A Systematic Review on Drugs Acting as Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor Agonists in the Treatment of Dementia

Acetylcholine signaling is attenuated in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias. A significant reduction in the expression of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) in the brain of AD patients has also been reported in several molecular biological and in situ labeling studies. The modulation of the functional deficit of the cholinergic system as a pharmacological target could therefore have a clinical benefit, which is not to be neglected. This systematic review was conducted to identify clinical trials, which evaluated the safety and efficacy of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists using Clinicaltrial (CT) and EudraCT databases. Structured searches identified 39 trials, which used 15 different drugs designed to increase the function of the nAChRs. Most of the identified clinical trials were phase II trials, with some of them classified as ongoing for several years. The systematic screening of the literature led to the selection of 14 studies out of the 8261 bibliographic records retrieved. Six trials reported detailed data on adverse events associated with the intervention, while twelve trials reported data on efficacy measures, such as attention, behavior and cognition. Overall, smost of the physical side effects of cholinergic agonists were reported to be well tolerated. Some trials also reported improvements in attention. However, the efficacy of these drugs in other cognitive and behavioral outcomes remains highly controversial.

Fluorescence activation mechanism and imaging of drug permeation with new sensors for smoking-cessation ligands

Nicotinic partial agonists provide an accepted aid for smoking cessation and thus contribute to decreasing tobacco-related disease. Improved drugs constitute a continued area of study. However, there remains no reductionist method to examine the cellular and subcellular pharmacokinetic properties of these compounds in living cells. Here, we developed new intensity-based drug-sensing fluorescent reporters (iDrugSnFRs) for the nicotinic partial agonists dianicline, cytisine, and two cytisine derivatives - 10-fluorocytisine and 9-bromo-10-ethylcytisine. We report the first atomic-scale structures of liganded periplasmic binding protein-based biosensors, accelerating development of iDrugSnFRs and also explaining the activation mechanism. The nicotinic iDrugSnFRs detect their drug partners in solution, as well as at the plasma membrane (PM) and in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) of cell lines and mouse hippocampal neurons. At the PM, the speed of solution changes limits the growth and decay rates of the fluorescence response in almost all cases. In contrast, we found that rates of membrane crossing differ among these nicotinic drugs by >30-fold. The new nicotinic iDrugSnFRs provide insight into the real-time pharmacokinetic properties of nicotinic agonists and provide a methodology whereby iDrugSnFRs can inform both pharmaceutical neuroscience and addiction neuroscience.

Cognitive Enhancers in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Alpha-7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor Agonists for Cognitive Deficits and Negative Symptoms

Background: Schizophrenia is a severe and enduring disease and is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Cognitive impairment is a core clinical symptom that plays a crucial role in functional outcomes and prognosis, thus making it a relevant treatment target. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of alpha-7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists (α7 nAChR) as adjunctive treatment to enhance cognition and ameliorate negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. Methods: A search strategy was developed for MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to May 2019. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared antipsychotic treatment plus α7 nAChR agonists with antipsychotic treatment plus placebo and determined their effects on the main cognitive domains proposed by the MATRICS initiative and on negative symptoms. Two authors independently reviewed study eligibility and data extraction and assessed the risk of bias of the studies included. According to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, we used a random-effects model and assessed the quality of the evidence. Results: Thirteen studies were included in the quantitative analysis. No differences were found in any of the cognitive domains assessed in four RCTs (n = 414). In contrast, nine RCTs (n = 978) presented a small effect in support of α7 nAChR agonists for negative symptoms [standardized mean difference -0.28, 95% CI (-0.56 to -0.00); P = 0.05], even though the confidence to support this evidence is low according to the GRADE system. Conclusions: Current evidence is too weak to consider α7 nAChR agonists as an effective add-on treatment to antipsychotics to enhance cognition and negative symptoms.

Relapse prevention interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

A number of treatments can help smokers make a successful quit attempt, but many initially successful quitters relapse over time. Several interventions have been proposed to help prevent relapse.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether specific interventions for relapse prevention reduce the proportion of recent quitters who return to smoking.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in February 2018 for studies mentioning relapse prevention or maintenance in their title, abstracts, or keywords.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of relapse prevention interventions with a minimum follow-up of six months. We included smokers who quit on their own, were undergoing enforced abstinence, or were participating in treatment programmes. We included studies that compared relapse prevention interventions with a no intervention control, or that compared a cessation programme with additional relapse prevention components with a cessation programme alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 77 studies (67,285 participants), 15 of which are new to this update. We judged 21 studies to be at high risk of bias, 51 to be at unclear risk of bias, and five studies to be at low risk of bias. Forty-eight studies included abstainers, and 29 studies helped people to quit and then tested treatments to prevent relapse. Twenty-six studies focused on special populations who were abstinent because of pregnancy (18 studies), hospital admission (five studies), or military service (three studies). Most studies used behavioural interventions that tried to teach people skills to cope with the urge to smoke, or followed up with additional support. Some studies tested extended pharmacotherapy.We focused on results from those studies that randomised abstainers, as these are the best test of relapse prevention interventions. Of the 12 analyses we conducted in abstainers, three pharmacotherapy analyses showed benefits of the intervention: extended varenicline in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 1297, risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.41, I² = 82%; moderate certainty evidence), rimonabant in assisted abstainers (1 study, RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.55), and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in unaided abstainers (2 studies, n = 2261, RR 1.24, 95% Cl 1.04 to 1.47, I² = 56%). The remainder of analyses of pharmacotherapies in abstainers had wide confidence intervals consistent with both no effect and a statistically significant effect in favour of the intervention. These included NRT in hospital inpatients (2 studies, n = 1078, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.60, I² = 0%), NRT in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 553, RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), extended bupropion in assisted abstainers (6 studies, n = 1697, RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.35, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and bupropion plus NRT (2 studies, n = 243, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.87, I² = 66%; low certainty evidence). Analyses of behavioural interventions in abstainers did not detect an effect. These included studies in abstinent pregnant and postpartum women at end of pregnancy (8 studies, n = 1523, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11, I² = 0%) and at postpartum follow-up (15 studies, n = 4606, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09, I² = 3%), studies in hospital inpatients (4 studies, n = 1300, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.11, I² = 0%), and studies in assisted abstainers (10 studies, n = 5408, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.13, I² = 56%; moderate certainty evidence) and unaided abstainers (5 studies, n = 3561, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, I² = 1%) from the general population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural interventions that teach people to recognise situations that are high risk for relapse along with strategies to cope with them provided no worthwhile benefit in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers, although unexplained statistical heterogeneity means we are only moderately certain of this. In people who have successfully quit smoking using pharmacotherapy, there were mixed results regarding extending pharmacotherapy for longer than is standard. Extended treatment with varenicline helped to prevent relapse; evidence for the effect estimate was of moderate certainty, limited by unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not detect a benefit from extended treatment with bupropion, though confidence intervals mean we could not rule out a clinically important benefit at this stage. Low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not show a benefit of extended treatment with nicotine replacement therapy in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers. More research is needed in this area, especially as the evidence for extended nicotine replacement therapy in unassisted abstainers did suggest a benefit.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are electronic devices that heat a liquid into an aerosol for inhalation. The liquid usually comprises propylene glycol and glycerol, with or without nicotine and flavours, and stored in disposable or refillable cartridges or a reservoir. Since ECs appeared on the market in 2006 there has been a steady growth in sales. Smokers report using ECs to reduce risks of smoking, but some healthcare organizations, tobacco control advocacy groups and policy makers have been reluctant to encourage smokers to switch to ECs, citing lack of evidence of efficacy and safety. Smokers, healthcare providers and regulators are interested to know if these devices can help smokers quit and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This review is an update of a review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and effect of using ECs to help people who smoke achieve long-term smoking abstinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO for relevant records from 2004 to January 2016, together with reference checking and contact with study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which current smokers (motivated or unmotivated to quit) were randomized to EC or a control condition, and which measured abstinence rates at six months or longer. As the field of EC research is new, we also included cohort follow-up studies with at least six months follow-up. We included randomized cross-over trials, RCTs and cohort follow-up studies that included at least one week of EC use for assessment of adverse events (AEs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Our main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up, and we used the most rigorous definition available (continuous, biochemically validated, longest follow-up). We used a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study, and where appropriate we pooled data from these studies in meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Our searches identified over 1700 records, from which we include 24 completed studies (three RCTs, two of which were eligible for our cessation meta-analysis, and 21 cohort studies). Eleven of these studies are new for this version of the review. We identified 27 ongoing studies. Two RCTs compared EC with placebo (non-nicotine) EC, with a combined sample size of 662 participants. One trial included minimal telephone support and one recruited smokers not intending to quit, and both used early EC models with low nicotine content and poor battery life. We judged the RCTs to be at low risk of bias, but under the GRADE system we rated the overall quality of the evidence for our outcomes as 'low' or 'very low', because of imprecision due to the small number of trials. A 'low' grade means that further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. A 'very low' grade means we are very uncertain about the estimate. Participants using an EC were more likely to have abstained from smoking for at least six months compared with participants using placebo EC (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.05 to 4.96; placebo 4% versus EC 9%; 2 studies; 662 participants. GRADE: low). The one study that compared EC to nicotine patch found no significant difference in six-month abstinence rates, but the confidence intervals do not rule out a clinically important difference (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.34; 584 participants. GRADE: very low).Of the included studies, none reported serious adverse events considered related to EC use. The most frequently reported AEs were mouth and throat irritation, most commonly dissipating over time. One RCT provided data on the proportion of participants experiencing any adverse events. The proportion of participants in the study arms experiencing adverse events was similar (ECs vs placebo EC: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.34 (298 participants); ECs vs patch: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22 (456 participants)). The second RCT reported no statistically significant difference in the frequency of AEs at three- or 12-month follow-up between the EC and placebo EC groups, and showed that in all groups the frequency of AEs (with the exception of throat irritation) decreased significantly over time.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence from two trials that ECs help smokers to stop smoking in the long term compared with placebo ECs. However, the small number of trials, low event rates and wide confidence intervals around the estimates mean that our confidence in the result is rated 'low' by GRADE standards. The lack of difference between the effect of ECs compared with nicotine patches found in one trial is uncertain for similar reasons. None of the included studies (short- to mid-term, up to two years) detected serious adverse events considered possibly related to EC use. The most commonly reported adverse effects were irritation of the mouth and throat. The long-term safety of ECs is unknown. In this update, we found a further 15 ongoing RCTs which appear eligible for this review.

Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Nicotine receptor partial agonists may help people to stop smoking by a combination of maintaining moderate levels of dopamine to counteract withdrawal symptoms (acting as an agonist) and reducing smoking satisfaction (acting as an antagonist).

OBJECTIVES

To review the efficacy of nicotine receptor partial agonists, including varenicline and cytisine, for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register for trials, using the terms ('cytisine' or 'Tabex' or 'dianicline' or 'varenicline' or 'nicotine receptor partial agonist') in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The register is compiled from searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO using MeSH terms and free text to identify controlled trials of interventions for smoking cessation and prevention. We contacted authors of trial reports for additional information where necessary. The latest update of the specialised register was in May 2015, although we have included a few key trials published after this date. We also searched online clinical trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials which compared the treatment drug with placebo. We also included comparisons with bupropion and nicotine patches where available. We excluded trials which did not report a minimum follow-up period of six months from start of treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on the type of participants, the dose and duration of treatment, the outcome measures, the randomisation procedure, concealment of allocation, and completeness of follow-up.The main outcome measured was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, and preferred biochemically validated rates where they were reported. Where appropriate we pooled risk ratios (RRs), using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials of cytisine (937 people) found that more participants taking cytisine stopped smoking compared with placebo at longest follow-up, with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 3.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.01 to 7.87; low-quality evidence). One recent trial comparing cytisine with NRT in 1310 people found a benefit for cytisine at six months (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.80).One trial of dianicline (602 people) failed to find evidence that it was effective (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.75). This drug is no longer in development.We identified 39 trials that tested varenicline, 27 of which contributed to the primary analysis (varenicline versus placebo). Five of these trials also included a bupropion treatment arm. Eight trials compared varenicline with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Nine studies tested variations in varenicline dosage, and 13 tested usage in disease-specific subgroups of patients. The included studies covered 25,290 participants, 11,801 of whom used varenicline.The pooled RR for continuous or sustained abstinence at six months or longer for varenicline at standard dosage versus placebo was 2.24 (95% CI 2.06 to 2.43; 27 trials, 12,625 people; high-quality evidence). Varenicline at lower or variable doses was also shown to be effective, with an RR of 2.08 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.78; 4 trials, 1266 people). The pooled RR for varenicline versus bupropion at six months was 1.39 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.54; 5 trials, 5877 people; high-quality evidence). The RR for varenicline versus NRT for abstinence at 24 weeks was 1.25 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.37; 8 trials, 6264 people; moderate-quality evidence). Four trials which tested the use of varenicline beyond the 12-week standard regimen found the drug to be well-tolerated during long-term use. The number needed to treat with varenicline for an additional beneficial outcome, based on the weighted mean control rate, is 11 (95% CI 9 to 13). The most commonly reported adverse effect of varenicline was nausea, which was mostly at mild to moderate levels and usually subsided over time. Our analysis of reported serious adverse events occurring during or after active treatment suggests there may be a 25% increase in the chance of SAEs among people using varenicline (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.49; 29 trials, 15,370 people; high-quality evidence). These events include comorbidities such as infections, cancers and injuries, and most were considered by the trialists to be unrelated to the treatments. There is also evidence of higher losses to follow-up in the control groups compared with the intervention groups, leading to a likely underascertainment of the true rate of SAEs among the controls. Early concerns about a possible association between varenicline and depressed mood, agitation, and suicidal behaviour or ideation led to the addition of a boxed warning to the labelling in 2008. However, subsequent observational cohort studies and meta-analyses have not confirmed these fears, and the findings of the EAGLES trial do not support a causal link between varenicline and neuropsychiatric disorders, including suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviour. The evidence is not conclusive, however, in people with past or current psychiatric disorders. Concerns have also been raised that varenicline may slightly increase cardiovascular events in people already at increased risk of those illnesses. Current evidence neither supports nor refutes such an association, but we await the findings of the CATS trial, which should establish whether or not this is a valid concern.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cytisine increases the chances of quitting, although absolute quit rates were modest in two recent trials. Varenicline at standard dose increased the chances of successful long-term smoking cessation between two- and three-fold compared with pharmacologically unassisted quit attempts. Lower dose regimens also conferred benefits for cessation, while reducing the incidence of adverse events. More participants quit successfully with varenicline than with bupropion or with NRT. Limited evidence suggests that varenicline may have a role to play in relapse prevention. The most frequently recorded adverse effect of varenicline is nausea, but mostly at mild to moderate levels and tending to subside over time. Early reports of possible links to suicidal ideation and behaviour have not been confirmed by current research.Future trials of cytisine may test extended regimens and more intensive behavioural support.

In vivo pharmacological interactions between a type II positive allosteric modulator of α7 nicotinic ACh receptors and nicotinic agonists in a murine tonic pain model

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The α7 nicotinic ACh receptor subtype is abundantly expressed in the CNS and in the periphery. Recent evidence suggests that α7 nicotinic ACh receptor (nAChR) subtypes, which can be activated by an endogenous cholinergic tone comprising ACh and the α7 agonist choline, play an important role in chronic pain and inflammation. In this study, we evaluated whether type II α7 positive allosteric modulator PNU-120596 induces antinociception on its own and in combination with choline in the formalin pain model.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

We assessed the effects of PNU-120596 and choline and the nature of their interactions in the formalin test using an isobolographic analysis. In addition, we evaluated the interaction of PNU-120596 with PHA-54613, an exogenous selective α7 nAChR agonist, in the formalin test. Finally, we assessed the interaction between PNU-120596 and nicotine using acute thermal pain, locomotor activity, body temperature and convulsing activity tests in mice.

KEY RESULTS

We found that PNU-120596 dose-dependently attenuated nociceptive behaviour in the formalin test after systemic administration in mice. In addition, mixtures of PNU-120596 and choline synergistically reduced formalin-induced pain. PNU-120596 enhanced the effects of nicotine and α7 agonist PHA-543613 in the same test. In contrast, PNU-120596 failed to enhance nicotine-induced convulsions, hypomotility and antinociception in acute pain models. Surprisingly, it enhanced nicotine-induced hypothermia via activation of α7 nAChRs.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our results demonstrate that type II α7 positive allosteric modulators produce antinociceptive effects in the formalin test through a synergistic interaction with the endogenous α7 agonist choline.

Interventions for smoking cessation and reduction in individuals with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Individuals with schizophrenia smoke more heavily than the general population and this contributes to their higher morbidity and mortality from smoking-related illnesses. It remains unclear what interventions can help them to quit or to reduce smoking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of different treatments for nicotine dependence in schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from inception to October 2012, and the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in November 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials for smoking cessation or reduction, comparing any pharmacological or non-pharmacological intervention with placebo or with another therapeutic control in adult smokers with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and quality of trials, as well as extracted data. Outcome measures included smoking abstinence, reduction in the amount smoked and any change in mental state. We extracted abstinence and reduction data at the end of treatment and at least six months after the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence or reduction and biochemically validated data where available. We noted any reported adverse events. Where appropriate, we pooled data using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 trials (16 trials of cessation; nine trials of reduction; one trial of relapse prevention; eight trials that reported smoking outcomes for interventions aimed at other purposes). Seven trials compared bupropion with placebo; meta-analysis showed that cessation rates after bupropion were significantly higher than placebo at the end of treatment (seven trials, N = 340; risk ratio [RR] 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69 to 5.42) and after six months (five trials, N = 214, RR 2.78; 95% CI 1.02 to 7.58). There were no significant differences in positive, negative and depressive symptoms between bupropion and placebo groups. There were no reports of major adverse events such as seizures with bupropion.Smoking cessation rates after varenicline were significantly higher than placebo, at the end of treatment (2 trials, N = 137; RR 4.74, 95% CI 1.34 to 16.71). Only one trial reported follow-up at six months and the CIs were too wide to provide evidence of a sustained effect (one trial, N = 128, RR 5.06, 95% CI 0.67 to 38.24). There were no significant differences in psychiatric symptoms between the varenicline and placebo groups. Nevertheless, there were reports of suicidal ideation and behaviours from two people on varenicline.Two studies reported that contingent reinforcement (CR) with money may increase smoking abstinence rates and reduce the level of smoking in patients with schizophrenia. However, it is uncertain whether these benefits can be maintained in the longer term. There was no evidence of benefit for the few trials of other pharmacological therapies (including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)) and psychosocial interventions in helping smokers with schizophrenia to quit or reduce smoking.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Bupropion increases smoking abstinence rates in smokers with schizophrenia, without jeopardizing their mental state. Varenicline may also improve smoking cessation rates in schizophrenia, but its possible psychiatric adverse effects cannot be ruled out. CR may help this group of patients to quit and reduce smoking in the short term. We failed to find convincing evidence that other interventions have a beneficial effect on smoking in schizophrenia.

Effects of short-term varenicline administration on emotional and cognitive processing in healthy, non-smoking adults: a randomized, double-blind, study

Varenicline is an effective and increasingly prescribed drug for smoking cessation, but has been associated with depressive symptoms and suicidal behavior. However, it remains unclear whether those changes in mood and behavior are directly related to varenicline use, or caused by smoking cessation itself or reflects depression and suicidality rates in smokers, independent of treatment. To investigate the influence of varenicline on mood and behavior independent of smoking and smoking cessation, we assessed the effects of varenicline on emotional processing (a biomarker of depressogenic effects), emotion-potentiated startle reactivity, impulsivity (linked with suicidal behavior), and cognitive performance in non-smoking subjects. We used a randomized, double-blind design, in which we administered varenicline or placebo to healthy subjects over 7 days (0.5 mg/day first 3 days, then 1 mg/day). Cognitive and emotional processing was assessed by a battery of computerized tasks and recording of emotion-potentiated startle response. A total of 41 subjects were randomized, with 38 subjects included in the analysis. The varenicline group did not differ from placebo in terms of negative biases in emotional processing or mood. However, compared with placebo, the varenicline group scored higher on working and declarative memory. In conclusion, short-term varenicline use did not influence negative biases in emotional processing or impulsivity in non-smoking subjects, thereby not supporting direct depressogenic or suicidal risk behavior-inducing effects. In contrast, varenicline may have cognitive-enhancing effects.

Effects of sazetidine-A, a selective alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor desensitizing agent on alcohol and nicotine self-administration in selectively bred alcohol-preferring (P) rats

RATIONALE

Manipulations of nicotinic cholinergic receptors have been shown to influence both alcohol and nicotine intake. Sazetidine-A [6-(5(((S)-azetidine-2-yl)methoxy)pyridine-3-yl)hex-5-yn-1-ol] is a novel compound that potently and selectively desensitizes alpha4beta2 nicotinic receptors with only modest receptor activation.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of the present study was to examine the effects of sazetidine-A on alcohol and nicotine self-administration in alcohol-preferring (P) rats.

METHODS

P rats were given the choice of water or alcohol. Once stable baselines were established, the acute (0, 0.1, 0.3, 1, and 3 mg/kg, s.c.) and chronic (3 mg/kg for 10 days) effects of sazetidine-A on alcohol intake were assessed. Naltrexone (2.5 mg/kg) served as a positive control. The effect of sazetidine-A (3 mg/kg) and naltrexone (4 mg/kg) on saccharin (0.2%) preference was also assessed. In addition, the acute effects of sazetidine-A (3 mg/kg) and naltrexone (4 mg/kg) on alcohol intake after alcohol deprivation were evaluated. In another experiment, the effects of sazetidine-A (0, 1, or 3 mg/kg) on i.v. nicotine self-administration in P and NP rats were assessed.

RESULTS

Sazetidine-A caused a dose-dependent reduction in alcohol intake. Chronic sazetidine-A also effectively reduced alcohol intake until the seventh day of treatment, when partial tolerance appeared to develop. In the post-deprivation study, sazetidine-A significantly reduced alcohol intake and preference. Sazetidine-A at 3 mg/kg significantly reduced nicotine self-administration in both lines.

CONCLUSIONS

Sazetidine-A significantly reduced alcohol and nicotine intake in P rats that self-administer higher levels of both drugs. Sazetidine-A may hold promise for the treatment of alcohol and nicotine addiction.

Preclinical characterization of A-582941: a novel alpha7 neuronal nicotinic receptor agonist with broad spectrum cognition-enhancing properties

Among the diverse sets of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), the alpha7 subtype is highly expressed in the hippocampus and cortex and is thought to play important roles in a variety of cognitive processes. In this review, we describe the properties of a novel biaryl diamine alpha7 nAChR agonist, A-582941. A-582941 was found to exhibit high-affinity binding and partial agonism at alpha7 nAChRs, with acceptable pharmacokinetic properties and excellent distribution to the central nervous system (CNS). In vitro and in vivo studies indicated that A-582941 activates signaling pathways known to be involved in cognitive function such as ERK1/2 and CREB phosphorylation. A-582941 enhanced cognitive performance in behavioral models that capture domains of working memory, short-term recognition memory, memory consolidation, and sensory gating deficit. A-582941 exhibited a benign secondary pharmacodynamic and tolerability profile as assessed in a battery of assays of cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and CNS function. The studies summarized in this review collectively provide preclinical validation that alpha7 nAChR agonism offers a mechanism with potential to improve cognitive deficits associated with various neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders.