Literature DB >> 18789923

Hydromorphone efficacy and treatment protocol impact on tolerance and mu-opioid receptor regulation.

Priyank Kumar1, Soujanya Sunkaraneni, Sunil Sirohi, Shveta V Dighe, Ellen A Walker, Byron C Yoburn.   

Abstract

This study examined the antinociceptive (analgesic) efficacy of hydromorphone and hydromorphone-induced tolerance and regulation of mu-opioid receptor density. Initially s.c. hydromorphone's time of peak analgesic (tail-flick) effect (45 min) and ED50 using standard and cumulative dosing protocols (0.22 mg/kg, 0.37 mg/kg, respectively) were determined. The apparent analgesic efficacy (tau) of hydromorphone was then estimated using the operational model of agonism and the irreversible mu-opioid receptor antagonist clocinnamox. Mice were injected with clocinnamox (0.32-25.6 mg/kg, i.p.) and 24 h later, the analgesic potency of hydromorphone was determined. The tau value for hydromorphone was 35, which suggested that hydromorphone is a lower analgesic efficacy opioid agonist. To examine hydromorphone-induced tolerance, mice were continuously infused s.c. with hydromorphone (2.1-31.5 mg/kg/day) for 7 days and then morphine cumulative dose response studies were performed. Other groups of mice were injected with hydromorphone (2.2-22 mg/kg/day) once, or intermittently every 24 h for 7 days. Twenty-four hours after the last injection, mice were tested using morphine cumulative dosing studies. There was more tolerance with infusion treatments compared to intermittent treatment. When compared to higher analgesic efficacy opioids, hydromorphone infusions induced substantially more tolerance. Finally, the effect of chronic infusion (31.5 mg/kg/day) and 7 day intermittent (22 mg/kg/day) hydromorphone treatment on spinal cord mu-opioid receptor density was determined. Hydromorphone did not produce any change in mu-opioid receptor density following either treatment. These results support suggestions that analgesic efficacy is correlated with tolerance magnitude and regulation of mu-opioid receptors when opioid agonists are continuously administered. Taken together, these studies indicate that analgesic efficacy and treatment protocol are important in determining tolerance and regulation of mu-opioid receptors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18789923      PMCID: PMC2586831          DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2008.08.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Pharmacol        ISSN: 0014-2999            Impact factor:   4.432


  37 in total

1.  Ligand-induced changes in surface mu-opioid receptor number: relationship to G protein activation?

Authors:  P A Zaki; D E Keith; G A Brine; F I Carroll; C J Evans
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 4.030

2.  Opioid agonist and antagonist treatment differentially regulates immunoreactive mu-opioid receptors and dynamin-2 in vivo.

Authors:  Byron C Yoburn; Vishal Purohit; Kaushal Patel; Qiuyu Zhang
Journal:  Eur J Pharmacol       Date:  2004-09-13       Impact factor: 4.432

Review 3.  Drug efficacy at G protein-coupled receptors.

Authors:  Terry Kenakin
Journal:  Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 13.820

4.  A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding.

Authors:  M M Bradford
Journal:  Anal Biochem       Date:  1976-05-07       Impact factor: 3.365

5.  Operational models of pharmacological agonism.

Authors:  J W Black; P Leff
Journal:  Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1983-12-22

6.  Use of beta-funaltrexamine to determine mu opioid receptor involvement in the analgesic activity of various opioid ligands.

Authors:  D M Zimmerman; J D Leander; J K Reel; M D Hynes
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 4.030

7.  Opioid agonists differentially regulate mu-opioid receptors and trafficking proteins in vivo.

Authors:  Minesh B Patel; Chintan N Patel; Vikram Rajashekara; Byron C Yoburn
Journal:  Mol Pharmacol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.436

8.  mu-Opioid receptor downregulation contributes to opioid tolerance in vivo.

Authors:  K Stafford; A B Gomes; J Shen; B C Yoburn
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.533

9.  An operational model of pharmacological agonism: the effect of E/[A] curve shape on agonist dissociation constant estimation.

Authors:  J W Black; P Leff; N P Shankley; J Wood
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 8.739

Review 10.  Hydromorphone in the management of cancer-related pain: an update on routes of administration and dosage forms.

Authors:  Maansi G Kumar; Senshang Lin
Journal:  J Pharm Pharm Sci       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.327

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Functional selectivity at the μ-opioid receptor: implications for understanding opioid analgesia and tolerance.

Authors:  Kirsten M Raehal; Cullen L Schmid; Chad E Groer; Laura M Bohn
Journal:  Pharmacol Rev       Date:  2011-08-26       Impact factor: 25.468

2.  Identification of the First Marine-Derived Opioid Receptor "Balanced" Agonist with a Signaling Profile That Resembles the Endorphins.

Authors:  Tyler A Johnson; Laura Milan-Lobo; Tao Che; Madeline Ferwerda; Eptisam Lambu; Nicole L McIntosh; Fei Li; Li He; Nicholas Lorig-Roach; Phillip Crews; Jennifer L Whistler
Journal:  ACS Chem Neurosci       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 4.418

Review 3.  Differences between opioids: pharmacological, experimental, clinical and economical perspectives.

Authors:  Asbjørn M Drewes; Rasmus D Jensen; Lecia M Nielsen; Joanne Droney; Lona L Christrup; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Julia Riley; Albert Dahan
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Hydromorphone in Chinchillas (Chinchilla lanigera).

Authors:  Emily A Evenson; Christoph Mans
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 5.  Analysis of opioid efficacy, tolerance, addiction and dependence from cell culture to human.

Authors:  Michael M Morgan; MacDonald J Christie
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 8.739

6.  Effects of repeated oxycodone administration on its analgesic and subjective effects in normal, healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Ziva D Cooper; Maria A Sullivan; Suzanne K Vosburg; Jeanne M Manubay; Margaret Haney; Richard W Foltin; Suzette M Evans; William J Kowalczyk; Phillip A Saccone; Sandra D Comer
Journal:  Behav Pharmacol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.293

Review 7.  Cellular Tolerance Induced by Chronic Opioids in the Central Nervous System.

Authors:  Sweta Adhikary; John T Williams
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-28

Review 8.  Regulation of μ-opioid receptors: desensitization, phosphorylation, internalization, and tolerance.

Authors:  John T Williams; Susan L Ingram; Graeme Henderson; Charles Chavkin; Mark von Zastrow; Stefan Schulz; Thomas Koch; Christopher J Evans; Macdonald J Christie
Journal:  Pharmacol Rev       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 25.468

9.  Adolescent oxycodone self administration alters subsequent oxycodone-induced conditioned place preference and anti-nociceptive effect in C57BL/6J mice in adulthood.

Authors:  Yong Zhang; Kyle Windisch; Joshua Altschuler; Sage Rahm; Eduardo R Butelman; Mary Jeanne Kreek
Journal:  Neuropharmacology       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 5.250

10.  Dosing protocol and analgesic efficacy determine opioid tolerance in the mouse.

Authors:  Priyanka A Madia; Shveta V Dighe; Sunil Sirohi; Ellen A Walker; Byron C Yoburn
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2009-10-09       Impact factor: 4.530

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.