La función de los receptores cannabinoides1 centrales y periféricos en la actividad antihiperalgésica de los cannabinoides en un modelo de dolor neuropático / The role of central and peripheral cannabinoid1 receptors in the antihyperalgesic activity of cannabinoids in a model of neuropathic pain

Se examinaron los efectos de los agonistas cannabinoides en la hiperalgesia en un modelo de dolor neuro p á t i c o en la rata y se investigaron los posibles sitios de acción. Se comparó la actividad antihiperalgésica de los cannabinoides con su capacidad de provocar efectos en la conducta característicos de la actividad cannabinoide central.WIN55,212-2 (0,3-10 mg.kg- 1), CP-55,940 (0,03-1 mg.kg-1) y HU-210 (0,001-0,03 mg.kg- 1) fueron todos ellos activos en una "tétrada" de pruebas consistentes en movimiento de la cola, catalepsia, rodillo giratorio e hipotermia después de su administración subcutánea, con una jerarquía de potencias en todas ellas de HU-210 > CP-55,940 > WIN55,212-2. Los efectos de WIN55,212-2 en sendas pruebas fueron bloqueados por el antagonista cannabinoid e1 ( C B1) SR141716A. En el modelo de dolor neuro pático por ligadura parcial del nervio ciático, WIN55,212-2, CP55,940 y HU-210 produjeron una reversión completa de la hiperalgesia mecánica en las 3 horas siguientes a su administración subcutánea, con valores D5 0 de 0,52, 0,08 y 0,005 mg.kg- 1, respectivamente. En este modelo, WIN55,212-2 fue también eficaz frente a la hiperalgesia térmica y la alodinia mecánica. WIN55,212-2 produjo una marcada reversión de la hiperalgesia mecánica después de su administración intratecal, un efecto bloqueado por el antagonista CB1 SR141716A. Tras su administración intraplantar en la pata trasera ipsilateral, WIN55,212-2 revirtió hasta en un 70 por ciento la hipealgesia mecánica, aunque también se observó actividad con dosis altas tras su inyección en la pata contralateral. El efecto antihiperalgésico de WIN55,212-2 inyectado en la pata ipsilateral se bloqueó con la administración subcutánea de SR141716A, pero no se vio afectado por la administración intratecal de ese compuesto. Estos datos indican que los cannabinoides son unos agentes antihiperalgésicos muy potentes y eficaces en un modelo de dolor neuropático, una actividad que probablemente éste mediada por su acción tanto en el SNC como en la periferia (AU)

The role of central and peripheral Cannabinoid1 receptors in the antihyperalgesic activity of cannabinoids in a model of neuropathic pain.

We have examined the effects of cannabinoid agonists on hyperalgesia in a model of neuropathic pain in the rat and investigated the possible sites of action. The antihyperalgesic activity of the cannabinoids was compared with their ability to elicit behavioural effects characteristic of central cannabinoid activity. WIN55,212-2 (0.3-10 mg kg(-1)), CP-55,940 (0.03-1 mg kg(-1)) and HU-210 (0.001-0.03 mg kg(-1)) were all active in a 'tetrad' of tests consisting of tail-flick, catalepsy, rotarod and hypothermia following subcutaneous administration, with a rank order of potency in each of HU-210 > CP-55,940 > WIN55,212-2. The effects of WIN55,212-2 in each assay were blocked by the Cannabinoid1 (CB1) antagonist SR141716A. In the partial sciatic ligation model of neuropathic pain WIN55,212-2, CP-55,940 and HU-210 produced complete reversal of mechanical hyperalgesia within 3 h of subcutaneous administration with D50 values of 0.52, 0.08 and 0.005 mg kg(-1), respectively. In this model WIN55,212-2 was also effective against thermal hyperalgesia and mechanical allodynia. WIN55,212-2 produced pronounced reversal of mechanical hyperalgesia following intrathecal administration that was blocked by the CB1 antagonist SR141716A. Following intraplantar administration into the ipsilateral hindpaw, WIN55,212-2 produced up to 70% reversal of mechanical hyperalgesia, although activity was also observed at high doses following injection into the contralateral paw. The antihyperalgesic effect of WIN55,212-2 injected into the ipsilateral paw was blocked by subcutaneously administered SR141716A, but was not affected by intrathecally administered SR141716A. These data show that cannabinoids are highly potent and efficacious antihyperalgesic agents in a model of neuropathic pain. This activity is likely to be mediated via an action in both the CNS and in the periphery.

Metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 (mGlu5) and nociceptive function. I. Selective blockade of mGlu5 receptors in models of acute, persistent and chronic pain.

The excitatory neurotransmitter, glutamate, is particularly important in the transmission of pain information in the nervous system through the activation of ionotropic and metabotropic glutamate receptors. A potent, subtype-selective antagonist of the metabotropic glutamate-5 (mGlu5) receptor, 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)-pyridine (MPEP), has now been discovered that has effective anti-hyperalgesic effects in models of inflammatory pain. MPEP did not affect rotarod locomotor performance, or normal responses to noxious mechanical or thermal stimulation in naïve rats. However, in models of inflammatory pain, systemic administration of MPEP produced effective reversal of mechanical hyperalgesia without affecting inflammatory oedema. In contrast to the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, indomethacin and diclofenac, the maximal anti-hyperalgesic effects of orally administered MPEP were observed without acute erosion of the gastric mucosa. In contrast to its effects in models of inflammatory pain, MPEP did not produce significant reversal of mechanical hyperalgesia in a rat model of neuropathic pain.

Analgesic profile of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists, (+)-epibatidine and ABT-594 in models of persistent inflammatory and neuropathic pain.

The anti-nociceptive and locomotor effects of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonists (+)-epibatidine and ABT-594 were compared in the rat. Acute thermal nociception was measured using the tail flick test. Mechanical hyperalgesia was measured as paw withdrawal threshold (PWT) in response to a mechanical stimulus in two animal models of persistent pain; (1) 24 h following subplantar injections of Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA) into the left hind paw or (2) 11-15 days following a partial ligation of the left sciatic nerve. Disruption of locomotor function was assessed using an accelerating rotarod device. In all tests, (+)-epibatidine was significantly more potent than ABT-594. Both (+)-epibatidine and ABT-594 dose-dependently increased tail flick latencies but only at doses that also disrupted performance in the rotarod test. On the other hand, (+)-epibatidine and ABT-594 dose-dependently reversed inflammatory and neuropathic hyperalgesia at significantly lower doses than that needed to disrupt performance in the rotarod test. In summary, ABT-594 is less potent than (+)-epibatidine in assays of acute and persistent pain and in the rotarod assay. However, ABT-594 displayed a clearer separation between its motor and anti-hyperalgesic effects. This shows that nicotinic agonists with improved selectivity between the nicotinic receptor subtypes could provide strong analgesic effects with a much improved therapeutic window.

Evidence against an involvement of the haloperidol-sensitive sigma recognition site in the discriminative stimulus properties of (+)-N-allylnormetazocine ((+)-SKF 10,047).

1. The involvement of the haloperidol-sensitive, sigma recognition site and the N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptor in the mediation of the discriminative stimulus properties of (+)-N-allylnormetazocine [+)-NANM, (+)-SKF 10,047), has been investigated in the rat by use of a two-lever, operant drug discrimination paradigm. 2. Six compounds with nanamolar affinity for the sigma recognition site [+/-)-pentazocine, (+)-3-(hydroxyphenyl)-N-propylpiperidine [+)-3-PPP), ditolylguanidine (DTG), haloperidol, (-)-butaclamol and BMY 14802) were investigated for their ability to generalise or antagonise the (+)-NANM discriminative stimulus. Each drug was tested at doses found in an ex vivo radioligand binding assay to displace [3H]-DTG from the central sigma recognition site by more than 40%. 3. While (+/-)-pentazocine (in the presence of naloxone) generalised and (+)-3-PPP partially antagonised the (+)-NANM cue, the other putative sigma ligands were ineffective either as agonists or antagonists at doses clearly occupying the sigma site in vivo. 4. Dose-dependent generalisation to the (+)-NANM cue was seen with the selective non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist, MK-801, a compound devoid of significant affinity for the sigma recognition site. 5. (+/-)-Pentazocine was found to antagonise seizures induced in the mouse by NMDLA, a model reflecting antagonism of central NMDA receptors, and a strong correlation was found between the rank order of potency of compounds to generalise to the (+)-NANM discriminative stimulus and their potencies as anticonvulsants. 6. In conclusion, no evidence was found to substantiate the contention that the discriminative stimulus properties of (+)-NANM are mediated by the haloperidol-sensitive sigma recognition site. On the other hand, the results are consistent with the interoceptive stimulus being mechanistically based in the NMDA receptor complex.