Sequential first-pass metabolism of nortilidine: the active metabolite of the synthetic opioid drug tilidine

Tilidine and dipyrone (metamizole) in cold pressor pain: A pooled analysis of efficacy, tolerability, and safety in healthy volunteers

The cold pressor test (CPT) is widely implemented and offers a simple, experimental acute pain model utilizing cold pain. Previous trials have frequently paired the CPT with opioids in order to investigate the mechanisms underlying pharmacological analgesia, due to their known analgesic efficacy. However, opioid side effects may lead to unblinding and raise concerns about the safety of the experimental setting. Despite the established clinical efficacy of dipyrone (metamizole), its efficacy, tolerability, and safety in cold pressor pain has not been systematically addressed to date. This pooled analysis included data of 260 healthy volunteers from three randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind substudies using the CPT following a pre‐test‐post‐test‐design. These substudies allow for comparing a single dose of 800 mg dipyrone with two different doses of the opioid tilidine/naloxone (50/4 mg and 100/8 mg, respectively). Outcomes included pain intensity ratings, pain tolerance, medication‐attributed side effects, as well as changes of blood pressure and heart rate. We demonstrate that both opioid doses and dipyrone had a comparable, significant analgesic effect on cold pressor pain. However, dipyrone was associated with significantly less self‐reported adverse effects and these were not significantly different from those under placebo. These results indicate that the combination of dipyrone and the CPT provides a safe, tolerable, and effective experimental model for the study of pharmacological analgesia. In combination with a CPT, dipyrone may be useful as a positive control, or baseline medication for the study of analgesic modulation.

Identifying New/Emerging Psychoactive Substances at the Time of COVID-19; A Web-Based Approach

COVID-19-related disruptions of people and goods' circulation can affect drug markets, especially for new psychoactive substances (NPSs). Drug shortages could cause a change in available NPS, with the introduction of new, unknown, substances. The aims of the current research were to use a web crawler, NPSfinder®, to identify and categorize emerging NPS discussed on a range of drug enthusiasts/psychonauts' websites/fora at the time of the pandemic; social media for these identified NPS were screened as well. The NPSfinder® was used here to automatically scan 24/7 a list of psychonaut websites and NPS online resources. The NPSs identified in the time frame between January and August 2020 were searched in both the European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addictions (EMCDDA)/United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) databases and on social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, and YouTube) as well, with a content qualitative analysis having been carried out on reddit.com. Of a total of 229 NPSs being discussed at the time of the pandemic, some 18 NPSs were identified for the first time by the NPSfinder®. These included six cathinones, six opioids, two synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRAs), two phenylcyclohexylpiperidine (PCP)-like molecules, and two psychedelics. Of these NPSs, 10 were found to be previously unreported to either the UNODC or the EMCDDA. Of these 18 NPSs, opioids and cathinones were the most discussed on social media/reddit, with the highest number of threads associated. Current findings may support the use of both automated web crawlers and social listening approaches to identify emerging NPSs; the pandemic-related imposed restrictions may somehow influence the demand for specific NPS classes.

Opioids as Substrates and Inhibitors of the Genetically Highly Variable Organic Cation Transporter OCT1

Genetic variants in the hepatic uptake transporter OCT1, observed in 9% of Europeans and white Americans, are known to affect pharmacokinetics and efficacy of tramadol, morphine, and codeine. Here, we report further opioids to be substrates and inhibitors of OCT1. Methylnaltrexone, hydromorphone, oxymorphone, and meptazinol were identified as OCT1 substrates. Methylnaltrexone is the strongest OCT1 substrate currently reported. It showed 86-fold higher accumulation in OCT1-overexpressing cells compared to control cells. We observed substantial differences in the inhibitory potency among structurally highly similar morphinan opioids (IC₅₀ ranged from 6.4 μM for dextrorphan to 2 mM for oxycodone). The ether linkage of C4-C5 in the morphinan ring leads to a strong reduction of inhibitory potency. In conclusion, although polyspecific, OCT1 possesses a strong selectivity for its ligands. In contrast to methylnaltrexone and hydromorphone, oxycodone and hydrocodone do not interact with OCT1 and may be safer for use in individuals with genetic OCT1 deficiency.

Pre-systemic elimination of tilidine: localization and consequences for the formation of the active metabolite nortilidine

The therapeutic activity of tilidine, an opioid analgesic, is mainly related to its active metabolite nortilidine. Nortilidine formation mainly occurs during the high intestinal first-pass metabolism of tilidine by N-demethylation. Elimination of the active nortilidine to the inactive bisnortilidine is also mediated by N-demethylation and is supposed to take place in the liver, probably at a smaller rate. The aim of this study was the investigation of the pre-systemic elimination of tilidine using grapefruit juice (GFJ) as an intestinal CYP3A4 inhibitor and efavirenz (EFV) as a CYP3A4 activator. A randomized, open, placebo-controlled, cross-over study was conducted in 12 healthy volunteers using 100 mg tilidine solution p.o., regular strength GFJ 250 mL (3 times at 12-hr intervals) and EFV 400 mg (12 hr before tilidine administration). Tilidine, nortilidine and bisnortilidine in plasma and urine were quantified by a validated LC/MS/MS analysis. GFJ did not change any pharmacokinetic parameter of tilidine and its metabolites, which suggests that intestinal CYP3A4 does not contribute to the first-pass metabolism of tilidine. No effect of EFV on the pharmacokinetics of the active nortilidine was observed except a significant reduction of the terminal elimination half-life by 15%. Overall elimination (renal and metabolic clearances) was unaffected by every treatment. CYP3A4 does not seem to play a major role in tilidine first-pass and overall metabolism. Other unknown metabolites and their enzymes responsible for their formation have to be investigated as they account for the majority of renally excreted metabolites.

Contribution of CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 to the formation of the active nortilidine from the prodrug tilidine

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT

The analgesic activity of tilidine is mediated by its active metabolite, nortilidine, which easily penetrates the blood-brain barrier and binds to the µ-opioid receptor as a potent agonist. Tilidine undergoes an extensive first-pass metabolism, which has been suggested to be mediated by CYP3A4 and CYP2C19; furthermore, strong inhibition of CYP3A4 and CYP2C19 by voriconazole increased exposure of nortilidine, probably by inhibition of further metabolism. The novel CYP2C19 gene variant CYP2C19*17 causes ultrarapid drug metabolism, in contrast to the *2 and *3 variants, which result in impaired drug metabolism.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

Using a panel study with CYP2C19 ultrarapid and poor metabolizers, a major contribution of polymorphic CYP2C19 on tilidine metabolic elimination can be excluded.  The potent CYP3A4 inhibitor ritonavir alters the sequential metabolism of tilidine, substantially reducing the partial metabolic clearances of tilidine to nortilidine and nortilidine to bisnortilidine, which increases the nortilidine exposure twofold. The lowest clearance in overall tilidine elimination is the N-demethylation of nortilidine to bisnortilidine. Inhibition of this step leads to accumulation of the active nortilidine.

AIMS

To investigate in vivo the effect of the CYP2C19 genotype on the pharmacokinetics of tilidine and the contribution of CYP3A4 and CYP2C19 to the formation of nortilidine using potent CYP3A4 inhibition by ritonavir.

METHODS

Fourteen healthy volunteers (seven CYP2C19 poor and seven ultrarapid metabolizers) received ritonavir orally (300 mg twice daily) for 3 days or placebo, together with a single oral dose of tilidine and naloxone (100 mg and 4 mg, respectively). Blood samples and urine were collected for 72 h. Noncompartmental analysis was performed to determine pharmacokinetic parameters of tilidine, nortilidine, bisnortilidine and ritonavir.

RESULTS

Tilidine exposure increased sevenfold and terminal elimination half-life fivefold during ritonavir treatment, but no significant differences were observed between the CYP2C19 genotypes. During ritonavir treatment, nortilidine area under the concentration-time curve was on average doubled, with no differences between CYP2C19 poor metabolizers [2242 h ng ml(-1) (95% confidence interval 1811-2674) vs. 996 h ng ml(-1) (95% confidence interval 872-1119)] and ultrarapid metabolizers [2074 h ng ml(-1) (95% confidence interval 1353-2795) vs. 1059 h ng ml(-1) (95% confidence interval 789-1330)]. The plasma concentration-time curve of the secondary metabolite, bisnortilidine, showed a threefold increase of time to reach maximal observed plasma concentration; however, area under the concentration-time curve was not altered by ritonavir.

CONCLUSIONS

The sequential metabolism of tilidine is inhibited by the potent CYP3A4 inhibitor, ritonavir, independent of the CYP2C19 genotype, with a twofold increase in the exposure of the active nortilidine.

Inhibition of the active principle of the weak opioid tilidine by the triazole antifungal voriconazole

AIMS

To investigate in vivo the influence of the potent CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 inhibitor voriconazole on the pharmacokinetics and analgesic effects of tilidine.

METHODS

Sixteen healthy volunteers received voriconazole (400 mg) or placebo together with a single oral dose of tilidine (100 mg). Blood samples and urine were collected for 24 h and experimental pain was determined by using the cold pressor test. Noncompartimental analysis was performed to determine pharmacokinetic parameters of tilidine, nortilidine and voriconazole, whereas pharmacodynamic parameters were analysed by nonparametric repeated measures ANOVA (Friedman).

RESULTS

Voriconazole caused a 20-fold increase in exposition of tilidine in serum [AUC 1250.8 h*ng ml(-1), 95% confidence interval (CI) 1076.8, 1424.9 vs. 61 h*ng ml(-1), 95% CI 42.6, 80.9; P < 0.0001], whereas the AUC of nortilidine also increased 2.5-fold. After voriconazole much lower serum concentrations of bisnortilidine were observed. The onset of analgesic activity occurred later with voriconazole, which is in agreement with the prolonged t(max) of nortilidine (0.78 h, 95% CI 0.63, 0.93 vs. 2.5 h, 95% CI 1.85, 3.18; P < 0.0001) due to the additional inhibition of nortilidine metabolism to bisnortilidine. After voriconazole the AUC under the pain withdrawal-time curve was reduced compared with placebo (149 s h(-1), 95% CI 112, 185 vs. 175 s h(-1), 95% CI 138, 213; P < 0.016), mainly due to the shorter withdrawal time 0.75 h after tilidine administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Voriconazole significantly inhibited the sequential metabolism of tilidine with increased exposure of the active nortilidine. Furthermore, the incidence of adverse events was almost doubled after voriconazole and tilidine.

Physiological modeling to understand the impact of enzymes and transporters on drug and metabolite data and bioavailability estimates

PURPOSE

To obtain mathematical solutions that correlate drug and metabolite exposure and systemic bioavailability (F (sys)) with physiological determinants, transporters and enzymes.

METHODS

A series of physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models that included renal excretion and sequential metabolism within the intestine and/or liver as metabolite formation organs were developed. The area under the curve for drug (AUC) and formed metabolite (AUC{mi,P}) were solved by matrix inversion.

RESULTS

The PBPK models revealed that AUC{mi,P} was dependent on dispositional parameters (transport and elimination) for the drug and metabolite. The solution was unique for each metabolite formation organ and was dependent on the type of drug and metabolite elimination organs. The AUC ratio of the formed metabolite after oral and intravenous drug dosing was useful for determination of the fraction absorbed (F (abs)) and not the systemic bioavailability (F (sys)) when either intestine or liver was the only drug elimination organ.

CONCLUSIONS

The AUC ratio of the formed metabolite after oral and intravenous drug dosing differed from that for drug and would not provide F (sys). However, the AUC ratio of the formed metabolite for oral and intravenous drug dosing furnished the estimate of F (abs) when intestine or liver was the only drug metabolic organ.

Role of active metabolites in the use of opioids

The opioid class of drugs, a large group, is mainly used for the treatment of acute and chronic persistent pain. All are eliminated from the body via metabolism involving principally CYP3A4 and the highly polymorphic CYP2D6, which markedly affects the drug's function, and by conjugation reactions mainly by UGT2B7. In many cases, the resultant metabolites have the same pharmacological activity as the parent opioid; however in many cases, plasma metabolite concentrations are too low to make a meaningful contribution to the overall clinical effects of the parent drug. These metabolites are invariably more water soluble and require renal clearance as an important overall elimination pathway. Such metabolites have the potential to accumulate in the elderly and in those with declining renal function with resultant accumulation to a much greater extent than the parent opioid. The best known example is the accumulation of morphine-6-glucuronide from morphine. Some opioids have active metabolites but at different target sites. These are norpethidine, a neurotoxic agent, and nordextropropoxyphene, a cardiotoxic agent. Clinicians need to be aware that many opioids have active metabolites that will become therapeutically important, for example in cases of altered pathology, drug interactions and genetic polymorphisms of drug-metabolizing enzymes. Thus, dose individualisation and the avoidance of adverse effects of opioids due to the accumulation of active metabolites or lack of formation of active metabolites are important considerations when opioids are used.

Development of opioid formulations with limited diversion and abuse potential

Non-medical abuse of prescription opioid medications is not a new phenomenon, but such use has been increasing in recent years. Various methods have been used and continue to be developed in an effort to limit diversion and abuse of opioid medications. A number of these methods will be described for opioid analgesic and addiction treatment formulations using relevant historical examples (e.g. propoxyphene, pentazocine, buprenorphine) as well as examples of formulations currently being considered or under development (e.g. oxycodone plus naltrexone, sustained-release buprenorphine). The focus, though not exclusively, will be on those formulations that represent a combination of an opioid agonist with an antagonist. These methods must take into consideration the pharmacokinetic profile of the agonist and antagonist, the expected primary route of abuse of the medication and the medication combination, the dose of medication that is likely to be abused, the availability of alternative drugs of abuse, and the population of potential abusers that is being targeted with the revised formulation.

Actions of tilidine and nortilidine on cloned opioid receptors

Tilidine, alone or combined with naloxone to prevent drug abuse, is used as an oral opioid analgesic. Although the analgesic action of tilidine and its active metabolite nortilidine is reversed by naloxone and therefore believed to involve the activation of the Mu opioid (MOP, OP3, mu) receptor, this has never been studied in recombinant systems. We have measured the selectivity of tilidine and nortilidine for human opioid and opioid-like receptors stably expressed in CHO-K1 cells, using the inhibition of the forskolin (FK)-induced accumulation of cAMP as endpoint. In cells expressing the MOP receptor, tilidine and nortilidine inhibited cAMP accumulation with IC50 of 11 microM and 110 nM, respectively. The agonist effects of nortilidine and [D-Ala2-MePhe4-Gly5-ol]enkephalin (DAMGO) on the MOP receptor were reversed by naloxone with very similar IC50 (1.2 versus 1.8 nM). At concentrations up to 100 microM, tilidine and nortilidine had no agonist effect on the DOP, KOP and NOP receptors. In conclusion, this study on cloned human receptors demonstrates that nortilidine is a selective agonist of the MOP receptor.

Pharmacological treatments for persistent non-malignant pain in older persons

Persistent non-malignant pain is common, often neglected and under-treated among older persons. Some older adults do not complain because they consider chronic pain to be a characteristic of normal aging. Physicians have concerns regarding adverse effects of pharmacological treatment. The model of the World Health Organization for treatment of cancer pain is generally accepted and also recommended for persistent non-cancer pain. Furthermore, non-pharmacological treatment should complement drug treatment whenever possible. An initial assessment and possible treatment of underlying causes of pain are pertinent. Modern pharmacological pain management is based on non-opioid and opioid analgesics. NSAIDs are among the most widely prescribed class of drugs in the world. The new cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib and rofecoxib offer an alternative for the treatment of mild-to-moderate pain in patients with a history of gastric ulcers or bleeding. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is being used widely for the management of mild pain across all age groups as it has moderate adverse effects at therapeutic dosages. For moderate pain, a combination of non-opioid analgesics and opioid analgesics with moderate pain relief properties (e.g. oxycodone, codeine, tramadol and tilidine/naloxone) is recommended. For severe pain, a combination of non-opioid analgesics and opioid analgesics with strong pain relief properties (e.g. morphine, codeine) is recommended. The least toxic means of achieving systemic pain relief should be used. For continuous pain, sustained-release analgesic preparations are recommended. Drugs should be given on a fixed time schedule, and possible adverse effects and interactions should be carefully monitored. Adjuvant drugs, such as antidepressants or anticonvulsants, can be very effective especially in the treatment of certain types of pain, such as in diabetic neuropathy. Effective pain management should result in decreased pain, increased function and improvement in mood and sleep.