Peter Athanasos1, Walter Ling2, Felix Bochner3,4, Jason M White5, Andrew A Somogyi3,4. 1. Discipline of Psychiatry, Flinders University, Bedford Park, Australia. 2. Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA. 3. Discipline of Pharmacology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. 4. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia. 5. School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Abstract
Objective: Acute pain management in opioid-dependent persons is complicated because of tolerance and opioid-induced hyperalgesia. Very high doses of morphine are ineffective in overcoming opioid-induced hyperalgesia and providing antinociception to methadone-maintained patients in an experimental setting. Whether the same occurs in buprenorphine-maintained subjects is unknown. Design: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled. Subjects were tested on two occasions, at least five days apart, once with intravenous morphine and once with intravenous saline. Subjects were tested at about the time of putative trough plasma buprenorphine concentrations. Setting: Ambulatory. Subjects: Twelve buprenorphine-maintained subjects: once daily sublingual dose (range = 2-22 mg); no dose change for 1.5-12 months. Ten healthy controls. Methods:Intravenous morphine bolus and infusions administered over two hours to achieve two separate pseudo-steady-state plasma concentrations one hour apart. Pain tolerance was assessed by application of nociceptive stimuli (cold pressor [seconds] and electrical stimulation [volts]). Ten blood samples were collected for assay of plasma morphine, buprenorphine, and norbuprenorphine concentrations until three hours after the end of the last infusion; pain tolerance and respiration rate were measured to coincide with blood sampling times. Results:Cold pressor responses (seconds): baseline: control34 ± 6 vs buprenorphine 17 ± 2 (P = 0.009); morphine infusion-end: control 52 ± 11(P = 0.04), buprenorphine 17 ± 2 (P > 0.5); electrical stimulation responses (volts): baseline: control 65 ± 6 vs buprenorphine 53 ± 5 (P = 0.13); infusion-end: control 74 ± 5 (P = 0.007), buprenorphine 53 ± 5 (P > 0.98). Respiratory rate (breaths per minute): baseline: control 17 vs buprenorphine 14 (P = 0.03); infusion-end: control 15 (P = 0.09), buprenorphine 12 (P < 0.01). Infusion-end plasma morphine concentrations (ng/mL): control 23 ± 1, buprenorphine 136 ± 10. Conclusions: Buprenorphinesubjects, compared with controls, were hyperalgesic (cold pressor test), did not experience antinociception, despite high plasma morphine concentrations, and experienced respiratory depression. Clinical implications are discussed.
RCT Entities:
Objective: Acute pain management in opioid-dependent persons is complicated because of tolerance and opioid-induced hyperalgesia. Very high doses of morphine are ineffective in overcoming opioid-induced hyperalgesia and providing antinociception to methadone-maintained patients in an experimental setting. Whether the same occurs in buprenorphine-maintained subjects is unknown. Design: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled. Subjects were tested on two occasions, at least five days apart, once with intravenous morphine and once with intravenous saline. Subjects were tested at about the time of putative trough plasma buprenorphine concentrations. Setting: Ambulatory. Subjects: Twelve buprenorphine-maintained subjects: once daily sublingual dose (range = 2-22 mg); no dose change for 1.5-12 months. Ten healthy controls. Methods: Intravenous morphine bolus and infusions administered over two hours to achieve two separate pseudo-steady-state plasma concentrations one hour apart. Pain tolerance was assessed by application of nociceptive stimuli (cold pressor [seconds] and electrical stimulation [volts]). Ten blood samples were collected for assay of plasma morphine, buprenorphine, and norbuprenorphine concentrations until three hours after the end of the last infusion; pain tolerance and respiration rate were measured to coincide with blood sampling times. Results: Cold pressor responses (seconds): baseline: control 34 ± 6 vs buprenorphine 17 ± 2 (P = 0.009); morphine infusion-end: control 52 ± 11(P = 0.04), buprenorphine 17 ± 2 (P > 0.5); electrical stimulation responses (volts): baseline: control 65 ± 6 vs buprenorphine 53 ± 5 (P = 0.13); infusion-end: control 74 ± 5 (P = 0.007), buprenorphine 53 ± 5 (P > 0.98). Respiratory rate (breaths per minute): baseline: control 17 vs buprenorphine 14 (P = 0.03); infusion-end: control 15 (P = 0.09), buprenorphine 12 (P < 0.01). Infusion-end plasma morphine concentrations (ng/mL): control 23 ± 1, buprenorphine 136 ± 10. Conclusions: Buprenorphine subjects, compared with controls, were hyperalgesic (cold pressor test), did not experience antinociception, despite high plasma morphine concentrations, and experienced respiratory depression. Clinical implications are discussed.
Authors: Ram P Kapil; Alessandra Cipriano; Kristen Friedman; Gregory Michels; Manjunath S Shet; Salvatore V Colucci; Glen Apseloff; Joseph Kitzmiller; Stephen C Harris Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2012-09-29 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Jonathan Daitch; Michael E Frey; David Silver; Carol Mitnick; Danielle Daitch; Joseph Pergolizzi Journal: Pain Physician Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Joseph Pergolizzi; Anna Maria Aloisi; Albert Dahan; Joerg Filitz; Richard Langford; Rudolf Likar; Sebastiano Mercadante; Bart Morlion; Robert B Raffa; Rainer Sabatowski; Paola Sacerdote; Luis M Torres; Avi A Weinbroum Journal: Pain Pract Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Amit Chakrabarti; George E Woody; Margaret L Griffin; Geetha Subramaniam; Roger D Weiss Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2009-11-30 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Lisa A Uebelacker; Donnell Van Noppen; Geoffrey Tremont; Genie Bailey; Ana Abrantes; Michael Stein Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2019-07-24
Authors: Catalina N Rey; Gary J Badger; Heidi S Melbostad; Deborah Wachtel; Stacey C Sigmon; Lauren K MacAfee; Anne K Dougherty; Sarah H Heil Journal: Contraception Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Joao P De Aquino; Suprit Parida; Victor J Avila-Quintero; Jose Flores; Peggy Compton; Thomas Hickey; Oscar Gómez; Mehmet Sofuoglu Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-09-22 Impact factor: 4.492