Gemma L Dalton1, Stan B Floresco2, Anthony G Phillips1. 1. Departments of Psychology, Psychiatry and Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. 2. Departments of Psychology, Psychiatry and Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. floresco@psych.ubc.ca.
Abstract
RATIONALE: There is an urgent need for novel drugs for treating cognitive deficits that are defining features of schizophrenia. The individual d- and l-enantiomers of the tetrahydroprotoberberine (THPB) d,l-govadine have been proposed for the treatment of cognitive deficiencies and positive symptoms of schizophrenia, respectively. OBJECTIVES: We examined the effects of d-, l-, or d,l-govadine on two distinct forms of cognitive flexibility perturbed in schizophrenia and compared them to those induced by a selective D1 receptor agonist and D2 receptor antagonist. METHODS: Male rats received d-, l-, or d,l-govadine (0.3, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/kg), D1 agonist SKF81297(0.1, 0.3, and 1.0 mg/kg), or D2 antagonist haloperidol (0.1-0.2 mg/kg). Experiment 1 used a strategy set-shifting task (between-subjects). In experiment 2, well-trained rats were tested on a probabilistic reversal task (within-subjects). RESULTS: d-Govadine improved set-shifting across all doses, whereas higher doses of l-govadine impaired set-shifting. SKF81297 reduced perseverative errors at the lowest dose. Low/high doses of haloperidol increased/decreased set-shifting errors, the latter "improvement" attributable to impaired retrieval of a previous acquired rule. Probabilistic reversal performance was less affected by these drugs, but d-govadine reduced errors during the first reversal, whereas l-govadine impaired initial discrimination learning. d,l-Govadine had no reliable cognitive effects but caused psychomotor slowing like l-govadine and haloperidol. CONCLUSIONS: These findings further highlight differences between two enantiomers of d,l-govadine that may reflect differential modulation of D1 and D2 receptors. These preclinical findings give further impetus to formal clinical evaluation of d-govadine as a treatment for cognitive deficiencies related to schizophrenia.
RATIONALE: There is an urgent need for novel drugs for treating cognitive deficits that are defining features of schizophrenia. The individual d- and l-enantiomers of the tetrahydroprotoberberine (THPB) d,l-govadine have been proposed for the treatment of cognitive deficiencies and positive symptoms of schizophrenia, respectively. OBJECTIVES: We examined the effects of d-, l-, or d,l-govadine on two distinct forms of cognitive flexibility perturbed in schizophrenia and compared them to those induced by a selective D1 receptor agonist and D2 receptor antagonist. METHODS: Male rats received d-, l-, or d,l-govadine (0.3, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/kg), D1 agonist SKF81297(0.1, 0.3, and 1.0 mg/kg), or D2 antagonist haloperidol (0.1-0.2 mg/kg). Experiment 1 used a strategy set-shifting task (between-subjects). In experiment 2, well-trained rats were tested on a probabilistic reversal task (within-subjects). RESULTS:d-Govadine improved set-shifting across all doses, whereas higher doses of l-govadine impaired set-shifting. SKF81297 reduced perseverative errors at the lowest dose. Low/high doses of haloperidol increased/decreased set-shifting errors, the latter "improvement" attributable to impaired retrieval of a previous acquired rule. Probabilistic reversal performance was less affected by these drugs, but d-govadine reduced errors during the first reversal, whereas l-govadineimpaired initial discrimination learning. d,l-Govadine had no reliable cognitive effects but caused psychomotor slowing like l-govadine and haloperidol. CONCLUSIONS: These findings further highlight differences between two enantiomers of d,l-govadine that may reflect differential modulation of D1 and D2 receptors. These preclinical findings give further impetus to formal clinical evaluation of d-govadine as a treatment for cognitive deficiencies related to schizophrenia.
Authors: D W Montgomery; C F Zukoski; G N Shah; A R Buckley; T Pacholczyk; D H Russell Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 1987-06-15 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Andrea Bari; David E Theobald; Daniele Caprioli; Adam C Mar; Alex Aidoo-Micah; Jeffrey W Dalley; Trevor W Robbins Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2010-01-27 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Johan Alsiö; Benjamin U Phillips; Júlia Sala-Bayo; Simon R O Nilsson; Teresa C Calafat-Pla; Arazo Rizwand; Jessica M Plumbridge; Laura López-Cruz; Jeffrey W Dalley; Rudolf N Cardinal; Adam C Mar; Trevor W Robbins Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 4.530