D-amphetamine maintenance therapy reduces cocaine use in female rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Currently, there are no approved medications to treat cocaine addiction. In this context, d-amphetamine maintenance therapy is a promising pharmacological strategy to reduce cocaine use. In both male rats and human cocaine users, d-amphetamine treatment reduces cocaine taking and seeking. However, this has not been examined systematically in female animals, even though cocaine addiction afflicts both women and men, and the sexes can differ in their response to cocaine. Here, we determined how d-amphetamine maintenance therapy during cocaine self-administration influences cocaine use in female rats. In experiment 1, two groups of female rats received 14 intermittent access (IntA) cocaine self-administration sessions. One group received concomitant d-amphetamine maintenance treatment (COC + A rats; 5 mg/kg/day, via minipump), the other group did not (COC rats). After discontinuing d-amphetamine treatment, we measured responding for cocaine under a progressive ratio schedule, responding under extinction and cocaine-primed reinstatement of drug seeking. In experiment 2, we assessed the effects of d-amphetamine maintenance on these measures in already cocaine-experienced rats. To this end, rats first received 14 IntA cocaine self-administration sessions without d-amphetamine. They then received 14 more sessions now either with (COC/COC + A rats) or without (COC/COC rats) concomitant d-amphetamine treatment. In both experiments, d-amphetamine treatment did not influence cocaine-primed reinstatement of cocaine seeking. However, after d-amphetamine treatment, rats responded less for cocaine both under progressive ratio and extinction conditions. Thus, d-amphetamine treatment can both prevent and reverse increases in the motivation to take and seek cocaine in female animals.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".