Dose-dependent effects of morphine on experimentally induced cutaneous pain in healthy volunteers

Morphine and Hydromorphone Effects, Side Effects, and Variability: A Crossover Study in Human Volunteers

BACKGROUND

Balancing between opioid analgesia and respiratory depression continues to challenge clinicians in perioperative, emergency department, and other acute care settings. Morphine and hydromorphone are postoperative analgesic standards. Nevertheless, their comparative effects and side effects, timing, and respective variabilities remain poorly understood. This study tested the hypothesis that IV morphine and hydromorphone differ in onset, magnitude, duration, and variability of analgesic and ventilatory effects.

METHODS

The authors conducted a randomized crossover study in healthy volunteers. Forty-two subjects received a 2-h IV infusion of hydromorphone (0.05 mg/kg) or morphine (0.2 mg/kg) 1 to 2 weeks apart. The authors measured arterial opioid concentrations, analgesia in response to heat pain (maximally tolerated temperature, and verbal analog pain scores at discrete preset temperatures to determine half-maximum temperature effect), dark-adapted pupil diameter and miosis, end-expired carbon dioxide, and respiratory rate for 12 h after dosing.

RESULTS

For morphine and hydromorphone, respectively, maximum miosis was less (3.9 [3.4 to 4.2] vs. 4.6 mm [4.0 to 5.0], P < 0.001; median and 25 to 75% quantiles) and occurred later (3.1 ± 0.9 vs. 2.3 ± 0.7 h after infusion start, P < 0.001; mean ± SD); maximum tolerated temperature was less (49 ± 2 vs. 50 ± 2°C, P < 0.001); verbal pain scores at end-infusion at the most informative stimulus (48.2°C) were 82 ± 4 and 59 ± 3 (P < 0.001); maximum end-expired CO2 was 47 (45 to 50) and 48 mmHg (46 to 51; P = 0.007) and occurred later (5.5 ± 2.8 vs. 3.0 ± 1.5 h after infusion start, P < 0.001); and respiratory nadir was 9 ± 1 and 11 ± 2 breaths/min (P < 0.001), and occurred at similar times. The area under the temperature tolerance-time curve was less for morphine (1.8 [0.0 to 4.4]) than hydromorphone (5.4°C-h [1.6 to 12.1] P < 0.001). Interindividual variability in clinical effects did not differ between opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

For morphine compared to hydromorphone, analgesia and analgesia relative to respiratory depression were less, onset of miosis and respiratory depression was later, and duration of respiratory depression was longer. For each opioid, timing of the various clinical effects was not coincident. Results may enable more rational opioid selection, and suggest hydromorphone may have a better clinical profile.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Methodology and applicability of the human contact burn injury model: A systematic review

The contact burn injury model is an experimental contact thermode-based physiological pain model primarily applied in research of drug efficacy in humans. The employment of the contact burn injury model across studies has been inconsistent regarding essential methodological variables, challenging the validity of the model. This systematic review analyzes methodologies, outcomes, and research applications of the contact burn injury model. Based on these results, we propose an improved contact burn injury testing paradigm. A literature search was conducted (15-JUL-2020) using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Sixty-four studies were included. The contact burn injury model induced consistent levels of primary and secondary hyperalgesia. However, the analyses revealed variations in the methodology of the contact burn injury heating paradigm and the post-burn application of test stimuli. The contact burn injury model had limited testing sensitivity in demonstrating analgesic efficacy. There was a weak correlation between experimental and clinical pain intensity variables. The data analysis was limited by the methodological heterogenicity of the different studies and a high risk of bias across the studies. In conclusion, although the contact burn injury model provides robust hyperalgesia, it has limited efficacy in testing analgesic drug response. Recommendations for future use of the model are being provided, but further research is needed to improve the sensitivity of the contact burn injury method. The protocol for this review has been published in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019133734).

Human surrogate models of central sensitization: A critical review and practical guide

Background

As in other fields of medicine, development of new medications for management of neuropathic pain has been difficult since preclinical rodent models do not necessarily translate to the clinics. Aside from ongoing pain with burning or shock‐like qualities, neuropathic pain is often characterized by pain hypersensitivity (hyperalgesia and allodynia), most often towards mechanical stimuli, reflecting sensitization of neural transmission.

Data treatment

We therefore performed a systematic literature review (PubMed‐Medline, Cochrane, WoS, ClinicalTrials) and semi‐quantitative meta‐analysis of human pain models that aim to induce central sensitization, and generate hyperalgesia surrounding a real or simulated injury.

Results

From an initial set of 1569 reports, we identified and analysed 269 studies using more than a dozen human models of sensitization. Five of these models (intradermal or topical capsaicin, low‐ or high‐frequency electrical stimulation, thermode‐induced heat‐injury) were found to reliably induce secondary hyperalgesia to pinprick and have been implemented in multiple laboratories. The ability of these models to induce dynamic mechanical allodynia was however substantially lower. The proportion of subjects who developed hypersensitivity was rarely provided, giving rise to significant reporting bias. In four of these models pharmacological profiles allowed to verify similarity to some clinical conditions, and therefore may inform basic research for new drug development.

Conclusions

While there is no single “optimal” model of central sensitization, the range of validated and easy‐to‐use procedures in humans should be able to inform preclinical researchers on helpful potential biomarkers, thereby narrowing the translation gap between basic and clinical data.

Significance

Being able to mimic aspects of pathological pain directly in humans has a huge potential to understand pathophysiology and provide animal research with translatable biomarkers for drug development. One group of human surrogate models has proven to have excellent predictive validity: they respond to clinically active medications and do not respond to clinically inactive medications, including some that worked in animals but failed in the clinics. They should therefore inform basic research for new drug development.

A data science approach to the selection of most informative readouts of the human intradermal capsaicin pain model to assess pregabalin effects

Persistent and, in particular, neuropathic pain is a major healthcare problem with still insufficient pharmacological treatment options. This triggered research activities aimed at finding analgesics with a novel mechanism of action. Results of these efforts will need to pass through the phases of drug development, in which experimental human pain models are established components e.g. implemented as chemical hyperalgesia induced by capsaicin. We aimed at ranking the various readouts of a human capsaicin-based pain model with respect to the most relevant information about the effects of a potential reference analgesic. In a placebo-controlled, randomized cross-over study, seven different pain-related readouts were acquired in 16 healthy individuals before and after oral administration of 300 mg pregabalin. The sizes of the effect on pain induced by intradermal injection of capsaicin were quantified by calculating Cohen's d. While in four of the seven pain-related parameters, pregabalin provided a small effect judged by values of Cohen's d exceeding 0.2, an item categorization technique implemented as computed ABC analysis identified the pain intensities in the area of secondary hyperalgesia and of allodynia as the most suitable parameters to quantify the analgesic effects of pregabalin. Results of this study provide further support for the ability of the intradermal capsaicin pain model to show analgesic effects of pregabalin. Results can serve as a basis for the designs of studies where the inclusion of this particular pain model and pregabalin is planned.

The Acute Effect of Skin Preheating on Capsaicin-Induced Central Sensitization in Humans

INTRODUCTION

Topical capsaicin is commonly employed to experimentally induce central sensitization (CS) in humans. While previous studies have investigated the effect of skin preheating on the sensitizing effect of capsaicin, no studies have compared the synergistic effect of skin preheating on the magnitude of sensitization via topical capsaicin within the first 30 minutes of application. We tested the hypothesis that skin preheating potentiates the sensitizing effect of topical capsaicin by evoking a larger region of secondary hyperalgesia vs. topical capsaicin alone.

METHODS

Twenty young, healthy subjects each received topical capsaicin (Zostrix HP 0.075%) only (CAP), topical capsaicin with preheating (CAP + HEAT), and topical nonsensitizing placebo cream (CON) in a crossover design. Capsaicin and placebo creams were applied to a 50 cm² area of the dorsal forearm. The CAP + HEAT session also included a 10-minute preheating session. Regions of secondary hyperalgesia were assessed using mechanical brush allodynia testing, and skin temperature was assessed via infrared thermography. Outcomes were normalized to baseline and compared at 10, 20, and 30 minutes after cream application.

RESULTS

The CAP + HEAT session led to a significantly larger area of secondary hyperalgesia compared to the CAP session as measured by brush allodynia (CON: 0 ± 0 cm; CAP: 2.08 ± 0.45 cm; CAP + HEAT: 3.70 ± 0.46 cm; P < 0.05) and skin temperature (CON: -2.92% ± 0.03%; CAP: -0.63% ± 0.09%; CAP + HEAT: 2.50% ± 0.11%; ( of baseline) P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preheating amplifies the sensitizing effect of topical capsaicin within 30 minutes of application. The heat-capsaicin technique may be employed to assess differing magnitudes of CS induction and enables future studies investigating the development and progression of CS in humans.

Effect of Intravenous Alfentanil on Nonpainful Thermally Induced Hyperalgesia in Healthy Volunteers

Experimental interventions that activate specific components of clinical pain are necessary for characterization of underlying mechanisms and pharmacology. Cutaneous hyperalgesia has been described that uses nonpainful heat to induce secondary hyperalgesia. This study evaluated the effect of intravenous alfentanil on experimental cutaneous hyperalgesia created using this method. Eighteen subjects participated in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled crossover study consisting of 2 sessions, 1 with alfentanil and 1 with placebo. Using a computer-controlled infusion pump, alfentanil or matching placebo was maintained at a constant plasma level of 75 ng/mL for 1 hour followed by the application of a 40°C heat stimulus to the right thenar eminence for 15 minutes. The temperature was raised by 1°C every 15 minutes until the subject reported pain or 45°C was reached. After the end point was reached, the temperature was maintained, and repeat testing was performed. The nonpainful heat created an area of secondary cutaneous hyperalgesia and significant decrease in mechanical pain threshold on heat-treated right vs untreated left during placebo administration. Alfentanil prevented the hypersensitivity when compared to placebo (P < .05) but failed to reduce the area of secondary hyperalgesia created by nonpainful heat when compared to placebo (P = .06). Neither alfentanil nor the heat lamp treatment showed any significant effect on other neurosensory measures. This study demonstrated a reliable production of cutaneous hyperalgesia using a nonpainful stimulus that is affected by the systemic delivery of alfentanil. This model for human cutaneous experimental pain may be a useful method for scientific characterization of analgesics.

A literature review on the pharmacological sensitivity of human evoked hyperalgesia pain models

AIMS

Human evoked pain models can be used to determine the efficacy of new and existing analgesics and to aid in the identification of new targets. Aspects of neuropathic pain can be simulated by inducing hyperalgesia resulting from provoked sensitization. The present literature review aimed to provide insight into the sensitivity of different hyperalgesia and allodynia models of pharmacological treatment.

METHODS

A literature search was performed to identify randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that included human hyperalgesia pain models and investigated the pharmacodynamic effects of different classes of drugs.

RESULTS

Three hyperalgesia models [ultraviolet B (UVB) irradiation, capsaicin and thermode burn] have been used extensively. Assessment of hyperalgesia/allodynia and pharmacological effect are measured using challenge tests, which generally comprise thermal (heat/cold) or mechanical stimulation (pin-prick, stroking or impact). The UVB model was sensitive to the antihyperalgesic effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids. The capsaicin model was partially sensitive to opioids. The burn model did not detect any antihyperalgesic effects when NSAIDs or local anaesthetics were administered but responded to the effects of N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists by moderately reducing mechanical hyperalgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on pharmacological sensitivity, the UVB model adequately reflects inflammatory pain and was sensitive to NSAIDs and opioids. Findings from the capsaicin and burn models raised questions about the translatability of these models to the treatment of neuropathic pain. There is a need for a reproducible and predictive model of neuropathic pain, either in healthy subjects or in patients.

Pattern of neuropathic pain induced by topical capsaicin application in healthy subjects

Human experimental pain models are widely used to study drug effects under controlled conditions, but they require further optimization to better reflect clinical pain conditions. To this end, we measured experimentally induced pain in 110 (46 men) healthy volunteers. The quantitative sensory testing (QST) battery (German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain) was applied on untreated ("control") and topical capsaicin-hypersensitized ("test") skin. Z-transformed QST-parameter values obtained at the test site were compared with corresponding values published from 1236 patients with neuropathic pain using Bayesian statistics. Subjects were clustered for the resemblance of their QST pattern to neuropathic pain. Although QST parameter values from the untreated site agreed with reference values, several QST parameters acquired at the test site treated with topical capsaicin deviated from normal. These deviations resembled in 0 to 7 parameters of the QST pattern observed in patients with neuropathic pain. Higher degrees (50%-60%) of resemblance to neuropathic QST pattern were obtained in 18% of the subjects. Inclusion in the respective clusters was predictable at a cross-validated accuracy of 86.9% by a classification and regression tree comprising 3 QST parameters (mechanical pain sensitivity, wind-up ratio, and z-transformed thermal sensory limen) from the control sites. Thus, we found that topical capsaicin partly induced the desired clinical pattern of neuropathic pain in a preselectable subgroup of healthy subjects to a degree that fuels expectations that experimental pain models can be optimized toward mimicking clinical pain. The subjects, therefore, qualify for enrollment in analgesic drug studies that use highly selected cohorts to enhance predictivity for clinical analgesia.

Demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones: Punctate stimulation pressure matters

BACKGROUND

Secondary hyperalgesia is increased sensitivity in normal tissue near an injury, and it is a measure of central sensitization reflecting injury-related effects on the CNS. Secondary hyperalgesia areas (SHAs), usually assessed by polyamide monofilaments, are important outcomes in studies of analgesic drug effects in humans. However, since the methods applied in demarcating the secondary hyperalgesia zone seem inconsistent across studies, we examined the effect of a standardized approach upon the measurement of SHA following a first degree burn injury (BI).

NEW METHOD

The study was a two-observer, test-retest study with the two sessions separated by 6wk. An observer-blinded design adjusted to examine day-to-day and observer-to-observer variability in SHA was used. In 23 healthy volunteers (12 females/11 males) a BI was induced by a contact thermode (47.0°C, 420s, 2.5×5.0cm(2)). The SHA, demarcated by polyamide monofilaments (bending force: 0.2, 69 and 2569mN) and a "weighted-pin" stimulator (512mN), were assessed 45 to 75min after each BI.

RESULTS

A random effect, linear mixed model demonstrated a logarithmic correlation between elicited skin pressures (mN/mm(2)) and the SHAs (P<0.0001). No day-to-day or observer-to-observer differences in SHAs were observed. Intraclass correlation coefficients, in the range of 0.51 to 0.84, indicated a moderate to almost perfect reliability between observers.

COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS

No standardized approach in SHA-assessment has hitherto been presented.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to demonstrate that demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones depends on the developed pressure of the punctate stimulator used.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy attenuates central sensitization induced by a thermal injury in humans

BACKGROUND

Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2 ) treatment has in animal experiments demonstrated antinociceptive effects. It was hypothesized that these effects would attenuate secondary hyperalgesia areas (SHAs), an expression of central sensitization, after a first-degree thermal injury in humans.

METHODS

Seventeen healthy volunteers were examined during two sessions using a randomized crossover design. Volunteers were studied during control conditions (ambient pressure, FI O2  = 0.21) and during HBO2 (2.4 standard atmosphere, FI O2  = 1.0, 90 min) conditions in a pressure chamber. Quantitative sensory testing, including assessment of SHAs was performed.

RESULTS

A statistically significant overall attenuation of SHAs was seen during the HBO2 sessions compared with the control-sessions (P = 0.011). In the eight volunteers starting with the HBO2 session, no difference in SHAs compared with control was demonstrated. However, in the nine volunteers starting with the control session, a statistical significant attenuation of SHAs was demonstrated in the HBO2 session (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that HBO2 therapy in humans attenuates central sensitization induced by a thermal skin injury, compared with control. These new and original findings in humans corroborate animal experimental data. The thermal injury model may give impetus to future human neurophysiological studies exploring the central effects of hyperbaric oxygen treatment.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of the analgesic and antihyperalgesic effects of morphine after intravenous infusion in human volunteers

Using a modelling approach, this study aimed to (i) examine whether the pharmacodynamics of the analgesic and antihyperalgesic effects of morphine differ; (ii) investigate the influence of demographic, pain sensitivity and genetic (OPRM1) variables on between-subject variability of morphine pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in human experimental pain models. The study was a randomized, double-blind, 5-arm, cross-over, placebo-controlled study. The psychophysical cutaneous pain tests, electrical pain tolerance (EPTo) and secondary hyperalgesia areas (2HA) were studied in 28 healthy individuals (15 males). The subjects were chosen based on a previous trial where 100 subjects rated (VAS) their pain during a heat injury (47°C, 7 min., 12.5 cm(2) ). The 33% lowest- and highest pain-sensitive subjects were offered participation in the present study. A two-compartment linear model with allometric scaling for weight provided the best description of the plasma concentration-time profile of morphine. Changes in the EPTo and 2HA responses with time during the placebo treatment were best described by a linear model and a quadratic model, respectively. The model discrimination process showed clear evidence for adding between-occasion variability (BOV) on baseline and the placebo slope for EPTo and 2HA, respectively. The sensitivity covariate was significant on baseline EPTo values and genetics as a covariate on the placebo slope for 2HA. The analgesic and antihyperalgesic effects of morphine were pharmacologically distinct as the models had different effect site equilibration half-lives and different covariate effects. Morphine had negligible effect on 2HA, but significant effect on EPTo.

Does naloxone reinstate secondary hyperalgesia in humans after resolution of a burn injury? A placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, cross-over study

INTRODUCTION

Development of secondary hyperalgesia following a cutaneous injury is a centrally mediated, robust phenomenon. The pathophysiological role of endogenous opioid signalling to the development of hyperalgesia is unclear. Recent animal studies, carried out after the resolution of inflammatory pain, have demonstrated reinstatement of tactile hypersensitivity following administration of μ-opioid-receptor-antagonists. In the present study in humans, we analyzed the effect of naloxone when given after the resolution of secondary hyperalgesia following a first-degree burn injury.

METHODS

Twenty-two healthy volunteers were included in this placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. Following baseline assessment of thermal and mechanical thresholds, a first-degree burn injury (BI; 47°C, 7 minutes, thermode area 12.5 cm(2)) was induced on the lower leg. Secondary hyperalgesia areas around the BI-area, and separately produced by brief thermal sensitization on the contralateral thigh (BTS; 45°C, 3 minutes, area 12.5 cm(2)), were assessed using a polyamide monofilament at pre-BI and 1, 2, and 3 hours post-BI. At 72 hrs, BI and BTS secondary hyperalgesia areas were assessed prior to start of a 30 minutes intravenous infusion of naloxone (total dose 21 microg/kg) or placebo. Fifteen minutes after start of the infusion, BI and BTS secondary hyperalgesia areas were reassessed, along with mechanical and thermal thresholds.

RESULTS

Secondary hyperalgesia areas were demonstrable in all volunteers 1-3 hrs post-BI, but were not demonstrable at 72 hrs post-burn in 73-86% of the subjects. Neither magnitude of secondary hyperalgesia areas nor the mechanical and thermal thresholds were associated with naloxone-treated compared to placebo-treated subjects.

CONCLUSION

Naloxone (21 microg/kg) did not reinstate secondary hyperalgesia when administered 72 hours after a first-degree burn injury and did not increase BTS-generated hyperalgesia. The negative results may be due to the low dose of naloxone or insufficient tissue injury to generate latent sensitization.

Human experimental pain models for assessing the therapeutic efficacy of analgesic drugs

Pain models in animals have shown low predictivity for analgesic efficacy in humans, and clinical studies are often very confounded, blurring the evaluation. Human experimental pain models may therefore help to evaluate mechanisms and effect of analgesics and bridge findings from basic studies to the clinic. The present review outlines the concept and limitations of human experimental pain models and addresses analgesic efficacy in healthy volunteers and patients. Experimental models to evoke pain and hyperalgesia are available for most tissues. In healthy volunteers, the effect of acetaminophen is difficult to detect unless neurophysiological methods are used, whereas the effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs could be detected in most models. Anticonvulsants and antidepressants are sensitive in several models, particularly in models inducing hyperalgesia. For opioids, tonic pain with high intensity is attenuated more than short-lasting pain and nonpainful sensations. Fewer studies were performed in patients. In general, the sensitivity to analgesics is better in patients than in healthy volunteers, but the lower number of studies may bias the results. Experimental models have variable reliability, and validity shall be interpreted with caution. Models including deep, tonic pain and hyperalgesia are better to predict the effects of analgesics. Assessment with neurophysiologic methods and imaging is valuable as a supplement to psychophysical methods and can increase sensitivity. The models need to be designed with careful consideration of pharmacological mechanisms and pharmacokinetics of analgesics. Knowledge obtained from this review can help design experimental pain studies for new compounds entering phase I and II clinical trials.

Assessing efficacy of non-opioid analgesics in experimental pain models in healthy volunteers: an updated review

AIM

Experimental pain models may help to evaluate the mechanisms of analgesics and target the clinical indications for their use. This review, the second in a series of two, addresses how the efficacy of non-opioid analgesics have been assessed in human volunteers using experimental pain models.

METHODS

A literature search was completed for randomized controlled studies that included human experimental pain models, healthy volunteers and non-opioid analgesics.

RESULTS

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs worked against various types of acute pain as well as in hyperalgesia. Analgesia from paracetamol was difficult to detect in experimental pain and the pain needed to be assessed with very sensitive methods like evoked brain potentials. The N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonists exemplified by ketamine generally needed strong, long-lasting or repeated pain in the skin for detectable analgesia, whereas pain in muscle and viscera generally was more easily attenuated. Gabapentin worked well in several models, particularly those inducing hyperalgesia, whereas lamotrigine was weak in modulation of experimental pain. Imipramine attenuated pain in most experimental models, whereas amitriptyline had weaker effects. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol attenuated pain in only a few models.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain induction and assessment are very important for the sensitivity of the pain models. Generally, experimental pain models need to be designed with careful consideration of the pharmacological mechanisms and pharmacokinetics of analgesics. The drawback with the different study designs is also discussed. This knowledge can aid the decisions that need to be taken when designing experimental pain studies for compounds entering Phase I and II trials.

Morphine is an arteriolar vasodilator in man

AIM

The mechanisms of action of morphine on the arterial system are not well understood. The aim was to report forearm vascular responses, and their mediation, to intra-arterial morphine in healthy subjects.

METHODS

Three separate protocols were performed: (i) dose ranging; (ii) acute tolerance; (iii) randomized crossover mechanistic study on forearm blood flow (FBF) responses to intrabrachial infusion of morphine using venous occlusion plethysmography. Morphine was infused either alone (study 1 and 2), or with an antagonist: naloxone, combined histamine-1 and histamine-2 receptor blockade or during a nitric oxide clamp.

RESULTS

Morphine caused an increase in FBF at doses of 30 microg min(-1)[3.25 (0.26) ml min(-1) 100 ml(-1)][mean (SEM)] doubling at 100 microg min(-1) to 5.23 (0.53) ml min(-1) 100 ml(-1). Acute tolerance was not seen to 50 microg min(-1) morphine, with increased FBF [3.96 (0.35) ml min(-1) 100 ml(-1)] (P = 0.003), throughout the 30-min infusion period. Vasodilatation was abolished by pretreatment with antihistamines (P = 0.008) and the nitric oxide clamp (P < 0.001), but not affected by naloxone. The maximum FBF with pretreatment with combined H1/H2 blockade was 3.06 (0.48) and 2.90 (0.17) ml min(-1) 100 ml(-1) after 30 min, whereas with morphine alone it reached 4.3 (0.89) ml min(-1) 100 ml(-1).

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-arterial infusion of morphine into the forearm circulation causes vasodilatation through local histamine-modulated nitric oxide release. Opioid receptor mechanisms need further exploration.

Assessing analgesic actions of opioids by experimental pain models in healthy volunteers - an updated review

AIM

Experimental pain models may help to evaluate the mechanisms of action of analgesics and target the clinical indications for their use. This review addresses how the efficacy of opioids can be assessed in human volunteers using experimental pain models. The drawback with the different study designs is also discussed.

METHOD

A literature search was completed for randomized controlled studies which included human experimental pain models, healthy volunteers and opioids.

RESULTS

Opioids with a strong affinity for the micro-opioid receptor decreased the sensation in a variety of experimental pain modalities, but strong tonic pain was attenuated more than short lasting pain and non-painful sensations. The effects of opioids with weaker affinity for the micro-opioid receptor were detected by a more narrow range of pain models, and the assessment methods needed to be more sensitive.

CONCLUSION

The way the pain is induced, assessed and summarized is very important for the sensitivity of the pain models. This review gives an overview of how different opioids perform in experimental pain models. Generally experimental pain models need to be designed with careful consideration of pharmacological mechanisms and pharmacokinetics of analgesics. This knowledge can aid the decisions needed to be taken when designing experimental pain studies for compounds entering phase 1 clinical trials.

Quantifying Allodynia in Patients Suffering From Unilateral Neuropathic Pain Using Von Frey Monofilaments

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to investigate whether quantitative sensory testing with Von Frey monofilaments (VFMs) can be used for the quantification of allodynia in patients with chronic neuropathic pain, and how the pain threshold of affected skin differs from healthy skin.

METHODS

Using VFMs, we aimed to determine the pain threshold in 22 patients suffering from allodynia as a consequence of a chronic unilateral neuropathic pain syndrome. We performed quantitative sensory testing according to the Method of Limits protocol. We used the patient's own contralateral side and 5 healthy control participants to obtain reference values.

RESULTS

On the affected side, we found in 20 out of 22 patients that the pain threshold could be determined with the monofilaments. On average, these 20 patients indicated pain upon the application of monofilament with logarithmic nr. 4.56, whereas no pain threshold could be determined on the contralateral, unaffected side, and in the healthy control participants for any monofilament.

DISCUSSION

We showed that although etiology and pathophysiology of allodynia vary individually, with VFMs the clinical symptom allodynia can be quantified in a simple and practical fashion in almost all patients.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2005

This paper is the 28th consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, now spanning over a quarter-century of research. It summarizes papers published during 2005 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurologic disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity, neurophysiology and transmitter release (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); immunological responses (Section 17).

Multiple dose gabapentin attenuates cutaneous pain and central sensitisation but not muscle pain in healthy volunteers

Various muscle pains constitute a large clinical problem, both for patients and clinicians. Gabapentin is an established therapy in neuropathic pain and reduces cutaneous pain in healthy volunteers. Gabapentin in combination with other analgesics reduces post-operative pain. No data exist on the effect of gabapentin on muscle pain. This study investigates the effect of gabapentin on muscle and cutaneous pain in healthy volunteers. Sixteen healthy volunteers, 8 male/8 female, were included in this double-blind three-session crossover study comparing the effects of 0, 1200, 1800 and 2600 mg (pre-treatment, titrated over 4 doses) gabapentin and placebo. Muscle pain was induced by infusing 0.5 ml of hypertonic saline into the anterior tibial muscle. Simultaneously, subjects graded pain on a computerized visual analog scale (VAS, 0-10). Total (AUC, VAS*duration in s) and maximal pain (VAS(max)) were assessed. Areas of local and referred pain were measured. Further, continuous intracutaneous electrical stimulation was applied to the forearm. Current was increased until pain intensity 5/10 or until subjects reached a cut-off of 70 mA. Spontaneous pain (VAS 0-10), areas of secondary hyperalgesia to pinprick (cm2) and mechanical pain threshold (g) within this area were assessed. Gabapentin pre-treatment reduced sensitivity to electrical induction of skin pain by 14%, p=0.016. Secondary hyperalgesia was induced, but areas were reduced after pre-treatment, p<0.05. Mechanical pain thresholds were unaffected. Pain induced by intramuscular infusion of hypertonic saline was not affected by gabapentin. In conclusion, single or repeated dosing of gabapentin reduced cutaneous but not muscle pain in healthy volunteers.