Bożena Antkowiak1, Małgorzata Paluch2, Magdalena Ciechanowska2, Małgorzata Nawrocka2, Krzysztof Bańkowski3, Olga Michalak3, Janusz Kocik2, Marek Kowalczyk4, Jan Izdebski5. 1. Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Warsaw, Poland. Electronic address: bantkowiak@wihe.waw.pl. 2. Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Warsaw, Poland. 3. Pharmaceutical Research Institute, Warsaw, Poland. 4. Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Warsaw, Poland; Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education, Warsaw, Poland. 5. Warsaw University, Department of Chemistry, Warsaw, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A preliminary evaluation of antinociceptive activity of a new cyclic dermorphin/deltorphin tetrapeptide analog restricted via a urea bridge and containing C-terminal ureidoethylamid {[H-Tyr-d-Lys(&(1))-Phe-Dab(&(2))-CH2CH2NHCONH2][&(1)CO&(2)]} (cUP-1) revealed a significant and long-lasting increase of pain threshold to thermal stimulation after systemic application. The current studies were aimed at further evaluation of cUP-1 activity in animal models of somatic and visceral pain. The influence of cUP-1 on motor functions was also investigated. METHODS: The influence of cUP-1 (0.5-2mgkg(-1), iv) on nociceptive threshold to mechanical pressure and analgesic efficacy in formalin and acetic acid-induced writhing tests were estimated. The antinociceptive effect of cUP-1 was compared to that of morphine (MF). The influence of cUP-1 (1, 4 and 8mgkg(-1), iv) on locomotor activity, motor coordination and muscle strength was estimated using open field and rota-rod tests and a grip strength measurement. RESULTS: Administration of cUP-1 in doses of 1 and 2mgkg(-1) elicited a significant increase of nociceptive threshold to mechanical pressure. MF applied in the same doses induced an antinociceptive effect only at the higher dose (2mgkg(-1)). There were no marked differences between the effect of cUP-1 and MF at each dose, at relative time points. In the writhing test and both phases of the formalin test, cUP-1 showed a significant, dose-dependent antinociceptive effect which did not markedly differ from that of MF. cUP-1 did not significantly affect motor functions of mice. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic application of cUP-1 elicited a dose-dependent antinociceptive effect. The analgesic efficacy of cUP-1 on mechanical nociception, visceral and formalin-induced pain was comparable to that of MF. cUP-1 did not impair motor functions of mice.
BACKGROUND: A preliminary evaluation of antinociceptive activity of a new cyclic dermorphin/deltorphin tetrapeptide analog restricted via a urea bridge and containing C-terminal ureidoethylamid {[H-Tyr-d-Lys(&(1))-Phe-Dab(&(2))-CH2CH2NHCONH2][&(1)CO&(2)]} (cUP-1) revealed a significant and long-lasting increase of pain threshold to thermal stimulation after systemic application. The current studies were aimed at further evaluation of cUP-1 activity in animal models of somatic and visceral pain. The influence of cUP-1 on motor functions was also investigated. METHODS: The influence of cUP-1 (0.5-2mgkg(-1), iv) on nociceptive threshold to mechanical pressure and analgesic efficacy in formalin and acetic acid-induced writhing tests were estimated. The antinociceptive effect of cUP-1 was compared to that of morphine (MF). The influence of cUP-1 (1, 4 and 8mgkg(-1), iv) on locomotor activity, motor coordination and muscle strength was estimated using open field and rota-rod tests and a grip strength measurement. RESULTS: Administration of cUP-1 in doses of 1 and 2mgkg(-1) elicited a significant increase of nociceptive threshold to mechanical pressure. MF applied in the same doses induced an antinociceptive effect only at the higher dose (2mgkg(-1)). There were no marked differences between the effect of cUP-1 and MF at each dose, at relative time points. In the writhing test and both phases of the formalin test, cUP-1 showed a significant, dose-dependent antinociceptive effect which did not markedly differ from that of MF. cUP-1 did not significantly affect motor functions of mice. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic application of cUP-1 elicited a dose-dependent antinociceptive effect. The analgesic efficacy of cUP-1 on mechanical nociception, visceral and formalin-induced pain was comparable to that of MF. cUP-1 did not impair motor functions of mice.
Authors: Justyna Piekielna; Renata Perlikowska; Jean Claude do-Rego; Jean-Luc do-Rego; Maria Camilla Cerlesi; Girolamo Calo; Alicja Kluczyk; Krzysztof Łapiński; Csaba Tömböly; Anna Janecka Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2015-04-03 Impact factor: 4.345