Article

Interaction between glucocorticoid hormones, stress and psychostimulant drugs.

INSERM U259, Université de Bordeaux 2, Rue Camille Saint-Saëns, 33077 Bordeaux Cedex, France.
European Journal of Neuroscience (Impact Factor: 3.67). 09/2002; 16(3):387-94. DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02089.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In this review we summarize data obtained from animal studies showing that glucocorticoid hormones have a facilitatory role on behavioural responses to psychostimulant drugs such as locomotor activity, self-administration and relapse. These behavioural effects of glucocorticoids involve an action on the meso-accumbens dopamine system, one of the major systems mediating the addictive properties of drugs of abuse. The effects of glucocorticoids in the nucleus accumbens are site-specific; these hormones modify dopamine transmission in only the shell of this nucleus without modifying it in the core. Studies with corticosteroid receptor antagonists suggest that the dopaminergic effects of these hormones depend mostly on glucocorticoid, not on mineralocorticoid receptors. These data suggest that an increase in glucocorticoid hormones, through an action on mesolimbic dopamine neurons, could increase vulnerability to drug abuse. We also discuss the implications of this finding with respect to the physiological role of glucocorticoids. It is proposed that an increase in glucocorticoids, by activating the reward pathway, could counteract the aversive effects of stress. During chronic stress, repeated increases in glucocorticoids and dopamine would result in sensitization of the reward system. This sensitized state, which can persist after the end of the stress, would render the subject more responsive to drugs of abuse and consequently more vulnerable to the development of addiction.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
156 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: According to genetic studies, the acute stimulating effect of ethanol seems to be associated with an increased predisposition to consume large quantities of ethanol. Ethanol-induced stimulation has been rarely reported in adult rats. However, infant rats, particularly during the second postnatal week of life, are highly sensitive to ethanol-induced behavioral activation. They also consume more ethanol than in later ontogenetic stages. In adult mice repeated ethanol experience usually results in sensitization to the stimulating effect of ethanol, while tolerance is the predominant result in rats. The present study was designed to explore in rats whether repeated exposure to ethanol during infancy modifies subjects' sensitivity to the stimulating effect of the drug, either increasing or decreasing its magnitude (i.e. sensitization or tolerance, respectively). Furthermore, we also explored the possible context-modulation of these effects. In two experiments, subjects were trained with water or ethanol (2.5g/kg) between postnatal days (PDs) 8 and 12 (Experiment 1) or between PDs 14 and 18 (Experiment 2), and tested in response to water or ethanol two days later. In these experiments we identified three variables that critically modulate the effect of the repeated ethanol exposure: sex, context and age. Ethanol exclusively and consistently induced locomotor sensitization in males trained outside of the testing context (Experiments 1a and 1b), while tolerance to the stimulating effect of ethanol was observed in males and females trained in the testing context (Experiment 1a). In Experiment 2 tolerance was detected in females trained outside of the testing context. Finally, experience with the testing context during training strongly attenuated the stimulating effect of ethanol in the older subjects (Experiment 2). These results show that the same ethanol treatment can produce opposite effects (tolerance or sensitization) and demonstrate the involvement of Pavlovian conditioning in the development of tolerance. Furthermore, sex was revealed as an important factor to take into consideration in the analysis of chronic experience with ethanol during infancy. We can conclude that specific ontogenetic stages can be used to study the biological determinants underlying both ethanol-induced tolerance and sensitization, and the environmental modulators of these effects. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Physiology & Behavior 11/2014; 139C:50-58. · 3.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Eating disorders are multifactorial conditions that can involve a combination of genetic, metabolic, environmental, and behavioral factors. Studies in humans and laboratory animals show that eating can also be regulated by factors unrelated to metabolic control. Several studies suggest a link between stress, access to highly palatable food, and eating disorders. Eating “comfort foods” in response to a negative emotional state, for example, suggests that some individuals overeat to self-medicate. Clinical data suggest that some individuals may develop addiction-like behaviors from consuming palatable foods. Based on this observation, “food addiction” has emerged as an area of intense scientific research. A growing body of evidence suggests that some aspects of food addiction, such as compulsive eating behavior, can be modeled in animals. Moreover, several areas of the brain, including various neurotransmitter systems, are involved in the reinforcement effects of both food and drugs, suggesting that natural and pharmacological stimuli activate similar neural systems. In addition, several recent studies have identified a putative connection between neural circuits activated in the seeking and intake of both palatable food and drugs. The development of well-characterized animal models will increase our understanding of the etiological factors of food addiction and will help identify the neural substrates involved in eating disorders such as compulsive overeating. Such models will facilitate the development and validation of targeted pharmacological therapies.
    Nutrients 10/2014; 2014(6):4591-4609. · 3.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: First line antidepressants are the so-called SSRI's (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors), e.g. fluvoxamine, fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine and escitalopram. Unfortunately, these drugs mostly do not provide full symptom relief and have a slow onset of action. Therefore also other antidepressants are being prescribed that inhibit the reuptake of norepinephrine (e.g. reboxetine, desipramine) or the reuptake of both serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (e.g. venlafaxine, duloxetine, milnacipran). Nevertheless, many patients encounter residual symptoms such as impaired pleasure, impaired motivation, and lack of energy. It is hypothesized that an impaired brain reward system may underlie these residual symptoms. In agreement, there is some evidence that reuptake inhibitors of both norepinephrine and dopamine (e.g. methylphenidate, bupropion, nomifensine) affect these residual symptoms. In the pipeline are new drugs that block all three monoamine transporters for the reuptake of 5-HT, norepinephrine and dopamine, the so-called triple reuptake inhibitors (TRI). The working mechanisms of the above-mentioned antidepressants are discussed, and it is speculated whether depressed patients with different symptoms, sometimes even opposite ones due to atypical or melancholic features, can be matched with the different drug treatments available. In other words, is personalized medicine for major depression an option in the near future? Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    European Journal of Pharmacology 01/2015; · 2.68 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
1 Download
Available from