The Temporal Focus Scale: factor structure and association with alcohol use in a sample of Northern Irish school children.

The Temporal Focus Scale (TFS) is a 12-item self-report measure of cognitive engagement with the temporal domains of past, present and future. Developed in college student samples, a three-factor structure with adequate reliability and validity was documented in a series of independent studies. We tested the factor structure of the scale in a sample of Northern Irish adolescents and found that our data supported a three factor structure, although there were problems with item 10. Because time perspective measures have been found to relate differentially to various health behaviours, we tested the relations between scores on the TFS and self-reported alcohol use. Results showed that scores on the TFS were not consistent statistical predictors of drinking category in a logistic regression. Results are discussed in terms of scale development, future scale use and the assessment of health-compromising behaviours such as adolescent alcohol consumption.

Components of behavioural impulsivity and automatic cue approach predict unique variance in hazardous drinking.

RATIONALE: Hazardous drinking is associated with both increased impulsivity and automatic approach tendencies elicited by alcohol-related cues. However, impulsivity is a multi-factorial construct, and it is currently unclear if all components of impulsivity are associated with heavy drinking. Furthermore, emerging evidence suggests that the relationships between hazardous drinking and automatic alcohol cognitions may be moderated by individual differences in impulsivity. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the independence of measures of impulsivity and their association with hazardous drinking, and to examine if the relationship between hazardous drinking and automatic alcohol approach tendencies would be moderated by individual differences in impulsivity. METHODS: Ninety-seven social drinkers (65 female) completed questionnaire measures of trait impulsivity, alcohol consumption and hazardous drinking. Participants also completed computerised measures of automatic alcohol approach tendencies (stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) task), and two behavioural measures of impulsivity (Go/No-go and delay discounting tasks). RESULTS: Principal component analysis revealed that the two measures of behavioural impulsivity were distinct from each other and from self-reported trait impulsivity, although self-reported non-planning impulsivity loaded on to two factors (trait impulsivity and delay discounting). Furthermore, all measures of impulsivity predicted unique variance in hazardous drinking as did automatic alcohol approach tendencies, although the latter relationship was not moderated by impulsivity. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that multiple components of impulsivity and automatic alcohol approach tendencies explain unique variance in hazardous drinking.

Nonaddictive instrumental drug use: Theoretical strengths and weaknesses.

The potential to instrumentalize drug use based upon the detection of very many different drug states undoubtedly exists, and such states may play a role in psychiatric and many other drug uses. Nevertheless, nonaddictive drug use is potentially more parsimoniously explained in terms of sensation seeking/impulsivity and drug expectations. Cultural factors also play a major role in nonaddictive drug use.

Risk-taking but not response inhibition or delay discounting predict alcohol consumption in social drinkers.

Impulsivity and risk-taking are multi-dimensional constructs that have been implicated in heavy drinking and alcohol problems. Our aim was to identify the specific component of impulsivity or risk-taking that explained the greatest variance in heavy and problem drinking among a sample of young adults recruited from a university population. Participants (N=75) completed a test battery comprising two commonly used response inhibition tasks (a Go/No-Go task and a Stop signal task), a delay discounting procedure, and the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) as a measure of risk-taking. Participants also completed the Barratt Impulsivity Scales (BIS) as a measure of trait impulsivity. In a hierarchical multiple regression model, risk-taking was identified as the only behavioural measure that predicted alcohol use and problems. In a secondary analysis, we demonstrated that risk-taking predicted unique variance in alcohol use and problems over and above that explained by trait impulsivity. Results suggest that among young adults, a behavioural measure of risk-taking predicts variance in alcohol consumption and alcohol problems, even when individual differences in trait impulsivity are statistically controlled. However, behavioural measures of response inhibition and delay discounting do not predict unique variance in alcohol use in young adult social drinkers.

Effects of alcohol preload on attentional bias towards cocaine-related cues.

BACKGROUND: Drug and alcohol users have an 'attentional bias' for substance-related cues, which is likely to reflect the incentive-motivational properties of those cues. Furthermore, administration of an alcohol preload increases attentional bias for alcohol and tobacco-related cues in heavy drinkers and tobacco smokers, respectively. The present study investigated attentional bias for cocaine cues in cocaine users and non-users following administration of either alcohol or placebo. METHOD: Thirty-two regular cocaine users and 40 non-users took part. Participants were administered alcohol or placebo, and administration was double blind. After drink administration, a Visual Probe task and Modified Stroop task were used to assess attentional bias. Subjective craving and alcohol outcome expectancies were also measured. RESULTS: There was a significant interaction between group and drink type on the visual probe task indicating that cocaine users who had received alcohol had increased attentional bias for cocaine pictures compared to non-users and cocaine users who received placebo. The cocaine Stroop revealed no differences between cocaine users and non-users, and no effects of alcohol in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol preload in regular cocaine users increases attentional bias for cocaine cues. However, cocaine users who received placebo did not show attentional bias for cocaine stimuli. Future research should investigate the effects of alcohol preload on attentional bias in cocaine-dependent individuals.

The effects of perceived quality on the behavioural economics of alcohol, amphetamine, cannabis, cocaine, and ecstasy purchases.

Previous research has indicated that non-dependent polydrug users are willing to pay more money to buy good quality drugs as their income increased. This study sought to examine whether altering the perceived quality of controlled drugs would affect drug purchases if the monetary price remained fixed. A random sample of 80 polydrug users were recruited. All participants were administered an anonymous questionnaire consisting of the Drug Abuse Screening Test for Adolescents (DAST-A), the Severity of Dependence Scale for cannabis (SDS), the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and questions about their drug use. Participants then completed a simulation of controlled drug purchases where the price of alcohol, amphetamine, cannabis, cocaine, and ecstasy remained the same but their perceived quality changed (i.e. unit price increased as the perceived quality decreased). The demand for alcohol was quality inelastic and alcohol quality had no effects on the purchase of any other controlled drug. Demand for cannabis was quality elastic and alcohol substituted for cannabis as its unit price increased. Demand for cocaine was quality elastic and alcohol, cannabis, and ecstasy substituted for cocaine as its unit price increased. Demand for ecstasy was quality elastic and alcohol and cocaine both substituted for ecstasy as its unit price increased. These results suggest that perceived quality influences the demand for controlled drugs and that monitoring the perceived quality of controlled drugs may provide a warning of potential public health problems in the near future.

Olanzapine withdrawal/discontinuation-induced hyperthermia in rats.

In female rats olanzapine (4 mg/kg b.i.d., i.p.) induced acute hypothermia, followed by very rapid full tolerance. With more prolonged treatment (over > 10 days) the hypothermic effect of olanzapine was reinstated. Subsequent withdrawal after 18 days of treatment induced very rapid onset (within 1 day) hyperthermia, which was time limited, dissipating completely over 3-4 days. These findings are similar to previous findings with clozapine [Goudie A Smith J Robertson A Cavanagh C (1999). Clozapine as a drug of dependence. Psychopharmacology; 142: 369-374.]. Although the mechanism(s) involved in the secondary hypothermic effect of olanzapine are, at present, unclear; the withdrawal hyperthermia observed represents the first report of a clear discontinuation effect of olanzapine. Such discontinuation effects are probably observed with many antipsychotic drugs. Since they have been suggested to facilitate relapse to psychosis and to interfere with subsequent clinical responses to antipsychotics, they merit further detailed analysis in both clinical and preclinical studies.

Potentiation of olanzapine substitution in rats discriminating clozapine by the D2/3 agonist quinpirole.

The D2/3 agonist (+)-4-propyl-9-hydroxynaphthoxazine (PHNO) has been reported to enhance the ability of olanzapine to substitute for clozapine and attenuate olanzapine-induced response suppression in monkeys. These data suggest that the relatively marked D2/3 antagonist actions of olanzapine limit its substitution for clozapine. The work reported here replicated and extended these findings. Twelve rats were trained to discriminate clozapine (5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal) from vehicle in an FR30 quantal food rewarded assay. The substitution curve for olanzapine (0-2.5 mg/kg) was then computed after treatment with either vehicle or a high dose (0.1 mg/kg) of the D2/3 agonist quinpirole. The olanzapine substitution curve was shifted significantly 5.2-fold in parallel to the left by quinpirole. Olanzapine suppressed responding significantly, but this effect was not attenuated or enhanced by quinpirole, which suppressed responding itself. Thus antagonist actions at D2/3 receptors clearly limit the ability of olanzapine to substitute for clozapine. These findings suggest that the clozapine versus vehicle discrimination is probably a bioassay for agents that resemble clozapine but which do not necessarily induce D2/3 antagonism. This discrimination may therefore not specifically detect clozapine-like antipsychotics, although it may be of value in developing such antipsychotics. The low discriminability of antipsychotics in general may be because antagonist actions at D2/3 receptors limit incentive salience in discrimination assays. These data are compatible with recent theorizing that therapeutic actions of antipsychotics in schizophrenia involve D2/3 receptor-mediated attenuation of stimulus salience.

Cyproheptadine resembles clozapine in vivo following both acute and chronic administration in rats.

Cyproheptadine is a cheap, widely available anti-allergy drug with a broad receptor binding profile which resembles that of clozapine. In rats discriminating clozapine from vehicle cyproheptadine mimicked clozapine very closely. Acutely it induced full generalization in the absence of response suppression, as observed with clozapine. Chronic administration of clozapine and cyproheptadine induced tolerance and cross-tolerance respectively to the clozapine stimulus. This was characterized by circa 3.5-fold parallel shifts to the right in the clozapine generalization curves. Such tolerance and cross-tolerance was spontaneously reversible, suggesting that it was pharmacodynamic, and that clozapine and cyproheptadine induce similar neuroadaptations when administered chronically. Administration of chlordiazepoxide at a very high dose induced no cross-tolerance to the clozapine stimulus showing the pharmacological specificity of tolerance. The clozapine stimulus is a compound cue involving actions at various receptors, and various clozapine-like antipsychotic (APD) drugs generalize fully to it. These data demonstrate that in vivo cyproheptadine resembles clozapine both acutely and chronically. Our findings, in conjunction with other actions of cyproheptadine -- induction of weight gain, alleviation of clozapine withdrawal, anxiolytic actions, alleviation of 'typical' APD-induced motoric side effects, and some preliminary clinical findings -- suggest that further study of cyproheptadine in conjunction with a 'typical' APD for the possible treatment of schizophrenia is merited at both pre-clinical and clinical levels.

Olanzapine and JL13 induce cross-tolerance to the clozapine discriminative stimulus in rats.

We have previously shown that chronic treatment with clozapine induces tolerance to the clozapine discriminative stimulus in rats. The studies reported here extended this work to assess whether chronic treatment with the clozapine-like antipsychotics olanzapine and 5-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)-8-chloro-pyrido[2,3-b][1,5] benzoxazepine fumarate (JL13) induced cross-tolerance to clozapine. Two groups of rats were trained to discriminate clozapine (5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal). Training was suspended and the rats were treated with either olanzapine or JL13 at high doses (5 and 20 mg/kg, respectively). These doses were administered twice daily. The clozapine generalization curve was computed three times - before chronic drug treatment, after 10 days of chronic treatment, and after 16 drug-free days. Both olanzapine and JL13 induced cross-tolerance to the clozapine stimulus, shown by significant 3.4 and 3.9 fold parallel shifts to the right in the clozapine generalization curves. Cross-tolerance was lost spontaneously during the drug-free days after treatment as clozapine sensitivity returned to baseline. We interpret these findings as indicative of the development of pharmacodynamic cross-tolerance to clozapine. Possible neuroadaptive mechanisms involved in such cross-tolerance are discussed. The paradigm outlined here allows refinement of antipsychotic drug discrimination assays to identify common chronic effects of such drugs.

The effects of price and perceived quality on the behavioural economics of alcohol, amphetamine, cannabis, cocaine, and ecstasy purchases.

Behavioural economic models of substance use describe the relationship between changes in unit price and consumption. However, these models rarely take account of the perceived quality (i.e. potency) of controlled drugs. Therefore we investigated the effects of both price and quality on the decision to purchase controlled drugs by polysubstance misusers. Forty current polysubstance misusers (29 males, 11 females; mean age 23.8) were recruited into the study. Participants were asked to hypothetically purchase drugs from a price list of alcohol, amphetamine, cannabis, cocaine and ecstasy at different levels of quality and price (i.e. better quality drugs cost more money). The disposable income available for those purchases was systematically varied in order to determine the impact of income on the decision to purchase drugs. Demand for both normal and strong alcohol was income inelastic. Demand for both poor and average quality cannabis and ecstasy was income inelastic, but demand for good quality cannabis and ecstasy was income elastic. The demand for poor quality cocaine was income inelastic, with the demand for both average and good quality cocaine being income elastic. Participants reported too few purchases of amphetamine, which precluded behavioural economic analysis. These results suggest that, like other goods, controlled drugs are purchased based upon the consumer's interpretations of their relative value. Therefore, it is probable that the purchase and subsequent use of controlled drugs by polysubstance misusers will be heavily influenced by the economic environment.

Stimulus properties of the "atypical" antipsychotic zotepine in rats: comparisons with clozapine and quetiapine.

The stimulus properties of the "atypical" antipsychotic zotepine were assessed in three studies in rats. In Study 1, the ability of zotepine to generalise to clozapine was studied. Two groups of rats were trained to discriminate clozapine at 2 and 5 mg/kg. Clozapine induced full generalisation in both groups, with the generalisation curves shifted significantly to the left in the low dose group. In generalisation tests clozapine did not suppress responding. Zotepine induced dose-related generalisation in both groups, with full generalisation in the low dose group and 50% maximal generalisation in the high dose group at the highest dose that could be tested. In contrast to clozapine, zotepine induced substantial (50% or more) substitution for clozapine only at doses which suppressed responding. In Study 2 zotepine was investigated in rats trained to discriminate quetiapine (10 mg/kg). Quetiapine induced full generalisation and zotepine only induced 54% generalisation at the highest dose that could be tested. Generalisation was accompanied by response suppression induced by both quetiapine and zotepine. In Study 3 an attempt was made to train a zotepine discrimination (1 mg/kg increased to 2 mg/kg). Even after 150 training sessions it proved impossible to obtain reliable discriminative responding with zotepine. These data suggest that: (i) The actions of zotepine in discrimination assays are similar to, but not identical with, those of clozapine and quetiapine; (ii) The differences among the actions of clozapine, quetiapine and zotepine may be related to either the unique ability of zotepine to block noradrenaline (NA) uptake, or to its more marked affinity for D(2) receptors; (iii) The finding that zotepine only mimicked quetiapine up to a level of 54% was unexpected, since quetiapine and clozapine generalise reciprocally and zotepine generalised fully to (low dose) clozapine. This finding may also be related either to zotepine's ability to inhibit NA uptake or its relatively high D(2) affinity; (iv) Although zotepine clearly possesses discriminative properties, it is not possible to train it as a reliable stimulus, in contrast to clozapine and quetiapine. This may be due to its more marked D(2) receptor affinity. Collectively, these data demonstrate both similarities and differences between zotepine and other novel atypical antipsychotics in drug discrimination assays.

Characterization of the effects of receptor-selective ligands in rats discriminating the novel antipsychotic quetiapine.

RATIONALE: Drug discrimination studies with clozapine have shown that such assays are of value in analysing the actions of novel antipsychotic agents in vivo. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the role of specific receptors in the discriminative stimulus properties of the novel "atypical" antipsychotic quetiapine. METHODS: Rats were trained to discriminate quetiapine at 10 mg/kg and tested with a range of ligands, selective for specific classes of receptor. RESULTS: Full generalization to quetiapine was only seen with quetiapine itself (100%) and with the muscarinic antagonist, scopolamine (87%). Partial generalization was seen with the alpha(1)-adrenoceptor antagonist prazosin (63%), the presumed preferential dopamine D(3) receptor antagonist PNU 91194A (54%) and the 5-HT/H(1)/M(1) antagonist cyproheptadine (55%). Minimal (<40%) or no (0%) generalization was seen with mepyramine (H(1) antagonist), SCH 23390 (D(1) antagonist), raclopride (D(2/3 )antagonist), ketanserin and MDL 100,907 (5-HT(2A ) antagonists), ondansetron (5-HT(3) antagonist), SB 242,084 (5-HT(2C) antagonist), 8-OHDPAT (5-HT(1A) agonist) yohimbine (alpha(2)-adrenoceptor antagonist) and the benzodiazepine, chlordiazepoxide. CONCLUSIONS: Together with data from a previous study (Smith and Goudie 2002) in which we observed full generalization to quetiapine with olanzapine, risperidone and clozapine, but not with typical antipsychotics (such as haloperidol) or the novel antipsychotic amisulpride, these data suggest that: i) the discriminative stimulus properties of quetiapine, like those of clozapine, probably reflect a "compound" stimulus which involves several classes of receptor; ii) the quetiapine cue is of value in analysing, and screening for, quetiapine- and clozapine-like agents in vivo; iii) blockade of muscarinic receptors is sufficient, although not necessary, to achieve full generalization to quetiapine; and iv) alpha(1-)adrenoceptors may be implicated in the quetiapine discriminative stimulus.

Characterization of olanzapine-induced weight gain in rats.

Novel antipsychotic drugs (APDs) have enhanced therapeutic actions compared to 'typical' APDs. However, clinical studies indicate that some induce marked weight gain. We attempted to model this effect in female Wistar rats given olanzapine chronically at 4 mg/kg b.i.d (4.5 h between injections). Such rats showed marked weight gain, which was statistically significant after only a single day of treatment, although weight gain increased up to a plateau after 10 days of treatment. Cessation of treatment led to rapid weight loss, which was significant after a single day of withdrawal. The weight gain observed was characterized by marked individual differences. As some clinical reports suggest that novel APD-induced weight gain is most pronounced in patients with the lowest body weight, we examined the relationship between weight gain and baseline body weight. However, we observed no significant relationship between baseline body weight and weight gain. The observation that olanzapine can induce weight gain rapidly in rats, in conjunction with the observation of marked individual differences in weight gain, suggests that patients at risk of developing weight gain might be detectable early in treatment. Furthermore, the finding that weight gain is rapidly reversible suggests that patients at risk of weight gain could be switched to APDs with less pronounced tendencies to induce weight gain. The study of APD-induced weight gain in rodents may provide insights into the nature, causes, and treatments for, novel APD-induced weight gain in the clinic. However, it remains to be determined how closely rodent models mimic the clinical situation and whether the mechanism(s) involved in the weight gain we have observed are the same as those involved in the clinical use of these drugs.

Discriminative stimulus properties in rats of the novel antipsychotic quetiapine.

Rats discriminated the novel antipsychotic quetiapine (Seroquel). Full generalization was seen with the novel ("atypical") antipsychotics, clozapine, olanzapine, and risperidone. Generalization was not seen with the older "typical" antipsychotics, haloperidol, chlorpromazine, and loxapine, or with the novel atypical antipsychotic, amisulpride. The pattern of generalization resembled that seen in rats trained to discriminate a low dose (1.25 mg/kg) of clozapine, which dissociates most novel antipsychotics from typical antipsychotics. However, the failure of the novel antipsychotic amisulpride to generalize demonstrates that this bioassay does not detect all novel antipsychotics. These data suggest that the discrimination of antipsychotics such as quetiapine may be of value in the development of novel antipsychotics, although the relationship between the discriminative properties of such drugs and their clinical actions is unclear.