The combination of escitalopram and aripiprazole: Investigation of psychomotor effects in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pre-clinical and clinical evidence suggests that the antidepressant efficacy of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor escitalopram can be enhanced by the dopamine and serotonin partial agonist aripiprazole. Given the range of possible neurochemical interactions between these drugs, the current study investigated whether aripiprazole alters the hedonic and psychomotor effects of escitalopram. Male Sprague Dawley rats ( n=116) received 10 mg/kg/day escitalopram (subcutaneous), 2 mg/kg/day aripiprazole (subcutaneous), or combined aripiprazole + escitalopram, and were tested for consumption of incentive nutritional stimuli (high-fructose corn syrup and chow), stereotypy and locomotor activity. At the conclusion of behavioral testing, mRNAs of two genes involved in reward processes were quantified: hypothalamic pro-opiomelanocortin and hippocampal brain-derived neurotrophic factor. Escitalopram produced a selective, but temporary, decrease in high fructose corn syrup consumption that was not altered by aripiprazole co-administration. Escitalopram had no significant effect on locomotion, but aripiprazole co-administration produced a persistent increase in stereotypy. Both brain-derived neurotrophic factor and pro-opiomelanocortin mRNA levels were lower in the aripiprazole + escitalopram group relative to the escitalopram group. Taken together, these results suggest that aripiprazole may enhance the antidepressant efficacy of escitalopram through improvement of psychomotor functions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".