Activation of D1 receptors affects human reactivity and flexibility to valued cues.
Journal
Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology
ISSN: 1740-634X
Titre abrégé: Neuropsychopharmacology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8904907
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2020
04 2020
Historique:
received:
13
09
2019
accepted:
09
01
2020
revised:
02
12
2019
pubmed:
22
1
2020
medline:
31
3
2021
entrez:
22
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Reward-predicting cues motivate goal-directed behavior, but in unstable environments humans must also be able to flexibly update cue-reward associations. While the capacity of reward cues to trigger motivation ('reactivity') as well as flexibility in cue-reward associations have been linked to the neurotransmitter dopamine in humans, the specific contribution of the dopamine D1 receptor family to these behaviors remained elusive. To fill this gap, we conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind pharmacological study testing the impact of three different doses of a novel D1 agonist (relative to placebo) on reactivity to reward-predicting cues (Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer) and flexibility of cue-outcome associations (reversal learning). We observed that the impact of the D1 agonist crucially depended on baseline working memory functioning, which has been identified as a proxy for baseline dopamine synthesis capacity. Specifically, increasing D1 receptor stimulation strengthened Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in individuals with high baseline working memory capacity. In contrast, higher doses of the D1 agonist improved reversal learning only in individuals with low baseline working memory functioning. Our findings suggest a crucial and baseline-dependent role of D1 receptor activation in controlling both cue reactivity and the flexibility of cue-reward associations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31962344
doi: 10.1038/s41386-020-0617-z
pii: 10.1038/s41386-020-0617-z
pmc: PMC7075935
doi:
Substances chimiques
DRD1 protein, human
0
Dopamine Agonists
0
Receptors, Dopamine D1
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
780-785Références
Garbusow M, et al. Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer effects in the nucleus accumbens relate to relapse in alcohol dependence. Addict Biol. 2016;21:719–31.
doi: 10.1111/adb.12243
Reddy LF, Waltz JA, Green MF, Wynn JK, Horan WP. Probabilistic reversal learning in schizophrenia: stability of deficits and potential causal mechanisms. Schizophr Bull. 2016;42:942–51.
doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbv226
pubmed: 4903059
pmcid: 4903059
Timmer MHM, Sescousse G, van der Schaaf ME, Esselink RAJ, Cools R. Reward learning deficits in Parkinson’s disease depend on depression. Psychol Med. 2017;47:2302–11.
doi: 10.1017/S0033291717000769
Schultz W. Neuronal reward and decision signals: from theories to data. Physiol Rev. 2015;95:853–951.
doi: 10.1152/physrev.00023.2014
pubmed: 4491543
pmcid: 4491543
Salamone JD, Correa M. The mysterious motivational functions of mesolimbic dopamine. Neuron. 2012;76:470–85.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.10.021
pubmed: 4450094
pmcid: 4450094
Ott T, Nieder A. Dopamine and cognitive control in prefrontal cortex. Trends Cogn Sci. 2019;23:213–34.
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2018.12.006
de Boer L, et al. Attenuation of dopamine-modulated prefrontal value signals underlies probabilistic reward learning deficits in old age. Elife. 2017;6:e26424.
doi: 10.7554/eLife.26424
pubmed: 5593512
pmcid: 5593512
Durstewitz D, Seamans JK. The computational role of dopamine D1 receptors in working memory. Neural Netw. 2002;15:561–72.
doi: 10.1016/S0893-6080(02)00049-7
Collins AG, Frank MJ. Opponent actor learning (OpAL): modeling interactive effects of striatal dopamine on reinforcement learning and choice incentive. Psychol Rev. 2014;121:337–66.
doi: 10.1037/a0037015
Weber SC, et al. Dopamine D2/3- and mu-opioid receptor antagonists reduce cue-induced responding and reward impulsivity in humans. Transl Psychiatry. 2016;6:e850.
doi: 10.1038/tp.2016.113
pubmed: 27378550
pmcid: 27378550
Swart JC, et al. Catecholaminergic challenge uncovers distinct Pavlovian and instrumental mechanisms of motivated (in)action. Elife. 2017;6:e22169.
Hebart MN, Glascher J. Serotonin and dopamine differentially affect appetitive and aversive general Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer. Psychopharmacology. 2015;232:437–51.
doi: 10.1007/s00213-014-3682-3
pubmed: 25034118
pmcid: 25034118
van der Schaaf ME, et al. Establishing the dopamine dependency of human striatal signals during reward and punishment reversal learning. Cereb Cortex. 2014;24:633–42.
doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhs344
pubmed: 23183711
pmcid: 23183711
Cools R, et al. Striatal dopamine predicts outcome-specific reversal learning and its sensitivity to dopaminergic drug administration. J Neurosci. 2009;29:1538–43.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4467-08.2009
pubmed: 19193900
pmcid: 19193900
Glueck E, Ginder D, Hyde J, North K, Grimm JW. Effects of dopamine D1 and D2 receptor agonists on environmental enrichment attenuated sucrose cue reactivity in rats. Psychopharmacology. 2017;234:815–25.
doi: 10.1007/s00213-016-4516-2
pubmed: 28032125
pmcid: 28032125
Lex A, Hauber W. Dopamine D1 and D2 receptors in the nucleus accumbens core and shell mediate Pavlovian-instrumental transfer. Learn Mem. 2008;15:483–91.
doi: 10.1101/lm.978708
pubmed: 18626092
pmcid: 18626092
Thompson JL, et al. Age-dependent D1-D2 receptor coactivation in the lateral orbitofrontal cortex potentiates NMDA receptors and facilitates cognitive flexibility. Cereb Cortex. 2016;26:4524–39.
doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhv222
pubmed: 26405054
pmcid: 26405054
Calaminus C, Hauber W. Guidance of instrumental behavior under reversal conditions requires dopamine D1 and D2 receptor activation in the orbitofrontal cortex. Neuroscience. 2008;154:1195–204.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.04.046
pubmed: 18538938
pmcid: 18538938
Haluk DM, Floresco SB. Ventral striatal dopamine modulation of different forms of behavioral flexibility. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2009;34:2041–52.
doi: 10.1038/npp.2009.21
Calaminus C, Hauber W. Intact discrimination reversal learning but slowed responding to reward-predictive cues after dopamine D1 and D2 receptor blockade in the nucleus accumbens of rats. Psychopharmacology. 2007;191:551–66.
doi: 10.1007/s00213-006-0532-y
pubmed: 17021925
pmcid: 17021925
de Boer L, et al. Dorsal striatal dopamine D1 receptor availability predicts an instrumental bias in action learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116:261–70.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1816704116
pubmed: 30563856
pmcid: 30563856
Frank MJ, Fossella JA. Neurogenetics and pharmacology of learning, motivation, and cognition. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2011;36:133–52.
doi: 10.1038/npp.2010.96
pubmed: 20631684
pmcid: 20631684
Cox SM, et al. Striatal D1 and D2 signaling differentially predict learning from positive and negative outcomes. Neuroimage. 2015;109:95–101.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.12.070
pubmed: 25562824
pmcid: 25562824
Davoren JE, et al. Discovery and lead optimization of atropisomer D1 agonists with reduced desensitization. J Med Chem. 2018;61:11384–97.
doi: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.8b01622
pubmed: 30431269
pmcid: 30431269
Gray DL, et al. Impaired beta-arrestin recruitment and reduced desensitization by non-catechol agonists of the D1 dopamine receptor. Nat Commun. 2018;9:674.
doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02776-7
pubmed: 29445200
pmcid: 29445200
Vijayraghavan S, Wang M, Birnbaum SG, Williams GV, Arnsten AF. Inverted-U dopamine D1 receptor actions on prefrontal neurons engaged in working memory. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10:376–84.
doi: 10.1038/nn1846
pubmed: 17277774
pmcid: 17277774
Floresco SB. Prefrontal dopamine and behavioral flexibility: shifting from an “inverted-U” toward a family of functions. Front Neurosci. 2013;7:62.
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2013.00062
pubmed: 23626521
pmcid: 23626521
Arnsten AF. Catecholamine influences on dorsolateral prefrontal cortical networks. Biol Psychiatry. 2011;69:e89–99.
doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.01.027
pubmed: 21489408
pmcid: 21489408
Takahashi H, Yamada M, Suhara T. Functional significance of central D1 receptors in cognition: beyond working memory. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2012;32:1248–58.
doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2011.194
pubmed: 22234338
pmcid: 22234338
Muller U, von Cramon DY, Pollmann S. D1- versus D2-receptor modulation of visuospatial working memory in humans. J Neurosci. 1998;18:2720–8.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-07-02720.1998
pubmed: 6793089
pmcid: 6793089
Cools R, D’Esposito M. Inverted-U-shaped dopamine actions on human working memory and cognitive control. Biol Psychiatry. 2011;69:e113–25.
doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.03.028
pubmed: 21531388
pmcid: 21531388
Landau SM, Lal R, O’Neil JP, Baker S, Jagust WJ. Striatal dopamine and working memory. Cereb Cortex. 2008;19:445–54.
doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhn095
pubmed: 2733326
pmcid: 2733326
Bäckman L, et al. Effects of working-memory training on striatal dopamine release. Science. 2011;333:718.
doi: 10.1126/science.1204978
Kimberg DY, D’Esposito M, Farah MJ. Effects of bromocriptine on human subjects depend on working memory capacity. Neuroreport. 1997;8:3581–5.
doi: 10.1097/00001756-199711100-00032
Cools R, Gibbs SE, Miyakawa A, Jagust W, D’Esposito M. Working memory capacity predicts dopamine synthesis capacity in the human striatum. J Neurosci. 2008;28:1208–12.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4475-07.2008
pubmed: 6671420
pmcid: 6671420
Soutschek A, et al. Dopaminergic D1 receptor stimulation affects effort and risk preferences. Biol Psychiatry. 2019. Epub 2019/11/02.
Carver CS, White TL. Behavioral-inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment—the Bis Bas Scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994;67:319–33.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319
Lehrl S, Mehrfachwahl-Wortschatz-Intelligenztest: MWT-B. Spitta, Balingen, 1999.
Patton JH, Stanford MS, Barratt ES. Factor structure of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale. J Clin Psychol. 1995;51:768–74.
doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(199511)51:6<768::AID-JCLP2270510607>3.0.CO;2-1
Lovibond PF, Colagiuri B. Facilitation of voluntary goal-directed action by reward cues. Psychol Sci. 2013;24:2030–7.
doi: 10.1177/0956797613484043
Watson P, Wiers RW, Hommel B, de Wit S. Working for food you don’t desire: cues interfere with goal-directed food-seeking. Appetite. 2014;79:139–48.
doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2014.04.005
Corbit LH, Janak PH, Balleine BW. General and outcome-specific forms of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer: the effect of shifts in motivational state and inactivation of the ventral tegmental area. Eur J Neurosci. 2007;26:3141–9.
doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2007.05934.x
Cools R, Altamirano L, D’Esposito M. Reversal learning in Parkinson’s disease depends on medication status and outcome valence. Neuropsychologia. 2006;44:1663–73.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.03.030
Cartoni E, Puglisi-Allegra S, Baldassarre G. The three principles of action: a Pavlovian-instrumental transfer hypothesis. Front Behav Neurosci. 2013;7:153.
doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00153
pubmed: 3832805
pmcid: 3832805
Corbit LH, Balleine BW. Double dissociation of basolateral and central amygdala lesions on the general and outcome-specific forms of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer. J Neurosci. 2005;25:962–70.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4507-04.2005
pubmed: 6725628
pmcid: 6725628
Corbit LH, Balleine BW. The general and outcome-specific forms of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer are differentially mediated by the nucleus accumbens core and shell. J Neurosci. 2011;31:11786–94.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2711-11.2011
pubmed: 3208020
pmcid: 3208020
Verharen JPH, Adan RAH, Vanderschuren L. Differential contributions of striatal dopamine D1 and D2 receptors to component processes of value-based decision making. Neuropsychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-019-0454-0 (2019).
Frank MJ. Dynamic dopamine modulation in the basal ganglia: a neurocomputational account of cognitive deficits in medicated and nonmedicated Parkinsonism. J Cogn Neurosci. 2005;17:51–72.
doi: 10.1162/0898929052880093
Xue G, et al. Common neural mechanisms underlying reversal learning by reward and punishment. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e82169.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082169
pubmed: 3859585
pmcid: 3859585
Wischnewski M, Zerr P, Schutter D. Effects of theta transcranial alternating current stimulation over the frontal cortex on reversal learning. Brain Stimul. 2016;9:705–11.
doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.04.011
pubmed: 27162098
pmcid: 27162098
Dalton GL, Wang NY, Phillips AG, Floresco SB. Multifaceted contributions by different regions of the orbitofrontal and medial prefrontal cortex to probabilistic reversal learning. J Neurosci. 2016;36:1996–2006.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3366-15.2016
pubmed: 26865622
pmcid: 26865622
Ghods-Sharifi S, Haluk DM, Floresco SB. Differential effects of inactivation of the orbitofrontal cortex on strategy set-shifting and reversal learning. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2008;89:567–73.
doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2007.10.007
pubmed: 18054257
pmcid: 18054257
Homayoun H, Moghaddam B. Differential representation of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer by prefrontal cortex subregions and striatum. Eur J Neurosci. 2009;29:1461–76.
doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06679.x
pubmed: 19309320
pmcid: 19309320
Keistler C, Barker JM, Taylor JR. Infralimbic prefrontal cortex interacts with nucleus accumbens shell to unmask expression of outcome-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer. Learn Mem. 2015;22:509–13.
doi: 10.1101/lm.038810.115
pubmed: 26373829
pmcid: 26373829
van der Schaaf ME, Fallon SJ, Ter Huurne N, Buitelaar J, Cools R. Working memory capacity predicts effects of methylphenidate on reversal learning. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013;38:2011–8.
doi: 10.1038/npp.2013.100
pubmed: 23612436
pmcid: 23612436
Schlagenhauf F, et al. Striatal dysfunction during reversal learning in unmedicated schizophrenia patients. Neuroimage. 2014;89:171–80.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.034
pubmed: 24291614
pmcid: 24291614