Differential Effects of Acute Treatment With Antipsychotic Drugs on Peripheral Catecholamines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antipsychotic drugs represent the most effective treatment for chronic psychotic disorders. The newer second generation drugs offer the advantage of fewer neurological side-effects compared to prior drugs, but many cause serious metabolic side-effects. The underlying physiology of these side-effects is not well-understood, but evidence exists to indicate that the sympathetic nervous system may play an important role. In order to examine this possibility further, we treated separate groups of adult female rats acutely with either the first generation antipsychotic drug haloperidol (0.1 or 1 mg/kg) or the second generation drugs risperidone (0.25 or 2.5 mg/kg), clozapine (2 or 20 mg/kg), olanzapine (3 or 15 mg/kg) or vehicle by intraperitoneal injection. Blood samples were collected prior to drug and then 30, 60, 120, and 180 mins after treatment. Plasma samples were assayed by HPLC-ED for levels of norepinephrine, epinephrine, and dopamine. Results confirmed that all antipsychotics increased peripheral catecholamines, although this was drug and dose dependent. For norepinephrine, haloperidol caused the smallest maximum increase (+158%], followed by risperidone (+793%), olanzapine (+952%) and clozapine (+1,684%). A similar pattern was observed for increases in epinephrine levels by haloperidol (+143%], olanzapine (+529%), risperidone (+617%) then clozapine (+806%). Dopamine levels increased moderately with olanzapine [+174%], risperidone [+271%], and clozapine [+430%]. Interestingly, levels of the catecholamines did not correlate strongly with each other prior to treatment at baseline, but were increasingly correlated after treatment as time proceeded. The results demonstrate antipsychotics can potently regulate peripheral catecholamines, in a manner consistent with their metabolic liability.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".