Involvement of 5-HT(2C) receptors in the anti-immobility effects of antidepressants in the forced swimming test in mice.

Several recent studies have demonstrated that 5-HT(1A), 5-HT(1B) and 5-HT(3) receptors were implicated in the mechanism of action of antidepressants in the mouse forced swimming test. Despite extensive evidence for a role of 5-HT(2C) receptors in depression, the precise role of these receptors in the effects of clinically established antidepressants was not directly investigated in the mouse forced swimming test. This work was aimed at exploring interactions between several doses of Ro 60-0175, a recently available, full and selective 5-HT(2C) agonist, and antidepressant drugs in the mouse forced swimming test. Spontaneous locomotor activity was measured as an index of intact sensorimotor functions and the dose-effect of Ro 60-0175 alone, as well as interactions with several antidepressants, such as tricyclic antidepressants (imipramine, desipramine and maprotiline) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (paroxetine, citalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine and sertraline), were studied in the mouse forced swimming test. There was no intrinsic antidepressant-like effect of Ro 60-0175, but an impairment in locomotor function was detected when using doses higher than 4 mg/kg in the mouse. There was a synergistic effect of low doses of Ro 60-0175 with sub-active doses of imipramine, paroxetine, citalopram and fluvoxamine; an antagonism between the highest dose of Ro 60-0175 and the active doses of paroxetine and fluoxetine was also detected. There is evidence that 5-HT(2C) receptors may be involved in the action of antidepressants which are able to boost the concentration of serotonin in the synapse, i.e. SSRIs and imipramine

The antidepressant activity of inositol in the forced swim test involves 5-HT(2) receptors.

The effect of inositol as an antidepressant was previously demonstrated in both animal models of depression-like behavior and in clinical trials. Unlike most antidepressant drugs, inositol does not have a clear target in the synapse and was not demonstrated to alter monoamine levels in the brain. The present study attempted to draw a psychopharmacological profile of inositol's behavioral effects by exploring the interactions between the drug and specific receptor agonists and antagonists in the forced swim test. Rats received inositol treatment (or control) in combination with the serotonergic metabolism inhibitor PCPA or with the noradrenergic neurotoxin DSP-4. Results indicated that PCPA but not DSP-4 abolished the ability of inositol to cause a reduction in immobility time in the forced swim test. In mice, the specific 5-HT(2A)/5-HT(2C) antagonist ritanserin, but not the 5-HT(1A)/5-HT(1B)/beta adrenergic antagonist pindolol, abolished inositol's effect in the forced swim test. The 5-HT(2A)/5-HT(2C) agonist DOI and the 5-HT(1A) agonist 8-OH-DPAT did not have any significant effects on inositol's activity. The present data indicates that the antidepressant effect of inositol may involve 5-HT(2) receptors. It is thus possible that the effects of reuptake antidepressant drugs and the effects of inositol may have a common final pathway.

How valuable are animal models in defining antidepressant activity?

Animal models of depression have been utilised to screen novel compounds with antidepressant potential although uncertainty lingers concerning their clinical relevance. In order for a model to be considered of any value, it must possess predictive validity (does drug action in the model correspond to that in the clinic?), face validity (are there phenomenological similarities between the model and the clinic?) and construct validity (does the model possess a strong theoretical rationale?). On the one hand, there are models based on stress such as the learned helplessness model, the forced swimming test and the chronic mild stress model and, on the other hand, models based on neuronal deficits such as the olfactory bulbectomy model. To date, among models more frequently used in depression, none of them meet all these criteria. Moreover, improvements to tests are often poorly validated and estimating time of onset of action of antidepressants remains a major challenge in animal model research. Finally, reproducing the tests outside the laboratory of origin continues to be problematic and leads to variability in results. Although animal models of depression fail to be unequivocally valid, they represent the best tool to define potential antidepressant activity of drugs, to investigate their mechanism of action and, to a greater extent, explore this complex heterogeneous illness. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Is dopamine implicated in the antidepressant-like effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the mouse forced swimming test?

RATIONALE: Microdialysis, binding and behavioural studies have shown that the dopaminergic system plays a role in antidepressant treatment. OBJECTIVES: The present study determined whether the antidepressant-like effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors measured in the mouse forced swimming test are mediated via dopamine receptors. METHODS: Male Swiss mice were randomly assigned to groups of 24 animals and injected IP with citalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, sertraline, or paroxetine alone or in combination with the dopamine D(1)agonist SKF 38393, the D(1) antagonist SCH 23390, the D(2) agonist bromocriptine, the D(2) antagonist sulpiride, the D(3) agonist PD 128 907, or the D(3) antagonist nafadotride. RESULTS: The anti-immobility effects of paroxetine, fluvoxamine and citalopram were increased by co-administration of SKF 38393 (0.5 and 2 mg/kg), SCH 23390 (0.06 mg/kg), bromocriptine (0.5 and 2 mg/kg) or PD 128 907 (1 and 2 mg/kg), and were attenuated by SCH 23390 (0.5 mg/kg). The anti-immobility effects of paroxetine and fluvoxamine were also increased with sulpiride (0.5 and 2 mg/kg). The anti-immobility effect of fluoxetine was increased by SKF 38393 (2 mg/kg) and PD 128 907(1 and 2 mg/kg) co-administration. The anti-immobility effect of sertraline (16 mg/kg) was increased by SKF 38393 (0.5 mg/kg), bromocriptine (2 mg/kg) and PD 128 907 (2 mg/kg) and the effect of sertraline (2 mg/kg) was increased by bromocriptine (2 mg/kg). The anti-immobility effect of paroxetine (4 mg/kg) was increased by nafadotride (2 mg/kg). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that the antidepressant activity of various SSRIs involves different dopamine receptor subtypes and that the serotoninergic and dopaminergic systems interact with each other.