Cited by 70Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

Mechanisms of withdrawal-associated increases in heroin self-administration: pharmacologic modulation of heroin vs food choice in heroin-dependent rhesus monkeys

Open access
Negus, S Stevens, Rice, Kenner C·2009·Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Opioid withdrawal can produce a constellation of physiological and behavioral signs, including an increase in opioid self-administration. Different mechanisms mediate different withdrawal signs, and the present study used pharmacologic tools to assess mechanisms underlying withdrawal-associated increases in opioid reinforcement. Five rhesus monkeys were rendered heroin dependent via daily 21-h heroin self-administration sessions. One hour after each heroin self-administration session, monkeys chose between heroin (0-0.1 mg/kg per injection) and food (1 g pellets) during 2-h choice sessions. Under these conditions, heroin maintained a dose-dependent increase in heroin choice, such that monkeys responded primarily for food when low heroin doses were available (0-0.01 mg/kg per injection) and primarily for heroin when higher heroin doses were available (0.032-0.1 mg/kg per injection). Periods of spontaneous withdrawal were intermittently introduced by omitting one 21-h heroin self-administration session, and test drugs were administered during these withdrawal periods. Untreated withdrawal robustly increased heroin choice during choice sessions. Withdrawal-associated increases in heroin choice were completely suppressed by the mu opioid agonist morphine (0.032-0.32 mg/kg/h, i.v.), but not by the alpha-2 noradrenergic agonist clonidine (0.01-0.1 mg/kg/h, i.v.), the dopamine/norepinephrine releaser amphetamine (0.032-0.1 mg/kg/h, i.v.), or the kappa-opioid antagonist 5'-guanidinonaltrindole (1.0 mg/kg, i.m.). The corticotropin-releasing factor 1 antagonist antalarmin (1.0-10 mg/kg per day, i.m.) produced a morphine-like suppression of withdrawal-associated increases in heroin choice in one of three monkeys. These results suggest that mechanisms of withdrawal-associated increases in the relative reinforcing efficacy of opioid agonists may be different from mechanisms of many other somatic, mood-related, and motivational signs of opioid withdrawal.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/npp.2008.127

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In rhesus monkeys using a choice model, a CRF1 receptor antagonist and a k-opioid receptor antagonist failed to show positive effects, while opioid substitution drugs showed positive results.

    “However, using this choice model, a study in rhesus monkeys failed to show positive effects with a CRF 1 receptor antagonist (although one of three monkeys did respond) and a k-opioid receptor antagonist, but it did show positive results with opioid substitution drugs (Negus and Rice, 2009).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Redmond DE Jr Huang YH 1982 The primate locus coeruleus and effects of clonidine on opiate withdrawal J Clin Psychiatry 43 25 29 6282817
  2. Seevers MH Deneau GA 1963 Physiological aspects of tolerance and dependence Physiological Pharmacology I R WS H FG 565 640 Academic Press New York

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Negus, S. S., & Rice, K. C.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Negus, S Stevens
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2008-08-13
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
899-911
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
OpenAlex
W2025778747
Cited by
70
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (P01DA014528, R01DA002519)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
opioid withdrawal, heroin addiction, heroin self-administration, opioid reinforcement, morphine, clonidine, amphetamine, antalarmin, mu-opioid receptor, kappa opioid receptor, rhesus monkeys
MeSH terms
Adrenergic Agonists, Amphetamine, Animals, Choice Behavior, Clonidine, Heroin, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Food, Heroin Dependence, Macaca mulatta, Male, Morphine, Narcotic Antagonists, Pyrimidines, Pyrroles, Self Administration, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Dopamine Agents, Behavior, Addictive, Receptors, Corticotropin-Releasing Hormone, Adrenergic Agents

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review