Effects of Potential Agonist-Replacement Therapies for Stimulant Dependence on Inhibitory Control in Cocaine Abusers

REFERENCES

• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration. Results from the 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings. Office of Applied Studies, Rockville, MD 2007, NSDUH Series H-32, DHHS Publication No. SMA 07-4293
   Google Scholar
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration. Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS). Highlights 2005. National Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment Services. Office of Applied Studies, Rockville, MD 2006, DASIS Series S-36, DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 07-4229
   Google Scholar
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration. Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN). 2005: National Estimates of Drug-Related Emergency Department Visits. Office of Applied Studies, Rockville, MD 2007, DAWN Series D-29, DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 07-4256
   Google Scholar
• Grabowski J, Rhoades H, Schmitz J, Stotts A, Daruzska L A, Creson D, Moeller F G. Dextroamphetamine for cocaine-dependence treatment: A double-blind randomized clinical trial?. J Clin Psychopharmacol 2001; 21: 522–526
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McBride A J, Sullivan G, Blewett A E, Morgan S. Amphetamine prescribing as a harm reduction measure: A preliminary study?. Addiction Research. 1997; 5: 95–112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCabe S, Knight J, Teter C, Wechsler H. Non-medical use of prescription stimulant among US college students: Prevalence and correlates from a national survey. Addiction 2005; 100(1)96–106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Wit H, Stewart J. Reinstatement of cocaine-reinforced responding in the rat?. Psychopharmacology 1981; 75: 134–143
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoops W W, Vansickel A R, Lile J A, Rush C R. Acute d-amphetamine pretreatment does not alter stimulant self-administration in humans?. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2007; 87: 20–29
   Google Scholar
• Weintraub D, Siderowf A D, Potenza M N, Goveas J, Morales K H, Duda J E, Moberg P J, Stern M B. Association of dopamine agonist use with impulse control disorders in Parkinson Disease?. Arch Neurol 2006; 63: 969–973
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fillmore M T, Rush C R, Marczinski C A. Effects of d-amphetamine on behavioral control in stimulant abusers: The role of prepotent response tendencies?. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2003; 71: 143–152
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiihonen J, Kuoppasalmi K, Fohr J, Tuomola P, Kuikanmaki O, Vorma H, Sokero P, Haukka J, Meririnne E. A comparison of aripiprazole, methylphenidate, and placebo for amphetamine dependence?. Am J Psychiatry 2007; 164: 160–162
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rush C R, Essman W D, Simpson C A, Baker R W. Reinforcing and subject-rated effects of methylphenidate and d-amphetamine in non-drug-abusing humans. J. Clin. Psychopharmacol 2001; 21(3)273–286
   Google Scholar
• Dackis C A, Kampman K M, Lynch K G, Pettinati H M, O'Brien C P. A double-blind placebo-controlled trial of modafinil for cocaine dependence?. Neuropsychopharmacol 2005; 30: 205–211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malcolm R, Book S W, Moak D, Devane L, Czepowicz V. Clinical applications of modafinil in stimulant abusers: Low abuse potential. Am J Addict 2002; 11(3)247–249
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rush C R, Kelly T H, Hays L R, Baker R W, Wooten A F. Acute behavioral and physiological effects of modafinil in drug abusers. Behav Pharmacol 2002b; 13(2)105–115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider W, Eschman A, Zuccolotto A. E-Prime User's Guide. Psychology Software Tools, Inc., Pittsburg, PA 2002
   Google Scholar
• Oliveto A H, Bickel W K, Hughes J R, Shea P J, Higgins S T, Fenwick J W. Caffeine drug discrimination in humans: Acquisition, specificity and correlation with self-reports?. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1992; 261: 885–894
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rush C R, Stoops W W, Hays L R, Glaser P EA, Hays L S. Risperidone attenuates the discriminative-stimulus and subject-rated effects of d-amphetamine?. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2003; 306: 195–204
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Marino M E, Haberny K A, Felch L J, Walsh S L, Preston K L, Bigelow G E. Development of a subjective rating scale sensitive to acute cocaine administration. National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph Series, Problems of Drug Dependence. 1997: Proceedings of the 59th Annual Scientific Meeting. 1998; 178: 139
   Google Scholar
• Stoops W W, Lile J A, Glaser P EA, Rush C R. Discriminative stimulus and self-reported effects of methylphenidate, d-amphetamine, and triazolam in methylphenidate-trained humans. Psychopharmacology 2005; 13(1)56–64
   Google Scholar
• Easton N, Steward C, Marshall F, Fone K, Marsden C. Effects of amphetamine isomers, methylphenidate and atomoxetine on synaptosomal and synaptic vesicle accumulation and release of dopamine and noradrenaline in vitro in the rat brain?. Neuropharmacol 2007; 52: 405–414
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little K Y. Amphetamine, but not methylphenidate, predicts antidepressant efficacy. J Clin Psychopharmacol 1988; 8(3)177–183
   Google Scholar
• Lin J, Hou Y, Jouvet M. Potential brain neuronal targets for amphetamine-, methylphenidate-, and modafinil-induced wakefulness, evidenced by c-fos immunocytochemistry in the cat. Proc. Natl. Acad?. Sci. 1996; 93: 14128–14133
   Google Scholar
• Dackis C A, Lynch K G, Yu E, Samaha F F, Kampman K M, Cornish J W, Rowan A, Poole S, White L, O'Brien C P. Modafinil and cocaine: A double-blind, placebo-controlled interaction study?. Drug Alcohol Depend 2003; 70: 29–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winhusen T, Somoza E, Singal B M, Harrer J, Apparaju S, Mezinskis J, Desai P, Elkashef A, Chiang C N, Horn P. Methylphenidate and cocaine: A placebo-controlled drug interaction study?. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 2006; 85: 29–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar