Comparison of Caffeine and d-amphetamine in Cocaine-Dependent Subjects: Differential Outcomes on Subjective and Cardiovascular Effects, Reward Learning, and Salivary Paraxanthine

Scott D Lane, Charles E Green, Joy M Schmitz, Nuvan Rathnayaka, Wendy B Fang, Sergi Ferré, F Gerard Moeller, Scott D Lane, Charles E Green, Joy M Schmitz, Nuvan Rathnayaka, Wendy B Fang, Sergi Ferré, F Gerard Moeller

Abstract

Due to indirect modulation of dopamine transmission, adenosine receptor antagonists may be useful in either treating cocaine use or improving disrupted cognitive-behavioral functions associated with chronic cocaine use. To compare and contrast the stimulant effects of adenosine antagonism to direct dopamine stimulation, we administered 150 mg and 300 mg caffeine, 20 mg amphetamine, and placebo to cocaine-dependent vs. healthy control subjects, matched on moderate caffeine use. Data were obtained on measures of cardiovascular effects, subjective drug effects (ARCI, VAS, DEQ), and a probabilistic reward-learning task sensitive to dopamine modulation. Levels of salivary caffeine and the primary caffeine metabolite paraxanthine were obtained on placebo and caffeine dosing days. Cardiovascular results revealed main effects of dose for diastolic blood pressure and heart rate; follow up tests showed that controls were most sensitive to 300 mg caffeine and 20 mg amphetamine; cocaine-dependent subjects were sensitive only to 300 mg caffeine. Subjective effects results revealed dose × time and dose × group interactions on the ARCI A, ARCI LSD, and VAS 'elated' scales; follow up tests did not show systematic differences between groups with regard to caffeine or d-amphetamine. Large between-group differences in salivary paraxanthine (but not salivary caffeine) levels were obtained under both caffeine doses. The cocaine-dependent group expressed significantly higher paraxanthine levels than controls under 150 mg and 3-4 fold greater levels under 300 mg at 90 min and 150 min post caffeine dose. However, these differences also covaried with cigarette smoking status (not balanced between groups), and nicotine smoking is known to alter caffeine/paraxanthine metabolism via cytochrome P450 enzymes. These preliminary data raise the possibility that adenosine antagonists may affect cocaine-dependent and non-dependent subjects differently. In conjunction with previous preclinical and human studies, the data suggest that adenosine modulating drugs may have value in the treatment of stimulant use disorders.

Keywords: Adenosine A1/A2 receptor; Caffeine; Cardiovascular effects; Cocaine dependence; Human; Paraxanthine; Reward learning; Subjective effects; d-amphetamine.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Salivary caffeine and paraxanthine levels acquired at −30, +30, +90, and +150 minutes post caffeine and placebo dosing for cocaine-dependent and control subjects. Time points are represented on the x-axis, and mean (± SEM) salivary levels (ng/mL) are shown on the y-axis.

References

    1. Koob GF, Ahmed SH, Boutrel B, Chen SA, Kenny PJ, et al. Neurobiological mechanisms in the transition from drug use to drug dependence. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2004;27:739–749.
    1. Moeller FG, Steinberg JL, Lane SD, Kjome KL, Ma L, et al. Increased Orbitofrontal Brain Activation after Administration of a Selective Adenosine A(2A) Antagonist in Cocaine Dependent Subjects. Front Psychiatry. 2012;3:44.
    1. Herin DV, Rush CR, Grabowski J. Agonist-like pharmacotherapy for stimulant dependence: preclinical, human laboratory, and clinical studies. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010;1187:76–100.
    1. Schmitz JM, Mooney ME, Moeller FG, Stotts AL, Green C, et al. Levodopa pharmacotherapy for cocaine dependence: choosing the optimal behavioral therapy platform. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008;94:142–150.
    1. Kosten TR, Wu G, Huang W, Harding MJ, Hamon SC, et al. Pharmacogenetic randomized trial for cocaine abuse: disulfiram and dopamine β-hydroxylase. Biol Psychiatry. 2013;73:219–224.
    1. Rush CR, Stoops WW. Agonist replacement therapy for cocaine dependence: a translational review. Future Med Chem. 2012;4:245–265.
    1. Sofuoglu M, DeVito EE, Waters AJ, Carroll KM. Cognitive enhancement as a treatment for drug addictions. Neuropharmacology. 2013;64:452–463.
    1. Woolverton WL, Kandel D, Schuster CR. Tolerance and cross-tolerance to cocaine and d-amphetamine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1978;205:525–535.
    1. Kollins SH, MacDonald EK, Rush CR. Assessing the abuse potential of methylphenidate in nonhuman and human subjects: a review. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2001;68:611–627.
    1. Castells X, Casas M, Pérez-Mañá C, Roncero C, Vidal X, et al. Efficacy of psychostimulant drugs for cocaine dependence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010:CD007380.
    1. Kelly TH, Stoops WW, Perry AS, Prendergast MA, Rush CR. Clinical neuropharmacology of drugs of abuse: a comparison of drug-discrimination and subject-report measures. Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2003;2:227–260.
    1. Ferré S. Role of the central ascending neurotransmitter systems in the psychostimulant effects of caffeine. J Alzheimers Dis. 2010;20(Suppl 1):S35–S49.
    1. Ferre S, Ciruela F, Borycz J, Solinas M, Quarta D, et al. Adenosine A1-A2A receptor heteromers: new targets for caffeine in the brain. Front Biosci. 2008;13:2391–2399.
    1. Orru M, Bakešová J, Brugarolas M, Quiroz C, Beaumont V, et al. Striatal pre- and postsynaptic profile of adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonists. PLoS One. 2011;6:e16088.
    1. LeWitt PA, Guttman M, Tetrud JW, Tuite PJ, Mori A, et al. Adenosine A2A receptor antagonist istradefylline (KW-6002) reduces “off” time in Parkinson’s disease: a double-blind, randomized, multicenter clinical trial (6002-US-005) Ann Neurol. 2008;63:295–302.
    1. Black KJ, Koller JM, Campbell MC, Gusnard DA, Bandak SI. Quantification of indirect pathway inhibition by the adenosine A2a antagonist SYN115 in Parkinson disease. J Neurosci. 2010;30:16284–16292.
    1. Lane S, Green C, Steinberg J, Ma L, Schmitz J, et al. Cardiovascular and Subjective Effects of the Novel Adenosine A (2A) Receptor Antagonist SYN115 in Cocaine Dependent Individuals. J Addict Res Ther S1. 2012
    1. Ferré S, Quiroz C, Orru M, Guitart X, Navarro G, et al. Adenosine A(2A) Receptors and A(2A) Receptor Heteromers as Key Players in Striatal Function. Front Neuroanat. 2011;5:36.
    1. Orrú M, Guitart X, Karcz-Kubicha M, Solinas M, Justinova Z, et al. Psychostimulant pharmacological profile of paraxanthine, the main metabolite of caffeine in humans. Neuropharmacology. 2013;67:476–484.
    1. Oliveto AH, McCance-Katz E, Singha A, Hameedi F, Kosten TR. Effects of d-amphetamine and caffeine in humans under a cocaine discrimination procedure. Behav Pharmacol. 1998;9:207–217.
    1. Liguori A, Hughes JR, Goldberg K, Callas P. Subjective effects of oral caffeine in formerly cocaine-dependent humans. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1997;49:17–24.
    1. Garrett BE, Griffiths RR. Intravenous nicotine and caffeine: subjective and physiological effects in cocaine abusers. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2001;296:486–494.
    1. Rush CR, Sullivan JT, Griffiths RR. Intravenous caffeine in stimulant drug abusers: subjective reports and physiological effects. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1995;273:351–358.
    1. Powell KR, Koppelman LF, Holtzman SG. Differential involvement of dopamine in mediating the discriminative stimulus effects of low and high doses of caffeine in rats. Behav Pharmacol. 1999;10:707–716.
    1. Green TA, Schenk S. Dopaminergic mechanism for caffeine-produced cocaine seeking in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2002;26:422–430.
    1. Stoops WW, Glaser PE, Fillmore MT, Rush CR. Reinforcing, subject-rated, performance and physiological effects of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine in stimulant abusing humans. J Psychopharmacol. 2004;18:534–543.
    1. Vansickel AR, Fillmorex MT, Hays LR, Rush CR. Effects of potential agonist-replacement therapies for stimulant dependence on inhibitory control in cocaine abusers. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2008;34:293–305.
    1. Rush CR, Stoops WW, Lile JA, Glaser PE, Hays LR. Subjective and physiological effects of acute intranasal methamphetamine during d-amphetamine maintenance. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2011;214:665–674.
    1. Comer SD, Mogali S, Saccone PA, Askalsky P, Martinez D, et al. Effects of Acute Oral Naltrexone on the Subjective and Physiological Effects of Oral D-Amphetamine and Smoked Cocaine in Cocaine Abusers. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013
    1. Frank MJ, Seeberger LC, O’reilly RC. By carrot or by stick: cognitive reinforcement learning in parkinsonism. Science. 2004;306:1940–1943.
    1. Frank MJ, Moustafa AA, Haughey HM, Curran T, Hutchison KE. Genetic triple dissociation reveals multiple roles for dopamine in reinforcement learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:16311–16316.
    1. Frank MJ, Samanta J, Moustafa AA, Sherman SJ. Hold your horses: impulsivity, deep brain stimulation, and medication in parkinsonism. Science. 2007;318:1309–1312.
    1. Frank MJ, Santamaria A, O’Reilly RC, Willcutt E. Testing computational models of dopamine and noradrenaline dysfunction in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2007;32:1583–1599.
    1. Martin WR, Sloan JW, Sapira JD, Jasinski DR. Physiologic, subjective, and behavioral effects of amphetamine, methamphetamine, ephedrine, phenmetrazine, and methylphenidate in man. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1971;12:245–258.
    1. Haertzen C, Hickey J. Addiction Research Center Inventory (ARCI): Measurement of euphoria and other drug effects. In: Bozarth M, editor. Methods of assessing the reinforcing properties of abused drugs. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1987. pp. 489–524.
    1. Kelly TH, Robbins G, Martin CA, Fillmore MT, Lane SD, et al. Individual differences in drug abuse vulnerability: d-amphetamine and sensation-seeking status. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2006;189:17–25.
    1. Bond AJ, James DC, Lader MH. Physiological and psychological measures in anxious patients. Psychol Med. 1974;4:364–373.
    1. Fischman MW. Relationship between self-reported drug effects and their reinforcing effects: Studies with stimulant drugs. In: Fischman MW, Mello NK, editors. Testing for abuse liability of drugs in humans. NIDA Research Monograph 92. Rockville, MD: U.S Department of Health and Human Services; 1989. pp. 211–230.
    1. Fischman MW, Foltin RW. Utility of subjective-effects measurements in assessing abuse liability of drugs in humans. Br J Addict. 1991;86:1563–1570.
    1. Jasinski DR, Henningfield JE. Human abuse liability assessment by measurement of subjective and physiological effects. NIDA Res Monogr. 1989;92:73–100.
    1. Badcock NR. Simpler measurement of caffeine and paraxanthine in saliva. Clin. 1990:391. Chem 36.
    1. Kukongviriyapan V, Senggunprai L, Prawan A, Gaysornsiri D, Kukongviriyapan U, et al. Salivary caffeine metabolic ratio in alcohol-dependent subjects. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;60:103–107.
    1. Perera V, Gross AS, Xu H, McLachlan AJ. Pharmacokinetics of caffeine in plasma and saliva, and the influence of caffeine abstinence on CYP1A2 metrics. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2011;63:1161–1168.
    1. Wilcox R. Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1997.
    1. Wilcox RR. Measuring and detecting associations: methods based on robust regression estimators or smoothers that allow curvature. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2010;63:379–393.
    1. Cohen J. Some statistical issues in psychological research. In: Wolman BB, editor. Handbook of clinical. New York: psychologyMcGraw-Hill; 1965. pp. 96–121.
    1. Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front. 2013:863. Psychol 4.
    1. White TL, Lott DC, de Wit H. Personality and the subjective effects of acute amphetamine in healthy volunteers. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2006;31:1064–1074.
    1. Zacny JP, Bodker BK, de Wit H. Effects of setting on the subjective and behavioral effects of d-amphetamine in humans. Addict Behav. 1992;17:27–33.
    1. Vansickel AR, Lile JA, Stoops WW, Rush CR. Similar discriminative-stimulus effects of D-amphetamine in women and men. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2007;87:289–296.
    1. Mumford GK1, Evans SM, Kaminski BJ, Preston KL, Sannerud CA, et al. Discriminative stimulus and subjective effects of theobromine and caffeine in humans. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1994;115:1–8.
    1. Wardle MC, Treadway MT, de Wit H. Caffeine increases psychomotor performance on the effort expenditure for rewards task. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2012;102:526–531.
    1. Oliveto AH, Bickel WK, Hughes JR, Shea PJ, Higgins ST, et al. Caffeine drug discrimination in humans: acquisition, specificity and correlation with self-reports. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1992;261:885–894.
    1. Ramirez FD, Femenía F, Simpson CS, Redfearn DP, Michael KA, et al. Electrocardiographic findings associated with cocaine use in humans: a systematic review. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2012;10:105–127.
    1. Schwartz BG, Rezkalla S, Kloner RA. Cardiovascular effects of cocaine. Circulation. 2010;122:2558–2569.
    1. Ward AS, Kelly TH, Foltin RW, Fischman MW. Effects of d-amphetamine on task performance and social behavior of humans in a residential laboratory. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 1997;5:130–136.
    1. Volkow ND, Li TK. Drug addiction: the neurobiology of behaviour gone awry. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;5:963–970.
    1. Fillmore MT, Rush CR, Marczinski CA. Effects of d-amphetamine on behavioral control in stimulant abusers: the role of prepotent response tendencies. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2003;71:143–152.
    1. Frankowska M, Marcellino D, Adamczyk P, Filip M, Fuxe K. Effects of cocaine self-administration and extinction on D2 -like and A2A receptor recognition and D2 -like/Gi protein coupling in rat striatum. Addict Biol. 2013;18:455–466.
    1. Marcellino D, Navarro G, Sahlholm K, Nilsson J, Agnati LF, et al. Cocaine produces D2R-mediated conformational changes in the adenosine A(2A)R-dopamine D2R heteromer. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2010;394:988–992.
    1. Faber MS, Jetter A, Fuhr U. Assessment of CYP1A2 activity in clinical practice: why, how, and when? Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2005;97:125–134.
    1. Kot M, Daniel WA. Caffeine as a marker substrate for testing cytochrome P450 activity in human and rat. Pharmacol Rep. 2008;60:789–797.
    1. Pocock SJ, Assmann SE, Enos LE, Kasten LE. Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems. Stat Med. 2002;21:2917–2930.
    1. Guydish J, Passalacqua E, Tajima B, Chan M, Chun J, et al. Smoking prevalence in addiction treatment: a review. Nicotine Tob Res. 2011;13:401–411.
    1. Strakowski SM, Sax KW, Rosenberg HL, DelBello MP, Adler CM. Human response to repeated low-dose d-amphetamine: evidence for behavioral enhancement and tolerance. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2001;25:548–554.
    1. White TL, Justice AJ, de Wit H. Differential subjective effects of D-amphetamine by gender, hormone levels and menstrual cycle phase. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2002;73:729–741.
    1. Angrist B, Corwin J, Bartlik B, Cooper T. Early pharmacokinetics and clinical effects of oral D-amphetamine in normal subjects. Biol Psychiatry. 1987;22:1357–1368.
    1. Brauer LH, Ambre J, De Wit H. Acute tolerance to subjective but not cardiovascular effects of d-amphetamine in normal, healthy men. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1996;16:72–76.
    1. Passmore AP, Kondowe GB, Johnston GD. Renal and cardiovascular effects of caffeine: a dose-response study. Clin Sci (Lond) 1987;72:749–756.
    1. Fredholm BB, Bättig K, Holmén J, Nehlig A, Zvartau EE. Actions of caffeine in the brain with special reference to factors that contribute to its widespread use. Pharmacol Rev. 1999;51:83–133.
    1. Asghar SJ, Tanay VA, Baker GB, Greenshaw A, Silverstone PH. Relationship of plasma amphetamine levels to physiological, subjective, cognitive and biochemical measures in healthy volunteers. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2003;18:291–299.
    1. Mooney ME, Herin DV, Schmitz JM, Moukaddam N, Green CE, et al. Effects of oral methamphetamine on cocaine use: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2009;101:34–41.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner