Keywords
methamphetamine, sensitization, mGluR5, allosteric modulator
methamphetamine, sensitization, mGluR5, allosteric modulator
Compulsive drug use and associated maladaptive behaviors are cardinal features of methamphetamine (METH) addiction, and have been strongly associated with the neurochemical consequences of repeated METH abuse1–3. Among the various neurotransmitter systems affected by METH exposure is the glutamate system, where long-lasting drug-induced changes are suspected factors underlying craving and persistent vulnerability to relapse4. Due to their dual roles in mediating glutamatergic synaptic plasticity and control of synaptic glutamate release, the metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) have emerged as therapeutic targets of interest in the study of drug addiction5. Antagonizing the excitatory postsynaptic metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) has been recently shown to attenuate the reinforcing effects of METH on a progressive ratio schedule, as well as attenuating drug-seeking behavior in rats previously trained to self-administer METH6. Selective stimulation of mGluR5 has been found to improve the rate of extinction learning in rats previously conditioned to the reinforcing effects of cocaine. This study investigated the role of mGluR5 in the behavioral changes induced by repeated exposure to METH, using positive and negative allosteric modulators of mGluR5 function in separate experiments.
The consequences of chronic METH abuse are often studied in the rat model of behavioral sensitization, where chronic METH injections reliably induce an elevated locomotor response to a subsequent METH challenge, relative to rats with no prior history of METH exposure8–11. Through their interactions with the dopaminergic projections of the medial forebrain, mGluRs have been found to have roles in both the development and expression of psychostimulant sensitization12. mGluR5 has been associated with the locomotor response and reinforcement attributes of psychostimulants since mice lacking this receptor were found not to respond to or self-administer cocaine as wild-type mice13. While antagonism of group I mGluRs, which includes mGluR5, in subsequent experiments has generally failed to convincingly affect locomotor sensitization to cocaine14, the effects of positive allosteric modulation on psychostimulant sensitization have so far remained untested. We evaluated the effect of the mGluR5 positive allosteric modulator (PAM) 3-cyano-N-(1,3-diphenyl-1H-pyrazol-5-yl)benzamide (CDPPB) and the mGluR5 negative allosteric modulator (NAM) fenobam on the expression of behavioral sensitization to METH. We utilized doses of CDPPB that have been shown to improve extinction learning after METH [30 mg/kg15], and cocaine [60 mg/kg7], self-administration training, and doses of fenobam (10–30 mg/kg) that have effectively reduced drug-seeking in METH-trained rats in our laboratory16.
Eighty-eight male Sprague-Dawley rats (Harlan Laboratories, Livermore, CA), weighing 250–275 g, were pair-housed on arrival in a humidity-controlled colony room and maintained in a reversed light/dark cycle with free access to food and water throughout the experiment. All experimentation was conducted during the dark phase of the light/dark cycle. All procedures were conducted with the approval of the Institutional Care and Use Committee at Arizona State University and in accordance with the principles of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Research Council)17.
3-cyano-N-(1,3-diphenyl-1H-pyrazol-5-yl)benzamide (CDPPB, custom synthesized by Chemir Analytical Services, Maryland Heights, MO) was suspended in 10% v/v Tween 80 via sonication to form a 60 mg/ml concentration for intraperitoneal (i.p.) administration. Fenobam (1-(3-chlorophenyl)-3-3-methyl-5-oxo-4H-imidazol-2-yl) urea (custom synthesized by Chemir Analytical Services) was suspended in 0.3% v/v Tween 80 vehicle to form a 30 mg/ml concentration for i.p. administration. (+)Methamphetamine hydrochloride (Sigma Aldrich, St Louis, MO) was dissolved in sterile saline for i.p. administration.
Locomotor activity was assessed in a Rotorat System apparatus (Med Associates, Mt. St Albans, VT) that measured rotational ambulation, quantified as quarter turns in both directions, within a bowl-shaped arena (Figure 1A). The rats (N=43 in the CDPPB experiment, N=45 in the fenobam experiment) were divided into groups where half of the rats received five injections of 1 mg/kg METH dissolved in saline (1 ml/kg, i.p.), separated by 48 hours, and the other half received injections of saline of matching volume (Figure 1B). Each injection was immediately followed by a 90 min locomotor test session. After a 6-day waiting period in the colony room, all rats were given a saline injection (1 ml/kg, i.p.) and subjected to a locomotor test session. The next day, rats were injected with 0 (N=7), 30 (N=8) or 60 mg/kg (N=6–7) CDPPB in one experiment; or 0 (N=8), 10 (N=8) or 30 mg/kg (N=6–7) fenobam in the other experiment, and 30 min later given a challenge dose of 0.5 mg/kg METH and subjected to a 90 min locomotor test session.
Additional experiments were conducted to examine the effects of mGluR5 modulation on baseline locomotion. Rats were acclimated to the apparatus in 90 min sessions for two consecutive days, and on the next day given a 90 min locomotor test session 30 min after treatment with 0, 30 or 60 mg/kg CDPPB in one experiment (N=5); or 0, 10 or 30 mg/kg fenobam in another experiment (N=5).
Data analysis procedures were performed using Prism 5 (GraphPad, La Jolla, CA). For the sensitization experiments, quarter turn data (in either direction, totaled over 90 min) taken during the five chronic treatment sessions were analyzed using 2-way ANOVA with METH history (naïve, METH-treated) as a between-subjects factor and day (1, 3, 5, 7 or 9) as a within-subjects factor. Locomotor behavior exhibited during the challenge sessions were quantified as quarter turns and analyzed using 2-way ANOVA with METH history and treatment (0, 30 or 60 mg/kg for the CDPPB experiment, and 0, 15 or 30 mg/kg for the fenobam experiment) as between-subjects factors. Significant interaction effects were followed by pairwise comparisons (Fisher’s LSD tests).
In the baseline locomotion experiments, quarter turn data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with CDPPB or fenobam treatment as the main factor.
In the CDPPB experiment, rats treated with repeated METH injections exhibited progressively increasing amounts of quarter turns, as confirmed by a significant main effect of METH history (F1,164 = 51.8, p < 0.0001) and a day × METH history interaction (F4,164 = 3.4, p < 0.05). In these rats, locomotion was significantly elevated from Day 1 levels (2110 ± 284) on Day 5 (3117 ± 401, p < 0.05, Fisher’s LSD test) and Day 7 (3432 ± 433, p < 0.01), but not Day 9 (Figure 2A and Table S1–Table S2). Similarly, in the fenobam experiment, repeated injections of METH but not saline resulted in elevated quarter turns, as confirmed by significant main effects of day (F4,172 = 4.1, p < 0.005) and METH history (F1,172 = 60.9, p < 0.0001) and a day × METH history interaction (F4,172 = 6.0, p < 0.0005). In these rats, locomotion was significantly elevated from Day 1 levels (2175 ± 320) on Day 5 (3136 ± 297, p < 0.05, Fisher’s LSD test), Day 7 (3548 ± 388, p < 0.01) and Day 9 (3469 ± 438, p < 0.05, Figure 2B and Table S3–Table S4).
In the CDPPB experiment, rats with a history of repeated METH treatments exhibited a greater number of quarter turns following a probe injection of 0.5 mg/kg METH, evidence of locomotor sensitization (Figure 2C and Table S5–Table S6). This elevated response to METH was not attenuated by CDPPB pretreatment, as shown by the existence of a main effect of METH history (F1,37 = 10.7, p < 0.005) but no other main effects or interactions.
In the fenobam experiment, rats with a history of repeated METH treatments also exhibited elevated quarter turns following the 0.5 mg/kg METH probe (Figure 2D and Table S7–Table S8). Pretreatment with fenobam attenuated the locomotor response to METH, regardless of METH exposure history, as revealed by the presence of main effects of METH history (F1,39 = 20.1, p < 0.001) and treatment (F2,39 = 6.7, p < 0.005), but no METH history × treatment interaction. However, pretreatment with the large dose of fenobam (30 mg/kg) resulted in significantly reduced METH-induced locomotion in rats with a history of chronic 1 mg/kg METH injections (0 mg/kg fenobam: 1192 ± 105 quarter turns vs. 30 mg/kg fenobam: 597 ± 150 quarter turns, p < 0.01, two-sample t-test), and produced a trend toward a significant reduction in rats with a history of saline injections (0 mg/kg fenobam: 622 ± 493 quarter turns vs. 30 mg/kg fenobam: 405 ± 106 quarter turns, P = 0.08).
All of the tested doses of CDPPB and fenobam had negligible effects on baseline locomotion, measured 30 min after time of injection. Both the 60 mg/kg dose of CDPPB (300 ± 92 quarter turns, vs. 345 ± 43 for the vehicle) and the 30 mg/kg dose of fenobam (389 ± 59 quarter turns, vs. 407 ± 74 for the vehicle) produced slightly attenuated locomotor responses, but no significant effects were revealed by ANOVA in either experiment (Figure 3 and Table S9–Table S10).
As expected, rats repeatedly injected with 1 mg/kg METH exhibited greater locomotor activity than the saline-treated rats, and demonstrated more activity during the latter sessions than the initial session. Treatment with CDPPB did not significantly alter METH-induced rotational locomotion, and treatment with fenobam only significantly reduced rotational locomotion at its highest dose (30 mg/kg). Neither CDPPB nor fenobam significantly attenuated the baseline locomotor activity of drug-naïve animals, although the small effect found for 30 mg/kg fenobam in that experiment (Figure 3B) could explain the moderate reduction of quarter turns exhibited by METH-challenged rats (Figure 2D) as a non-specific phenomenon. Thus, locomotor effects of mGluR5 modulation were largely absent at the dose ranges that have been shown in earlier studies to reduce operant behavior motivated by METH or cocaine training7,15,16,18,19.
These largely negative findings indicate that the maintenance of behavioral sensitization is likely mediated by neurobiological substrates other than mGluR5. These data are also in agreement with previous observations that mGluR5 function does not appear critical for the expression of locomotor sensitization to cocaine14,20, and extends them to include METH sensitization. Furthermore, the contribution of mGluR5 to initial locomotor responses to injected psychostimulants13 appears to be replaced by other neurochemical substrates with chronic drug exposure.
While mGluR5 is an important therapeutic target in researching treatments for addiction to psychostimulants as well as other abused substances, there is building evidence that the role of this receptor in drug-related behaviors changes with increasing exposure. A recent study of rats chronically exposed to METH sufficient to induce measurable conditioned place preference found a reduction of surface expression of mGluR5 in the medial prefrontal cortex21, an area known to contribute to the expression of behavioral sensitization4. The current findings using the behavioral sensitization model therefore suggest that the changes in the degree to which mGluR5 mediates drug-stimulated and drug-conditioned behavior previously shown to occur with chronic cocaine exposure might also take place in rats with a history of chronic METH exposure. The possibility of the changing roles among the various mGluR subfamilies as a result of drug exposure merits further studies utilizing animal models of METH-induced activity and motivated behavior.
PRK and MFO conceived of the study and designed the experiments. PRK, NEN, LRW and NZ carried out the research. PRK and MFO prepared the initial draft of the manuscript and all further revisions. All authors approved of the final manuscript for publication.
This work was completed with the support of NIH/NIDA grants DA025606 and DA024355 to MFO.
The authors wish to acknowledge Angel Villa, Kaveish Sewalia, Elisabeth Moore, Casey Halstengard, Piroska Barabas and Lauren Hood of Arizona State University for providing valuable technical assistance.
Rat | CDPPB | Quarter turns |
---|---|---|
101 | 0 | 304 |
104 | 0 | 171 |
107 | 0 | 490 |
110 | 0 | 353 |
113 | 0 | 407 |
102 | 30 | 353 |
105 | 30 | 401 |
108 | 30 | 198 |
111 | 30 | 384 |
114 | 30 | 307 |
103 | 60 | 650 |
106 | 60 | 120 |
109 | 60 | 245 |
112 | 60 | 199 |
115 | 60 | 285 |
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | |||
---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | |
Version 1 12 Mar 13 |
read | read | read |
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (0)