Literature DB >> 17874319

Population pharmacokinetics of buprenorphine following a two-stage intravenous infusion in healthy volunteers.

Mette L Jensen1, David J R Foster, Richard N Upton, Kim Kristensen, Steen H Hansen, Niels-Henrik Jensen, Bettina N Nielsen, Ulrik Skram, Hanne H Villesen, Lona Christrup.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this investigation was to characterize the pharmacokinetics of buprenorphine following administration of an intravenous (i.v.) infusion. To date, the population kinetics of buprenorphine has been described for bolus administration only.
METHODS: Twenty-three healthy male volunteers aged 21-40 years received 0.6 mg buprenorphine by means of an i.v. infusion over a 150-min period. The plasma concentration-time profiles up to 24 h post-administration of the infusion were subjected to population pharmacokinetic modelling using NONMEM: software.
RESULTS: A three-compartment model best described the plasma concentration-time course. Body weight was found to be a significant covariate for elimination clearance in a linear fashion. Inter-individual variability (coefficient of variation) was estimable for apparent clearance (CL, 23.5%), central distribution volume (V(1), 81.8%), peripheral distribution volume 1 (V(2), 23.7%) and inter-compartmental clearances between V(1) and V(2) (Q(2), 34.8%). Models using parameters derived from previous published data obtained after an i.v. bolus of buprenorphine were found to overestimate the measured buprenorphine concentrations during the course of the i.v. infusion and to underpredict those following the end of the infusion.
CONCLUSION: Most parameters describing the disposition of buprenorphine in the volunteers showed only moderate inter-subject variability. However, the parameters differed from those previously reported for i.v. bolus administration. We conclude that pharmacokinetic parameter estimates obtained from the appropriate study in accordance to the mode of administration should be used in the design of dose regimens of buprenorphine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17874319     DOI: 10.1007/s00228-007-0377-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  15 in total

1.  Response variability to analgesics: a role for non-specific activation of endogenous opioids.

Authors:  Martina Amanzio; Antonella Pollo; Giuliano Maggi; Fabrizio Benedetti
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2001-02-15       Impact factor: 6.961

2.  Determination of buprenorphine in human plasma by gas chromatography-positive ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.

Authors:  D E Moody; J D Laycock; A C Spanbauer; D J Crouch; R L Foltz; J L Josephs; L Amass; W K Bickel
Journal:  J Anal Toxicol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.367

3.  Mechanism-based PK/PD modeling of the respiratory depressant effect of buprenorphine and fentanyl in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  A Yassen; E Olofsen; R Romberg; E Sarton; L Teppema; M Danhof; A Dahan
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 6.875

4.  Mechanism-based pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of the antinociceptive effect of buprenorphine in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Ashraf Yassen; Erik Olofsen; Raymonda Romberg; Elise Sarton; Meindert Danhof; Albert Dahan
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 7.892

5.  Metabolic turnover rate: a physiological meaning of the metabolic rate per unit body weight.

Authors:  M Kleiber
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 2.691

6.  Bioavailability of sublingual buprenorphine.

Authors:  J Mendelson; R A Upton; E T Everhart; P Jacob; R T Jones
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 3.126

7.  Within- and between- subject variability in methadone pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in methadone maintenance subjects.

Authors:  Julia Hanna; David J R Foster; Amy Salter; Andrew A Somogyi; Jason M White; Felix Bochner
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Human pharmacokinetics of intravenous, sublingual, and buccal buprenorphine.

Authors:  J J Kuhlman; S Lalani; J Magluilo; B Levine; W D Darwin
Journal:  J Anal Toxicol       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 3.367

9.  Population pharmacokinetics of propofol: a multicenter study.

Authors:  J Schüttler; H Ihmsen
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 7.892

10.  Buprenorphine kinetics.

Authors:  R E Bullingham; H J McQuay; A Moore; M R Bennett
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1980-11       Impact factor: 6.875

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Abuse-Deterrent Opioid Formulations: Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Considerations.

Authors:  Carmen Walter; Claudia Knothe; Jörn Lötsch
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Sublingual Buprenorphine in Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.

Authors:  Chee M Ng; Erin Dombrowsky; Hopi Lin; Michelle E Erlich; David E Moody; Jeffrey S Barrett; Walter K Kraft
Journal:  Pharmacotherapy       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 4.705

3.  (R)- and (S)-methadone and buprenorphine concentration ratios in maternal and umbilical cord plasma following chronic maintenance dosing in pregnancy.

Authors:  Andrea L Gordon; Olga V Lopatko; Andrew A Somogyi; David J R Foster; Jason M White
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 4.  Management of chronic pain in the elderly: focus on transdermal buprenorphine.

Authors:  Nalini Vadivelu; Roberta L Hines
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.458

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.