Cited by 110Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and Opioid Use

Modulation of Oral Morphine Antinociceptive Tolerance and Naloxone-Precipitated Withdrawal Signs by Oral Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol

Cichewicz, Diana L., Welch, Sandra P.·2003·The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

Abstract

Previous studies have demonstrated a functional interaction between cannabinoid and opioid systems in the development and expression of morphine tolerance and dependence. In these experiments, we examined the effect of a low oral dose of Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta 9-THC) on the development of oral morphine tolerance and the expression of naloxone-precipitated morphine withdrawal signs of jumping and diarrhea in ICR mice. Chronic treatment with high-dose oral morphine produced a 3.12-fold antinociceptive tolerance. Tolerance to morphine was prevented in groups receiving a daily cotreatment with a nonanalgetic dose (20 mg/kg p.o.) of Delta 9-THC, except when challenged with a very high dose of morphine. The chronic coadministration of low-dose Delta 9-THC also reduced naloxone-precipitated (1 mg/kg s.c.) platform jumping by 50% but did not reduce diarrhea. In separate experiments, mice treated chronically with high-dose morphine p.o. were not cross-tolerant to Delta 9-THC; in fact, these morphine-tolerant mice were more sensitive to the acute antinociceptive effects of Delta 9-THC. Delta 9-THC (20 mg/kg p.o.) also reduced naloxone-precipitated jumping but not diarrhea when administered acutely to morphine-tolerant mice. These results represent the first evidence that oral morphine tolerance and dependence can be circumvented by coadministration of a nonanalgetic dose of Delta 9-THC p.o. In summary, cotreatment with a combination of morphine and Delta 9-THC may prove clinically beneficial in that long-term morphine efficacy is maintained.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1124/jpet.102.046870

Cites

43 of 43 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cichewicz, D. L., & Welch, S. P.
Affiliations
Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-06
Volume
305
Issue
3
Pages
812-817
ISSN
0022-3565 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2138954299
Cited by
110
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 10
FWCI
2.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k02da000186-09)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 07027, DA 05274, K02 DA-00186, T32DA007027)
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 tolerance, naloxone-precipitated withdrawal, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, opioid-cannabinoid interaction, opioid use disorder, antinociception, diarrhea, cross-tolerance, chronic morphine administration, oral administration
MeSH terms
Administration, Oral, Analgesics, Analgesics, Opioid, Animals, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Tolerance, Hallucinogens, Male, Mice, Inbred ICR, Morphine, Morphine Dependence, Naloxone, Narcotic Antagonists, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Dronabinol, 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