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
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

780-785

Références

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

Auteurs

Alexander Soutschek (A)

Department of Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany. Alexander.Soutschek@psy.lmu.de.
Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. Alexander.Soutschek@psy.lmu.de.

Rouba Kozak (R)

Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Nicholas de Martinis (N)

Praxis Precision Medicines, Cambridge, MA, USA.

William Howe (W)

School of Neuroscience, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.

Christopher J Burke (CJ)

Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Ernst Fehr (E)

Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Neuroscience Center Zurich, University of Zurich, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Alexander Jetter (A)

Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Philippe N Tobler (PN)

Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Neuroscience Center Zurich, University of Zurich, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH