Goal-directed attention involves the selective processing of behaviorally relevant sensory information. This selective processing is thought to be supported by glutamatergic and noradrenergic systems. Pharmacotherapies that simultaneously target these systems could therefore be effective treatments for impaired attention.
Aims:
We first tested an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor co-agonist (D-serine) for effects on attention (processing speed and attentional lapses). NMDA receptor activation is thought to support noradrenergic effects on sensory processing; therefore, we tested a combination treatment comprising D-serine and a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (atomoxetine).
Methods:
D-serine was first tested in rats performing a two-choice visuospatial discrimination task. Combination treatments comprising relatively low doses of D-serine and atomoxetine were then tested in a separate group.
Results:
In experiment 1, D-serine reduced the skew of initiation time (IT) distributions (IT devmode) at the highest dose tested (300 mg/kg). In experiment 2, low-dose D-serine (125 mg/kg) had no effect, while low-dose atomoxetine (0.3 mg/kg) reduced IT devmode and slowed movement speed. Importantly, the combination of these relatively low doses of D-serine and atomoxetine reduced IT devmode more than either drug alone without further slowing movement speed.
Conclusions:
IT devmode is thought to reflect attentional lapses; therefore, D-serine’s effects on IT devmode suggest that NMDA receptors are involved in the preparatory deployment of attention. Greater effects following a combination of D-serine and atomoxetine suggest that preparatory attention can be facilitated by targeting glutamatergic and noradrenergic systems simultaneously. These results could inform the development of improved treatments for individuals with ADHD who experience abnormally high attentional lapses.
ArmstrongKMChangMHMooreT (2009) Selection and maintenance of spatial information by frontal eye field neurons. J Neurosci29: 15621–15629.
2.
ArmstrongKMFitzgeraldJKMooreT (2006) Changes in visual receptive fields with microstimulation of frontal cortex. Neuron50: 791–798.
3.
AstafievSVShulmanGLStanleyCM, et al. (2003) Functional organization of human intraparietal and frontal cortex for attending, looking, and pointing. J Neurosci23: 4689–4699.
4.
Aston-JonesGCohenJD (2005) An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annu Rev Neurosci28: 403–450.
5.
Aston-JonesGRajkowskiJCohenJ (1999) Role of locus coeruleus in attention and behavioral flexibility. Biol Psychiatry46: 1309–1320.
6.
Aston-JonesGRajkowskiJKubiakP, et al. (1994) Locus coeruleus neurons in monkey are selectively activated by attended cues in a vigilance task. J Neurosci14: 4467–4480.
7.
AvellarMScorielsLMadeiraC, et al. (2016) The effect of D-serine administration on cognition and mood in older adults. Oncotarget7: 11881–11888.
8.
BaarendsePJJVanderschurenLJMJ (2012) Dissociable effects of monoamine reuptake inhibitors on distinct forms of impulsive behavior in rats. Psychopharmacology219: 313–326.
9.
BadoPMadeiraCVargas-LopesC, et al. (2011) Effects of low-dose D-serine on recognition and working memory in mice. Psychopharmacology218: 461–470.
10.
BariAAston-JonesG (2013) Atomoxetine modulates spontaneous and sensory-evoked discharge of locus coeruleus noradrenergic neurons. Neuropharmacology64: 53–64.
11.
BédardAVSteinMAHalperinJM, et al. (2015) Differential impact of methylphenidate and atomoxetine on sustained attention in youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J Child Psychol Psychiatry56: 40–48.
12.
BennARobinsonESJ (2017) Differential roles for cortical versus sub-cortical noradrenaline and modulation of impulsivity in the rat. Psychopharmacology234: 255–266.
13.
BerridgeCWAbercrombieED (1999) Relationship between locus coeruleus discharge rates and rates of norepinephrine release within neocortex as assessed by in vivo microdialysis. Nueroscience99: 1263–1270.
14.
BlondeauCDellu-HagedornF (2007) Dimensional analysis of ADHD subtypes in rats. Biol Psychiatry61: 1340–1350.
15.
BouretSSaraSJ (2005) Network reset: A simplified overarching theory of locus coeruleus noradrenaline function. Trends Neurosci28: 574–582.
16.
BresslerSLTangWSylvesterCM, et al. (2008) Top-down control of human visual cortex by frontal and parietal cortex in anticipatory visual spatial attention. J Neurosci28: 10056–10061.
17.
BroadbentDE (1958) Perception and Communication. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
18.
BuffaloEAFriesPLandmanR, et al. (2010) A backward progression of attentional effects in the ventral stream. Proc Natl Acad Sci107: 361–365.
19.
BuschmanTJKastnerS (2015) From behavior to neural dynamics: An integrated theory of attention. Neuron88: 127–144.
20.
BuschmanTJMillerEK (2007) Top-down versus bottom-up control of attention in the prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices. Science315: 1860–1862.
21.
BushnellMCGoldbergMERobinsonDL (1981) Behavioral enhancement of visual responses in monkey cerebral cortex. I. Modulation in posterior parietal cortex related to selective visual attention. J Neurophysiol46: 755–772.
22.
BymasterFPKatnerJSNelsonDL, et al. (2002) Atomoxetine increases extracellular levels of norepinephrine and dopamine in prefrontal cortex of rat: A potential mechanism for efficacy in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology27: 699–711.
23.
Caballero-PuntiverioMLerdrupLSGrupeM, et al. (2019) Effect of ADHD medication in male C57BL/6J mice performing the rodent continuous performance test. Psychopharmacology236: 1839–1851.
24.
ChamberlainSRdel CampoNDowsonJ, et al. (2007) Atomoxetine improved response inhibition in adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Biol Psychiatry62: 977–984.
25.
ChenLMuhlhauserMYangCR (2003) Glycine tranporter-1 blockade potentiates NMDA-mediated responses in rat prefrontal cortical neurons in vitro and in vivo. J Neurophysiol89: 691–703.
26.
CorbettaMKincadeJMOllingerJM, et al. (2000) Voluntary orienting is dissociated from target detection in human posterior parietal cortex. Nat Neurosci3: 292–297.
27.
CorbettaMKincadeJMShulmanGL (2002) Neural systems for visual orienting and their relationships to spatial working memory. J Cogn Neurosci14: 508–523.
28.
CorbettaMShulmanGL (2002) Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nat Rev Neurosci3: 201–215.
29.
DasilvaMBrandtCGieselmannMA, et al. (2021) Contribution of ionotropic glutamatergic receptors to excitability and attentional signals in macaque frontal eye field. Cerebral Cortex31: 3266–3284.
30.
DingZBrownJWRueterLE, et al. (2018) Profiling attention and cognition enhancing drugs in a rat touchscreen-based continuous performance test. Psychopharmacology235: 1093–1105.
31.
DowningCJ (1988) Expectancy and visual-spatial attention: Effects on perceptual quality. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform14: 188–202.
32.
D’SouzaDCRadhakrishnanRPerryE, et al. (2013) Feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the combination of D-serine and computerized cognitive retraining in schizophrenia: An international collaborative pilot study. Neuropsychopharmacology38: 492–503.
33.
FanLChouTGauSS (2017) Neural correlates of atomoxetine improving inhibitory control and visual processing in drug-naïve adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Hum Brain Mapp38: 4850–4864.
34.
FernandoABPEconomidouDTheobaldDE, et al. (2012) Modulation of high impulsivity and attentional performance in rats by selective direct and indirect dopaminergic and noradrenergic receptor agonists. Psychopharmacology219: 341–352.
35.
FerrarisDDuvallBKoY-S, et al. (2008) Synthesis and biological evaluation of D-amino acid oxidase inhibitors. J Med Chem51: 3357–3359.
36.
FerryBRoozendaalBMcGaughJL (1999) Basolateral amygdala noradrenergic influences on memory storage are mediated by an interaction between β- and α-1 adrenoceptors. J Neurosci19: 5119–5123.
37.
FooteSLBloomFEAston-JonesG (1983) Nucleus locus ceruleus: New evidence of anatomical and physiological specificity. Physiol Rev63: 844–914.
38.
FriesPReynoldsJRorieAE, et al. (2001) Modulation of oscillatory neuronal synchronization by selective visual attention. Science291: 1560–1563.
39.
FriesPWomelsdorfTOostenveldR, et al. (2008) The effects of visual stimulation and selective visual attention on rhythmic neuronal synchronization in macaque area V4. J Neurosci28: 4823–4835.
40.
FukushimaTKawaiJImaiK, et al. (2004) Simultaneous determination of D- and L-serine in rat brain microdialysis sample using a column-switching HPLC with fluorimetric detection. Biomed Chromatogr18: 813–819.
41.
GanoteCEPetersonDRCaroneFA (1974) The nature of D-serine-induced nephrotoxicity. Am J Pathol77: 269–282.
42.
GauSS-FShangC-Y (2010) Executive functions as endophenotypes in ADHD: Evidence from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Battery (CANTAB). J Child Psychol Psychiatry51: 838–849.
43.
GregoriouGGGottsSJZhouH, et al. (2009) High-frequency, long-range coupling between prefrontal and visual cortex during attention. Science324: 1207–1210.
44.
GuevaraCMManiAR (2016) The role of D-serine in peripheral tissues. Eur J Pharmacol780: 216–223.
45.
HasegawaHMasudaNNatoriH, et al. (2019) Pharmacokinetics and toxicokinetics of d-serine in rats. J Pharm Biomed Anal162: 264–271.
46.
HopfingerJBBuonocoreMHMangunGR (2000) The neural mechanisms of top-down attentional control. Nat Neurosci3: 284–291.
47.
JentschJDAardeSMSeuE (2009) Effects of atomoxetine and methylphenidate on performance of a lateralized reaction time task in rats. Psychopharmacology202: 497–504.
48.
JonesBMooreR (1977) Ascending projections of the locus coeruleus in the rat. II. Autoradiographic study. Brain Res127: 25–53.
49.
JonesBYangT-Z (1985) The efferent projections from the reticular formation and the locus coeruleus studied by anterograde and retrograde axonal transport in the rat. J Comp Neurol242: 56–92.
50.
KakegawaWMiyoshiYHamaseK, et al. (2011) D-serine regulates cerebellar LTD and motor coordination through the δ2 glutamate receptor. Nat. Neurosci. 14:603-611.
51.
KarasawaJ-IHashimotoKChakiS (2008) D-Serine and a glycine transporter inhibitor improve MK-801-induced cognitive deficits in a novel object recognition test in rats. Behav Brain Res186: 78–83.
52.
KastnerSPinskMADe WeerdP, et al. (1999) Increased activity in human visual cortex during directed attention in the absence of visual stimulation. Neuron22: 751–761.
53.
KastnerSUngerleiderL (2000) Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex. Annu Rev Neurosci23: 315–341.
54.
KawauraKKoikeHKinoshitaK, et al. (2015) Effects of a glycine transporter-1 inhibitor and D-serine on MK-801-induced immobility in the forced swimming test in rats. Behav Brain Res278: 186–192.
55.
KoffarnusMNKatzJL (2011) Response requirement and increases in accuracy produced by stimulant drugs in a 5-choice serial reaction-time task in rats. Psychopharmacology213: 723–733.
56.
KoflerMJRapportMDSarverDE, et al. (2013) Reaction time variability in ADHD: A meta-analytic review of 319 studies. Clin Psychol Rev33: 795–811.
57.
KratzOStuderPBaackJ, et al. (2012) Differential effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine on attentional processes in children with ADHD: An event-related potential study using the Attention Network Test. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry37: 81–89.
58.
LabrieVClapcoteSJRoderJC (2009) Mutant mice with reduced NMDA-NR1 glycine affinity or lack of D-amino acid oxidase function exhibit altered anxiety-like behaviors. Pharmacol Biochem Behav91: 610–620.
59.
Leth-SteensenCKing ElbazZDouglasVI (2000) Mean response times, variability, and skew in the responding of ADHD children: A response time distributional approach. Acta Psychol104: 167–190.
60.
LevinRDor-AbarbanelAEEdelmanS, et al. (2015) Behavioral and cognitive effects of the N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor co-agonist d-serine in healthy humans: Initial findings. J Psychiatr Res61: 188–195.
61.
LiuY-PHuangT-STungC-S, et al. (2015) Effects of atomoxetine on attention and impulsivity in the five-choice serial reaction time task in rats with lesions of dorsal noradrenergic ascending bundle. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry56: 81–90.
62.
LucciniEMusanteVNeriE, et al. (2007) Functional interactions between presynaptic NMDA receptors and metabotropic glutamate receptors co-expressed on rat and human noradrenergic terminals. Br J Pharmacol151: 1087–1094.
63.
MatherMClewettDSakakiM, et al. (2016) Norepinephrine ignites local hot spots of neuronal excitation: How arousal amplifies selectivity in perception and memory. Behav Brain Sci39: e200.
64.
MooreTArmstrongKM (2003) Selective gating of visual signals by microstimulation of frontal cortex. Nature421: 370–373.
65.
MorrisonJHFooteSLO’ConnorD, et al. (1982) Laminar, tangential and regional organization of the noradrenergic innervation of monkey cortex: Dopamine-β-hydroxylase immunohistochemistry. Brain Res Bull9: 309–319.
66.
NavarraRGrafRHuangY, et al. (2008) Effects of atomoxetine and methylphenidate on attention and impulsivity in the 5-choice serial reaction time test. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry32: 34–41.
67.
NiHShangCGauSSLinY, et al. (2013) A head-to-head randomized clinical trial of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment for executive function in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol16: 1959–1973.
68.
NiHHwang GuSLinH, et al. (2016) Atomoxetine could improve intra-individual variability in drug-naïve adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder comparably with methylphenidate: A head-to-head randomized clinical trial. J Psychopharmacol30: 459–467.
69.
OrdwayGO’DonnellJFrazerA (1987) Effects of clenbuterol on central β1 and β2 adrenergic receptors of the rat. J Pharmacol Exp Ther241: 187–95.
70.
Orozco-IbarraMMedina-CamposONSánchez-GonzálezDJ, et al. (2007) Evaluation of oxidative stress in D-serine induced nephrotoxicity. Toxicology229: 123–135.
71.
PascuzzoGJSkeenLC (1982) Brainstem projections to the frontal eye field in cat. Brain Res241: 341–346.
72.
PatersonNERicciardiJWetzlerC, et al. (2011) Sub-optimal performance in the 5-choice serial reaction time task in rats was sensitive to methylphenidate, atomoxetine and d-amphetamine, but unaffected by the COMT inhibitor tolcapone. Neurosci Res69: 41–50.
73.
PatersonNEWetzlerCHackettA, et al. (2012) Impulsive action and impulsive choice are mediated by distinct neuropharmacological substrates in rat. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol15: 1473–1487.
74.
PattijTSchettersDSchoffelmeerANM, et al. (2012) On the improvement of inhibitory response control and visuospatial attention by indirect and direct adrenoceptor agonists. Psychopharmacology219: 327–340.
75.
PetersenSEPosnerMI (2012) The attention system of the human brain: 20 years after. Annu Rev Neurosci35: 73–89.
76.
PoseyDJWiegandREWilkersonJ, et al. (2006) Open-label atomoxetine for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms associated with high-functioning pervasive developmental disorders. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol16: 599–610.
77.
PosnerMSnyderCDavidsonB (1980) Attention and the detection of signals. J Exp Psychol Gen109: 160–174.
78.
RamosBPArnstenAFT (2007) Adrenergic pharmacology and cognition: Focus on the prefrontal cortex. Pharmacol Ther113: 523–536.
79.
RamosBPStarkDVerduzcoL, et al. (2006) 2A-adrenoceptor stimulation improves prefrontal cortical regulation of behavior through inhibition of cAMP signaling in aging animals. Learn Mem13: 770–776.
80.
ReddingZVChawlaPSabolKE (2019) The use of reaction time distributions to study attention in male rats: The effects of atomoxetine and guanfacine. Psychopharmacology236: 3579–3592.
81.
ReynoldsJHChelazziL (2004) Attentional modulation of visual processing. Annu Rev Neurosci27: 611–647.
82.
RobbinsT (2002) The 5-choice serial reaction time task: Behavioural pharmacology and functional neurochemistry. Psychopharmacology163: 362–380.
83.
RobinsonESJ (2012) Blockade of noradrenaline re-uptake sites improves accuracy and impulse control in rats performing a five-choice serial reaction time tasks. Psychopharmacology219: 303–312.
84.
RobinsonESJEagleDMMarAC, et al. (2008) Similar effects of the selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor atomoxetine on three distinct forms of impulsivity in the rat. Neuropsychopharmacol33: 1028–1037.
85.
RoomPPostemaFKorfJ (1981) Divergent axon collaterals of rat locus coeruleus neurons: Demonstration by a fluorescent double labeling technique. Brain Res221: 219–230.
86.
SabolKERichardsJBBroomSL, et al. (2003) Effects of stimulus salience and methamphetamine on choice reaction time in the rat: Central tendency versus distribution skew. Behav Pharmacol14: 489–500.
87.
SaraSJBouretS (2012) Orienting and reorienting: The locus coeruleus mediates cognition through arousal. Neuron76: 130–141.
88.
SchneiderWShiffrinRM (1977) Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychol Rev84: 1–66.
89.
SchwarzLALuoL (2015) Organization of the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system. Curr Biol25: R1051–R1056.
90.
Servan-SchreiberDPrintzHCohenJ (1990) A network model of catecholamine effects: Gain, signal-to-noise ratio, and behavior. Science249: 892–895.
91.
ShangC-YGauSS-F (2012) Improving visual memory, attention, and school function with atomoxetine in boys with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol22: 353–363.
92.
ShibaoCRajSRGamboaA, et al. (2007) Norepinephrine transporter blockade with atomoxetine induces hypertension in patients with impaired autonomic function. Hypertension50: 47–53.
93.
SilverMARessDHeegerDJ (2007) Neural correlates of sustained spatial attention in human early visual cortex. J Neurophysiol97: 229–237.
94.
StoufferEMPetriHLDevanBD (2004) Effect of D-serine on a delayed match-to-place task for the water maze. Behav Brain Res152: 447–452.
95.
SunHCockerPJZeebFD, et al. (2012) Chronic atomoxetine treatment during adolescence decreases impulsive choice, but not impulsive action, in adult rats and alters markers of synaptic plasticity in the orbitofrontal cortex. Psychopharmacology219: 285–301.
96.
SwansonLWHartmanBK (1975) The central adrenergic system. An immunofluorescence study of the location of cell bodies and their efferent connections in the rat utilizing dopamine-B-hydroxylase as a marker. J Comp Neurol163: 467–505.
97.
TammLNaradMEAntoniniTN, et al. (2012) Reaction time variability in ADHD: A review. Neurotherapeutics9: 500–508.
98.
Tsutsui-KimuraIOhmuraYIzumiT, et al. (2009) The effects of serotonin and/or noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors on impulsive-like action assessed by the three-choice serial reaction time task: A simple and valid model of impulsive action using rats. Behav Pharmacol20: 474–483.
99.
WangMYangYWangC, et al. (2013) NMDA receptors subserve persistent neuronal firing during working memory in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Neuron77: 736–749.
100.
WehmeierPMSchachtAWolffC, et al. (2011) Neuropsychological outcomes across the day in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder treated with atomoxetine: Results from a placebo-controlled study using a computer-based continuous performance test combined with an infra-red motion-tracking device. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol21: 433–444.
101.
WehmeierPMSchachtAUlberstadF, et al. (2012) Does atomoxetine improve executive function, inhibitory control, and hyperactivity?: Results from a placebo-controlled trial using quantitative measurement technology. J Clin Psychopharmacol32: 653–660.
102.
ZhangHHuangYMishlerK, et al. (2005) Interaction between the antidepressant-like behavioral effects of beta adrenergic agonists and the cyclic AMP PDE inhibitor rolipram in rats. Psychopharmacology182: 104–115.
103.
ZhouHThompsonKG (2009) Cognitively directed spatial selection in the frontal eye field in anticipation of visual stimuli to be discriminated. Vision Res49: 1205–1215.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
