Cited by 124Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyCannabis and Cannabinoid Research

The role of endogenous opioids in enhancing the antinociception produced by the combination of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol and morphine in the spinal cord.

Pugh, G, Smith, P B, Dombrowski, D S, Welch, S P·1996·The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

Abstract

We have shown previously that intrathecal (i.t.) administration of the combination of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and morphine results in a greater than additive antinociceptive effect. Similarly, pretreating mice with subthreshold doses of the kappa agonist, Dynorphin A (1-8), produced a parallel, leftward shift of the morphine dose-response curve, shifting the ED50 of morphine from 0.32 to 0.04 micrograms/mouse. A cocktail of enzyme inhibitors used to prevent the metabolism of Dynorphin A (1-8) into the delta receptor agonist, [Leu5]-enkephalin, attenuated the enhancement of morphine-induced antinociception by delta 9-THC. The enhanced antinociceptive effect observed after i.t. administration of the combination of delta 9-THC and morphine was also attenuated with antisera to Dynorphin A (1-8) (10 micrograms/ mouse) and Dynorphin A (1-13) (10 micrograms/mouse). Antisera to Dynorphin A (1-8) and Dynorphin A (1-17) blocked the antinociceptive effects of delta 9-THC (50 micrograms i.t.) without producing any significant alteration in the hypothermic and cataleptic effects or hypomotility produced by delta 9-THC. The antinociception produced by the combination of delta 9-THC and morphine was blocked by the kappa antagonist, nor-binaltorphimine (2 micrograms/ mouse), as well as the delta antagonist, naltrindole (5 micrograms/ mouse). Thus, the antinociception of morphine, which is mediated predominately by mu receptors, may be enhanced by delta 9-THC through the activation of kappa and delta receptors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-3565(25)21168-5

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pugh, G., Smith, P. B., Dombrowski, D. S., & Welch, S. P.
Affiliations
Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-11
Volume
279
Issue
2
Pages
608-616
ISSN
0022-3565 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1907921830
Cited by
123
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k02da000186-09)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 05274, DA‐03672, KO2 DA00186)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Keywords
endogenous opioids, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, morphine, antinociception, spinal cord, dynorphin A, kappa opioid receptor, delta opioid receptor, mu-opioid receptor, nor-binaltorphimine, naltrindole, leu-enkephalin, intrathecal administration
MeSH terms
Analgesia, Analgesics, Animals, Body Temperature, Calcium, Catalepsy, Drug Synergism, Dynorphins, Male, Morphine, Rabbits, Spinal Cord, Dronabinol, Receptors, Opioid, delta, Receptors, Opioid, kappa, Mice

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