Discriminative stimulus properties of muscarinic agonists

Nicotinic aspects of the discriminative stimulus effects of arecoline

Despite the evidence that the muscarinic agonist arecoline is a drug of abuse throughout Southeast Asia, its stimulus characteristics have not been well studied. The goal of this work was to understand more about the mediation of discriminative stimulus effects of arecoline. Arecoline (1.0 mg/kg s.c.) was trained as a discriminative stimulus in a group of eight rats. The ability of various cholinergic agonists and antagonists to mimic or antagonize the discriminative stimulus effects of arecoline and to modify its rate-suppressing effects was evaluated. A muscarinic antagonist, but neither of two nicotinic antagonists, was able to modify the discriminative stimulus effects of arecoline, suggesting a predominant muscarinic basis of arecoline's discriminative stimulus effects in this assay. However, both nicotine itself and two nicotine agonists with selective affinity for the α4β2* receptor (ispronicline and metanicotine) produced full arecoline-like discriminative stimulus effects in these rats. The discriminative stimulus effects of the selective nicotine agonists were blocked by both the general nicotine antagonist mecamylamine and by the selective α4β2* antagonist, dihydro-beta-erythroidine (DHβE). Surprisingly, only DHβE antagonized the rate-suppressing effects of the selective nicotine agonists. These data indicate a selective α4β2* nicotine receptor component to the behavioral effects of arecoline. Although the nicotinic aspects of arecoline's behavior effects could suggest that abuse of arecoline-containing material (e.g. betel nut chewing) is mediated through nicotinic rather than muscarinic actions, further research, specifically on the reinforcing effects of arecoline, is necessary before this conclusion can be supported.

Novel Antimuscarinic Antidepressant-like Compounds with Reduced Effects on Cognition

The cholinergic nervous system has been implicated in mood disorders, evident in the fast-onset antidepressant effects of scopolamine, a potent muscarinic antagonist, in clinical studies. One prominent disadvantage of the use of scopolamine in the treatment of depression is its detrimental effects on cognition, especially as such effects might aggravate cognitive deficits that occur with depression itself. Thus, the identification of antimuscarinic drugs that are free of such detrimental effects may provide an important avenue for the development of novel therapeutics for the management of depression. The present data in rats indicate that a historical muscarinic antagonist, L-687,306, and a muscarinic antagonist of our own design, CJ2100, were as or more effective than scopolamine in antagonizing both the bradycardic effects of the muscarinic agonist arecoline in cardiovascular studies and its discriminative stimulus and rate-decreasing effects in behavioral studies. Additionally, both novel muscarinic antagonists were as effective as scopolamine in decreasing immobility in the forced swim test, a preclinical indicator of potential antidepressant activity. However, at equieffective or even larger doses, they were considerably less disruptive than scopolamine in assays of cognition-related behavior. All three drugs displayed high specificity for the mAChRs with few off-target binding sites, and CJ2100 showed modest affinity across the mAChRs when compared with L-687,306 and scopolamine. These data emphasize the dissimilar pharmacological profiles that are evident across antimuscarinic compounds and the potential utility of novel antagonists for the improved treatment of depression. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Some clinical studies with the muscarinic antagonist scopolamine document its ability to produce antidepressant effects in patients with mood disorders; however, scopolamine also has well known adverse effects on both autonomic and centrally mediated physiological functions that limit its therapeutic use. This study characterizes the cardiovascular and discriminative stimulus effects of two novel muscarinic antagonists, L-687,306 and CJ2100, that produce antidepressant-like effects in a rodent model (forced swim test) without affecting touchscreen-based cognitive performance (titrating psychomotor vigilance and delayed matching-to-position).

Comparison of the muscarinic antagonist effects of scopolamine and L-687,306

This study aimed to use central and peripheral assays to compare the effects of the muscarinic antagonist scopolamine with those of a novel muscarinic antagonist, L-687,306 [(3R,4R)-3-(3-cyclopropyl-1,2,4,oxadiazol[5-yl]-1-azabicyclo[2.2.1]heptane. Groups of rats were trained to discriminate the stimulus effects of the muscarinic agonist, arecoline (1.0 mg/kg); concomitant measures of response rate were recorded. Separate groups were prepared with telemetery devices for recording bradycardia induced by arecoline (10 mg/kg). Methyl arecoline and arecoline were nearly equally potent in producing a brief but profound bradycardia, indicative of an equivalent effect in the heart. L-687,306 and scopolamine were both able to block this peripheral effect of arecoline. L-687,306 produced a surmountable antagonism of both the discriminative and rate-suppressing effects of arecoline. Scopolamine, however, was unable to antagonize the rate-reducing effects of arecoline in the discrimination assay. This limited the number of rats that could respond to the discriminative stimulus effects of arecoline, as well as the amount of arecoline stimulus effects they were able to report. The data suggest that L-687,306 may be a more generally effective muscarinic antagonist than scopolamine and support earlier reports that this antagonist has less direct effect on behavior.

Drug discrimination in neurobiology

Areas of neurobiological interest are identified towards which drug discrimination (DD) studies have made important contributions. DD allows ligand actions to be analyzed at the whole organism level, with a neurobiological specificity that is exquisite and often unrivalled. DD analyses have thus been made of a vast array of CNS agents acting on receptors, enzymes, or ion channels, including most drugs of abuse. DD uniquely offers access to the study of subjective drug effects in animals, using a methodology that also is transposable to humans and has generated unprecedented models of pathology (e.g., chronic pain, opiate addiction). Parametric studies of such independent variables as training dose and reinforcement provide refined insights into the dynamic psychophysiological mechanisms of both drug effects and behavior. Three different mechanisms have been identified by which discriminative, and perhaps other behaviors, can come about. DD also is superbly sensitive to small, partial activation of molecular substrates; this has enabled DD analyses to pioneer the unravelling of molecular mechanisms of drug action (attributing, f.ex., LSD's particular subjective effects to an unusual, partial activation of 5-HT, and perhaps other receptors). DD has both oriented and served as a tool to conduct drug discovery research (e.g., pirenperone-risperidone, loperamide). The DD response arguably constitutes a quantal, rather than graded, variable, and as such allows a comprehension of molecular, pharmacological, and behavioral mechanisms that would have been otherwise inaccessible. Perhaps most important are the following further contributions. One is the notion that particular, different levels of receptor activation are associated with qualities of neurobiological actions that also differ and are unique, this notion arguably constituting the most significant addition to affinity and intrinsic activity since the earliest theoretical conceptions of molecular pharmacology. Another contribution consists of studies that render redundant the notion of tolerance and identify fundamental mechanisms of signal transduction; these mechanisms account for apparent tolerance, dependence, addiction, and sensitization, and appear to operate ubiquitously in a bewildering array of biological systems.

The role of muscarinic cholinergic receptors in the discriminative stimulus properties of clozapine in rats

The present study examined the role of muscarinic receptors in the discriminative stimulus properties of clozapine. One group of rats was trained to discriminate the atypical antipsychotic clozapine (CLZ, 5.0 mg/kg, i.p.) from vehicle in a two-lever drug discrimination procedure, and a second group of rats was trained to discriminate the muscarinic cholinergic antagonist scopolamine (SCP, 0.125 mg/kg, i.p.) from saline. Complete cross-generalization was obtained for SCP in the CLZ-trained rats and for CLZ in the SCP-trained rats. The M1 muscarinic antagonist trihexyphenidyl substituted completely for both CLZ and SCP; however, the M2 antagonist BIBN 99 failed to substitute for either CLZ or SCP. In other substitution tests, the tricyclic antidepressant amitriptyline, the antihistamine promethazine, and cyproheptadine (5-hydroxytryptamine [5-HT]2A/5-HT2C, histamine, and muscarinic antagonist) substituted completely for CLZ and SCP. The tetracyclic antidepressant mianserin substituted completely in the CLZ-trained rats, but did not substitute for SCP. Compounds that produced partial substitution included the tricyclic antidepressant imipramine, the anxiolytic chlordiazepoxide, and the antipsychotic thioridazine. Other compounds tested only in the CLZ-trained rats that failed to produce reliable CLZ-appropriate responding included N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA, selective agonist for glutamate receptors), metergoline (5-HT2A/5-HT2C antagonist), propranolol (beta noradrenergic antagonist), and phentolamine (alpha noradrenergic antagonist). All of the compounds that produced CLZ-appropriate responding (except for mianserin) display high binding affinities for muscarinic cholinergic receptors. The results of the present study demonstrated that muscarinic receptors (especially M1) play an important role in the mediation of the discriminative stimulus properties of CLZ in rats, and provide additional support for the importance of CLZ's anticholinergic properties as part of it's unique profile as an atypical antipsychotic.

Mianserin as a discriminative stimulus in rats: asymmetrical cross-generalization with scopolamine

The present study was conducted to determine if the tetracyclic antidepressant mianserin could be established as a discriminative stimulus in rats. One group of rats was trained to discriminate mianserin (4.0 mg/kg, IP) from saline in a two-lever drug discrimination procedure, and a second group of rats was trained to discriminate the muscarinic cholinergic antagonist scopolamine (0.25 mg/kg, IP) from saline. Generalization testing with the training drugs yielded an ED50 of 0.502 mg/kg for the mianserin-trained rats and an ED50 of 0.048 mg/kg for the scopolamine-trained rats. Asymmetrical cross-generalization between mianserin and scopolamine was observed, because scopolamine produced mianserin-appropriate responding, but mianserin did not produce scopolamine-appropriate responding. This study is the first demonstration that rats can be trained to discriminate mianserin from saline and that antagonism of muscarinic cholinergic receptors is sufficient to produce mianserin-appropriate responding.

Discriminative stimulus properties of NIK-247 and tetrahydroaminoacridine, centrally active cholinesterase inhibitors, in rats

The discriminative stimulus effect of the novel centrally active cholinesterase inhibitor, NIK-247, was investigated in rats and compared with that of tetrahydroaminoacridine (THA). Rats were trained to discriminate either 10 mg/kg NIK-247 or 1.8 mg/kg THA from saline in a two-lever food-reinforced procedure. The stimulus effect of NIK-247 was substituted for by the cholinesterase inhibitors, THA and physostigmine. The THA stimulus was substituted for by NIK-247 and physostigmine. The muscarinic receptor agonist arecoline substituted for the NIK-247 and THA stimuli. Both stimulus effects of NIK-247 and THA were blocked by the muscarinic antagonist scopolamine. The dopaminergic-activating drugs amantadine and lisuride substituted for the stimulus effects of NIK-247 and THA. However, neither the NIK-247 nor the THA stimulus was antagonized by the dopamine antagonists haloperidol, SCH 23390, and sulpiride. These results suggest that the discriminative stimulus effects of NIK-247 and THA are mediated by muscarinic receptors, and that the dopaminergic activity resulting from cholinergic activation may account for some part of both stimuli.

Behavioral response of rats with cortical lesions to cholinomimetics

This study examined the performance of cortically lesioned rats and their response to cholinomimetic agents in passive avoidance and water maze tasks. Lesions encompassing mainly the frontal and parietal cortices produce a deficit in a 5-day passive avoidance retention test. This deficit was attenuated by the intraperitoneal (IP) administration of muscarinic agonists or an anticholinesterase. In the Morris water maze task, lesioned vehicle-treated animals showed greater escape latency times when compared to their sham counterparts. Cholinomimetics, injected daily during acquisition, improved mean escape latency time on days 3 and 4 of testing. The performance of the various groups in a cued version of the water task did not differ. This work demonstrates that performance deficits arising from neocortical loss can be attenuated by cholinergic drugs.

Discriminative stimulus properties of the muscarinic receptor agonists Lu 26-046 and O-Me-THPO in rats: evidence for involvement of different muscarinic receptor subtypes

The discriminative cues induced by the muscarinic receptor agonists Lu 26-046 ((-)-7-methyl-3(2-propynyloxy)-4,5,6,7-tetrahydroisothiazolo [4,5-c]pyridine ) and O-Me-THPO (3-methoxy-4,5,6,7-tetrahydroisoxazolo[4,5-c]pyridine) were investigated. The results were compared with those obtained for the binding profiles of these agonists at central muscarinic receptors and with results concerning their functional effects at peripheral muscarinic receptors in vitro. Lu 26-046 had preferential affinity for M1 versus M2 receptors (Ki index [3H]quinuclidinyl benzilate ([3H]QNB/[3H]pirenzepine 4.2) and had partial agonistic activity at M1 and M2 receptors in rat superior cervical ganglion and guinea pig left atrim, respectively. A weak antagonistic effect at M3 receptors in guinea pig ileum was observed. O-Me-THPO had non-selective agonistic effects at peripheral M1, M2 and M3 receptors and had a slight preference for central M2 receptors in binding experiments (M2/M1 index 0.31). Lu 26-046 dose dependently substituted for Lu 26-046 and partially substituted for O-Me-THPO in rats trained to discriminate Lu 26-046 and O-Me-THPO from saline, respectively. The (+)-enantiomer of Lu 26-046, Lu 26-047, had weak partial M1 agonistic activity and M2/M3 antagonistic effects at peripheral receptors. Lu 26-047 also had a high M2/M1 index (9.3) in binding experiments. Lu 26-047 substituted for Lu 26-046, but preferentially inhibited the effect of O-Me-THPO. Pilocarpine had a preferential effect in Lu 26-046-trained rats, while oxotremorine and arecoline had preferential effects in O-Me-THPO-trained rats. Large increases in latency times or a disruption of responding was generally observed. These compounds were full agonists at peripheral M1, M2 and M3 receptors. The muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine antagonized the effect of O-Me-THPO and partially inhibited the effect of Lu 26-046. Scopolamine partially substituted for Lu 26-046. The quaternary muscarinic receptor agonist N-methyl atropine had no effect, indicating that the cues are mediated by central muscarinic receptors. It is suggested that the discriminative cues of Lu 26-046 and O-Me-THPO are preferentially mediated by central M1 (partial) and M2 receptor stimulation, respectively. The role of central M3 receptors is not known.

Discriminative stimulus properties of physostigmine in rats

Sprague-Dawley rats were trained to discriminate a subcutaneous injection of physostigmine (0.2 mg/kg) from a similar injection of saline in a two-lever, food-reinforced behavior paradigm. The training dose of physostigmine reduced the response rate to about 50% of that in saline sessions. The discriminative stimulus (DS) effect of physostigmine is mediated by a central cholinergic mechanism since it was antagonized by scopolamine (0.1 mg/kg), but was unaffected by methylscopolamine (1 mg/kg) or pirenzepine (3 mg/kg). Neostigmine produced predominantly saline-appropriate lever choice. Compounds which produced averages of greater than 80% responses on the physostigmine lever are: compound BM-5 (N-methyl-N-(1-methyl-4-pyrrolidino-2-butynyl)-acetamide), tetrahydroaminoacridine (THA), RS-86 (2-ethyl-8-methyl-2,8-diazaspiro-(4,5)-decan-1,3-dion hydrobromide), cis-AF30 (2-methyl-spiro-(1,3-dioxolane-4,3')-quinuclidine), and pilocarpine. In comparison, oxotremorine, aceclidine (3-acetoxy-quinuclidine), arecoline, and nicotine produced a maximum average responding of 40-70% on the physostigmine lever. The DS effect of physostigmine in rats appeared to involve a greater participation of M1 and M2 muscarinic or the nicotinic receptor in the brain.

Pharmacological characterization of the physostigmine stimulus in rats

Rats were trained to discriminate 0.10 mg/kg SC physostigmine from saline in a two-lever food-reinforced task. There was generalization to the acetylcholine esterase inhibitor THA as well as to the muscarinic receptor agonists arecoline, oxotremorine and RS 86, but not to neostigmine or nicotine. The physostigmine cue was blocked by SC scopolamine hydrobromide and by ICV pirenzepine, but not by scopolamine methylbromide or by mecamylamine. These antagonism studies suggest that the discriminative cue elicited by physostigmine might be mainly mediated by central M1 receptors.