Non-serotonergic pharmacological profiles and associated cognitive effects of serotonin reuptake inhibitors

Journal of Psychopharmacology - Tập 15 Số 3 - Trang 173-179 - 2001
Jeroen A. J. Schmitt1, Monique J. Kruizinga, Wim J. Riedel2
1Experimental Psychopharmacology Unit, Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology (DRT10), Universiteit Maastricht, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands;
2Experimental Psychopharmacology Unit, Brain and Behaviour Institute, Universiteit Maastricht, The Netherlands

Tóm tắt

The current study was carried out to investigate the cognitive effects of two serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), sertraline and paroxetine, with special reference to differences in their affinity for other neurotransmitter systems, i.e. anticholinergic activity of paroxetine and putative dopamine reuptake activity of sertraline. The study was conducted according to a double-blind, three-way cross-over design. During three treatment periods of 2 weeks, 24 healthy middle-aged (aged 30–50 years) subjects of both sexes received sertraline (50 mg on days 1–7, 100 mg on days 8–14), paroxetine (20 mg on days 1–7, 40 mg on days 8–14) and placebo. Paroxetine specifically impaired delayed recall in a word learning test at a dose of 20 and 40 mg. Sertraline did not affect word learning but improved performance on a verbal fluency task at a dose of 50 and 100 mg. Neither drug affected performance on a short-term memory scanning task. These subtle but significant changes in cognitive performance can be explained by subtle differences in pharmacological profiles of these SSRIs. The additional anticholinergic effects of paroxetine could account for its induction of long-term memory impairment. Similarly, the additional dopaminergic effects of sertraline could account for its induction of slightly improved verbal fluency. The impairing and facilitating cognitive effects of paroxetine and sertraline, respectively, may be more pronounced in the elderly depressed patient.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1007/BF02246237

10.1016/S0197-4580(88)80124-6

10.1016/0149-7634(94)00068-C

10.1016/S0165-0327(97)00086-4

Beatty W W, 1986, Physiol Psychol, 14, 82

10.1016/0028-3932(89)90109-7

10.1016/0024-3205(93)90194-8

10.1016/S0959-4388(97)80013-X

10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.285

10.1177/026988119701100410

10.1523/JNEUROSCI.15-01-00821.1995

10.1016/0165-0327(90)90079-N

10.1007/s002130050610

10.2165/00003495-199855010-00007

10.1016/S0166-4328(97)00048-X

10.1097/00004850-199206004-00012

10.1097/00004850-199403001-00004

Kerr J S, 1992, Int Clin Psychopharmacol, 7, 101

10.2165/00002512-199405030-00005

10.1097/00002826-199710000-00006

Lane R, 1999, German J Psychiatry, 2, 1

Lezak M D, 1995, Neuropsychological assessment, 3

10.1093/cercor/8.3.218

Luteijn F, 1983, Manual Groningen Intelligencetest (GIT)

10.1016/S0304-3940(98)00928-8

10.1007/s002130050967

10.1093/brain/121.6.1155

Nebes R, 1997, Psychopharmacol Bull, 33, 715

10.1016/0028-3908(94)90089-2

10.3758/BF03342823

10.2165/00023210-199912020-00007

10.1001/archpsyc.1989.01810070051009

10.2165/00002018-199818030-00004

Rey A (1964) L'examen psychologique dans les cas d’encéphalopathie traumatique. Presses Universitaires de France, Lyon

10.1097/00004714-199606002-00002

10.1007/BF02246090

Riedel W J, 1997, Human psychopharmacology: measures and methods, 29

10.1007/s002130050845

10.1002/(SICI)1099-1077(199910)14:7<499::AID-HUP136>3.0.CO;2-1

10.1016/0924-977X(94)00130-4

10.1016/S0301-0511(96)05222-2

10.1177/026988110001400102

10.1017/S0033291797005382

10.1097/00004850-198607000-00006

10.1016/0301-0082(94)90060-4

Stahl S M, 1998, J Clin Psychiatry, 59, 5

Sternberg S, 1969, Am Sci, 57, 421

10.1007/BF02247392

10.1016/S0014-2999(97)01393-9

10.1002/hup.470060202

10.1176/ajp.149.10.1393

10.1016/0002-9378(91)90645-8

10.1016/0924-977X(96)88173-9

Volkow N D, 1998, Am J Psychiatry, 155, 344

Williams S A, 1996, J Clin Psychiatry, 1, 7

10.1007/BF02247444

Winer B J, 1971, Statistical principles in experimental design

10.1001/archpsyc.1965.01720310065008