D1 and D2 Dopamine Receptors in Gambling and Amphetamine Reinforcement
HFDEX
Comparative Effects of a D2 and Mixed D1-D2 Dopamine Antagonist on Gambling and Amphetamine Reinforcement in Pathological Gamblers and Healthy Controls
1 other identifier
interventional
60
1 country
1
Brief Summary
To determine if:
- 1.pathological gambling is similar to psychostimulant addiction as reflected by parallel roles for D1 and D2 receptors in gambling and stimulant reinforcement.
- 2.these parallel roles are linked with gambling pathology or if they are evident in both gamblers and controls.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for phase_2
Started Sep 2009
Longer than P75 for phase_2
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
September 1, 2009
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
July 23, 2014
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
July 30, 2014
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
June 1, 2015
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 1, 2015
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
April 25, 2016
CompletedApril 25, 2016
April 1, 2016
5.8 years
July 23, 2014
January 20, 2016
April 11, 2016
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Subjective Reinforcement Self-report Scales
Self-reported Confidence to Refrain from Gambling (0 - 10) was assessed at test session baseline, before the slot machine and after the slot machine (Phase 1); and before amphetamine and at peak amphetamine (Phase 2). The maximum score (10) denotes complete confidence to refrain from gambling (i.e., NO urge or compulsion to gamble); the minimum score (0) denotes complete lack of confidence to refrain from gambling (i.e., overwhelming urge to gamble). Scores between 10 and 0 denote intermediate confidence to refrain from gambling with LOWER scores denoting less confidence to refrain from gambling -- i.e., GREATER urge or compulsive motivation to gamble. Scores shown are based on single item visual analogue ratings 0-10 from each participant at the specified time point. The mean (SD) of these single item ratings is presented for each sub-group.
At key points in testing: immediately after the slot machine game, and at expected peak subjective-behavioral effects for amphetamine (90-minutes post-capsule administration).
Secondary Outcomes (5)
Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)
At key points in testing: immediately after the slot machine game (change from session baseline), and at expected peak subjective-behavioral effects for amphetamine (90-minutes post-capsule administration)(change from session baseline).
Cognitive Task Performance
At key points during testing: immediately after the slot machine, at expected peak subjective-behavioral effects for amphetamine (90-minutes post-capsule administration)
Betting Behaviour in Laboratory-based Slot Machine Game
1x per test session (total of 4 test sessions) for duration of the study: 4 weeks (1 session/week)
Speed of Play on Slot Machine Game
15-minutes
Winnings on Slot Machine Upon Completion of Game
15-minutes
Study Arms (2)
Haloperidol
ACTIVE COMPARATORSubjects randomized to pre-treatment drug sequence 1 (haloperidol on day 1 of each phase), or drug sequence 2 (haloperidol on day 2 of each phase). Dose 1: 3 visually identical capsules, each containing 1 mg haloperidol OR 3 visually identical placebo (lactose) capsules Dose 2: when participants reach expected peak blood levels for dose 1, they will receive their second dose. On sessions 1 and 2 (Phase I), this will consist of 2 dummy capsules, visually identical to those administered for dose 1. On sessions 3 and 4 (Phase II), the dose will consist of 2 visually identical capsules each containing 10 mg dexedrine. Response measured to 15 min session of a commercial slot machine game.
Fluphenazine
ACTIVE COMPARATORSubjects randomized to pre-treatment drug sequence 1 (fluphenazine on day 1 of each phase), or drug sequence 2 (fluphenazine on day 2 of each phase). Dose 1: 3 visually identical capsules, each containing 1 mg fluphenazine OR 3 visually identical placebo (lactose) capsules Dose 2: when participants reach expected peak blood levels for dose 1, they will receive their second dose. On sessions 1 and 2 (Phase I), this will consist of 2 dummy capsules, visually identical to those administered for dose 1. On sessions 3 and 4 (Phase II), the dose will consist of 2 visually identical capsules each containing 10 mg dexedrine. Response measured to 15 min session of a commercial slot machine game.
Interventions
Dose/maximum dose = 3-mg; route = oral. Participants assigned to the haloperidol antagonist group will receive 2 doses (@ 3 mg) on alternate sessions (with minimum of 2 weeks between individual doses). Dose 1: 3 visually identical capsules, each containing 1 mg haloperidol.
Dose/maximum dose = 3-mg; route = oral. Participants assigned to the fluphenazine antagonist group will receive 2 doses (@ 3 mg) on alternate sessions (with minimum of 2 weeks between individual doses). Dose 1: 3 visually identical capsules, each containing 1 mg fluphenazine.
Dose/maximum dose = 20-mg; route = oral. All participants will receive 2 doses (@ 20 mg) during Phase II - sessions 3, 4, with minimum 1 week between individual doses. Dose 2: when participants reach expected peak blood levels for dose 1, they will receive their second dose. On sessions 3 and 4 (Phase II), the dose will consist of 2 visually identical capsules each containing 10 mg D-amphetamine.
Dose 1: On alternate sessions (1 and 3 or 2 and 4, depending on counterbalancing) participants will receive 3 visually identical placebo (lactose) capsules. Dose 2: when participants reach expected peak blood levels for dose 1, they will receive their second dose. On sessions 1 and 2 (Phase I), this will consist of 2 dummy capsules, visually identical to those administered for dose 1.
15 minute play of a commercial slot machine game in bar-simulated laboratory setting.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- PATHOLOGICAL GAMBLERS
- otherwise healthy, non-treatment seeking, non-abstinent
- male or female
- ages 19-65
- DSM-IV PG symptom scale score \> 5
- SOGS (South Oaks Gambling Screen) score \> 5
- nicotine dependence acceptable
- CONTROLS
- healthy
- male or female
- ages 19-65
- DSM-IV PG symptom scale score = 0
- SOGS score = 0
- nicotine dependence acceptable
- must have played slot machine \> 5 times
You may not qualify if:
- both Pathological Gamblers and Controls
- Axis I psychopathology aside from nicotine dependence (or PG) based on SCID
- Schizotypal or Borderline Personality Disorder based on psychiatric interview
- Family history of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder
- English comprehension below grade 7 level.
- ADS (Alcohol Dependence Scale) \> 13 (more than low dependence)
- BDI (Beck Depression Inventory) short form \> 10 (more than low depression)
- DAST (Drug Abuse Screening Test) \> 4 (possible drug abuse)
- Consumption of \> 20/15 (men/women) standard alcoholic drinks/ week (hazardous drinking)
- Smoking \> 20 cigarettes/day to help minimize withdrawal symptoms during test phase
- Any prior use of psychostimulant drugs
- Current use of medication that could interact with any of the study medications
- Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S1, Canada
Related Publications (8)
APA (2000) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. IV-TR ed. American Psychiatric Association: Washington, DC.
BACKGROUNDEnggasser JL, de Wit H. Haloperidol reduces stimulant and reinforcing effects of ethanol in social drinkers. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2001 Oct;25(10):1448-56.
PMID: 11696664BACKGROUNDHolley FO, Magliozzi JR, Stanski DR, Lombrozo L, Hollister LE. Haloperidol kinetics after oral and intravenous doses. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1983 Apr;33(4):477-84. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1983.65.
PMID: 6831826BACKGROUNDLesieur HR, Blume SB. The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): a new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. Am J Psychiatry. 1987 Sep;144(9):1184-8. doi: 10.1176/ajp.144.9.1184.
PMID: 3631315BACKGROUNDMidha KK, McKay G, Edom R, Korchinski ED, Hawes EM, Hall K. Kinetics of oral fluphenazine disposition in humans by GC-MS. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1983;25(5):709-11. doi: 10.1007/BF00542363.
PMID: 6662169BACKGROUNDWachtel SR, Ortengren A, de Wit H. The effects of acute haloperidol or risperidone on subjective responses to methamphetamine in healthy volunteers. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2002 Sep 1;68(1):23-33. doi: 10.1016/s0376-8716(02)00104-7.
PMID: 12167550BACKGROUNDWong YN, Wang L, Hartman L, Simcoe D, Chen Y, Laughton W, Eldon R, Markland C, Grebow P. Comparison of the single-dose pharmacokinetics and tolerability of modafinil and dextroamphetamine administered alone or in combination in healthy male volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol. 1998 Oct;38(10):971-8. doi: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1998.tb04395.x.
PMID: 9807980BACKGROUNDZack M, Lobo D, Biback C, Fang T, Smart K, Tatone D, Kalia A, Digiacomo D, Kennedy JL. Priming effects of a slot machine game and amphetamine on probabilistic risk-taking in people with gambling disorder and healthy controls. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2023 Feb;45(1):31-60. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2023.2187041. Epub 2023 Mar 15.
PMID: 36919514DERIVED
Related Links
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Dr. Daniela Lobo, Qualified Investigator for Study, Clinician-Scientist
- Organization
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Daniela Lobo, MD, Ph.D.
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restrictive Agreement
- No
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 2
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- TRIPLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- DIAGNOSTIC
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Clinician Scientist
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
July 23, 2014
First Posted
July 30, 2014
Study Start
September 1, 2009
Primary Completion
June 1, 2015
Study Completion
September 1, 2015
Last Updated
April 25, 2016
Results First Posted
April 25, 2016
Record last verified: 2016-04
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share