Adelaida Morte

Noradrenergic Stimulation Enhances Human Action Monitoring

Noradrenergic neurotransmission has been associated with the modulation of higher cognitive functions mediated by the prefrontal cortex. In the present study, the impact of noradrenergic stimulation on the human action-monitoring system, as indexed by event-related brain potentials, was examined. After the administration of a placebo or the selective α2-adrenoceptor antagonist yohimbine, which stimulates firing in the locus ceruleus and noradrenaline release, electroencephalograpic recordings were obtained from healthy volunteers performing a letter flanker task. Yohimbine led to an increase in the amplitude of the error-related negativity in conjunction with a significant reduction of action errors. Reaction times were unchanged, and the drug did not modify the N2 in congruent versus incongruent trials, a measure of preresponse conflict, or posterror adjustments as measured by posterror slowing of reaction time. The present findings suggest that the locus ceruleus-noradrenaline system exerts a rather specific effect on human action monitoring.

Central and Peripheral Evaluation of Rupatadine, a New Antihistamine/Platelet-Activating Factor Antagonist, at Different Doses in Healthy Volunteers

Aims: To assess peripheral anti-H1 and central nervous system (CNS) activity of single increasing doses of rupatidine fumarate (RU), a new antihistamine/platelet-activating factor antagonist compound, in comparison with hydroxyzine and placebo. Methods: Eighteen healthy young subjects of both sexes took part in a crossover, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Treatments tested were: RU 10, 20, 40 and 80 mg and hydroxyzine 25 mg, as a positive standard. Before and several times after drug intake, peripheral anti-H1 activity was appraised by the skin reactivity to intradermal injection of histamine. CNS effects were also obtained by objective tests of psychomotor performance and subjective mood scales. Results: All active treatments showed a significant reduction of the wheal and flare reaction in relation to placebo, RU displaying a potent dose-dependent inhibition pattern. The global nonparametric Friedman test to changes from placebo in 15 objective variables from psychomotor performance showed a significant impairment of similar magnitude after hydroxyzine 25 mg (p = 0.01) and RU 80 mg (p = 0.02), but this was slower in development and recovery after the latter. After RU 40 mg, a smaller impairment was also obtained (p = 0.04). Activity (p = 0.01) and drowsiness (p = 0.02) scales showed significant changes, the subjects feeling less active and more drowsy after all active treatments. Conclusion: RU presents a potent dose-dependent peripheral anti-H1 activity, displaying psychomotor impairment activity only at the highest dose (80 mg), while therapeutically relevant lower doses (10 and 20 mg) were similar to placebo.

Pharmacokinetics of the somatostatin analog lanreotide in patients with severe chronic renal insufficiency

To characterize the pharmacokinetic profile of the somatostatin analog lanreotide in patients with severe chronic renal insufficiency.

Sleep Laboratory Study on Single and Repeated Dose Effects of Paroxetine, Alprazolam and Their Combination in Healthy Young Volunteers

Aims: To evaluate the potential interaction of 20 mg paroxetine and 1 mg alprazolam (early morning once-daily administration) on polysomnographic (PSG) sleep and subjective sleep and awakening quality, both after a single intake and after reaching a steady-state concentration. Methods: Twenty-two (11 for the PSG) healthy young volunteers of both sexes with no history of sleep disturbances (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index <5) participated in a double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, repeated-dose, 4-period, cross-over study. All volunteers received all 4 treatment sequences: paroxetine–alprazolam placebo (PAP); paroxetine placebo–alprazolam (PPA); paroxetine–alprazolam (PA), and paroxetine placebo–alprazolam placebo (PLA), in a randomized order. Each treatment was administered over 15 consecutive days, with a treatment-free interval of 7 days prior to the subsequent study period. In each experimental period, one PSG sleep study was performed on the 1st night (single-dose effects) and another study was performed on the 15th night (repeated-dose effects). Additionally, two other PSG studies were assessed: an adaptation recording, and a control night recording. All-night PSG recordings were obtained following standard procedures. Each 30-second period was scored according to the criteria of Rechtschaffen and Kales by means of an automatic sleep analysis system: Somnolyzer 24x7TM. A self-rating scale for sleep and awakening quality and early morning behavior was completed no later than 15 min after awakening over the 15 days of each experimental intervention. General lineal models (treatment/time) were applied separately to each variable. Results: (1) No significant effects were observed in any sleep variables when control nights were compared with the 1st night with PLA. (2) Sleep continuity: After PAP a clear awakening effect was seen both in the first and second evaluations, mainly in wake time, movement time, number of awakenings and stage-1 duration. After PPA an evident hypnotic effect was observed on night 1. This effect was mainly observed in maintenance variables and slightly in sleep initiation variables; it had decreased by night 15. After PA an intermediate behavior in the variables related to sleep continuity was seen, highlighting the absence of the tolerance phenomenon observed when PPA was administered alone. (3) Sleep architecture: The most important effects in REM sleep were observed after PAP; an increase in REM latency and decreases in REM sleep. PAP also induced decreases in the number of non-REM and REM periods and increases in the average duration of non-REM periods and sleep cycles. PA presented a similar pattern to PAP, and PPA similar to PLA. In relation to non-REM sleep, PA showed more stage-2 and less slow-wave sleep (SWS). (4) Subjective perception: No significant differences were observed between treatments while they were being taken, but impairments in subjective sleep quality, awaking quality, latency and efficiency were seen, mainly after PA but also after PPA discontinuations. Conclusion: The combination of PAP and PPA presented an intermediate pattern in relation to sleep continuity, with less awaking effect than PAP alone and less hypnotic effect than PPA alone, and without developing tolerance. The PAP and PPA combination also showed a similar effect to PAP on REM sleep and was the treatment with the longest stage 2 and shortest SWS. No subjective sleep and awakening effects were seen during drug intake but subjective withdrawal reports were seen after abrupt interruption. The high agreement rate for the epoch-by-epoch comparison between automatic and human scoring confirms the validity of the Somnolyzer 24x7 and thus facilitates sleep studies in neuropsychopharmacological research.

Lack of pharmacologic interaction between paroxetine and alprazolam at steady state in healthy volunteers.

Abstract: This investigation aimed to provide evidence on the lack of pharmacokinetic interaction of paroxetine (20 mg/d) and alprazolam (1 mg/d) in combined therapy. In addition, the central effects of both drugs when administered alone and in combination were assessed to rule out any relevant synergistic depressant central effect. Twenty-five healthy young adult volunteers participated in a double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, repeated dose (15 days), 4-period crossover study. Each subject received each of 4 treatment sequences (ie, paroxetine-alprazolam placebo, alprazolam-paroxetine placebo, paroxetine-alprazolam, and paroxetine placebo-alprazolam placebo) in randomized order. The ratios for area under the curve within a dosing interval and maximum plasma concentration of the paroxetine plus alprazolam sequence to single agent paroxetine were 1.07 (90% confidence interval = 0.99 to 1.16) and 1.05 (90% confidence interval = 0.97 to 1.13), respectively, with no statistically significant differences between the 2 treatments. Similarly, for alprazolam, ratios for the combined to the single treatment sequence were 0.99 (90% confidence interval = 0.93 to 1.05) and 1.00 (90% confidence interval = 0.94 to 1.07) for area under the curve within a dosing interval and maximum plasma concentration, respectively, showing no evidence for interaction. Comparative pharmacodynamics on the combination was assessed using 6 Psychomotor Performance Tests and 5 Visual Analogue Scales focused on mood variables. Alprazolam and paroxetine plus alprazolam induced similar and significant performance impairment and sedation after both single and repeated dose administration, being less evident on day 15. After dosing, paroxetine plus alprazolam showed a lower recovery pattern than alprazolam alone, especially on day 15. No treatment sequence showed cumulative effects after repeated dose administration. Psychomotor Performance Tests and Visual Analogue Scales data suggested lack of pharmacodynamic interactions. Accordingly, study results showed no evidence for pharmacologic interactions between paroxetine and alprazolam at steady state. The most commonly reported adverse event was drowsiness, with a higher incidence under both single and combined alprazolam treatments.

Effects of tobacco smoking on the kinetics of the pupillary light reflex: a comparison between smokers and non-smokers.

Background: The time course of the pupillary light reflex (PLR) is determined by the successive activation of parasympathetic and sympathetic innervations of the iris, latency and amplitude reflecting parasympathetic activity and recovery time showing mainly sympathetic activity. Objective: To determine the effects of tobacco cigarette smoking on the PLR in smokers after an abstinence period of at least 12 h. Methods: Ten smokers (mean 15.7 cigarettes/day) and 10 non-smokers participated in a randomised, non-intervention controlled, cross-over study that included a parallel control group. Smokers underwent two sessions with a time interval between 3 and 8 days; two recordings were taken at each session, separated by 20 min: session 1, without smoking, and session 2, smoking 3 cigarettes within a 30-min period. Non-smokers underwent one session; two recordings were taken separated by 20 min. At each recording, in both groups, PLR was elicited with four light flashes of increasing luminance. Results: The relationship between PLR parameters and light intensity was linear in each subject. The slope of the regression line for relative amplitude increase versus intensity was significantly flatter in abstinent smokers than in non-smokers (p = 0.033); the slope returned significantly after smoking (p = 0.043). No other significant effects were obtained. Conclusions: Kinetic parameters of PLR provide a sensitive pharmacological test to detect cholinergic neurotransmission manipulation effects, as they seem to detect changes in moderate smokers after 12 h of abstinence, and their reversal on return to smoking. These results suggest an enhancement in the suppression of the parasympathetic oculomotor reflex arc rather than a facilitation of the sympathetic drive to the iris.