Chronic dopamine D1, dopamine D2 and combined dopamine D1 and D2 antagonist treatment in Cebus apella monkeys: antiamphetamine effects and extrapyramidal side effects.

To determine: (1) whether the apparent lack of efficacy of dopamine D1 (D1) antagonists in the clinic might be attributable to development of tolerance to antipsychotic effects; and (2) whether combined D1 and D2 antagonism might contribute to clozapine's clinical profile, eight Cebus apella monkeys were chronically treated with a D1 antagonist (NNC 756) ((+)-8-chloro-7-hydroxy-3-methyl-5-(7-(2,3- dihydrobenzofuranyl)-2,3,4,5-tetrahydro-1H-3-benzazepine), a D2 antagonist (raclopride) or a combination of the two antagonists. Prior neuroleptic exposure had resulted in oral dyskinesia in seven monkeys and sensitization to dystonia in all, yielding a model for acute and chronic extrapyramidal side effects (EPS). Dextroamphetamine-induced motoric unrest and stereotypies were used as a psychosis model. We found tolerance toward dystonic symptoms during D1 and D1 + D2 treatments but not during D2 treatment. D2 but not D1 or D1 + D2 antagonism caused exacerbation of dyskinesia. Both D1 and D1 + D2 antagonism were superior to D2 antagonism alone in counteracting the amphetamine-induced behaviors, with no tolerance to antiamphetamine effects. These findings suggest: (1) reasons other than tolerance (e.g., differences among antagonists) may explain the lack of efficacy in clinical trials with D1 antagonists; and (2) that D1 antagonism alone or combined and modest D1 and D2 antagonism offers the potential of antipsychotic efficacy with a lower risk of EPS than traditional D2 antagonism. Further clinical trials with D1 or combined D1 and D2 antagonists are, therefore, recommended.

Long-term treatment with low doses of the D1 antagonist NNC 756 and the D2 antagonist raclopride in monkeys previously exposed to dopamine antagonists.

Eight Cebus apella monkeys previously exposed to D1 and D2 antagonists were treated subcutaneously for 8 weeks with the D1 antagonist NNC 756 (0.01 mg/kg), followed by a wash-out period of 4 weeks and treatment with the D2 antagonist raclopride for 8 weeks (end doses 0.01 mg/kg). NNC 756 induced no dystonia, while marked dystonia was induced by raclopride. Mild tolerance to the dystonia-inducing effect of raclopride slowly developed. Both drugs induced significant sedation and mild bradykinesia. Sedation induced by NNC 756 was stronger than that of raclopride, while no differences were found regarding bradykinesia. The sedative effect of both NNC 756 and raclopride increased over time during chronic treatment. No changes in bradykinesia developed. No significant dyskinesia was induced by NNC 756, while raclopride significantly induced both acute and tardive oral dyskinesia. Furthermore, raclopride-induced acute dyskinesia worsened during chronic treatment. Concomitant treatment with NNC 756 tended to reduce the D1 agonist SKF 81297-induced dyskinesia and grooming, while concomitant treatment with raclopride increased SKF 81297-induced dyskinesia and tended to decrease SKF 81297-induced grooming. Chronic treatment with raclopride induced supersensitivity to both the D2/D3 agonist LY 171555 and SKF 81297, while chronic NNC 756 treatment only induced supersensitivity to SKF 81297. The findings indicate that D1 antagonists may induce less dystonia and oral dyskinesia as compared with D2 antagonists and support the hypothesis of both a permissive and an inhibitory interaction between D1 and D2 receptor systems.