ArticlePsychopharmacology2007
In vivo Schild regression analyses using nonselective 5-HT2C receptor antagonists in a rat operant behavioral assay.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleAlthough competitive antagonism experiments are critical tools in the classification of potential pharmacotherapies, no studies have quantitatively compared the potencies of 5-HT(2C) receptor antagonists using the Schild regression analysis in vivo.
objectivesTo evaluate the behavioral effects of 5-HT(2C) receptor agonists and antagonists, a series of nonselective 5-HT(2C) receptor antagonists, the 5-HT(2A/2C) receptor antagonist ketanserin, the 5-HT(2B) receptor antagonist SB 204,741, the 5-HT(2B/2C) receptor antagonist SB 200,646, and the peripherally acting 5-HT(2C) receptor antagonist RS102,221 were evaluated for their capacity to competitively antagonize the agonists MK212, mCPP, or BW723C86 in rats. MATERIALS AND
methodsMale Sprague-Dawley rats (N = 28) were trained to respond under a fixed ratio 10 schedule of food reinforcement. A multiple-trial, cumulative-dosing procedure was used to evaluate the capacity of the compounds to suppress response rates.
resultsMK212, mCPP, and the 5-HT(2B) receptor agonist BW723C86 dose-dependently decreased response rates. Only metergoline, mianserin, and methysergide produced a dose-dependent antagonism of the rate-decreasing effects of both mCPP and MK212. Apparent pA(2) analysis indicated that metergoline, mianserin, and methysergide were approximately equipotent as antagonists overall. Metergoline and mianserin failed to block the rate-decreasing effects of BW723C86. Ketanserin, SB 200,646, SB 204,741, and RS102,221 failed to block either mCPP or MK212, suggesting that 5-HT(2A), 5-HT(2B), or peripheral 5-HT(2C) receptors do not play a primary role in the rate-decreasing effects of these two agonists.
conclusionsTaken together, these antagonism profiles suggest that the agonists MK212 and mCPP produce their rate-decreasing effects through a combination of 5-HT receptors with the 5-HT(2C) receptor playing a prominent but not exclusive role.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.