Evenden John, Duncan Bertina, Ko Tracey
Department of Neuroscience, CNS Discovery, AstraZeneca R&D Wilmington, Wilmington, Delaware 19850, USA.
Behav Pharmacol. 2006 Feb;17(1):87-99. doi: 10.1097/01.fbp.0000189812.77049.e5.
Characterization of anxiolytic drugs often employs conflict paradigms in which the drug effects on punished and unpunished responding can be compared. In this study, a fixed interval schedule generating a range of baseline response rates allowed comparison of the effects of anxiolytic drugs with those of psychotomimetic drugs on equivalent and differing rates of punished and unpunished responding. The first response made by the rat after a 40-s fixed interval elapsed resulted in food pellet delivery. In punished intervals, signalled by the illumination of stimulus lamps above each lever, a 0.6-mA shock was delivered after every 20th response, resulting in a lower rate of responding than that in the unpunished intervals. Three psychotomimetic agents, D-amphetamine, MK801 and DOI were compared with the anxiolytics chlordiazepoxide, NS2710 and pregabalin. The three psychotomimetics preferentially increased rates of unpunished responding compared with those of punished responding. Chlordiazepoxide, NS2710 and, to a lesser extent, pregabalin increased rates of both unpunished and punished responding. In comparison studies, yohimbine also increased rates of both unpunished and punished responding whereas the antidepressant citalopram had no effect. In conclusion, stable baseline performance over many months allowed the direct comparison of several different drugs in the same subjects with no need to adjust shock levels or equate baseline response rates. The drugs had systematic and replicable effects in this procedure, which, in the case of amphetamine and chlordiazepoxide, were similar to those in other species, and psychotomimetic drugs could clearly be distinguished from anxiolytic drugs. The procedure, however, has limited value for characterizing novel anxiolytic agents as the examples used here increased punished and unpunished responding to the same extent, and were indistinguishable in that regard from the clinically anxiogenic agent, yohimbine.
抗焦虑药物的特性研究通常采用冲突范式,在此范式中,可以比较药物对受惩罚反应和未受惩罚反应的影响。在本研究中,固定间隔时间表产生了一系列基线反应率,从而能够比较抗焦虑药物与拟精神病药物对同等和不同的受惩罚及未受惩罚反应率的影响。大鼠在40秒固定间隔过去后做出的第一次反应会导致食物颗粒发放。在受惩罚的间隔期间,由每个杠杆上方的刺激灯亮起发出信号,每第20次反应后给予0.6毫安的电击,导致反应率低于未受惩罚的间隔期间。将三种拟精神病药物D-苯丙胺、MK801和DOI与抗焦虑药物氯氮卓、NS2710和普瑞巴林进行了比较。与受惩罚反应相比,这三种拟精神病药物优先提高未受惩罚反应的速率。氯氮卓、NS2710以及在较小程度上的普瑞巴林增加了未受惩罚和受惩罚反应的速率。在比较研究中,育亨宾也增加了未受惩罚和受惩罚反应的速率,而抗抑郁药西酞普兰没有效果。总之,数月来稳定的基线表现使得能够在同一受试者中直接比较几种不同的药物,而无需调整电击水平或使基线反应率相等。这些药物在此程序中具有系统性和可重复性的效果,就苯丙胺和氯氮卓而言,与其他物种中的效果相似,并且拟精神病药物可以明显与抗焦虑药物区分开来。然而,该程序在表征新型抗焦虑药物方面价值有限,因为此处使用的例子在相同程度上增加了受惩罚和未受惩罚的反应,并且在这方面与临床上具有致焦虑作用的药物育亨宾无法区分。