Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Dogrul, A
• Seyrek, M

Titel

Systemic morphine produce antinociception mediated by spinal 5‐HT 7 , but not 5‐HT 1A and 5‐HT 2 receptors in the spinal cord

Ist Teil von

• British journal of pharmacology, 2009-01, Vol.149 (5), p.498-505

Erscheinungsjahr

2009

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ）

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Background and purpose: The serotonergic system within the spinal cord have been proposed to play an important role in the analgesic effects of systemic morphine. Currently, seven groups of 5‐HT receptors (5‐HT 1–7 ) have been characterized. One of the most recently identified subtypes of 5 HT receptor is the 5‐HT 7 receptor. We aimed to examine the role of spinal 5‐HT 7 receptors in the antinociceptive effects of systemic morphine. Experimental approach: The involvement of spinal 5‐HT 7 receptor in systemic morphine antinociception was compared to that of the 5‐HT 1A and 5‐HT 2 receptors by using the selective 5‐HT 7 receptor antagonist, SB‐269970, the selective 5‐HT 1A receptor antagonist, WAY 100635, the selective 5‐HT 2 antagonist ketanserin as well as the non‐selective 5‐HT 1,2,7 receptor antagonist, metergoline. Nociception was evaluated by the radiant heat tail‐flick test. Key results: I.t. administration of SB‐269970 (10  μ g) and metergoline (20  μ g) completely blocked the s.c. administered morphine‐induced (1, 3, 5 and 10 mg kg −1 ) antinociception in a time‐dependent manner. Additionally, i.t. administration of SB‐269970 (1, 3, 10 and 20  μ g) and metergoline (1, 5, 10 and 20  μ g) dose dependently inhibited the antinociceptive effects of a maximal dose of morphine (10 mg kg −1 , s.c.). I.t. administration of WAY 100635 (20  μ g) or ketanserine (20  μ g) did not alter morphine‐induced (1, 3, 5 and 10 mg kg −1 , s.c.) antinociception. Conclusion and implications: These findings indicate that the involvement of spinal 5‐HT 7 , but not of 5‐HT 1A or of 5‐HT 2 receptors in the antinociceptive effects of systemic morphine. British Journal of Pharmacology (2006) 149 , 498–505. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0706854