Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33140215›Full record

Trial reportPsychopharmacology2021

No effect of a dopaminergic modulation fMRI task by amisulpride and L-DOPA on reward anticipation in healthy volunteers.

Oliver Grimm, Magdalena Nägele, Lea Küpper-Tetzel, Moritz de Greck, Michael Plichta, Andreas Reif

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychopharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Dopaminergic modulation of social reward anticipation in depression: neural effects of amisulpride versus placebo.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Oliver GrimmDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany. oliver.grimm@kgu.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0767-0301
Magdalena NägeleDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Lea Küpper-TetzelDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Moritz de GreckDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Michael PlichtaDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Andreas ReifDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleDysregulation of dopaminergic neurotransmission, specifically altered reward processing assessed via the reward anticipation in the MID task, plays a central role in the etiopathogenesis of neuropsychiatric disorders.

objectivesWe hypothesized to find a difference in the activity level of the reward system (measured by the proxy reward anticipation) under drug administration versus placebo, in that amisulpride reduces, and L-DOPA enhances, its activity.

methodsWe studied the influence of dopamine agonist L-DOPA and the antagonist amisulpride on the reward system using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during a monetary incentive delay (MID) task in n = 45 healthy volunteers in a randomized, blinded, cross-over study.

resultsThe MID paradigm elicits strong activation in reward-dependent structures (such as ventral striatum, putamen, caudate, anterior insula) during reward anticipation. The placebo effect demonstrated the expected significant blood oxygen level-dependent activity in reward-dependent brain regions. Neither amisulpride nor L-DOPA led to significant changes in comparison with the placebo condition. This was true for whole-brain analysis as well as analysis of a pre-defined nucleus accumbens region-of-interest mask.

conclusionThe present results cast doubt on the sensitivity of reward anticipation contrast in the MID task for assessing dopamine-specific changes in healthy volunteers by pharmaco-fMRI. While our task was not well-suited for detailed analysis of the outcome phase, we provide reasonable arguments that the lack of effect in the anticipation phase is not due to an inefficient task but points to unexpected behavior of the reward system during pharmacological challenge. Group differences of reward anticipation should therefore not be seen as simple representatives of dopaminergic states.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAmisulprideAnticipation, PsychologicalBrainCross-Over StudiesDopamineDopamine AgonistsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansLevodopaMaleMotivationRewardYoung AdultAmisulprideDopamineDopamine AgonistsLevodopaAmisulprideDopamineL-DOPAMonetary incentive delayRewardStriatum

Identifiers

PMID33140215
PMCPMC8062334
OpenAlexW3095228716

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.