Psychopharmacology

, Volume 220, Issue 4, pp 751–762 | Cite as

Linking the pharmacological content of ecstasy tablets to the subjective experiences of drug users

  • Tibor M. Brunt
  • Maarten W. Koeter
  • Raymond J. M. Niesink
  • Wim van den Brink
Original Investigation

Abstract

Rationale

Most studies on the subjective effects of ecstasy are based on the assumption that the substance that was taken is 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). However, many tablets sold as ecstasy contain other substances and MDMA in varying doses. So far, few attempts have been made to take this into account while assessing subjective effects.

Objectives

This study aims to link the pharmacological content of tablets sold as ecstasy to the subjective experiences reported by ecstasy users.

Methods

Self-reported effects on ecstasy tablets were available from 5,786 drug users who handed in their tablets for chemical analysis at the Drug Information and Monitoring System (DIMS) in the Netherlands. Logistic regression was employed to link the pharmacological content of ecstasy tablets to the self-reported subjective effects and compare effects with MDMA to other substances present.

Results

MDMA showed a strong association with desirable subjective effects, unparalleled by any other psychoactive substance. However, the association of MDMA was dose-dependent, with higher doses (>120 mg/tablet) likely to evoke more adverse effects. The novel psychostimulants mephedrone and p-fluoroamphetamine were considered relatively desirable, whereas meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (mCPP) and p-methoxymethamphetamine (PMMA) were strongly associated with adverse subjective effects. Also, 3,4-methylene-dioxyamphetamine (MDA) and benzylpiperazine (BZP) were not appreciated as replacement for MDMA.

Conclusion

Linking the pharmacological content of ecstasy sold on the street to subjective experiences contributes to a better understanding of the wide range of subjective effects ascribed to ecstasy and provides a strong rationale for the prolonged endurance of MDMA as the key ingredient of the ecstasy market.

Keywords

3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) Ecstasy Subjective effects Desirable Adverse Dose 

References

  1. Aerts LA, Mallaret M, Rigter H (2000) N-Methyl-1-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2-butanamine (MBDB): its properties and possible risks. Addict Biol 5:269–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Antia U, Lee HS, Kydd RR, Tingle MD, Russell BR (2009) Pharmacokinetics of ‘party pill’ drug N-benzylpiperazine (BZP) in healthy human participants. Forensic Sci Int 186:63–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baylen CA, Rosenberg H (2006) A review of the acute subjective effects of MDMA/ecstasy. Addiction 101:933–947Google Scholar
  4. Becker J, Neis P, Röhrich J, Zörntlein S (2003) A fatal paramethoxymethamphetamine intoxication. Leg Med (Tokyo) 5:S138–S141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bossong MG, Van Dijk JP, Niesink RJ (2005) Methylone and mCPP, two new drugs of abuse? Addict Biol 10:321–323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bossong M, Brunt TM, Van Dijk JP, Rigter S, Hoek J, Goldschmidt H, Niesink RJ (2010) mCPP: an undesired addition to the ecstasy market. J Psychopharmacol 24:1395–1401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyer EW, Quang L, Woolf A, Shannon M, Magnani B (2001) Dextromethorphan and ecstasy pills. JAMA 285:409–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunt TM, Poortman A, Niesink RJ, van den Brink W (2010) Instability of the ecstasy market and a new kid on the block: mephedrone. J Psychopharmacol. doi:10.1177/0269881110378370
  9. Butler RA, Sheridan JL (2007) Highs and lows: patterns of use, positive and negative effects of benzylpiperazine-containing party pills (BZP-party pills) amongst young people in New Zealand. Harm Reduct J 4:18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bytzer P, Hallas J (2000) Drug-induced symptoms of functional dyspepsia and nausea. A symmetry analysis of one million prescriptions. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 14:1479–1484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caldicott DG, Edwards NA, Kruys A, Kirkbride KP, Sims DN, Byard RW, Prior M, Irvine RJ (2003) Dancing with “death”: p-methoxyamphetamine overdose and its acute management. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 41:143–154PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Callaghan PD, Irvine RJ, Daws LC (2005) Differences in the in vivo dynamics of neurotransmitter release and serotonin uptake after acute para-methoxyamphetamine and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine revealed by chronoamperometry. Neurochem Int 47:350–361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Camilleri AM, Caldicott D (2005) Underground pill testing, down under. Forensic Sci Int 151:53–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carhart-Harris RL, King LA, Nutt DJ (2011) A web-based survey on mephedrone. Drug Alcohol Depend. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.02.011
  15. Cohen BM, Butler R (2010) BZP-party pills: a review of research on benzylpiperazine as a recreational drug. Int J Drug Policy 22:95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cole JC, Bailey M, Sumnall HR, Wagstaff GF, King LA (2002) The content of ecstasy tablets: implications for the study of their long-term effects. Addiction 97:1531–1536PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cunningham RS (1997) 5-HT3-receptor antagonists: a review of pharmacology and clinical efficacy. Oncol Nurs Forum 24:33–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. de Boer D, Bosman IJ, Hidvégi E, Manzoni C, Benkö AA, dos Reys LJ, Maes RA (2001) Piperazine-like compounds: a new group of designer drugs-of-abuse on the European market. Forensic Sci Int 121:47–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dumont GJ, Verkes RJ (2006) A review of acute effects of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine in healthy volunteers. J Psychopharmacol 20:176–187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. EMCDDA (2003–2011) European information system and database on new drugs, EWS final reports 2003–2011, http://ednd.emcdda.europa.eu/
  21. EMCDDA (2010) European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Annual Report 2010, http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_120104_EN_EMCDDA_AR2010_EN.pdf
  22. Erowid (2006) Erowid 4-Fluoroamphetamine (para-Fluoroamphetamine) Vault, http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/4_fluoroamphetamine/
  23. Erowid (2010) Erowid Experience Vaults: 4-Methylmethcathinone Reports, http://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_4Methylmethcathinone.shtml
  24. Europol-EMCDDA (2010) Annual Report on the implementation of Council Decision 2005/387/JHA,http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_132857_EN_EMCDDA-Europol%20Annual%20Report%202010A.pdf
  25. Feuchtl A, Bagli M, Stephan R, Frahnert C, Kölsch H, Kühn KU, Rao ML (2004) Pharmacokinetics of m-chlorophenylpiperazine after intravenous and oral administration in healthy male volunteers: implication for the pharmacodynamic profile. Pharmacopsychiatry 37:180–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gijsman HJ, Cohen AF, van Gerven JM (2004) The application of the principles of clinical drug development to pharmacological challenge tests of the serotonergic system. J Psychopharmacol 18:7–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Giraudon I, Bello PY (2007) Monitoring ecstasy content in France: results from the National Surveillance System 1999–2004. Subst Use Misuse 42:1567–1578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Glennon RA, Ismaiel AE, McCarthy BG, Peroutka SJ (1989) Binding of arylpiperazines to 5-HT3 serotonin receptors: results of a structure-affinity study. Eur J Pharmacol 168:387–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gouzoulis-Mayfrank E, Thelen B, Habermeyer E, Kunert HJ, Kovar KA, Lindenblatt H, Hermle L, Spitzer M, Sass H (1999) Psychopathological, neuroendocrine and autonomic effects of 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine (MDE), psilocybin and d-methamphetamine in healthy volunteers. Results of an experimental double-blind placebo-controlled study. Psychopharmacology Berl 142:41–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hegadoren KM, Baker GB, Bourin M (1999) 3,4-Methylenedioxy analogues of amphetamine: defining the risks to humans. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 23:539–553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hermle L, Spitzer M, Borchardt D, Kovar KA, Gouzoulis E (1993) Psychological effects of MDE in normal subjects. Are entactogens a new class of psychoactive agents? Neuropsychopharmacology 8:171–176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Higgins GA, Kilpatrick GJ (1999) 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 8:2183–2188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hiyama T, Yoshihara M, Tanaka S, Haruma K, Chayama K (2009) Effectiveness of prokinetic agents against diseases external to the gastrointestinal tract. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 24:537–546PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression, 2nd edn. Wiley, University of Massachusetts, MassachusettsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Huxster JK, Pirona A, Morgan MJ (2006) The sub-acute effects of recreational ecstasy (MDMA) use: a controlled study in humans. J Psychopharmacol 20:281–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jan RK, Lin JC, Lee H, Sheridan JL, Kydd RR, Kirk IJ, Russell BR (2010) Determining the subjective effects of TFMPP in human males. Psychopharmacology Berl 211:347–353PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnstone AC, Lea RA, Brennan KA, Schenk S, Kennedy MA, Fitzmaurice PS (2007) Benzylpiperazine: a drug of abuse? J Psychopharmacol 21:888–894PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johansen SS, Hansen AC, Müller IB, Lundemose JB, Franzmann MB (2003) Three fatal cases of PMA and PMMA poisoning in Denmark. J Anal Toxicol 27:253–256PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Kalasinsky KS, Hugel J, Kish SJ (2004) Use of MDA (the “love drug”) and methamphetamine in Toronto by unsuspecting users of ecstasy (MDMA). J Forensic Sci 49:1106–1112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kenyon SL, Ramsey JD, Lee T, Johnston A, Holt DW (2005) Analysis for identification in amnesty bin samples from dance venues. Ther Drug Monit 27:793–798PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kolbrich EA, Goodwin RS, Gorelick DA, Hayes RJ, Stein EA, Huestis MA (2008) Physiological and subjective responses to controlled oral 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine administration. J Clin Psychopharmacol 28:432–440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Liechti ME, Gamma A, Vollenweider FX (2001) Gender differences in the subjective effects of MDMA. Psychopharmacology Berl 154:161–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lin DL, Liu HC, Yin HL (2007) Recent paramethoxymethamphetamine (PMMA) deaths in Taiwan. J Anal Toxicol 31:109–113PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Lin JC, Bangs N, Lee H, Kydd RR, Russell BR (2009) Determining the subjective and physiological effects of BZP on human females. Psychopharmacology Berl 207:439–446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lin JC, Jan RK, Lee H, Jensen MA, Kydd RR, Russell BR (2011) Determining the subjective and physiological effects of BZP combined with TFMPP in human males. Psychopharmacology Berl 214:761–768PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lora-Tamayo C, Tena T, Rodríguez A, Moreno D, Sancho JR, Enseñat P, Muela F (2004) The designer drug situation in Ibiza. Forensic Sci Int 140:195–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Marona-Lewicka D, Rhee GS, Sprague JE, Nichols DE (1995) Psychostimulant-like effects of p-fluoroamphetamine in the rat. Eur J Pharmacol 287:105–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Matok I, Gorodischer R, Koren G, Sheiner E, Wiznitzer A, Levy A (2009) The safety of metoclopramide use in the first trimester of pregnancy. N Engl J Med 360:2528–2535PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Maurer HH, Kraemer T, Springer D, Staack RF (2004) Chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, and hepatic metabolism of designer drugs of the amphetamine (ecstasy), piperazine, and pyrrolidinophenone types: a synopsis. Ther Drug Monit 26:127–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McElrath K, O’Neill C (2011) Experiences with mephedrone pre- and post-legislative controls: perceptions of safety and sources of supply. Int J Drug Policy 22:120–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Morefield KM, Keane M, Felgate P, White JM, Irvine RJ (2011) Pill content, dose and resulting plasma concentrations of 3,4-methylendioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) in recreational ‘ecstasy’ users. Addiction 106:1293–1300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Murphy PN, Wareing M, Fisk J (2006) Users’ perceptions of the risks and effects of taking ecstasy (MDMA): a questionnaire study. J Psychopharmacol 20:447–455PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nagai F, Nonaka R, Satoh Hisashi Kamimura K (2007) The effects of non-medically used psychoactive drugs on monoamine neurotransmission in rat brain. Eur J Pharmacol 559:132–137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Páleníček T, Balíková M, Rohanová M, Novák T, Horáček J, Fujáková M, Höschl C (2011) Behavioral, hyperthermic and pharmacokinetic profile of para-methoxymethamphetamine (PMMA) in rats. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 98:130–139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Parrott AC, Buchanan T, Scholey AB, Heffernan T, Ling J, Rodgers J (2002) Ecstasy/MDMA attributed problems reported by novice, moderate and heavy recreational users. Hum Psychopharmacol 17:309–312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Parrott AC (2004) Is ecstasy MDMA? A review of the proportion of ecstasy tablets containing MDMA, their dosage levels, and the changing perceptions of purity. Psychopharmacology Berl 173:234–241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Parrott AC (2006) MDMA in humans: factors which affect the neuropsychobiological profiles of recreational ecstasy users, the integrative role of bioenergetic stress. J Psychopharmacol 20:147–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Parrott AC, Rodgers J, Buchanan T, Ling J, Heffernan T, Scholey AB (2006) Dancing hot on Ecstasy: physical activity and thermal comfort ratings are associated with the memory and other psychobiological problems reported by recreational MDMA users. Hum Psychopharmacol 21:285–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Peroutka SJ, Newman H, Harris H (1988) Subjective effects of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine in recreational users. Neuropsychopharmacology 1:273–277PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Rohanova M, Balikova M (2009) Studies on distribution and metabolism of para-methoxymethamphetamine (PMMA) in rats after subcutaneous administration. Toxicology 259:61–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schifano F, Corkery J, Deluca P, Oyefeso A, Ghodse AH (2006) Ecstasy (MDMA, MDA, MDEA, MBDB) consumption, seizures, related offences, prices, dosage levels and deaths in the UK (1994–2003). J Psychopharmacol 20:456–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schifano F, Albanese A, Fergus S, Stair JL, Deluca P, Corazza O, Davey Z, Corkery J, Siemann H, Scherbaum N, Farré M, Torrens M, Demetrovics Z, Ghodse AH, Psychonaut Web Mapping; ReDNet Research Groups (2011) Mephedrone (4-methylmethcathinone; ‘meow meow’): chemical, pharmacological and clinical issues. Psychopharmacology Berl 214:593–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Simonsen KW, Kaa E, Nielsen E, Rollmann D (2003) Narcotics at street level in Denmark. A prospective investigation from 1995 to 2000. Forensic Sci Int 131:162–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Staack RF (2007) Piperazine designer drugs of abuse. Lancet 369:1411–1413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Staack RF, Maurer HH (2003) Piperazine-derived designer drug 1-(3-chlorophenyl)piperazine (mCPP): GC-MS studies on its metabolism and its toxicological detection in rat urine including analytical differentiation from its precursor drugs trazodone and nefazodone. J Anal Toxicol 27:560–568PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Sumnall HR, Cole JC, Jerome L (2006) The varieties of ecstatic experience: an exploration of the subjective experiences of ecstasy. J Psychopharmacol 20:670–682PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tancer ME, Johanson CE (2001) The subjective effects of MDMA and mCPP in moderate MDMA users. Drug Alcohol Depend 65:97–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tancer M, Johanson CE (2003) Reinforcing, subjective, and physiological effects of MDMA in humans: a comparison with d-amphetamine and mCPP. Drug Alcohol Depend 72:33–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tanner-Smith EE (2006) Pharmacological content of tablets sold as “ecstasy”: results from an online testing service. Drug Alcohol Depend 83:247–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Thomasius R, Petersen K, Buchert R, Andresen B, Zapletalova P, Wartberg L, Nebeling B, Schmoldt A (2003) Mood, cognition and serotonin transporter availability in current and former ecstasy (MDMA) users. Psychopharmacology Berl 167:85–96PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Thompson I, Williams G, Caldwell B, Aldington S, Dickson S, Lucas N, McDowall J, Weatherall M, Robinson G, Beasley R (2010) Randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the effects of the ‘party pills’ BZP/TFMPP alone and in combination with alcohol. J Psychopharmacol 24:1299–1308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. UNODC (2010) United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, World Drug Report 2010, http://www.unodc.org/documents/wdr/WDR_2010/World_Drug_Report_2010_lo-res.pdf
  73. Verheyden SL, Hadfield J, Calin T, Curran HV (2002) Sub-acute effects of MDMA (+/−3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, “ecstasy”) on mood: evidence of gender differences. Psychopharmacology Berl 161:23–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Vogels N, Brunt TM, Rigter S, van Dijk P, Vervaeke H, Niesink RJ (2009) Content of ecstasy in the Netherlands: 1993–2008. Addiction 104:2057–2066PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wee S, Anderson KG, Baumann MH, Rothman RB, Blough BE, Woolverton WL (2005) Relationship between the serotonergic activity and reinforcing effects of a series of amphetamine analogs. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 313:848–854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Winstock AR, Mitcheson LR, Deluca P, Davey Z, Corazza O, Schifano F (2011) Mephedrone, new kid for the chop? Addiction 106:154–161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tibor M. Brunt
    • 1
    • 3
  • Maarten W. Koeter
    • 2
  • Raymond J. M. Niesink
    • 1
  • Wim van den Brink
    • 2
  1. 1.Drug Information and Monitoring SystemNetherlands Institute of Mental Health and AddictionUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Amsterdam Institute for Addiction ResearchAcademic Medical Center of the University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Trimbos InstituteNetherlands Institute of Mental Health and AddictionUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations