RATIONALE: Some opioid receptor ligands that appear to be neutral antagonists can have inverse agonist activity under conditions of increased constitutive activity (e.g., agonist treatment). OBJECTIVES: This study compared the opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone and its metabolites 6alpha-naltrexol and 6beta-naltrexol in nondependent and morphine-dependent monkeys to see whether their potencies varied according to drug treatment and, presumably, to differences in constitutive activity of mu opioid receptors. RESULTS: In monkeys (n = 4) receiving 3.2 mg/kg per day of morphine and discriminating 0.0178 mg/kg naltrexone, naltrexone and each metabolite increased responding on the naltrexone lever in a dose-related manner with naltrexone being 8- and 71-fold more potent than 6alpha- and 6beta-naltrexol, respectively. After 27 h of no-morphine treatment, monkeys responded on the naltrexone lever, and this effect was reversed by morphine. Naltrexone and each metabolite prevented morphine reversal of naltrexone-lever responding, and their rank order potency was the same as their substitution for naltrexone; however, the potency between naltrexone and each metabolite was slightly greater in morphine-dependent as compared to morphine-deprived monkeys. In a separate group (n = 3) of nondependent monkeys discriminating 1.78 mg/kg of morphine, all three compounds antagonized morphine with the same potency as in the reversal study (morphine-dependent monkeys), with Schild analyses showing no difference in apparent affinities (pA (2)) between nondependent and morphine-dependent monkeys. CONCLUSION: Naltrexone and 6alpha- and 6beta-naltrexol have qualitatively similar effects, and their potencies do not vary markedly with opioid treatment, suggesting that under these conditions, they do not vary with regard to inverse agonism.
RATIONALE: Some opioid receptor ligands that appear to be neutral antagonists can have inverse agonist activity under conditions of increased constitutive activity (e.g., agonist treatment). OBJECTIVES: This study compared the opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone and its metabolites 6alpha-naltrexol and 6beta-naltrexol in nondependent and morphine-dependent monkeys to see whether their potencies varied according to drug treatment and, presumably, to differences in constitutive activity of mu opioid receptors. RESULTS: In monkeys (n = 4) receiving 3.2 mg/kg per day of morphine and discriminating 0.0178 mg/kg naltrexone, naltrexone and each metabolite increased responding on the naltrexone lever in a dose-related manner with naltrexone being 8- and 71-fold more potent than 6alpha- and 6beta-naltrexol, respectively. After 27 h of no-morphine treatment, monkeys responded on the naltrexone lever, and this effect was reversed by morphine. Naltrexone and each metabolite prevented morphine reversal of naltrexone-lever responding, and their rank order potency was the same as their substitution for naltrexone; however, the potency between naltrexone and each metabolite was slightly greater in morphine-dependent as compared to morphine-deprived monkeys. In a separate group (n = 3) of nondependent monkeys discriminating 1.78 mg/kg of morphine, all three compounds antagonized morphine with the same potency as in the reversal study (morphine-dependent monkeys), with Schild analyses showing no difference in apparent affinities (pA (2)) between nondependent and morphine-dependent monkeys. CONCLUSION:Naltrexone and 6alpha- and 6beta-naltrexol have qualitatively similar effects, and their potencies do not vary markedly with opioid treatment, suggesting that under these conditions, they do not vary with regard to inverse agonism.
Authors: Kirsten M Raehal; John J Lowery; Castigliano M Bhamidipati; Ryan M Paolino; Jennifer R Blair; Danxin Wang; Wolfgang Sadée; Edward J Bilsky Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2005-02-16 Impact factor: 4.030
Authors: L Malspeis; M S Bathala; T M Ludden; H B Bhat; S G Frank; T D Sokoloski; B E Morrison; R H Reuning Journal: Res Commun Chem Pathol Pharmacol Date: 1975-09
Authors: Philippe De Deurwaerdère; Sylvia Navailles; Kelly A Berg; William P Clarke; Umberto Spampinato Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2004-03-31 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: An-Li Wang; Steven B Lowen; Igor Elman; Zhenhao Shi; Victoria P Fairchild; Alexander Bouril; Ruben C Gur; Daniel D Langleben Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2017-10-18
Authors: Jun-Xu Li; Lance R McMahon; Lisa R Gerak; Ginger L Becker; Charles P France Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2008-05-10 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Ellen A Walker; Christina Chambers; Matthew G Korber; Srihari R Tella; Cassandra Prioleau; Li Fang Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 4.402