Anthony R. Caggiula

Guidelines on nicotine dose selection for in vivo research

RationaleThis review provides insight for the judicious selection of nicotine dose ranges and routes of administration for in vivo studies. The literature is replete with reports in which a dosaging regimen chosen for a specific nicotine-mediated response was suboptimal for the species used. In many cases, such discrepancies could be attributed to the complex variables comprising species-specific in vivo responses to acute or chronic nicotine exposure.ObjectivesThis review capitalizes on the authors’ collective decades of in vivo nicotine experimentation to clarify the issues and to identify the variables to be considered in choosing a dosaging regimen. Nicotine dose ranges tolerated by humans and their animal models provide guidelines for experiments intended to extrapolate to human tobacco exposure through cigarette smoking or nicotine replacement therapies. Just as important are the nicotine dosaging regimens used to provide a mechanistic framework for acquisition of drug-taking behavior, dependence, tolerance, or withdrawal in animal models.ResultsSeven species are addressed: humans, nonhuman primates, rats, mice, Drosophila, Caenorhabditis elegans, and zebrafish. After an overview on nicotine metabolism, each section focuses on an individual species, addressing issues related to genetic background, age, acute vs chronic exposure, route of administration, and behavioral responses.ConclusionsThe selected examples of successful dosaging ranges are provided, while emphasizing the necessity of empirically determined dose–response relationships based on the precise parameters and conditions inherent to a specific hypothesis. This review provides a new, experimentally based compilation of species-specific dose selection for studies on the in vivo effects of nicotine.

Cue dependency of nicotine self-administration and smoking

A paradox exists regarding the reinforcing properties of nicotine. The abuse liability associated with smoking equals or exceeds that of other addictive drugs, yet the euphoric, reinforcing and other psychological effects of nicotine, compared to these other drugs, are more subtle, are manifest under more restricted conditions, and do not readily predict the difficulty most smokers experience in achieving abstinence. One possible resolution to this apparent inconsistency is that environmental cues associated with drug delivery become conditioned reinforcers and take on powerful incentive properties that are critically important for sustaining smoking in humans and nicotine self-administration in animals. We tested this hypothesis by using a widely employed self-administration paradigm in which rats press a lever at high rates for 1 h/day to obtain intravenous infusions of nicotine that are paired with two types of visual stimuli: a chamber light that when turned on signals drug availability and a 1-s cue light that signals drug delivery. We show that these visual cues are at least as important as nicotine in sustaining a high rate of responding once self-administration has been established, in the degree to which withdrawing nicotine extinguishes the behavior, and in the reinstatement of lever pressing after extinction. Additional studies demonstrated that the importance of these cues was manifest under both fixed ratio and progressive ratio (PR) schedules of reinforcement. The possibility that nicotine-paired cues are as important as nicotine in smoking behavior should refocus our attention on the psychology and neurobiology of conditioned reinforcers in order to stimulate the development of more effective treatment programs for smoking cessation.

Sex differences in nicotine effects and self-administration: review of human and animal evidence.

Although both the human and animal literatures are notable for the general lack of attention paid to possible sex differences in drug self-administration behavior, evidence is accumulating to suggest that males and females may differ in factors that maintain tobacco smoking or nicotine self-administration. Self-administration of nicotine per se may be less robust in women, and women are less sensitive than men to some effects of nicotine that may be reinforcing. Compared to men, smoking behavior of women may be influenced more by non-nicotine stimuli associated with smoking, suggesting greater conditioned reinforcement of smoking in women. Moreover, nicotine replacement, the current standard treatment for smoking cessation, is sometimes less effective in women, further suggesting the need for greater consideration of non-nicotine factors that may maintain womens smoking. Very recent research on rats also indicates sex differences in nicotine self-administration. However, these differences are complex and suggest that nicotine-seeking behavior is composed of several components, including hedonic, incentive-motivational, and conditioning effects; males and females may differ in one or more of these components. Menstrual or estrous cycle phase effects on the maintenance of nicotine self-administration are not particularly apparent in humans or animals, although cycle phase may influence other stages of dependence (e.g., withdrawal symptoms during cessation). Future research should evaluate further the consistency of results across human and non-human species, identify the conditions and procedures under which sex differences are observed, and elucidate the specific components of reinforcement that may differ between males and females. Studies also should examine the possible generalizability of these sex differences to other drugs of abuse. Identification of specific factors responsible for these sex differences may lead to improved interventions for smoking cessation and other substance abuse in women.

Operant responding for a visual reinforcer in rats is enhanced by noncontingent nicotine: implications for nicotine self-administration and reinforcement.

RationaleCurrent conceptualizations of drug reinforcement assume that drug-taking behavior is a consequence of the contingent, temporal relationship between the behavior and drug reward. However, stimulant drugs also potentiate the rewarding effects of other reinforcers when administered noncontingently.ObjectivesThese studies were designed to determine whether noncontingent nicotine enhances the reinforcing properties of a nonpharmacological reinforcer and whether this direct effect facilitates operant behavior within the context of a nicotine self-administration procedure.MethodsRats self-administered nicotine or food, or received noncontingent nicotine, saline, or food either with or without a response-contingent, unconditioned reinforcing visual stimulus (VS).ResultsNoncontingent nicotine, whether delivered as discrete injections based on a pattern of self-administered nicotine or as a continuous infusion, increased response rates maintained by the VS. There were no significant differences in responding by animals that received contingent compared with noncontingent nicotine when a VS was available. This increase was not observed in the absence of the VS or as a consequence of noncontingent food delivery. Operant behavior was equally attenuated and reinstated by the removal and subsequent replacement of contingent and noncontingent nicotine. Nicotine supported self-administration in the absence of response-contingent, nicotine-paired stimuli; however, response rates were drastically reduced compared with nicotine self-administration with the VS.ConclusionsNicotine influences operant behavior in two ways: by acting as a primary reinforcer when it is contingent upon behavior, and by directly potentiating the reinforcing properties of other stimuli through a nonassociative mechanism. Nicotine self-administration and smoking may be largely dependent upon this later action.

Complex interactions between nicotine and nonpharmacological stimuli reveal multiple roles for nicotine in reinforcement

RationaleAlthough considerable progress has been made, we do not yet fully understand the behavioral and neurobiological basis of nicotine reinforcement, and without this knowledge, treatment strategies aimed at reducing smoking remain deficient.ObjectivesThis review describes an original perspective on nicotine reinforcement, which arises from substantial evidence of complex interactions between nicotine and nonpharmacological stimuli. We hypothesize that nicotine reinforcement derives from at least two sources: (1) primary reinforcement, an action that requires response-dependent drug administration and is capable of conveying secondary reinforcing effects on associated stimuli, and (2) the reinforcement-enhancing effect of nicotine, which directly enhances behavior maintained by salient nonnicotine stimuli and does not require a contingent relationship between drug administration and reinforced operant responding. Although novel for nicotine, this hypothesis has origins in an extensive literature on the reinforcing effects of psychostimulants. Empirical support for this hypothesis, based largely on animal models of reinforcement, will be presented.ConclusionsAnimal models of drug reinforcement have evolved to reflect our growing awareness of the multidimensional nature of drug dependence in humans. Investigating the interaction between nicotine and nonpharmacological stimuli within the context of the drug self-administration paradigm in rats has generated new insights into the paradox of how nicotine, an apparently weak primary reinforcer, can sustain the robust behavior observed in self-administration and in smoking. The hypothesis presented in this paper—that nicotine acts as both a primary reinforcer and an enhancer of other nonnicotine reinforcers—provides important direction for future investigations into the neurobiology of nicotine reinforcement and treatments for smoking cessation.

Nicotine self-administration in rats

Considering the importance of self-administration models in determining mechanisms of drug maintained behavior, we attempted to replicate the findings of nicotine self-administration by Corrigall and Coen. Male, Sprague-Dawley rats, trained on food reinforcement, acquired relatively high and stable rates of self-administration of IV nicotine bitartrate (0.03 mg/kg, free base). Extinction and reacquisition followed substituting saline and then nicotine, respectively. Responses, infusions and intake decreased at 0.003 mg/kg, while intake increased at 0.06 mg/kg. This model of nicotine self-administration provides a reliable alternative to experimenter-administration models for examining the effects of nicotine.

Importance of nonpharmacological factors in nicotine self-administration.

There is mounting evidence that nonpharmacological factors critically modulate the effects of several drugs of abuse both in humans and experimental animals. This paper reviews research from this laboratory on one factor that influences the degree to which nicotine is self-administered: environmental stimuli that form the context within which nicotine is taken. The results suggest that the direct, pharmacological actions of nicotine are necessary but not sufficient to explain either the high rates of self-administration exhibited by laboratory animals or cigarette smoking by humans, and that future investigations on the neurophysiological effects of nicotine that underlie smoking behavior must take into account the environmental context within which the behavior occurs.

Acquisition of nicotine self-administration in rats : the effects of dose, feeding schedule, and drug contingency

Abstract The studies presented here were designed to further clarify the nature of nicotine self-administration (SA) based on a limited access model in which rats are food restricted, receive operant training using food reinforcement, and are then tested in daily 1-h drug sessions. We examined the effects of dose, feeding schedule, and contingency of drug delivery on acquisition of nicotine SA. Two doses of nicotine bitartrate, 0.03 and 0.06 mg/kg per infusion (free base), supported the transition from food-reinforced to drug-reinforced responding, although the pattern of behavior differed between these doses. In contrast, 0.01 mg/kg per infusion failed to maintain nicotine SA. In a second study, animals were divided into three groups according to feeding schedule. Rats that were both weight restricted and food deprived showed the highest level of SA behavior, although neither food deprivation nor weight restriction was necessary to establish SA. In the third experiment, rats that were switched from food to nicotine as the response-dependent reinforcer maintained higher response rates throughout a 9-day period than animals switched to response-independent (i.e., yoked) nicotine which showed minimal responding after day 1. Furthermore, the differences between self-administering and yoked animals emerged during the first session, suggesting that nicotine may serve as a reinforcer during the first drug exposure in naive animals. These results indicate that acquisition of nicotine SA can be influenced by both dose of nicotine and feeding schedule and that, in animals previously trained on a food-reinforced operant, active lever pressing is maintained only when nicotine delivery is contingent upon responding.

Nicotine self-administration in rats on a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement.

Abstract  Rationale: Robust intravenous (i.v.) nicotine self-administration (SA) in rats has been reported by several laboratories, including our own, using fixed ratio (FR) schedules of reinforcement. Studies on other drugs of abuse, however, suggest that progressive ratio (PR) schedules may provide additional information not gained using FR schedules. Objective: Here, we attempt to establish and characterize nicotine SA on a PR. Methods: One study allowed animals to acquire SA on a FR at four doses of nicotine (0.02, 0.03, 0.06, 0.09 mg/kg) before being switched to a PR. A second study examined extinction by saline substitution or pretreatment with the nicotinic antagonist, mecamylamine, including a preliminary analysis into the role of secondary reinforcers in the extinction process. Results: SA of nicotine on a PR was stable across repeated sessions. The number of infusions earned on a PR correlated with infusion rate on a FR; however, a large portion of the variance in SA on a PR could not be accounted for by infusion rate on a FR. Infusions on a PR increased across the same range of doses that produced a decrease in the infusion rate on a FR. Extinction of responding occurred after saline substitution or pretreatment with mecamylamine, and animals re-acquired when nicotine was again available without pretreatment. The presence of drug-paired stimuli appeared to lengthen the extinction process. Conclusions: Nicotine supports stable SA on a PR. Since PR and FR schedules may measure different aspects of nicotine reinforcement, PR schedules may be valuable in further characterizing group and individual differences in nicotine reinforcement.

Dissociating the primary reinforcing and reinforcement-enhancing effects of nicotine using a rat self-administration paradigm with concurrently available drug and environmental reinforcers

RationaleNicotine has two effects on reinforcement in traditional self-administration paradigms. It serves as a primary reinforcer by increasing the probability of behaviors that result in nicotine delivery. However, nicotine also potently enhances behaviors that result in the delivery of nonpharmacological reinforcers.ObjectivesThe present study sought to dissociate these two effects of nicotine on reinforcement.MethodsFor one group of rats (2 lever), a nonpharmacological reinforcer [visual stimulus (VS)] was available for pressing one lever. Nicotine infusions were available for pressing a different lever. A second group (NIC + VS) received more traditional self-administration training; both the VS and nicotine were delivered for pressing a single active lever. Control groups received either nicotine infusions (NIC only) or VS presentations (VS only) for pressing the active lever.ResultsNicotine alone was a weak reinforcer; the VS alone was slightly more reinforcing than nicotine. When these two reinforcers were combined (NIC + VS), response rates were synergistically increased. For the 2-lever group, responding on the nicotine lever was weak, matching the response rates of rats receiving nicotine alone. However, responding on the VS lever was potently enhanced in this group; equaling the response rates for rats receiving both reinforcers for making a single response (NIC + VS).ConclusionsThese data indicate that the reinforcement-enhancing effects of nicotine are very potent even when only moderate quantities of the drug are self-administered. Moreover, they provide the first demonstration that the reinforcement-enhancing and primary reinforcing effects of nicotine can be dissociated behaviorally.