Residual dopamine receptor desensitization following either high- or low-dose sub-chronic prior exposure to the atypical anti-psychotic drug olanzapine.

RATIONALE: Anti-psychotic drugs are antagonists of dopamine D2 receptors and repeated administration may lead to the development of dopamine receptor supersensitivity. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of sub-chronic olanzapine treatments upon the induction of dopamine receptor supersensitivity. METHODS: Rats were administered ten daily low or high doses of the atypical anti-psychotic drug olanzapine (0.01 or 1.0 mg/kg). After 5 days of withdrawal, all groups received 2.0 mg/kg apomorphine on five successive days. Five days after the apomorphine sensitization protocol, in separate experiments, either a conditioning test or an apomorphine sensitization test was conducted. RESULTS: During the anti-psychotic treatment the high dose of olanzapine induced profound locomotion suppression, whereas the low dose had no effect upon locomotion. The apomorphine treatments given to the vehicle control group generated locomotor sensitization. This sensitization effect was attenuated by the same degree for both the low or high dose prior olanzapine treatments. Also, the low and high-dose olanzapine pre-treatments diminished subsequent apomorphine-conditioned and apomorphine-sensitized locomotor responses. CONCLUSIONS: The equivalent attenuation of the apomorphine sensitization produced by both olanzapine doses indicates that this effect was unrelated to the direct effects of olanzapine upon locomotion. Furthermore, the persistence of the desensitization effects well after the termination of the olanzapine treatments is indicative of a residual desensitization of the dopamine system. These findings are of importance when considering the use of atypical anti-psychotic drugs in the treatment of psychoses and other disorders in which overactivity of the dopamine system is considered a contributory factor.

Post-trial apomorphine at an autoreceptor dose level can eliminate apomorphine conditioning and sensitization: support for the critical role of dopamine in re-consolidation.

Re-exposure to conditioned drug stimuli triggers re-consolidation processes. In the present study post-trial apomorphine treatments were administered in order to interact with the re-consolidation of an apomorphine conditioned/sensitized locomotor response. A low (0.05 mg/kg) and a high (2.0mg/kg) dose were used to inhibit or to enhance dopamine activity, respectively. Initially, groups received 5 daily apomorphine (2.0mg/kg)/vehicle treatments either paired or unpaired to open-field placement. The paired treatments generated a progressive locomotor response. Subsequently, all groups received a 5 min non-drug test for conditioning and a conditioned locomotor response was observed in the paired group. The groups received another apomorphine (2.0mg/kg)/vehicle treatment as a re-induction treatment. At this stage the post-trial protocol was initiated. One set of paired, unpaired and vehicle groups were given a low dose of apomorphine (0.05 mg/kg) post-trial; another set received a high dose of apomorphine (2.0mg/kg) post-trial. The remaining group set received vehicle post-trial. The low dose post-trial treatment eliminated the conditioned and sensitized locomotor response and the high dose post-trial treatment enhanced the conditioned and sensitized locomotor response. The efficacy of the post-trial apomorphine treatments to modify the conditioned and the sensitized response after a brief non-drug exposure to test cues supports the proposition that exteroceptive cues control conditioning and sensitization and that the interoceptive drug cues make little or no associational contribution to apomorphine conditioning and sensitization. In addition, the findings point to the importance of dopamine activation in both the acquisition and re-consolidation of conditioning processes.

Opposite effects of low versus high dose haloperidol treatments on spontaneous and apomorphine induced motor behavior: evidence that at a very low dose haloperidol acts as an indirect dopamine agonist.

Anti-psychotic drugs are antagonists at the dopamine D2 receptors and repeated administration can lead to the development of dopamine receptor supersensitivity. In two experiments, separate groups of rats were administered 10 daily low or high doses of the typical anti-psychotic drug haloperidol (0.03 or 1.0 mg/kg). The high dose decreased locomotion whereas, the low dose increased locomotion. After 5 days of withdrawal, all groups received 2.0 mg/kg apomorphine on 5 successive days. The apomorphine treatments given to the vehicle group generated a progressive locomotion sensitization effect and this effect was potentiated by pre-exposure to 0.03 mg/kg haloperidol. Initially, the prior high dose of haloperidol exaggerated the apomorphine locomotor stimulant effect but with repeated apomorphine treatments desensitization developed. Following a 5-day withdrawal period an apomorphine challenge test was conducted and apomorphine sensitization was absent in the haloperidol high dose pre-exposure group but potentiated in the low dose pre-exposure group. In the second replication experiment a conditioning test instead of a sensitization challenge test was conducted 5 days after completion of the 5-day apomorphine treatment protocol. The repeated apomorphine treatments induced conditioned hyper- locomotion and this conditioned effect was prevented by the prior high dose haloperidol pre-exposure but enhanced by the prior low dose haloperidol pre-exposure. Two new key findings are (a) that a low dose haloperidol regimen can function as a dopamine agonist and these effects persist after withdrawal and (b) that repeated apomorphine treatments can desensitize D2 receptors previously sensitized by a high dose haloperidol treatment regimen.

Reversal of apomorphine locomotor sensitization by a single post-conditioning trial treatment with a low autoreceptor dose of apomorphine: a memory re-consolidation approach.

Sensitization is a common feature of psychostimulants and sensitization effects are generally considered to be linked to the addictive properties of these drugs. We used a conventional paired/unpaired Pavlovian protocol to induce a context specific sensitization to the locomotor stimulant effect of a high dose of apomorphine (2.0mg/kg). Two days following a 5 session sensitization induction phase, a brief 5min non-drug test for conditioning was conducted. Only the paired groups exhibited locomotor stimulant conditioned response effects. Immediately following this brief test for conditioning, the paired and the unpaired groups received injections of 0.05mg/kg apomorphine, 2.0mg/kg apomorphine or vehicle designed to differentially impact memory re-consolidation of the conditioning. Two days later, all groups received a sensitization challenge test with 2.0mg/kg apomorphine. The 2.0mg/kg apomorphine post-trial treatment potentiated sensitization while the 0.05mg/kg eliminated sensitization. These effects were only observed in the paired groups. The activation of dopaminergic systems by the high dose of apomorphine strengthened the drug/environment association whereas the inhibition of dopamine activity by the low auto-receptor dose eliminated this association. The results point to the importance of conditioning to context specific sensitization and targeting memory re-consolidation of conditioning as a paradigm to modify sensitization.

Apomorphine conditioning and sensitization: the paired/unpaired treatment order as a new major determinant of drug conditioned and sensitization effects.

Repeated treatments with psychostimulant drugs generate behavioral sensitization. In the present study we employed a paired/unpaired protocol to assess the effects of repeated apomorphine (2.0 mg/kg) treatments upon locomotion behavior. In the first experiment we assessed the effects of conditioning upon apomorphine sensitization. Neither the extinction of the conditioned response nor a counter-conditioning procedure in which we paired an inhibitory treatment (apomorphine 0.05 mg/kg) with the previously established conditioned stimulus modified the sensitization response. In the second experiment, we administered the paired/unpaired protocol in two phases. In the second phase, we reversed the paired/unpaired protocol. Following the first phase, the paired group alone exhibited conditioned locomotion in the vehicle test and a sensitization response. In the second phase, the initial unpaired group which received 5 paired apomorphine trials during the reversal phase did not develop a conditioned response but developed a potentiated sensitization response. This disassociation of the conditioned response from the sensitization response is attributed to an apomorphine anti-habituation effect that can generate a false positive Pavlovian conditioned response effect. The potentiated sensitization response induced by the treatment reversal protocol points to an important role for the sequential experience of the paired/unpaired protocol in behavioral sensitization.