Literature DB >> 15983465

Alfentanil and placebo analgesia: no sex differences detected in models of experimental pain.

Erik Olofsen1, Raymonda Romberg, Hans Bijl, René Mooren, Frank Engbers, Benjamin Kest, Albert Dahan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess whether patient sex contributes to the interindividual variability in alfentanil analgesic sensitivity, the authors compared male and female subjects for pain sensitivity after alfentanil using a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling approach.
METHODS: Healthy volunteers received a 30-min alfentanil or placebo infusion on two occasions. Analgesia was measured during the subsequent 6 h by assaying tolerance to transcutaneous electrical stimulation (eight men and eight women) of increasing intensity or using visual analog scale scores during treatment with noxious thermal heat (five men and five women). Sedation was concomitantly measured. Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models were applied to the analgesia and sedation data using NONMEM. For electrical pain, the placebo and alfentanil models were combined post hoc.
RESULTS: Alfentanil and placebo analgesic responses did not differ between sexes. The placebo effect was successfully incorporated into the alfentanil pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model and was responsible for 20% of the potency of alfentanil. However, the placebo effect did not contribute to the analgesic response variability. The pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis of the electrical and heat pain data yielded similar values for the potency parameter, but the blood-effect site equilibration half-life was significantly longer for electrical pain (7-9 min) than for heat pain (0.2 min) or sedation (2 min).
CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the ample literature demonstrating sex differences in morphine analgesia, neither sex nor subject expectation (i.e., placebo) contributes to the large between-subject response variability with alfentanil analgesia. The difference in alfentanil analgesia onset and offset between pain tests is discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15983465     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200507000-00020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  23 in total

Review 1.  Population pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of anesthetics.

Authors:  Erik Olofsen; Albert Dahan
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 2.  Sex, gender, and pain: an overview of a complex field.

Authors:  Robert W Hurley; Meredith C B Adams
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 5.108

3.  Comparison of proportional and differential odds models for mixed-effects analysis of categorical data.

Authors:  Maria C Kjellsson; Per-Henrik Zingmark; E Niclas Jonsson; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2008-09-23       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  Translational and Early Phase Strategies for Treatment Development: Report of ISCTM Autumn 2013 Symposium.

Authors:  Jared W Young; William Z Potter; Steve Riley; Geert J Groeneveld; Bruce J Kinon; Mike F Egan; Douglas E Feltner
Journal:  Innov Clin Neurosci       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr

5.  Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intrathecally administered Xen2174, a synthetic conopeptide with norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor and analgesic properties.

Authors:  Pieter Okkerse; Justin L Hay; Elske Sitsen; Albert Dahan; Erica Klaassen; William Houghton; Geert Jan Groeneveld
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 4.335

6.  Cyclosporine-inhibitable blood-brain barrier drug transport influences clinical morphine pharmacodynamics.

Authors:  Konrad Meissner; Michael J Avram; Viktar Yermolenka; Amber M Francis; Jane Blood; Evan D Kharasch
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 7.892

7.  The use of a battery of pain models to detect analgesic properties of compounds: a two-part four-way crossover study.

Authors:  Pieter Okkerse; Guido van Amerongen; Marieke L de Kam; Jasper Stevens; Richard P Butt; Rachel Gurrell; Albert Dahan; Joop M van Gerven; Justin L Hay; Geert Jan Groeneveld
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  μ-Opioid Receptor Agonists: Do They Have Utility in the Treatment of Acute Pain?

Authors:  Thomas K Henthorn; Susan K Mikulich-Gilbertson
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 7.892

Review 9.  Assessing analgesic actions of opioids by experimental pain models in healthy volunteers - an updated review.

Authors:  Camilla Staahl; Anne Estrup Olesen; Trine Andresen; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Asbjørn Mohr Drewes
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 4.335

10.  Evaluation of potential sex differences in the subjective and analgesic effects of morphine in normal, healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Sandra D Comer; Ziva D Cooper; William J Kowalczyk; Maria A Sullivan; Suzette M Evans; Adam M Bisaga; Suzanne K Vosburg
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 4.530

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.