Cited by 33Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

Differential response to IV carfentanil in chronic cocaine users and healthy controls

Open access
Minkowski, Carolynne P., Epstein, David, Frost, J. James, Gorelick, David A.·2012·Addiction Biology

Abstract

Chronic cocaine exposure in both rodents and humans increases regional brain mu‐opioid receptor (mOR) binding potential, suggesting that cocaine users might have an altered response to mOR agonists. We evaluated the response to IV carfentanil (a selective mOR agonist) in 23 cocaine users [mean (standard deviation) age 33.8 (4.0) years, 83% men] who underwent positron emission tomography (PET) scanning with [C‐11]‐carfentanil [44.7 (19.5) ng/kg] while housed on a closed research ward and 15 healthy non‐drug‐using controls [43.9 (14.2) years, 80% men] scanned [49.5 (12.6) ng/kg] as outpatients. Cocaine users had used for 8.7 (4.3) years and on 73 (22)% of days in the two weeks prior to PET scanning. Common adverse effects associated with mOR agonists (nausea, dizziness, headache, vomiting, itchiness) were assessed by self‐report (five‐point Likert scales) during and for 90 minutes after the scans. Cocaine users were significantly less likely than controls to report any symptom (30.4% versus 60%) and had fewer total symptoms [0.43 (0.73) versus 1.1 (1.0)] during scans, even after statistically controlling for age and carfentanil dose. These differences were also present after the scans and at repeat scans performed after about one week or 12 weeks of monitored cocaine abstinence. In a larger group of cocaine users and separate controls, there was no significant group difference in carfentanil half‐life, suggesting that the observed difference was pharmacodynamically, rather than pharmacokinetically, based. These findings suggest that cocaine users are less responsive than healthy controls to mOR agonist adverse effects despite having increased regional brain mOR binding potential.

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 · 10.1111/j.1369-1600.2010.00256.x

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • Other withdrawal changes include increased μ opioid receptor responsivity during opioid withdrawal and decreased GABAergic and increased NMDA glutamatergic transmission in the nucleus accumbens.

    “Other observed changes include increases in μ opioid receptor responsivity during opioid withdrawal,71,72 and decreases in GABAergic and increases in NMDA glutamatergic transmission in the nucleus accumbens.”

    From Neurobiology of addiction: a neurocircuitry analysis (2016) · cites this paper as [72]

    The citation is attached to the claim of increased μ-opioid receptor responsivity during opioid withdrawal, not the later GABAergic/NMDA clause. The Discussion (page unavailable) examines cocaine abstinence instead and reports fewer adverse effects from a μ-opioid receptor agonist in cocaine users than in controls. A search for opioid withdrawal and receptor responsivity found no passage addressing the cited claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Minkowski, C. P., Epstein, D., Frost, J. J., & Gorelick, D. A.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Gorelick, David A.
Venue
Addiction Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-11-04
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
149-155
ISSN
  • 1355-6215 (ISSN-L)
  • 1369-1600
OpenAlex
W1867524622
Cited by
33
References
31
Citations by year
2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Addiction Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01da009479-03, 5r01da011774-02)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA-11774, DA-09479, ZIADA000241, R01DA012274, DA-12274)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
carfentanil, cocaine users, mu-opioid receptor agonists, opioid side effects, cocaine abstinence, pharmacodynamics
MeSH terms
Adult, Analgesics, Opioid, Brain, Dizziness, Female, Fentanyl, Half-Life, Headache, Humans, Injections, Intravenous, Male, Nausea, Pruritus, Time Factors, Vomiting, Cocaine-Related Disorders, Positron-Emission Tomography

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