QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: jpet.109.150540v1 330/1/236    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Nicholson, K. L. Articles by Basile, A. S. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nicholson, K. L. Articles by Basile, A. S.

NEUROPHARMACOLOGY

Preclinical Evaluation of the Abuse Potential of the Analgesic Bicifadine

Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia (K.L.N., R.L.B.); Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Pharmacology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland (K.G., M.K.); and DOV Pharmaceutical, Inc., Somerset, New Jersey (J.T., P.S., A.S.B.)

The abuse liability of the analgesic bicifadine was investigated in animal models used to predict the abuse potential of psychostimulants in humans. Bicifadine, cocaine, d-amphetamine, bupropion, and desipramine were evaluated for the production of cocaine-like discriminative stimulus effects in rats. Cocaine, d-amphetamine, and bupropion dose-dependently and fully substituted for cocaine. Bicifadine and desipramine produced a maximum mean cocaine-lever selection of 80 and 69%, respectively, but doses yielding peak substitution strongly suppressed response rates. Microdialysis studies in normal waking rats indicated that d-amphetamine increased dopamine levels in the nucleus accumbens and striatum to a much greater degree than bicifadine, but bicifadine increased 5-hydroxytryptamine levels in the nucleus accumbens and striatum more than d-amphetamine. Bicifadine was also tested for intravenous self-administration in rhesus monkeys experienced with cocaine administration. Reinforcing effects of bicifadine were observed in only two of four subjects, whereas cocaine, d-amphetamine, and bupropion served as reinforcers in all four monkeys. When evaluated under a progressive ratio procedure, no dose of bicifadine maintained responding to the extent of cocaine, d-amphetamine, or bupropion. The discriminative stimulus effects associated with bicifadine were similar, but not identical, to those of psychostimulants. Although bicifadine maintained self-administration behavior in some subjects, its reinforcing efficacy was very low relative to cocaine, d-amphetamine, and bupropion. These results are consistent with the microdialysis findings of lower dopamine levels and higher 5-hydroxytryptamine levels after administration of bicifadine relative to d-amphetamine. Overall, the current findings support a low abuse potential of bicifadine, more resembling that of antidepressants than psychostimulants.

Address correspondence to: Katherine L. Nicholson, Virginia Commonwealth University, Department of Pharmacology/Toxicology, P.O. Box 980613, Richmond, VA 23298-0613. E-mail: klnichol{at}vcu.edu