Characteristic of Interactions Between Intrathecal Gabapentin and Either Clonidine or Neostigmine in the Formalin Test

Pharmacological interactions between intrathecal pregabalin plus tianeptine or clopidogrel in a rat model of neuropathic pain

Background

There is still unmet need in treating neuropathic pain and increasing awareness regarding the use of drug combinations to increase the effectiveness of treatment and reduce adverse effects in patients with neuropathic pain.

Methods

This study was performed to determine the individual and combined effects of pregabalin, tianeptine, and clopidogrel in a rat model of neuropathic pain. The model was created by ligation of the L5-L6 spinal nerve in male Sprague-Dawley rats; mechanical allodynia was confirmed using von Frey filaments. Drugs were administered to the intrathecal space and mechanical allodynia was assessed; drug interactions were estimated by isobolographic or fixed-dose analyses.

Results

Intrathecal pregabalin and tianeptine increased the mechanical withdrawal threshold in a dose-dependent manner, but intrathecal clopidogrel had little effect on the mechanical withdrawal threshold. An additive effect was noted between pregabalin and tianeptine, but not between pregabalin and clopidogrel.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that intrathecal coadministration of pregabalin and tianeptine effectively attenuated mechanical allodynia in the rat model of neuropathic pain. Thus, pregabalin plus tianeptine may be a valid option to enhance the efficacy of neuropathic pain treatment.

Analgesia for Sheep in Commercial Production: Where to Next?

Simple Summary

Increasing societal and customer pressure to provide animals with ‘a life worth living’ continues to apply pressure on industry to alleviate pain associated with husbandry practices, injury and illness. Although a number of analgesic solutions are now available for sheep, providing some amelioration of the acute pain responses, this review has highlighted a number of potential areas for further research.

Abstract

Increasing societal and customer pressure to provide animals with ‘a life worth living’ continues to apply pressure on livestock production industries to alleviate pain associated with husbandry practices, injury and illness. Over the past 15–20 years, there has been considerable research effort to understand and develop mitigation strategies for painful husbandry procedures in sheep, leading to the successful launch of analgesic approaches specific to sheep in a number of countries. However, even with multi-modal approaches to analgesia, using both local anaesthetic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), pain is not obliterated, and the challenge of pain mitigation and phasing out of painful husbandry practices remains. It is timely to review and reflect on progress to date in order to strategically focus on the most important challenges, and the avenues which offer the greatest potential to be incorporated into industry practice in a process of continuous improvement. A structured, systematic literature search was carried out, incorporating peer-reviewed scientific literature in the period 2000–2019. An enormous volume of research is underway, testament to the fact that we have not solved the pain and analgesia challenge for any species, including our own. This review has highlighted a number of potential areas for further research.

Antiepileptic drugs as analgesics/adjuvants in inflammatory pain: current preclinical evidence

Inflammatory pain is the most common type of pain that is treated clinically. The use of currently available treatments (classic analgesics - NSAIDs, paracetamol and opioids) is limited by insufficient efficacy and/or side effects/tolerance development. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are widely used in neuropathic pain treatment, but there is substantial preclinical evidence on their efficacy against inflammatory pain, too. In this review we focus on gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) and dibenzazepine AEDs (carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, and recently introduced eslicarbazepine acetate) and their potential for relieving inflammatory pain. In models of somatic, visceral and trigeminal inflammatory pain, that have a translational value for inflammatory conditions in locomotor system, viscera and head/face, AEDs have demonstrated analgesic activity. This activity was mostly consistent, dependent on the dose and largely independent on the site of inflammation and method of its induction, nociceptive stimuli, species, specific drug used, its route of administration and dosing schedule. AEDs exerted comparable efficacy with classic analgesics. Effective doses of AEDs are lower than toxic doses in animals and, when expressed as equivalent human doses, they are largely overlapping with AEDs doses already used in humans for treating epilepsy/neuropathic pain. The main mechanism of antinociceptive/antihyperalgesic action of gabapentinoids in inflammatory pain models seems to be α₂δ-dependent suppression of voltage-gated calcium channels in primary sensory neurons that leads to reduced release of neurotransmitters in the spinal/medullar dorsal horn. The suppression of NMDA receptors via co-agonist binding site primarily at spinal sites, activation of various types of K⁺ channels at spinal and peripheral sites, and activation of noradrenergic and serotonergic descending pain modulatory pathways may also contribute. Inhibition of voltage-gated sodium channels along the pain pathway is probably the main mechanism of antinociceptive/antihyperalgesic effects of dibenzazepines. The recruitment of peripheral adrenergic and purinergic mechanisms and central GABAergic mechanisms may also contribute. When co-administered with classic/other alternative analgesics, AEDs exerted synergistic/additive interactions. Reviewed data could serve as a basis for clinical studies on the efficacy/safety of AEDs as analgesics/adjuvants in patients with inflammatory pain, and contribute to the improvement of the treatment of various inflammatory pain states.

Synergistic Interaction of a Gabapentin- Mangiferin Combination in Formalin-Induced Secondary Mechanical Allodynia and Hyperalgesia in Rats Is Mediated by Activation of NO-Cyclic GMP-ATP-Sensitive K+ Channel Pathway

Preclinical Research Gabapentin is an anticonvulsant used to treat neuropathic pain. Mangiferin is an antioxidant that has antinociceptive and antiallodynic effects in inflammatory and neuropathic pain models. The purpose of this study was to determine the interaction between mangiferin and gabapentin in the development and maintenance of formalin-induced secondary allodynia and hyperalgesia in rats. Gabapentin, mangiferin, or their fixed-dose ratio combination were administrated peripherally. Isobolographic analyses was used to define the nature of the interaction of antiallodynic and/or antihyperalgesic effects of the two compounds. Theoretical ED₅₀ values for the combination were 74.31 µg/paw and 95.20 µg/paw for pre- and post-treatment, respectively. These values were higher than the experimental ED₅₀ values, 29.45 µg/paw and 37.73 µg/paw respectively, indicating a synergistic interaction in formalin-induced secondary allodynia and hyperalgesia. The antiallodynic and antihyperalgesic effect induced by the gabapentin/mangiferin combination was blocked by administration of L-NAME, the soluble guanylyl cyclase inhibitor, ODQ and glibenclamide. These data suggest that the gabapentin- mangiferin combination produces a synergistic interaction at the peripheral level. Moreover, the antiallodynic and hyperalgesic effect induced by the combination is mediated via the activation of an NO-cyclic GMP-ATP-sensitive K⁺ channel pathway. Drug Dev Res 78 : 390-402, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The evolution of spinal/epidural neostigmine in clinical application: Thoughts after two decades

Since the first clinical application of analgesia following spinal anticholinesterase by 1940's, several clinical double-blind studies have been conducted to date, where intrathecal doses of neostigmine in humans ranged from 750 to 1 μg, due to side-effects. Conversely, epidural neostigmine has been evaluated in proportionally higher doses and represents an alternative, but still deserves more investigation concerning both acute and chronic pain, as it seems devoid of important side-effects.

Epidural administration of neostigmine-loaded nanofibers provides extended analgesia in rats

Background

In this study, neostigmine-loaded electrospun nanofibers were prepared and then their efficacy and duration of analgesic action were studied after epidural administration in rats by repeated tail flick and formalin tests.

Methods

The neostigmine poly vinyl alcohol (PVA) nanofibers were fabricated by electrospinning methods. The nanofibers (1 mg) were injected into the lumbar epidural space (L5-L6) of rats (n = 6). Cerebrospinal fluid samples of rats were collected 1, 5 and 24 hours after injection and then were sampled once weekly for 4 weeks. Free-neostigmine concentration was measured in the samples spectrophotometrically. Rat nociceptive responses were evaluated by repeated tail-flick and formalin tests for 5 weeks after the nanofibers (1 mg) injection. Locomotor activity of rats was measured in the open-field at the same period.

Results

The cerebrospinal fluid concentration of free neostigmine reached 5 μg/ml five hours after injection and remained constant until the end of the experiments. The tail-flick latency of treated rats was significantly (p < 0.01) increased and remained constant up to 4 weeks. Pain scores of the rats in both phases of formalin test were significantly (p < 0.01) reduced during the same periods, Epidural injection of the nanofibers had no effect on locomotor activity of rats in an open-field.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that the neostigmine nanofibers can provide sustained release of neostigmine for induction of prolonged analgesia after epidural administration. High tissue distribution and penetration of the nanofibers in dorsal horn can increase thermal and chemical analgesia duration without altering locomotor activity in rats for 4 weeks.

Coadministration of tramadol and tizanidine in an experimental acute pain model in rat

Preclinical Research The use of drug combinations to achieve a desired effect is a common practice in pharmacological reaserch and in clinical practice. The present study was designed to evaluate the potential synergistic antinociceptive interactions between tizanidine, an α-2-adrenoceptor agonist and tramadol on formalin-induced nociception in rat using isobolographic analyses. Tramadol (0.1-100 μg/paw) and tizanidine (0.01-10 μg/paw) were injected into the paw prior to formalin injection (1%). Both drugs produced a dose-dependent antinociceptive effect. The EC50 values were estimated for individual drugs, and isobolograms were constructed. Tizanidine (EC50  = 0.125 ± 0.026 μg) was more potent than tramadol (EC50  = 16.45 ± 6.4 μg). The combination of tramadol-tizanidine at fixed ratios of 1:1 (EC50exp  = 67.43 ± 11 μg; EC50teo  = 8.28 ± 3.2 μg) and 3:1 (EC50exp  = 31.25 ± 9.49 μg; CE50teo  = 12.36 ± 4.8 μg) generated subadditivity (antagonism). On the basis of the current preclinical data, the pharmacological profile of the combination of tramadol-tizanidine produced antagonism. Thus, the utmost caution is required during the use of this combination in clinical practice, due to their antagonistic interaction.

Additive interaction of intrathecal ginsenosides and neostigmine in the rat formalin test

Background

The authors evaluated the effect of intrathecal mixture of ginsenosides with neostigmine on formalin-induced nociception and made further clear the role of the spinal muscarinic (M) receptors on the activity of ginsenosides.

Methods

A catheter was located in the intrathecal space of male Sprague-Dawley rats. Pain was evoked by injection of formalin solution (5%, 50 µl) to the hindpaw. Isobolographic analysis was done to characterize drug interaction between ginsenosides and neostigmine. The antagonism of ginsenosides-mediated antinociception was determined with M1 receptor antagonist (pirenzepine), M2 receptor antagonist (methoctramine), M3 receptor antagonist (4-DAMP), M4 receptor antagonist (tropicamide). The expression of muscarinic receptor subtypes was examined with RT-PCR.

Results

Intrathecal ginsenosides and neostigmine produced an antinociceptive effect during phase 1 and phase 2 in the formalin test. Isobolographic analysis revealed an additive interaction between ginsenosides and neostigmine in both phases. Intrathecal pirenzepine, methoctramine, 4-DAMP, and tropicamide reversed the antinociception of ginsenosides in both phases. M1-M4 receptors mRNA detected in spinal cord of naïve rats and the injection of formalin decreased the expression of M1 receptor mRNA, but it had no effect on the expression of other three muscarinic receptors mRNA. Intrathecal ginsenosides little affected the expression of all of muscarinic receptors mRNA in formalin-injected rats.

Conclusions

Intrathecal ginsenosides additively interacted with neostigmine in the formalin test. Furthermore, M1-M4 receptors exist in the spinal cord, all of which contribute to the antinocieption of intrathecal ginsenosides.

Role of central muscarinic cholinergic receptors in the formalin-induced pain in rats

Objectives:

In the present study, central effects of physostigmine and atropine have investigated in the formalin-induced pain in rats.

Materials and Methods:

In conscious rats implanted with an intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) cannula, the effects of i.c.v. injection of physostigmine and atropine were investigated on the formalin test in the rat. Formalin test was induced by subcutaneous (s.c.) injection of formalin (50 μl, 1%) in ventral surface of left hind paw, and durations of licking and biting of the injected paw were measured in 5-min blocks for 1 h.

Results:

Formalin produced a biphasic response (first phase: 0–5 and second phase: 15–40 min) in durations of licking and biting of the injected paw. Physostigmine at doses of 2.5, 5 and 10 ug significantly (P < 0.05) attenuated both first and second phases of pain response. Atropine (5 and 10 ug), used alone, produced no significant effect on pain, but pretreatment with atropine (10 ug) significantly (P < 0.05) blocked antinociception induced by physostigmine (5 ug).

Conclusion:

These results indicate that i.c.v. physostigmine can affect both neurogenic and inflammatory phases of formalin-induced pain through a mechanism in which the muscarinic cholinergic receptors are involved.

The synergistic interaction between rilmenidine and paracetamol in the writhing test in mice

The aim of the study was to ascertain antinociceptive effects of rilmenidine, a second-generation imidazoline-alpha-2-adrenoreceptor agonist, and to see whether rilmenidine was able to increase the analgesic effects of paracetamol in the writhing test in mice. An acetic acid (0.7%) solution was injected into the peritoneal cavity and the number of writhes was counted. The influence on locomotor performance was tested using the rotarod test. Rilmenidine, paracetamol, and rilmenidine-paracetamol fixed-ratio combinations produced dose-dependent antinociceptive effects. ED(50) values were estimated for the individual drugs and an isobologram was constructed. The derived theoretical additive ED(50) value for the rilmenidine-paracetamol combination was 109.23 +/- 35.05 mg/kg. This value was significantly greater than the observed ED(50) value which was 56.35 +/- 20.86 mg/kg, indicating a synergistic interaction. Rilmenidine did not impair motor coordination, as measured by the rotarod test, at antinociceptive and higher doses.

Antinociceptive interactions between intrathecal gabapentin and MK801 or NBQX in rat formalin test

Antagonists for spinal N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) and amino-hydroxy-methtyl-isoxazolepropionate (AMPA) receptors are effective in attenuating acute nociception or injury-induced hyperalgesia. The antinociception of spinal gabapentin is developed in injury-induced hyperalgesia without affecting acute nociception. The authors evaluated the effects of intrathecal gabapentin, NMDA antagonist (MK801) and AMPA antagonist (NBQX) in the formalin test which shows injury-induced hyperalgesia as well as acute pain. We further assessed the interactions between gabapentin and either MK801 or NBQX. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were implanted with intrathecal catheters. To evoke pain, 50 microL of 5% formalin solution was injected into the hindpaw. The interaction was investigated by a fixed dose analysis or an isobolographic analysis. MK801 and NBQX suppressed flinching responses during phase 1 of the formalin test, while gabapentin had little effect on phase 1. All three agents decreased the phase 2 flinching response. A fixed dose analysis in phase 1 showed that gabapentin potentiated the antinociceptive effect of MK801 and NBQX. Isobolographic analysis in phase 2 revealed a synergistic interaction after coadministration of gabapentin-MK801 or gabapentin-NBQX. Correspondingly, spinal gabapentin with NMDA or AMPA antagonist may be useful in managing acute pain and injury-induced hyperalgesia.