Comparative effects of an acute dose of fish oil on omega-3 fatty acid levels in red blood cells versus plasma: implications for clinical utility.

BACKGROUND: Omega-3 fatty acid (n-3 FA) biostatus can be estimated with red blood cell (RBC) membranes or plasma. The matrix that exhibits the lower within-person variability and is less affected by an acute dose of n-3 FA is preferred in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: We compared the acute effects of a large dose of n-3 FA on RBC and plasma levels of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) plus docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). METHODS: Healthy volunteers (n = 20) were given 4 capsules containing 3.6 g of n-3 FA with a standardized breakfast. Blood samples were drawn at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours. The EPA + DHA content of RBC membranes and plasma (the latter expressed as a percentage of total FA and as a concentration) were determined. General linear mixed models were used to analyze the mean response profiles in FA changes over time for plasma and RBCs. RESULTS: At 6 hours after load, the plasma concentration of EPA + DHA had increased by 47% (95% confidence interval [CI], 24% to 73%) and the plasma EPA + DHA percentage of total FA by 19% (95% CI, 4.7% to 36%). The RBC EPA + DHA percentage of composition was unchanged [-0.6% (95% CI, -2.6% to 1.5%)]. At 24 hours, the change in both of the plasma EPA + DHA markers was 10-fold greater than that in RBCs. CONCLUSIONS: An acute dose of n-3 FA (eg, a meal of oily fish or fish oil supplements) taken within a day before a doctor's visit can elevate levels of EPA + DHA in plasma, whether expressed as a percentage or a concentration, but not in RBC membranes. Similar to hemoglobin A1c, which is not affected by an acute glycemic deviation, RBCs provide a more reliable estimate of a patient's chronic EPA + DHA status than does plasma.

Exposure to marijuana smoke impairs memory retrieval in mice.

Marijuana (Cannabis sativa) and its primary psychoactive component, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC), have long been known to disrupt cognition in humans. Although Delta(9)-THC and other cannabinoids disrupt performance in a wide range of animal models of learning and memory, few studies have investigated the effects of smoked marijuana in these paradigms. Moreover, in preclinical studies, cannabinoids are generally administered before acquisition, and because retention is generally evaluated soon afterward, it is difficult to distinguish between processes related to acquisition and retrieval. In the present study, we investigated the specific effects of marijuana smoke and injected Delta(9)-THC on acquisition versus memory retrieval in a mouse repeated acquisition Morris water-maze task. To distinguish between these processes, subjects were administered Delta(9)-THC or they were exposed to marijuana smoke either 30 min before acquisition or 30 min before the retention test. Inhalation of marijuana smoke or injected Delta(9)-THC impaired the ability of the mice to learn the location of the hidden platform and to recall the platform location once learning had already taken place. In contrast, neither drug impaired performance in a cued task in which the platform was made visible. Finally, the cannabinoid-1 (CB(1)) receptor antagonist N-(piperidin-1-yl)-5-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-methyl-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide HCl (rimonabant) blocked the memory disruptive effects of both Delta(9)-THC and marijuana. These data represent the first evidence demonstrating that marijuana impairs memory retrieval through a CB(1) receptor mechanism of action and independently of its effects on sensorimotor performance, motivation, and initial acquisition.

Lack of behavioral sensitization after repeated exposure to THC in mice and comparison to methamphetamine.

RATIONALE: Recent evidence has provided support for the incentive-sensitization model of addiction, where repeated stimulation of neural reward circuits leads to a long-lasting sensitization of mesolimbic dopaminergic activity. This phenomenon has been demonstrated with many drugs of abuse, most often by measuring progressively increased activating effects of drugs on locomotor activity, thought to reflect an underlying neural sensitization. Whether cannabinoids, and in particular Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), produce similar effects in this model is somewhat controversial, with mixed evidence in the literature. OBJECTIVES: These experiments were conducted to determine whether behavioral sensitization could be established in mice after repeated exposure to THC. Sensitization to repeated methamphetamine treatment was used as a positive control. METHODS: The effects of acute and repeated intermittent (every 3-4 days) treatment with THC or methamphetamine on locomotor activity were determined in Institute of Cancer Research (ICR) mice. Additional experiments with THC employed a dosing regimen that increased the number of injections, controlled for behavioral tolerance, examined different aspects of behavior, and used a different species (Sprague-Dawley rats). RESULTS: Both methamphetamine and THC acutely increased activity. A robust dose-dependent sensitization was observed after intermittent treatment with methamphetamine but not with THC. Additionally, no evidence for behavioral sensitization to the effects of THC was found with any of the various protocols. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that repeated THC treatment is less likely to produce behavioral sensitization than are other drugs of abuse. It appears that this phenomenon may only occur under very particular conditions, which raises doubts about its relevance to chronic cannabis users.

Differential behavioral responses to nicotine in Lewis and Fischer-344 rats.

Individual and strain variability in the effects of nicotine suggests the involvement of a genetic component in nicotinic cholinergic receptor (nAChR) function, which may help explain nicotine's variable behavioral and pharmacological effects in different individuals. The present study evaluated differential responses to the discriminative stimulus (DS) and rewarding properties of nicotine in Lewis (LEW) and Fischer-344 (F-344) rats. Drug discrimination (DD) data suggest that the LEW rat is more sensitive to nicotine as LEW rats acquired the nicotine discrimination at a dose of 0.4 mg/kg, whereas F-344 rats acquired the dose of 0.9 mg/kg (all nicotine doses expressed as free base). Similarly, LEW rats exhibited nicotine-conditioned place preference (CPP) at 0.6 mg/kg, whereas the F-344 rats did not. Subsequent testing with a higher dose (0.9 mg/kg) failed to maintain the nicotine-CPP in the LEW rats. Conversely, nicotine-place preference in the F-344 rats was not changed at the higher dose. Taken together, these results suggest potential differences of sensitivities in LEW and F-344 rats to the rewarding and discriminative stimulus (DS) properties of nicotine. These findings support previous research by demonstrating that the F-344 rat is less sensitive to nicotine compared to the LEW rat.