Joel S Cavallo1, Nicholas A Ruiz1, Harriet de Wit2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Ave, MC3077, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Ave, MC3077, Chicago, IL, USA. hdew@uchicago.edu.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Contextual stimuli present during drug experiences become associated with the drug through Pavlovian conditioning and are thought to sustain drug-seeking behavior. Thus, extinction of conditioned responses is an important target for treatment. To date, acquisition and extinction to drug-paired cues have been studied in animal models or drug-dependent individuals, but rarely in non-drug users. OBJECTIVE: We have recently developed a procedure to study acquisition of conditioned responses after single doses of methamphetamine (MA) in healthy volunteers. Here, we examined extinction of these responses and their persistence after conditioning. METHODS: Healthy adults (18-35 years; N = 20) received two pairings of audio-visual stimuli with MA (20 mg oral) or placebo. Responses to stimuli were assessed before and after conditioning, using three tasks: behavioral preference, attentional bias, and subjective "liking." RESULTS: Subjects exhibited behavioral preference for the drug-paired stimuli at the first post-conditioning test, but this declined rapidly on subsequent extinction tests. They also exhibited a bias to initially look towards the drug-paired stimuli at the first post-test session, but not thereafter. Subjects who experienced more positive subjective drug effects during conditioning exhibited a smaller decline in preference during the extinction phase. Further, longer inter-session intervals during the extinction phase were associated with less extinction of the behavioral preference measure. CONCLUSIONS: Conditioned responses after two pairings with MA extinguish quickly, and are influenced by both subjective drug effects and the extinction interval. Characterizing and refining this conditioning procedure will aid in understanding the acquisition and extinction processes of drug-related conditioned responses in humans.
RATIONALE: Contextual stimuli present during drug experiences become associated with the drug through Pavlovian conditioning and are thought to sustain drug-seeking behavior. Thus, extinction of conditioned responses is an important target for treatment. To date, acquisition and extinction to drug-paired cues have been studied in animal models or drug-dependent individuals, but rarely in non-drug users. OBJECTIVE: We have recently developed a procedure to study acquisition of conditioned responses after single doses of methamphetamine (MA) in healthy volunteers. Here, we examined extinction of these responses and their persistence after conditioning. METHODS: Healthy adults (18-35 years; N = 20) received two pairings of audio-visual stimuli with MA (20 mg oral) or placebo. Responses to stimuli were assessed before and after conditioning, using three tasks: behavioral preference, attentional bias, and subjective "liking." RESULTS: Subjects exhibited behavioral preference for the drug-paired stimuli at the first post-conditioning test, but this declined rapidly on subsequent extinction tests. They also exhibited a bias to initially look towards the drug-paired stimuli at the first post-test session, but not thereafter. Subjects who experienced more positive subjective drug effects during conditioning exhibited a smaller decline in preference during the extinction phase. Further, longer inter-session intervals during the extinction phase were associated with less extinction of the behavioral preference measure. CONCLUSIONS: Conditioned responses after two pairings with MA extinguish quickly, and are influenced by both subjective drug effects and the extinction interval. Characterizing and refining this conditioning procedure will aid in understanding the acquisition and extinction processes of drug-related conditioned responses in humans.
Authors: Nora D Volkow; Gene-Jack Wang; Frank Telang; Joanna S Fowler; Jean Logan; Anna-Rose Childress; Millard Jayne; Yeming Ma; Christopher Wong Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2006-06-14 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Gillinder Bedi; Kenzie L Preston; David H Epstein; Stephen J Heishman; Gina F Marrone; Yavin Shaham; Harriet de Wit Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2011-04-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Andrew J Waters; Brian L Carter; Jason D Robinson; David W Wetter; Cho Y Lam; William Kerst; Paul M Cinciripini Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: C E Cook; A R Jeffcoat; B M Sadler; J M Hill; R D Voyksner; D E Pugh; W R White; M Perez-Reyes Journal: Drug Metab Dispos Date: 1992 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.922
Authors: Kathryne Van Hedger; Sarah K Keedy; Leah M Mayo; Markus Heilig; Harriet de Wit Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 7.853