Stimulus effects of N-monoethyl-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane (MDE) and N-hydroxy-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane (N-OH MDA) in rats trained to discriminate MDMA from saline.
Richard A Glennon, B R Misenheimer
Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior August 1989 DOI: 10.1016/0091-3057(89)90491-7 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Drug discrimination study in rats Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Population | Rats trained to discriminate MDMA from saline |
| Interventions | MDMA MDE N-OH MDA (+)amphetamine |
| Dose | 1.5 mg/kg MDMA (training dose); MDMA ED50 = 0.76 mg/kg; MDE ED50 = 0.73 mg/kg; N-OH MDA ED50 = 0.47 mg/kg |
| Topics | MDMA |
| Key points | The MDMA stimulus generalized to MDE and N-OH MDA but only partially to (+)amphetamine (maximum 49% MDMA-appropriate responding). The authors suggest that MDMA produces effects other than amphetamine-like ones, and that MDE and N-OH MDA are MDMA-like agents with even less amphetamine-like action than MDMA. |
Abstract
Tests of stimulus generalization were conducted using rats trained to discriminate 1.5 mg/kg of N-monomethyl-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane HCl (MDMA) from saline in order to determine if two structurally related analogs (MDE and N-OH MDA) would produce similar stimulus effects. The MDMA-stimulus (MDMA, ED50 value = 0.76 mg/kg) generalized both to MDE (ED50 value = 0.73 mg/kg) and N-OH MDA (ED50 value = 0.47 mg/kg). Administration of (+)amphetamine resulted in partial generalization (maximum of 49% MDMA-appropriate responding) in the MDMA-trained animals. Taken together with our previous studies showing that MDMA substitutes for the phenylisopropylamine stimulant (+)amphetamine, but that neither MDE nor N-OH MDA substitute for (+)amphetamine or for the phenylisopropylamine hallucinogen 1-(2,5-dimethoxy-4-methylphenyl)-2-aminopropane (DOM), the present results [i.e., MDMA-stimulus generalization to MDE, N-OH MDA, but not to (+)amphetamine] suggest that 1) MDMA produces effects other than those that may be considered amphetamine-like, and 2) MDE and N-OH MDA are MDMA-like agents with even less of an amphetamine-like component of action than MDMA itself.
Comparable studies
Other preclinical and animal studies on MDMA, most cited first.
Citations in the library
Cited by 23
- Initial characterization of PMMA as a discriminative stimulus. Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior 1997
- A three-choice discrimination procedure dissociates the discriminative stimulus effects of d-amphetamine and (±)-MDMA in rats. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology 2000
- Beyond ecstasy: Alternative entactogens to 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine with potential applications in psychotherapy Journal of Psychopharmacology September 10, 2020
- MDMA (3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine) Analogues as Tools to Characterize MDMA-Like Effects: An Approach to Understand Entactogen Pharmacology Current Neuropharmacology August 1, 2013
- The Neuropsychopharmacology and Toxicology of 3,4‐methylenedioxy‐N‐ethyl‐amphetamine (MDEA) CNS Drug Reviews June 1, 2004
and 18 more in the library
Cites 7
- Differences Between the Mechanism of Action of MDMA, MBDB, and the Classic Hallucinogens. Identification of a New Therapeutic Class: Entactogens Journal of Psychoactive Drugs October 1, 1986
- Serotonin Receptor Binding Affinities of Several Hallucinogenic Phenylalkylamine and N,N-Dimethyltryptamine Analogues Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 1978
- Behavioral properties of psychoactive phenylisopropylamines in rats. European Journal of Pharmacology December 17, 1981
- Stimulus properties of 1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane (MDA) analogs. Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior March 1988
- Drug discrimination studies with MDMA and amphetamine. Psychopharmacology 1988
and 2 more in the library