Neural and behavioral effects of a novel mu opioid receptor antagonist in binge-eating obese people

Victoria C Cambridge, Hisham Ziauddeen, Pradeep J Nathan, Naresh Subramaniam, Chris Dodds, Samuel R Chamberlain, Annelize Koch, Kay Maltby, Andrew L Skeggs, Antonella Napolitano, I Sadaf Farooqi, Edward T Bullmore, Paul C Fletcher, Victoria C Cambridge, Hisham Ziauddeen, Pradeep J Nathan, Naresh Subramaniam, Chris Dodds, Samuel R Chamberlain, Annelize Koch, Kay Maltby, Andrew L Skeggs, Antonella Napolitano, I Sadaf Farooqi, Edward T Bullmore, Paul C Fletcher

Abstract

Background: Binge eating is associated with obesity and has been conceptualized as "food addiction." However, this view has received only inconsistent support in humans, and limited evidence relates key neurocircuitry to the disorder. Moreover, relatively few studies have used pharmacologic functional magnetic resonance imaging to probe the underlying basis of altered eating behaviors.

Methods: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study, we explored the effects of a potent mu-opioid receptor antagonist, GSK1521498, in obese individuals with moderate binge eating. Subjects were tested during a baseline placebo run-in period and retested after 28-days of drug (n = 21) or placebo (n = 21) treatment. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging and behavioral measures, we determined the drug's effects on brain responses to food images and, separately, on motivation to expend energy to view comparable images.

Results: Compared with placebo, GSK1521498 was associated with a significant reduction in pallidum/putamen responses to pictures of high-calorie food and a reduction in motivation to view images of high-calorie food. Intriguingly, although motivational responding was reduced, subjective liking for the same images actually increased following drug treatment.

Conclusions: Stimulus-specific putamen/pallidal responses in obese people with binge eating are sensitive to altered mu-opioid function. This neuromodulation was accompanied by reductions in motivational responding, as measured by grip force, although subjective liking responses to the same stimuli actually increased. As well as providing evidence for a link between the opioid system and food-related behavior in binge-eating obese individuals, these results support a dissociation across measures of motivation and liking associated with food-related stimuli in these individuals.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01195792.

Copyright © 2013 Society of Biological Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study design. Following screening and a 7-day single-blind, placebo run-in, a baseline assessment was performed during a 2-day stay on the clinical research unit. This included the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and grip force tasks that are the focus of this article. Thereafter, participants were randomised to receive oral GSK1521498 (5 mg) or placebo for 28 days. Further inpatient assessments were performed on Day 14 and Day 28. fMRI and grip force task were repeated on Day 28. Several other physical, cognitive, and eating measures were performed over the course of the visits (see Ziauddeen et al. for details).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Functional magnetic resonance imaging task: liking ratings. Subjective liking of food images was assessed (see Methods and Materials) using duration of button press and is represented here in milliseconds. Average values for each of the four image categories are shown before (Day –1) and after (Day 28) drug and placebo treatment. HC, high-calorie images; LC, low calorie images; NFR, nonfood rewarding images; NFNR, nonfood, nonrewarding images.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Functional magnetic resonance imaging results at Day –1. The upper panel depicts the regions of interest used on orthogonal maximum intensity projections (“glass brains” viewed from the right (left projection), from behind (middle) and from above (right). The lower panels show the significant (p<.05, uncorrected for display) areas of activation when contrasting viewing of high-calorie to low-calorie food images at Day –1. This contrast used the placebo and GSK1521498 treatment groups combined and shows activity across key regions of reward circuitry. Full details of the activation foci are presented in Table 1. Areas of significant activation are rendered onto a standard template image in Montreal Neurological Institute space with sections chosen at the coordinates most appropriate to display the key activations. This activation map was used as a mask to constrain subsequent analysis exploring condition-specific effects of GSK1521498.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) results Day 28: drug-by-stimulus-by-reward interaction. fMRI results at Day 28 showing drug by stimulus type (food vs. nonfood) by reward type (high calorie/high reward vs. low calorie/low reward). The pallidum/putamen region demonstrating this interaction (p<.05, uncorrected for multiple comparisons for display) is shown superimposed onto orthogonal sections of a structural MRI in standard Montreal Neurological Institute space. In the lower right panel are plotted the parameter estimates for each of the stimulus types after placebo and GSK1521498 treatment. HC, high-calorie images; LC, low calorie images; NFHR, nonfood high reward images; NFNR, nonfood, nonrewarding images.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Grip force task: effort expended and liking ratings. The top panel shows the grip force exerted and the corresponding liking ratings at baseline in both groups and separately for placebo and the GSK1521498 group at the end of treatment. It can be seen that the difference between force exerted for high-fat (HF) versus low-fat (LF) food images is no longer significant after drug treatment, even though the subjective liking for these images is higher. The bottom panel displays the correlations between the exerted force and liking ratings for the high-fat food images, again at baseline for both groups and separately at Day 28. The correlation between these two measures is seen at baseline and in the placebo group at the end of treatment but is lost in the drug group. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Change from baseline in grip force and liking ratings. *p < .05; **p < .01. HF, high fat; LF, low fat; PBO, placebo.

References

    1. Berridge K.C. Food reward: Brain substrates of wanting and liking. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1996;20:1–25.
    1. Robbins T.W., Everitt B.J. A role for mesencephalic dopamine in activation: Commentary on Berridge (2006) Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2007;191:433–437.
    1. de Wit S., Dickinson A. Associative theories of goal-directed behaviour: A case for animal-human translational models. Psychol Res. 2009;73:463–476.
    1. Everitt B.J., Belin D., Economidou D., Pelloux Y., Dalley J.W., Robbins T.W. Review. Neural mechanisms underlying the vulnerability to develop compulsive drug-seeking habits and addiction. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008;363:3125–3135.
    1. Everitt B.J., Robbins T.W. Neural systems of reinforcement for drug addiction: From actions to habits to compulsion. Nat Neurosci. 2005;8:1481–1489.
    1. Berridge K.C. “Liking” and “wanting” food rewards: Brain substrates and roles in eating disorders. Physiol Behav. 2009;97:537–550.
    1. Yeomans M.R., Gray R.W. Opioid peptides and the control of human ingestive behaviour. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2002;26:713–728.
    1. Calcagnetti D.J., Reid L.D. Morphine and acceptability of putative reinforcers. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1983;18:567–569.
    1. Cooper S.J., Kirkham T.C. Opioid mechanisms in the control of food consumption and taste preferences. In: Hertz A., editor. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology. Springer-Verlag; Berlin: 1993. pp. 239–262.
    1. Gosnell B.A., Levine A.S. Stimulation of ingestive behaviour by preferential and selective opioid agonists. In: Cooper S.J., Clifton P.G., editors. Drug Receptor Subtypes and Ingestive Behaviour. Academic Press; London: 1996. pp. 147–166.
    1. Pecina S., Berridge K.C. Opioid site in nucleus accumbens shell mediates eating and hedonic “liking” for food: Map based on microinjection Fos plumes. Brain Res. 2000;863:71–86.
    1. Kelley A.E., Bakshi V.P., Haber S.N., Steininger T.L., Will M.J., Zhang M. Opioid modulation of taste hedonics within the ventral striatum. Physiol Behav. 2002;76:365–377.
    1. Nathan P.J., Bullmore E.T. From taste hedonics to motivational drive: Central mu-opioid receptors and binge-eating behaviour. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2009;12:995–1008.
    1. Le Merrer J., Becker J.A., Befort K., Kieffer B.L. Reward processing by the opioid system in the brain. Physiol Rev. 2009;89:1379–1412.
    1. Spanagel R., Herz A., Shippenberg T.S. Opposing tonically active endogenous opioid systems modulate the mesolimbic dopaminergic pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992;89:2046–2050.
    1. Kalivas P.W. Neurotransmitter regulation of dopamine neurons in the ventral tegmental area. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 1993;18:75–113.
    1. Rada P., Barson J.R., Leibowitz S.F., Hoebel B.G. Opioids in the hypothalamus control dopamine and acetylcholine levels in the nucleus accumbens. Brain Res. 2010;1312:1–9.
    1. Mathon D.S., Ramakers G.M., Pintar J.E., Marinelli M. Decreased firing frequency of midbrain dopamine neurons in mice lacking mu opioid receptors. Eur J Neurosci. 2005;21:2883–2886.
    1. Chefer V.I., Kieffer B.L., Shippenberg T.S. Basal and morphine-evoked dopaminergic neurotransmission in the nucleus accumbens of MOR- and DOR-knockout mice. Eur J Neurosci. 2003;18:1915–1922.
    1. Cottone P., Sabino V., Steardo L., Zorrilla E.P. Opioid-dependent anticipatory negative contrast and binge-like eating in rats with limited access to highly preferred food. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008;33:524–535.
    1. Giuliano C., Robbins T.W., Nathan P.J., Bullmore E.T., Everitt B.J. Inhibition of opioid transmission at the mu-opioid receptor prevents both food seeking and binge-like eating. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012;37:2643–2652.
    1. Davis C.A., Levitan R.D., Reid C., Carter J.C., Kaplan A.S., Patte K.A. Dopamine for “wanting” and opioids for “liking”: A comparison of obese adults with and without binge eating. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009;17:1220–1225.
    1. Johnson PM, Kenny PJ (2010): Dopamine D2 receptors in addiction-like reward dysfunction and compulsive eating in obese rats. Nat Neurosci 13:635–641.
    1. Gearhardt A.N., Corbin W.R., Brownell K.D. Food addiction: An examination of the diagnostic criteria for dependence. J Addict Med. 2009;3:1–7.
    1. Wilson G.T. Eating disorders, obesity and addiction. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2010;18:341–351.
    1. Ziauddeen H., Farooqi I.S., Fletcher P.C. Obesity and the brain: How convincing is the addiction model? Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012;13:279–286.
    1. Matthews P.M., Honey G.D., Bullmore E.T. Applications of fMRI in translational medicine and clinical practice. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7:732–744.
    1. Rabiner E.A., Beaver J., Makwana A., Searle G., Long C., Nathan P.J. Pharmacological differentiation of opioid receptor antagonists by molecular and functional imaging of target occupancy and food reward-related brain activation in humans. Mol Psychiatry. 2011;16(826–835):785.
    1. Volkow N.D., Wang G.J., Maynard L., Jayne M., Fowler J.S., Zhu W. Brain dopamine is associated with eating behaviors in humans. Int J Eat Disord. 2003;33:136–142.
    1. Wang G.J., Volkow N.D., Fowler J.S. The role of dopamine in motivation for food in humans: Implications for obesity. Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2002;6:601–609.
    1. Wang G.J., Volkow N.D., Logan J., Pappas N.R., Wong C.T., Zhu W. Brain dopamine and obesity. Lancet. 2001;357:354–357.
    1. Wang G.J., Volkow N.D., Thanos P.K., Fowler J.S. Imaging of brain dopamine pathways: Implications for understanding obesity. J Addict Med. 2009;3:8–18.
    1. Nathan P.J., O’Neill B.V., Mogg K., Bradley B.P., Beaver J., Bani M. The effects of the dopamine D(3) receptor antagonist GSK598809 on attentional bias to palatable food cues in overweight and obese subjects. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;15:149–161.
    1. Fletcher P.C., Napolitano A., Skeggs A., Miller S.R., Delafont B., Cambridge V.C. Distinct modulatory effects of satiety and sibutramine on brain responses to food images in humans: A double dissociation across hypothalamus, amygdala, and ventral striatum. J Neurosci. 2010;30:14346–14355.
    1. Oltmanns K.M., Heldmann M., Daul S., Klose S., Rotte M., Schafer M. Sibutramine promotes amygdala activity under fasting conditions in obese women. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2012;221:693–700.
    1. Chamorro A.J., Marcos M., Miron-Canelo J.A., Pastor I., Gonzalez-Sarmiento R., Laso F.J. Association of micro-opioid receptor (OPRM1) gene polymorphism with response to naltrexone in alcohol dependence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Addict Biol. 2012;17:505–512.
    1. Ignar D.M., Goetz A.S., Noble K.N., Carballo L.H., Stroup A.E., Fisher J.C. Regulation of ingestive behaviors in the rat by GSK1521498, a novel micro-opioid receptor-selective inverse agonist. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2011;339:24–34.
    1. Nathan P.J., O'Neill B.V., Bush M.A., Koch A., Tao W.X., Maltby K. Opioid receptor modulation of hedonic taste preference and food intake: A single-dose safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic investigation with GSK1521498, a novel mu-opioid receptor inverse agonist. J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;52:464–474.
    1. Ziauddeen H, Chamberlain S, Nathan PJ, Koch A, Napolitano A, Bush MA, et al. (2012): Effects of the mu opioid receptor anatagonist GSK1521498 on hedonic and consummatory behaviour: A proof of mechanism study in binge eating subjects [published online ahead of print November 13]. Mol Psychiatry.
    1. Gormally J., Black S., Daston S., Rardin D. The assessment of binge eating severity among obese persons. Addict Behav. 1982;7:47–55.
    1. Gladis M.M., Wadden T.A., Foster G.D., Vogt R.A., Wingate B.J. A comparison of two approaches to the assessment of binge eating in obesity. Int J Eat Disord. 1998;23:17–26.
    1. Farooqi I.S., Bullmore E., Keogh J., Gillard J., O’Rahilly S., Fletcher P.C. Leptin regulates striatal regions and human eating behavior. Science. 2007;317:1355.
    1. Maldjian J.A., Laurienti P.J., Kraft R.A., Burdette J.H. An automated method for neuroanatomic and cytoarchitectonic atlas-based interrogation of fMRI data sets. Neuroimage. 2003;19:1233–1239.
    1. Killgore W.D., Young A.D., Femia L.A., Bogorodzki P., Rogowska J., Yurgelun-Todd D.A. Cortical and limbic activation during viewing of high- versus low-calorie foods. Neuroimage. 2003;19:1381–1394.
    1. Schur E.A., Kleinhans N.M., Goldberg J., Buchwald D., Schwartz M.W., Maravilla K. Activation in brain energy regulation and reward centers by food cues varies with choice of visual stimulus. Int J Obes (Lond) 2009;33:653–661.
    1. Smith K.S., Tindell A.J., Aldridge J.W., Berridge K.C. Ventral pallidum roles in reward and motivation. Behav Brain Res. 2009;196:155–167.
    1. Nathan P.J., O’Neill B.V., Bush M.A., Koch A., Tao W.X., Maltby K. Opioid receptor modulation of hedonic taste preference and food intake: A single-dose safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic investigation with GSK1521498, a novel μ-opioid receptor inverse agonist. J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;52:464–474.
    1. Volkow N.D., Wang G.-J., Fowler J.S., Tomasi D. Addiction circuitry in the human brain. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2012;52:321–336.
    1. Gearhardt A.N., Yokum S., Orr P.T., Stice E., Corbin W.R., Brownell K.D. Neural correlates of food addiction. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68:808–816.
    1. Stewart J.E., Keast R.S. Recent fat intake modulates fat taste sensitivity in lean and overweight subjects. Int J Obes (Lond) 2012;36:834–842.
    1. Cooper S.J., Turkish S. Effects of naltrexone on food preference and concurrent behavioral responses in food-deprived rats. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2003;33:17–20.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren