Abstract
The reinforcing and subjective effects of phenylpropanolamine (PPA, 25 and 75 mg, PO) were compared with those of d-amphetamine (AMP, 5 mg) in a group of normal, healthy adults (eight males, nine females) with no history of drug abuse. A discrete-trial choice procedure was used in which subjects first sampled placebo and a dose of one of the drugs. Subjects were then allowed to choose between self-administration of drug or placebo on three separate occasions. The relative frequency with which active drug was chosen over placebo was used as the primary index of the drug's reinforcing efficacy. Subjective effects were measured with the Profile of Mood States, a short version of the Addiction Research Center Inventory and a series of visual analog scales. Ratings of drug liking, drug labelling, general activity level and strength of drug preference were also obtained. As expected, AMP was chosen significantly more often than expected by chance (69% of occasions). AMP also increased ratings of drug liking, preference strength, and activity level, and produced a profile of subjective effects consistent with its well-established stimulant and euphorigenic properties. The low dose of PPA was without effect on most measures. PPA 75 mg was chosen significantly less often than expected by chance (39% of occasions). This dose of PPA was most frequently labelled as a stimulant, and produced significant increases on ratings of Anxiety and “stimulated,” and decreases on ratings of “sedated” and “hungry.” Unlike AMP, PPA did not affect ratings of drug liking or mood scales reflecting euphoria. In sum, these results indicate that PPA does not possess AMP-like dependence potential.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bigelow GE (1985) Quantitative assessment of mood and behavioral reinforcing effect of phenylpropanolamine. In: Morgan JP, Kagan DV, Brody JS (eds) Phenylpropanolamine: risks, benefits, and controversies. Praeger, New York, pp 328–340
Blum A (1981) Phenylpropanolamine: an over-the-counter amphetamine. JAMA 245:1346–1347
Chait LD, Uhlenhuth EH, Johanson CE (1986) The discriminative stimulus and subjective effects of phenylpropanolamine, mazindol and d-amphetamine in humans. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 24:1665–1672
Chait LD, Uhlenhuth EH, Johanson CE (1987) Reinforcing and subjective effects of several anorectics in normal human volunteers. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 242:777–783
de Wit H, Uhlenhuth EH, Johanson CE (1986) Individual differences in the reinforcing and subjective effects of amphetamine and diazepam. Drug Alcohol Depend 16:341–360
Dixon WJ (ed) (1983) BMDP statistical software. University of California Press, Berkeley
Griffiths RR, Brady JV, Snell JD (1978) Relationship between anorectic and reinforcing properties of appetite suppressant drugs: implications for assessment of abuse liability. Biol Psychiatry 13:283–290
Griffiths RR, Bigelow GE, Henningfield JE (1980) Similarities in animal and human drug-taking behavior. In: Mello NK (ed) Advances in substance abuse, vol 1. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut, pp 1–90
Haertzen CA (1974) An overview of Addiction Research Center Inventory Scales (ARCI): an appendix and manual of scales. US Government Printing Office, Washington DC
Johanson CE, Uhlenhuth EH (1978) Drug self-administration in humans. In: Krasnegor NA (ed) Self-administration of abused substances: methods for study. NIDA Research Monograph 20. US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, pp 68–85
Johanson CE, Kilgore K, Uhlenhuth EH (1983) Assessment of dependence potential of drugs in humans using multiple indices. Psychopharmacology 81:144–149
Lake CR, Quirk RS (1984) CNS stimulants and the look-alike drugs. Psychiatr Clin North Am 7:689–701
Lamb RJ, Sannerud CA, Griffiths RR (1987) An examination of the intravenous self-administration of phenylpropanolamine using a cocaine substitution procedure in the baboon. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 28:389–392
Martin WR, Sloan JW, Sapira JD, Jasinski DR (1971) Physiologic, subjective and behavioral effects of amphetamine, methamphetamine, ephedrine, phenmetrazine, and methylphenidate in man. Clin Pharmacol Ther 12:245–258
McNair DM, Lorr M, Droppleman LF (1971) Manual for the Profile of Mood States. Educational and Industrial Testing Service, San Diego
Morgan JP, Kagan DV, Brody JS (eds) (1985) Phenylpropanolamine: risks, benefits, and controversies. Praeger, New York
Pentel P (1984) Toxicity of over-the-counter stimulants. JAMA 252:1898–1903
SPSSX user's guide (1983) McGraw-Hill, New York
Woolverton WL, Johanson CE, de la Garza R, Ellis S, Seiden LS, Schuster CR (1986) Behavioral and neurochemical evaluation of phenylpropanolamine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 237:926–930
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chait, L.D., Uhlenhuth, E.H. & Johanson, C.E. Phenylpropanolamine: reinforcing and subjective effects in normal human volunteers. Psychopharmacology 96, 212–217 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00177562
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00177562