Article

Chronic atomoxetine treatment during adolescence decreases impulsive choice, but not impulsive action, in adult rats and alters markers of synaptic plasticity in the orbitofrontal cortex.

Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.
Psychopharmacology (Impact Factor: 4.06). 08/2011; 219(2):285-301. DOI: 10.1007/s00213-011-2419-9
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Impulsivity is a key symptom of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The use of the norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, atomoxetine, to treat ADHD suggests that the activity of the norepinephrine transporter (NET) may be important in regulating impulsive behavior. Many ADHD patients receive chronic drug treatment during adolescence, a time when frontal brain regions important for impulse control are undergoing extensive development.
The current study aimed to determine the effects of chronic atomoxetine treatment during adolescence in rats on two distinct forms of impulsivity in adulthood and whether any behavioral changes were accompanied by alterations in mRNA or protein levels within the frontal cortices.
Rats received daily injections of saline or atomoxetine (1 mg/kg) during adolescence (postnatal days 40-54). Two weeks later, animals were trained to perform either the delay-discounting test or the five-choice serial reaction time task (5CSRT).
Adolescent atomoxetine treatment caused a stable decrease in selection of small immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards (impulsive choice) in adulthood, but did not affect premature responding (impulsive action) in the 5CSRT. Chronic atomoxetine treatment also altered the ability of acute atomoxetine to modulate aspects of impulsivity, but did not change the response to d-amphetamine. Ex vivo analysis of brain tissue indicated that chronic atomoxetine decreased phosphorylation of CREB and ERK in the orbitofrontal cortex and decreased mRNA for BDNF and cdk5.
These data suggest that repeated administration of atomoxetine in adolescence can lead to stable decreases in impulsive choice during adulthood, potentially via modulating development of the orbitofrontal cortex.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
57 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Impulsive decision making is a hallmark of frequently occurring addiction disorders including alcohol dependence (AD). Therefore, ameliorating impulsive decision making is a promising target for the treatment of AD. Previous studies have shown that modafinil enhances cognitive control functions in various psychiatric disorders. However, the effects of modafinil on delay discounting and its underlying neural correlates have not been investigated as yet. The aim of the current study was to investigate the effects of modafinil on neural correlates of impulsive decision making in abstinent AD patients and healthy control (HC) subjects.
    Psychological medicine. 03/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although a multifaceted concept, many forms of impulsivity may originate from interactions between prefrontally-mediated cognitive control mechanisms and limbic, reward or incentive salience approach processes. We describe a novel task that combines reward and control processes to probe this putative interaction. The task involves elements of the monetary incentive delay task (Knutson et al., [2000]: Neuroimage 12:20-27) and the Go/No-Go task (Garavan et al., [1999]: Neuroimage 17:1820-1829) and requires human subjects to make fast responses to targets for financial reward but to occasionally inhibit responding when a NoGo signal rather than a target is presented. In elucidating the dynamic between reward anticipation and control we observed that successful inhibitions on monetary trials, relative to unsuccessful inhibitions, were associated, during the anticipation phase, with increased activation in the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG), decreased activity in the ventral striatum (VS), and altered functional connectivity between the two. Notably, this rIFG area had a small overlap but was largely distinct from an adjacent rIFG region that was active for the subsequent motor response inhibitions. Combined, the results suggest a role for adjacent regions of the rIFG in impulsive choice and in impulsive responding and identify a functional coupling between the rIFG and the VS. Hum Brain Mapp, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Human Brain Mapping 08/2014; · 6.88 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous work has established a robust relationship between impulsivity and addiction, and revealed that impulsive decision making predisposes the vulnerability to cocaine-seeking behavior in rats. An important next step is to assess whether elevated relapse vulnerability can be treated via the reduction of impulsive decision making. Therefore, this study explored whether subchronic atomoxetine treatment can reduce relapse vulnerability by reducing impulsive decision making. Rats were trained in the delayed reward task and were subjected to 3 weeks of cocaine self-administration. Following drug self-administration, animals were divided to different experimental groups and received the noradrenaline transporter inhibitor and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder drug atomoxetine or vehicle subchronically for 20 days. On days 1 and 10 after treatment cessation, a context-induced reinstatement test was performed. Throughout the entire experiment, changes in impulsive decision making were continuously monitored. Subchronic treatment with atomoxetine reduced context-induced reinstatement both 1 and 10 days after treatment cessation, only in animals receiving no extinction training. Interestingly, neither subchronic nor acute atomoxetine treatments affected impulsive decision making. Our data indicate that the enduring reduction in relapse sensitivity by atomoxetine occured independent of a reduction in impulsive decision making. Nonetheless, repeated atomoxetine administration seems a promising pharmacotherapeutical strategy to prevent relapse to cocaine seeking in abstinent drug-dependent subjects.
    Addiction Biology 07/2014; · 5.91 Impact Factor