Cited by 81Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Cannabinoid WIN 55,212-2 inhibits the activity-dependent facilitation of spinal nociceptive responses

Strangman, Nicole M., Walker, J. Michael·1999·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

Cannabinoids suppress nociceptive processing of acute stimuli, but little is known about their effects on processes that lead to hyperexcitability of nociceptive neurons following prolonged noxious stimulation. Wind-up, the increasingly strong response of spinal nociceptive neurons to repetitive noxious electrical stimuli, results from a fast-rising cumulative depolarization and increase in intracellular calcium concentration. These processes produce central sensitization, the increased excitability of spinal nociceptive neurons that contributes to the hyperalgesia and allodynia associated with chronic pain. Intravenous injection of the potent, synthetic cannabinoid agonist WIN 55, 212-2, but not the inactive enantiomer, WIN 55,212-3, dose-dependently decreased the wind-up of spinal wide dynamic range and nociceptive-specific neurons independent of acute responses to activation of low- and high-threshold primary afferents. This is the first direct evidence that cannabinoids inhibit the activity-dependent facilitation of spinal nociceptive responses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1999.82.1.472

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?

  • WIN55,212-2 dose-dependently inhibits windup and CCI-induced increases in spontaneous firing of spinal wide dynamic range neurons through a CB1-dependent mechanism.

    “A neurophysiological basis for these findings is derived from the observation that WIN55,212-2 (i.v.) dose-dependently inhibits windup46 as well as CCI-induced increases in spontaneous firing47 of spinal wide dynamic range (WDR) neurons through a CB1-dependent mechanism.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 46 · Cited by 81

Authors
Strangman, N. M., & Walker, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Departments of Neuroscience and
  • Brown University (US)
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1999-07-01
Volume
82
Issue
1
Pages
472-477
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2238644000
Cited by
81
References
46
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k02mh001083-03, 5r01ns033247-08, 5r01da010043-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K02MH01083)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA-10043)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS 33247)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
WIN 55,212-2, cannabinoids, wind-up, central sensitization, spinal nociceptive neurons, hyperexcitability, hyperalgesia, allodynia, chronic pain, intracellular calcium, wide dynamic range neurons, nociceptive-specific neurons, enantiomer specificity
MeSH terms
Animals, Cannabinoids, Electric Stimulation, Hyperalgesia, Injections, Intravenous, Male, Morpholines, Naphthalenes, Nerve Fibers, Neurons, Nociceptors, Pain, Reaction Time, Spinal Cord, Stereoisomerism, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, 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