Cited by 45Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchPain Management and Opioid Use

Decreased basal endogenous opioid levels in diabetic rodents: Effects on morphine and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinoid-induced antinociception

Williams, Jovan, Haller, Victoria L., Stevens, David L., Welch, Sandra P.·2008·European Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract

We have previously demonstrated synergy between morphine and Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC) in the expression of antinociception in acute pain models and in arthritic models of chronic pain. Our data has been extended to include acute pain in both diabetic mice and rats. In diabetic mice, Delta(9)-THC p.o. was more active in the tail-flick test in the diabetic mouse than in the non-diabetic mouse. Morphine (s.c.) was less potent in diabetic than in non-diabetic mice [6.1 (5.1-7.2) versus 3.2 (2.4-4.1) mg/kg, respectively], an effect previously extensively documented in pre-clinical and clinical testing. In addition, the combination of Delta(9)-THC with morphine produced a greater-than-additive relief of acute pain in mice. In the rat, the induction of the diabetic state decreased the antinociceptive effect of morphine, an effect temporally related to a decreased release of specific endogenous opioids. Conversely, Delta(9)-THC retained the ability to release endogenous opioids in diabetic rats and maintained significant antinociception. Extrapolation of such studies to the clinical setting may indicate the potential for use of Delta(9)-THC-like drugs in the treatment of diabetic neuropathic pain, alone or in combination with very low doses of opioids.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejphar.2007.12.035

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • THC and WIN55,212-2 produce antinociception in rodent STZ-induced peripheral neuropathy.

    “Several studies have demonstrated that THC (Williams et al, 2008) and WIN55,212-2 (Bujalska, 2008;Doğrul et al, 2004;Ikeda et al, 2013;Jahanabadi et al, 2016;Mohammadi-Farani et al, 2010;Ulugol et al, 2004;Vera et al, 2012;Vincenzi et al, 2013) produce antinociception in rodent STZinduced peripheral neuropathy.”
  • Δ9-THC exhibited enhanced antinociceptive efficacy in diabetic rats whereas morphine showed reduced antinociceptive efficacy.

    “Interestingly, Δ9-THC exhibited enhanced antinociceptive efficacy in diabetic rats whereas morphine showed reduced antinociceptive efficacy.115”
  • A non-nociceptive dose of Δ9-THC administered with morphine enhanced the antinociceptive properties of morphine in both diabetic and naive mice.

    “Moreover, a non-nociceptive dose of Δ9-THC, administered in conjunction with morphine, enhanced the antinociceptive properties of morphine in both diabetic and naive mice.115”
  • Diabetic rats exhibit lower levels of dynorphin and β-endorphins in cerebrospinal fluid relative to non-diabetic rats treated under the same conditions.

    “Diabetic rats exhibit lower levels of dynorphin and β-endorphins in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) relative to non-diabetic rats treated under the same conditions.115”
  • Administration of Δ9-THC to diabetic rats restored cerebrospinal fluid levels of endogenous dynorphin and leu-enkephalin to levels observed following morphine administration to non-diabetic rats.

    “Administration of Δ9-THC to diabetic rats restored CSF levels of endogenous dynorphin and leu-enkephalin to levels observed following morphine administration to non-diabetic rats.115”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, J., Haller, V. L., Stevens, D. L., & Welch, S. P.
Affiliations
Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Corresponding author
Haller, Victoria L.
Venue
European Journal of Pharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-04
Volume
584
Issue
1
Pages
78-86
ISSN
0014-2999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2036908810
Cited by
45
References
79
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Thomas F. and Kate Miller Jeffress Memorial Trust
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 07027, DA 05274, T32DA007027)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
endogenous opioids, diabetes mellitus, morphine, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, antinociception, acute pain, opioid synergy, diabetic neuropathic pain, opioid release, tail-flick test, chronic pain
MeSH terms
Administration, Oral, Analgesics, Opioid, Animals, Diabetes Mellitus, Experimental, Diabetic Neuropathies, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Synergism, Drug Therapy, Combination, Injections, Intraperitoneal, Injections, Subcutaneous, Male, Mice, Inbred ICR, Morphine, Pain Measurement, Dronabinol, Down-Regulation, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Pain Threshold, Analgesics, Non-Narcotic, Opioid Peptides, Mice, 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