Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Translational Psychiatry logoLink to Translational Psychiatry
. 2021 Sep 1;11:445. doi: 10.1038/s41398-021-01548-8

Naloxone precipitated withdrawal increases dopamine release in the dorsal striatum of opioid dependent men

Ehsan Shokri-Kojori 1,✉, Gene-Jack Wang 1, Nora D Volkow 1,✉
PMCID: PMC8410787  PMID: 34471102

Abstract

Dopamine (DA) neurotransmission is critical in the neurobiology of reward and aversion, but its contribution to the aversive state of opioid withdrawal remains unknown in humans. To address this, we used updated voxelwise methods and retrospectively analyzed a [11C]raclopride-PET dataset to measure D2/3 receptor availability and relative cerebral blood flow (R1) in male opioid use disorder (OUD) participants (n = 10) during placebo and acute opioid withdrawal conditions. We found that acute withdrawal precipitated by the opioid antagonist naloxone significantly increased dorsal striatal DA release in OUD participants (pFWE < 0.05). Net changes in striatal DA were significantly correlated with a subjective index of withdrawal aversion such that greater DA increases were associated with more aversive responses (r(8) = 0.82, p < 0.005). Withdrawal also affected brain function, as indexed by increases in relative cerebral blood flow in the insula and putamen (pFWE < 0.05). Our findings are different from preclinical studies that have primarily reported decreases in ventral striatal DA during naloxone precipitated withdrawal, whereas this effect was not significant in OUD participants (p = 0.79). In sum, we provide evidence for the contribution of increases in dorsal striatal DA to the aversive state of naloxone precipitated withdrawal in humans.

Subject terms: Addiction, Molecular neuroscience

Introduction

The opioid epidemic is a leading health crisis in the US. Acute opioid withdrawal is an important contributor to drug-seeking behavior and relapse, and its underlying neurobiology is critical for the treatment development of opioid use disorder (OUD). Changes in opioid neurotransmission contribute to physical dependence and withdrawal symptomatology in OUD [1, 2]. Changes in the dopamine (DA) system, the main contributor to reward and aversion [3, 4], have been also implicated in OUD. Similar to other substance use disorders [5], OUD has been associated with decreased striatal D2/3 receptor (D2/3R) availability [6, 7]. Opioids, directly and indirectly, affect midbrain DA neurons in the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc). Stimulation of mu-opioid receptor (MOR) suppresses the inhibitory effect of GABA interneurons on DA neurons in the VTA. This indirect inhibition results in increased DA release in the ventral striatum that has been associated with the rewarding effects of opioid drugs [8]. Kappa opioid receptors (KORs) also regulate DA release through their direct effect on DA neurons and are implicated in aversion including opioid withdrawal [9, 10]. Different effects of opioid antagonists and agonists on the opioid receptors in the SNc and VTA could differentially affect DA release in the dorsal and ventral striatum [11].

Symptoms of acute opioid withdrawal primarily reflect disruptions in opioid signaling in multiple neuronal systems following repeated opioid exposure. Preclinical data indicate that acute opioid exposure stimulates MOR in the locus coeruleus (LC), suppresses norepinephrine release, and reduces adrenergic function [12]. Chronic opioid exposure increases basal LC activity, presumably, to counterbalance the repeated suppression of norepinephrine release [13]. Abrupt discontinuation of opioids or administration of opioid antagonists (such as naloxone (NAL)) markedly increases norepinephrine release and triggers systemic withdrawal symptoms [14]. Acute opioid withdrawal is stressful and stimulates the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis, leading to increases in pituitary pro-opiomelanocortin mRNA, adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), and adrenal cortisol release [15].

NAL, a non-selective opioid antagonist [16, 17], is used to reverse opioid overdose effects [18] and precipitates withdrawal in opioid-dependent individuals. Here we aimed to study the contribution of DA to NAL precipitated withdrawal (NPW) in OUD participants. For this purpose, we employed updated voxelwise PET analysis techniques (to improve image co-registration, normalization, and reference region identification) and revisited a [11C]raclopride-PET dataset where we had assessed changes in DA release between placebo and NPW conditions in OUD men [6]. As a secondary goal, we explored the functional effects of NPW (indexed by relative cerebral blood flow, rCBF) on the pituitary (related to stress and HPA stimulation) [15, 19] and habenula (implicated in NAL aversion) [20]. Preclinical studies that assessed the effect of NPW on DA, have mostly focused on the ventral striatum and have reported decreases [10, 21–25] or no change in DA release [26]. In contrast, increases in DA have been reported in the dorsal striatum during NPW [27]. Thus, we hypothesized that NPW would increase DA in the dorsal striatum and decrease DA in the ventral striatum and that changes in striatal DA would be associated with a subjective index of withdrawal aversion.

Methods

Participants

This study entailed a retrospective analysis of a [11C]raclopride-PET brain imaging dataset [6] with a total of 20 PET scans that were collected on 10 OUD participants (10 males, age = 40.8 ± 4.3 years) in two sessions following administration of saline (SAL) and NAL (see PET imaging and modeling). The original report [6] included 11 OUD participants with PET data collected during SAL, out of which 9 OUD participants were reported to undergo [11C]raclopride-PET imaging during NAL condition. However, after reexamination of data records, we were able to identify an additional OUD participant with [11C]raclopride-PET data for both sessions (a total of 10 OUD participants). The remaining OUD participant with [11C]raclopride-PET data collected only under SAL condition was not included in this report. OUD participants were studied at Brookhaven National Laboratory and provided written informed consent that was approved by the Human Subjects Research Committee of the Brookhaven National Laboratory. OUD participants had at least one year history of continued opioid use (heroin or methadone treated) and met DSM-IV criteria for opioid dependence. OUD participants were also current smokers (n = 8), current marijuana users (n = 7), current (n = 4) or past (n = 3) cocaine users, current (n = 2) or past (n = 1) amphetamine users, and past LSD users (n = 2). The sample size was justified based on a recent study showing that the effect of morphine on striatal DA could be detected in 10 healthy controls [28]. Imaging data on two healthy controls were also available [6] but not included in this analysis due to the small sample size.

PET imaging and modeling

The OUD participants (n = 10) underwent two consecutive dynamic [11C]raclopride-PET scans (CTI-Siemens ECAT 931, ~6 mm FWHM) on the same day, except for two participants who were studied on different days. The first scan with [11C]raclopride started 5–7 min following administration of intravenous (IV) SAL. After 2 h, the second scan with [11C]raclopride was started following administration of IV NAL that was given in 0.01 mg/kg increments (every 4 min) until withdrawal symptoms appeared (e.g., yawning, abdominal cramps, rhinorrhea, and tearing) [6]. OUD participants received about 0.02 mg/kg of NAL. Two participants received 0.01 mg/kg NAL and were scanned on a different day from the SAL scan. Frame-wise motion correction was applied to all scans. Both dynamic [11C]raclopride-PET scans for each participant were co-registered and were normalized to MNI space (2-mm isotropic) using FSL (the FMRIB Software Library) [29] and AFNI [30] routines. To estimate D2/3R availability in OUD, dynamic [11C]raclopride-PET data were modeled in PMOD 3.9 (PMOD Technologies Ltd, Zurich, Switzerland). The simplified reference tissue model 2 (SRTM2) [31] with a cerebellar reference region was used to estimate voxelwise binding potential (BPnd) and R1 (R1 = K1/K′1). R1 is a proxy of rCBF with good agreement with rCBF measures obtained by [15O]H2O-PET [32–34] and with high reliability for [11C]raclopride-PET [35].

Voxelwise comparisons

Voxelwise paired t-tests were performed to assess NAL effects on [11C]raclopride BPnd and R1 in SPM12 (Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, London) [36]. Images were smoothed with a 5-mm full-width at half-maximum Gaussian kernel prior to the paired t-test analyses. A threshold of p ≤ 0.01 in SPM12 was used and cluster sizes were corrected for multiple comparisons in the whole brain using the random field theory to control family-wise error (pFWE < 0.05) [37].

Net DA release and net rCBF change

DA release was calculated by subtracting the D2/3R BPnd in the drug condition (e.g., NAL) from that in the SAL condition and dividing the result by D2/3R BPnd in the SAL condition (to normalize for regional differences in D2/3R). Net DA release was calculated by averaging DA release across the striatum. To estimate drug-induced changes in rCBF, we subtracted R1 in the SAL condition from that in the drug condition and divided the result by R1 in the SAL condition (to normalize for regional differences in R1). Net rCBF change was calculated by averaging rCBF change across the striatum. When R1 measures are directly being compared, we use R1 in the text, otherwise, we use rCBF change or net rCBF change as defined here.

Regions of interest (ROIs)

We assessed NPW-induced changes in [11C]raclopride BPnd using a priori ROIs of the dorsal (caudate and putamen combined) and ventral striatum [38]. We also performed exploratory analyses to assess the effect of NPW on R1 in the pituitary and habenula ROIs. The pituitary has high MOR levels [39, 40], is a major source of endorphins (endogenous MOR agonist), and modulates the HPA response during NPW. Increases in pituitary R1 (measured with PET) have been observed in conditions that trigger the release of pituitary hormones [41]. For this purpose, we used T1w (available in FSL) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) maps [42] in the MNI space with 2-mm isotropic resolution to extract anatomical ROIs for the pituitary gland and the nearby internal carotid arteries. The pituitary ROI was centered at (MNI: x = 0 mm, y = 2 mm, z = −32 mm) [43] and expanded to cover nearby areas with high T1w image intensity (63 voxels, 0.50 mL). We used high-intensity areas in the MRA map, adjacent to the pituitary ROI, to create a bilateral internal carotid ROI (666 voxels, 5.33 mL). The pituitary and carotid ROIs had no spatial overlap. The habenula has notably high levels of MOR (medial habenula) [44] and also expresses KOR (lateral habenula) [45], is implicated in aversive states [46] including NPW [20], and modulates DA release [47, 48]. A bilateral habenula ROI was defined based on MNI coordinates defined in the literature [49]. An adjacent control ROI was positioned anterior to the habenula ROI. We tested the effect of NPW on R1 in both bilateral ROIs and corrected for multiple comparisons for these two ROIs (n = 2, p < 0.025). Considering that the volume of the habenula was only a fraction of the spatial resolution of the PET camera, we were unable to distinguish between LHb and medial habenula (the segment implicated in NAL aversion) [20], and our habenula findings should be considered preliminary and interpreted with caution.

Physiological monitoring in OUD

Plasma levels of cortisol and prolactin, cardiovascular measures of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and pulse rate were recorded during SAL and NAL imaging sessions according to procedures described previously [6]. To correct for multiple comparisons across physiological and subjective measures, we applied a familywise false discovery rate of 0.05 [50].

Plasma cortisol and prolactin levels were measured before, and 10, 30, and 60 min after SAL and NAL injection in 9 OUD participants but complete data was only available at 30 and 60 min post-injection. We averaged plasma levels at these later time points and compared the average cortisol and prolactin levels between SAL and NAL conditions.

Electrocardiographic and blood pressure recordings were obtained continuously throughout the NAL and SAL sessions (every 1 min for 20 min and then at 25, 30, 45, and 60 min). We averaged cardiovascular data points across each session and compared the changes in cardiovascular measures between NAL and SAL sessions.

Behavioral monitoring in OUD

Subjective withdrawal experience was measured by self-reports of alertness, anxiety, annoyance, loss of control, depression, distressful thoughts, happiness, mood, restlessness, concentration, desire to use an opiate, optimism, activeness, indifference, irritability, and pain that were scored from 0 for lowest to 10 for highest. These self-reports were obtained 10 min pre (baseline) and 10, 30, and 60 min post-injection in each session (Supplementary Table 1). Additional measures of withdrawal symptoms (e.g., muscle twitches or shivering) were not included here due to their limited variability across participants. The subjective NAL effect was studied by comparing each of the three post-injection data points with the baseline. To estimate an index of NAL aversion, we calculated the first principle component of the (z-scored) changes across any of the subjective measures/time points that showed a significant NAL effect (p < 0.05, uncorrected). This component accounted for 37% of the variance of changes in these subjective measures and was used as an index of NAL aversion (see Supplementary Table 1), where higher component scores were associated with more aversion.

Results

Effects of NPW on striatal DA release

A voxelwise paired t-test showed that NPW significantly increased DA in a cluster including the caudate and putamen of OUD participants, as measured by decreases in [11C]raclopride BPnd (pFWE < 0.05, Fig. 1A, Supplementary Table 2). For this cluster, the mean ± standard deviation of [11C]raclopride BPnd for SAL condition was 1.54 ± 0.21 and for NAL condition was 1.25 ± 0.21. The net increase in striatal DA release (averaged throughout the striatum, see the “Methods” section) was also significant during NPW (p = 0.009, Cohen’s d = 1.05). Follow-up ROI analyses showed significant NPW-induced decreases in BPnd in the dorsal striatal ROI (SAL BPnd: 1.93 ± 0.27, NAL BPnd: 1.73 ± 0.23, p = 0.005) whereas no significant change in BPnd was found in the ventral striatal ROI (SAL BPnd: 1.47 ± 0.26, NAL BPnd: 1.46 ± 0.28, p = 0.79). NPW-induced decreases in BPnd in the dorsal striatal ROI were significantly different from changes in BPnd in the ventral striatal ROI (p = 0.002).

Fig. 1. Naloxone precipitated withdrawal affects dopamine release and relative cerebral blood flow in OUD men.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

A Voxelwise t-test on [11C]racloprideBPnd revealed consistent decreases in NAL compared to SAL (pFWE < 0.05). B Increases in R1 (a surrogate for rCBF) in the NAL compared to SAL (pFWE < 0.05). C, D Index of naloxone aversion (higher component scores indicate more aversion) was significantly associated with net increases in striatal DA-release but not with net increases in striatal rCBF (see the “Methods” section). E Left and right columns show sagittal and axial views of the human brain. First row: T1w map of human brain (0.5-mm isotropic). The yellow arrows point at the pituitary. Second row: magnetic resonance angiography map of human brain (0.5-mm isotropic) [42]. The red arrows point at the internal carotid arteries. Third row: pituitary (yellow) and internal carotid arteries (red) ROIs. Fourth row: map of t-scores for the effect of NPW on R1 (cluster size > 200 voxels). F Increases in pituitary R1 across participants with NAL compared to SAL. G Increases in carotid R1 with NAL compared to SAL. H Increases in plasma cortisol with NAL compared to SAL. I Changes in plasma prolactin with NAL compared to SAL. It was notable that the two OUD participants with hyperprolactinemia showed a large reduction in prolactin with NAL compared to SAL. J Association between net striatal DA-release and increase in pituitary R1. K Association between net striatal DA-release and increase in carotid artery R1. L Association between net striatal DA-release and increase in plasma cortisol level. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.005.

Effects of NPW on rCBF

A voxelwise paired t-test showed that NPW increased R1 (indexing rCBF) in insular and putamen regions (pFWE < 0.05, Fig. 1B, Supplementary Table 3). There was a trend increase in net striatal rCBF (the whole striatum, see the “Methods” section) during NPW (p = 0.06) though changes in the dorsal (p = 0.11) and ventral (p = 0.67) striatal ROIs were not significant. Changes in net striatal DA were not significantly associated with changes in net striatal rCBF (see the “Methods” section) (r(8) = 0.005, p = 0.99).

Effects of NPW on subjective measures of withdrawal

NPW was aversive and resulted in significant increases in self-reports of anxiety, annoyance, and restlessness and decreases in happiness and mood (pFDR < 0.05, Supplementary Table 1). A withdrawal aversion index was calculated using the first principal component of the change in subjective measures that showed a significant NAL effect (see the “Methods” section) where higher component scores were associated with more aversion. The withdrawal aversion index was significantly and positively associated with changes in net striatal DA (r(8) = 0.82, p = 0.0036, Fig. 1C) but not with net changes in striatal rCBF (r(8) = 0.14, p = 0.69, Fig. 1D).

Effects of NPW on peripheral measures

NPW elevated plasma cortisol levels and elevated cardiovascular activity (Fig. 1H, p = 0.003, pFDR < 0.05, Supplementary Fig. 1). Changes in plasma prolactin were not significant (p = 0.07, Fig. 1I). The positive correlation between changes in plasma cortisol and changes in net striatal DA was not significant (r(7) = 0.49, p = 0.15, Fig. 1L).

ROIs analyses of R1

NPW significantly increased R1 in the pituitary (p = 0.0006) and carotid (p = 0.03) ROIs (Fig. 1E–G, see the “Methods” section). Net increases in striatal DA was significantly and positively associated with increases in pituitary R1 (r(8) = 0.78, p = 0.008, Fig. 1J) but significantly and negatively with an increase in carotid R1 (r(8) = −0.71, p = 0.02, Fig. 1K). NPW also increased R1 in the habenula ROI (p < 0.025, see Supplementary Fig. 2 and the section “Methods”).

Discussion

Here we document that NPW in OUD participants was associated with increased DA release in the dorsal but not ventral striatum. Increases in striatal DA release were positively associated with withdrawal aversion and with increases in pituitary R1. The findings implicate DA in the aversive experience of acute opioid withdrawal and in the concomitant activation of the HPA axis. Preclinical studies that have measured DA in the ventral striatum have shown that opioid withdrawal is associated with decreases in DA [10, 21–25, 51–54], whereas some studies have reported increases in DA particularly in the dorsal striatum [27, 55]. We found that NPW increased DA in the dorsal striatum and the effect was significantly different from changes in the ventral striatal DA in OUD participants. However, different from the preclinical literature, we did not observe DA decreases in the ventral striatum, which could reflect differences in experimental procedures or interspecies differences.

DA increases in dorsal but not ventral striatum during NPW

The mechanisms responsible for the DA increases in the dorsal but not ventral striatum during NPW in OUD are unclear and could reflect differences in the effects of NAL on the SNc and VTA. Since NAL is a non-specific antagonist, the regional effect of NAL could be determined by the relative involvement of different opioid receptors in regulating DA neurons and DA release. For example, blockade of KOR (expressed on DA neurons and their terminals) could increase DA release [56, 57]. This effect could be counteracted by MOR blockade which enhances the inhibition of DA neurons (decreases DA release), particularly in the VTA with higher MOR-expressing GABAergic interneurons than SNc [58]. Thus, the less inhibitory effects of MOR blockade in the SNc relative to VTA could account for relative increases in DA release in the dorsal striatum during NPW. In addition, MOR-expressing GABAergic afferents (e.g., from RMTg) interact with midbrain GABAergic interneurons and could lead to MOR antagonist-induced DA release [59]. These mechanisms of DA regulation may have been differently affected in the SNc and VTA by chronic exposure to opioids [60], which could lead to differences in DA release in the dorsal and ventral striatum during NPW. It is noteworthy that dorsal striatal DA increases during NPW were different in the location from the effect of morphine in healthy controls where DA release increased primarily in the ventral striatum [28].

Aversion-related increases in striatal DA

NPW-induced aversion was associated with net increases in striatal DA, such that OUD participants with more aversive withdrawal experiences had more DA increases. In general, DA increases, particularly in the nucleus accumbens of the ventral striatum, have been observed in response to reward and reward expectation (including drugs) [61, 62] but also aversion and stress [63, 64]. In this respect, distinct subgroups of DA neurons with different afferent projections have been implicated in processing of reward and aversion [48]. Specifically, lateral VTA neurons encode reward and receive excitatory inputs from laterodorsal tegmentum and inhibitory inputs from the lateral habenula (LHb) via RMTg [48, 65]. Medial VTA neurons encode aversion and receive glutamatergic inputs from the LHb [48]. Similar to VTA, different subgroups of SNc DA neurons are implicated in aversion and reward [66]. Thus, aversion-related increases in dorsal striatal DA during NPW may be consistent with excitation of dorsolateral SNc DA neurons that project to the dorsal striatum and respond to aversive stimuli [66, 67]. The lateral habenula is a key projecting region to DA neurons and has a major role in the neurocircuitry of aversion with its indirect inhibitory control [47, 68, 69] and direct excitatory control over the VTA and SNc [70, 71]. LHb is also modulated by opioids through KOR [45] and MOR [72]. Interestingly, though preliminary in nature, we documented a significant increase in rCBF in the habenula during NPW (Supplementary Fig. 2) that supports its involvement in acute opioid withdrawal in humans.

NPW effects on striatal function

We found a significant regional increase in R1 in the insula and putamen (Fig. 1B) and a trend increase in net striatal rCBF during NPW. However, the correlation between changes in net striatal DA and net striatal rCBF was not significant. Recent reports also revealed a mismatch between amplitude of striatal DA release and BOLD response (related to blood flow and a marker of brain function) [73]. Together with DA, glutamate and aspartate signaling [74] and GABAergic and cholinergic interneurons [75, 76], are expected to modulate striatal function during NPW. Thus, it is likely that striatal rCBF changes during NPW reflect contributions from multiple neurotransmitters [77].

HPA hyperactivity during NPW

We observed significant increases in plasma cortisol and in pituitary R1 (see the “Methods” section) that were consistent with HPA hyperactivity during NPW [78]. Opioid and DA receptors modulate HPA function [79], for example, MOR is highly expressed in the pituitary [40]. The positive association between increases in pituitary R1 and striatal DA release could reflect concomitant effects of NAL on the pituitary and DA systems [80, 81]. Previous studies have reported positive associations between striatal DA release and cortisol levels during an IV amphetamine challenge (which was generally rewarding) [82] and during an aversive psychological stressor condition [64]. This association was not significant in our study (r(7) = 0.49, p = 0.15) which could reflect the chronic state of stress in OUD [83] or our limited sample size.

Limitations and considerations

In a prior analysis of this dataset [6], the failure to detect striatal DA increase during NPW is likely due to limitations in imaging analysis tools. The old analysis did not rely on alignment of sessions to a common anatomical reference which could have been introduced within and between-subject variability in the hand-drawn ROIs. In addition, the striatal ROIs were large (spanning multiple planes) [6] which may have obscured focal effects within striatal subregions. The present study overcame these limitations by aligning participants’ scans and then transferring the images to a common MNI space to identify striatal and cerebellar ROIs and to assess NPW effects on striatal DA at the voxel level. Different from the old analysis, we used a simplified reference tissue model (see the section “Methods”), which does not rely on arterial input function, an approach that is potentially beneficial for eliminating another source of variability (i.e., measurement errors in arterial input function) in the kinetic modeling of PET data [84]. The main limitation of this study is the small sample size (n = 10). The difficulty of conducting imaging studies in OUD individuals during acute opioid withdrawal did not allow us to expand the sample size. Yet, we showed a significant and relatively large effect of NPW on striatal DA (Cohen’s d = 1.05) that could be clinically meaningful and merits further investigation. However, the behavioral associations with NPW-induced DA release should be interpreted with caution in our small sample. We also cannot ascertain a causal relationship between NPW-induced DA release and withdrawal aversion. Finally, because of the limited PET resolution, ROI analyses in small regions (e.g., habenula) should be considered preliminary.

Conclusion

Preclinical studies have shown increases or decreases in DA release or neuronal activity primarily in the ventral but also dorsal striatum in response to aversion and reward [59, 61, 63, 85, 86]. In humans, brain imaging studies have reported different BOLD activation in the dorsal and ventral striatum with aversive and rewarding stimuli [63, 87–89]. Other than a prior study showing that psychological stress increased striatal DA release in the human ventral striatum [64], our findings are the first to document in humans that a drug-induced aversive and stressful state was associated with DA increases in the dorsal striatum. We also showed that the striatal DA increases were associated with the severity of opioid withdrawal experience. These observations support the contribution of DA to opioid-related aversion and could be relevant for the development of treatments for OUD [90, 91].

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information (187KB, docx)

Acknowledgements

We thank Christopher Wong for assistance with behavioral and imaging data. We thank memebers of Laboratory of Neuroimaging at the NIAAA for their support.

Author contributions

ES-K and NDV designed the study, interpreted the data, and wrote the manuscript. ES-K performed the analyses. NDV and G-JW collected the data. All authors commented on the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by NIAAA intramural research program (Grant Y1AA3009). Open Access funding provided by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Data availability

Most data are included in the manuscript and supplementary information and are availabe upon request.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Ehsan Shokri-Kojori, Email: ehsan.shokrikojori@nih.gov.

Nora D. Volkow, Email: nvolkow@nida.nih.gov

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41398-021-01548-8.

References

  • 1.Cox B.M. Opioid Receptor-G Protein Interactions: Acute and Chronic Effects of Opioids. In: Herz A., Akil H., Simon E.J. (eds) Opioids. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, vol 104 / 1. Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 1993, pp 145–188, 10.1007/978-3-642-77460-7_8.
  • 2.Merrer JL, Becker JAJ, Befort K, Kieffer BL. Reward processing by the opioid system in the brain. Physiol Rev. 2009;89:1379–412. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00005.2009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Pignatelli M, Bonci A. Role of dopamine neurons in reward and aversion: a synaptic plasticity perspective. Neuron. 2015;86:1145–57. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.04.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Volkow ND, Wise RA, Baler R. The dopamine motive system: implications for drug and food addiction. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2017;18:741–52. doi: 10.1038/nrn.2017.130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Volkow N, Fowler J, Wang G, Baler R, Telang F. Imaging dopamine’s role in drug abuse and addiction. Neuropharmacology. 2009;56:3–8. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2008.05.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Wang G-J, Volkow ND, Fowler JS, Logan J, Abumrad NN, Hitzemann RJ, et al. Dopamine D2 receptor availability in opiate-dependent subjects before and after naloxone-precipitated withdrawal. Neuropsychopharmacology. 1997;16:174–82. doi: 10.1016/S0893-133X(96)00184-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Martinez D, Saccone PA, Liu F, Slifstein M, Orlowska D, Grassetti A, et al. Deficits in dopamine D2 receptors and presynaptic dopamine in heroin dependence: commonalities and differences with other types of addiction. Biol Psychiatry. 2012;71:192–8. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.08.024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Devine DP, Leone P, Pocock D, Wise R. Differential involvement of ventral tegmental mu, delta and kappa opioid receptors in modulation of basal mesolimbic dopamine release: in vivo microdialysis studies. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1993;266:1236–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Chefer VI, Bäckman CM, Gigante ED, Shippenberg TS. Kappa opioid receptors on dopaminergic neurons are necessary for Kappa-mediated place aversion. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013;38:2623–31. doi: 10.1038/npp.2013.171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Spanagel R, Almeida OF, Bartl C, Shippenberg TS. Endogenous κ-opioid systems in opiate withdrawal: role in aversion and accompanying changes in mesolimbic dopamine release. Psychopharmacology. 1994;115:121–7. doi: 10.1007/BF02244761. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Nazzaro J, Seeger T, Gardner E. Morphine differentially affects ventral tegmental and substantia nigra brain reward thresholds. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1981;14:325–31. doi: 10.1016/0091-3057(81)90398-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Samuels ER, Szabadi E. Functional neuroanatomy of the noradrenergic locus coeruleus: its roles in the regulation of arousal and autonomic function part I: principles of functional organisation. Curr Neuropharmacol. 2008;6:235–53. doi: 10.2174/157015908785777229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Kosten TR, George TP. The neurobiology of opioid dependence: implications for treatment. Sci Pract Perspect. 2002;1:13–20. doi: 10.1151/spp021113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Rasmussen K. Afferent effects on locus coeruleus in opiate withdrawal. Prog Brain Res. 1991;88:207–16. doi: 10.1016/s0079-6123(08)63810-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Zhou Y, Leri F, Ho A, Kreek MJ. Suppression of hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis by acute heroin challenge in rats during acute and chronic withdrawal from chronic heroin administration. Neurochem Res. 2013;38:1850–60. doi: 10.1007/s11064-013-1091-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Wang D, Sun X, Sadee W. Different effects of opioid antagonists on μ-, δ-, and κ-opioid receptors with and without agonist pretreatment. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2007;321:544–52. doi: 10.1124/jpet.106.118810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Raynor K, Kong H, Chen Y, Yasuda K, Yu L, Bell GI, et al. Pharmacological characterization of the cloned kappa-, delta-, and mu-opioid receptors. Mol Pharmacol. 1994;45:330–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Shaw LV, Moe J, Purssell R, Buxton JA, Godwin J, Doyle-Waters MM, et al. Naloxone interventions in opioid overdoses: a systematic review protocol. Syst Rev. 2019;8:1–9. doi: 10.1186/s13643-019-1048-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Caron MG, Beaulieu M, Raymond V, Gagné B, Drouin J, Lefkowitz RJ, et al. Dopaminergic receptors in the anterior pituitary gland. Correlation of [3H] dihydroergocryptine binding with the dopaminergic control of prolactin release. J Biol Chem. 1978;253:2244–53. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Boulos LJ, Ben Hamida S, Bailly J, Maitra M, Ehrlich AT, Gavériaux-Ruff C, et al. Mu opioid receptors in the medial habenula contribute to naloxone aversion. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2020;45:247–55. doi: 10.1038/s41386-019-0395-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Acquas E, Carboni E, Di Chiara G. Profound depression of mesolimbic dopamine release after morphine withdrawal in dependent rats. Eur J Pharm. 1991;193:133–4. doi: 10.1016/0014-2999(91)90214-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Pothos E, Rada P, Mark GP, Hoebel BG. Dopamine microdialysis in the nucleus accumbens during acute and chronic morphine, naloxone-precipitated withdrawal and clonidine treatment. Brain Res. 1991;566:348–50. doi: 10.1016/0006-8993(91)91724-f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Rossetti ZL, Hmaidan Y, Gessa GL. Marked inhibition of mesolimbic dopamine release: a common feature of ethanol, morphine, cocaine and amphetamine abstinence in rats. Eur J Pharm. 1992;221:227–34. doi: 10.1016/0014-2999(92)90706-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Zhou Q, Nyberg F. Injection of substance P (SP) N-terminal fragment SP(1-7) into the ventral tegmental area modulates the levels of nucleus accumbens dopamine and dihydroxyphenylacetic acid in male rats during morphine withdrawal. Neurosci Lett. 2002;320:117–20. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3940(01)02564-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Stella L, De Novellis V, Vitelli MR, Capuano A, Mazzeo F, Berrino L, et al. Interactive role of adenosine and dopamine in the opiate withdrawal syndrome. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Arch Pharmacol. 2003;368:113–8. doi: 10.1007/s00210-003-0773-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Silverstone PH, Done C, Sharp T. In vivo monoamine release during naloxone-precipitated morphine withdrawal. Neuroreport. 1993;4:1043–5. doi: 10.1097/00001756-199308000-00012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Iwamoto E, Ho I, Way EL. Elevation of brain dopamine during naloxone-precipitated withdrawal in morphine-dependent mice and rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1973;187:558–67. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Spagnolo PA, Kimes A, Schwandt ML, Shokri-Kojori E, Thada S, Phillips KA, et al. Striatal dopamine release in response to morphine: a [11C]-raclopride positron emission tomography study in healthy men. Biol Psychiatry. 2019;86:356–364. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2019.03.965. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Jenkinson M, Beckmann CF, Behrens TEJ, Woolrich MW, Smith SM. FSL. NeuroImage. 2012;62:782–90. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Cox RW. AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. Comput Biomed Res. 1996;29:162–73. doi: 10.1006/cbmr.1996.0014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Wu Y, Carson RE. Noise reduction in the simplified reference tissue model for neuroreceptor functional imaging. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002;22:1440–52. doi: 10.1097/01.WCB.0000033967.83623.34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Meyer PT, Hellwig S, Amtage F, Rottenburger C, Sahm U, Reuland P, et al. Dual-biomarker imaging of regional cerebral amyloid load and neuronal activity in dementia with PET and 11C-labeled Pittsburgh compound B. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:393–400. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.110.083683. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Chen YJ, Rosario BL, Mowrey W, Laymon CM, Lu X, Lopez OL, et al. Relative 11C-PiB delivery as a proxy of relative CBF: quantitative evaluation using single-session 15O-water and 11C-PiB PET. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1199–205. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.114.152405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Bilgel M, Beason-Held L, An Y, Zhou Y, Wong DF, Resnick SM. Longitudinal evaluation of surrogates of regional cerebral blood flow computed from dynamic amyloid PET imaging. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2020;40:288–97. doi: 10.1177/0271678X19830537. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Stokes PR, Egerton A, Watson B, Reid A, Breen G, Lingford-Hughes A, et al. Significant decreases in frontal and temporal [11C]-raclopride binding after THC challenge. NeuroImage. 2010;52:1521–7. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.04.274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Friston KJ, Holmes AP, Poline JB, Grasby PJ, Williams SC, Frackowiak RS, et al. Analysis of fMRI time-series revisited. NeuroImage. 1995;2:45–53. doi: 10.1006/nimg.1995.1007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Poline J-B, Worsley KJ, Evans AC, Friston KJ. Combining spatial extent and peak intensity to test for activations in functional imaging. Neuroimage. 1997;5:83–96. doi: 10.1006/nimg.1996.0248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Tziortzi AC, Haber SN, Searle GE, Tsoumpas C, Long CJ, Shotbolt P, et al. Connectivity-based functional analysis of dopamine release in the striatum using diffusion-weighted MRI and positron emission tomography. Cereb Cortex. 2014;24:1165–77. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhs397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Smith YR, Zubieta JK, del Carmen MG, Dannals RF, Ravert HT, Zacur HA, et al. Brain opioid receptor measurements by positron emission tomography in normal cycling women: relationship to luteinizing hormone pulsatility and gonadal steroid hormones 1. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1998;83:4498–505. doi: 10.1210/jcem.83.12.5351. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Cumming P, Marton J, Lilius TO, Olberg DE, Rominger A. A survey of molecular imaging of opioid receptors. Molecules. 2019;24:4190.. doi: 10.3390/molecules24224190. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Huynh HK, Willemsen ATM, Holstege G. Female orgasm but not male ejaculation activates the pituitary. A PET-neuro-imaging study. NeuroImage. 2013;76:178–82. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.03.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Mouches P, Forkert ND. A statistical atlas of cerebral arteries generated using multi-center MRA datasets from healthy subjects. Sci Data. 2019;6:29. doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0034-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Rucker P, Ikuta T. Pituitary gland functional connectivity and BMI. Front Neurosci. 2019;13:120. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2019.00120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Gardon O, Faget L, Chu Sin Chung P, Matifas A, Massotte D, Kieffer BL. Expression of mu opioid receptor in dorsal diencephalic conduction system: new insights for the medial habenula. Neuroscience. 2014;277:595–609. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2014.07.053. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Chen C, Willhouse AH, Huang P, Ko N, Wang Y, Xu B, et al. Characterization of a knock-in mouse line expressing a fusion protein of κ opioid receptor conjugated with tdTomato: 3-dimensional brain imaging via CLARITY. eNeuro 2020; 7: ENEURO.0028-0020.2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 46.Lazaridis I, Tzortzi O, Weglage M, Märtin A, Xuan Y, Parent M, et al. A hypothalamus-habenula circuit controls aversion. Mol Psychiatry. 2019;24:1351–68. doi: 10.1038/s41380-019-0369-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Christoph GR, Leonzio RJ, Wilcox KS. Stimulation of the lateral habenula inhibits dopamine-containing neurons in the substantia nigra and ventral tegmental area of the rat. J Neurosci. 1986;6:613–9. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.06-03-00613.1986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Lammel S, Lim BK, Ran C, Huang KW, Betley MJ, Tye KM, et al. Input-specific control of reward and aversion in the ventral tegmental area. Nature. 2012;491:212–7. doi: 10.1038/nature11527. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Lawson RP, Drevets WC, Roiser JP. Defining the habenula in human neuroimaging studies. Neuroimage. 2013;64:722–7. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.08.076. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc: Ser B. 1995;57:289–300. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Tjon GH, De Vries TJ, Ronken E, Hogenboom F, Wardeh G, Mulder AH, et al. Repeated and chronic morphine administration causes differential long-lasting changes in dopaminergic neurotransmission in rat striatum without changing its δ- and κ-opioid receptor regulation. Eur J Pharmacol. 1994;252:205–12. doi: 10.1016/0014-2999(94)90598-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Grasing K, Ghosh S. Selegiline prevents long-term changes in dopamine efflux and stress immobility during the second and third weeks of abstinence following opiate withdrawal. Neuropharmacology. 1998;37:1007–17. doi: 10.1016/s0028-3908(98)00093-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Erhardt A, Sillaber I, Welt T, Müller MB, Singewald N, Keck ME. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation increases the release of dopamine in the nucleus accumbens shell of morphine-sensitized rats during abstinence. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2004;29:2074–80. doi: 10.1038/sj.npp.1300493. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Bland ST, Hutchinson MR, Maier SF, Watkins LR, Johnson KW. The glial activation inhibitor AV411 reduces morphine-induced nucleus accumbens dopamine release. Brain Behav Immun. 2009;23:492–7. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2009.01.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Maruyama Y, Takemori AE. The role of dopamine and norepinephrine in the naloxone-induced abstinence of morphine-dependent mice. J Pharm Exp Ther. 1973;185:602–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Spanagel R, Herz A, Shippenberg TS. Opposing tonically active endogenous opioid systems modulate the mesolimbic dopaminergic pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1992;89:2046–50. doi: 10.1073/pnas.89.6.2046. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Van't Veer A, Bechtholt AJ, Onvani S, Potter D, Wang Y, Liu-Chen LY, et al. Ablation of Kappa-opioid receptors from brain dopamine neurons has anxiolytic-like effects and enhances cocaine-induced plasticity. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013;38:1585–97. doi: 10.1038/npp.2013.58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Margolis EB, Toy B, Himmels P, Morales M, Fields HL. Identification of rat ventral tegmental area GABAergic neurons. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e42365.. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042365. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Devine DP, Leone P, Wise RA. Mesolimbic dopamine neurotransmission is increased by administration of μ-opioid receptor antagonists. Eur J Pharmacol. 1993;243:55–64. doi: 10.1016/0014-2999(93)90167-g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Williams JT, Christie MJ, Manzoni O. Cellular and synaptic adaptations mediating opioid dependence. Physiol Rev. 2001;81:299–343. doi: 10.1152/physrev.2001.81.1.299. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Fields HL, Margolis EB. Understanding opioid reward. Trends Neurosci. 2015;38:217–25. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2015.01.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Berridge KC. The debate over dopamine’s role in reward: the case for incentive salience. Psychopharmacology. 2007;191:391–431. doi: 10.1007/s00213-006-0578-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Salamone JD, Correa M. The mysterious motivational functions of mesolimbic dopamine. Neuron. 2012;76:470–85. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.10.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Pruessner JC, Champagne F, Meaney MJ, Dagher A. Dopamine release in response to a psychological stress in humans and its relationship to early life maternal care: a positron emission tomography study using [11C] raclopride. J Neurosci. 2004;24:2825–31. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3422-03.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Steidl S, Wang H, Ordonez M, Zhang S, Morales M. Optogenetic excitation in the ventral tegmental area of glutamatergic or cholinergic inputs from the laterodorsal tegmental area drives reward. Eur J Neurosci. 2017;45:559–71. doi: 10.1111/ejn.13436. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Matsumoto M, Hikosaka O. Two types of dopamine neuron distinctly convey positive and negative motivational signals. Nature. 2009;459:837–41. doi: 10.1038/nature08028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Pauli WM, Larsen T, Collette S, Tyszka JM, Seymour B, O'Doherty JP. Distinct contributions of ventromedial and dorsolateral subregions of the human substantia nigra to appetitive and aversive learning. J Neurosci. 2015;35:14220–33. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2277-15.2015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Brown PL, Palacorolla H, Brady D, Riegger K, Elmer GI, Shepard PD. Habenula-induced inhibition of midbrain dopamine neurons is diminished by lesions of the rostromedial tegmental nucleus. J Neurosci. 2017;37:217–25. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1353-16.2016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Matsumoto M, Hikosaka O. Lateral habenula as a source of negative reward signals in dopamine neurons. Nature. 2007;447:1111–5. doi: 10.1038/nature05860. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Brown PL, Shepard PD. Functional evidence for a direct excitatory projection from the lateral habenula to the ventral tegmental area in the rat. J Neurophysiol. 2016;116:1161–74. doi: 10.1152/jn.00305.2016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Namboodiri VMK, Rodriguez-Romaguera J, Stuber GD. The habenula. Curr Biol. 2016;26:R873–R877. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.08.051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Margolis EB, Fields HL. Mu opioid receptor actions in the lateral habenula. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0159097.. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159097. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Li N, Jasanoff A. Local and global consequences of reward-evoked striatal dopamine release. Nature. 2020;580:239–44. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2158-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Sepulveda MJ, Hernandez L, Rada P, Tucci S, Contreras E. Effect of precipitated withdrawal on extracellular glutamate and aspartate in the nucleus accumbens of chronically morphine-treated rats: an in vivo microdialysis study. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1998;60:255–62. doi: 10.1016/s0091-3057(97)00550-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Chieng B, Williams JT. Increased opioid inhibition of GABA release in nucleus accumbens during morphine withdrawal. J Neurosci. 1998;18:7033–9. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-17-07033.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Neugebauer NM, Einstein EB, Lopez MB, McClure-Begley TD, Mineur YS, Picciotto MR. Morphine dependence and withdrawal induced changes in cholinergic signaling. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2013;109:77–83. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2013.04.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Lorenz RC, Gleich T, Buchert R, Schlagenhauf F, Kühn S, Gallinat J. Interactions between glutamate, dopamine, and the neuronal signature of response inhibition in the human striatum. Hum Brain Mapp. 2015;36:4031–40. doi: 10.1002/hbm.22895. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Zhang G-F, Ren YP, Sheng LX, Chi Y, Du WJ, Guo S, et al. Dysfunction of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis in opioid dependent subjects: effects of acute and protracted abstinence. Am J Drug Alcohol Abus. 2008;34:760–8. doi: 10.1080/00952990802385781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Adamson W, Windh R, Blackford S, Kuhn C. Ontogeny of μ-and κ-opiate receptor control of the hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal axis in rats. Endocrinology. 1991;129:959–64. doi: 10.1210/endo-129-2-959. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Wand GS, Weerts EM, Kuwabara H, Frost JJ, Xu X, McCaul ME. Naloxone-induced cortisol predicts mu opioid receptor binding potential in specific brain regions of healthy subjects. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2011;36:1453–9. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2011.03.019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Wand GS, Weerts EM, Kuwabara H, Wong DF, Xu X, McCaul ME. The relationship between naloxone‐induced cortisol and delta opioid receptor availability in mesolimbic structures is disrupted in alcohol‐dependent subjects. Addict Biol. 2013;18:181–92. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-1600.2011.00430.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Oswald LM, Wong DF, McCaul M, Zhou Y, Kuwabara H, Choi L, et al. Relationships among ventral striatal dopamine release, cortisol secretion, and subjective responses to amphetamine. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2005;30:821–32. doi: 10.1038/sj.npp.1300667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Yang J, Li J, Xu G, Zhang J, Chen Z, Lu Z, et al. Elevated hair cortisol levels among heroin addicts on current methadone maintenance compared to controls. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0150729. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150729. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Lammertsma AA, Bench CJ, Hume SP, Osman S, Gunn K, Brooks DJ, et al. Comparison of methods for analysis of clinical [11C] raclopride studies. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1996;16:42–52. doi: 10.1097/00004647-199601000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Shippenburg T, Bals-Kubik R. Involvement of the mesolimbic dopamine system in mediating the aversive effects of opioid antagonists in the rat. Behav Pharmacol. 1995;6:99–106. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Steidl S, Wasserman DI, Blaha CD, Yeomans JS. Opioid-induced rewards, locomotion, and dopamine activation: a proposed model for control by mesopontine and rostromedial tegmental neurons. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017;83:72–82. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.09.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Delgado MR, Jou RL, Phelps EA. Neural systems underlying aversive conditioning in humans with primary and secondary reinforcers. Front Neurosci. 2011;5:71–71. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2011.00071. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Baliki MN, Geha PY, Fields HL, Apkarian AV. Predicting value of pain and analgesia: nucleus accumbens response to noxious stimuli changes in the presence of chronic pain. Neuron. 2010;66:149–60. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.03.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Delgado MR, Nystrom LE, Fissell C, Noll DC, Fiez JA. Tracking the Hemodynamic Responses To Reward And Punishment In The Striatum. J Neurophysiol. 2000;84:3072–7. doi: 10.1152/jn.2000.84.6.3072. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Mahoney JJ, III, Haut MW, Hodder SL, Zheng W, Lander LR, Berry JH, et al. Deep brain stimulation of the nucleus accumbens/ventral capsule for severe and intractable opioid and benzodiazepine use disorder. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2021;29:210–5. doi: 10.1037/pha0000453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Karkalas J, Lal H. A comparison of haloperidol with methadone in blocking heroin-withdrawal symptoms. Int Pharmacopsychiatry. 1973;8:248–51. doi: 10.1159/000468001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Information (187KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

Most data are included in the manuscript and supplementary information and are availabe upon request.

Articles from Translational Psychiatry are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES