Cited by 82Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and Opioid Use

Low dose combination of morphine and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol circumvents antinociceptive tolerance and apparent desensitization of receptors

Open access
Smith, Paul A., Selley, Dana E., Sim-Selley, Laura J., Welch, Sandra P.·2007·European Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract

Morphine and delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) produce antinociception via mu opioid and cannabinoid CB1 receptors, respectively, located in central nervous system (CNS) regions including periaqueductal gray and spinal cord. Chronic treatment with morphine or THC produces antinociceptive tolerance and cellular adaptations that include receptor desensitization. Previous studies have shown that administration of combined sub-analgesic doses of THC+morphine produced antinociception in the absence of tolerance. The present study assessed receptor-mediated G-protein activity in spinal cord and periaqueductal gray following chronic administration of THC, morphine or low dose combination. Rats received morphine (escalating doses from 1 to 6x75 mg s.c. pellets or s.c. injection of 100 to 200 mg/kg twice daily), THC (4 mg/kg i.p. twice daily) or low dose combination (0.75 mg/kg each morphine (s.c) and THC (i.p.) twice daily) for 6.5 days. Antinociception was measured in one cohort of rats using the paw pressure test, and a second cohort was assessed for agonist-stimulated [35S]GTPgammaS binding. Chronic administration of morphine or THC produced antinociceptive tolerance to the respective drugs, whereas combination treatment did not produce tolerance. Administration of THC attenuated cannabinoid CB1 receptor-stimulated G-protein activity in both periaqueductal gray and spinal cord, and administration of morphine decreased mu opioid receptor-stimulated [35S]GTPgammaS binding in spinal cord or periaqueductal gray, depending on route of administration. In contrast, combination treatment did not alter cannabinoid CB1 receptor- or mu opioid receptor-stimulated G-protein activity in either region. These results demonstrate that low dose THC-morphine combination treatment produces antinociception in the absence of tolerance or attenuation of receptor activity.

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 · 10.1016/j.ejphar.2007.06.001

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • Tolerance to morphine alone was rapidly established, but there was no loss of effect with low-dose combinations of morphine plus delta-9-THC.

    “Tolerance to morphine alone rapidly established; no loss of effect with low-dose combinations of morphine + delta-9-THC”

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. [9]9. Ellison NM. Cancer Pain. In: Patt RB, editor. Toxicities and their treatments. Philadelphia, PA: JB Lippincott; 1993. pp. 185–194. [[Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Toxicities%20and%20their%20treatments&author=NM%20Ellison&publication_year=1993&)]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smith, P. A., Selley, D. E., Sim-Selley, L. J., & Welch, S. P.
Affiliations
Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Corresponding author
Selley, Dana E.
Venue
European Journal of Pharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-10
Volume
571
Issue
2-3
Pages
129-137
ISSN
0014-2999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2109170164
Cited by
81
References
38
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • U.S. Public Health Service
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA-14277, R01DA014277, DA 05274, R01DA010770, DA107710, P50DA005274)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
morphine, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, antinociceptive tolerance, receptor desensitization, mu-opioid receptor, CB1 receptor, spinal cord, periaqueductal gray, long-term opioid therapy, analgesia
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Animals, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Synergism, Drug Therapy, Combination, Drug Tolerance, Injections, Intraperitoneal, Injections, Subcutaneous, Male, Morphine, Morpholines, Naphthalenes, Pain, Pain Measurement, Periaqueductal Gray, Spinal Cord, Sulfur Radioisotopes, Dronabinol, Time Factors, Guanosine 5'-O-(3-Thiotriphosphate), Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Pain Threshold, Receptors, Opioid, mu, Analgesics, Non-Narcotic, Enkephalin, Ala(2)-MePhe(4)-Gly(5)-, Receptor, Cannabinoid, CB1, Benzoxazines, Rats

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