ArticleAddiction biology2025
Selective Effects of Acutely Administered N-Acetyl-Cysteine in Rodent Models of Nicotine-Conditioned Behaviours.
Article in Addiction biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Selective Effects of Acutely Administered N-Acetyl-Cysteine in Rodent Models of Nicotine-Conditioned Behaviours.Addiction biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chronic nicotine administration leads to neuroadaptations, an important process in nicotine and tobacco dependence for which treatments are limited. The cysteine pro-drug, N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC), is a promising glutamatergic agent that has shown some clinical efficacy in reducing nicotine use in humans. The purpose of this study was to examine NAC in two rodent models of nicotine dependence. NAC (0, 5, 20, 50 and 100 mg/kg) was examined on locomotor activity in groups of rats previously exposed to nicotine or saline. In the second experiment, NAC (0, 50 and 100 mg/kg i.p.) was evaluated against the discriminative stimulus effects of nicotine (0.2 mg/kg) using a two-lever procedure under a tandem schedule (VI10"-FR10) of food reinforcement. Pre-treatment with NAC in doses greater than 20 mg/kg attenuated the expression of conditioned hyperactivity when rats were placed in locomotor boxes previously paired with chronic nicotine administration. The same doses of NAC had modest effects in attenuating nicotine-stimulated hyperactivity in nicotine-treated or saline-treated rats tested in the same locomotor boxes. In the discrimination task, NAC did not generalise to the nicotine stimulus and nor did it modify the dose-response curve to nicotine, suggesting that NAC may not modify the subjective effects of nicotine. These results suggest NAC selectively attenuates conditioned responses to nicotine-paired stimuli without modifying nicotine-induced hyperactivity or the discriminative stimulus effects of nicotine. Thus, the study proposes that if NAC was to act in a similar selective manner in humans, the specific action of NAC to attenuate conditioned responses may limit its potential as a treatment to manage nicotine dependence.
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.