Modulation of the induction or expression of psychostimulant sensitization by the circumstances surrounding drug administration

Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 347-354

  Robinson, Terry E ^a   Browman, Kaitlin E ^a   Crombag, Hans S ^a   Badiani, Aldo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Amphetamine; Behavior; Cocaine; Environment

Indexed keywords

AMPHETAMINE; COCAINE; DOPAMINE; PSYCHOSTIMULANT AGENT;

BEHAVIOR; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG MECHANISM; DRUG SENSITIZATION; HUMAN; NEUROPHARMACOLOGY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMOTOR ACTIVITY; REVIEW; STATE DEPENDENT LEARNING;

EID: 0031924335     PISSN: 01497634     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0149-7634(97)00020-1     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Anagnostaras, S.G. and Robinson, T.E., Sensitization to the psychomotor stimulant effects of amphetamine: modulation by associative learning. Behav. Neurosci. 110: 1397-1414; 1996.
2. Badiani A., Anagnostaras S. G., Robinson T. E. The development of sensitization to the psychomotor stimulant effects of amphetamine is enhanced in novel environment. Psychopharmacology. 117:1995;443-452.
3. Badiani A., Browman K. E., Robinson T. E. Influence of novel versus home environments on sensitization to the psychomotor stimulant effects of cocaine and amphetamine. Brain Res. 674:1995;291-298.
4. Badiani A., Morano M. I., Akil H., Robinson T. E. Circulating adrenal hormones are not necessary for the development of sensitization to the psychomotor activating effects of amphetamine. Brain Res. 673:1995;13-24.
5. Barrett, J.E., Nonpharmacological factors determining the behavioral effects of drugs. In: Psychopharmacology: The Third Generation of Progress, ed. H.Y. Meltzer. New York: Raven Press; 1987; 1493-1501.
6. Beck C. H.M., Chow H. L., Cooper S. J. Initial environment influences amphetamine-induced stereotypy: subsequently environment change has little effect. Behav. Neural Biol. 46:1986;383-397.
7. Berridge K. C., Robinson T. E. The mind of an addicted brain: neural sensitization of wanting versus liking. Curr. Direct. Psychol. Sci. 4:1995;71-76.
8. Browman K. E., Badiani A., Robinson T. E. Environmental influences on the psychomotor response to intravenous cocaine: a dose-effect investigation. Soc. Neurosci. Abstr. 22:1996;926.
9. Cho, A.K., Segal, D.S., eds. Amphetamine and Its Analogs: Psychopharmacology, Toxicology and Abuse. New York: Academic Press; 1994.
10. Cools A. R. Differential role of mineralocorticoid and glucocorticoid receptors in the genesis of dexamphetamine-induced sensitization of mesolimbic, alpha 1 adrenergic receptors in the ventral striatum. Neuroscience. 43:1991;419-428.
11. Crombag H. S., Badiani A., Robinson T. E. Signalled versus unsignalled intravenous amphetamine: large differences in the acute psychomotor response and sensitization. Brain Res. 722:1996;227-231.
12. Einat H., Szechtman H. Environmental modulation of both locomotor response and locomotor sensitization to the dopamine agonist quinpirole. Behav. Pharmacol. 4:1993;399-403.
13. Ellinwood E. H., Kilbey M. M. Amphetamine stereotypy: the influence of environmental factors and prepotent behavioral patterns on its topography and development. Biol. Psychiatry. 10:1975;3-16.
14. Ellinwood E. H. "Accidental conditioning" with chronic metamphetamine intoxication: implication for a theory of drug habituation. Psychopharmacologia. 21:1971;131-138.
15. Falk, J.L., Feingold, D.A., Environmental and cultural factors in the behavioral action of drugs. In Psychopharmacology: The Third Generation of Progress. ed. H.Y. Meltzer, New York: Raven Press; 1987; 1503-1510.
16. Hammer, R.P., ed. The Neurobiology of Cocaine: Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 1995.
17. Henry D. J., White F. J. Repeated cocaine administration causes persistent enhancement of D1 dopamine receptor sensitivity within the rat nucleus accumbens. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 258:1991;882-890.
18. Hinson R. E., Poulos C. X. Sensitization to the behavioral effects of cocaine: modification by Pavlovian conditioning. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 15:1981;559-562.
19. Hirabayashi M., Alam M. R. Enhancing effect of methamphetamine on ambulatory activity produced by repeated administration in mice. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 15:1981;925-932.
20. Hoffman D. C., Wise R. A. Locomotor activating effects of the D2 agonist bromocriptine show environment-specific sensitization following repeated injections. Psychopharmacology. 107:1992;277-284.
21. Horger B. A., Giles M. K., Schenk S. Preexposure to amphetamine and nicotine predisposes rats to self-administer a low dose of cocaine. Psychopharmacology. 107:1992;271-276.
22. Horger B. A., Shelton K., Schenk S. Preexposure sensitizes rats to the rewarding effects of cocaine. Pharm. Biochem. Behav. 37:1990;707-711.
23. Kalivas P. W., Stewart J. Dopamine transmission in the initiation and expression of drug- and stress-induced sensitization of motor activity. Brain Res. Rev. 16:1991;223-244.
24. Kelleher R. T., Morse W. H. Determinants of the specificity of behavioral effects of drugs. Ergeb. Physiol. Biol. Chem. Exp. Pharmak. 60:1968;1-56.
25. Koob G. F., Bloom F. E. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of drug dependence. Science. 242:1988;715-723.
26. Lett B. T. Repeated exposures intensify rather than diminish the rewarding effects of amphetamine, morphine, and cocaine. Psychopharmacology (Berlin). 98:1989;357-362.
27. Mattingly B. A., Gotsick J. E. Conditioning and experiential factors affecting the development of sensitization to apomorphine. Behav. Neurosci. 103:1989;1311-1317.
28. Mazurski E. J., Beninger R. J. Environment-specific conditioning and sensitization with (+)-amphetamine. Pharmacol. Blochem. Behav. 27:1987;61-65.
29. Paulson P. E., Camp D. M., Robinson T. E. The time course of transient behavioral depression and persistent behavioral sensitization in relation to regional brain monoamine concentrations during amphetamine withdrawal in rats. Psychopharmacology. 103:1991;480-492.
30. Pert A., Post R., Weiss S. R. Conditioning as a critical determinant of sensitization induced by psychomotor stimulants. NIDA Res. Monogr. 97:1990;208-241.
31. Piazza P. V., Deminière J. M., Le Moal M., Simon H. Factors that predict individual vulnerability to amphetamine self-administration. Science. 245:1989;1511-1513.
32. Post R. M., Lockfeld A., Squillace K. M., Contel N. R. Drug-environment interaction: context dependency of cocaine-induced behavioral sensitization. Life Sci. 28:1981;755-760.
33. Robinson T. E., Becker J. B. Behavioral sensitization is accompanied by an enhancement in amphetamine-stimulated dopamine release from striatal tissue in vitro. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 85:1982;253-254.
34. Robinson T. E., Becker J. B. Enduring changes in brain and behavior produced by chronic amphetamine administration: a review and evaluation of animal models of amphetamine psychosis. Brain Res. Rev. 11:1986;157-198.
35. Robinson T. E., Berridge K. C. The neural basis of drug craving: An incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res. Rev. 18:1993;247-291.
36. Sahakian B. J., Robbins T. W., Morgan M. J., Iversen S. D. The effects of psychomotor stimulants on stereotypy and locomotor activity in socially-deprived and control rats. Brain Res. 84:1975;195-205.
37. Schallert T., De Ryck M., Teitelbaum P. Atropine stereotypy as a behavioral trap: a movement subsystem and electroencephalographic analysis. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 94:1980;1-24.
38. Schiff S. R. Conditioned dopaminergic activity. Biol. Psychiatry. 17:1982;135-154.
39. Stewart J., Badiani A. Tolerance and sensitization to the behavioral effects of drugs. Behav. Pharmacol. 4:1993;289-312.
40. Stewart, J., De Wit, H. Reinstatement of drug-taking behavior as a method of assessing incentive motivational properties of drugs. In Methods of Assessing the Reinforcing Properties of Abused Drugs, ed. M.A. Bozarth. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1987; 211-227.
41. Stewart, J., Vezina, P. Conditioning and behavioral sensitization. In: Sensitization in the Nervous System, eds. P.W. Kalivas, C.D. Barnes. Caldwell, NJ: Telford Press; 1988; 207-224.
42. Stewart J., Vezina P. Extinction procedures abolish conditioned stimulus control but spare sensitized responding to amphetamine. Behav. Pharmacol. 2:1991;65-71.
43. Sullivan R., Dogaru C., Szechtman H. Constriction of environmental space and the behavioral response to the dopamine agonist quinpirole. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 43:1992;1217-1217.
44. Terlouw E. M.C., De Rosa G., Lawrence A. B., Illius A. W., Ladewig J. Behavioural responses to amphetamine and apomorphine in pigs. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 43:1992;329-340.
45. Tilson H. A., Rech R. A. Conditioned drug effects and absence of tolerance d-amphetamine induced motor activity. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 1:1973;149-153.
46. Valadez A., Schenk S. Persistence of the ability of amphetamine preexposure to facilitate acquisition of cocaine self-administration. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 47:1994;203-205.
47. Vezina P., Stewart J. Conditioning and place-specific sensitization of increases in activity induced by morphine in the VTA. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 20:1984;925-934.
48. Weiss S. R., Post R. M., Pert A., Woodward R., Murman D. Context-dependent cocaine sensitization: differential effect of haloperidol on development versus expression. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 34:1989;655-661.
49. White, F.J., Wolf, M.E. Psychomotor stimulants. In The Biological Bases of Drug Tolerance and Dependence, ed. J. Pratt. New York: Academic Press; 1991; 153-197.
50. Willner P., Papp M., Cheeta S., Muscat R. Environmental influences on behavioural sensitization to the dopamine agonist quinpirole. Behav. Pharmacol. 3:1992;43-50.
51. Wise R. A., Bozarth M. A. A psychomotor stimulant theory of addiction. Psychol. Rev. 94:1987;469-492.