![]() |
|
|
Vol. 282, Issue 3, 1442-1457, 1997
Division of Behavioral Biology, Department of Psychiatry and
Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore,
Maryland
The discriminative stimulus effects of benzodiazepines often have been
indistinguishable from those of barbiturates or other sedative/anxiolytics. However, baboons and rats trained to discriminate lorazepam did not reliably generalize to pentobarbital in previous studies, although animals comparably trained to discriminate
pentobarbital reliably generalized to lorazepam. The present study
investigated the generalization profile for a variety of anxiolytic,
sedative and other drugs in baboons trained to discriminate oral
lorazepam (1.8 mg/kg). Triazolam, alprazolam, diazepam, midazolam,
bromazepam, temazepam and nordiazepam occasioned >80% of total
responses on the lorazepam-paired lever, in that order of potency, 60 min after oral dosing; chlordiazepoxide did so in three of five
baboons. However, barbiturates (amobarbital, hexobarbital,
methohexital, pentobarbital, phenobarbital, secobarbital) and
methyprylon occasioned lorazepam-appropriate responding in only one or
two baboons. Testing barbiturates at different pretreatment times
(amobarbital, hexobarbital, pentobarbital or secobarbital) or by an
i.m. route of administration (methohexital, pentobarbital) did not
produce an increase in generalization. Neither other classic
sedatives/anxiolytics (chloral hydrate, clomethiazole, ethanol,
methaqualone, meprobamate, triclofos), nor anticonvulsants (phenytoin,
valproic acid), nor drugs from other pharmacological classes shared
discriminative-stimulus effects with lorazepam. These results, together
with those from previous studies in which lorazepam or another
benzodiazepine served as the training stimulus, indicate that lorazepam
training results in a more selective generalization profile with
respect to sedative/anxiolytic drugs than does training with other
benzodiazepines.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S Pompeia, G. Manzano, T. S, and O. Bueno What makes lorazepam different from other benzodiazepines? J. Physiol., December 1, 2005; 569(2): 709 - 709. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. R. McMahon, L. R. Gerak, and C. P. France Potency of Positive gamma -Aminobutyric AcidA Modulators to Substitute for a Midazolam Discriminative Stimulus in Untreated Monkeys Does Not Predict Potency to Attenuate a Flumazenil Discriminative Stimulus in Diazepam-Treated Monkeys J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., September 1, 2001; 298(3): 1227 - 1235. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. K. Rowlett, R. D. Spealman, and S. Lelas Discriminative Stimulus Effects of Zolpidem in Squirrel Monkeys: Comparison with Conventional Benzodiazepines and Sedative-Hypnotics J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., December 1, 1999; 291(3): 1233 - 1241. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
B. J. Smith and W. K. Bickel Flumazenil Discrimination by Humans under a Two-Response and a Novel-Response Procedure J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., December 1, 1999; 291(3): 1257 - 1268. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
N. A. Ator and R. R. Griffiths Drug Discrimination Analysis of Partial Agonists at the Benzodiazepine Site. I. Differential Effects of U-78875 Across Training Conditions in Baboons and Rats J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., June 1, 1999; 289(3): 1434 - 1446. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||