ArticlePsychopharmacology2013
Assessment of the abuse liability of ABT-288, a novel histamine H₃ receptor antagonist.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Whole-brain mapping of histaminergic projections in mouse brain.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Pitolisant, a wake-promoting agent devoid of psychostimulant properties: Preclinical comparison with amphetamine, modafinil, and solriamfetol.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleHistamine H3 receptor antagonists, such as ABT-288, have been shown to possess cognitive-enhancing and wakefulness-promoting effects. On the surface, this might suggest that H3 antagonists possess psychomotor stimulant-like effects and, as such, may have the potential for abuse.
objectivesThe aim of the present study was to further characterize whether ABT-288 possesses stimulant-like properties and whether its pharmacology gives rise to abuse liability.
methodsThe locomotor-stimulant effects of ABT-288 were measured in mice and rats, and potential development of sensitization was addressed. Drug discrimination was used to assess amphetamine-like stimulus properties, and drug self-administration was used to evaluate reinforcing effects of ABT-288. The potential development of physical dependence was also studied.
resultsABT-288 lacked locomotor-stimulant effects in both rats and mice. Repeated administration of ABT-288 did not result in cross-sensitization to the stimulant effects of d-amphetamine in mice, suggesting that there is little overlap in circuitries upon which the two drugs interact for motor activity. ABT-288 did not produce amphetamine-like discriminative stimulus effects in drug discrimination studies nor was it self-administered by rats trained to self-administer cocaine. There were no signs of physical dependence upon termination of repeated administration of ABT-288 for 30 days.
conclusionsThe sum of these preclinical data, the first of their kind applied to H3 antagonists, indicates that ABT-288 is unlikely to possess a high potential for abuse in the human population and suggests that H3 antagonists, as a class, are similar in this regard.
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.