PubMed · 16323708
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Jonathan D Moreno. Keeping pain in perspective.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16323708/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
We evaluated the effects of pretreatment with clorgyline, an irreversible monoamine oxidase (MAO)-A inhibitor, on morphine-induced hyperlocomotion and antinociception. A single administration of morphine (30 mg/kg, i.p.) to male ICR mice induced a hyperlocomotion. ANOVA analysis revealed the statistical significance of the morphine effect on horizontal locomotion and of the clorgyline pretreatment x morphine interaction effect, but not of the effect of clorgyline pretreatment. The initial (5 min after challenge) phase of morphine actions vs. saline challenge appeared as if morphine had a strong inhibitory effect on locomotor activity in combination with different doses of clorgyline. The mice administered with morphine in combination of clorgyline (1 and 10 mg/kg) did not show any stereotypic behaviors. Clorgyline at a dose of 0.1 mg/kg but not other doses tested significantly potentiated morphine-induced antinociception evaluated by tail flick but not hot plate test. During the measurements of locomotor activity and antinociception, clorgyline at doses of 1 and 10 mg/kg significantly inhibited monoamine metabolism through MAO. These results suggest that clorgyline showed an inhibitory effect on morphine-induced hyperlocomotion, but not antinociception, through MAO inhibition. There is not a possibility that clorgyline pretreatment enhanced morphine action on motor activity, resulting in the abnormal behavior from hyperlocomotion to stereotypic movements.
mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptors have been implicated in pain associated with inflammation. In the present study, the formalin test was used to measure sustained pain with components of tissue injury. The aims of the present study were to assess: (i) the role of mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptors in inflammatory pain using selective antagonist EMQMCM, 1.25-5 mg/kg, as the mGlu1 receptor antagonist, and MPEP or MTEP, 2.5-10 mg/kg, as mGlu5 receptor antagonist; (ii) the possible interaction between mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptor antagonists and morphine; and (iii) whether tolerance develops to the analgesic effects of these antagonists after prolonged treatment. EMQMCM, MTEP and MPEP significantly reduced the manifestation of both phases of formalin response. However, all these mGlu receptor antagonists did not affect the withdrawal latencies in a model of acute pain (Hargreaves test), which has a different underlying mechanism. In the present study, the suppressive effect on formalin-induced pain behaviour was much stronger when mGlu1 and mGlu5 receptor antagonists were co-injected compared to administration of a single antagonist, but this effect was not seen when mGlu receptor antagonist was co-administered with morphine. This is in contrast to the pronounced inhibitory effects after co-treatment with morphine and the uncompetitive NMDA receptor antagonist memantine. The present study also provides the first direct in vivo evidence that prolonged administration of MTEP (5 mg/kg) over 7 days leads to the development of tolerance to its antinociceptive effects. Such tolerance was not observed when EMQMCM (5 mg/kg) was administered in the same manner. In conclusion, these results provide additional arguments for the role of group I mGlu receptors in pain with inflammatory conditions.
Ultra-low-dose methionine-enkephalin-arginine-phenylalanine improves vagal transmission (vagotonic) and decreases heart rate via delta(1)-opioid receptors within the sinoatrial (SA) node. Higher doses activate delta(2)-opioid receptors, interrupt vagal transmission (vagolytic), and reduce the bradycardia. Preconditioning-like occlusion of the nodal artery produced a vagotonic response that was reversed by the delta(1)-antagonist 7-benzylidenaltrexone (BNTX). The following study tested the hypothesis that extended delta(1)-opioid receptor stimulation reduces subsequent delta(2)-receptor responses. The delta(2)-agonist deltorphin II was introduced in the SA node by microdialysis to evaluate delta(2) responses before and after infusion of the delta(1)-agonist TAN-67. TAN-67 reduced the vagolytic effect of deltorphin by two-thirds. When the delta(1)-antagonist BNTX was combined with TAN-67, the deltorphin response was preserved, suggesting that attrition of the prior response was mediated by delta(1) activity. When TAN-67 was omitted in time control studies, some loss of delta(2) responses was apparent in the absence of the delta(1) treatment. This loss was also eliminated by BNTX, suggesting that the attenuation of the response after deltorphin alone was also the result of delta(1) activity. Additional studies tested TAN-67 alone in the absence of prior deltorphin. When time controls were conducted without the initial deltorphin treatment, a robust vagolytic response was observed. When TAN-67 preceded the delayed deltorphin, the vagolytic response was eroded, indicating an independent effect of TAN-67. BNTX infused afterward was unable to restore the delta(2) response. These data support the conclusion that the loss of the delta(2) response resulted from reduced delta(2) activity mediated by continued delta(1)-receptor stimulation and not the arithmetic consequence of increased competition from that same delta(1) receptor.