Synthesis and pharmacological evaluation of 5-pyrrolidinylquinoxalines as a novel class of peripherally restricted κ-opioid receptor agonists.

5-Pyrrolidinyl substituted perhydroquinoxalines were designed as conformationally restricted κ-opioid receptor agonists restricted to the periphery. The additional N atom of the quinoxaline system located outside the ethylenediamine κ pharmacophore allows the fine-tuning of the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. The perhydroquinoxalines were synthesized stereoselectively using the concept of late stage diversification of the central building blocks 14. In addition to high κ-opioid receptor affinity they demonstrate high selectivity over µ, δ, σ1, σ2, and NMDA receptors. In the [35S]GTPγS assay full agonism was observed. Because of their high polarity, the secondary amines 14a (log D7.4=0.26) and 14b (log D7.4=0.21) did not penetrate an artificial blood-brain barrier. 14b was able to inhibit the spontaneous pain reaction after rectal mustard oil application to mice (ED50=2.35 mg/kg). This analgesic effect is attributed to activation of peripherally located κ receptors, since 14b did not affect centrally mediated referred allodynia and hyperalgesia.

Mechanistic and functional differentiation of tapentadol and tramadol.

INTRODUCTION: Many opioid analgesics share common structural elements; however, minor differences in structure can result in major differences in pharmacological activity, pharmacokinetic profile, and clinical efficacy and tolerability. AREAS COVERED: This review compares and contrasts the chemistry, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and CNS 'functional activity' of tapentadol and tramadol, responsible for their individual clinical utilities. EXPERT OPINION: The distinct properties of tapentadol and tramadol generate different CNS functional activities, making each drug the prototype of different classes of opioid/nonopioid analgesics. Tramadol's analgesia derives from relatively weak µ-opioid receptor (MOR) agonism, plus norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake inhibition, provided collectively by the enantiomers of the parent drug and a metabolite that is a stronger MOR agonist, but has lower CNS penetration. Tapentadol's MOR agonist activity is several-fold greater than tramadol's, with prominent norepinephrine reuptake inhibition and minimal serotonin effect. Accordingly, tramadol is well-suited for pain conditions for which a strong opioid component is not needed-and it has the benefit of a low abuse potential; whereas tapentadol, a schedule-II controlled substance, is well-suited for pain conditions requiring a strong opioid component-and it has the benefit of greater gastrointestinal tolerability compared to classical strong opioids. Both drugs offer distinct and complementary clinical options.

Tramadol has a better potency ratio relative to morphine in neuropathic than in nociceptive pain models.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Treatment of neuropathic pain remains a challenge and the role of various analgesics in this setting is still debated. The effects of tramadol, an atypically acting analgesic with a combined opioid and monoaminergic mechanism of action, and morphine, a prototypical opioid, were tested in rat models of neuropathic and nociceptive pain. METHODS: Cold allodynia and mechanical hypersensitivity, symptoms of neuropathic pain, were studied in rat models of mononeuropathic pain. Cold allodynia was analyzed in the chronic constriction injury (CCI) model and mechanical hypersensitivity was analyzed in the spinal nerve ligation (SNL) model. Heat-induced rat tail-flick latencies were determined as measure for nociceptive pain. RESULTS: Cold allodynia and mechanical hypersensitivity were strongly attenuated with similar absolute potency after intravenous administration of tramadol and morphine. The doses of drug that were calculated to result in 50% pain inhibition (ED(50)) for tramadol and morphine were 2.1 and 0.9 mg/kg, respectively, in CCI rats and 4.3 and 3.7 mg/kg, respectively, in SNL rats. In the tail-flick assay of acute nociception, the potency of the two drugs differed markedly, as seen by ED(50) values of 5.5 and 0.7 mg/kg intravenously for tramadol and morphine, respectively. Accordingly, the analgesic potency ratio (ED(50) tramadol/ED(50) morphine) of both compounds differed in neuropathic (potency ratio 2.3 in CCI and 1.2 in SNL) and nociceptive pain models (potency ratio 7.8), suggesting a relative increase in potency of tramadol in neuropathic pain compared with nociceptive pain. CONCLUSION: The results of this study are consistent with clinical data supporting the efficacy of opioids in neuropathic pain conditions, and furthermore suggest an additional contribution of the monoaminergic mechanism of tramadol in the treatment of neuropathic pain states.

Reversibility of opioid receptor occupancy of buprenorphine in vivo.

The slow association and incomplete dissociation of buprenorphine from opioid receptors observed in vitro have been suggested to reduce the accessibility of opioid receptors in vivo. If so, it might be expected that buprenorphine continues to occupy opioid receptors long after the antinociceptive activity has dissipated. To examine this hypothesis, buprenorphine (46.4 microg/kg i.v.) was administered to rats 1, 2, 4 or 8 h before isolation of their forebrain membranes and the maximal binding capacity (Bmax) for [3H]-[D-Ala2, N-methyl-Phe4-Gly5-ol]-enkephalin ([3H]DAMGO) was determined to measure the number of mu-opioid receptor binding sites remaining. Extent and duration of the reduction of Bmax by buprenorphine (ED50 11.2 microg/kg 1 h post-application) correlated with the antinociceptive activity in the rat tail flick (ED50 16.4 microg/kg i.v. 1 h post-application). At 8 h after administration there was still residual antinociception but no further attenuation of Bmax was detectable. Thus receptor occupancy by buprenorphine does not cause impairment of mu-opioid receptor accessibility beyond the duration of its antinociceptive activity. Therefore, no impairment of antinociception in the case of an opioid switch is to be expected.

Interaction of mu-opioid receptor agonists and antagonists with the analgesic effect of buprenorphine in mice.

Buprenorphine is a potent opioid analgesic with partial agonistic properties at mu-opioid receptors. This study investigated the interaction potential with several full mu-agonists in the tail-flick test in mice. We further examined the reversibility of buprenorphine antinociception by different mu-opioid receptor antagonists. Combination of buprenorphine with morphine, oxycodone, hydromorphone and fentanyl in the analgesic dose range resulted in additive or synergistic effects. When given after the decline of the acute buprenorphine effect, both morphine and fentanyl also showed full efficacy. A moderate antagonistic effect according to the partial mu-agonistic properties of buprenorphine was only seen when high doses exceeding the therapeutic dose ranges were combined. Under these conditions antinociception of morphine was reduced to the effect of buprenorphine alone. Prophylactic administration of naloxone (10 mg/kg i.v.), naltrexone (1 mg/kg i.v.) and clocinnamox (5 mg/kg s.c.) fully and persistently blocked the antinociception of a high dose of buprenorphine. An established effect of buprenorphine was less sensitive, although repeated administration of naloxone induced complete antagonism, as did the irreversible antagonist clocinnamox under prophylactic and curative treatment conditions. Our results suggest that the antinociceptive effect of buprenorphine is mainly, if not exclusively, mediated by activation of mu-opioid receptors. They confirm clinical experience that in the analgesic dose range a switch between buprenorphine and full mu-agonists is possible without loss of analgesic efficacy and without a refractory period between the termination of buprenorphine analgesia and the onset of action of the new mu-opioid treatment. Antinociception of buprenorphine is sensitive towards mu-opioid receptor antagonists and incomplete inhibition can be improved by increasing the dose or repetitive dosing.