Activation of Epac in the BLA disrupts reconsolidation and attenuates heroin‐seeking behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The susceptibility to drug cravings evoked by stimuli poses a formidable hurdle in the treatment of addiction and the prevention of relapse. Pharmacological interventions targeting drug-associated memories hold promise for curbing relapse by impeding the process of memory reconsolidation, predominantly governed by cAMP signalling. Exchange Protein Activated by cAMP (Epac) serves as a distinctive mediator of cAMP signalling, which has been implicated in reinforcing the effects of cocaine and facilitating the acquisition. Nonetheless, the role of Epac in heroin-related memory and the subsequent seeking behaviour remains enigmatic. In this study, we explored the impact of Epac activation on the reconsolidation process of drug-related memories associated with heroin self-administration. Over the course of 10 consecutive days, rats underwent training, wherein they acquired the behaviour of nose poking to obtain heroin accompanied by a tone + light cue. This nose-poking behaviour was subsequently extinguished when heroin infusion and cue presentation were discontinued. Subsequently, we administered 8-pCPT-cAMP (8-CPT), an Epac-specific activator, into the basolateral amygdala at various time points, either in the presence or absence of a conditioned stimulus. Our findings demonstrate that administering 8-CPT immediately after memory retrieval effectively reduces cue- and heroin-induced reinstatement, with the observed effects persisting significantly for a minimum of 28 days. However, infusion of 8-CPT for a duration of 6 h following the memory retrieval trial, or without it altogether, had no discernible impact. Thus, these findings strongly suggest that Epac activation can disrupt the reconsolidation of heroin-associated memory, thereby diminishing the reinstatement of heroin-seeking behaviour.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".