You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
  • Hypothesis
  • Open Access

2 October 2021

Many Drugs of Abuse May Be Acutely Transformed to Dopamine, Norepinephrine and Epinephrine In Vivo

Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
This article belongs to the Special Issue The Cellular, Synaptic and Molecular Mechanisms of Action of Central Nervous System Drugs

Abstract

It is well established that a wide range of drugs of abuse acutely boost the signaling of the sympathetic nervous system and the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis, where norepinephrine and epinephrine are major output molecules. This stimulatory effect is accompanied by such symptoms as elevated heart rate and blood pressure, more rapid breathing, increased body temperature and sweating, and pupillary dilation, as well as the intoxicating or euphoric subjective properties of the drug. While many drugs of abuse are thought to achieve their intoxicating effects by modulating the monoaminergic neurotransmitter systems (i.e., serotonin, norepinephrine, dopamine) by binding to these receptors or otherwise affecting their synaptic signaling, this paper puts forth the hypothesis that many of these drugs are actually acutely converted to catecholamines (dopamine, norepinephrine, epinephrine) in vivo, in addition to transformation to their known metabolites. In this manner, a range of stimulants, opioids, and psychedelics (as well as alcohol) may partially achieve their intoxicating properties, as well as side effects, due to this putative transformation to catecholamines. If this hypothesis is correct, it would alter our understanding of the basic biosynthetic pathways for generating these important signaling molecules, while also modifying our view of the neural substrates underlying substance abuse and dependence, including psychological stress-induced relapse. Importantly, there is a direct way to test the overarching hypothesis: administer (either centrally or peripherally) stable isotope versions of these drugs to model organisms such as rodents (or even to humans) and then use liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry to determine if the labeled drug is converted to labeled catecholamines in brain, blood plasma, or urine samples.

1. Introduction

Many drugs of abuse, such as cocaine or opium, either occur naturally in plants or can be readily derived from plant-based chemicals [1,2]. This natural occurrence makes it likely that evolving organisms, such as various animals, that consume a diverse range of plants have evolved mechanisms for metabolizing or inactivating these molecules, such as the cytochrome P450 molecules found in the liver (and the brain) [3]. Whereas many drugs are transformed into metabolites with active psychotropic properties, most drugs are not typically thought to be converted to molecules that occur naturally in the body and participate in normal, endogenous signaling pathways.
Aside from their widely varying intoxicating or euphoriant subjective properties, different classes of drugs of abuse share the property of acutely boosting the body’s stress signaling pathways, namely the sympathetic nervous system and HPA axis which use norepinephrine and epinephrine as major output molecules [4,5,6,7]. This results in what can be perceived as unpleasant side effects such as boosting the heart rate, elevating blood pressure, increasing the rate of breathing, elevating body temperature and accompanied sweating, as well as pupillary dilation. While the mechanisms through which drugs such as stimulants, opioids, and psychedelics boost sympathetic and HPA axis signaling are perhaps continuing to be investigated, they are not thought to be actively converted to endogenous signaling molecules such as the catecholamines (dopamine, norepinephrine, epinephrine).

2. Hypothesis: A Wide Range of Drugs of Abuse Are Acutely Transformed to Catecholamines In Vivo

This paper puts forth the hypothesis that a broad range of drugs of abuse—stimulants, opioids, psychedelics—are actually acutely converted to catecholamines in the body. This biochemical conversion, which may occur in a wide range of animals as well as in humans (and possibly other organisms), may not only underlie the boosting of sympathetic nervous system and HPA axis signaling described above, but also contribute to the intoxicating or rewarding properties of these drugs (along with their known interaction with monoaminergic or opioid signaling molecules or receptors). This proposed biotransformation to catecholamines is suggested here to occur in addition to the acute conversion of these drugs to their known metabolites (see below). It is also hypothesized that this conversion to catecholamines, perhaps especially by boosting norepinephrine and epinephrine in an ongoing manner through repeated use of drugs, plays a significant role in substance abuse and dependence, including psychological stress-induced relapse of drug seeking behavior. To my knowledge, this overall hypothesis is novel and has not yet been scientifically investigated, but is directly testable in animals or even human subjects, using stable isotope biochemical experiments (see below).

4. Evaluation of the Hypothesis

The overarching hypothesis put forth here is directly testable with relatively simple and safe biochemistry experiments using stable isotopes. In these experiments, a model organism such as a mouse or a rat (or even a human) is systemically administered a stable isotope version of one of the drugs discussed above, which is engineered to contain an additional neutron in the nucleus of one or more of its atoms. Such compounds are not radioactive and have the same chemical properties as the normal version of the drug. They are commercially available or can be custom engineered by many companies around the world (for example: MilliporeSigma, CDN Isotopes, Charles River Laboratories, Cambridge Isotope Laboratories). Stable isotope alcohol, for example, is already available commercially (ethanol-1-13C, MilliporeSigma, catalog # 324523). Typically, “heavy” carbon (i.e., carbon 13 instead of carbon 12, which is the isotope typically found naturally) or “heavy” hydrogen (deuterium) is substituted for at least one atom of the molecule. This “labeled” drug is then administered to the model organism, and then after a time delay of perhaps an hour or up to a day or two, blood plasma, urine, or brain tissue or cerebrospinal fluid (possibly in conjunction with microdialysis) samples are collected. These samples are then processed using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry to determine if any of the “heavy” atoms from the labeled drug administration are incorporated into catecholamines (dopamine, norepinephrine, epinephrine). Having an hypothesis regarding which portion of the labeled drug molecule should be preserved in the labeled catecholamine is therefore important to consider in engineering the original labeled drug.
For a carbon 13 labeled drug molecule, for example, one approach to analyzing the data from liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry is to calculate the ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 13 (i.e., C12/C13) in the retention time area plots for each catecholamine, which should be reduced in animals that received carbon 13 stable isotope drug treatment. This raises another important point: half of the animals should receive a “control” injection of the normal, unlabeled version of the drug. That means all animals, whether they receive the labeled or unlabeled version of the drug, would undergo the same injection or infusion stress, and also experience the same period of acute intoxication, where the only difference between groups is the drug labeling. Then, an unpaired two-tailed (or possibly one-tailed) t test could be used to compare the carbon 12 to carbon 13 ratio, for each catecholamine, from all the unlabeled drug animals versus the labeled drug animals. Perhaps a sample size of 10 or more animals per group could be used.
In addition, operating a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer in targeted mode should also reveal if there is a significant peak in the samples for “heavy” versions of any of the three catecholamines. It is suggested here that administering these drugs peripherally to mice or rats (typically intraperitoneally) would still allow the drug to cross the blood–brain barrier, since in humans these drugs are typically administered systemically and still produce intoxicating effects. For brain tissue analysis of animals, whole brain homogenates (including brainstem) could initially be performed, where later, more refined experiments could seek to define which brain circuits and cell types carry out these putative biosynthetic reactions. However, a number of laboratories around the world are already set up to carry out microdialysis analysis of neurotransmitters in a variety of distinct brain regions, which could immediately test the hypothesis put forth here. Of course, it is also possible that putative drug conversion to catecholamines occurs outside the brain as well, in peripheral organs such as the adrenal glands.

5. Consequences of the Hypothesis

If many drugs of abuse are acutely converted to catecholamines in vivo, this would have a number of important implications. Not only would this potentially help explain the stimulatory effect of these compounds on the sympathetic nervous system and HPA axis, but it may also contribute to our understanding of their intoxicating or euphoriant properties, since both dopamine and norepinephrine have already been implicated in reward processing in the brain [16,17,18]. It is suggested here that these putative acute effects on boosting catecholaminergic signaling interact with the more established mechanisms of these drugs, which involve modulation of monoaminergic (or opioid) receptors and signaling pathways, to produce their psychotropic qualities (which vary greatly across these classes of drugs). If these drugs tend to boost noradrenergic and adrenergic signaling, this may also play a prominent role in the development and maintenance of substance abuse, since the tone of norepinephrine and epinephrine may tend to remain elevated with repeated drug use and this has been implicated in substance abuse [17]. Acute boosting of catecholamines could also affect psychological stress-induced relapse of drug seeking behavior, as the individual may seek drugs during or after stress because they crave the rewarding properties of boosting dopamine or norepinephrine, and this could also be a means of replenishing depleted cellular stores of these “stress hormones” [19,20]. Drug seeking could also then be viewed as a means for maintaining critical neurotransmitter pools for individuals who genetically have elevated tone or a “high set point” for each of these three catecholamines [19,20].
There may be several other consequences if the hypothesis put forth here is verified. It may suggest that methylation and demethylation are actually important and common processes in regulating organic molecules in addition to DNA, in the body. An additional point is that it is not obvious to the author that other major types or classes of drugs, such as marijuana and nicotine (or caffeine), are also acutely converted to catecholamines or other endogenous signaling molecules. Inspection of the molecular structures of THC (i.e., the active ingredient in marijuana) and nicotine, for example, does not reveal the same moieties as in the various stimulants, opioids, and psychedelics described above. THC and nicotine may, however, be acutely transformed to catecholamines through other molecular mechanisms. A final point is that many of the drugs described above occur in nature, whereas others appear not to (and are synthetically manufactured). It is nonetheless suggested here that the body has evolved molecular mechanisms, including various currently unidentified enzymes, for transforming all of these drugs to dopamine, norepinephrine, and epinephrine. One psychedelic drug discussed above, DMT, is actually present endogenously in the mammalian brain, including in rodents [21].
As noted above, this publication is suggesting that biotransformation of various drugs of abuse to catecholamines is occurring in addition to the known reactions of these drugs to form their conventional, already identified metabolites. In this scenario, only a perhaps small subset of these drug molecules is acutely transformed to catecholamines, whereas most of these drug molecules are rapidly converted to known metabolites through previously demonstrated pharmacokinetic pathways. A large number of prior publications have identified the metabolites of, for example, cocaine, amphetamine, heroin, morphine, LSD, DMT, and ethanol, where a number of these metabolites themselves have psychotropic qualities [22,23,24,25,26,27]. This publication is not suggesting that those various metabolic pathways are incorrect, but rather that a perhaps minor subset of those drug molecules is instead converted to catecholamines in a large enough quantity to nonetheless boost sympathetic and HPA axis signaling.
While the overall hypothesis put forth in this publication is very general in covering a broad range of drugs, sympathetic nervous system and HPA axis activation are also known to broadly accompany the effects of these various classes of drugs, providing a rationale for tying together transformation to catecholamines with the different classes in this hypothesis-based publication. Additionally, the various classes of drugs contain similar molecular moieties, suggesting some degree of plausibility that they could be transformed in similar ways in vivo. One possibility, however, is that only a subset of these drugs is converted to catecholamines in the body. It is moreover not clear that all of the proposed biochemical reactions, including in vivo demethylation of hydrocarbons, are thermodynamically plausible. It is also, as noted above, not known which enzymes may catalyze these proposed novel reactions, and whether such putative enzymes could have evolved in various organisms. These questions remain to be addressed by future molecular experimentation, in conjunction with the stable isotope methodology described here.
In conclusion, this paper has put forth the hypothesis that a wide range of drugs of abuse—stimulants, opioids, psychedelics—are acutely transformed to catecholamines in vivo. This may partially explain the stimulatory effect of these drugs on sympathetic nervous system and HPA axis signaling, as well as modulation of their subjective psychotropic properties, while suggesting a potential underlying role in substance abuse and dependence. Importantly, relatively simple experiments can be conducted, involving administration of stable isotope versions of these drugs to model organisms followed by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, to test whether portions of the drugs are indeed incorporated into new dopamine, norepinephrine, and epinephrine molecules.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares that he has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Aguayo, L.; Guzman, L.; Perez, C.; Aguayo, L.; Silva, M.; Becerra, J.; Fuentealba, J. Historical and Current Perspectives of Neuroactive Compounds Derived from Latin America. Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 2006, 6, 997–1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bucardo, J.; Brouwer, K.C.; Magis-Rodríguez, C.; Ramos, R.; Fraga, M.; Perez, S.G.; Patterson, T.L.; Strathdee, S.A. Historical trends in the production and consumption of illicit drugs in Mexico: Implications for the prevention of blood borne infections. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005, 79, 281–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Miksys, S.; Tyndale, R.F. Cytochrome P450-mediated drug metabolism in the brain. J. Psychiatry Neurosci. 2013, 38, 152–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Manetti, L.; Cavagnini, F.; Martino, E.; Ambrogio, A. Effects of cocaine on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. J. Endocrinol. Investig. 2014, 37, 701–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Weber, R.J.; Gomez-Flores, R.; Smith, J.E.; Martin, T.J. Neuronal adaptations, neuroendocrine and immune correlates of heroin self-administration. Brain Behav. Immun. 2009, 23, 993–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Brown, H.; Pollard, K.A. Drugs of Abuse: Sympathomimetics. Crit. Care Clin. 2021, 37, 487–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Olbrich, S.; Preller, K.H.; Vollenweider, F.X. LSD and ketanserin and their impact on the human autonomic nervous system. Psychophysiology 2021, 58, e13822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Andreou, D.; Söderman, E.; Axelsson, T.; Sedvall, G.C.; Terenius, L.; Agartz, I.; Jönsson, E.G. Polymorphisms in genes implicated in dopamine, serotonin and noradrenalin metabolism suggest association with cerebrospinal fluid monoamine metabolite concentrations in psychosis. Behav. Brain Funct. 2014, 10, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Blaschko, H. The specific action of l-dopa decarboxylase. J. Physiol. 1942, 101, 337–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Bulbring, E. The methylation of noradrenaline by minced suprarenal tissue. Br. J. Pharmacol. Chemother. 1949, 4, 234–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Holtz, P. Dopadecarboxylase. Naturwissenschaften 1939, 27, 724–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Efimova, O.A.; Koltsova, A.S.; Krapivin, M.I.; Tikhonov, A.V.; Pendina, A.A. Environmental Epigenetics and Genome Flexibility: Focus on 5-Hydroxymethylcytosine. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 3223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Haensel, V.; Ipatieff, V.N. Selective demethylation of paraffin hydrocarbons. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1946, 68, 345–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mackey, K.; Veazie, S.; Anderson, J.; Bourne, D.; Peterson, K. Barriers and Facilitators to the Use of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder: A Rapid Review. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2020, 35, 954–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Cornelissen, A.S.; Klaassen, S.D.; Van Groningen, T.; Bohnert, S.; Joosen, M.J.A. Comparative physiology and efficacy of atropine and scopolamine in sarin nerve agent poisoning. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2020, 396, 114994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. You, C.; Vandegrift, B.; Brodie, M.S. Ethanol actions on the ventral tegmental area: Novel potential targets on reward pathway neurons. Psychopharmacology 2018, 235, 1711–1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Fitzgerald, P.J. Elevated norepinephrine may be a unifying etiological factor in the abuse of a broad range of substances: Alcohol, nicotine, marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and caffeine. Subst. Abus. Res. Treat. 2013, 7, 171–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Weinshenker, D.; Schroeder, J.P. There and back again: A tale of norepinephrine and drug addiction. Neuropsychopharmacology 2007, 32, 1433–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Fitzgerald, P.J. Neurodrinking: Is alcohol a substrate in a novel, endogenous synthetic pathway for norepinephrine? Med. Hypotheses 2012, 78, 760–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Fitzgerald, P.J. Neurodining: Common dietary factors may be substrates in novel biosynthetic pathways for monoaminergic neurotransmitters. Med. Hypotheses 2020, 138, 109618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Dean, J.G.; Liu, T.; Hu, S.; Sheler, B.; Barker, S.A.; Strassman, R.J.; Wang, M.W.; Borjigin, J. Biosynthesis and Extracellular Concentrations of N, N- dimethyltryptamine (DMT) in Mammalian Brain. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 9333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Gottås, A.; Øiestad, E.L.; Boix, F.; Vindenes, V.; Ripel, A.; Thaulow, C.H.; Mørland, J. Levels of heroin and its metabolites in blood and brain extracellular fluid after i.v. heroin administration to freely moving rats. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2013, 170, 546–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Cameron, L.P.; Olson, D.E. Dark Classics in Chemical Neuroscience: N, N-Dimethyltryptamine (DMT). ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2018, 9, 2344–2357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Markowitz, J.S.; Patrick, K.S. The Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Amphetamines Utilized in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. J. Child Adolesc. Psychopharmacol. 2017, 27, 678–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bystrowska, B.; Adamczyk, P.; Moniczewski, A.; Zaniewska, M.; Fuxe, K.; Filip, M. LC/MS/MS evaluation of cocaine and its metabolites in different brain areas, peripheral organs and plasma in cocaine self-administering rats. Pharmacol. Rep. 2012, 64, 1337–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Singh, A.K. Alcohol interaction with cocaine, methamphetamine, opioids, nicotine, cannabis, and γ-hydroxybutyric acid. Biomedicines 2019, 7, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Reyes-Parada, M.; Iturriaga-Vasquez, P.; Cassels, B.K. Amphetamine derivatives as monoamine oxidase inhibitors. Front. Pharmacol. 2020, 10, 1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.