![]() |
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
BEHAVIORAL PHARMACOLOGY
+ µ and
+
Agonists on Schedule-Controlled Responding and Thermal Nociception
Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Center, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Belmont, Massachusetts (G.W.S., D.C.L., S.S.N.); and Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, National Institute on Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland (J.E.F., K.C.R.)
Agonists at
, µ, and
opioid receptors produce interacting effects in rodents and nonhuman primates. To further evaluate the determinants of these interactions, this study examined the effects of mixtures of
+ µ and
+
agonists in rhesus monkeys (n = 45) using two behavioral procedures, an assay of schedule-controlled responding for food reinforcement and an assay of thermal nociception. Results were analyzed using dose-addition analysis. In the assay of schedule-controlled responding, the
agonist (+)-4-[(
R)-
-((2S,5R)-4-allyl-2,5-dimethyl-1-piperazinyl)-3-methoxy-benzyl]-N,N-diethyl-benzamide (SNC80); the µ agonists methadone, fentanyl, morphine, and nalbuphine; and the
agonists (5
,7
,8
)-()-N-methyl-N-(7-(1-pyrrolidinyl)-1-oxaspiro(4,5)dec-8-yl) benzeneacetamide (U69,593) and bremazocine all dose dependently decreased rates of food-maintained responding when administered alone. Fixed ratio mixtures of SNC80 + µ agonists produced additive or subadditive effects, whereas SNC80 +
agonist mixtures produced only additive effects. In the assay of thermal nociception, SNC80 produced no measurable effects when administered alone, whereas µ and
agonists produced dose-dependent antinociception. SNC80 + µ agonist mixtures produced superadditive effects manifested as leftward shifts in µ agonist dose-effect curves. This synergism was antagonized by the
-selective antagonist naltrindole, suggesting that SNC80-induced enhancement of µ agonist antinociception was
receptor-mediated. SNC80 did not enhance the antinociceptive effects of the highly selective
agonist U69,593, and it produced only a marginal enhancement of antinociception produced by the less selective
agonist bremazocine. These results suggest that
agonists may selectively enhance the antinociceptive effects of µ agonists in rhesus monkeys. These results also confirm that opioid agonist interactions may depend on the receptor selectivity and relative doses of the agonists and on the experimental endpoint.
Address correspondence to: S. Stevens Negus, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Center, Harvard Medical School, McLean Hospital, 115 Mill St., Belmont, MA 02478-9106. E-mail: negus{at}mclean.harvard.edu
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
G. P. Do Carmo, R. Polt, E. J. Bilsky, K. C. Rice, and S. S. Negus Behavioral Pharmacology of the {micro}/{delta} Opioid Glycopeptide MMP2200 in Rhesus Monkeys J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., September 1, 2008; 326(3): 939 - 948. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. D. Cooper, Y. N.-T. Truong, Y.-G. Shi, and J. H. Woods Morphine Deprivation Increases Self-Administration of the Fast- and Short-Acting {micro}-Opioid Receptor Agonist Remifentanil in the Rat J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., September 1, 2008; 326(3): 920 - 929. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. D. Fischer and L. A. Dykstra Interactions between an N-Methyl-D-aspartate Antagonist and Low-Efficacy Opioid Receptor Agonists in Assays of Schedule-Controlled Responding and Thermal Nociception J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., September 1, 2006; 318(3): 1300 - 1306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. W. Stevenson, J. E. Folk, K. C. Rice, and S. S. Negus Interactions between {delta} and {micro} Opioid Agonists in Assays of Schedule-Controlled Responding, Thermal Nociception, Drug Self-Administration, and Drug versus Food Choice in Rhesus Monkeys: Studies with SNC80 [(+)-4-[({alpha}R)-{alpha}-((2S,5R)-4-Allyl-2,5-dimethyl-1-piperazinyl)-3-methoxybenzyl]-N,N-diethylbenzamide] and Heroin J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., July 1, 2005; 314(1): 221 - 231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||