Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Issues
    • Issue in progress
    • Issues by date
  • Sections
    • Editorial
    • Review
    • Research
    • Commentary
    • Psychopharmacology for the Clinician
    • Letters to the Editor
  • Topic Collections
  • Instructions for Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission checklist
    • Editorial policies
    • Publication fees
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Dr. Francis Wayne Quan Memorial Prize
    • Open access
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • About
    • General information
    • Staff
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
JPN
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
JPN

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Issues
    • Issue in progress
    • Issues by date
  • Sections
    • Editorial
    • Review
    • Research
    • Commentary
    • Psychopharmacology for the Clinician
    • Letters to the Editor
  • Topic Collections
  • Instructions for Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission checklist
    • Editorial policies
    • Publication fees
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Dr. Francis Wayne Quan Memorial Prize
    • Open access
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • About
    • General information
    • Staff
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact
  • Subscribe to our alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Follow JPN on Twitter
Editorial
Open Access

Does stimulant drug–induced sensitization occur in primates?

Marco Leyton
J Psychiatry Neurosci April 13, 2022 47 (2) E148-E152; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.220055
Marco Leyton
From the Departments of Psychiatry and Psychology, McGill University; the Department of Neurology & Neurosurgery, Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University; the Center for Studies in Behavioral Neurobiology, Concordia University; and the Research Unit on Children’s Psychosocial Maladjustment, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Que., Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Drug-induced sensitization is said to occur when a drug regimen leads to larger responses to the same dose or measurable responses to a previously ineffective low dose. Sensitization hypotheses of problematic substance use further propose that these effects facilitate the development of incentive responses to drug-paired cues.1 These effects are well-established in rodents,2–5 but, in some circles, it remains controversial whether they occur in primates (Box 1). What is the evidence?

Box 1:

Controversies

Contrary voices

Some well-respected researchers have expressed doubts that stimulant drug–induced sensitization develops in primates; e.g., “there is minimal evidence of sensitization in humans6,” and “sensitization… does not appear to happen in primates.7” Curiously, the latter statement was made when commenting on a study that was not about sensitization. Rhesus monkeys had self-administered cocaine for 100 days but were tested without drug and in an environment that had been paired with the absence of drug.8

History of the controversy

The debate about sensitization in primates primarily reflects 2 related issues. First, questions remain about the mediating neurobiology following extensive drug use. Second, it has been suggested that the low dopamine responses seen in people with substance use disorders under some testing conditions are the primary driver of addiction-related behaviours.9 In comparison, this writer and others propose that low dopamine states aggravate the clinical picture of addiction, but this does not include the ability to activate drug-seeking.10–13 To the contrary, there is considerable evidence for the converse.10,11,14 Dopamine release in humans is increased by all relapse triggers tested to date, including drug-related cues,15–19 small quantities of the drug,20,21 stress,22,23 and, in people with long histories of opioid use, drug withdrawal.24,25 As sagely noted by David Epstein,26 no one feature is likely to account for all clinically relevant aspects of addiction. Claims that sensitization is not one of the critical elements are likely misguided.

Implications for clinical practice

The incentive sensitization model proposes that repeated, intermittent exposure to strong rewards progressively increases their ability to elicit approach.4,12,13 These processes can become tied to either healthy or unhealthy pursuits.13,27,28 There is little evidence that the effects can be reversed, but, among those with addictions, there is evidence that sensitization-influenced reinforcement processes can be redirected toward healthy ones; e.g., the financial rewards provided in contingency management therapy.13,29

The evidence of drug-induced sensitization in humans has also raised concerns about prescribing stimulant medications to youth with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. There is little evidence that standard continuous exposure regimens of low to moderate doses lead to sensitization, but problems might arise in some,30 especially those who have been prescribed amphetamines as opposed to methylphenidate.31 This requires further study.

Sensitization to nonstimulant drugs in primates

Few studies have tested whether “non-stimulant” drugs can produce sensitization in primates precluding confident conclusions. This noted, both alcohol and opioids can have stimulant effects and these effects can become sensitized in rodents.32–34 In humans, there is preliminary evidence that striatal dopamine responses to alcohol35,36 and alcohol-paired cues37 are larger in high-than in low-risk drinkers, and alcohol use problems are associated with larger ethanol-induced stimulant responses38 and striatal dopamine release.39 Opioid sensitization in primates is less studied, and the relation to increased drug use remains less clear.32 There is, however, some evidence that repeat morphine administration can lead to behavioural sensitization40 and, in humans, early-life trauma is associated with increased risk of opioid use disorders and augmented morphine reward.41

Stimulant drug–induced behavioural sensitization in healthy humans

The first 2 attempts to demonstrate stimulant drug–induced behavioural sensitization in humans were unsuccessful.42,43 Both administered low doses of d-amphetamine (5 or 10 mg, orally). In comparison, 80 % of studies (8 of 10) administering at least 20 mg of d-amphetamine found evidence of sensitization.44–51 Among the 6 studies that administered at least 3 doses of 20 mg or more, 100 % found an effect.44–47,49,50 The most consistent changes were to the drug’s behaviourally energizing effects12,13 with augmented responses continuing for at least a year49 (Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Stimulant drug–induced behavioural sensitization in humans

Stimulant drug–induced behavioural sensitization in nonhuman primates

There is consistent evidence of cocaine and amphetamine-induced behavioural sensitization in nonhuman primates.54–69 As in humans, augmented responses have been seen for psychomotor stimulation, but psychosis-like phenomena can emerge following high-dose regimens. The effects can last for more than 2 years60 (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Stimulant drug–induced behavioural sensitization in nonhuman primates

Stimulant drug–induced behavioural sensitization in people with addictions

Clinical observations at least raise the possibility that people with stimulant drug addictions exhibit behavioural sensitization; e.g., markedly elevated incentive (drug-seeking) responses to small doses of the drug and drug-related cues. These observations noted, perhaps the most compelling demonstration that extensive substance use can lead to sensitization in humans investigated alcohol. In this 10-year prospective study, young adult drinkers (n = 163) received an alcohol challenge (0.8 g/kg, orally) at baseline and 5 and 10 years later.38 Among those who developed an alcohol use disorder (AUD; n = 39), the self-reported alcohol-induced “wanting” and “stimulation” responses became progressively larger. The larger the wanting and stimulation responses, the greater the likelihood of developing an AUD and the greater the number of AUD symptoms.

Stimulant drug–induced dopamine sensitization in healthy humans

Based on studies in rodents, 2 neurotransmitters have been implicated in drug-induced sensitization: dopamine2–4,70 and glutamate.70–73 In humans, the transmitter release literature is both smaller and limited to dopamine, but evidence of amphetamine-induced sensitization has been found in all 3 studies that administered at least 3 doses (0.3–0.4 mg/kg, orally).44,22,49 Correlational research suggests that these augmentations could continue to accumulate through to 150 uses or more.20 The drug use histories that yield sensitization can also lead to conditioned dopamine release.16,74

Stimulant drug–induced dopamine sensitization in nonhuman primates

Two studies giving 10–50 stimulant drug exposures found sensitized dopamine responses in nonhuman primates;75,76 4 studies with more extensive regimens did not.64,68,77,78 A number of explanations have been offered for the negative findings, including (1) small sample sizes (n = 4–6), particularly since, in both rodents and humans, only some develop an enlarged response;13,49 (2) the absence of drug-related cues during testing, an important feature since the expression of sensitization can become context-dependent;12,79,80 (3) the use of isoflurane,81 an anesthetic that can alter dopamine cell firing and release; (4) evidence that drug-induced dopamine sensitization is readily expressed following modest substance use75 but not following the ingestion of greater quantities with only brief abstinence periods before testing;77,82 (5) the possibility that, following many drug use sessions and the development of highly trained associations, dopamine cell reactivity comes to be influenced by reward-prediction errors (RPE; i.e., larger responses to unexpected drug delivery);21 and (6) for cocaine, sensitized glutamate release might be more important than dopamine.70

Stimulant drug–induced dopamine sensitization in people with addictions

In people with addictions, there is some evidence of dopamine sensitization. Compared with healthy controls, people who used methamphetamine showed larger amphetamine-induced dopamine responses in extrastriatal regions.83 Within the striatum, 1 study found larger responses to ethanol in people with an AUD39 while another study84 found larger responses to amphetamine in people with a gambling disorder. These studies noted, the most common finding in people with cocaine85–88 and amphetamine use disorders89 has been an absence of sensitized responses and even significantly reduced responses. These blunted responses may be specific to the testing conditions rather than evidence of ubiquitous dopamine deficits.12,79,80,90 Indeed, there is well-replicated evidence that people with stimulant use disorders exhibit robust dopamine responses to drug-related cues.15,17–19,91 Moreover, those with a cocaine use disorder can also exhibit larger stimulant drug–induced striatal dopamine responses than healthy volunteers when drug administration is unexpected.21 Together, these findings indicate that, in this population, there remains only modest evidence of dopamine sensitization per se, but the potential for large dopamine responses is retained, differing only in when it is expressed.

Conclusion

This brief analysis yields 3 main conclusions. First, despite occasional claims to the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence of stimulant drug–induced behavioural sensitization in both human and nonhuman primates (18 of 19 studies administering at least 3 doses of at least 0.25 mg/kg of amphetamine or high-dose cocaine). Second, there is compelling evidence of dopamine sensitization in primates (5 of 5 studies administering 3–50 drug doses). Third, behavioural sensitization following extended high-dose drug use occurs, but more work is needed to understand the mediating neurobiology and when the augmented responses are expressed. Answering these questions will require thoughtful study designs. For laboratory research, this includes (1) testing awake subjects in the same environment where the drug was previously given, (2) administering the drug intermittently92,93 with abstinence periods long enough to promote the incubation of both conditioned and sensitized responses, (3) testing how the influence of drug-paired cues (conditioning) and expectations (RPE) might change with progressively greater substance use, and (4) testing samples large enough to capture individual differences in susceptibility. Among those who are susceptible to drug use problems, features 1 and 2 resemble the early substance-use patterns that typically lead to a problem. This might not be a coincidence.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Isabelle Boileau, Andrea King, and Paul Vezina for feedback on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Footnotes

  • The views expressed in this editorial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries, the journal’s editorial board or the Canadian College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

  • Competing interests: None declared.

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original publication is properly cited, the use is noncommercial (i.e., research or educational use), and no modifications or adaptations are made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

References

  1. ↵
    1. Robinson TE,
    2. Berridge KC
    . The neural basis of drug craving: an incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 1993;18:247–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Kalivas PW,
    2. Stewart J
    . Dopamine transmission in the initiation and expression of drug- and stress-induced sensitization of motor activity. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 1991;16:223–44.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Vezina P
    . Sensitization of midbrain dopamine neuron reactivity and the self-administration of psychomotor stimulant drugs. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2004;27:827–39.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Berridge KC,
    2. Robinson TE
    . Liking, wanting, and the incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Am Psychol 2016;71:670–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Robinson MJ,
    2. Zumbusch AS,
    3. Anselme P
    . The incentive sensitization theory of addiction. The Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology 2022. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.715 (accessed 2022 Feb. 5).
  5. ↵
    1. Ivanov I,
    2. Bjork JM,
    3. Blair J,
    4. et al
    . Sensitization-based risk for substance abuse in vulnerable individuals with ADHD: review and reexamination of evidence. [Epub ahead of print]. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2022;135:104575.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Bradberry CW
    . Whole brain metabolic mapping–another chapter in a great book on the effects of cocaine in monkeys. [Epub ahead of print]. Neuropsychopharmacology 2021 Oct 13. doi:10.1038/s41386-021-01201-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    1. Porrino LJ,
    2. Smith HR,
    3. Beveridge TJR,
    4. et al
    . Residual deficits in functional brain activity after chronic cocaine self-administration in rhesus monkeys. [Epub ahead of print]. Neuropsychopharmacology 2021 Aug 12. doi:10.1038/s41386-021-01136-w.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. ↵
    1. Blum K,
    2. Gardner E,
    3. Oscar-Berman M,
    4. et al
    . “Liking” and “wanting” linked to reward deficiency syndrome (RDS): hypothesizing differential responsivity in brain reward circuitry. Curr Pharm Des 2012; 18:113–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Leyton M
    . What’s deficient in reward deficiency? J Psychiatry Neurosci 2014;39:291–3.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Boyle M
    . Neuroscience of addiction: relevance to prevention and treatment. Am J Psychiatry 2018;175:729–40.
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Leyton M
    . Conditioned and sensitized responses to stimulant drugs in humans. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2007;31:1601–13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Leyton M,
    2. Vezina P
    . Dopamine ups and downs in vulnerability to addictions: a neurodevelopmental model. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2014;35:268–76.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. ↵
    1. Stewart J
    . Psychological and neural mechanisms of relapse. Phil Trans R Soc B 2008;363:3146–58.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Milella MS,
    2. Fotros A,
    3. Gravel P,
    4. et al
    . Cocaine cue-induced dopamine release in the human prefrontal cortex. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2016;41:322–30.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Boileau I,
    2. Dagher A,
    3. Leyton M,
    4. et al
    . Conditioned dopamine release in humans: A PET [11C]raclopride study with amphetamine. J Neurosci 2007;27:3998–4003.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Wang GJ,
    3. Telang F,
    4. et al
    . Cocaine cues and dopamine in dorsal striatum: mechanism of craving in cocaine addiction. J Neurosci 2006;26:6583–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Wong DF,
    2. Kuwabara H,
    3. Schretlen DJ,
    4. et al
    . Increased occupancy of dopamine receptors in human striatum during cue-elicited cocaine craving. Neuropsychopharmacology 2006;31:2716–27.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Fotros A,
    2. Casey KF,
    3. Larcher K,
    4. et al
    . Cocaine cue-induced dopamine release in the amygdala and hippocampus: a high-resolution PET [18F]fallypride study in cocaine dependent participants. Neuropsychopharmacology 2013;38:1780–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Cox SML,
    2. Benkelfat C,
    3. Dagher A,
    4. et al
    . Striatal dopamine responses to intranasal cocaine self-administration in humans. Biol Psychiatry 2009;65:846–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Wang GJ,
    2. Wiers CE,
    3. Shumay E,
    4. et al
    . Expectation effects on brain dopamine responses to methylphenidate in cocaine use disorder. Transl Psychiatry 2019;9:93.
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. Booij L,
    2. Welfeld K,
    3. Leyton M,
    4. et al
    . Dopamine cross-sensitization between psychostimulant drugs and stress in healthy male volunteers. Transl Psychiatry 2016;6:e740 doi:10.1038/tp.2016.6.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. ↵
    1. Pruessner JC,
    2. Champagne F,
    3. Meaney MJ,
    4. et al
    . Dopamine release in response to a psychological stress in humans and its relationship to early life maternal care: a positron emission tomography study using [11C]raclopride. J Neurosci 2004;24:2825–31.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Shokri-Kojori E,
    2. Wang G-J,
    3. Volkow ND
    . Naloxone precipitated withdrawal increases dopamine release in the dorsal striatum of opioid dependent men. Transl Psychiatry 2021;11:445.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Leyton M
    . Why did the kitten cross the road? A meditation on positive vs. negative reinforcement in addiction. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2021;46:E184–5.
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Epstein D
    . Let’s agree to agree: a comment on Hogarth (2020), with a plea for not-so-competing theories of addiction. Neuropsychopharmacology 2020;45:715–6.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Venniro M,
    2. Zhang M,
    3. Caprioli D,
    4. et al
    . Volitional social interaction prevents drug addiction in rat models. Nat Neurosci 2018;21:1520–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Mitchell JB,
    2. Stewart J
    . Facilitation of sexual behaviors in the male rat in the presence of stimuli previously paired with systemic injections of morphine. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1990;35:367–72.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Bentzley BS,
    2. Han SS,
    3. Neuner S,
    4. et al
    . Comparison of treatments for cocaine use disorder among adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2021;4:e218049.
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. Fotopoulos N,
    2. Devenyi GA,
    3. Guay S,
    4. et al
    . Cumulative exposure to ADHD medication is inversely related to hippocampal subregional volume in children. Neuroimage Clin 2021;31:102695.
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Moran LV,
    2. Ongur D,
    3. Hsu J,
    4. et al
    . Psychosis with methylphenidate or amphetamine in patients with ADHD. N Engl J Med 2019;380:1128–38.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Badiani A,
    2. Belin D,
    3. Epstein D,
    4. et al
    . Opiate versus psychostimulant addiction: the differences do matter. Nat Rev Neurosci 2011;12:685–700.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Newman EL,
    2. Leonard MZ,
    3. Arena DT,
    4. et al
    . Social defeat stress and escalation of cocaine and alcohol consumption: focus on CRF. Neurobiol Stress 2018;9:151–65.
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    1. Cofresí RU,
    2. Bartholow BD,
    3. Piasecki TM
    . Evidence for incentive salience sensitization as a pathway to alcohol use disorder. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2019;107:897926.
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. Boileau I,
    2. Assad JM,
    3. Pihl RO,
    4. et al
    . Alcohol promotes dopamine release in human nucleus accumbens. Synapse 2003;49:226–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Setiawan E,
    2. Pihl RO,
    3. Dagher A,
    4. et al
    . Differential striatal dopamine responses following oral alcohol in individuals at varying risk for dependence. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2014;38:126–34.
    OpenUrl
  34. ↵
    1. Oberlin BG,
    2. Dzemidzic M,
    3. Tran SM,
    4. et al
    . Beer flavor provokes striatal dopamine release in male drinkers: mediation by family history of alcoholism. Neuropsychopharmacology 2013;38:1617–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. King A,
    2. Vena A,
    3. Hasin DH,
    4. et al
    . Subjective responses to alcohol in the development and maintenance of alcohol use disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2021;178:560–71.
    OpenUrl
  36. ↵
    1. Yoder KK,
    2. Albrecht DS,
    3. Dzemidzic M,
    4. et al
    . Differences in IV alcohol-induced dopamine release in the ventral striatum of social drinkers and nontreatment-seeking alcoholics. Drug Alcohol Depend 2016;160:163–9.
    OpenUrl
  37. ↵
    1. Chen S,
    2. Zhai H,
    3. Cui Y,
    4. et al
    . Clonidine attenuates morphine withdrawal and subsequent drug sensitization in rhesus monkeys. Acta Pharmacol Sin 2007;28:473–83.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Carlyle M,
    2. Broomby R,
    3. Simpson G,
    4. et al
    . A randomised, double-blind study investigating the relationship between early childhood trauma and the rewarding effects of morphine. Addict Biol 2021; 26:e13047.
    OpenUrl
  39. ↵
    1. Johanson CE,
    2. Uhlenhuth EH
    . Drug preference and mood in humans: repeated assessment of d-amphetamine. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1981;14:159–63.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Kelly TH,
    2. Foltin RW,
    3. Fischman MW
    . The effects of repeated amphetamine exposure on multiple measures of human behavior. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1991;38:417–26.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Weidenauer A,
    2. Bauer M,
    3. Sauerzopf U,
    4. et al
    . On the relationship of first-episode psychosis to the amphetamine-sensitized state: a dopamine D(2/3) receptor agonist radioligand study. Transl Psychiatry 2020;10:2.
    OpenUrl
    1. Smart K,
    2. Nagano-Saito A,
    3. Milella M,
    4. et al
    . Low metabotropic glutamate type 5 receptor binding is associated with d-amphetamine sensitization in mice and humans. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2021;46:E1–13.
    OpenUrl
    1. Strakowski SM,
    2. Sax KW
    . Progressive behavioral response to repeated d-amphetamine challenge: further evidence for sensitization in humans. Biol Psychiatry 1998;44:1171–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Strakowski SM,
    2. Sax KW,
    3. Rosenberg HL,
    4. et al
    . Human response to repeated low-dose d-amphetamine: evidence for behavioral enhancement and tolerance. Neuropsychopharmacology 2001;25:548–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Strakowski SM,
    2. Sax KW,
    3. Setters MJ,
    4. et al
    . Enhanced response to repeated d-amphetamine challenge: evidence for behavioral sensitization in humans. Biol Psychiatry 1996;40:872–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    1. Boileau I,
    2. Dagher A,
    3. Leyton M,
    4. et al
    . Modeling sensitization to stimulants in humans: a [11C]raclopride/PET study in healthy volunteers. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2006;63:1386–95.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. O’Daly OG,
    2. Joyce D,
    3. Stephan KE,
    4. et al
    . Functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation of the amphetamine sensitization model of schizophrenia in healthy male volunteers. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2011;68:545–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Childs E,
    2. de Wit H
    . Contextual conditioning enhances the psychostimulant and incentive properties of amphetamine in humans. Addict Biol 2013;18:985–92.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Kegeles LS,
    2. Zea-Ponce Y,
    3. Abi-Dargham A,
    4. et al
    . Stability of [123I] IBZM SPECT measurement of amphetamine-induced striatal dopamine release in humans. Synapse 1999;31:302–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Wachtel SR,
    2. de Wit H
    . Subjective and behavioral effects of repeated d-amphetamine in humans. Behav Pharmacol 1999;10:271–81.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. ↵
    1. Tatum AL,
    2. Seevers MH
    . Experimental cocaine addiction. J Exp Pharmacol Exp Ther 1929;36:401–10.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    1. Ellinwood EH
    . Effect of chronic methamphetamine intoxication in rhesus monkeys. Biol Psychiatry 1971;3:25–32.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Garver DL,
    2. Schlemmer R Jr.,
    3. Maas JW,
    4. et al
    . A schizophreniform behavioral psychosis mediated by dopamine. Am J Psychiatry 1975; 132:33–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Post RM,
    2. Kopanda RT
    . Cocaine, kindling, and reverse tolerance. Lancet 1975;1:409–10.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Ellinwood EH,
    2. Kilbey MM
    . Amphetamine stereotypy: the influence of environmental factors and prepotent behavioral patterns on its topography and development. Biol Psychiatry 1975;10:3–16.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Ridley RM,
    2. Baker HF,
    3. Scraggs PR
    . The time course of the behavioral effects of amphetamine and their reversal by haloperidol in a primate species. Biol Psychiatry 1979;14:753–65.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  47. ↵
    1. Castner SA,
    2. Goldman-Rakic PS
    . Long-lasting psychotomimetic consequences of repeated low-dose amphetamine exposure in rhesus monkeys. Neuropsychopharmacology 1999;20:10–28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Post RM,
    2. Kopanda RT,
    3. Black KE
    . Progressive effects of cocaine on behavior and central amine metabolism in rhesus monkeys: relationship to kindling and psychosis. Biol Psychiatry 1976;11:403–19.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Ridley RM,
    2. Baker HF,
    3. Owen F,
    4. et al
    . Behavioral and biochemical effects of chronic amphetamine treatment in the vervet monkey. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1982;78:245–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Farfel GM,
    2. Klevens MS,
    3. Woolverton WL,
    4. et al
    . Effects of repeated injections of cocaine on catecholamine receptors binding sites, dopamine transporter binding sites and behavior in the rhesus monkey. Brain Res 1992;578:235–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    1. Castner SA,
    2. Al-Tikriti MS,
    3. Baldwin RM,
    4. et al
    . Behavioral changes and [123I]IBZM equilibrium SPECT measurement of amphetamine-induced dopamine release in rhesus monkeys exposed to subchronic amphetamine. Neuropsychopharmacology 2000;22:4–13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Castner SA,
    2. Goldman-Rakic PS
    . Amphetamine sensitization of hallucinatory-like behaviors is dependent on prefrontal cortex in nonhuman primates. Biol Psychiatry 2003;54:105–10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Rodriguez JS,
    2. Morris SM,
    3. Hotchkiss CE,
    4. et al
    . The effects of chronic methylphenidate administration on operant test battery performance in juvenile rhesus monkeys. Neurotoxicol Teratol 2010; 32: 142–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Gill KE,
    2. Pierre PJ,
    3. Daunais J,
    4. et al
    . Chronic treatment with extended release methylphenidate does not alter dopamine systems or increase vulnerability for cocaine self-administration: a study in nonhuman primates. Neuropsychopharmacology 2012;37:2555–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. ↵
    1. Soto PL,
    2. Wilcox KM,
    3. Zhou Y,
    4. et al
    . d,l- Amphetamine mixture in peri-adolescent rhesus monkeys: effects on physiology, behavior, and dopamine system development. Neuropsychopharmacology 2012;37:2566–79.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. ↵
    1. Martelle SE,
    2. Porrino LJ,
    3. Nader MA
    . Effects of chronic methylphenidate in adolescence on later methylphenidate self-administration in rhesus monkeys. Behav Pharmacol 2013;24:478–81.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  51. ↵
    1. Vanderschuren LJMJ,
    2. Kalivas PW
    . Alterations in dopaminergic and glutamatergic transmission in the induction and expression of behavioral sensitization: a critical review of preclinical studies. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2000;151:99–120.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Pierce RC,
    2. Bell K,
    3. Duffy P,
    4. et al
    . Repeated cocaine augments excitatory amino acid transmission in the nucleus accumbens only in rats having developed behavioral sensitization. J Neurosci 1996;16:1550–60.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Brebner K,
    2. Wong TP,
    3. Liu L,
    4. et al
    . Nucleus accumbens long-term depression and the expression of behavioral sensitization. Science 2005;310:1340–3.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  52. ↵
    1. Wolf ME
    . Synaptic mechanisms underlying persistent cocaine craving. Nat Rev Neurosci 2016;17:351–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. ↵
    1. Cox SML,
    2. Yau Y,
    3. Larcher K,
    4. et al
    . Cocaine cue-induced dopamine release in recreational cocaine users. Sci Rep 2017;7:46665. doi: 10.1038/srep46665.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Bradberry CW
    . Acute and chronic dopamine dynamics in a model of recreational cocaine use. J Neurosci 2000;20:7109–15.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. ↵
    1. Domino EF,
    2. Tsukada H
    . Nicotine sensitization of monkey striatal dopamine release. Eur J Pharmacol 2009;607:91–5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  56. ↵
    1. Bradberry CW,
    2. Rubino SR
    . Dopaminergic responses to self-administered cocaine in Rhesus monkeys do not sensitize following high cumulative intake. Eur J Neurosci 2006;23:2773–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  57. ↵
    1. Ota M,
    2. Ogawa S,
    3. Kato K,
    4. et al
    . Striatal and extra-striatal dopamine release in the common marmoset brain measured by positron emission tomography and [18F]fallypride. Neurosci Res 2015;101:1–5.
    OpenUrl
  58. ↵
    1. Vezina P,
    2. Leyton M
    . Conditioned cues and the expression of sensitization in animals and humans. Neuropharmacology 2009;56 (Suppl 1):160–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. ↵
    1. Leyton M,
    2. Vezina P
    . Striatal ups and downs: their roles in vulnerability to addictions in humans. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2013;37(9 Pt A):1999–2014.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. ↵
    1. Castner SA,
    2. Williams GV
    . From vice to virtue: insights from sensitization in the nonhuman primate. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2007;31:1572–92.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  61. ↵
    1. Vezina P,
    2. McGehee DS,
    3. Green WN
    . Exposure to nicotine and sensitization of nicotine-induced behaviors. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2007;31:1625–38.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. ↵
    1. Boileau I,
    2. Payer D,
    3. Rusjan P,
    4. et al
    . Heightened dopaminergic response to amphetamine at the D3 dopamine receptor in methamphetamine users. Neuropsychopharmacology 2016;41:2994–3002.
    OpenUrl
  63. ↵
    1. Boileau I,
    2. Payer D,
    3. Chugani B,
    4. et al
    . In vivo evidence for greater amphetamine-induced dopamine release in pathological gambling: a positron emission tomography study with [11C]-(+)-PHNO. Mol Psychiatry 2014;19:1305–13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  64. ↵
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Wang GJ,
    3. Fowler JS,
    4. et al
    . Decreased striatal dopaminergic responsiveness in detoxified cocaine-dependent subjects. Nature 1997;24:830–3.
    OpenUrl
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Wang GJ,
    3. Ma Y,
    4. et al
    . Activation of orbital and medial prefrontal cortex by methylphenidate in cocaine-addicted subjects but not in controls: relevance to addiction. J Neurosci 2005;25:3932–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Tomasi D,
    3. Wang G-J,
    4. et al
    . Stimulant-induced dopamine increases are markedly blunted in active cocaine abusers. Mol Psychiatry 2014;19:1037–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. ↵
    1. Martinez D,
    2. Carpenter KM,
    3. Liu F,
    4. et al
    . Imaging dopamine transmission in cocaine dependence: link between neurochemistry and response to treatment. Am J Psychiatry 2011;168:634–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. ↵
    1. Wang GJ,
    2. Smith L,
    3. Volkow ND,
    4. et al
    . Decreased dopamine activity predicts relapse in methamphetamine abusers. Mol Psychiatry 2012;17:918–25.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. ↵
    1. Leyton M
    . Ubiquitous dopamine deficit hypotheses in cocaine use disorder lack support. Am J Psychiatry 2021;178:469.
    OpenUrl
  68. ↵
    1. Di Ciano P,
    2. de Wit H,
    3. Mansouri E,
    4. et al
    . The influence of conditioned stimuli on [11C]-(+)-PHNO PET binding in tobacco smokers after a one week abstinence. Sci Rep 2021;11:11667.
    OpenUrl
  69. ↵
    1. Calipari ES,
    2. Ferris MJ,
    3. Zimmer BA,
    4. et al
    . Temporal pattern of cocaine intake determines tolerance vs sensitization of cocaine effects at the dopamine transporter. Neuropsychopharmacology 2013;38:2385–92.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  70. ↵
    1. Samaha AN,
    2. Khoo SY-S,
    3. Ferrario CR,
    4. et al
    . Dopamine ‘ups and downs’ revisited. Trends Neurosci 2021;44:516–26.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience: 47 (2)
J Psychiatry Neurosci
Vol. 47, Issue 2
27 Apr 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on JPN.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Does stimulant drug–induced sensitization occur in primates?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from JPN
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the JPN web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Does stimulant drug–induced sensitization occur in primates?
Marco Leyton
J Psychiatry Neurosci Apr 2022, 47 (2) E148-E152; DOI: 10.1503/jpn.220055

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Does stimulant drug–induced sensitization occur in primates?
Marco Leyton
J Psychiatry Neurosci Apr 2022, 47 (2) E148-E152; DOI: 10.1503/jpn.220055
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Alerts
  • RSS

Authors & Reviewers

  • Overview for Authors
  • Submit a manuscript
  • Manuscript Submission Checklist

About

  • General Information
  • Staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising
  • Reprints
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibility
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1180-4882.

All editorial matter in JPN represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.
To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: [email protected].
View CMA's Accessibility policy.

Powered by HighWire