Cited by 58Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchPsychedelics and Drug StudiesForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis

Opioid antagonism enhances marijuana's effects in heavy marijuana smokers.

Open access
Cooper, Ziva D., Haney, Margaret·2010·Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Rationale and objective Studies in laboratory animals strongly suggest reciprocal modulation of the opioidergic and endocannabinoid systems, a relationship that has not been demonstrated in humans. This study sought to clarify this interaction by assessing how a range of naltrexone doses altered the subjective, cognitive, and cardiovascular effects of marijuana.Material and methods Daily marijuana smokers (n = 29) participated in this within-subject, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Naltrexone (0, 12, 25, 50, or 100 mg) was administered before active or inactive marijuana (3.27 or 0% THC) was smoked.Results Active marijuana increased subjective ratings of marijuana 'Strength,' 'High,' and positive subjective ratings of marijuana quality and drug effect including 'Liking,' 'Good,' and 'Take Again' compared to inactive marijuana. Naltrexone alone decreased ratings of 'Liking,' 'Take Again,' and 'Stimulated' compared with placebo, but increased ratings of drug 'Strength,' 'High,' 'Good,' 'Liking,' 'Stimulated,' and 'Take Again' when administered under active marijuana conditions. Active marijuana did not affect performance on cognitive tasks relative to inactive marijuana, whereas naltrexone decreased performance when administered alone or in combination with active marijuana. Active marijuana increased heart rate compared to inactive marijuana under placebo naltrexone conditions. Although naltrexone alone decreased heart rate, it further increased marijuana's cardiovascular effect.Conclusions In heavy marijuana smokers opioid-receptor blockade enhanced the subjective and cardiovascular effects of marijuana, suggesting that endogenous opioids dampen cannabinoid effects in this population. These findings demonstrate that a broad range of clinically used doses of naltrexone potentially increases the abuse liability and cardiovascular risks of cannabinoids.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00213-010-1875-y

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Acute administration of naltrexone potentiated the positive subjective effects of cannabis, but repeated administration decreased such effects.

    “It has been reported that the acute administration of naltrexone potentiated the positive subjective effects of cannabis but that repeated administration decreased such effects 74, 75.”

    From Psychosocial and pharmacological interventions for the treatment of cannabis use disorder (2018) · cites this paper as [75]

    The Results (Subjective ratings) report that naltrexone generally increased positive subjective ratings when combined with active marijuana in heavy marijuana smokers. The Introduction describes single-dose testing, and Future directions and limitations raises chronic administration as a question; this paper does not establish that repeated administration decreased those effects. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Haney M Comer SD Ward AS Foltin RW Fischman MW Factors influencing marijuana self-administration by humans Behav Pharmacol 1997 8 101 112 9833006

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cooper, Z. D., & Haney, M.
Affiliations
Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Cooper, Ziva D.
Venue
Psychopharmacology
Published
2010-05-19
Volume
211
Issue
2
Pages
141-148
ISSN
  • 0033-3158 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2072
OpenAlex
W2022083093
Cited by
58
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA-09236, P50DA009236)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychedelics and Drug Studies
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Keywords
naltrexone, cannabis, opioid antagonism, endocannabinoid system, opioid-cannabinoid interaction, subjective drug effects, drug liking, cognitive performance, heart rate, cardiovascular effects, abuse liability, opioid receptor blockade
MeSH terms
Adult, Marijuana Abuse, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Drug Interactions, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Marijuana Smoking, Naltrexone, Narcotic Antagonists, Psychomotor Performance, Dronabinol

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review