![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Bidirectional effects of fentanyl on dendritic spines and AMPA receptors depend upon the internalization of mu opioid receptors *Department of Neuroscience, The University of Minnesota, 321 Church St S.E. Minneapolis, MN 55455 +Department of Pharmacology, The University of Minnesota, 321 Church St S.E. Minneapolis, MN 55455 #Department of Neurology, Chengdu General Military Hospital, Chengdu City, 610083, China Correspondence should be sent to: Dezhi Liao, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Neuroscience, The University of Minnesota, 321 Church St S.E. Minneapolis, MN 55455, Tel: 612-626-3522, e-mail: liaox020/at/umn.edu The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at Neuropsychopharmacology.Abstract Fentanyl is a frequently used and abused opioid analgesic and can cause internalization of mu opioid receptors (MORs). Receptor internalization modulates the signaling pathways of opioid receptors. Because changes in dendritic spines and synaptic AMPA receptors play important roles in addiction and memory loss, we investigated how fentanyl affects dendritic spines and synaptic AMPA receptors in cultured hippocampal neurons. Fentanyl at low concentrations (0.01 and 0.1 µM) caused collapse of dendritic spines and decreased the number of AMPA receptor clusters. In contrast, fentanyl at high concentrations (1 and 10 µM) had opposite effects, inducing the emergence of new spines and increasing the number of AMPA receptor clusters. These dose-dependent bidirectional effects of fentanyl were blocked by a selective MOR antagonist CTOP at 5 µM. In neurons that had been transfected with HA-tagged or GFP-tagged MORs, fentanyl at high concentrations induced persistent and robust internalization of MORs, whereas fentanyl at lower concentrations induced little or transient receptor internalization. The blockade of receptor internalization with the expression of dominant negative Dynamin I (the K44E mutant) reversed the effect of fentanyl at high concentrations, supporting a role of receptor internalization in modulating the dose-dependent effects of fentanyl. In contrast to morphine, the effects of fentanyl on dendritic spines are distinctively bidirectional and concentration-dependent, probably due to its ability to induce robust internalization of MORs at high concentrations. The characterization of the effects of fentanyl on spines and AMPA receptors may help us understand the roles of MOR internalization in addiction and cognitive deficits. Keywords: Fentanyl, Dendritic Spines, AMPA receptors, Receptor Internalization, Cognitive Dysfunctions INTRODUCTION Behavioral sensitization to psychostimulants was prevented when NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 was administered prior to injection of cocaine and amphetamine (Karler et al., 1989) or when MK-801 was microinjected into ventral tegmental area (VTA) or amygdala (Kalivas and Alesdatter 1993). The tolerance and sensitization of opiates were also inhibited by treatment of MK-801 before opiate exposure (Trujillo and Akil, 1991; Wolf and Jeziorski, 1993). NMDA receptors are required for synaptic plasticity and therefore opioid-induced plasticity of dendritic spines is likely to play some roles in drug addiction. These pioneer studies lead to the widely accepted hypothesis that drug addiction is a neural plasticity-dependent pathological form of learning and memory (Kauer and Malenka 2007; Kelley 2004; Nestler 2002; Williams et al., 2001; Wolf 2002). A large amount of evidence shows that chronic opioid use or abuse leads to impairment of cognitive functions (Ersche et al., 2006; Bodnar 2007; Gruber et al., 2007; Mintzer et al., 2005). The pyramidal cell layer of the hippocampus is one of the regions that have the highest level of MOR proteins (Arvidsson et al., 1995) and MOR mRNA (Mansour et al., 1995). The pyramidal neurons are glutamatergic neurons with numerous dendritic spines that contain AMPA receptors and NMDA receptors (Hollmann and Heinemann, 1994; Kennedy 2000). Synaptic plasticity of dendritic spines has been proposed to be the cellular basis for experience-dependent learning and memory for decades (Bliss and Collingridge, 1993; Malenka 1994; Martin et al., 2000). Chronic administration with morphine profoundly decreases the density of dendritic spines in the hippocampus in rats that self-administered morphine (Robinson et al., 2002; this group of rats repeatedly took morphine, resulting in long-time continuous exposure of morphine). Chronic treatment with morphine also caused collapse of dendritic spines in cultured hippocampal neurons (Liao et al., 2005). Therefore, chronic opioid exposure may cause cognitive deficits via MOR-mediated aberrations in dendritic spines and synaptic AMPA receptors. Fentanyl is one of the most popular opioid analgesics for patients undergoing surgery or suffering from chronic pain (Stanley 1992, 2005; Skaer 2004, 2006). Overdose of “killer fentanyl” in opioid addicts has caused grave concerns in public health and safety (Fodale et al., 2008). Despite the extensive use and abuse of fentanyl, it is still unknown whether synthetic opioids such as fentanyl have the same pharmacological effect on excitatory synapses as naturally derived opiates such as morphine. In the present study, unlike morphine, fentanyl at a low concentration decreases the density of spines and AMPA receptor clusters whereas at a high concentration it increases the density of spines and AMPA receptor clusters. In our previous studies, naloxone and genetic deletion of MORs in transgenic mice increased the density of dendritic spines, suggesting that MOR-mediated tonic inhibition of spinogenesis may play an important role in maintaining the normal morphology of dendritic spines in mature neurons (Liao et al., 2005). In the present study, we will test the hypothesis that fentanyl at a high concentration induces emergence of new spines by removing MOR-mediated tonic inhibition of spinogenesis via receptor internalization. MATERIALS AND METHODS High-density neuronal cultures and neuronal transfection A 25-mm glass polylysine-coated coverslip (thickness, 0.08 mm) was glued to the bottom of a 35-mm culture dish with a 22-mm hole using silicone sealant as previously described (Lin et al., 2004; Wiens et al., 2005). Dissociated neuronal cultures from rat hippocampus at postnatal day 1–2 were prepared as previously described (Liao et al., 2001). Primary hippocampal cultures were used because the hippocampus is one of the regions that contain the highest level of MORs (Arvidsson et al., 1995) and has been implicated to be important for addiction (Vorel et al., 2001; Biala et al., 2005; Fan et al., 1999) as well as learning and memory (Malinow et al., 2000). Neurons were plated onto prepared 35-mm culture dishes at a density of 1× 106 cells per dish. The age of cultured neurons was counted from the day of plating, one day in vitro (DIV). Neurons at 5–7 DIV were transfected with appropriate plasmids using the standard calcium phosphate precipitation method as previously described (Lin et al., 2004). After transfection, neurons were put back to a tissue culture incubator (37°C, 5% CO2) and allowed to mature and develop dendritic spines until ~3 weeks in vitro for usage. In co-transfections, several different plasmids were mixed together with the phosphate buffer and CaCl2 before being added to culture media. Low-density neuronal cultures In order to detect the distribution of endogenous synaptic proteins with high resolution, low-density neuronal cultures were prepared as previously described with some modifications (Liao et al., 1999). Dissociated neuronal cultures from rat hippocampus at postnatal day 1–2 were plated into 12-well culture plates at a density of 50,000 to 100,000 cells per well. Each well contained a polylysine-coated 12-mm glass coverslip on the bottom. In order to maintain the low-density cultures for a long time (> 1 month), the above 12-mm coverslips with low-density cultured neurons were transferred to 60 mm dishes (4 coverslips per dish; the coverslips faced up) that contained high-density neuronal cultures after 1 week in vitro. In previous studies, dishes with a glial feed layer were often used to support low-density cultures (Goslin and Banker, 1991). Recently, we found that high-density neuronal cultures were far better supporters than pure glial cells, suggesting that neurons probably also play some roles in the survival of nearby neurons. Time-lapse live imaging method To label dendrites, high-density neurons at 5–7 DIV were transfected with plasmids encoding enhanced green fluorescence (GFP) or GFP-tagged molecules. The 35-mm culture dishes fit tightly in a homemade holding chamber on a fixed platform above an inverted Nikon microscope sitting on an X-Y translation stage (Burleigh, Inc). The location of any neuron of interest was recorded by the reading of the X-Y translation stage. The culture dish was immediately put back into a tissue culture incubator after each observation. Neurons could be found again in the next observation using the X-Y translation stage (accuracy, 4 µm). In addition, this X-Y translation stage could also be used to find neurons after fixation and permeabilization (see the next paragraph for fixation method). In order to block the internalization of MORs, neurons were co-transfected with HA-tagged dominant negative Dynamin I (the K44E mutant, referred to as Dyn-; Chu et al., 1997; Zhao et al., 2006) and GFP-tagged proteins. In these experiments, the X-Y translation stage was particularly useful in locating neurons because the expression of HA-tagged Dynamin I in these neurons was detected using a mouse monoclonal anti-HA antibody (Covance, Richmond, CA) after fixation and permeabilization. Immunocytochemistry in fixed tissues A rabbit polyclonal antibody against the N-terminus of GluR1 subunits of AMPA receptors was used to detect the surface AMPA receptors (see next paragraph for surface staining). Cultured neurons were fixed and permeabilized successively with 4% paraformaldehyde, 100% methanol and 0.2% Triton X-100 (Liao et al., 1999). Commercial antibodies against synaptophysin (mouse monoclonal, Chemicon) and PSD95 (mouse monoclonal, Chemicon) were used as pre- and post-synaptic markers, respectively (Liao et al., 1999; 2001). Finally, FITC (green) or Rhodamine (red)-conjugated secondary antibodies (Jackson Immuno) were used to recognize these primary antibodies. Live surface staining of N-GluR1 and HA-tag MOR-GFP The live surface staining of GluR1 subunits of AMPA receptors has been previously described (Liao et al., 1999; O’brien et al., 1998). A polyclonal rabbit antibody was made against the N-terminus of GluR1 subunits of AMPA receptors. Neurons at 21 DIV were treated with fentanyl at a concentration of 0 (untreated control), 0.01, 0.1, 1 or 10 µM for 3 days and, thereafter, were incubated with culture media that contained the anti-N-GluR1 antibody at 37°C in a tissue culture incubator for 1 hour. These neurons were incubated with a rhodamine-conjugated antibody diluted in 10% donkey serum for another 1 hour in 37°C after fixation and permeabilization. These neurons were also co-stained with either the pre-synaptic marker synaptophysin or the post-synaptic marker PSD95. To measure fentanyl-induced internalization of MORs, neurons were transfected with plasmids encoding MORs with an HA tag at the N-terminus and a GFP tag at the C-terminus. Neurons at 21 DIV were treated with fentanyl at a concentration of 0, 0.01, 0.1, 1 or 10 µM for 1 hour. A mouse monoclonal anti-HA antibody (Covance, Richmond, CA) was added to culture media that contained fentanyl (concentration unchanged) at 37°C for another 1 hour (fentanyl treatment time = 2 hours). Rhodamine-linked secondary anti-mouse antibody was used to label the primary anti-HA antibody after the cultured neurons were fixed and permeabilized with 4% paraformaldehyde, methanol and triton (Liao et al., 2007b). Image analysis Time-lapse live images from the same neuron at 21 DIV were taken before and at various time points after drug treatments as previously described (Liao et al., 2005). All digital images were analyzed with MetaMorph Imaging System (Universal Imaging Co.). Unless stated otherwise, all images of live neurons were taken as stacks and were averaged into one image before further analysis. In addition to simple averaging, stacks of images were also processed by deconvolution analyses using the MetaMorph software with the nearest planes. A stack of deconvoluted images was further averaged into one single image. A dendritic protrusion with an expanded head that was 50% wider than its neck was defined as a spine. The number of spines from a dendrite was manually counted and normalized per 100 µm dendritic length. The intensity of fluorescence in the soma and individual dendrites was measured using the MetaMorph program (auto-threshold for bright objects) and further calibrated by nearby baseline area: calibrated fluorescence = (dendritic fluorescence – baseline)/baseline. To quantify the endocytosis in neurons expressing HA-MOR-GFP, the HA tag was sequentially stained with a primary anti-HA antibody and a Rhodamine-labeled (red) secondary antibody. The ratio of red to green fluorescence in the same region was used to estimate the ratio of surface MOR/total MOR. Using another method to quantify endocytosis, the coefficient of variation (CV) was used to estimate the aggregation of MOR-GFP in dendrites. The CV values were estimated from un-deconvoluted images. A line (width = 3 pixels; fluorescence intensities at the 3 pixels were averaged into one pixel) was manually drawn in the middle of a dendrite. The fluorescence intensities at all pixels of this line were read out using the “line scan” program and all pixels were pooled together to calculate the coefficient of variation (CV = standard deviation/mean). Because CV reflects how variable the data in a sample are, a dendrite with relatively uniform MOR-GFP distribution should yield a low CV value. In contrast, a dendrite with aggregates of MOR-GFP should yield a high CV value. Student t-tests were used for comparison between parameters from two groups whereas ANOVA tests were used for comparison between parameters from multiple groups (n - number of neurons; p <0.05, significant). All data are reported as Mean ± Standard Error. *, P<0.05; **, P<0.01; ***, P<0.001. RESULTS Fentanyl causes concentration-dependent bidirectional changes in dendritic spines Chronic treatment with the MOR agonist morphine caused collapse of dendritic spines in cultured dissociated neurons (Liao et al., 2005). It is still unknown whether synthetic opioids such as fentanyl have the same pharmacological effect on excitatory synapses as naturally derived opiates such as morphine. To determine how chronic treatment with fentanyl affects the morphology of dendritic spines, cultured dissociated rat hippocampal neurons were transfected with plasmids encoding the enhanced green fluorescence protein (GFP). Fentanyl at four concentrations (0.01, 0.1, 1 and 10 µM) was applied to GFP-labeled neurons at 21 days in vitro (DIV; Figure 1B–E
To test whether fentanyl induces acute changes in dendritic spines, the density of dendritic spines were measured before, 2 hours and 4 hours after treatment of fentanyl at 0.01 and 10 µM whereas untreated neurons were used as the control (Figure 1H Fentanyl-induced bidirectional changes require the participation of MORs Fentanyl is an opioid agonist that primarily activates MORs but can also activate delta opioid receptors (DORs) with a much lower affinity (Rang et al., 1995). To determine whether the activation of MORs plays an important role in the fentanyl-induced bidirectional change in dendritic spines, a selective MOR antagonist, D-Phe-Cys-Tyr-D-Trp-Orn-Thr-Pen-Thr-NH2 (CTOP), at 5 µM was added to the media of cultured neurons and neurons were continuously treated with CTOP for 1 week. In the two testing groups, dynamic changes in dendritic protrusions and spines were monitored for 3 days after adding fentanyl at 0.01 and 10 µM, respectively, to the CTOP-containing neuronal media (Figure 2A–C
Fentanyl causes bidirectional changes in synaptic AMPA receptors To test whether fentanyl can alter the function of excitatory synapses by regulating AMPA receptor trafficking, a polyclonal rabbit antibody against the N-terminus of GluR1 subunits was used to recognize surface AMPA receptors (see Materials and Methods for details). Low-density cultured neurons were treated with fentanyl at 0 (control), 0.01, 0.1, 1 and 10 µM for 3 days and were co-stained with antibodies against N-GluR1 and the pre-synaptic marker synaptophysin (Figure 3
Post-synaptic density protein 95 (PSD95) is an NMDA receptor anchoring protein that is abundant in the post-synaptic density of dendritic spines (Kennedy 2000) and is widely used to label excitatory glutamatergic synapses. Low-density cultured neurons were treated with fentanyl at 0 (control), 0.01, 0.1, 1 and 10 µM for 3 days and were co-stained with antibodies against N-GluR1 and PSD95 (Figure 4
Fentanyl can cause persistent and robust internalization of MORs at a high concentration but little internalization at a low concentration To investigate the effects of fentanyl on MOR endocytosis in hippocampal neurons, neurons were transfected with plasmids encoding MOR with a HA tag in the N-terminus (extracellular, labeled as red by antibodies) and a GFP tag in the C-terminus (green, label both intracellular and extracellular receptors; Figure 5
The aggregation of MORs has widely been used to reflect the internalization of MORs in previous studies (Sternini et al., 1996; Haberstock-Debic et al., 2003, 2005). We used this phenomenon as a tool to examine the temporal dynamics of receptor internalization in live neurons expressing MOR-GFP (Figure 6
Blockade of receptor internalization prevents the fentanyl-induced bidirectional changes Based on previous data in Figure 1
To further test the hypothesis that fentanyl at high concentrations increases the density of dendritic spines by blocking the MOR-mediated signaling pathway via receptor internalization, high density cultured neurons that expressed K44E Dynamin I mutant and GFP were treated with fentanyl at concentrations of 0, 0.01, 0.1, 1 and 10 µM (n=17 in the group treated with fentanyl at 10 µM; n=10–12 in all other groups). Similar to neurons without the transfection of K44E Dynamin I mutant (see Figure 1
DISCUSSION Morphine, oxycodone, methadone and fentanyl are among the most commonly prescribed opioids for pain management (Hank and Reid, 2005). Fentanyl is frequently used as an opioid analgesic in surgery (Stanley 2005) and often used to treat chronic cancer and non-cancer pains (Skaer 2006; Trescot et al., 2008). Furthermore, addiction to fentanyl has emerged as a major issue due to the marked increase in the number of abusers in the past decade and the propensity of opiate addicts to mix fentanyl with heroin and to die from overdose (Compton and Volkow, 2005; Schumann et al., 2008; Kronstrand et al., 1997; Fodale et al., 2008). Due to the extensive use and abuse of fentanyl and potential importance of neural plasticity in addiction, characterizing the effects of this drug on dendritic spines and AMPA receptors should be of great interest to clinicians, neuroscientists and pharmacologists. Dose-dependent bidirectional effects of fentanyl on dendritic spines and AMPA receptors The present study demonstrates that fentanyl causes dose-dependent bidirectional changes in dendritic spines and AMPA receptors (Figure 1 Relationship between fentanyl-induced changes in spines and cognitive dysfunctions Chronic exposure to MOR agonists heroin, morphine and methadone lead to many cognition dysfunctions including deficits in spatial learning and memory (Bodnar and Hadjimarkou 2003; Gruber et al., 2007). In contrast, MOR antagonists such as naloxone and naltrexone enhance learning and memory and block the adverse cognitive effects of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) (Canli et al., 1990; Gallagher 1985; Prudic et al., 1999). In mice overexpressing human amyloid precursor protein (hAPP; a model of pre-clinical Alzheimer’s disease), the expression level of enkephalin is increased and memory deficits are reduced by beta-funaltrexamine, an irreversible blocker of MORs (Meilandt et al., 2008). Morphine significantly decreases the density of dendritic spines whereas MOR antagonist naloxone has an opposite effect (Liao et al., 2005). Therefore, it is tempting to use the severity of opioid-induced collapse of dendritic spines to speculate on the likelihood for a specific opioid to cause cognitive deficits. Fentanyl at 0.01 µM decreased the density of spines by 36% (Figure 1 The Effects of Fentanyl on the Internalization of MORs The present study demonstrates that the ability of fentanyl to induce receptor internalization is concentration dependent (Figure 5 The present study demonstrates that the RAVE (Relative Activity Versus Endocytosis) value of a specific opioid can be changed if different concentrations are applied. Morphine induces little receptor internalization in most cell types, whereas other opioids such as DAMGO, etorphine and methadone cause strong receptor internalization (Alvarez et al., 2002; Sternini et al., 1996; Whistler and von Zastrow, 1998). A “RAVE” hypothesis has been proposed to explain the roles of receptor internalization and desensitization in opioid addiction and tolerance (Finn and Whistler, 2001; He et al., 2002; Whistler et al., 1999). According to this hypothesis, chronic treatment with an opioid drug with a high RA (Relative Activity) / VE (Endocytosis) value would cause more severe tolerance and addiction (Alvarez et al., 2001). Fentanyl was previously proposed to have high RAVE value and thus high addictive liability (Martini and Whistler, 2007). The present study indicates that the RAVE value of fentanyl can be “high” or “low” depending upon concentrations applied. Fentanyl at a low concentration (0.01 µM) causes strong collapse of spines but induces no significant receptor internalization, yielding a high RAVE value. Fentanyl at a high concentration (10 µM) causes no collapse of spines (actually has the opposite effects) but induces robust receptor internalization, yielding a low RAVE value. Relationship between receptor internalization and spine changes K44E mutant of Dynamin I is a dominant negative inhibitor that can block the internalization of mu, delta and kappa opioid receptors (Zhao et al., 2006; Chu et al., 1997). The blockade of receptor internalization by dominant negative Dynamin I (K44E) reversed the effects of fentanyl at high concentrations (1 and 10 µM) on dendritic spines, preventing the bidirectional effects of fentanyl (Figure 7 Summary The present study demonstrates that chronic treatment with fentanyl at low concentrations causes the collapse of dendritic spines and removal of synaptic AMPA receptors, whereas fentanyl at high concentrations has opposite effects. This bidirectional effect is prevented by the blockade of MOR internalization via the expression of a dominant negative Dynamin I (K44E), indicating an important role of receptor internalization in this cellular process. Characterizing the fentanyl-induced alterations in dendritic spines and AMPA receptor trafficking might shed new light on the cellular mechanism underlying the addiction, tolerance and cognitive deficits that are caused by the illicit abuse and/or clinical use of this drug. Acknowledgements We thank Drs. George Wilcox and Brian Hoover for their helpful comments, and Mr. Eric Nordstrom for his technical support. This study is supported by National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA) grants R01-DA020582 and K02-DA025048 to DL, grants from Chinese government (30570591 and 06MA147) to HL and NIDA grants P50-DA011806, R01-DA007339, R01-DA000564, R01-DA016674, K05-DA070554 and K05-DA000513 to HHL and PYL. Footnotes Disclosure/Conflict of Interest: The author(s) declare that, except for income received from my primary employer, no financial support or compensation has been received from any individual or corporate entity over the past three years for research or professional service and there are no personal financial holdings that could be perceived as constituting a potential conflict of interest. References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Life Sci. 1989; 45(7):599-606.
[Life Sci. 1989]J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1993 Oct; 267(1):486-95.
[J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1993]Science. 1991 Jan 4; 251(4989):85-7.
[Science. 1991]Mol Interv. 2002 Jun; 2(3):146-57.
[Mol Interv. 2002]Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007 Nov; 8(11):844-58.
[Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007]Neuropsychopharmacology. 2006 May; 31(5):1036-47.
[Neuropsychopharmacology. 2006]Peptides. 2007 Dec; 28(12):2435-513.
[Peptides. 2007]Neuropsychol Rev. 2007 Sep; 17(3):299-315.
[Neuropsychol Rev. 2007]Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005 May 9; 78(2):225-30.
[Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005]J Neurosci. 1995 May; 15(5 Pt 1):3328-41.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Pain Symptom Manage. 1992 Apr; 7(3 Suppl):S3-7.
[J Pain Symptom Manage. 1992]J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005 May; 29(5 Suppl):S67-71.
[J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005]Drugs. 2004; 64(23):2629-38.
[Drugs. 2004]Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Mar 31; 4():24.
[Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006]Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2008 May; 7(3):213-7.
[Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2008]Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2004 Apr 2; 316(2):501-11.
[Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2004]J Neurosci. 2005 Nov 16; 25(46):10627-36.
[J Neurosci. 2005]J Neurosci. 2001 Aug 15; 21(16):6008-17.
[J Neurosci. 2001]J Neurosci. 1995 May; 15(5 Pt 1):3328-41.
[J Neurosci. 1995]Science. 2001 May 11; 292(5519):1175-8.
[Science. 2001]Nat Neurosci. 1999 Jan; 2(1):37-43.
[Nat Neurosci. 1999]J Biol Chem. 1997 Oct 24; 272(43):27124-30.
[J Biol Chem. 1997]Mol Pharmacol. 2006 Apr; 69(4):1421-32.
[Mol Pharmacol. 2006]Nat Neurosci. 1999 Jan; 2(1):37-43.
[Nat Neurosci. 1999]J Neurosci. 2001 Aug 15; 21(16):6008-17.
[J Neurosci. 2001]Nat Neurosci. 1999 Jan; 2(1):37-43.
[Nat Neurosci. 1999]Neuron. 1998 Nov; 21(5):1067-78.
[Neuron. 1998]Mol Cell Neurosci. 2007 Jul; 35(3):456-69.
[Mol Cell Neurosci. 2007]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Feb 1; 102(5):1725-30.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Feb 1; 102(5):1725-30.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Feb 1; 102(5):1725-30.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Feb 1; 102(5):1725-30.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005]Science. 2000 Oct 27; 290(5492):750-4.
[Science. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Aug 20; 93(17):9241-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996]J Neurosci. 2003 May 15; 23(10):4324-32.
[J Neurosci. 2003]J Neurosci. 2005 Aug 24; 25(34):7847-57.
[J Neurosci. 2005]Mol Cell Neurosci. 2007 Jul; 35(3):456-69.
[Mol Cell Neurosci. 2007]J Biol Chem. 1997 Oct 24; 272(43):27124-30.
[J Biol Chem. 1997]Support Care Cancer. 2005 Mar; 13(3):145-52.
[Support Care Cancer. 2005]J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005 May; 29(5 Suppl):S67-71.
[J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005]Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Mar 31; 4():24.
[Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006]Pain Physician. 2008 Mar; 11(2 Suppl):S181-200.
[Pain Physician. 2008]Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006 Feb 1; 81(2):103-7.
[Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Feb 1; 102(5):1725-30.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005]J Neurophysiol. 2007 Feb; 97(2):1485-94.
[J Neurophysiol. 2007]Mol Cell Neurosci. 2007 Jul; 35(3):456-69.
[Mol Cell Neurosci. 2007]J Neurosci. 2008 Sep 24; 28(39):9670-81.
[J Neurosci. 2008]Peptides. 2003 Aug; 24(8):1241-302.
[Peptides. 2003]Neuropsychol Rev. 2007 Sep; 17(3):299-315.
[Neuropsychol Rev. 2007]Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1990 Jul; 36(3):521-5.
[Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1990]Behav Neural Biol. 1985 Nov; 44(3):374-85.
[Behav Neural Biol. 1985]Neuropsychopharmacology. 1999 Aug; 21(2):285-93.
[Neuropsychopharmacology. 1999]Mol Pharmacol. 1992 Jan; 41(1):185-96.
[Mol Pharmacol. 1992]Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2007 Oct; 17(5):556-64.
[Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2007]J Neurosci. 2002 Jul 1; 22(13):5769-76.
[J Neurosci. 2002]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Aug 20; 93(17):9241-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Aug 18; 95(17):9914-9.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998]Neuron. 2001 Dec 6; 32(5):829-39.
[Neuron. 2001]Cell. 2002 Jan 25; 108(2):271-82.
[Cell. 2002]Mol Pharmacol. 2006 Apr; 69(4):1421-32.
[Mol Pharmacol. 2006]J Biol Chem. 1997 Oct 24; 272(43):27124-30.
[J Biol Chem. 1997]Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2007 Oct; 17(5):556-64.
[Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2007]