RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Effects of methamphetamine isomers on d-methamphetamine self-administration and food-maintained responding in male rats
Bardo, M. T., Denehy, E. D., Hammerslag, L. R., Dwoskin, L. P., Blough, B. E., Landavazo, A., Bergman, J., & Kohut, S. J. (2019). Effects of methamphetamine isomers on d-methamphetamine self-administration and food-maintained responding in male rats. Psychopharmacology, 236(12), 3557-3565. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-019-05327-8
RATIONALE: Methamphetamine (METH) abuse is generally attributed to the d-isomer. Self-administration of l-METH has been examined only in rhesus monkeys with a history of cocaine self-administration or drug-naïve rats using high toxic doses.
OBJECTIVES: In this study, the ability of l-METH and, for comparison, d-METH to engender self-administration in experimentally naïve rats, as well as to decrease d-METH self-administration and food-maintained responding, was examined.
METHODS: Male Sprague-Dawley rats were used in 3 separate experiments. In experiment 1, the acquisition of l- or d-METH self-administration followed by dose-response determinations was studied. In experiment 2, rats were trained to self-administer d-METH (0.05 mg/kg/infusion) and, then, various doses of l- or d-METH were given acutely prior to the session; the effect of repeated l-METH (30 mg/kg) also was examined. In experiment 3, rats were trained to respond for food reinforcement and, then, various doses of l- or d-METH were given acutely prior to the session; the effect of repeated l-METH (3 mg/kg) also was examined.
RESULTS: Reliable acquisition of l- and d-METH self-administration was obtained at unit doses of 0.5 and 0.05 mg/kg/infusion respectively. The dose-response function for l-METH self-administration was flattened and shifted rightward compared with d-METH self-administration, with peak responding for l- and d-METH occurring at unit doses of 0.17 and 0.025 respectively. l-METH also was approximately 10-fold less potent than d-METH in decreasing d-METH self-administration and 2-fold lower in decreasing food-maintained responding. Tolerance did not occur to repeated l-METH pretreatments on either measure.
CONCLUSIONS: As a potential pharmacotherapeutic, l-METH has less abuse liability than d-METH and its efficacy in decreasing d-METH self-administration and food-maintained responding is sustained with repeated treatment.
