DOCSLIB.ORG

Pharmacology and Toxicology of Amphetamine and Related Designer Drugs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pharmacology and Toxicology of Amphetamine and Related Designer Drugs Pharmacology and Toxicology of Amphetamine and Related Designer Drugs U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES • Public Health Service • Alcohol Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration Pharmacology and Toxicology of Amphetamine and Related Designer Drugs Editors: Khursheed Asghar, Ph.D. Division of Preclinical Research National Institute on Drug Abuse Errol De Souza, Ph.D. Addiction Research Center National Institute on Drug Abuse NIDA Research Monograph 94 1989 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration National Institute on Drug Abuse 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, DC 20402 Pharmacology and Toxicology of Amphetamine and Related Designer Drugs ACKNOWLEDGMENT This monograph is based upon papers and discussion from a technical review on pharmacology and toxicology of amphetamine and related designer drugs that took place on August 2 through 4, 1988, in Bethesda, MD. The review meeting was sponsored by the Biomedical Branch, Division of Preclinical Research, and the Addiction Research Center, National Institute on Drug Abuse. COPYRIGHT STATUS The National Institute on Drug Abuse has obtained permission from the copyright holders to reproduce certain previously published material as noted in the text. Further reproduction of this copyrighted material is permitted only as part of a reprinting of the entire publication or chapter. For any other use, the copyright holder’s permission is required. All other matieral in this volume except quoted passages from copyrighted sources is in the public domain and may be used or reproduced without permission from the Institute or the authors. Citation of the source is appreciated. Opinions expressed in this volume are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policy of the National Institute on Drug Abuse or any other part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The U.S. Government does not endorse or favor any specific commercial product or company. Trade, proprietary, or company names appearing in this publication are used only because they are considered essential in the context of the studies reported herein. DHHS publication number (ADM)89-1640 Printed 1989 NIDA Research Monographs are indexed in the Index Medicus. They are selectively included in the coverage of American Statistics Index, Biosciences Information Service, Chemical Abstracts, Current Contents, Psychological Abstracts, and Psychopharmacology Abstracts. iv Contents Page Preface ix Structure-Activity Relationships of MDMA-Like Substances 1 David E. Nichols and Robert Oberlender Self-Injection in Baboons of Amphetamines and Related Designer Drugs 30 CA. Sannerud, J.V. Brady, and R.R. Griffiths Stimulus Properties of Hallucinogenic phenalkylamines and Related Designer Drugs: Formulation of Structure-Activity Relationships 43 Richard A. Glennon Amphetamines: Aggressive and Social Behavior 68 Klaus A. Miczek and Jennifer W. Tidey Neurochemical Mechanisms Involved in Behavioral Effects of Amphetamines and Related Designer Drugs 101 Lisa H. Gold, Mark A. Geyer, and George F. Koob Neuronal Actions of Amphetamine in the Rat Brain 127 Philip M. Groves, Lawrence J. Ryan, Marco Diana, Stephen J. Young, and Lisa J. Fisher v Page Methamphetamine and Related Drugs: Toxicity and Resulting Behavioral Changes in Response to Pharmacological Probes 146 Lewis S. Seiden and Mark S. Kleven Role of Dopamine in the Neurotoxicity Induced by Amphetamines and Related Designer Drugs . 161 James W. Gibb. Donna M. Stone, Michel Johnson, and Glen R. Hanson Acute and Long-Term Neurochemical Effects of Methylenedioxymethamphetamine in the Rat 179 Christopher J. Schmidt Effects of MDMA and MDA on Brain Serotonin Neurons: Evidence from Neurochemical and Autoradiographic Studies 196 Errol B. De Souza and George Battaglia Characterization of Brain Interactions With Methylenedioxyamphetamine and Methylenedioxymethamphetamine 223 Robert Zaczek, Stephen Hurt, Steven Culp, and Errol B. De Souza Pharmacologic profile of Amphetamine Derivatives at Various Brain Recognition Sites: Selective Effects on Serotonergic Systems 240 George Battaglia and Errol B. De Souza Effects of Amphetamine Analogs on Central Nervous System Neuropeptide Systems 259 Glen R. Hanson, Patricia Sonsalla, Anita Letter, Kalpana M. Merchant, Michel Johnson, Lloyd Bush, and James W. Gibb Effects of Neurotoxic Amphetamines on Serotonergic Neurons: Immunocytochemical Studies 270 Mark E. Molliver, Laura A. Mamounas, and Mary Ann Wilson Studies of MDMA-Induced Neurotoxicity in Nonhuman Primates: A Basis for Evaluating Long-Term Effects in Humans 306 George A. Ricaurte vi Page Dose- and Time-Dependent Effects of Stimulants 323 Everett H. Ellinwood, Jr., and Tong H. Lee Recommendations for Future Research on Amphetamines and Related Designer Drugs 341 Ray W. Fuller List of NIDA Research Monographs 358 vii Preface The abuse of amphetamines is of national concern from a public health perspective. Review of this subject is timely and important, because the problem of amphetamine-like drugs has recently been amplified by the introduction of designer drugs in the illicit market. There has been an increasing number of attempts by chemists in clandestine laboratories to synthesize structurally altered congeners that might intensify the mood- altering property of this class of compounds. While attention over the last few decades has been centered on research related to amphetamine, methamphetamine, and clinically prescribed amphetamine derivatives including fenfluramine, recent attention has focused on a variety of amphetamine-related designer drugs. These designer drugs include ring- substituted derivatives of amphetamine and methamphetamine such as 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA) and 3,4-methylenedioxymetham- phetamine (MDMA “ecstasy”), respectively. MDMA has been the focus of a great deal of recent attention, since it represents one of a number of “designer drugs” that is being increasingly abused among certain segments of the population, especially among college students. This popularity is ascribed to the drugs’ mixed central nervous system (CNS) stimulant and hallucinogenic effects. Furthermore, MDMA has been the subject of recent scientific and legal debate, as several psychiatrists have reported that MDMA may “enhance emotions” and “feelings of empathy” and thus serve as an adjunct in psychotherapy. While the psychotherapeutic usefulness of this drug remains to be determined, a great deal of research has been carried out on the abuse liability, behavioral effects, and neurotoxic effects of the amphetamine-related designer drugs. A technical review meeting entitled “Pharmacology and Toxicology of Amphetamine and Related Designer Drugs” was held at the National Institutes of Health on August 2-4, 1988. The purpose of the technical review was to bring together scientists who have been carrying out research in the area to (1) summarize the research findings, (2) understand the neuronal mechanisms through which the amphetamines produce their effects, and (3) develop a consensus regarding future directions that may lead to better characterization of the effects of these drugs on various physiological parameters. An understanding of the mechanisms is critical to the development of therapeutic approaches for the treatment of intoxication, addiction, and adverse effects. The proceedings of this meeting are presented in the following chapters. ix Khursheed Asghar, Ph.D. Division of Preclinical Research National Institute on Drug Abuse Rockville, MD Errol B. De Souza, Ph.D. Neurobiology Laboratory Neurosciences Branch Addiction Research Center National Institute on Drug Abuse Baltimore, MD x Structure-Activity Relationships of MDMA-Like Substances David E. Nichols and Robert Oberlender INTRODUCTION There is virtually no one who is involved in drug abuse research, or who studies the properties of recreationally used drugs, that is not by now fami- liar with 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) (figure 1). Over the past 4 years this substance, usually referred to in the popular press as “Ecstasy,” has received widespread media attention, This chapter will relate recent fmdings with respect to the potential dangers attendant on the use of MDMA and explore its pharmacological properties. MDMA (1) FIGURE 1. MDMA As the title implies, MDMA has pharmacological properties that set it apart from other classes of drugs. This is one of the most intriguing aspects of MDMA, largely overlooked as researchers examined the potential risks to health of MDMA use. Basic questions of how drugs work and why some are pleasurable and some are not are fundamental to our understanding of why humans use drugs. Although much of the popularity of MDMA can no doubt be attributed to curiosity following media attention, the drug itself must have some rewarding qualities. MDMA typifies a central problem with the substituted amphetamine-type substances: The fact that we know so little about any of these kinds of drugs. What does MDMA actually do? What are the psychopharmacologi- cal properties that make it attractive for recreational use? Is it “just another hallucinogenic amphetamine,” as some have asserted? In the following 1 discussion, an attempt will be made to address some of these issues, and to put the questions into a broader perspective. MDMA was patented in 1914 by a German pharmaceutical firm
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EL PASO INTELLIGENCE CENTER DRUG TREND Synthetic Stimulants Marketed As Bath Salts
    LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE EPIC Tactical Intelligence Bulletins EL PASO INTELLIGENCE CENTER DRUG TREND TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE BULLETIN EB11-16 ● Synthetic Stimulants Marketed as Bath Salts ● March 8, 2011 This document is the property of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and is marked Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES). Further dissemination of this document is strictly forbidden except to other law enforcement agencies for criminal law enforcement purposes. The following information must be handled and protected accordingly. Summary Across the United States, synthetic stimulants that are sold as “bath salts”¹ have become a serious drug abuse threat. These products are produced under a variety of faux brand names, and they are indirectly marketed as legal alternatives to cocaine, amphetamine, and Ecstasy (MDMA or 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine). Poison control centers nationwide have received hundreds of calls related to the side-effects of, and overdoses from, the use of these potent and unpredictable products. Numerous media reports have cited bath salt stimulant overdose incidents that have resulted in emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and severe psychotic episodes, some of which, have led to violent outbursts, self-inflicted wounds, and even suicides. A number of states have imposed emergency measures to ban bath salt stimulant products (or the chemicals in them) including Florida, Louisiana, North Dakota, and West Virginia; and similar measures are pending in Hawaii, Kentucky, Michigan, and Mississippi. A prominent U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article Pol J Public Health 2015;125(2): 116-120
    Review Article Pol J Public Health 2015;125(2): 116-120 Marta BeMBnowska, Jadwiga Jośko-ochoJska What causes depression in adults? Abstract The problem of depression in adolescents is discussed increasingly more often. A lot of researchers devote their careers to investigating this subject. The issue becomes vital, since the number of young people with depressive symptoms is constantly on the rise. The diagnosis can be difficult, as many a time the changes so typical for the puberty period appear. They include mood swings, explosiveness, propulsion disorders, puissance, insomnia, concentration problems etc. These might be the first symptoms of depression as well. It is impossible to point to one cause of depression because it is a disease conditioned by many different factors, ranging from independent factors like genetic, biological, hormonal, through the influence of the fam- ily or the environment influence and socio-cultural components. Early depression symptoms, long time exposure to stress, challenges or adversities – things every young person has to deal with - are a breeding ground for risky behaviors among adolescents. Teens are more likely to reach for different kinds of stimulants like alcohol, cigarettes or drugs etc. It has also been proven that anti-health behaviors may cause depression in the future. Keywords: adolescent depression, risk factors, adolescents, behavior, anti-health. DOI: 10.1515/pjph-2015-0037 INTRODUCTION How mothers negative emotions affect the fetus during pregnancy? Depression in adolescents is a particular example of Since early pregnancy, the mothers’ emotions significant- an emotional and behavioral disorder, typical for the puberty ly affect the formation of synapses and the neurotransmitters period.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 42/Friday, March 4, 2005
    Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 42 / Friday, March 4, 2005 / Notices 10677 Drug Schedule Drug Schedule Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, Cathinone (1235) .......................... I Alpha-Methylfentanyl (9814) ........ I the above named company is granted Methcathinone (1237) .................. I Acetyl-alpha-methylfentanyl I registration as a bulk manufacturer of N-Ethylamphetamine (1475) ........ I (9815). the basic classes of controlled N,N-Dimethylamphetamine (1480) I Beta-hydroxyfentanyl (9830) ........ I substances listed. Aminorex (1585) ........................... I Beta-hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl I 4-7Methylaminorex (cis isomer) I (9831). Dated: Febuary 22, 2005. (1590). Alpha-Methylthiofentanyl (9832) ... I William J. Walker, Gamma hydroxybutyric acid I 3–Methylthiofentanyl (9833) ......... I Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Thiofentanyl (9835) ...................... I (2010). Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Amphetamine (1100) .................... II Methaqualone (2565) ................... I Administration. Alpha-Ethyltryptamine (7249) ....... I Methamphetamine (1105) ............ II Lysergic acid diethylamide (7315) I Phenmetrazine (1631) .................. II [FR Doc. 05–4205 Filed 3–3–05; 8:45 am] Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370) ..... I Methylphenidate (1724) ................ II BILLING CODE 4410–09–P Mescaline (7381) .......................... I Ambobarbital (2125) ..................... II 3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine I Pentobarbital (2270) ..................... II (7390).
    [Show full text]
  • Gabab Regulation of Methamphetamine-Induced Associative Learning
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2010 Gabab Regulation of Methamphetamine-Induced Associative Learning Robin Michelle Voigt Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss Part of the Pharmacology Commons Recommended Citation Voigt, Robin Michelle, "Gabab Regulation of Methamphetamine-Induced Associative Learning" (2010). Dissertations. 38. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/38 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 2010 Robin Michelle Voigt LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO GABAB REGULATION OF METHAMPHETAMINE-INDUCED ASSOCIATIVE LEARNING A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PROGRAM IN MOLECULAR PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS BY ROBIN MICHELLE VOIGT CHICAGO, IL DECEMBER 2010 Copyright by Robin Michelle Voigt, 2010 All rights reserved ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Without the support of so many generous and wonderful individuals I would not have been able to be where I am today. First, I would like to thank my Mother for her belief that I could accomplish anything that I set my mind to. I would also like to thank my dissertation advisor, Dr. Celeste Napier, for encouraging and challenging me to be better than I thought possible. I extend gratitude to my committee members, Drs. Julie Kauer, Adriano Marchese, Micky Marinelli, and Karie Scrogin for their guidance and insightful input.
    [Show full text]
  • Did Internet-Purchased Diet Pills Cause Serotonin Syndrome?
    Did Internet-purchased diet pills cause serotonin syndrome? Phentermine also may have increased patient’s neuroleptic malignant syndrome risk s. G, age 28, presents to a tertiary® careDowden hospital Health Media with altered mental status. Six weeks ago she Mstarted taking phentermine, 37.5 mg/d, to lose weight. Her body mass indexCopyright is 24 kg/mFor2 (normal personal range), use only and she obtained the stimulant agent via the Internet. Her family reports Ms. G was very busy in the past week, staying up until 2 AM cleaning. They say she also was irritable with her 5-year-old son. Two days ago, Ms. G complained of fatigue and nausea without emesis. She went to bed early and did not awaken the next morning. Her sister found her in bed, minimally re- DIONISI sponsive to verbal stimuli, and brought her to the hospital. Patients have used phentermine as a weight-reducing IMAGES/SANDRA GETTY agent since the FDA approved this amphetamine-like © compound in 1960.1 Phentermine’s mechanism of ac- tion is thought to involve dopaminergic, noradrenergic, Kyoung Bin Im, MD and serotonergic effects.2 Stimulation of norepineph- Chief resident Internal medicine and psychiatry combined residency program rine (NE) release is its most potent effect, followed Departments of internal medicine and psychiatry by NE reuptake inhibition, stimulation of dopamine Jess G. Fiedorowicz, MD (DA) release, DA reuptake inhibition, stimulation of Associate in psychiatry serotonin (5-HT) release, and 5-HT reuptake inhibition Department of psychiatry (weak).3 Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine Because phentermine could in theory cause serotonin 4 University of Iowa syndrome, its use is contraindicated with monoamine Iowa City oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and not recommended with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).5 One case report describes an interaction between fl uox- etine and phentermine that appears consistent with se- rotonin syndrome.6 We are aware of no case reports of Current Psychiatry serotonin syndrome caused by phentermine alone.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Review Officer Manual
    Department of Health and Human Services Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Center for Substance Abuse Prevention Medical Review Officer Manual for Federal Agency Workplace Drug Testing Programs EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2010 Note: This manual applies to Federal agency drug testing programs that come under Executive Order 12564 dated September 15, 1986, section 503 of Public Law 100-71, 5 U.S.C. section 7301 note dated July 11, 1987, and the Department of Health and Human Services Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (73 FR 71858) dated November 25, 2008 (effective October 1, 2010). This manual does not apply to specimens submitted for testing under U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs (49 CFR Part 40). The current version of this manual and other information including MRO Case Studies are available on the Drug Testing page under Medical Review Officer (MRO) Resources on the SAMHSA website: http://www.workplace.samhsa.gov Previous Versions of this Manual are Obsolete 3 Table of Contents Chapter 1. The Medical Review Officer (MRO)........................................................................... 6 Chapter 2. The Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form ................................................ 7 Chapter 3. Urine Drug Testing ...................................................................................................... 9 A. Federal Workplace Drug Testing Overview..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Subchronic Continuous Phencyclidine Administration Potentiates Amphetamine-Induced Frontal Cortex Dopamine Release
    Neuropsychopharmacology (2003) 28, 34–44 & 2003 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0893-133X/03 $25.00 www.neuropsychopharmacology.org Subchronic Continuous Phencyclidine Administration Potentiates Amphetamine-Induced Frontal Cortex Dopamine Release Andrea Balla1, Henry Sershen1,2, Michael Serra1, Rajeth Koneru1 and Daniel C Javitt*,1,2 1 2 Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, Orangeburg, NY, USA; Department of Psychiatry, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA Functional dopaminergic hyperactivity is a key feature of schizophrenia. Etiology of this dopaminergic hyperactivity, however, is unknown. We have recently demonstrated that subchronic phencyclidine (PCP) treatment in rodents induces striatal dopaminergic hyperactivity similar to that observed in schizophrenia. The present study investigates the ability of PCP to potentiate amphetamine-induced dopamine release in prefrontal cortex (PFC) and nucleus accumbens (NAc) shell. Prefrontal dopaminergic hyperactivity is postulated to underlie cognitive dysfunction in schizophrenia. In contrast, the degree of NAc involvement is unknown and recent studies have suggested that PCP-induced hyperactivity in rodents may correlate with PFC, rather than NAc, dopamine levels. Rats were treated with 5–20 mg/kg/day PCP for 3–14 days by osmotic minipump. PFC and NAc dopamine release to amphetamine challenge (1 mg/kg) was monitored by in vivo microdialysis and HPLC-EC. Doses of 10 mg/kg/day and above produced serum PCP concentrations (50–150 ng/ml) most associated with PCP psychosis in humans. PCP-treated rats showed significant, dose-dependent enhancement in amphetamine-induced dopamine release in PFC but not NAc, along with significantly enhanced locomotor activity. Enhanced response was observed following 3-day, as well as 14-day, treatment and resolved within 4 days of PCP treatment withdrawal.
    [Show full text]
  • SENATE BILL No. 259 No
    SENATE BILL No. 259 SENATE BILL No. 259 March 10, 2011, Introduced by Senators JONES, CASPERSON and SCHUITMAKER and referred to the Committee on Judiciary. A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled "Public health code," by amending section 7212 (MCL 333.7212), as amended by 2010 PA 171. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT: 1 Sec. 7212. (1) The following controlled substances are 2 included in schedule 1: 3 (a) Any of the following opiates, including their isomers, 4 esters, the ethers, salts, and salts of isomers, esters, and 5 ethers, unless specifically excepted, when the existence of these 6 isomers, esters, ethers, and salts is possible within the 7 specific chemical designation: SENATE BILL No. 259 00981'11 TLG 2 1 Acetylmethadol Difenoxin Noracymethadol 2 Allylprodine Dimenoxadol Norlevorphanol 3 Alpha-acetylmethadol Dimepheptanol Normethadone 4 Alphameprodine Dimethylthiambutene Norpipanone 5 Alphamethadol Dioxaphetyl butyrate Phenadoxone 6 Benzethidine Dipipanone Phenampromide 7 Betacetylmethadol Ethylmethylthiambutene Phenomorphan 8 Betameprodine Etonitazene Phenoperidine 9 Betamethadol Etoxeridine Piritramide 10 Betaprodine Furethidine Proheptazine 11 Clonitazene Hydroxypethidine Properidine 12 Dextromoramide Ketobemidone Propiram 13 Diampromide Levomoramide Racemoramide 14 Diethylthiambutene Levophenacylmorphan Trimeperidine 15 Morpheridine 16 (b) Any of the following opium derivatives, their salts, 17 isomers, and salts of isomers, unless specifically excepted, when 18 the existence of these salts, isomers, and salts of
    [Show full text]
  • Depressive Disorders a Clinical Overview
    Depressive Disorders A clinical overview Dr. Scott Yarosh, Medical Director, Behavioral Health Depressive Disorders • What is depression? – Complex series of conditions – Physical component – Emotional component – Treatments aimed at both components 2 History of concept of depression • First concept of depression: Mesopotamia, second millennium BC • Causes: spiritual passion; demonic possession • Problems to be addressed by priests; not “medically” oriented – Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, Chinese and Egyptians similar ideas • Early Treatments include beating, starvation, physical restraint – Represents early stigma of mental illness 3 Progression of thought on depression • Greeks and Romans – post CE; initial conception of depression as physical • Notion that toxic “humors” may be harbored within body and cause mood change • Newer Treatments – Gymnastics, massage, diet, baths, poppy extract and donkey milk 4 More contemporary thoughts on depression • 1895- Emil Kraepelin differentiated manic depression from depression – Foundational concept that schizophrenia and mood are distinct • 1917 - Sigmund Freud introduced concept of the “unconscious” – Depression was anger turned inward – Self loathing – Psychoanalysis: Form of treatment to bring unconscious thoughts and emotions to conscious awareness. Depression has “nurture” roots. 5 6 Early thoughts on depression Freudian analysis mainstay of treatment – early 20th century • Helpful for certain types of patients • Lengthy and expensive • Seen more as treatment for the elite. Not “The Peoples” therapy. • Sigmund did not take kindly to the Prior Authorization process 7 Rapid changes in concept of mental illness and depression • Post WWII- state of psychiatric diagnoses was chaotic • DSM system introduced 1952; solve “Tower of Babel” crisis of psych • Most profound change – 1980 DSM III – Change from cause bases diagnoses to measurable observation – Endogenous depression vs exogenous depression – eliminated • Washington University (St.
    [Show full text]
  • 3,4-Methylenedioxymethcathinone (Methylone) [“Bath Salt,” Bk-MDMA, MDMC, MDMCAT, “Explosion,” “Ease,” “Molly”] December 2019
    Drug Enforcement Administration Diversion Control Division Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section 3,4-Methylenedioxymethcathinone (Methylone) [“Bath salt,” bk-MDMA, MDMC, MDMCAT, “Explosion,” “Ease,” “Molly”] December 2019 Introduction: discriminate DOM from saline. 3,4-Methylenedioxymethcathinone (methylone) is a Because of the structural and pharmacological similarities designer drug of the phenethylamine class. Methylone is a between methylone and MDMA, the psychoactive effects, adverse synthetic cathinone with substantial chemical, structural, and health risks, and signs of intoxication resulting from methylone pharmacological similarities to 3,4-methylenedioxymeth- abuse are likely to be similar to those of MDMA. Several chat amphetamine (MDMA, ecstasy). Animal studies indicate that rooms discussed pleasant and positive effects of methylone when methylone has MDMA-like and (+)-amphetamine-like used for recreational purpose. behavioral effects. When combined with mephedrone, a controlled schedule I substance, the combination is called User Population: “bubbles.” Other names are given in the above title. Methylone, like other synthetic cathinones, is a recreational drug that emerged on the United States’ illicit drug market in 2009. It is perceived as being a ‘legal’ alternative to drugs of Licit Uses: Methylone is not approved for medical use in the United abuse like MDMA, methamphetamine, and cocaine. Evidence States. indicates that youths and young adults are the primary users of synthetic cathinone substances which include methylone. However, older adults also have been identified as users of these Chemistry: substances. O H O N CH3 Illicit Distribution: CH O 3 Law enforcement has encountered methylone in the United States as well as in several countries including the Netherlands, Methylone United Kingdom, Japan, and Sweden.
    [Show full text]
  • (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub
    US 20130289061A1 (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2013/0289061 A1 Bhide et al. (43) Pub. Date: Oct. 31, 2013 (54) METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS TO Publication Classi?cation PREVENT ADDICTION (51) Int. Cl. (71) Applicant: The General Hospital Corporation, A61K 31/485 (2006-01) Boston’ MA (Us) A61K 31/4458 (2006.01) (52) U.S. Cl. (72) Inventors: Pradeep G. Bhide; Peabody, MA (US); CPC """"" " A61K31/485 (201301); ‘4161223011? Jmm‘“ Zhu’ Ansm’ MA. (Us); USPC ......... .. 514/282; 514/317; 514/654; 514/618; Thomas J. Spencer; Carhsle; MA (US); 514/279 Joseph Biederman; Brookline; MA (Us) (57) ABSTRACT Disclosed herein is a method of reducing or preventing the development of aversion to a CNS stimulant in a subject (21) App1_ NO_; 13/924,815 comprising; administering a therapeutic amount of the neu rological stimulant and administering an antagonist of the kappa opioid receptor; to thereby reduce or prevent the devel - . opment of aversion to the CNS stimulant in the subject. Also (22) Flled' Jun‘ 24’ 2013 disclosed is a method of reducing or preventing the develop ment of addiction to a CNS stimulant in a subj ect; comprising; _ _ administering the CNS stimulant and administering a mu Related U‘s‘ Apphcatlon Data opioid receptor antagonist to thereby reduce or prevent the (63) Continuation of application NO 13/389,959, ?led on development of addiction to the CNS stimulant in the subject. Apt 27’ 2012’ ?led as application NO_ PCT/US2010/ Also disclosed are pharmaceutical compositions comprising 045486 on Aug' 13 2010' a central nervous system stimulant and an opioid receptor ’ antagonist.
    [Show full text]
  • Methylphenidate Versus Dexamphetamine in Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: a Double-Blind, Crossover Trial
    Methylphenidate Versus Dexamphetamine in Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Double-blind, Crossover Trial Daryl Efron, FRACP; Frederick Jarman, FRACP; and Melinda Barker, Grad Dip Ed Psych ABSTRACT. Objective. To compare methylphenidate behavioral, academic, and social functioning. Many (MPH) and dexamphetamine (DEX) in a sample of chil- well-designed, placebo-controlled studies have dem- dren with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder onstrated beyond doubt the benefits of stimulants in (ADHD). the vast majority of children with ADHD.2–4 In a Method. A total of 125 children with ADHD received review of 110 studies on the effects of stimulant both MPH (0.3 mg/kg twice daily) and DEX (0.15 mg/kg drugs on more than 4200 children with ADHD, twice daily) for 2 weeks a double-blind, crossover study. 4 ; Outcome measures were Conners’ Parent Rating Scale– Barkley found that 75% of subjects were regarded Revised, Conners’ Teacher Rating Scale–Revised, a Par- as improved on stimulants. The mean placebo re- ent Global Perceptions questionnaire, the Continuous sponse was 39%. Performance Test, and the Barkley Side Effects Rating Methylphenidate (MPH) and dexamphetamine Scale. (DEX) are the two stimulants prescribed most fre- Results. There were significant group mean im- quently and have been shown to have similar types provements from baseline score on all measures for of positive effects in children with ADHD. However, both stimulants. On the Conners’ Teacher Rating Scal- it is not known whether one is more efficacious than e–Revised, response was greater on MPH than DEX on the other in terms of probability of producing a the conduct problems and hyperactivity factors, as well positive response, magnitude of response, quality of as on the hyperactivity index.
    [Show full text]