Comparison of behavioral and radioprotective effects of WR-2721 and WR-3689

Abstract

The behavio ral effects of the radioprotectant agents ethiofo, S-2-(3-aminopropylamino)ethylphosphorothioic acid (WR-2721) and S-2-(3-methylaminopropyl)aminoethylphosphorothioic acid (WR-3689) were evaluated in rats trained to respond under a multiple fixed-interval 120-s, fixed-ratio 50-response (mult FI FR) schedule of milk reinforcement. Each compound produced dose-dependent reductions in responding under both schedules over the same dose range (100–180 mg/kg, IP); ED 50 s indicated that WR-3689 was slightly more potent than WR-2721. On several performance measures, WR-3689 produced greater decrements during a second dose-effect determination, whereas WR-2721 had more pronounced effects during the initial one. In a second series of studies, low (56 mg/kg) and high (180 mg/kg) doses of both drugs were tested for radioprotective effects in rats responding under an FR-50 schedule of milk reinforcement and exposed to a nonlethal (5 gray, Gy) or lethal (10 Gy) dose of ionizing radiation ( 60Co gamma rays). Neither dose of radiation altered FR response rates on the day of exposure (day 1). Five Gy of gamma radiation produced a 25–40% reduction in response rates on days 2–5 (24–72 h) after exposure. Neither dose of WR-2721 or WR-3689 provided significant protection against these performance decrements. All groups exposed to 10 Gy experienced a progressive decline in FR responding on days 2–5 after exposure. Performance of groups that received pretreatment with the 180-mg/kg dose of either drug or the 56-mg/kg dose of WR-3689 was maintained at significantly higher levels than saline-treated controls on days 4–5 after exposure to 10 Gy; however, even at these higher levels of performance response rates remained below 50% of preirradiation control levels. Subsequently, 56 and 180 mg/kg WR-3689 and 180 mg/kg WR-2721 were found to provide protection against the lethal consequences of the 10-Gy exposure. Thus, neither WR-2721 nor WR-3689 afforded any significant short-term protection against radiation-induced performance decrements when these drugs were administered at either behaviorally ineffective or behaviorally disruptive doses. Rather, the beneficial effects of these drugs paralleled their ability to antagonize radiation-induced lethality.