Literature DB >> 3207527

Relative bioavailability of controlled release morphine tablets (MST continus) in cancer patients.

P Poulain1, P J Hoskin, G W Hanks, O A-Omar, V A Walker, A Johnston, P Turner, G W Aherne.   

Abstract

The bioavailability of oral controlled release morphine tablets (MST, Napp Laboratories) and oral morphine sulphate in aqueous solution (MSS) was compared in 10 patients with advanced cancer. Serum samples were analysed for morphine, morphine-3-glucuronide (M3G) and morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G) using a specific HPLC assay. The relative bioavailability of morphine with MST was significantly less than that with MSS (mean 80%, range 50-110%) although there was no difference between the formulations in the relative availability of M3G and M6G. There was no significant difference between the formulations in the serum concentration of morphine at 12 h. The mean ratios morphine: M6G:M3G (comparing areas under the serum concentration-time curves) were 1:9:56. There was a highly significant linear relationship between the dose administered and AUC for morphine, M3G and M6G after MSS; and for morphine after MST. Median tmax for morphine was 0.5 h with MSS and 2.5 h with MST; for M3G 1.5 h with MSS and 3.0 h with MST; and for M6G 1.5 h with MSS and 3.25 h with MST. A secondary peak of unconjugated morphine, which may represent enterohepatic circulation, was seen in several patients 2-4 h after administration of elixir and 4-6 h after administration of MST.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3207527     DOI: 10.1093/bja/61.5.569

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Anaesth        ISSN: 0007-0912            Impact factor:   9.166


  15 in total

1.  Pharmacokinetics and efficacy of rectal versus oral sustained-release morphine in cancer patients.

Authors:  T J Wilkinson; B A Robinson; E J Begg; S B Duffull; P J Ravenscroft; J J Schneider
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 3.333

2.  Single-dose and steady-state kinetics of morphine and its metabolites in cancer patients--a comparison of two oral formulations.

Authors:  J Hasselström; N Alexander; C Bringel; J O Svensson; J Säwe
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 2.953

3.  Further development of a morphine hydrogel suppository.

Authors:  L Cole; C D Hanning; S Robertson; K Quinn
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 4.  Enterohepatic circulation of opioid drugs. Is it clinically relevant in the treatment of cancer patients?

Authors:  G W Hanks; P J Wand
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1989-08       Impact factor: 6.447

5.  The bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of morphine after intravenous, oral and buccal administration in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  P J Hoskin; G W Hanks; G W Aherne; D Chapman; P Littleton; J Filshie
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 6.  Morphine in cancer pain: modes of administration. Expert Working Group of the European Association for Palliative Care.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-03-30

7.  Morphine pharmacokinetics and metabolism in humans. Enterohepatic cycling and relative contribution of metabolites to active opioid concentrations.

Authors:  J Hasselström; J Säwe
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 6.447

8.  Plasma levels of morphine and morphine glucuronides in the treatment of cancer pain: relationship to renal function and route of administration.

Authors:  G M Peterson; C T Randall; J Paterson
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 9.  Sustained relief of chronic pain. Pharmacokinetics of sustained release morphine.

Authors:  G K Gourlay
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 6.447

10.  Drug therapy of pain in cancer.

Authors:  G W Hanks
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 1.107

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.