Cited by 203Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Amphetamine and methamphetamine differentially affect dopamine transporters in vitro and in vivo.

Open access

Abstract

The psychostimulants d-amphetamine (AMPH) and methamphetamine (METH) release excess dopamine (DA) into the synaptic clefts of dopaminergic neurons. Abnormal DA release is thought to occur by reverse transport through the DA transporter (DAT), and it is believed to underlie the severe behavioral effects of these drugs. Here we compare structurally similar AMPH and METH on DAT function in a heterologous expression system and in an animal model. In the in vitro expression system, DAT-mediated whole-cell currents were greater for METH stimulation than for AMPH. At the same voltage and concentration, METH released five times more DA than AMPH and did so at physiological membrane potentials. At maximally effective concentrations, METH released twice as much [Ca(2+)](i) from internal stores compared with AMPH. [Ca(2+)](i) responses to both drugs were independent of membrane voltage but inhibited by DAT antagonists. Intact phosphorylation sites in the N-terminal domain of DAT were required for the AMPH- and METH-induced increase in [Ca(2+)](i) and for the enhanced effects of METH on [Ca(2+)](i) elevation. Calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II and protein kinase C inhibitors alone or in combination also blocked AMPH- or METH-induced Ca(2+) responses. Finally, in the rat nucleus accumbens, in vivo voltammetry showed that systemic application of METH inhibited DAT-mediated DA clearance more efficiently than AMPH, resulting in excess external DA. Together these data demonstrate that METH has a stronger effect on DAT-mediated cell physiology than AMPH, which may contribute to the euphoric and addictive properties of METH compared with AMPH.

Overview

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 · 10.1074/jbc.m805298200

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 82 references

14 of the 82 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Fischer, 1976, Proc. West Pharmacol. Soc., 19, 179
  2. Jones, 1998, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 95, 4029
  3. Hastrup, 2001, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 98, 10055
  4. Kahlig, 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 102, 3495
  5. Carvelli, 2008, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 105, 14192
  6. Carvelli, 2004, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 101, 16046
  7. Salahpour, 2008, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 105, 4405

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–171 of 171

Metadata

Authors
Goodwin, J. S., Larson, G. A., Swant, J., Sen, N., Javitch, J. A., Zahniser, N. R., De Felice, L. J., & Khoshbouei, H.
Affiliations
  • Meharry Medical College (US)
  • University of Colorado Denver (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Khoshbouei, Habibeh
Venue
Journal of Biological Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-01
Volume
284
Issue
5
Pages
2978-2989
ISSN
0021-9258 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025188861
Cited by
203
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 13
FWCI
3.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Biological Chemistry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0642188)
  • National Institutes of Health (DA012408, DA004216, DA022413)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (T32HL076133, HL076133)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA012408, P01DA012408, DA021471, DA015050, K05DA022413, DA-022413, DA-004216, K05DA015050, R01DA026947, DA06338, R24DA021471)
  • National Cancer Institute (U54CA091408, U54CA91408)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (U54NS041071, NS034075, R01NS034075)
  • National Center for Research Resources (G12RR003032, U54RR019192, G12-RR03032)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
amphetamine, methamphetamine, dopamine transporter, dopamine release, psychostimulants, intracellular calcium, N-terminal phosphorylation, calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II, protein kinase C, nucleus accumbens, dopamine clearance, drug addiction
MeSH terms
Amphetamine, Animals, Bacterial Proteins, Calcium, Cell Line, Dopamine, Humans, Luminescent Proteins, Male, Methamphetamine, Nucleus Accumbens, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Patch-Clamp Techniques, Dopamine Plasma Membrane Transport Proteins, Rats, In Vitro Techniques

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