abuse in lower socioeconomic populations. There is laboratory evidence that behavioral alternatives (enrichment or exercise) and alternative reinforcers (e.g., sweetened solutions) can reduce self-administration of a variety of drugs. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to determine if drug self-administration could devalue wheel activity in an animal model. METHODS: Male Wistar rats were trained to self-administer 3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV; "bath salts"), 0.05 mg/kg/infusion, i.v., with concurrent access to a running wheel that was either locked (LW) or unlocked (UW). RESULTS: MDPV intake steadily increased across the 20-session acquisition interval but did not differ significantly between UW and LW groups. Mean wheel rotations declined significantly across the acquisition interval in the UW group. Of the rats that acquired self-administration, 60 % engaged in a binge-like behavior at the initiation of acquisition; intake was limited only by post-reinforcement time-out. The binge rats had higher post-acquisition levels of drug intake (even after excluding the binge session), and the UW binge rats showed a precipitous post-acquisition drop in wheel activity that was not observed in the UW no-binge rats. CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm that MDPV is a powerful reward/reinforcer and show that a relatively high rate of intake at the onset of drug taking can devalue natural rewards (wheel activity) and can predict higher subsequent drug intake levels. Thus, limiting the intensity of initial drug exposure may attenuate subsequent drug abuse/addiction by preventing the devaluation of natural alternative rewards/reinforcers.
Authors: Edward A Ross; Gary M Reisfield; Mary C Watson; Chris W Chronister; Bruce A Goldberger Journal: Am J Med Date: 2012-06-09 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: L D Simmler; T A Buser; M Donzelli; Y Schramm; L-H Dieu; J Huwyler; S Chaboz; M C Hoener; M E Liechti Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Lucas R Watterson; Peter R Kufahl; Natali E Nemirovsky; Kaveish Sewalia; Megan Grabenauer; Brian F Thomas; Julie A Marusich; Scott Wegner; M Foster Olive Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 4.280
Authors: Michelle L Miller; Amira Y Moreno; Shawn M Aarde; Kevin M Creehan; Sophia A Vandewater; Brittani D Vaillancourt; M Jerry Wright; Kim D Janda; Michael A Taffe Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: John F Wyman; Eric S Lavins; David Engelhart; Erica J Armstrong; Kimberly D Snell; Paul D Boggs; Shaena M Taylor; Rindi N Norris; Frank P Miller Journal: J Anal Toxicol Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 3.367
Authors: Nicole L Schramm-Sapyta; Q David Walker; Joseph M Caster; Edward D Levin; Cynthia M Kuhn Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2009-06-23 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Charles W Schindler; Eric B Thorndike; Steven R Goldberg; Kurt R Lehner; Nicholas V Cozzi; Simon D Brandt; Michael H Baumann Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2015-08-29 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Ryan A Gregg; Callum Hicks; Sunil U Nayak; Christopher S Tallarida; Paul Nucero; Garry R Smith; Allen B Reitz; Scott M Rawls Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Brenda M Gannon; Lauren N Russell; Meet S Modi; Kenner C Rice; William E Fantegrossi Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2017-08-04 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Mehrak Javadi-Paydar; Eric L Harvey; Yanabel Grant; Sophia A Vandewater; Kevin M Creehan; Jacques D Nguyen; Tobin J Dickerson; Michael A Taffe Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2018-06-16 Impact factor: 4.530