Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Dopamine and antipsychotic drug action revisited

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

H. M. Jones
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
L. S. Pilowsky
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Corresponding
E-mail address:
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Image of the first page of this article
Type
Editorial
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2002 

The key event in the initiation of pharmacological responses is the formation of a complex between the ligand (or drug or molecule) and its site of action (Reference Taylor, Insel, Pratt and TaylorTaylor & Insel, 1990). Competitive binding experiments ascertain how specific the interaction is between a ligand and its binding site by examining the ability of various compounds to compete with a radiolabelled reference probe for the site. The more potently a drug binds to the receptor, the more effective it is at competing for labelled sites. The greater the potency a drug has for the receptor, the lower the concentration required before all available receptor sites are occupied or blocked. This affinity (termed K d or K i) for the receptor is quantified in test-tube experiments and is a function of the rate of drug association and dissociation from the receptor. It is empirically measured as the concentration of drug required to block half the total receptor population. High-affinity drugs have low K d values. These drugs are better at ‘occupying’ receptors. In living animals, including humans, receptor occupancy by drugs is also determined by the rate of association and dissociation of the drug from the receptors, the concentration of drug at the receptor and the concentration of endogenous neurotransmitter at the receptor (Reference StrangeStrange, 2001). Rehearsing these dry pharmacological concepts is important to our understanding of antipsychotic drug action, in particular how dopamine is the ‘comeback kid’ for hypotheses of antipsychotic drug action, a lead candidate for antipsychotic drug discovery and relevant to the modern clinical management of schizophrenia. Here we shall discuss the dopamine hypothesis of drug action, review studies that have refined understanding of its relevance, and attempt to synthesise the current view with respect to clinical management.

DOPAMINERGIC PATHWAYS AND RECEPTOR PHYSIOLOGY

Dopamine is one of the principal modulatory neurotransmitters in the brain. Dopamine systems arise from two primary midbrain clusters, the ventral tegmental area (A10) and the substantia nigra (A9), which have discrete projections to mesolimbic, mesocortical and striatal regions of the brain. A separate tuberoinfundibular pathway runs from hypothalamic neurons to the pituitary gland. The dopamine receptor family separates into two major subtypes: D1-like (D1 and D5) and D2-like (D2, D3, D4). Variants of the dopamine receptors exist with different DNA and amino acid sequences. Receptor cloning has identified two isoforms of the D2 receptor (D2short and D2long), which are differentially localised in the brain. The neurochemical anatomy of dopamine differs in cortical and striatal regions, and it now appears that dopamine concentration, receptor regulation and D2-like receptor subtype density vary greatly between striatal and extrastriatal regions (Reference Lidow, Williams and Goldman-RakicLidow et al, 1998; Reference StrangeStrange, 2001). Antipsychotic drugs are thought to achieve their main effects (both beneficial and unwanted) by acting on D2 receptors.

DOPAMINE RECEPTORS AND ANTIPSYCHOTIC DRUG ACTION

The D2 receptor blockade hypothesis

Without exception, effective antipsychotic drugs have at least some degree of antagonism of the dopamine D2 receptors. The observation that antipsychotic drug affinity for the D2 receptor and the average daily dose required to control symptoms were directly correlated (Reference Peroutka and SnyderPeroutka & Snyder, 1980) led to confirmation that it was a major site of action of antipsychotic drugs (Reference Creese, Burt and SnyderCreese et al, 1976; Reference Seeman, Lee and Chau-WongSeeman et al, 1976; Reference Johnstone, Crow and FrithJohnstone et al, 1978). These findings rationalised clinical observation and practice at the time. Efforts to treat partially or poorly responsive patients revolved around ‘mega-dose’ antipsychotic therapy, although many contemporaneous papers questioned the usefulness of this approach (Reference Baldessarini, Katz and CottonBaldessarini et al, 1984; Reference Van Putten and MarderVan Putten & Marder, 1986). More D2 receptor blockade was better, the theory went, and concomitant movement disorder (secondary to striatal D2 receptor blockade) and hyperprolactinaemia (secondary to pituitary D2 blockade) were an inevitable, if unfortunate, corollary of treatment.

Re-evaluation of the dopamine hypothesis of antipsychotic drug action

In the 1980s and 1990s the simple understanding that dopamine D2 receptor blockade was linearly related to clinical response was reversed (as is so often the case in schizophrenia research) by powerful new research tools, which forced the re-evaluation of the role of D2 receptors in antipsychotic drug action. These included receptor imaging in vivo with positron and single photon emission tomography (PET and SPET). One PET study showed that up to 12 different typical antipsychotic drugs had 65-85% occupancy at D2 receptors in living patients (Reference Farde, Wiesel and NordstromFarde et al, 1989). Subsequent studies revealed that the degree of D2 receptor occupancy was directly correlated with the dose (or plasma level) of traditional antipsychotic drugs; but did D2 receptor occupancy also correlate with clinical benefit?

Chinks in the ‘dopamine hypothesis’ armour appeared with the clear demonstration that some patients taking therapeutic doses of typical antipsychotic drugs not only failed to benefit from the treatment, but also had levels of central D2 receptor blockade in excess of 90% (Reference Wolkin, Barouche and WolfWolkin et al, 1989; Reference Pilowsky, Costa and EllPilowsky et al, 1993). This finding obviated pharmacokinetic explanations that poor clinical effect was the result of low brain penetration or increased wash-out of typical antipsychotic drugs in treatment-resistant individuals. Indeed, some patients who responded well to treatment showed remarkably low levels of D2 receptor blockade (Reference Pilowsky, Costa and EllPilowsky et al, 1993). These data contributed greatly to the consensus that high-dosage antipsychotic treatment was, in the main, unhelpful in the treatment of poorly responsive schizophrenia (Reference ThompsonThompson, 1994). Finally, clozapine, a therapeutically superior antipsychotic drug without extrapyramidal side-effects (and modest affinity for D2 receptors in vitro) had consistently low levels of D2 receptor blockade (ranging from 20% to 60%) in association with excellent clinical response, even in patients previously poorly responsive to standard or high-dosage typical antipsychotic drug therapy (Reference Pilowsky, Costa and EllPilowsky et al, 1992).

This evidence prompted a careful reinterpretation of the importance of D2 receptor blockade to therapeutic efficacy. Other receptor systems were probed as potential sites of antipsychotic drug action, and a call was made to abandon preconceived ideas of particular neurochemical profiles determining atypical drug activity until potential sites for drug discovery were better understood (Reference KerwinKerwin, 1994). Simple behavioural or clinical definitions of atypicality (low or no extrapyramidal symptoms or hyperprolactinaemia at therapeutically relevant doses) would preserve an open field for novel therapeutic targets. Most notable of these was the 5-hydroxytryptamine type 2 (5-HT2) receptor subclass. Meltzer et al (Reference Meltzer, Matsubara and Lee1989) proposed, on the basis of drug affinity data, that the ratio of 5-HT2A to D2 receptor affinities was the major determinant of a drug's likelihood to behave as an atypical antipsychotic. Studies using PET and SPET found that many atypical antipsychotic drugs, including clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone and quetiapine, shared a strikingly high degree of 5-HT2A receptor occupancy (> 90%) over their entire dose range (Reference Nordstrom, Farde and HalldinNordstrom et al, 1993a ; Reference Nyberg, Farde and ErikssonNyberg et al, 1993; Reference Travis, Busatto and PilowskyTravis et al, 1998; Reference Kapur, Zipursky and RemingtonKapur et al, 1999; Reference Jones, Travis and MulliganJones et al, 2001). This is unsurprising given that olanzapine, risperidone and quetiapine were developed on the basis of their high 5-HT2A: D2 receptor affinity profiles. It appears from the results of further studies (particularly the failure of pure 5-HT2A antagonists to show striking therapeutic effects) that 5-HT2A receptor occupancy alone is unlikely to be sufficient to determine clinical efficacy for antipsychotic drugs (Reference Kapur, Zipursky and RemingtonKapur et al, 1999).

The central primacy of dopamine to antipsychotic action

The notion that D2 receptor occupancy was central to therapeutic response never really went away. Compounds that lack even modest activity at these sites are therapeutically inactive. Nordstrom et al (Reference Nordstrom, Farde and Weisel1993b ) and later Kapur et al (Reference Kapur, Zipursky and Jones2000a ) showed that symptom reduction and side-effect induction could be fitted to a threshold model of striatal D2 receptor occupancy (at least in acutely relapsed patients and excluding excellent responders and treatment-resistant cases). In one study of 22 patients (5 women and 17 men) with first-episode schizophrenia, Kapur et al (Reference Kapur, Zipursky and Jones2000a ) demonstrated that striatal D2 receptor occupancy values exceeding approximately 65% predicted clinical benefit, values exceeding 72% predicted hyperprolactinaemia, and values exceeding 78% predicted motor side-effects. For the clinician, maintaining patients within a therapeutic window of 7-15% D2 receptor occupancy is not straightforward, especially when prescribing haloperidol, since doses as low as 2.5 mg of this drug result in a wide variation in striatal D2/D3 receptor occupancy (38-87%).

Furthermore, individual responses to similar degrees of D2 receptor occupancy may vary, based on other as yet undefined pharmacogenetic characteristics and on the individual's underlying dopaminergic tone (Reference Laruelle, Abi-Dargham and Van-DyckLaruelle et al, 1996). It is pertinent to this point that hyperprolactinaemia occurred in 80% (4 out of 5) of the women and 24% (4 out of 17) of the men in the study by Kapur et al (Reference Kapur, Zipursky and Jones2000a ) despite similar levels of D2 receptor occupancy. Melkersson et al (Reference Melkersson, Hulting and Rane2000) reported that in a group of patients receiving long-term typical antipsychotic therapy, the women developed symptomatic hyperprolactinaemia at half the chlorpromazine equivalent dose of that in men (approximately 250 mg chlorpromazine equivalents).

Dopamine transmission is abnormal in schizophrenia

Post-mortem studies of D2 receptors in schizophrenia were crucial to the genesis of the dopamine hypothesis. Increased striatal D2 receptor density was reported by some authors (Reference Lee and SeemanLee & Seeman, 1980; Reference Mackay, Iversen and RossorMackay et al, 1982), but these findings were questioned on the basis that the data were obtained by studying antipsychotic-treated patients. Classical antipsychotic therapy could, in itself, cause D2 receptor upregulation (Reference Clow, Theodoru and JennerClow et al, 1980). Imaging studies using PET and SPET could control for this confound by studying never-treated people with schizophrenia. These studies did not, on the whole, support increased striatal D2 receptor density in schizophrenia (Reference Farde, Wiesel and Stone-ElanderFarde et al, 1990; Reference Martinot, Peron-Magnan and HuretMartinot et al, 1990; Reference Pilowsky, Costa and EllPilowsky et al, 1994), although the possibility that endogenous dopamine concentration was abnormal (Reference Mackay, Iversen and RossorMackay et al, 1982; Reference ReynoldsReynolds, 1983) remained untested in vivo. Support for the central importance of dopaminergic antagonism in antipsychotic efficacy eventually came from [123I]-iodobenzamide SPET data suggesting that dopamine transmission was indeed disrupted in schizophrenia. Using dynamic challenge paradigms, Laruelle et al (Reference Laruelle, Abi-Dargham and Van-Dyck1996) demonstrated an aberrant response in people with schizophrenia to a drug that elevated dopamine levels. Following administration of amphetamine, mean occupancy of striatal D2 receptors by amphetamine-stimulated endogenous dopamine release was approximately doubled in the patient group compared with the control group. This effect was more striking in the more acutely ill patients, although findings in many patients overlapped with those in controls. These data, replicated using a different PET technique (Reference Breier, Su and SaundersBreier et al, 1997), provided concrete proof of disturbed dopamine control, at least in some people with schizophrenia. Drawing on these and other data, Moore et al (Reference Moore, West and Grace1999) have thoughtfully argued that overactive phasic dopamine transmission in limbic regions (including the amygdala and nucleus accumbens) could account for misinterpretation of innocuous external stimuli (resulting in delusions) and improper filtering of perceptions (causing hallucinations). Blockade of D2 receptors in these regions would help control the positive symptoms of schizophrenia. In cortical (especially frontal and prefrontal cortical) regions, these authors propose that tonic dopamine transmission is relatively underactive, resulting in disrupted executive function, poverty of thought, speech and action, and low motivation. Antipsychotic occupancy of D2 receptors in these regions would worsen these negative features. This attractively parsimonious model synthesises available data and meshes with the finding that atypical antipsychotic drugs (particularly clozapine and quetiapine) exhibit cortically selective D2 receptor occupancy (primarily temporal cortex, including amygdala and hippocampus) at clinically useful doses in vivo (Reference Pilowsky, Mulligan and ActonPilowsky et al, 1997; Reference Lidow, Williams and Goldman-RakicLidow et al, 1998; Reference Meltzer, Park and KesslerMeltzer et al, 1999; Reference Stephenson, Bigliani and JonesStephenson et al, 2000; Reference Xiberas, Martinot and MalletXiberas et al, 2001). This effect is not seen for standard doses of typical antipsychotic drugs (Reference Bigliani, Mulligan and ActonBigliani et al, 1999). Importantly, drugs with modest affinity for D2 receptors exhibit this effect robustly across their whole dose range, whereas atypical drugs with higher affinity for the D2 receptor (e.g. risperidone) display dose-dependent limbic selectivity (Reference Xiberas, Martinot and MalletXiberas et al, 2001; Reference Bressan, Erlandsson and JonesBressan et al, 2003; Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Preferentially high occupancy of dopamine D2/D3 receptors in the thalamus and temporal cortex by risperidone in a patient treated with risperidone (dose <4 mg) compared with a healthy volunteer (see Reference Bressan, Erlandsson and JonesBressan et al, 2003). (a, b) Normal volunteer: (a) striatum and thalamus, (b) temporal cortex and cerebellum. (c, d) Patient treated with risperidone: (c) striatum and thalamus, (d) temporal cortex and cerebellum.

These data could not be replicated by Talvik et al (Reference Talvik, Nordstrom and Nyberg2001), and full in vivo PET or SPET confirmation awaits further study. Nevertheless, regionally selective dopaminergic action of atypical antipsychotic drugs is supported by both electrophysiological and animal studies (Reference Lidow, Williams and Goldman-RakicLidow et al, 1998; Reference StrangeStrange, 2001).

How much D2 blockade is too much?

The advent of antipsychotic drugs with very low affinity for dopamine D2 receptors (most notably clozapine and quetiapine) begged the question whether D2 receptor blockade was invariably required for antipsychotic efficacy. Imaging studies using PET reveal that striatal D2 receptor occupancy by these drugs changes considerably over a 24 h period, even in steady state (Reference Gefvert, Bergstrom and LangstromGefvert et al, 1998; Reference Kapur, Zipursky and JonesKapur et al, 2000b ). Consideration of the D2 receptor affinity and occupancy data relating to typical and atypical antipsychotic drugs led Kapur & Seeman (Reference Kapur and Seeman2001) to conclude that owing to low affinity for the D2 receptor (driven, as these authors see it, by fast dissociation ‘off’ the receptor) clozapine and quetiapine exhibit transiently high D2 receptor occupancy (not exceeding the threshold required to induce adverse movement or hormonal side-effects), which declines to very low levels over a 24 h period. This suggests that low-affinity drugs, with modest effects at D2 receptors, may antagonise the system in a manner that preserves physiologically responsive endogenous dopamine transmission across a wide dose range (Reference Kapur, Zipursky and JonesKapur et al, 2000b ). The effect may presumably also be achieved by higher-affinity drugs that are cleared rapidly from the synapse, or given at doses producing low synaptic concentrations of the drug (Reference StrangeStrange, 2001). These data still do not explain the well-documented discrepancy between the rapid D2 receptor blockade induced by antipsychotic drugs and the gradual remission of psychotic symptoms over several days or weeks. This delay could result from longer-term effects of antipsychotic drugs on brain plasticity, including (for example) synaptogenesis (Reference Konradi and HeckersKonradi & Heckers, 2001).

TO AFFINITY... AND BEYOND! ‘SMART’ ANTIPSYCHOTIC DRUGS

The above suggests that a reasonable goal for effective, less-toxic treatment of schizophrenia is the regionally sensitive stabilisation of dopamine function, and not the ‘blunderbuss’ dopaminergic paralysis induced by classical antipsychotic drugs. This selective targeting could come about by exploiting behaviour intrinsic to compounds with low D2 affinity, by designing compounds selective for dopamine receptor subtypes found at greater densities in limbic or cortical regions (for example D3 receptors), or by modulating dopamine release through action at alternative systems (novel candidates include serotonin, sigma and glutamate receptor sites). Such ideas are certainly relevant to current therapeutics and future drug development. Novel agents with specific action at presynaptic D3 autoreceptors controlling central dopamine release may offer more physiological modulation of dopamine than conventional antagonists (Reference Reavill, Taylor and WoodReavill et al, 2000; Reference StrangeStrange, 2001). It is apparent that as the neurochemical pathology of schizophrenia is not fully understood, and as many patients are only partially responsive or are insensitive to dopaminergic antagonism, many non-dopaminergic sites (especially those mediated by glutamate and serotonin) remain potent targets for future drug discovery. The availability of high- and low-affinity D2/D3 receptor antagonist antipsychotic drugs offers clinicians much choice, and the above data provide a rational evidence base for prescribing, tailored as far as possible to individual patient responses.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

H.M.J. is supported by an unrestricted charitable grant from Astrazeneca. L.S.P. is a UK Medical Research Council Senior Clinical Fellow and has received research grants from Astrazeneca, Novartis, Janssen and Sanofi-Synthelabo, and honoraria for lectures and consultancies to GlaxoSmith Kline, Astrazeneca, Novartis, Pfizer and Janssen.

References

Baldessarini, R. J., Katz, B. & Cotton, P. (1984) Dissimilar dosing with high and low potency neuroleptics. American Journal of Psychiatry, 141, 748752.Google ScholarPubMed
Bigliani, V., Mulligan, R. S., Acton, P. D., et al (1999) In vivo occupancy of striatal and temporal cortical D2/D3 dopamine receptors by typical antipsychotic drugs. [123|] epidepride single photon emission tomography (SPET) study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 175, 231238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Breier, A., Su, T. P., Saunders, R., et al (1997) Schizophrenia is associated with elevated amphetamine-induced synaptic dopamine concentrations: evidence from a novel positron emission tomography method. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 94, 25692574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bressan, R. A., Erlandsson, K., Jones, H. M., et al (2003) Optimising limbic selective D2/D3 receptor occupancy by risperidone — a1231 epidepride SPET study. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, in press.Google Scholar
Clow, A., Theodoru, A., Jenner, P., et al (1980) Changes in rat striatal dopamine turnover and receptor activity during one year's neuroleptic administration. European Journal of Pharmacology, 63, 135144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creese, I., Burt, D. R. & Snyder, S. H. (1976) Dopamine receptor binding predicts clinical and pharmacological potencies of antischizophrenic drugs. Science, 192, 481483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farde, L., Wiesel, F. A., Nordstrom, A. L., et al (1989) DI- and D2-Dopamine receptor occupancy during treatment with conventional and atypical neuroleptics. Psychopharmacology, 99, S28S31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farde, L., Wiesel, F. A., Stone-Elander, S., et al (1990) D2 dopamine receptors in neuroleptic-naive schizophrenic patients. A positron emission tomography study with [||C] raclopride. Archives of General Psychiatry, 47, 213219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gefvert, O., Bergstrom, M., Langstrom, B., et al (1998) Time course of central nervous dopamine-D2 and 5-HT2 receptor blockade and plasma drug concentrations after discontinuation of quetiapine (Seroquel) in patients with schizophrenia. Psychopharmacology (Berlin), 135, 119126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, E. C., Crow, T. J., Frith, C. D., et al (1978) Mechanism of the antipsychotic effect in the treatment of acute schizophrenia. Lancet, i, 848851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, H., Travis, M. J., Mulligan, R. S., et al (2001) In vivo 5HT2a receptor blockade by quetiapine. An R91150 single photon emission tomography study. Psychopharmacology (Berlin), 157, 6066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapur, S. & Seeman, P. (2001) Does fast dissociation from the dopamine D2 receptor explain the action of atypical antipsychotics? A new hypothesis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 360369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kapur, S., Zipursky, R. & Remington, G. (1999) Clinical and theoretical implications of 5-HT2 and D2 receptor occupancy of clozapine, risperidone, and olanzapine in schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 286293.Google Scholar
Kapur, S., Zipursky, R., Jones, C., et al (2000a) Relationship between dopamine D(2) occupancy, clinical response, and side effects: a double-blind PET study of first-episode schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 514520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapur, S., Zipursky, R., Jones, C., et al (2000b) A positron emission tomography study of quetiapine in schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry, 57, 553559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerwin, R.W. (1994) The new atypical antipsychotics. A lack of extrapyramidal side-effects and new routes in schizophrenia research. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 141148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Konradi, C. & Heckers, S. (2001) Antipsychotic drugs and neuroplasticity: insights into the treatment and neurobiology of schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 50, 729742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laruelle, M., Abi-Dargham, A., Van-Dyck, C. H., et al (1996) Single photon emission computerized tomography imaging of amphetamine-induced dopamine release in drug-free schizophrenic subjects. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 93, 92359240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, T. & Seeman, P. (1980) Elevation of brain neuroleptic/dopamine receptors in schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 191197.Google Scholar
Lidow, M. S., Williams, G.V. & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1998) The cerebral cortex: a case for a common site of action of antipsychotics. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 19, 136140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackay, A. V., Iversen, L. L., Rossor, M., et al (1982) Increased brain dopamine and dopamine receptors in schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry, 39, 991997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinot, J. L., Peron-Magnan, P., Huret, J. D., et al (1990) Striatal D2 dopaminergic receptors assessed with positron emission tomography and 76Br bromospiperone in untreated schizophrenic patients. American Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 4450.Google ScholarPubMed
Melkersson, K. I., Hulting, A. L., Rane, A.J. (2000) Dose requirement and prolactin elevation of antipsychotics in male and female patients with schizophrenia or related psychoses. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 51, 317324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meltzer, H. Y., Matsubara, S. & Lee, J. C. (1989) The ratios of serotonin and dopamine2 affinities differentiate atypical and typical antipsychotic drugs. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 25, 390397.Google ScholarPubMed
Meltzer, H. Y., Park, S. & Kessler, R. (1999) Cognition, schizophrenia and the atypical antipsychotic drugs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 96, 1359113593.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, H., West, A. R. & Grace, A. A. (1999) The regulation of forebrain dopamine transmission: relevance to the pathophysiology and psychopathology of schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 46, 4055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordstrom, A. L., Farde, L. & Halldin, C. (1993a) High 5HT2 receptor occupancy in clozapine treated patients demonstrated by PET. Psychopharmacology, 110, 365367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordstrom, A. L., Farde, L., Weisel, F. A., et al (1993b) Central D2 dopamine receptor occupancy in relation to antipsychotic drug effects: a double blind PET study of schizophrenic patients. Biological Psychiatry, 33, 227235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyberg, S., Farde, L., Eriksson, L., et al (1993) 5HT2 and D2 dopamine receptor occupancy by risperidone in the living human brain. Psychopharmacology, 110, 265272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peroutka, S.J. & Snyder, S. H. (1980) Relationship of neuroleptic drug effects at brain dopamine, serotonin, alpha-adrenergic and histaminergic receptors to clinical potency. American Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 15181522.Google Scholar
Pilowsky, L. S., Costa, D. C., Ell, P. J., et al (1992) Clozapine, single photon emission tomography and the D2 dopamine receptor blockade hypothesis of schizophrenia. Lancet, 340, 199202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pilowsky, L. S., Costa, D. C., Ell, P. J., et al (1993) Antipsychotic medication, D2 dopamine receptor blockade and clinical response — a 1231 IBZM SPET (single photon emission tomography) study. Psychological Medicine, 23, 791799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilowsky, L. S., Costa, D. C., Ell, P. J., et al (1994) D2 dopamine receptor binding in the basal ganglia of antipsychotic free schizophrenic patients. An 123I-IBZM single photon emission computerised tomography study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 1626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pilowsky, L. S., Mulligan, R. S., Acton, P. D., et al (1997) Limbic selectivity of clozapine. Lancet, 350, 490491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reavill, C., Taylor, S. G., Wood, M. D., et al (2000) Pharmacological actions of a novel high-affinity, and selective human dopamine D2 receptor antagonist, SB-277011-A. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 294, 11541165.Google ScholarPubMed
Reynolds, G. P. (1983) Increased concentrations and lateral asymmetry of amygdala dopamine in schizophrenia. Nature, 304, 527528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seeman, P., Lee, T., Chau-Wong, M., et al (1976) Antipsychotic drug doses and neuroleptic/dopamine receptors. Nature, 261, 717718.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stephenson, C. M. E., Bigliani, V., Jones, H. M., et al (2000) Striatal and extra-striatal D2/D3 receptor occupancy by quetiapine in vivo.[123I]-epidepride single photon emission tomography (SPET) study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 177, 408415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strange, P. G. (2001) Antipsychotic drugs: importance of dopamine receptors for mechanisms of therapeutic actions and side effects. Pharmacological Reviews, 53, 119133.Google ScholarPubMed
Talvik, M., Nordstrom, A. L., Nyberg, S., et al (2001) No support for regional selectivity in clozapine treated patients: a PET study with [||C] raclopride and [||C] FLB 457. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 926930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, P. & Insel, P. A. (1990) The molecular basis of pharmacologic selectivity. In Principles of Drug Action — The Basis of Pharmacology (eds Pratt, W B. & Taylor, P.), pp. 1102. London: Churchill Livingstone.Google Scholar
Thompson, C. (1994) The use of high-dose antipsychotic medication. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 448458.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Travis, M. J., Busatto, G. F., Pilowsky, L. S., et al (1998) 5HT2a receptor blockade in schizophrenic patients treated with risperidone or clozapine, a 1231-5-1-R-91150 single photon emission tomography (SPET) study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 173, 236241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Putten, T. & Marder, S. (1986) Low dose treatment strategies. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 47 (suppl.12), 16.Google ScholarPubMed
Wolkin, A., Barouche, F., Wolf, A. P., et al (1989) Dopamine blockade and clinical response: evidence for two biological subgroups of schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 146, 905908.Google ScholarPubMed
Xiberas, X., Martinot, J. L., Mallet, L., et al (2001) Extrastriatal and striatal D2 dopamine receptor blockade with haloperidol or new antipsychotic drugs in patients with schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry, 179, 503508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 134
Total number of PDF views: 322 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 02nd January 2018 - 22nd January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Access
Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-4qfsd Total loading time: 0.391 Render date: 2021-01-22T07:30:48.620Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "1", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Dopamine and antipsychotic drug action revisited
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Dopamine and antipsychotic drug action revisited
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Dopamine and antipsychotic drug action revisited
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *