Generalization to atypical antipsychotic drugs depends on training dose in rats trained to discriminate 1.25 mg/kg clozapine versus 5.0 mg/kg clozapine versus vehicle in a three-choice drug discrimination task

The prototypical atypical antipsychotic drug (APD) clozapine (CLZ) elicits a discriminative cue that appears to be similar to the stimulus properties elicited by atypical, but not typical, antipsychotic drugs in two-choice drug discrimination procedures. However, the ability of CLZ to generalize to atypical APDs depends on the training dose, since several atypical APDs (e.g. sertindole, risperidone) do not substitute for a 5.0 mg/kg CLZ training dose in rats, but do so for a 1.25 mg/kg CLZ training dose. Yet, a 1.25 mg/kg CLZ discriminative stimulus has not generalized to all atypical APDs either (e.g. quetiapine); thus, both 1.25 mg/kg and 5.0 mg/kg CLZ discriminative stimuli may be necessary to provide a better screen for atypical APDs. The present study sought to determine whether a three-choice 1.25 mg/kg CLZ versus 5.0 mg/kg CLZ versus vehicle drug discrimination task in rats might better distinguish atypical from typical APDs. Adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were trained in this three-choice drug discrimination task with a fixed ratio 30 reinforcement schedule for food. Clozapine produced full substitution (>or=80% condition-appropriate responding) for both the 1.25 mg/kg CLZ dose (ED50=0.09 mg/kg) and the 5.0 mg/kg CLZ dose (ED50=2.71 mg/kg). The atypical APD olanzapine produced full substitution for the 5.0 mg/kg CLZ dose, but not for the 1.25 mg/kg CLZ dose (ED50=1.55 mg/kg). In contrast, the atypical APD quetiapine produced full substitution for the 1.25 mg/kg CLZ dose (ED50=0.13 mg/kg), but not for the 5.0 mg/kg CLZ dose. Similarly, the atypical APD sertindole produced full substitution for only the 1.25 mg/kg CLZ dose (ED50=0.94 mg/kg). Risperidone, another atypical APD, produced partial substitution (>or=60% and 相似文献   

Discriminative stimulus properties of 1.25 and 5.0 mg/kg doses of clozapine in rats: examination of the role of dopamine, serotonin, and muscarinic receptor mechanisms

Clozapine (CLZ), an atypical antipsychotic drug (APD), produces minimal extrapyramidal side effects (EPS) and has significant advantages for treating both positive and negative symptoms in schizophrenic patients. CLZ has been established as a discriminative cue in the drug discrimination paradigm and in generalization tests the CLZ cue is more selective for atypical, rather than typical, APDs. However, greater selectivity for atypical antipsychotics has been demonstrated with a lower (1.25 mg/kg) CLZ training dose in rats [Psychopharmacology, 149 (2000) 189], rather than the traditional, higher training dose (5.0 mg/kg). It is therefore of interest to evaluate the properties mediating the 1.25 mg/kg CLZ discriminative cue. In the present study, rats were trained to discriminate either 1.25 mg/kg (N=7) or 5.0 mg/kg (N=7) CLZ from vehicle in a two-lever drug discrimination task. The typical antipsychotic haloperidol (0.1-0.4 mg/kg) did not substitute for either CLZ cue, whereas the atypical antipsychotic melperone (0.37-3.0 mg/kg) provided full substitution in both groups (>80% CLZ-appropriate responding). The 5-HT(1A) receptor agonist (+)-8-OH-DPAT (0.04-0.16 mg/kg), and the selective 5-HT(2A) receptor antagonist M100907 (0.03-1.0 mg/kg) did not produce substitution in either group. (+)-8-OH-DPAT combined with haloperidol (0.05 mg/kg) engendered only partial substitution (>60% CLZ-appropriate responding) for both CLZ cues, and M100907 combined with haloperidol (0.05 and 0.1 mg/kg doses) failed to provide substitution in either group. Trihexyphenidyl (0.18-6.0 mg/kg), a muscarinic M(1)-preferring receptor antagonist, engendered full substitution for the 1.25 mg/kg CLZ cue, but only partial substitution for the 5.0 mg/kg CLZ cue. These results provide evidence that antagonism at the muscarinic M(1) receptor is sufficient to provide 1.25 mg/kg CLZ-like discriminative stimulus effects.     

Discriminative-stimulus effects of clozapine in squirrel monkeys: comparison with conventional and novel antipsychotic drugs

 The effects of conventional and novel atypical antipsychotic drugs were compared to clozapine in squirrel monkeys that discriminated IM injections of clozapine (1.0 mg/kg) from saline in a two-lever drug discrimination procedure. Clozapine (0.03–3.0 mg/kg) produced dose-related increases in responding on the clozapine-associated lever with full substitution at the training dose in all monkeys. Dose-related increases in responding on the clozapine-associated lever and full substitution also were observed with structural analogues of clozapine including perlapine and fluperlapine (0.1–3.0 mg/kg), seroquel (0.1–5.6 mg/kg), and JL 5, JL 8 and JL 18 (0.1–3.0 mg/kg). Other clozapine analogues, including olanzapine, amoxapine, loxapine and clothiapine, and conventional antipsychotic drugs, including phenothiazines such as chlorpromazine and thioridazine, produced some clozapine-associated responding up to the highest doses that could be studied, but did not substitute for clozapine. Olanzapine did produce full clozapine-lever responding following pretreatment with the dopamine D₂-receptor agonist (+)-PHNO (0.003–0.01 mg/kg). Putatively atypical antipsychotics that are structurally unrelated to clozapine including risperidone (0.003–0.1 mg/kg), sertindole (0.03–1.0 mg/kg) and remoxipride (0.1–5.6 mg/kg) similarly failed to substitute for clozapine up to the highest doses. The present results indicate that some, but not all, structural analogs of clozapine have clozapine-like discriminative-stimulus effects and that novel antipsychotic drugs which purportedly have clozapine-like clinical efficacy may not produce its interoceptive stimulus effects. Received: 2 November 1996 / Final version: 13 January 1997     

Role of D1 and D2 dopamine receptors in the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine in rats

The purpose of the present study was to assess the role of dopamine D₁ and D₂ receptors in the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine (CLZ). Two groups of rats were trained to discriminate either a moderate dose of clozapine (5.0 mg/kg) from vehicle or a high dose of clozapine (10.0 mg/kg) from vehicle in a two‐lever drug discrimination paradigm. Generalization testing with clozapine yielded an ED₅₀ of 0.9 mg/kg (95% confidence limits = 0.5–2.0 mg/kg) for the 5.0 CLZ group and 2.0 mg/kg (95% confidence limits = 1.4–2.8 mg/kg) for the 10.0 CLZ group. Substitution testing with the D₁ antagonist SCH 23390 and the D₂ dopamine antagonist haloperidol failed to produce clozapine‐appropriate responding for either of the clozapine training doses. The antipsychotic drug thioridazine (which binds to a number of neurotransmitters in addition to dopamine) produced partial substitution (64.5% drug lever responding) in the 5.0 CLZ group at the 5.0 mg/kg dose. These results suggest that antagonism of D₁ and D₂ dopamine receptors alone is not sufficient to produce clozapine‐appropriate responding, even with the higher training dose of 10.0 mg/kg. Drug Dev. Res. 46:139–147, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic drug clozapine in rats trained to discriminate 1.25 mg/kg clozapine vs. 5.0 mg/kg clozapine vs. vehicle

Clozapine, the prototype for atypical antipsychotic drugs, is used in the drug discrimination paradigm as a model for screening atypical from typical antipsychotic drugs. Previous drug discrimination studies in rats have shown that a 1.25 mg/kg clozapine training dose provides full stimulus generalization (i.e.) >or=80% condition-appropriate responding) to most atypical antipsychotic drugs, although a 5.0 mg/kg clozapine training dose appears necessary to provide stimulus generalization to other atypical antipsychotic drugs. The present study sought to characterize the pharmacological mechanisms that mediate these clozapine training doses. In rats trained to discriminate 1.25 vs. 5.0 mg/kg clozapine vs. vehicle in a three-choice drug discrimination task, various receptor-selective compounds were tested for stimulus generalization. The antidepressant mianserin was also tested. Full stimulus generalization from the 1.25 mg/kg clozapine training dose occurred only to mianserin (98.8%). Partial substitution (i.e. >or=60% and <80% condition-appropriate responding) to the 5.0 mg/kg clozapine training dose occurred for the muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine. The combined total percentage of responding on the 1.25 and 5.0 mg/kg clozapine levers, however, was well above the full substitution criteria at the 0.25, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/kg scopolamine doses. The M1 agonist N-desmethylclozapine, the nicotinic antagonist mecamylamine, the D1 antagonist SCH 23390, the D4 antagonist LU 38-012, the 5-HT1A agonist (+)-8-OH-DPAT, the 5-HT1A antagonist WAY 100 635, the 5-HT2A/2B/2C antagonist ritanserin, the 5-HT6 antagonist RO4368554, the alpha1 antagonist prazosin, the alpha2 antagonist yohimbine, and the histamine H1 antagonist pyrilamine all failed to substitute for either the 1.25 or the 5.0 mg/kg clozapine training doses. These results are consistent with previous evidence that antidepressant drugs have a tendency to substitute for clozapine and that muscarinic receptor antagonism may mediate the discriminative stimulus properties of 5.0 mg/kg clozapine. The lack of stimulus generalization from either clozapine training dose to other receptor-selective compounds, however, fails to explain how this model screens atypical from typical antipsychotic drugs and suggests that the discriminative stimulus properties of clozapine consist of a compound cue.     

The role of M<Subscript>1</Subscript> muscarinic cholinergic receptors in the discriminative stimulus properties of <Emphasis Type="Italic">N</Emphasis>-desmethylclozapine and the atypical antipsychotic drug clozapine in rats

Rationale  The discriminative stimulus properties of clozapine (CLZ) have been studied for decades because it remains the prototype for atypical antipsychotic drug effects and yet is unique in many ways, including increased efficacy in treatment-resistant schizophrenia and in reducing suicidality. Recent studies have indicated that the active CLZ metabolite N-desmethylclozapine (NDMC) may play a role in mediating the cognitive efficacy of CLZ and may also have atypical antipsychotic properties. Objectives  The present study sought to determine if NDMC has discriminative stimulus properties similar to that of its parent drug CLZ. Materials and methods  Rats were trained to discriminate 1.25 mg/kg CLZ from vehicle in a two-choice drug discrimination task. Results  Although NDMC (2.5–20.0 mg/kg) failed to substitute for CLZ, the combination of NDMC (5.0 and 10.0 mg/kg) with a low dose (0.3125 mg/kg) of CLZ produced full substitution (>80% CLZ-appropriate responding) for the 1.25 mg/kg CLZ training dose. Co-administration of the M1-preferring receptor antagonist trihexyphenidyl (6.0 mg/kg) with a 5.0 mg/kg dose of NDMC produced partial substitution (>60% to <80% CLZ-appropriate responding) for CLZ, while administration of trihexyphenidyl alone (0.3–12.0 mg/kg) failed to substitute for CLZ. Conclusions  These findings suggest that NDMC produces discriminative stimulus effects that are different from those elicited by its parent drug CLZ. This difference may be due to the agonist properties of NDMC at M₁ muscarinic cholinergic receptors.     

Discriminative stimulus properties of atypical and typical antipsychotic drugs: a review of preclinical studies

Background  Drug discrimination is an increasingly valuable behavioral assay for the preclinical development of antipsychotic drugs. The majority of studies have used the atypical antipsychotic clozapine because it displays robust discriminative stimulus properties and is the “prototypical” or “gold standard” atypical antipsychotic against which other antipsychotics will undoubtedly be compared for many years. Objectives  Pharmacological mechanisms mediating the discriminative stimulus properties of antipsychotics used as training drugs and the usefulness of drug discrimination for distinguishing typical and atypical antipsychotics were reviewed. Results  Clozapine appears to have a compound cue involving antagonism of two or more receptors. While muscarinic receptor antagonism is a prominent factor for mediation of clozapine’s cue in rats with a 5.0-mg/kg training dose, there are differences in clozapine’s cue with a low training dose and in pigeons and mice. With a low training dose, clozapine has consistently produced full or partial generalization to atypical but not to typical antipsychotics. Although not evaluated as extensively, the atypical antipsychotics quetiapine and ziprasidone also appear to generalize to atypical but not typical antipsychotics. This has not been the case for other antipsychotic drugs (olanzapine, chlorpromazine, haloperidol) used as training drugs. Conclusions  There are important differences in discriminative stimulus properties both between and within atypical and typical antipsychotics and across species. While low-dose clozapine discrimination in rats appears to provide a more sensitive behavioral assay for distinguishing atypical from typical antipsychotics, the extent to which clozapine’s discriminative stimulus properties are predictive of its antipsychotic effects remains to be determined.     

The discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine in rats

Rationale: Analysis of the preclinical behavioral effects of atypical antipsychotic agents will provide a better understanding of how they differ from typical antipsychotics and aid in the development of future atypical antipsychotic drugs. Objectives: The present study was designed to provide information about the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine. Methods: Rats were trained to discriminate the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine (either 0.5 mg/kg OLZ or 0.25 mg/kg OLZ, i.p.) from vehicle in a two- lever drug discrimination procedure. The atypical antipsychotic clozapine fully substituted for olanzapine in both the 0.5-mg/kg OLZ group (99.3% drug lever responding [DLR]) and the 0.25-mg/kg OLZ group (99.9% DLR). The typical antipsychotic chlorpromazine also substituted for olanzapine in both the 0.5-mg/kg OLZ group (87.5% DLR) and in the 0.25-mg/kg OLZ group (98.9% DLR); whereas, haloperidol displayed partial substitution for olanzapine in the 0.5-mg/kg OLZ group (56.1% DLR) and in the 0.25-mg/kg OLZ group (76.4% DLR). The 5.0-mg/kg dose of thioridazine produced olanzapine-appropriate responding in the 0.5-mg/kg OLZ group (99.6% DLR), but only partial substitution was seen with the 0.25-mg/kg OLZ training dose (64.0% DLR). The atypical antipsychotics raclopride (53.9% DLR) and risperidone (60.1% DLR) displayed only partial substitution in the 0.5-mg/kg OLZ group. Both the muscarinic cholinergic antagonist scopolamine (90.0% DLR) and the 5-HT_2A/2C serotonergic antagonist ritanserin (86.0% DLR) fully substituted for olanzapine in the 0.5-mg/kg OLZ group. Conclusions: In contrast to previous discrimination studies with clozapine-trained rats, the typical antipsychotic agents chlorpromazine and thioridazine and the serotonin antagonist ritanserin substituted for olanzapine. These results demonstrate that there are differences in the mechanisms underlying the discriminative stimulus properties of clozapine and olanzapine. Specifically, olanzapine’s discriminative stimulus properties appear to be meditated in part by both cholinergic and serotonergic mechanisms. Received: 1 March 1999 / Final version: 6 September 1999     

Serotonin receptor mechanisms mediate the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine in C57BL/6 mice

Rationale The atypical antipsychotic drug (APD) clozapine (CLZ) has been shown to have a robust discriminative cue in rats, pigeons, and monkeys in two-choice drug discrimination procedures.Objectives The present study determined whether a two-choice drug discrimination procedure with CLZ could be established in C57BL/6 mice and whether this procedure could distinguish between atypical and typical APDs.Methods C57BL/6 male mice were trained to discriminate 2.5 mg/kg CLZ from vehicle in a two-lever drug discrimination procedure.Results Generalization testing with CLZ produced full substitution at the 2.5- and 5.0-mg/kg doses with an ED₅₀ of 1.14 mg/kg. The atypical APDs olanzapine (ED₅₀=0.24 mg/kg), risperidone (ED₅₀=0.072 mg/kg), and ziprasidone (ED₅₀=0.33 mg/kg) fully substituted for CLZs discriminative cue, while the typical APD haloperidol failed to substitute for CLZ. Generalization testing with selective ligands showed that the serotonin (5-HT)_2A/2B/2C antagonist ritanserin fully substituted for CLZ (ED₅₀=2.08 mg/kg) and that the 5-HT receptor agonist quipazine significantly attenuated CLZs discriminative cue without disrupting response rates. The muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine, the dopamine agonist amphetamine, and the 5-HT agonist quipazine failed to substitute for CLZ.Conclusions These results demonstrated that antagonism of 5-HT receptors plays an important role in mediating the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical APD CLZ in C57BL/6 mice. The atypical APDs olanzapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone fully substituted for CLZ, while the typical APD haloperidol did not. These results suggest that CLZ drug discrimination in C57BL/6 mice may be an effective preclinical behavioral assay for screening atypical from typical antipsychotic drugs.     

Clozapine discrimination with a low training dose distinguishes atypical from typical antipsychotic drugs in rats

Rationale: Previous drug discrimination studies with clozapine have not reliably distinguished between atypical and typical antipsychotics. Objectives: The present study was conducted to determine whether low-dose clozapine drug discrimination could distinguish atypical from typical antipsychotics. Methods: Rats were trained to discriminate 1.25 mg/kg clozapine from vehicle in a two-lever drug discrimination procedure. Results: Generalization testing revealed full substitution with the atypical antipsychotics olanzapine (90.3% maximum generalization), sertindole (99.8%), and risperidone (87.1%) and partial substitution for quetiapine (seroquel, 66.4%) and the typical antipsychotics haloperidol (56.8%) and thioridazine (74.3%). Remoxipride (23.1%) and the typical antipsychotics chlorpromazine (27.9%) and fluphenazine (29.5%) did not reliably substitute for clozapine. Conclusions: In contrast to previous clozapine drug discrimination studies with higher training doses, the atypical antipsychotics olanzapine, sertindole, and risperidone reliably substituted for clozapine while typical antipsychotics did not. These results suggest that low-dose clozapine drug discrimination may be a more sensitive assay for distinguishing atypical from typical antipsychotic drugs. Received: 3 August 1999 / Final version: 9 December 1999     

A comparison of the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic drug clozapine in DBA/2 and C57BL/6 inbred mice

Inbred mouse strain comparisons are an important aspect of pharmacogenetic research, especially in strains known to differ in regard to specific neurotransmitter systems. DBA/2 mice differ from C57BL/6 mice in terms of both functional and anatomical characteristics of dopamine systems. Given the importance of D2 antagonism in the action of antipsychotic drugs and in theories regarding schizophrenia (i.e. the dopamine hypothesis), this study compared the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic drug clozapine (CLZ) in C57BL/6 and DBA/2 inbred mice. DBA/2 and C57BL/6 mice were trained to discriminate 2.5 mg/kg of CLZ from vehicle in a two-lever drug discrimination procedure and tested with a variety of antipsychotic drugs and selective ligands. Both strains of mice readily acquired the CLZ discrimination. The atypical antipsychotic drugs olanzapine and risperidone fully substituted for CLZ in both DBA/2 and C57BL/6 mice, but ziprasidone fully substituted only in the C57BL/6 mice. The typical antipsychotic drug haloperidol produced partial substitution for CLZ in the DBA/2 mice, and the dopamine agonist amphetamine required a higher dose to reduce response rates significantly in DBA/2 mice as compared with C57BL/6 mice. Antagonism of serotonergic (5-HT2A/2B/2C) receptors with ritanserin and alpha1-adrenergic receptors with prazosin engendered CLZ-appropriate responding only in the C57BL/6 mice. Thus, while serotonergic and alpha-adrenergic antagonism were shown to be important for CLZ's discriminative cue in C57BL/6 mice, none of the selective ligands produced CLZ-appropriate responding in DBA/2 mice. Differences in dopamine-mediated functions between the two strains of mice may explain some of the findings in this study.     

Discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine and the typical antipsychotic chlorpromazine in a three-choice drug discrimination procedure in rats

Rationale The atypical antipsychotic drug (APD) clozapine elicits a robust discriminative cue that is generally selective for other atypical APDS in two-choice drug discrimination (DD) procedures.Objectives The present study determined whether a three-choice DD procedure with the atypical APD clozapine (CLZ) versus the typical APD chlorpromazine (CPZ) versus vehicle (VEH) could provide greater selectivity between atypical and typical APDs.Methods Sprague-Dawley rats were trained to discriminate 5.0 mg/kg CLZ from 1.0 mg/kg CPZ from VEH in a three-lever DD task with an FR30 food reinforcement schedule.Results Generalization testing with CLZ produced CPZ-appropriate responding at lower doses (ED₅₀=0.103 mg/kg) and CLZ-appropriate responding at higher doses (ED₅₀=1.69 mg/kg). Generalization testing with the atypical APD olanzapine produced similar results. In contrast, the atypical APD risperidone and the typical APDs CPZ and haloperidol produced only CPZ-appropriate responding. The muscarinic antagonist scopolamine produced CPZ-appropriate responding at lower doses and CLZ-appropriate responding at higher doses in a manner similar to CLZ and olanzapine. The co-administration of haloperidol (0.00625 mg/kg) with scopolamine shifted the dose–response curve for CLZ-appropriate responding to the left. The 5-HT_2A/2C antagonist ritanserin and the H₁ histamine antagonist pyrilamine did not substitute for either CLZ or CPZ. The ₁ adrenergic antagonist prazosin did not substitute for CLZ, but produced full substitution for CPZ.Conclusions The three-choice DD procedure clearly distinguished the atypical APDs CLZ and olanzapine from the typical APDs CPZ and haloperidol; however, the stimulus properties of the atypical APD risperidone were similar to CPZ, but not to CLZ. These findings further suggest that CLZ, as well as CPZ, elicits a compound cue.     

Chlorpromazine as a discriminative stimulus in rats: Generalization to typical and atypical antipsychotics

The discriminative stimulus properties of the typical antipsychotic chlorpromazine were examined in a two‐lever drug discrimination procedure for food reward. Six of nine rats readily acquired the discrimination between 1.0 mg/kg chlorpromazine (i.p.) and vehicle in a mean of 29.7 training sessions. The chlorpromazine generalization curve was dose‐dependent and yielded an ED₅₀ of 0.305 mg/kg (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.201–0.463 mg/kg). The chlorpromazine cue generalized to the atypical antipsychotics clozapine (ED₅₀ for the clozapine curve was 0.258 mg/kg [95% CI = 0.047–1.420 mg/kg]) and olanzapine (ED₅₀ for the olanzapine curve was 0.199 mg/kg [95% CI = 0.076–0.522 mg/kg]) and to the typical antipsychotic thioridazine (ED₅₀ for the thioridazine curve was 3.103 mg/kg [95% CI = 1.993–4.832 mg/kg]). Haloperidol (a typical antipsychotic) and raclopride (an atypical antipsychotic) did not substitute for chlorpromazine. It is clear from the present results that the discriminative stimulus properties of chlorpromazine share similarities both with the atypical antipsychotics clozapine and olanzapine and with the typical antipsychotic thioridazine. The extent to which the discriminative stimulus properties of antipsychotic drugs reflect or are predictive of their therapeutic effects in schizophrenic patients remains unclear. Drug Dev. Res. 48:38–44, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Effects of subchronic administration of clozapine, thioridazine and haloperidol on tests related to extrapyramidal motor function in the rat

Clozapine, thioridazine (THIO) and haloperidol were administered for 14 consecutive days, and separate groups of rats were used to study the effects of these drugs on tremulous jaw movements and lever pressing. Rats were observed on day 13 for the ability of the antipsychotic drugs to induce jaw movements. Haloperidol produced a dose-related increase in jaw movements, while clozapine and THIO failed to induce jaw movements. On day 14, rats were challenged with 5.0 mg/kg of the anticholinesterase tacrine, which induces a very high level of jaw movement activity. Clozapine significantly reduced tacrine-induced tremulous jaw movements, while haloperidol did not. Although previous work had shown that acute THIO could suppress jaw movements, repeated THIO failed to do so. In order to provide an additional behavioral test for comparisons of the relative potencies of the antipsychotic drugs, rats were tested for the effects of these drugs on fixed ratio 5 lever pressing. All three drugs significantly suppressed lever pressing. Haloperidol showed sensitization with repeated injections, while clozapine showed tolerance. Data were analyzed by taking the ratio of the ED₅₀ for suppression of tacrine-induced jaw movement over the ED₅₀ for suppression of lever pressing on day 14. Clozapine reduced tacrine-induced jaw movements in a dose range slightly lower than that required for reduction of lever pressing. In contrast, THIO and haloperidol failed to affect tacrine-induced jaw movements even at doses that were 5–18 times the ED₅₀ for suppression of lever pressing. Thus, tests of jaw movement activity and lever pressing after repeated administration may be useful for assessing atypical antipsychotic drugs. Received: 2 August 1997 / Final version: 23 December 1997     

Atypical antipsychotic drugs block selective components of amphetamine-induced stereotypy

Individual items of behavior produced by 1.0 or 5.0 mg/kg d-amphetamine were monitored in rats pretreated 15 minutes earlier with vehicle or with behaviorally relevant doses of haloperidol (0.1 or 0.25 mg/kg), clozapine (1.0 or 5.0 mg/kg), or thioridazine (1.0 or 5.0 mg/kg). Unlike haloperidol, the atypical antipsychotics failed to block all components of either the low- or high-dose response to amphetamine. These drugs, however, did block selective items of amphetamine-induced stereotyped behavior. Clozapine significantly attenuated the sniffing produced by 1.0 mg/kg d-amphetamine as well as the oral behavior (licking and/or biting) produced by 5.0 mg/kg d-amphetamine. Thioridazine, at a dose of 5.0 mg/kg, also reduced oral behavior and selectively blocked repetitive head bobbing. Taken together, these results suggest that although atypical antipsychotic drugs exert some common effects on the amphetamine behavioral response, these drugs do not influence all amphetamine-induced behaviors equally.     

Further characterization of the discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic drug clozapine in C57BL/6 mice: role of 5-HT2A serotonergic and α1 adrenergic antagonism

Rationale  The discriminative stimulus properties of the atypical antipsychotic drug (APD) clozapine (CLZ) have recently been studied in C57BL/6 mice, a common background strain for genetic alterations. However, further evaluation is needed to fully characterize CLZ’s discriminative cue in this strain of mice. Objectives  The objectives of the study were to confirm the previous findings using a shorter pretreatment time and to further characterize the receptor mechanisms mediating the discriminative stimulus properties of CLZ by testing APDs, selective ligands, and N-desmethylclozapine (CLZ’s major metabolite) in C57BL/6 mice. Materials and methods  C57BL/6 male mice were trained to discriminate 2.5 mg/kg CLZ (s.c.) from vehicle in a two-lever drug discrimination task. Results  Generalization testing with CLZ yielded an ED₅₀ = 1.19 mg/kg. Substitution testing with APDs showed that the atypical APDs quetiapine, sertindole, zotepine, iloperidone, and melperone fully substituted for CLZ (≥80% CLZ-appropriate responding), but aripiprazole did not. The typical APDs chlorpromazine and thioridazine substituted for CLZ (fluphenazine and perphenazine did not). The serotonin (5-HT) _2A antagonist M100907 and the α₁-adrenoceptor antagonist prazosin fully substituted for CLZ. The H₁ histaminergic antagonist pyrilamine, dopamine agonist amphetamine, and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor fluoxetine did not substitute for CLZ. While N-desmethylclozapine did not substitute for CLZ when tested alone, N-desmethylclozapine plus a low dose of CLZ combined in an additive manner produced full substitution. Conclusions  CLZ’s discriminative cue in C57BL/6 mice is a “compound” cue mediated in part by antagonism of 5-HT_2A and α₁ receptors.     

Effects of antipsychotic drugs on operant responding after acute and repeated administration

RATIONALE: The current generation of atypical antipsychotic drugs represents an improvement over traditional ("typical") antipsychotics in many respects. However, a theoretical framework and adequate preclinical models have not yet been developed to predict or explain differences among the atypical antipsychotics, a necessary component of future development. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present set of experiments was to identify differences between the acute and subchronic effects of several atypical antipsychotic drugs and the typical antipsychotic haloperidol on operant responding in rats. METHODS: The effects of haloperidol and the atypical antipsychotics clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, sertindole, quetiapine, remoxipride, and thioridazine were determined in rats trained to respond for food reward under a multiple fixed ratio 30/fixed interval 60 s schedule. A profile of the acute effects of each drug on response rates, response durations, and within-session effects were determined. Next, the dose of each drug that produced 75% suppression of response rates was administered for 16 consecutive days to determine whether or not tolerance would develop to the rate-suppressing effects of that dose. RESULTS: All drugs produced dose-related decreases in response rates. Only haloperidol and risperidone produced significant increases in response duration, while only haloperidol and remoxipride displayed within-session response decrements. Tolerance was evident for clozapine and to a lesser extent thioridazine. CONCLUSIONS: These results illustrate that the current generation of atypical antipsychotics are a heterogeneous group and that operant procedures may be useful for identifying differences preclinically. Specifically, clozapine appears to possess properties that distinguish it from other atypical antipsychotics, particularly after repeated dosing.     

Atypical antipsychotic drugs: current issues of safety and efficacy in the management of schizophrenia

This review focuses on the comparative safety and efficacy profile of nine atypical antipsychotic drugs (amisulpride, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone and zotepine), which may ultimately affect the therapeutic options available for patients with schizophrenia. These antipsychotic compounds differ markedly in their potential to impact a number of quality-of-life measures. Furthermore, their differential effects on anxiety disorders, treatment-resistant depressive illness, cognitive functions and manic disorders may influence the selection of atypical antipsychotics for conditions associated with schizophrenia. The possible relevance of these parameters in evaluating the risk/benefit equation and probable involvement of varying receptor mechanisms is also discussed.     

Quinpirole, 8-OH-DPAT and ketanserin modulate catalepsy induced by high doses of atypical antipsychotics

The effect of the selective dopamine D2 receptor agonist quinpirole, the selective 5-HT1A receptor agonist 8-OH-DPAT and the selective 5-HT2A receptor antagonist ketanserin on catalepsy induced by atypical antipsychotics clozapine, risperidone, olanzapine and sertindole at higher doses was studied in rats. Haloperidol (0.5, 1 and 2 mg/kg), clozapine (50 and 75 mg/kg) and olanzapine (15 and 30 mg/kg) produced catalepsy dose-dependently while sertindole at doses up to 40 mg/kg failed to produce catalepsy in rats. However, sertindole (15, 30 and 45 mg/kg) produced a cataleptic effect in mice in a dose-dependent manner. At a high dose (5 mg/kg), risperidone produced catalepsy in rats. Quinpirole (0.05 and 0.1 mg/kg) reversed the cataleptic effect of haloperidol (2 mg/kg), risperidone (5 mg/kg), olanzapine (30 mg/kg) and sertindole (45 mg/kg). Quinpirole (0.05 and 0.1 mg/kg) reversed clozapine (75 mg/kg)-induced catalepsy. 8-OH-DPAT (0.15 and 0.3 mg/kg) dose-dependently reversed catalepsy induced by haloperidol (2 mg/kg) and risperidone (5 mg/kg) without affecting the cataleptic effect of olanzapine. However, the higher dose (0.45 mg/kg) of 8-OH-DPAT reversed it significantly. 8-OH-DPAT (0.3 mg/kg) reversed clozapine (75 mg/kg)-induced catalepsy. 8-OH-DPAT (0.15, 0.3 and 0.45 mg/kg) failed to reverse sertindole-induced catalepsy. Ketanserin (0.75 and 1.5 mg/kg) completely reversed catalepsy induced by haloperidol (2 mg/kg) and risperidone (5 mg/kg). Ketanserin (0.75 and 1.5 mg/kg) dose-dependently reversed olanzapine (30 mg/kg) and sertindole (45 mg/kg)-induced catalepsy without any effect on clozapine (75 mg/kg)-induced catalepsy. A higher dose (3 mg/kg) of ketanserin reversed clozapine-induced catalepsy. The present study suggests that atypical antipsychotics show fewer extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) due to greater modulation of the serotonergic system. Therefore, an antipsychotic with dopamine D2/5-HT2A antagonistic action and 5-HT1A agonistic action may prove to be superior to the existing antipsychotics.     

Differential effects of ondansetron, haloperidol and clozapine on electrical self-stimulation of the ventral tegmental area

The effects of 5-HT(3), receptor blockade with ondansetron (0.025-0.2mg/kg) on intracranial self-stimulation of the ventral tegmental area were compared with effects of the typical antipsychotic drug haloperidol (0.01-0.3mg/kg) and the atypical antipsychotic drug clozapine (1.25-10mg/kg). Rats were trained to self-stimulate using unipolar ventral tegmental electrodes (200μm diameter) to deliver 1s trains of 0.2ms cathodal pulses of constant current stimulation as a reinforcer. The animals were tested daily in frequency threshold tests. The frequency that maintained half maximal response rates (M50) and the maximal number of responses at a single frequency (RMAX) and the number of responses per session (TRESP) were used to measure drug effects. Ondansetron had no effects on the behavioural measures in this study. Haloperidol induced a significant increase in M50 at 0.3mg/kg without altering RMAX; TRESP was reduced by 0.1 and 0.3mg/kg of this drug. Clozapine increased M50 at 5.0mg/kg; following 10.0mg/kg of clozapine responding was completely abolished and no M50 measure could be calculated. Clozapine reduced RMAX at 1.25, 5.0 and 10.0mg/kg; TRESP was decreased by 5.0 and 10.0mg/kg of clozapine. The present results indicate that ondansetron had no measurable effects under conditions in which haloperidol and clozapine increase reinforcement thresholds and decrease response rates maintained by ventral tegmental self-stimulation.