JPET

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roache, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Griffiths, R. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Roache, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Griffiths, R. R.

Lorazepam and meprobamate dose effects in humans: behavioral effects and abuse liability

JD Roache and RR Griffiths

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.

On a residential research ward, the acute effects of placebo, lorazepam (LZ) (1.5-9.0 mg) and meprobamate (MEP) (600-3600 mg) were examined using a within-subject double-blind Latin Square design in nine male subjects with histories of drug abuse. Drug effects were assessed with objective performance tasks, subject estimates of performance, staff ratings of drug effects and subject ratings of drug effects, sleep, mood, drug liking and monetary street value. Generally, both LZ and MEP produced comparable dose-related effects; LZ had a more rapid onset of action and on several measures showed a more shallow dose-response curve than MEP. With LZ, but not MEP, subjects under-estimated the degree to which their performance was impaired and under-rated drug effects as compared to analogous staff ratings. Both drugs produced sedation-like subject ratings of mood and sleep but generally did not produce tranquilization-like ratings. MEP produced subject ratings of drug liking and monetary street value which were equal to or in some cases greater than those of LZ. Relative potency estimations showed that LZ was 510 to 783 times more potent than MEP in producing performance impairment but was only 370 times more potent than MEP in producing subject ratings of drug liking. Overall, these data indicate that the likelihood of abuse of MEP is at least equal to if not greater than that of LZ although LZ may have a greater likelihood of producing adverse behavioral effects such as a performance impairment and under- estimates of the degree of impairment. These data in conjunction with previous results from this laboratory show that the behavioral effects of benzodiazepines can be differentiated from those of other types of sedative/anxiolytics and that MEP displays characteristics of a barbiturate-like profile of action.

Volume 243, Issue 3, pp. 978-988, 12/01/1987
Copyright © 1987 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Arch Gen PsychiatryHome page
M. W. Johnson, P. E. Suess, and R. R. Griffiths
Ramelteon: a novel hypnotic lacking abuse liability and sedative adverse effects.
Arch Gen Psychiatry, October 1, 2006; 63(10): 1149 - 1157.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.Home page
J. M. Rho, S. D. Donevan, and M. A. Rogawski
Barbiturate-Like Actions of the Propanediol Dicarbamates Felbamate and Meprobamate
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., March 1, 1997; 280(3): 1383 - 1391.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.Home page
C. R. Rush, S. Madakasira, N. H. Goldman, W. L. Woolverton, and J. K. Rowlett
Discriminative Stimulus Effects of Zolpidem in Pentobarbital-Trained Subjects: II. Comparison with Triazolam and Caffeine in Humans
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., January 1, 1997; 280(1): 174 - 188.
[Abstract] [Full Text]




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
 Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 1987 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.