Lyndsey E. Collins

Nucleus accumbens and effort-related functions: behavioral and neural markers of the interactions between adenosine A2A and dopamine D2 receptors.

Nucleus accumbens dopamine (DA) is a critical component of the brain circuitry regulating work output in reinforcement-seeking behavior and effort-related choice behavior. Moreover, there is evidence of an interaction between DA D(2) and adenosine A(2A) receptor function. Systemic administration of adenosine A(2A) antagonists reverses the effects of D(2) antagonists on tasks that assess effort related choice. The present experiments were conducted to determine if nucleus accumbens is a brain locus at which adenosine A(2A) and DA D(2) antagonists interact to regulate effort-related choice behavior. A concurrent fixed ratio 5 (FR5)/chow feeding procedure was used; with this procedure, rats can choose between completing an FR5 lever-pressing requirement for a preferred food (i.e., high carbohydrate operant pellets) or approaching and consuming a freely available food (i.e., standard rodent chow). Rats trained with this procedure spend most of their time pressing the lever for the preferred food, and eat very little of the concurrently available chow. Intracranial injections of the selective DA D(2) receptor antagonist eticlopride (1.0, 2.0, 4.0 microg) into nucleus accumbens core, but not a dorsal control site, suppressed FR5 lever-pressing and increased consumption of freely available chow. Either systemic or intra-accumbens injections of the adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonist MSX-3 reversed these effects of eticlopride on effort-related choice. Intra-accumbens injections of eticlopride also increased local expression of c-Fos immunoreactivity, and this effect was attenuated by co-administration of MSX-3. Adenosine and DA systems interact to regulate instrumental behavior and effort-related processes, and nucleus accumbens is an important locus for this interaction. These findings may have implications for the treatment of psychiatric symptoms such as psychomotor slowing, anergia and fatigue.

Differential actions of adenosine A1 and A2A antagonists on the effort-related effects of dopamine D2 antagonism

Adenosine and dopamine receptors in striatal areas interact to regulate a number of different functions, including aspects of motor control and motivation. Recent studies indicate that adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonists can reverse the effects of dopamine (DA) D(2) antagonists on instrumental tasks that provide measures of effort-related choice behavior. The present experiments compared the ability of the adenosine A(2A) antagonist KW6002, the nonselective adenosine antagonist caffeine, and the adenosine A(1) receptor selective antagonist DPCPX, to reverse the behavioral effects of the DA D(2) antagonist haloperidol. For these studies, a concurrent choice procedure was used in which rats could select between lever pressing on a fixed ratio 5 schedule for a preferred food or approaching and consuming a less preferred lab chow that was concurrently available in the chamber. Under baseline or control conditions, rats show a strong preference for lever pressing, and eat little of the chow; IP injections of 0.1 mg/kg haloperidol significantly reduced lever pressing and substantially increased chow intake. The adenosine A(2A) antagonist KW6002 (0.125-0.5 mg/kg IP) and the nonselective adenosine antagonist caffeine (5.0-20.0 mg/kg) significantly reversed the effects of haloperidol. However, the adenosine A(1) antagonist DPCPX (0.1875-0.75 mg/kg IP) failed to reverse the effects of the D(2) antagonist. The rank order of effect sizes in the reversal experiments was KW6002>caffeine>DPCPX. None of these drugs had any effect on behavior when they were injected in the absence of haloperidol. These results indicate that the ability of an adenosine antagonist to reverse the effort-related effects of a D(2) antagonist depends upon the subtype of adenosine receptor being blocked. Together with other recent results, these experiments indicate that there is a specific interaction between DA D(2) and adenosine A(2A) receptors, which could be related to the co-localization of these receptors on the same population of striatal neurons.

Potential anxiogenic effects of cannabinoid CB1 receptor antagonists/inverse agonists in rats: Comparisons between AM4113, AM251, and the benzodiazepine inverse agonist FG-7142

Cannabinoid CB1 inverse agonists suppress food-motivated behaviors, but may also induce psychiatric effects such as depression and anxiety. To evaluate behaviors potentially related to anxiety, the present experiments assessed the CB1 inverse agonist AM251 (2.0-8.0mg/kg), the CB1 antagonist AM4113 (3.0-12.0mg/kg), and the benzodiazepine inverse agonist FG-7142 (10.0-20.0mg/kg), using the open field test and the elevated plus maze. Although all three drugs affected open field behavior, these effects were largely due to actions on locomotion. In the elevated plus maze, FG-7142 and AM251 both produced anxiogenic effects. FG-7142 and AM251 also significantly increased c-Fos activity in the amygdala and nucleus accumbens shell. In contrast, AM4113 failed to affect performance in the plus maze, and did not induce c-Fos immunoreactivity. The weak effects of AM4113 are consistent with biochemical data showing that AM4113 induces little or no intrinsic cellular activity. This research may lead to the development of novel appetite suppressants with reduced anxiogenic effects.

Interactions between adenosine and dopamine receptor antagonists with different selectivity profiles: Effects on locomotor activity

Forebrain dopamine (DA) is a critical component of the brain circuitry regulating behavioral activation. Adenosine A(2A) antagonists reverse many of the behavioral effects of DA antagonists, and A(2A) receptors are co-localized with D(2) receptors on striatal medium spiny neurons. The present work was undertaken to determine if the ability of an A(2A) antagonist, a non-selective adenosine antagonist, or an A(1) antagonist to reverse the locomotor effects of DA blockade in rats differed depending upon whether D(1) or D(2) family receptors were being antagonized. The adenosine antagonists MSX-3, caffeine, DPCPX and CPT were studied for their ability to reverse the locomotor suppression induced by the D(1) antagonist SCH 39166 (ecopipam) and the D(2) antagonist eticlopride. The D(1) and D(2) antagonists suppressed locomotion in all experiments. The adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonist MSX-3 (0.5-2.0 mg/kg IP) significantly reversed the suppression of locomotion induced by eticlopride. The non-selective adenosine antagonist caffeine (5.0-20.0 mg/kg IP) also reversed the effect of eticlopride, though the effect was not as robust as that seen with MSX-3. The adenosine A(1) antagonists DPCPX (0.375-1.5 mg/kg) and CPT (3.0-12.0 mg/kg IP) were unable to reverse the locomotor impairment elicited by eticlopride. Furthermore, the attenuation of locomotion induced by the D(1) antagonist could only be reversed by the highest dose of MSX-3, but not by caffeine, DPCPX or CPT. DA and adenosine receptor antagonists interact in the regulation of locomotor activation, but the nature of this interaction appears to depend upon the receptor selectivity profiles of the specific drugs being tested.

The CB1 inverse agonist AM251, but not the CB1 antagonist AM4113, enhances retention of contextual fear conditioning in rats.

The effects of CB1 antagonist/inverse agonists on the acquisition and consolidation of conditioned fear remain uncertain. Recent studies suggest that the CB1 antagonist/inverse agonist AM251 affects acquisition or consolidation of both contextual and discretely cued fear memories. AM251 is frequently referred to as a CB1 antagonist; however in vitro signal transduction assays indicate that this drug also elicits inverse agonist activity at CB1 receptors. The present studies were undertaken to compare the effects of AM251 on conditioned fear with those produced by AM4113, a novel CB1 antagonist with minimal inverse agonist activity. All drugs were administered prior to conditioning. In retention tests conducted two weeks after conditioning, both AM251 (4.0 mg/kg) and AM4113 (6.0 mg/kg)-treated animals exhibited reduced freezing during a conditioned tone cue played within a novel context. In contextual fear retention tests, animals previously treated with 4.0 or 8.0 mg/kg AM251 exhibited enhanced freezing. By contrast, no dose of AM4113 had any significant effect on contextual fear memory, which is consistent with the lower signal transduction activity of AM4113 at CB1 receptors compared to AM251. These results suggest that CB1 neutral antagonists may be less likely than CB1 inverse agonists to facilitate the acquisition or consolidation of contextual fear that may contribute to some clinical disorders.

Oral tremor induced by the muscarinic agonist pilocarpine is suppressed by the adenosine A2A antagonists MSX-3 and SCH58261, but not the adenosine A1 antagonist DPCPX

Tremulous jaw movements in rats, which can be induced by dopamine (DA) antagonists, DA depletion, and cholinomimetics, have served as a useful model for studies of tremor. Although adenosine A(2A) antagonists can reduce the tremulous jaw movements induced by DA antagonists and DA depletion, there are conflicting reports about the interaction between adenosine antagonists and cholinomimetic drugs. The present studies investigated the ability of adenosine antagonists to reverse the tremorogenic effect of the muscarinic agonist pilocarpine. While the adenosine A(2A) antagonist MSX-3 was incapable of reversing the tremulous jaw movements induced by the 4.0mg/kg dose of pilocarpine, both MSX-3 and the adenosine A(2A) antagonist SCH58261 reversed the tremulous jaw movements elicited by 0.5mg/kg pilocarpine. Systemic administration of the adenosine A(1) antagonist DPCPX failed to reverse the tremulous jaw movements induced by either an acute 0.5mg/kg dose of the cholinomimetic pilocarpine or the DA D2 antagonist pimozide, indicating that the tremorolytic effects of adenosine antagonists may be receptor subtype specific. Behaviorally active doses of MSX-3 and SCH 58261 showed substantial in vivo occupancy of A(2A) receptors, but DPCPX did not. The results of these studies support the use of adenosine A(2A) antagonists for the treatment of tremor.

The novel adenosine A2A antagonist Lu AA47070 reverses the motor and motivational effects produced by dopamine D2 receptor blockade

Dopamine D2 and adenosine A(2A) receptors interact to regulate aspects of motor and motivational function, and it has been suggested that adenosine A(2A) antagonists could be useful for the treatment of parkinsonism and depression. The present experiments were performed to characterize the effects of Lu AA47070, which is a phosphonooxymethylene prodrug of a potent and selective adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonist, for its ability to reverse the motor and motivational effects of D2 antagonism. In the first group of studies, Lu AA47070 (3.75-30 mg/kg IP) was assessed for its ability to reverse the effects of the D2 receptor antagonist pimozide (1.0 mg/kg IP) using several measures of motor impairment, including catalepsy, locomotion, and tremulous jaw movements, which is a rodent model of parkinsonian tremor. Lu AA47070 produced a significant reversal of the effects of pimozide on all three measures of parkinsonian motor impairment. In addition, Lu AA47070 was able to reverse the effects of a low dose of the D2 antagonist haloperidol on a concurrent lever pressing/chow feeding task that is used as a measure of effort-related choice behavior. The ability of Lu AA47070 to reverse the effects of D2 receptor blockade suggests that this compound could have potential utility as a treatment for parkinsonism, and for some of the motivational symptoms of depression.

Oral tremor induced by galantamine in rats: a model of the parkinsonian side effects of cholinomimetics used to treat Alzheimer's disease

Anticholinesterases are the most common treatment for Alzheimers disease, and, in recent years, a new group of cholinesterase inhibitors (i.e. rivastigmine, galantamine, and donepezil) has become available. Although these drugs improve cognitive symptoms, they also can induce or exacerbate parkinsonian symptoms, including tremor. The present studies were conducted to determine if galantamine induces tremulous jaw movements, a rodent model of parkinsonian tremor, and to investigate whether these oral motor impairments can be reversed by co-administration of adenosine A(2A) antagonists. The first experiment demonstrated that systemic injections of galantamine (0.75-6.0 mg/kg I.P.) induced a dose-related increase in tremulous jaw movements in rats. In a second study, co-administration of the muscarinic antagonist scopolamine (0.0156-0.25 mg/kg I.P.) produced a dose dependent suppression of tremulous jaw movements induced by a 3.0 mg/kg dose of galantamine, indicating that galantamine induces these tremulous oral movements through actions on muscarinic acetylcholine receptors. In two additional studies, analyses of freeze-frame video and electromyographic activity recorded from the lateral temporalis muscle indicated that the local frequency of these galantamine-induced jaw movements occurs in the 3-7 Hz frequency range that is characteristic of parkinsonian tremor. In the final experiment, the adenosine A(2A) antagonist MSX-3 significantly attenuated the tremulous jaw movements induced by the 3.0mg/kg dose of galantamine, which is consistent with the hypothesis that co-administration of adenosine A(2A) antagonists may be beneficial in reducing parkinsonian motor impairments induced by anticholinesterase treatment.

Intracerebroventricular administration of cannabinoid CB1 receptor antagonists AM251 and AM4113 fails to alter food-reinforced behavior in rats.

RationaleDrugs that interfere with cannabinoid CB1 transmission suppress food-motivated behaviors and may be useful as appetite suppressants, but there is uncertainty about the locus of action for the feeding-suppression effects of these drugs.ObjectiveThe present work was conducted to determine if two drugs that interfere with cannabinoid receptor transmission, AM251 and AM4113, have effects on food-reinforced behavior after administration into the lateral ventricle (intracerebroventricular (ICV)).ResultsAlthough systemic administration of both drugs can suppress food-reinforced behavior, neither AM251 (40, 80, and 160 μg) nor AM4113 (60, 120, and 240 μg) administered at various times prior to testing produced any suppression of food-reinforced operant responding on a fixed-ratio 5 schedule. Because the modulation of locomotion by drugs that act on CB1 receptors is hypothesized to be a forebrain effect, these drugs also were assessed for their ability to reverse the locomotor suppression produced by the CB1 agonist AM411. ICV administration of either AM251 or AM4113 reversed the locomotor suppression induced by the CB1 agonist AM411 in the same dose range that failed to produce any effects on feeding.ConclusionsThis indicates that both AM4113 and AM251, when administered ICV, can interact with forebrain CB1 receptors and are efficacious on forebrain-mediated functions unrelated to feeding. These results suggest that CB1 neutral antagonists or inverse agonists may not be affecting food-reinforced behavior via interactions with forebrain CB1 receptors located in nucleus accumbens or hypothalamus and that lower brainstem or peripheral receptors may be involved.