Advertisement

Psychopharmacology

, Volume 71, Issue 3, pp 219–225 | Cite as

Metoclopramide: Antipsychotic efficacy of a drug lacking potency in receptor models

  • Michael Stanley
  • Andrew Lautin
  • John Rotrosen
  • Samuel Gershon
  • David Kleinberg
Original Investigations

Abstract

Metoclopramide is a substituted benzamide derivative, structurally similar to procainamide and sulpiride. In behavioral, biochemical, and neuroendocrine tests it displays classic neuroleptic dopamine (DA) antagonist properties; in contrast to other DA antagonists, it lacks potency in currently used DA receptor models. In clinical studies using low doses or dubious measures, it was considered not to be efficacious as an antipsychotic. We now find that it indeed has a clinical profile similar to known neuroleptics when used in a dose range predicted from animal models. The findings raise questions regarding the validity and universality of several predictive models, as well as hypotheses purporting to explain molecular mechanisms of action of neuroleptic agents. The drug's inactivity in receptor models suggests that an as yet unidentified DA receptor subpopulation may be important as the mediator of many DA dependent neurobiologic phenomena.

Key words

Metoclopramide Antipsychotic efficacy Dopamine receptor models 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bateman D, Kahn C, Legg N, Reid J (1978) Metoclopramide in Parkinson's disease. Clin Pharmacol Ther 24:459–464Google Scholar
  2. Borenstein P, Bles G (1965) Effects cliniques et electro-encephalographiques du metoclopramide en psychiatrie. Therapie 20:975–995Google Scholar
  3. Byck R (1975) Drugs and the treatment of psychiatric disorders. In: Goodman L, Gilman A (eds) The pharmacological basis of Therapeutics. MacMillan, New York, p 152Google Scholar
  4. Costall B, Naylor R (1976a) Antagonism of the hyperactivity induced by dopamine applied intracerebrally to the nucleus accumbens septi by typical neuroleptics and by clozapine, sulpiride and thioridazine. Eur J Pharmacol 35:161–168Google Scholar
  5. Costall B, Naylor R (1976b) A Comparison of the abilities of typical neuroleptic agents and of thioridazine, clozapine, sulpiride, and metoclopramide to antagonize the hyperactivity induced by dopamine applied intracerebrally to areas of the extrapyramidal and mesolimbic systems. Eur J Pharmacol 40:9–19Google Scholar
  6. Creese I, Burt D, Snyder S (1976) Dopamine receptor binding predicts clinical and pharmacological potencies of antischizophrenic drugs. Science 192:481–483Google Scholar
  7. Creese I, Steward K, Snyder SH (1979) Species variations in dopamine receptor binding. Eur J Pharmacol 60:55–66Google Scholar
  8. Elliott P, Jenner P, Marsden C (1978) Atropine manipulation of elevated dopamine turnover caused by haloperidol or substituted benzamide drugs. J Pharm Pharmacol 30:788–791Google Scholar
  9. Hackman R, Pentikainen P, Neuvonen P, Vapaatalo H (1973) Inhibition of the apomorphine gnawing compulsion by amantadine. Experentia 34:1524–1525Google Scholar
  10. Healey D, Burger H (1978) Sustained elevation of serum Prolactin by Metoclopramide: A clinical model of idiopathic hyperprolactinemia. J Clin Endocrin Metabol 46:709–714Google Scholar
  11. Horrobin DF, Ally AI, Karmali RA, Karmazyn M, Manku MS, Morgan RO (1978) Prostaglandins and schizophrenia: further discussion of the evidence. Psychol Med 8:43–48Google Scholar
  12. Howard J, Large B, Wedley S, Pullar I (1978) The effects of standard neuroleptic compounds on the binding of 3H-spiroperidol in the striatum and mesolimbic system of the rat in vitro. Life Sci 23:599–604Google Scholar
  13. Hwang P, Guyda H, Friesen H (1971) A radioimmunoassay for human prolactin. Proc Natl Acad Sci (USA) 68:1902–1906Google Scholar
  14. Jenner P, Elliott P, Clow A, Reavill C, Marsden C (1978) A comparison of in vitro and in vivo dopamine receptor antagonism produced by substituted benzamide drugs. J Pharm Pharmacol 30:46–48Google Scholar
  15. Karatia M, Taub M, Marsden C (1978) Extrapyramidal side-effects of metoclopramide. Lancet II:1254–1255Google Scholar
  16. Kebabian J, Calne D (1979) Multiple receptors for dopamine. Nature 277:93–96Google Scholar
  17. Kebabian J, Petzold G, Greengard P (1972) Dopamine-sensitive adenylate cyclase in caudate nucleus of rat brain, and its similarity to the ‘Dopamine Receptor’. Proc Nat Acad Sci (USA) 69:2145–2149Google Scholar
  18. Lautin A, Wazer H, Stanley M, Rotrosen J, Gershon S (1980) Chronic treatment with metoclopramide induces behavioral supersensitivity to apomorphine and enhances specific binding of 3H-spiroperidol to rat striata. Life Sci (in press)Google Scholar
  19. Lavy S, Malamed E, Penchas S (1978) Tardive dyskinesia associated with metoclopramide. Brit Med J I:77–78Google Scholar
  20. Melzer H, So R, Miller R, Fang V (1979) Comparison of the effects of substituted benzamides and standard neuroleptics on the binding of 3H-spiroperidol in the rat pituitary and striatum with in vivo effects on rat prolactin secretion. Life Sci 25:573–584Google Scholar
  21. Mishra R (1978) Effect of substituted benzamide drugs on rat striatal tyrosine hydroxylase. Eur J Pharmacol 51:189–190Google Scholar
  22. Nakra B, Bond A, Lader M (1975) Comparative psychotropic effects of metoclopramide and prochlorperazine in normal subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 15:449–454Google Scholar
  23. Peringer E, Jenner P, Marsden DC (1975) Effect of metoclopramide on turnover of brain dopamine, noradrenaline and 5-hydroxytryptamine. J Pharm Pharmacol 27:442–444Google Scholar
  24. Robinson S, Berney S, Mishra R, Sulser F (1979) The relative role of dopamine and norepinephrine receptor blockade in the action of antipsychotic drugs: Metoclopramide, Thiethylperazine, and molindone as pharmacological tools. Psychopharmacology 64:141–147Google Scholar
  25. roufogalis B, Thornton M, Wade D (1976) Specificity of the dopamine sensitive adenylate cyclase for antipsychotic antagonists. Life Sci 19:927–934Google Scholar
  26. Seeman P, Lee T, Chan-Wang M, Wong K (1976) Antipsychotic drug doses and neuroleptic dopamine receptors. Nature 261:717–718Google Scholar
  27. Spitzer RE, Endicott J, Robins E (1977) Research diagnostic criteria for a selected group of functional disorders, 3rd edGoogle Scholar
  28. Stanley M, Wilk S (1979) Striatal DOPAC elevation predicts antipsychotic efficacy of metoclopramide. Life Sci 24:1907–1912Google Scholar
  29. Sulser F, Robinson S (1978) Clinical implications of pharmacological differences among antipsychotic drugs (with particular emphasis on biochemical central synaptic adrenergic mechanisms). In: Lipton M, Di Mascio A, Killam K (eds) Psychopharmacology: A generation of progress. Raven, New York, p 943Google Scholar
  30. Wood G (1978) An adverse reaction to metoclopramide therapy. Brit J Oral Surg 15:278–280Google Scholar
  31. Worms P, Lloyd KG (1979) Predictability and specificity of behavioral screening tests for neuroleptics. In: Zbinden G, Gross S (eds) Pharmacological methods in toxicology — proceddings of an International Workshop. Pergamon, London, p 256Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Stanley
    • 1
    • 2
  • Andrew Lautin
    • 1
    • 2
  • John Rotrosen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Samuel Gershon
    • 1
    • 2
  • David Kleinberg
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychiatryNew York University Medical CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Psychiatry Service of the Veterans Administration Medical CenterN.Y.

Personalised recommendations