TABLE 7.

Preclinical antinociception drug profile for cannabinoid receptor agonists: a class of candidate analgesics

		Pain Behavior (Dependent Variable)a
		Unconditioned Behavior US→UR		Classical Conditioning CS+US; CS→UR		Operant Conditioning SD→R→SC
Pain Stimulus (Independent Variable)		PS→UR	PS→[US→UR]	CS+PS; CS→UR	PS→[CS+US; CS→UR]	PS→R→SC	SD→R→PS	PS→[SD→R→SC]
Noxious	Thermal	1–3					8
	Mechanical	1, 2, 4
	Chemical	1, 5, 6	6, 7					6
Inflammation	+ Thermal	9–11
	+ Mechanical	1, 4, 9
	Spontaneous		12
Neuropathy	+ Thermal	13–15
	+ Mechanical	14–16					18
	Spontaneous		17					16

Citations are shown to indicate effects produced by systemic administration of cannabinoid receptor agonists [∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol, 2-[(1R,2R,5R)-5-hydroxy-2-(3-hydroxypropyl) cyclohexyl]-5-(2-methyloctan-2-yl)phenol (CP55940), (11R)-2-methyl-11-[(morpholin-4-yl)methyl]-3-(naphthalene-1-carbonyl)-9-oxa-1-azatricyclo[6.3.1.0⁴,¹²]dodeca-2,4(12),5,7-tetraene (WIN55212-2), nabilone] in different types of preclinical procedures using the designated pain stimulus to produce the designated pain behavior. Fill color indicates predominant drug effects: green, drug usually effective; and red, drug usually ineffective. No fill indicates drug not tested. Citations are not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to illustrate typical outcomes.

^aNumbers correspond to the following references: 1) Sofia et al., 1975; 2) Tseng and Craft, 2001; 3) Fan et al., 1994; 4) Smith et al., 1998; 5) Moss and Johnson, 1980; 6) Kwilasz and Negus, 2012; 7) Miller et al., 2012; 8) Kangas and Bergman, 2014; 9) Li et al., 1999; 10) Kinsey et al., 2011; 11) Conti et al., 2002; 12) Kandasamy et al., 2018; 13) Mao et al., 2000; 14) Bridges et al., 2001; 15) Pascual et al., 2005; 16) Leitl and Negus, 2016; 17) Wilkerson et al., 2018; and 18) Pedersen and Blackburn-Munro, 2006.