Abstract
Anorexia nervosa (AN) is an eating disorder characterized by severe hypophagia and weight loss, and an intense fear of weight gain. Activity-based anorexia (ABA) refers to the weight loss, hypophagia and paradoxical hyperactivity that develops in rodents exposed to running wheels and restricted food access, and provides a model for aspects of AN. The atypical antipsychotic olanzapine was recently shown to reduce both AN symptoms and ABA. We examined which component of the complex pharmacological profile of olanzapine reduces ABA. Mice received 5-HT2A/2C, 5-HT3, dopamine D1-like, D2, D3 or D2/3 antagonist treatment, and were assessed for food intake, body weight, wheel running and survival in ABA. D2/3 receptor antagonists eticlopride and amisulpride reduced weight loss and hypophagia, and increased survival during ABA. Furthermore, amisulpride produced larger reductions in weight loss and hypophagia than olanzapine. Treatment with either D3 receptor antagonist SB277011A or D2 receptor antagonist L-741,626 also increased survival. All the other treatments either had no effect or worsened ABA. Overall, selective antagonism of D2 and/or D3 receptors robustly reduces ABA. Studies investigating the mechanisms by which D2 and/or D3 receptors regulate ABA, and the efficacy for D2/3 and/or D3 antagonists to treat AN, are warranted.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Anorexia nervosa (AN) is an eating disorder characterized by hypophagia, weight loss and an intense fear of weight gain. AN typically onsets in mid-adolescence and primarily affects females.1 AN affects ~0.1–1.7% of the population during their lifetime.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 The standard mortality ratio is 5.86,6 representing one of the highest mortality rates of all psychiatric illnesses.7 No approved pharmacological treatments currently exist for AN.
The activity-based anorexia (ABA) phenomenon models aspects of AN. In the ABA paradigm, rodents housed with running wheels and subjected to restricted food access rapidly develop hypophagia, weight loss, and paradoxical increases in wheel running. Conversely, rodents exposed to either restricted food access or running wheels maintain normal body weight.8, 9 Progression of ABA is characterized by hypothermia, loss of estrus, increased HPA axis activity and ultimately stomach ulceration and death.8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ABA exhibits predictive validity for aspects of AN. For example, adolescent rodents are more vulnerable to ABA than older rodents.13, 14, 15, 16 Thus, the ABA paradigm provides a useful preclinical tool for studying aspects of AN.
Currently, only a handful of small, randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of olanzapine to improve AN symptomatology have been performed. Three such trials reported improved AN symptomology in patients receiving olanzapine treatment,17, 18, 19 whereas two trials found no effect of olanzapine.20, 21 Thus, the potential efficacy of olanzapine in AN requires further study, and efforts to identify other treatments are imperative. Identifying the mechanisms by which olanzapine reduces ABA22 could provide insight into the neurobiological processes underlying AN, and thereby identify novel treatments. Olanzapine is an antagonist with high affinity for 5-HT2A/2B/2C, α1-adrenergic, muscarinic M1–4, and histamine H1 receptors (Ki=1.9–25 nM), and moderate affinity for 5-HT3 and dopamine D1–5 receptors (Ki=17.1–202 nM).23, 24 Antagonist properties of olanzapine at either dopamine or serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine, 5-HT) receptors could reduce ABA, as both regulate feeding25, 26 and locomotion.27, 28 Furthermore, abnormalities in 5-HT and dopamine neurotransmitter systems have been reported in ill and recovered AN patients. For example, the major metabolite of 5-HT, 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid, is elevated after weight restoration in AN.29, 30 Recovered AN patients also exhibit reductions in homovanillic acid, a dopamine metabolite,31 and increases in D2/3 receptor binding in the anteroventral striatum.32 These biomarkers may represent trait alterations that increase vulnerability to AN. As ill and recovered AN patients exhibit alterations in serotonergic and dopaminergic signaling systems, olanzapine may reduce ABA in rodents and AN symptoms in patients through antagonist properties at certain serotonergic and/or dopaminergic receptors.
To determine which aspect of olanzapine’s complex pharmacology reduces ABA, we examined the effects of selective serotonergic or dopaminergic receptor antagonists on ABA in mice. We assessed the effects of the 5-HT2A/2C receptor antagonist ritanserin, and the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist ondansetron. Then, we examined the effects of the D1-like antagonist SCH23390 and the D2/3 receptor antagonists eticlopride or amisulpride. We also compared the ability of amisulpride and olanzapine to reduce ABA. Finally, we used the D3 receptor antagonist SB277011A and the D2 receptor antagonist L-741,626 to discern the effects of selective D3 and D2 receptor antagonism on ABA.
Materials and methods
Animals
Balb/cJ female mice (Jackson Laboratories, Bar Harbor, ME, USA), aged 8 weeks, were acclimated to the vivarium for 1 week before the experimental procedures. Mice received ad libitum access to standard chow and water, except during food restriction. Animals were euthanized, or ‘dropped’, from experiments when they lost 25% of their baseline body weight (assessed on the last day of baseline). All the procedures were conducted in accord with the National Institutes of Health laboratory animal care guidelines and with Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approval at the University of Chicago.
Experimental conditions
Mice were housed in a climate-controlled room maintained on a 12:12 light–dark cycle (lights off at 2000 h). Cages (19.56 × 34.70 × 14.41 cm) were equipped with wireless low-profile running wheels (Med Associates, St Albans, VT, USA). Running wheels transmitted running data every 30 s to a computer with Wheel Manager Software 24 h a day. Food was provided in a glass jar (65 cm diameter × 50 cm height) during baseline and restriction periods.
Activity-based anorexia paradigm
The mice were pseudo-randomly divided into experimental groups on the basis of body weight upon arrival. During acclimation (2 days), baseline (7 days), and food restriction (14 days), mice were singly housed and given 24 h running wheel access. During restriction, the mice received daily food access for 6 h a day beginning at 0900 h. Six hours daily food access induces a dropout rate of approximately ⩽7 days, permitting detection of either increases or decreases in survival.22 Daily body weight, food intake and wheel running were recorded during baseline and restriction conditions. Food anticipatory activity (FAA), defined as running activity 0–4 h before food access, and postprandial activity (PPA), defined as running activity following food access and before initiation of the dark cycle, were also determined. Days to dropout (loss of 25% baseline body weight) provided a measure of survival.
Experimental design
For all the experiments, the mice were subjected to the treatment regime (see Supplementary Methods) and ABA paradigm described above. Sample sizes were chosen on the basis of previous studies, which identified statistical differences in survival in the ABA paradigm.22 The experimenter was not blind to the treatment groups to accurately dose each group via the drinking water (See Supplementary Methods).
Experiment 1: mice received 0, 0.01, 0.1 or 1 mg kg−1 per day ritanserin and a separate group received 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine as a positive control (n=8 per group). Ritanserin33, 34, 35 and olanzapine22 doses were based on previous studies.
Experiment 2: mice received 0 (n=12), 0.1 (n=11), 1 (n=12) or 10 mg kg−1 per day ondansetron (n=12),36, 37, 38 or 30 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine (n=12).22
Experiment 3: mice received 0, 0.005, 0.5 or 0.5 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390,39, 40, 41, 42 or 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine22 (n=12 per group).
Experiment 4: mice received 0, 0.1, 0.5 or 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride,43, 44, 45 or 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine22 (n=12 per group).
Experiment 5: mice received 0, 10, 50 or 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride.46, 47, 48, 49 A separate group received 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride43, 44, 45 as a positive control (n=12 per group).
Experiment 6: effects of amisulpride (0, 100 or 150 mg kg−1 per day)46, 47, 48, 49 were compared with olanzapine (12 or 18 mg kg−1 per day)22 (n=12 per group).
Experiment 7: mice received 0 (n=15), 5 (n=14), 25 (n=15) or 50 mg kg−1 per day (n=15) SB277011A.50, 51, 52, 53 For experiments 7 and 8, the restriction period lasted only 10 days as dropout from the ABA paradigm generally occurs within this timeframe.
Experiment 8: mice received 0, 1, 10 or 20 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 (n=15 per group).54, 55, 56, 57
Statistics
For baseline data, analyses of variance assessed the effects of treatment as a between-subjects factor, and day as a within-subjects factor for each dependent variable (body weight, food intake, wheel running). Post hoc analyses of variance resolved main effects of treatment or interactions of treatment × day. Bonferroni adjustments were made when post hoc analyses of variance were applied.
The mice drop out of the ABA paradigm during restriction, creating data sets with missing values. Therefore, general linear models (PROC GLIMMIX; SAS v9.2, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA; code available from corresponding author upon request) were used to assess differences in body weight, food intake, wheel running, FAA, and PPA during restriction. Post hoc analyses resolving main effects of treatment and treatment × day interactions were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the false discovery rate method. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan–Meier test with Logrank (Mantel–Cox) and Peto–Peto–Wilcoxon post hoc tests.
For baseline and restriction data, all the post hoc tests compared drug doses to vehicle. For experiment 6, all the doses were compared with one another. The mice were excluded from the data set when their log-transformed dropout day was >2 s.d. from the group mean (see Supplementary Results). Significance was set at P<0.05.
Results
Ritanserin reduces food intake and wheel running during ABA
During baseline, neither ritanserin nor olanzapine treatment altered body weight (Supplementary Table S1). Main effects indicated that 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced food intake (F(4,31)=4.098, P<0.01) and wheel running (F(4,32)=3.020, P<0.05; all comparisons P<0.05, Supplementary Table S1). For experiment 1, baseline running-wheel data reflects the last 4 days of baseline due to a malfunction of the data acquisition system.
During food restriction, ritanserin treatment did not alter survival (Figure 1a). Conversely, 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine treatment increased survival (P<0.0005).
A main effect of treatment (F(4,111)=5.23, P<0.001) and post hoc analyses revealed that 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced weight loss (P<0.005), while ritanserin had no effect (Supplementary Figure S1A). Specifically, 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased body weight on days 1–3 relative to vehicle (treatment × day, F(21,111)=17.04, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.001; Supplementary Figure S1A). Olanzapine 25 mg kg−1 per day also protected against hypophagia (F(4,112)=12.50, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0001; Supplementary Figure S1B). Specifically, 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased food intake on day 1, while 0.1 mg kg−1 per day and 1 mg kg−1 per day ritanserin reduced food intake on days 3 and 4, and day 4, respectively, relative to vehicle (treatment × day, F(22,112)=13.69, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S1B).
All doses of ritanserin and 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced wheel running (F(4,112)=4.91, P<0.005; all comparisons, P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S1C). Specifically, 0.01, 0.1 and 1 mg kg−1 per day ritanserin reduced wheel running on day 4, days 2–4 and day 4, respectively (treatment × day, F(22,112)=4.06, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S1C). All the doses of ritanserin reduced FAA on days 3 and 4, and 25 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced FAA on day 4 (treatment × day, F(17,81)=4.79, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S1D). Finally, 0.1 mg kg−1 per day ritanserin reduced PPA on day 3 (treatment × day, F(22,110)=5.99, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S1E).
Ondansetron treatment decreases body weight and food intake during ABA
During baseline, neither ondansetron nor olanzapine altered body weight or food intake (Supplementary Table S1). However, a main effect of treatment (F(4,50)=4.275, P<0.005) and post hoc analyses indicated that 30 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced wheel running (P<0.05, Supplementary Table S1).
During restriction, ondansetron did not alter survival (Figure 1b). However, 30 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased survival early in the restriction period (P<0.05), but in not the late phase (P=0.25).
All the doses of ondansetron and olanzapine produced further reductions in body weight (F(4,244)=13.85, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0001; Supplementary Figure S2A) and food intake (F(4,245)=102.99, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0001; Supplementary Figure S2B) compared with vehicle. Specifically, 0.1, 1 and 10 mg kg−1 per day ondansetron reduced food intake on days 6 and 7, days 4 and 5 and days 3–6, respectively (treatment × day, F(46,245)=23.43, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05). Finally, 30 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced food intake on days 5, 6 and 13 (all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S2B).
Neither ondansetron nor olanzapine altered wheel running (Supplementary Figure S2C) or FAA (Supplementary Figure S2D). However, all the doses of ondansetron increased PPA (F(4,245)=4.53, P<0.005; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S2E, see inset). Specifically, 0.1 mg kg−1 per day ondansetron increased PPA on day 6 (treatment × day, F(46,245)=3.65, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S2E).
SCH23390 treatment increases body weight and food intake during ABA
Neither SCH23390 nor 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine altered the body weight, food intake or wheel running during baseline (Supplementary Table S1).
During restriction, SCH23390 did not alter survival (Figure 1c). Conversely, 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased survival (P<0.01).
A main effect of treatment (F(4,245)=36.12, P<0.0001) revealed that 0.05 and 0.5 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390 and 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced weight loss (all comparisons P<0.001; Supplementary Figure S3A, see inset). Specifically, 0.05 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390 and 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased the body weight on day 5 and days 3–5, respectively (treatment × day, F(42,245)=23.77, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S3A). Furthermore, 0.005 mg kg−1 per day and 0.05 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390, as well as 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced hypophagia (F(4,239)=89.41, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.001; Supplementary Figure S3B, see inset).
Wheel running was not altered by either treatment (Supplementary Figure S3C). However, both 0.05 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390 and 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased FAA (F(4,198)=25.09, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.005; Supplementary Figure S3D, see inset). In addition, 0.05 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390 reduced PPA (F(4,244)=13.86, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0005; Supplementary Figure S3E, see inset). Finally, 0.005 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390 and 15 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased PPA on day 2, and days 1 and 2, respectively (treatment × day, F(42,244)=5.97, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S3E).
Eticlopride treatment robustly increases survival in ABA
During baseline, neither eticlopride nor olanzapine altered body weight, food intake or wheel running (Supplementary Table S1).
During restriction, 0.5 and 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride increased survival (all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 2a). Importantly, 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride completely prevented dropout. Mice receiving 0.1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride or 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine did not differ from mice receiving vehicle.
All the doses of eticlopride protected against weight loss (F(4,448)=36.31, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.01; Figure 2b, see inset). Conversely, 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced body weight (P<0.0001). In addition, 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride increased body weight on days 3–5, while 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced body weight on day 7 (treatment × day, F(64,448)=14.91, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 2b). Similarly, 0.1 and 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride increased, whereas 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine decreased food intake (F(4,446)=47.54, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 2c, see inset). Specifically, 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine reduced food intake on days 6–9 (treatment × day, F(64,446)=26.81, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 2c).
All the doses of eticlopride increased wheel running (F(4,449)=2.88, P<0.05; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 2d, see inset). No effects of treatment on FAA were found (Supplementary Figure S4A). However, 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased PPA (F(4,449)=8.55, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.001; Supplementary Figure S4B, see inset).
Amisulpride treatment increases survival, body weight and food intake during ABA
During baseline, neither amisulpride nor eticlopride altered the body weight or food intake (Supplementary Table S1). However, 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride reduced wheel running on day 1 (treatment × day, F(24,53)=2.685, P<0.0001; data not shown).
During restriction, amisulpride increased survival (Figure 3a). Although 10 and 50 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride induced nonsignificant increases in survival, 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride increased survival (P<0.05). Similarly, 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride increased survival (P<0.0005).
All the treatments reduced weight loss (F(4,408)=12.10, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0001; Figure 3b) and hypophagia (F(4,406)=51.29, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0001; Figure 3c, see inset). Furthermore, 50 and 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride increased food intake on day 5, and 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride increased food intake on food restriction days 5 and 6 (treatment × day, F(63,406)=35.92, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 3c).
All the treatments reduced wheel running (F(4,394)=3.45, P<0.01; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 3d, see inset). Moreover, both 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride and 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride reduced FAA on food restriction day 3, and food restriction days 3 and 5, respectively (treatment × day, F(62,359)=3.54, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S5A). Neither amisulpride nor eticlopride altered PPA (Supplementary Figure S5B).
Amisulpride produces larger reductions in body weight loss and hypophagia during ABA than olanzapine
Neither amisulpride nor olanzapine altered body weight, food intake or wheel running during baseline (Supplementary Table S1).
During restriction, both amisulpride and olanzapine increased survival compared with vehicle (Figure 4a). Specifically, 100 mg kg−1 per day (P<0.05), but not 150 mg kg−1 per day, amisulpride increased survival. The 12 mg kg−1 per day (P<0.01) and 18 mg kg−1 per day (P<0.05) doses of olanzapine also increased survival. The 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride group did not differ from the 12 mg kg−1 per day or 18 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine groups. However, both the olanzapine treatment groups increased survival compared with 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride (all comparisons P<0.05). Finally, 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride increased survival compared with 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride (P<0.05), while 12 and 18 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine produced comparable survival times.
The 100 mg kg−1 per day dose of amisulpride and 12 and 18 mg kg−1 per day doses of olanzapine reduced weight loss compared with vehicle during restriction (F(4,281)=15.60, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.001; Figure 4b, see inset). Moreover, 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride reduced weight loss relative to 12 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine and 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride (all comparisons P<0.005). Both the olanzapine doses reduced weight loss relative to 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride (all comparisons P<0.005). Furthermore, 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride reduced hypophagia compared with all the other treatment groups (F(4,280)=107.40, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0001; Figure 4c, see inset). Both the doses of olanzapine reduced hypophagia relative to 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride and vehicle (all comparisons P<0.0005). On the other hand, 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride reduced food intake compared with vehicle (P<0.05). Furthermore, 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride increased food intake compared with 12 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine on days 6, 9 and 14, and 18 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine on restriction day 9 (treatment × day, F(51,280)=28.10, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 4c).
Neither amisulpride nor olanzapine altered wheel running (Figure 4d). A main effect of treatment (F(4,233)=11.68, P<0.0001) showed that 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride increased FAA compared with 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride, 18 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine and vehicle (all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S6A, see inset). Also, 12 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased FAA relative to 18 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine, 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride and vehicle (all comparisons P<0.05). Finally, 18 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine increased FAA compared with 150 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride and vehicle (all comparisons P<0.05). Neither amisulpride nor olanzapine altered PPA (Supplementary Figure S6B).
SB277011A treatment increases survival in ABA
During baseline, SB277011A did not alter body weight, food intake or wheel running (Supplementary Table S1).
During restriction, 50 mg kg−1 per day SB277011A increased survival (P<0.005; Figure 5a). Neither body weight (Figure 5b) nor food intake (Figure 5c) were altered by SB277011A.
Furthermore, SB277011A did not induce changes in wheel running (Figure 5d) or FAA (Supplementary Figure S7A). Conversely, a main effect of treatment (F(3,193)=6.43, P<0.0005) indicated that both 25 and 50 mg kg−1 per day SB277011A increased PPA (all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S7B, see inset).
L-741,626 treatment increases survival, body weight and food intake during ABA
During baseline, L-741,626 did not alter body weight, food intake or wheel running (Supplementary Table S1).
During restriction, both 10 mg kg−1 per day (P<0.05) and 20 mg kg−1 per day (P<0.0005) L-741,626 increased survival (Figure 5e).
Both 1 mg kg−1 per day and 20 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 reduced weight loss (F(3,305)=14.55, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.001; Figure 5f, see inset). Specifically, 20 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 increased body weight on days 3–5 (treatment × day, F(34,305)=13.28, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Figure 5f). Furthermore, all the doses of L-714,626 reduced hypophagia (F(3,301)=56.25, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.0001; Figure 5g, see inset).
A main effect of treatment (F(3,305)=11.40; P<0.0001) showed that 1 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 increased wheel running (P<0.001; Figure 5h, see inset). Furthermore, 10 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 increased wheel running on day 3 (treatment × day, F(34,305)=2.15, P<0.001; P<0.05; Figure 5h). Both 1 mg kg−1 per day and 10 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 increased FAA (F(3,264)=4.80, P<0.005; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S7C, see inset). Moreover, all the doses of L-741,626 decreased PPA (F(3,305)=12.95, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05; Supplementary Figure S7D, see inset). Specifically, 1 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 decreased PPA on day 5, whereas 10 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 increased PPA on day 1 (treatment × day, F(34,305)=5.69, P<0.0001; all comparisons P<0.05). Finally, 10 and 20 mg kg−1 per day L-741,626 decreased PPA on days 4 and 5, and day 5, respectively (all comparisons P<0.0005; Supplementary Figure S7D).
Discussion
Here we report that selective antagonism of D2 and/or D3 receptors significantly reduces ABA. The D2/3 receptor antagonists eticlopride and amisulpride robustly increased survival, and reduced weight loss and hypophagia during restriction. Thus, D2/3 receptor blockade underlies, at least in part, the ability of olanzapine to reduce ABA. Furthermore, amisulpride produced larger reductions in weight loss and hypophagia than olanzapine, suggesting that dopamine D2/3 receptor antagonism may underlie the mechanism of action of olanzapine. Thus, D2/3 antagonists should be examined in AN. Furthermore, selective antagonism of either D2 or D3 receptors also reduced ABA. Since selective D3 antagonism has a reduced propensity to induce extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS),53, 55, 58, 59, 60 selective D3 receptor antagonism should also be explored as a novel treatment for AN. Although D1-like antagonist SCH23390 increased body weight and food intake during restriction, survival was not increased. Surprisingly, 5-HT2A/2C or 5-HT3 receptor antagonism increased ABA. In sum, D2/3 and/or D3 receptor antagonists may provide effective treatment for AN, and should be investigated in clinical trials.
Increases in survival are paramount to indicating reductions in ABA. Additional effects indicating reduced ABA include reductions in weight loss and hypophagia. Reductions in wheel running during restriction can also indicate reduced ABA, but animals also run less before dropout, confounding the interpretation of wheel running. Recently, Wu et al.61 has shown that decreases in FAA and increases in PPA correlate with weight loss61 contrary to previous findings, which indicated that decreases in FAA are associated with reduced ABA.22, 62, 63 Our findings indicate that changes in FAA and PPA remain inconsistent or unobserved, and do not always correlate with increases in survival. For example, amisulpride decreased FAA in experiment 5 (Supplementary Figure S5A), but increased FAA in experiment 6 (Supplementary Figure S6A), despite consistently increasing survival (Figures 3a and 4a). Moreover, none of our experiments yielded simultaneous increases in FAA and decreases in PPA alongside increases in survival.
Overall, none of the selective serotonergic or dopaminergic antagonists used herein produced significant alterations in the body weight, food intake or wheel running during baseline. Therefore, observed effects on ABA were unlikely owing to drug-induced changes in metabolism, activity levels or appetite, but were specific to restriction conditions.
We used a range of olanzapine doses across the present studies to identify an optimal dose of olanzapine. Doses from 12 to 25 mg kg−1 per day increased survival (Figures 1a, c and 4a), whereas higher doses did not (Figures 1b and 2a). Furthermore, optimal doses of olanzapine (12–18 mg kg−1 per day) not only increased survival (Figures 1c and 4a), but also increased body weight (Supplementary Figures S3A and Figure 4b) and food intake (Supplementary Figures S3B and Figure 4b), during food restriction. Moreover, as olanzapine doses above 25 mg kg−1 per day increased, ABA also increased. For example, both 30 and 35 mg kg−1 per day olanzapine decreased body weight and food intake during restriction (Supplementary Figures S2A and S2B and Figures 2b and c). Furthermore, decreases in baseline food intake (25 mg kg−1 per day) and wheel running (30 mg kg−1 per day) indicate a propensity for higher doses of olanzapine to induce nonspecific effects (Supplementary Table S1).
Olanzapine has a higher affinity for 5-HT2A/2C receptors than dopamine receptors,23, 24 and 5-HT2A/2C receptor blockade is thought to contribute to weight gain following atypical antipsychotic treatment.64 However, the effects of 5-HT2A/2C antagonists on food intake in rodents vary, and are dependent on experimental conditions.65, 66, 67, 68, 69 Our findings show that ritanserin had no effect on survival, and reduced food intake (0.1 and 1 mg kg−1 per day) and wheel running (all doses)(Figure 1a, Supplementary Figures S1A and S1C). Thus, 5-HT2A/2C receptor antagonism may increase ABA by increasing hypophagia during restriction.
Ondansetron reduces symptoms of bulimia nervosa70 and obsessive-compulsive disorder,71 two disorders comorbid with AN.72 However, ondansetron did not increase survival in ABA and exacerbated ABA by reducing body weight and food intake (Supplementary Figures S2A and 2B). Therefore, 5-HT3 receptor antagonism is unlikely to contribute to the ability of olanzapine to reduce ABA.
Olanzapine has high affinity binding at 5-HT6 receptors (Ki=6 nM).24 However, mice have reduced 5-HT6 receptor expression in the striatum compared with rats and humans, and alterations in key amino-acid sequences, which result in different pharmacological profiles.73 Thus, findings obtained using mice might not be readily translated to humans. Therefore, we did not investigate the effects of 5-HT6 antagonists on ABA.
Although antagonism of D1-like receptors using SCH23390 did not alter survival, 0.05 mg kg−1 per day and 0.5 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390 reduced weight loss and 0.005 mg kg−1 per day and 0.05 mg kg−1 per day SCH23390 reduced hypophagia (Figure 1c, Supplementary Figures S3A and S3B). As SCH23390 induced only minor reductions in ABA without increasing survival, D1-like receptor antagonism is unlikely to contribute substantially to the ability of olanzapine to reduce ABA.
The D2/3 receptor antagonists eticlopride and amisulpride robustly increased survival in ABA. Notably, 1 mg kg−1 per day eticlopride prevented mice from dropping out of restriction (Figure 2a). Moreover, both amisulpride and eticlopride reduced weight loss and hypophagia (Figures 3a–c). Although optimal doses of amisulpride and olanzapine required to reduce ABA produced comparable increases in survival, 100 mg kg−1 per day amisulpride produced larger reductions in weight loss and hypophagia than olanzapine (Figures 4a–c). These findings suggest that dopamine D2/3 receptor antagonism plays a significant role in the therapeutic mechanism of olanzapine to reduce ABA behavior.
As D2/3 antagonists robustly reduced ABA, we examined whether blockade of one or both dopamine receptors drives this effect. We found that selective antagonism of either D2 or D3 receptors increased survival (Figures 5a and e). The D2 receptor antagonist L-741,626 also reduced weight loss and hypophagia during restriction (Figures 5f and g). Increases in survival induced by D3 antagonist SB277011A appear smaller in magnitude, and might be due to nonsignificant reductions in weight loss and wheel running (Figures 5b and d). Higher doses of SB277011A might produce more robust increases in survival. Although L-741,626 and SB277011A exhibit ~40-fold and 100-fold selectivity for the D2 or D3 receptor, respectively, cross-receptor reactivity may have been present at the doses used in these studies. Recent findings in rats indicate that L-741,626 has relatively no D3 receptor occupancy at 10 mg kg−1 per day, and that 10 mg kg−1 per day SB277011A exhibits ~20% receptor occupancy at D2 receptors.74 Given that survival increased as the dose of SB277011A increased, D2 receptor antagonism might have a role in the ability of SB277011A to increase survival. Future studies using conditional knockout of D2 or D3 receptors will be required to definitively resolve their respective contributions to ABA behavior.
Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of dopaminergic antagonists to ameliorate AN symptomology are limited and severely underpowered. Overall, typical antipsychotic treatment produces marginal increases in body weight in AN patients, as well as EPS and sedation.75, 76 Conversely, atypical antipsychotics, most accurately distinguished from typical antipsychotics by a reduced susceptibility to EPS,77 show promise in reducing AN symptomology. Consistent with our finding that D2/3 antagonists reduce ABA, a small, single-blind trial showed that atypical antipsychotic amisulpride increased weight gain in AN patients.78 Conversely, the related compound sulpiride, produced only marginal increases in weight gain in anorexic patients.79 These data are consistent with the report that recovered AN patients show increased binding affinity at D2/3 receptors in the anteroventral striatum, which could be a trait alteration that increases susceptibility to AN.32 The preferential high affinity binding at limbic cortical D2/3 receptors, rather than striatal D2/3 receptors, may underlie the reduced incidence of EPS following amisulpride treatment.49, 80, 81 Furthermore, amisulpride does not show high affinity binding at 5-HT2C receptors, muscarinic, or histamine H1 receptors,81, 82 which are thought to contribute to the metabolic side effects of olanzapine.83 Therefore, amisulpride may reduce AN symptomology with fewer side effects associated with olanzapine or typical antipsychotic treatment.
We also found that selective antagonism of D3 receptors reduces ABA (Figure 5a). Since antagonism at striatal D2 receptors is thought to drive EPS,77 the enriched mesolimbic expression of D3 receptors84 may indicate a novel treatment target for AN with reduced susceptibility to EPS. In fact, reduced EPS were observed in humans,58 and in the catalepsy rodent model of EPS,53 following D3 antagonist treatment. As both amisulpride and D3 antagonists are thought to produce a low incidence of EPS, these agents may provide therapeutic benefit in AN while avoiding unwanted side effects.
We aimed to determine which aspect of olanzapine’s complex pharmacology reduces ABA by examining the effects of selective serotonergic or dopaminergic receptor antagonists on ABA. Our findings suggest that D2/3 receptor antagonism mediates reductions in ABA produced by olanzapine, while D1-like, 5-HT2A/2C, and 5-HT3 receptor blockade does not (Supplementary Table S3). However, complex interactions between multiple receptors could have a role in the mechanism of olanzapine to reduce ABA. We did not examine the effects of simultaneously antagonizing three or more receptors on ABA, yet we still identified robust effects of D2/3 receptor blockade via two selective D2/3 receptor antagonists, and selective antagonism at D2 or D3 receptors alone.
In conclusion, we show that D2/3 antagonists robustly increase survival, body weight, and food intake during ABA and therefore might provide effective treatment for AN. Furthermore, we found that D3 receptor antagonism alone also reduces ABA, and could provide a novel approach to treating AN with reduced risk for EPS. Currently, there is a dearth of suitably powered, placebo-controlled clinical trials evaluating potential pharmacological treatments for anorexia nervosa. Our data indicate that clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of amisulpride and D3 antagonists in AN are warranted.
References
Attia E . Anorexia nervosa: current status and future directions. Annu Rev Med 2010; 61: 425–435.
Bulik CM, Sullivan PF, Tozzi F, Furberg H, Lichtenstein P, Pedersen NL . Prevalence, heritability, and prospective risk factors for anorexia nervosa. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2006; 63: 305–312.
Hudson JI, Hiripi E, Pope HG Jr, Kessler RC . The prevalence and correlates of eating disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Biol Psychiatry 2007; 61: 348–358.
Smink FR, van Hoeken D, Oldehinkel AJ, Hoek HW . Prevalence and severity of DSM-5 eating disorders in a community cohort of adolescents. Int J Eat Disord 2014; 47: 610–619.
Swanson SA, Crow SJ, Le Grange D, Swendsen J, Merikangas KR . Prevalence and correlates of eating disorders in adolescents. Results from the national comorbidity survey replication adolescent supplement. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2011; 68: 714–723.
Smink FR, van Hoeken D, Hoek HW . Epidemiology of eating disorders: incidence, prevalence and mortality rates. Curr Psychiatry Rep 2012; 14: 406–414.
Harris EC, Barraclough B . Excess mortality of mental disorder. Br J Psychiatry 1998; 173: 11–53.
Hall JF, Hanford PV . Activity as a function of a restricted feeding schedule. J Comp Physiol Psychol 1954; 47: 362–363.
Routtenberg A, Kuznesof AW . Self-starvation of rats living in activity wheels on a restricted feeding schedule. J Comp Physiol Psychol 1967; 64: 414–421.
Burden VR, White BD, Dean RG, Martin RJ . Activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis is elevated in rats with activity-based anorexia. J Nutr 1993; 123: 1217–1225.
Gutierrez E, Vazquez R, Boakes RA . Activity-based anorexia: ambient temperature has been a neglected factor. Psychon Bull Rev 2002; 9: 239–249.
Watanabe K, Hara C, Ogawa N . Feeding conditions and estrous cycle of female rats under the activity-stress procedure from aspects of anorexia nervosa. Physiol Behav 1992; 51: 827–832.
Boakes RA, Mills KJ, Single JP . Sex differences in the relationship between activity and weight loss in the rat. Behav Neurosci 1999; 113: 1080–1089.
Doerries LE, Stanley EZ, Aravich PF . Activity-based anorexia: relationship to gender and activity-stress ulcers. Physiol Behav 1991; 50: 945–949.
Paré WP VG, Isom KE, Reeves JM . Sex differences and incidence of activity-stress ulcers in the rat. Psychol Rep 1978; 43: 591–594.
Woods DJ, Routtenberg A . ‘Self-starvation’ in activity wheels: developmental and chlorpromazine interactions. J Comp Physiol Psychol 1971; 76: 84–93.
Attia E, Kaplan AS, Walsh BT, Gershkovich M, Yilmaz Z, Musante D et al. Olanzapine versus placebo for out-patients with anorexia nervosa. Psychol Med 2011; 41: 2177–2182.
Bissada H, Tasca GA, Barber AM, Bradwejn J . Olanzapine in the treatment of low body weight and obsessive thinking in women with anorexia nervosa: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Am J Psychiatry 2008; 165: 1281–1288.
Mondraty N, Birmingham CL, Touyz S, Sundakov V, Chapman L, Beumont P . Randomized controlled trial of olanzapine in the treatment of cognitions in anorexia nervosa. Australas Psychiatry 2005; 13: 72–75.
Brambilla F, Garcia CS, Fassino S, Daga GA, Favaro A, Santonastaso P et al. Olanzapine therapy in anorexia nervosa: psychobiological effects. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 2007; 22: 197–204.
Kafantaris V, Leigh E, Hertz S, Berest A, Schebendach J, Sterling WM et al. A placebo-controlled pilot study of adjunctive olanzapine for adolescents with anorexia nervosa. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 2011; 21: 207–212.
Klenotich SJ, Seiglie MP, McMurray MS, Roitman JD, Le Grange D, Dugad P et al. Olanzapine, but not fluoxetine, treatment increases survival in activity-based anorexia in mice. Neuropsychopharmacology 2012; 37: 1620–1631.
Bymaster FP, Calligaro DO, Falcone JF, Marsh RD, Moore NA, Tye NC et al. Radioreceptor binding profile of the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine. Neuropsychopharmacology 1996; 14: 87–96.
Richtand NM, Welge JA, Logue AD, Keck PE Jr, Strakowski SM, McNamara RK . Dopamine and serotonin receptor binding and antipsychotic efficacy. Neuropsychopharmacology 2007; 32: 1715–1726.
Blundell JE . Serotonin and the biology of feeding. Am J Clin Nutr 1992; 55: 155S–159S.
Palmiter RD . Is dopamine a physiologically relevant mediator of feeding behavior? Trends Neurosci 2007; 30: 375–381.
Fibiger HC, Campbell BA . The effect of para-chlorophenylalanine on spontaneous locomotor activity in the rat. Neuropharmacology 1971; 10: 25–32.
Pijnenburg AJ, Honig WM, Van der Heyden JA, Van Rossum JM . Effects of chemical stimulation of the mesolimbic dopamine system upon locomotor activity. Eur J Pharmacol 1976; 35: 45–58.
Kaye WH, Gwirtsman HE, George DT, Ebert MH . Altered serotonin activity in anorexia nervosa after long-term weight restoration. Does elevated cerebrospinal fluid 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid level correlate with rigid and obsessive behavior? Arch Gen Psychiatry 1991; 48: 556–562.
Kaye WH, Gwirtsman HE, George DT, Jimerson DC, Ebert MH . CSF 5-HIAA concentrations in anorexia nervosa: reduced values in underweight subjects normalize after weight gain. Biol Psychiatry 1988; 23: 102–105.
Kaye WH, Frank GK, McConaha C . Altered dopamine activity after recovery from restricting-type anorexia nervosa. Neuropsychopharmacology 1999; 21: 503–506.
Frank GK, Bailer UF, Henry SE, Drevets W, Meltzer CC, Price JC et al. Increased dopamine D2/D3 receptor binding after recovery from anorexia nervosa measured by positron emission tomography and [11c]raclopride. Biol Psychiatry 2005; 58: 908–912.
Ago Y, Nakamura S, Kajita N, Uda M, Hashimoto H, Baba A et al. Ritanserin reverses repeated methamphetamine-induced behavioral and neurochemical sensitization in mice. Synapse 2007; 61: 757–763.
Gao B, Cutler MG . Effects of acute and subchronic administration of ritanserin on the social behaviour of mice. Neuropharmacology 1993; 32: 265–272.
Su YA, Si TM, Zhou DF, Guo CM, Wang XD, Yang Y et al. Risperidone attenuates MK-801-induced hyperlocomotion in mice via the blockade of serotonin 5-HT 2A/2C receptors. Eur J Pharmacol 2007; 564: 123–130.
Liang DY, Li X, Clark JD . 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor modulates opioid-induced hyperalgesia and tolerance in mice. Anesthesiology 2011; 114: 1180–1189.
Roychoudhury M, Kulkarni SK . Prevention of morphine discontinuation phenomenon in mice by ondansetron, a selective 5-HT3 antagonist. Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol 1996; 18: 677–683.
Wu Q, Clark MS, Palmiter RD . Deciphering a neuronal circuit that mediates appetite. Nature 2012; 483: 594–597.
Cheng JT, Kuo DY . Both alpha1-adrenergic and D(1)-dopaminergic neurotransmissions are involved in phenylpropanolamine-mediated feeding suppression in mice. Neurosci Lett 2003; 347: 136–138.
Kaur G, Kulkarni SK . Studies on modulation of feeding behavior by atypical antipsychotics in female mice. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2002; 26: 277–285.
Ladurelle N, Duterte-Boucher D, Costentin J . Stimulation of D1 and D2 dopamine receptors produces additive anorectic effects. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 1991; 5: 481–490.
Liu YY, Liu TY, Qu WM, Hong ZY, Urade Y, Huang ZL . Dopamine is involved in food-anticipatory activity in mice. J Biol Rhythms 2012; 27: 398–409.
Bulwa ZB, Sharlin JA, Clark PJ, Bhattacharya TK, Kilby CN, Wang Y et al. Increased consumption of ethanol and sugar water in mice lacking the dopamine D2 long receptor. Alcohol 2011; 45: 631–639.
Chausmer AL, Katz JL . The role of D2-like dopamine receptors in the locomotor stimulant effects of cocaine in mice. Psychopharmacology 2001; 155: 69–77.
Ferrari F, Giuliani D . Effects of (-)eticlopride and 7-OH-DPAT on the tail-suspension test in mice. J Psychopharmacol 1997; 11: 339–344.
Cordonnier L, Sanchez M, Roques BP, Noble F . Facilitation of enkephalins-induced delta-opioid behavioral responses by chronic amisulpride treatment. Neuroscience 2005; 135: 1–10.
Pawar GR, Agrawal RP, Phadnis P, Paliwal A, Vyas S, Solanki P . Evaluation of antidepressant like property of amisulpride per se and its comparison with fluoxetine and olanzapine using forced swimming test in albino mice. Acta Pol Pharm 2009; 66: 327–331.
Perrault G, Depoortere R, Morel E, Sanger DJ, Scatton B . Psychopharmacological profile of amisulpride: an antipsychotic drug with presynaptic D2/D3 dopamine receptor antagonist activity and limbic selectivity. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1997; 280: 73–82.
Scatton B, Claustre Y, Cudennec A, Oblin A, Perrault G, Sanger DJ et al. Amisulpride: from animal pharmacology to therapeutic action. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1997; 12: S29–S36.
Bespalov A, Jongen-Relo AL, van Gaalen M, Harich S, Schoemaker H, Gross G . Habituation deficits induced by metabotropic glutamate receptors 2/3 receptor blockade in mice: reversal by antipsychotic drugs. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2007; 320: 944–950.
Gyertyan I, Saghy K . Effects of dopamine D3 receptor antagonists on spontaneous and agonist-reduced motor activity in NMRI mice and Wistar rats: comparative study with nafadotride, U 99194A and SB 277011. Behav Pharmacol 2004; 15: 253–262.
Heidbreder CA, Andreoli M, Marcon C, Hutcheson DM, Gardner EL, Ashby CR Jr . Evidence for the role of dopamine D3 receptors in oral operant alcohol self-administration and reinstatement of alcohol-seeking behavior in mice. Addict Biol 2007; 12: 35–50.
Reavill C, Taylor SG, Wood MD, Ashmeade T, Austin NE, Avenell KY et al. Pharmacological actions of a novel, high-affinity, and selective human dopamine D(3) receptor antagonist, SB-277011-A. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2000; 294: 1154–1165.
Fan X, Xu M, Hess EJ . D2 dopamine receptor subtype-mediated hyperactivity and amphetamine responses in a model of ADHD. Neurobiol Dis 2010; 37: 228–236.
Millan MJ, Dekeyne A, Rivet JM, Dubuffet T, Lavielle G, Brocco M . S33084, a novel, potent, selective, and competitive antagonist at dopamine D(3)-receptors: II. Functional and behavioral profile compared with GR218,231 and L741,626. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2000; 293: 1063–1073.
Onogi H, Nakagawasai O, Tan-No K, Mitazaki S, Sato A, Nakaya K et al. p-Hydroxyamphetamine causes prepulse inhibition disruptions in mice: contribution of dopamine neurotransmission. Behav Brain Res 2010; 214: 349–356.
Riday TT, Dankoski EC, Krouse MC, Fish EW, Walsh PL, Han JE et al. Pathway-specific dopaminergic deficits in a mouse model of Angelman syndrome. J Clin Invest 2012; 122: 4544–4554.
Geyer MA, Gross G . Novel antischizophrenia treatments. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology. Springer: Heidelberg, Germany/New York, NY, USA, 2012, pp 187.
Gyertyan I, Saghy K . The selective dopamine D3 receptor antagonists, SB 277011-A and S 33084 block haloperidol-induced catalepsy in rats. Eur J Pharmacol 2007; 572: 171–174.
Millan MJ, Gressier H, Brocco M . The dopamine D3 receptor antagonist, (+)-S 14297, blocks the cataleptic properties of haloperidol in rats. Eur J Pharmacol 1997; 321: R7–R9.
Wu H, van Kuyck K, Tambuyzer T, Luyten L, Aerts JM, Nuttin B . Rethinking food anticipatory activity in the activity-based anorexia rat model. Sci Rep 2014; 4: 3929.
Atchley DP, Eckel LA . Treatment with 8-OH-DPAT attenuates the weight loss associated with activity-based anorexia in female rats. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 2006; 83: 547–553.
Hillebrand JJ, van Elburg AA, Kas MJ, van Engeland H, Adan RA . Olanzapine reduces physical activity in rats exposed to activity-based anorexia: possible implications for treatment of anorexia nervosa? Biol Psychiatry 2005; 58: 651–657.
Roerig JL, Steffen KJ, Mitchell JE . Atypical antipsychotic-induced weight gain: insights into mechanisms of action. CNS Drugs 2011; 25: 1035–1059.
Fletcher PJ . Increased food intake in satiated rats induced by the 5-HT antagonists methysergide, metergoline and ritanserin. Psychopharmacology 1988; 96: 237–242.
Grignaschi G, Samanin R . Role of 5-HT receptors in the effect of d-fenfluramine on feeding patterns in the rat. Eur J Pharmacol 1992; 212: 287–289.
Massi M, Marini S . Effect of the 5HT2 antagonist ritanserin on food intake and on 5HT-induced anorexia in the rat. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1987; 26: 333–340.
Samanin R, Mennini T, Bendotti C, Barone D, Caccia S, Garattini S . Evidence that central 5-HT2 receptors do not play an important role in the anorectic activity of D-fenfluramine in the rat. Neuropharmacology 1989; 28: 465–469.
von Meyenburg C, Langhans W, Hrupka BJ . Evidence that the anorexia induced by lipopolysaccharide is mediated by the 5-HT2C receptor. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 2003; 74: 505–512.
Faris PL, Kim SW, Meller WH, Goodale RL, Oakman SA, Hofbauer RD et al. Effect of decreasing afferent vagal activity with ondansetron on symptoms of bulimia nervosa: a randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet 2000; 355: 792–797.
Soltani F, Sayyah M, Feizy F, Malayeri A, Siahpoosh A, Motlagh I . A double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study of ondansetron for patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Hum Psychopharmacol 2010; 25: 509–513.
Kaye WH, Bulik CM, Thornton L, Barbarich N, Masters K . Comorbidity of anxiety disorders with anorexia and bulimia nervosa. Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161: 2215–2221.
Hirst WD, Abrahamsen B, Blaney FE, Calver AR, Aloj L, Price GW et al. Differences in the central nervous system distribution and pharmacology of the mouse 5-hydroxytryptamine-6 receptor compared with rat and human receptors investigated by radioligand binding, site-directed mutagenesis, and molecular modeling. Mol Pharmacol 2003; 64: 1295–1308.
Davoodi N, te Riele P, Langlois X . Examining dopamine D3 receptor occupancy by antipsychotic drugs via [3H]7-OH-DPAT ex vivo autoradiography and its cross-validation via c-fos immunohistochemistry in the rat brain. Eur J Pharmacol 2014; 740: 669–675.
Dally P, Sargant W . Treatment and outcome of anorexia nervosa. Br Med J 1966; 2: 793–795.
Vandereycken W, Pierloot R . Pimozide combined with behavior therapy in the short-term treatment of anorexia nervosa. A double-blind placebo-controlled cross-over study. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1982; 66: 445–450.
Meltzer HY . Update on typical and atypical antipsychotic drugs. Annu Rev Med 2013; 64: 393–406.
Ruggiero GM, Laini V, Mauri MC, Ferrari VM, Clemente A, Lugo F et al. A single blind comparison of amisulpride, fluoxetine and clomipramine in the treatment of restricting anorectics. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2001; 25: 1049–1059.
Vandereycken W . Neuroleptics in the short-term treatment of anorexia nervosa. A double-blind placebo-controlled study with sulpiride. Br J Psychiatry 1984; 144: 288–292.
Bressan RA, Erlandsson K, Jones HM, Mulligan R, Flanagan RJ, Ell PJ et al. Is regionally selective D2/D3 dopamine occupancy sufficient for atypical antipsychotic effect? an in vivo quantitative [123I]epidepride SPET study of amisulpride-treated patients. Am J Psychiatry 2003; 160: 1413–1420.
Schoemaker H, Claustre Y, Fage D, Rouquier L, Chergui K, Curet O et al. Neurochemical characteristics of amisulpride, an atypical dopamine D2/D3 receptor antagonist with both presynaptic and limbic selectivity. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1997; 280: 83–97.
Abbas AI, Hedlund PB, Huang XP, Tran TB, Meltzer HY, Roth BL . Amisulpride is a potent 5-HT7 antagonist: relevance for antidepressant actions in vivo. Psychopharmacology 2009; 205: 119–128.
Nasrallah HA . Atypical antipsychotic-induced metabolic side effects: insights from receptor-binding profiles. Mol Psychiatry 2008; 13: 27–35.
Gurevich EV, Joyce JN . Distribution of dopamine D3 receptor expressing neurons in the human forebrain: comparison with D2 receptor expressing neurons. Neuropsychopharmacology 1999; 20: 60–80.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by NIMH grant R01MH099248-02 and CTSA UL1 RR024999 (SCD).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on the Translational Psychiatry website
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
About this article
Cite this article
Klenotich, S., Ho, E., McMurray, M. et al. Dopamine D2/3 receptor antagonism reduces activity-based anorexia. Transl Psychiatry 5, e613 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2015.109
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2015.109
- Springer Nature Limited
This article is cited by
-
AgRP neurons coordinate the mitigation of activity-based anorexia
Molecular Psychiatry (2023)
-
A D2 to D1 shift in dopaminergic inputs to midbrain 5-HT neurons causes anorexia in mice
Nature Neuroscience (2022)
-
Association between impulsivity and orthorexia nervosa: any moderating role of maladaptive personality traits?
Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity (2022)
-
Activity-based anorexia animal model: a review of the main neurobiological findings
Journal of Eating Disorders (2021)
-
Dopamine D2 receptor overexpression in the nucleus accumbens core induces robust weight loss during scheduled fasting selectively in female mice
Molecular Psychiatry (2021)