Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology

, Volume 386, Issue 10, pp 865–873 | Cite as

Non-invasive combined surrogates of remifentanil blood concentrations with relevance to analgesia

  • Jörn Lötsch
  • Carsten Skarke
  • Jutta Darimont
  • Michael Zimmermann
  • Lutz Bräutigam
  • Gerd Geisslinger
  • Alfred Ultsch
  • Bruno G. Oertel
Original Article

Abstract

Surrogates may provide easy and quick access to information about pharmacological parameters of interest that can be directly measured only with difficulty. Surrogates have been proposed for opioid blood concentrations to replace invasive sampling, serving as a basis for target-controlled infusion systems to optimize analgesia. We aimed at identifying surrogates of remifentanil steady-state blood concentrations with relevance for its clinical, in particular, analgesic, effects. A “single ascending dose” study design assessed concentration-dependent effects of remifentanil in a double-blind randomized fashion in 16 healthy volunteers. Remifentanil was administered by means of computerized infusion aimed at steady-state effect–site concentrations of 0, 1.2, 1.8, 2.4, 3, 3.6, 4.8, and 6 ng/ml (one concentration per subject, two subjects per concentration). Arterial remifentanil blood concentrations were measured during apparent steady state. Pharmacodynamic parameters were measured at baseline and during steady-state conditions. Potential surrogate parameters included the pupil diameter, the amplitude of pupil light reflex, and the performance in a visual tracking task. Clinical parameters were analgesia to experimental pain, nausea, tiredness, and visual acuity. Remifentanil blood concentrations were well predicted by its effects on the pupil light reflex amplitude, better than by its miotic effects. However, the best prediction for both remifentanil blood concentrations and analgesic effects was obtained using a combination of three surrogate parameters (pupil diameter, light reflex amplitude, and tracking performance). This combination of pharmacodynamic parameters provided even better predictions of analgesia than could be obtained using the measured opioid blood concentrations. Developing surrogates only for opioid blood concentrations is insufficient when opioid effects are the final goal. Combining pharmacodynamic surrogate parameters seems to provide a promising approach to obtain acceptable predictions of relevant clinical effects, with better results than obtained with measuring or estimating blood concentrations.

Keywords

Remifentanil Blood pharmacokinetics/pharmacology Analgesics Opioid Surrogates Miosis/chemically induced Pupil/drug effects 

Supplementary material

210_2013_889_MOESM1_ESM.doc (559 kb)
ESM 1(DOC 559 kb)

References

  1. Angst MS, Clark JD (2006) Opioid-induced hyperalgesia: a qualitative systematic review. Anesthesiology 104:570–587PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouman-Thio E, Franson K, Miller B, Getsy J, Cohen A, Bai SA, Yohrling J, Frederick B, Marciniak S, Jiao Q, Jang H, Davis H, Burggraaf J (2008) A phase I, single and fractionated, ascending-dose study evaluating the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity of an erythropoietin mimetic antibody fusion protein (CNTO 528) in healthy male subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 48:1197–1207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bright E, Baines DB, French BG, Cartmill TB (1993) Upper limb amputation following radial artery cannulation. Anaesth Intensive Care 21:351–353PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Buch H, Vinding T, Nielsen NV (2001) Prevalence and causes of visual impairment according to World Health Organization and United States criteria in an aged, urban Scandinavian population: the Copenhagen City Eye Study. Ophthalmology 108:2347–2357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Drummond JC, Brann CA, Perkins DE, Wolfe DE (1991) A comparison of median frequency, spectral edge frequency, a frequency band power ratio, total power, and dominance shift in the determination of depth of anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 35:693–699PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DuMouchel WH, O'Brien FL (1989) Integrating a robust option into a multiple regression computing environment. Proceedings of the 21st Symposium on the Interface, American Statistical AssociationGoogle Scholar
  7. Egan TD (1995) Remifentanil pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: a preliminary appraisal. Clin Pharmacokinet 29:80–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Egan TD, Lemmens HJ, Fiset P, Hermann DJ, Muir KT, Stanski DR, Shafer SL (1993) The pharmacokinetics of the new short-acting opioid remifentanil (GI87084B) in healthy adult male volunteers. Anesthesiology 79:881–892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Egan TD, Minto CF, Hermann DJ, Barr J, Muir KT, Shafer SL (1996) Remifentanil versus alfentanil: comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in healthy adult male volunteers [published erratum appears in Anesthesiology 1996 Sep;85(3):695]. Anesthesiology 84:821–833PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Egan TD, Kern SE, Muir KT, White J (2004) Remifentanil by bolus injection: a safety, pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and age effect investigation in human volunteers. Br J Anaesth 92:335–343PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans PJ, Kerr JH (1975) Arterial occlusion after cannulation. Br Med J 3:197–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hermann DJ, Egan TD, Muir KT (1999) Influence of arteriovenous sampling on remifentanil pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Clin Pharmacol Ther 65:511–518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holford NH, Sheiner LB (1982) Kinetics of pharmacologic response. Pharmacol Ther 16:143–166PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hosmer DW, Taber S, Lemeshow S (1991) The importance of assessing the fit of logistic regression models: a case study. Am J Public Health 81:1630–1635PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hummel T, Kobal G (2001) Olfactory event-related potentials. In: Simon SA, Nicolelis MAL (eds) Methods in chemosensory research. CRC Press, Boca Raton, London, New York, Washington, D.C., pp 429–464Google Scholar
  16. Hummel T, Hummel C, Friedel I, Pauli E, Kobal G (1994) A comparison of the antinociceptive effects of imipramine, tramadol and anpirtoline. Br J Clin Pharmacol 37:325–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jiang LJ, Wang M, Or YS (2009) Pharmacokinetics of EDP-420 after ascending single oral doses in healthy adult volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 53:1786–1792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Johnson NL, Kotz S, Balakrishnan N (1994) Lognormal distributions Continuous univariate distributions, JohnWiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Kern SE, Stanski DR (2008) Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenously administered anesthetic drugs: concepts and lessons for drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 84:153–157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kharasch ED, Hoffer C, Walker A, Sheffels P (2003) Disposition and miotic effects of oral alfentanil: a potential noninvasive probe for first-pass cytochrome P4503A activity. Clin Pharmacol Ther 73:199–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kobal G (1985) Pain-related electrical potentials of the human nasal mucosa elicited by chemical stimulation. Pain 22:151–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koppert W, Sittl R, Scheuber K, Alsheimer M, Schmelz M, Schuttler J (2003) Differential modulation of remifentanil-induced analgesia and postinfusion hyperalgesia by S-ketamine and clonidine in humans. Anesthesiology 99:152–159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kosek E, Jensen KB, Lonsdorf TB, Schalling M, Ingvar M (2009) Genetic variation in the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR, rs25531) influences the analgesic response to the short acting opioid Remifentanil in humans. Molecular Pain 5: 37Google Scholar
  24. Lin L, Chang LW, Tsai CY, Hsu CH, Chung DT, Aronstein WS, Ajayi F, Kuzmak B, Lyon RA (2010) Dose escalation study of the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of nemonoxacin (TG-873870), a novel potent broad-spectrum nonfluorinated quinolone, in healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:405–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lötsch J, Angst MS (2003) The mu-opioid agonist remifentanil attenuates hyperalgesia evoked by blunt and punctuated stimuli with different potency: a pharmacological evaluation of the freeze lesion in humans. Pain 102:151–161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lötsch J, Darimont J, Skarke C, Zimmermann M, Hummel T, Geisslinger G (2001) Effects of the opioid remifentanil on olfactory function in healthy volunteers. Life Sci 69:2279–2285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lötsch J, Dudziak R, Freynhagen R, Marschner J, Geisslinger G (2006) Fatal respiratory depression after multiple intravenous morphine injections. Clin Pharmacokinet 45:1051–1060PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lötsch J, Geisslinger G, Tegeder I (2009) Genetic modulation of the pharmacological treatment of pain. Pharmacol Ther 124:168–184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lötsch J, Prüss H, Veh RW, Doehring A (2010) A KCNJ6 (Kir3.2, GIRK2) gene polymorphism modulates opioid effects on analgesia and addiction but not on pupil size. Pharmacogenet Genomics 20:291–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lötsch J, Doehring A, Mogil JS, Arndt T, Geisslinger G, Ultsch A (2013) Functional genomics of pain in analgesic drug development and therapy. Pharmacol Ther 139:60-70Google Scholar
  31. Maher CE, Selley DE, Childers SR (2000) Relationship of mu opioid receptor binding to activation of G-proteins in specific rat brain regions. Biochem Pharmacol 59:1395–1401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Minto CF, Schnider TW, Egan TD, Youngs E, Lemmens HJ, Gambus PL, Billard V, Hoke JF, Moore KH, Hermann DJ, Muir KT, Mandema JW, Shafer SL (1997a) Influence of age and gender on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of remifentanil I. Model development. Anesthesiology 86:10–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Minto CF, Schnider TW, Shafer SL (1997b) Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of remifentanil II. Model application. Anesthesiology 86:24–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mitrovic I, Margeta-Mitrovic M, Bader S, Stoffel M, Jan LY, Basbaum AI (2003) Contribution of GIRK2-mediated postsynaptic signaling to opiate and alpha 2-adrenergic analgesia and analgesic sex differences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:271–276PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moskovitz BL, Benson CJ, Patel AA, Chow W, Mody SH, McCarberg BH, Kim MS (2011) Analgesic treatment for moderate-to-severe acute pain in the United States: patients' perspectives in the Physicians Partnering Against Pain (P3) survey. J Opioid Manag 7:277–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noh GJ, Kim KM, Jeong YB, Jeong SW, Yoon HS, Jeong SM, Kang SH, Linares O, Kern SE (2006) Electroencephalographic approximate entropy changes in healthy volunteers during remifentanil infusion. Anesthesiology 104:921–932PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oertel BG, Lötsch J (2013) Clinical pharmacology of analgesics assessed with human experimental pain models: bridging basic and clinical research. Br J Pharmacol 168:534–553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oertel BG, Doehring A, Roskam B, Kettner M, Hackmann N, Ferreirós N, Schmidt PH, Lötsch J (2012a) Genetic–epigenetic interaction modulates μ-opioid receptor regulation. Hum Mol Genet 21:4751–4760PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oertel BG, Vermehren J, Zimmermann M, Huynh TT, Doehring A, Ferreiros N, Senzel S, Schmitz-Rixen T, Erbe M, Geisslinger G, Harder S, Angst MS, Lötsch J (2012b) Necessity and risks of arterial blood sampling in healthy volunteer studies. Clin Pharmacokinet 51:629–638PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Padhi D, Jang G, Stouch B, Fang L, Posvar E (2011) Single-dose, placebo-controlled, randomized study of AMG 785, a sclerostin monoclonal antibody. J Bone Mineral Res Off J Am Soc Bone Mineral Res 26:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Porreca F, Ossipov MH (2009) Nausea and vomiting side effects with opioid analgesics during treatment of chronic pain: mechanisms, implications, and management options. Pain Med 10:654–662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sahinovic MM, Absalom AR, Struys MM (2010) Administration and monitoring of intravenous anesthetics. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 23:734–740PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schwilden H, Stoeckel H (1993) Closed-loop feedback controlled administration of alfentanil during alfentanil-nitrous oxide anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 70:389–393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Selinger K, Lanzo C, Sekut A (1994) Determination of remifentanil in human and dog blood by HPLC with UV detection. J Pharm Biomed Anal 12:243–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shafer SL, Varvel JR, Aziz N, Scott JC (1990) Pharmacokinetics of fentanyl administered by computer-controlled infusion pump. Anesthesiology 73:1091–1102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sharpe LG, Pickworth WB (1985) Opposite pupillary size effects in the cat and dog after microinjections of morphine, normorphine and clonidine in the Edinger-Westphal nucleus. Brain Res Bull 15:329–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sim LJ, Selley DE, Xiao R, Childers SR (1996) Differences in G-protein activation by mu- and delta-opioid, and cannabinoid, receptors in rat striatum. Eur J Pharmacol 307:97–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Simone CB 2nd, Vapiwala N, Hampshire MK, Metz JM (2012) Cancer patient attitudes toward analgesic usage and pain intervention. Clin J Pain 28:157–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sinatra R (2010) Causes and consequences of inadequate management of acute pain. Pain Med 11:1859–1871PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Skarke C, Darimont J, Schmidt H, Geisslinger G, Lotsch J (2003) Analgesic effects of morphine and morphine-6-glucuronide in a transcutaneous electrical pain model in healthy volunteers. Clin Pharmacol Ther 73:107–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Spearman C (1987) The proof and measurement of association between two things. By C. Spearman, 1904. Am J Psychol 100:441–471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tzabazis A, Ihmsen H, Schywalsky M, Schwilden H (2004) EEG-controlled closed-loop dosing of propofol in rats. Br J Anaesth 92:564–569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wu CL, Raja SN (2011) Treatment of acute postoperative pain. Lancet 377:2215–2225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jörn Lötsch
    • 1
    • 4
  • Carsten Skarke
    • 1
    • 5
  • Jutta Darimont
    • 1
    • 6
  • Michael Zimmermann
    • 2
  • Lutz Bräutigam
    • 1
  • Gerd Geisslinger
    • 1
    • 4
  • Alfred Ultsch
    • 3
  • Bruno G. Oertel
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Pharmazentrum Frankfurt/ZAFESGoethe-UniversityFrankfurtGermany
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain TherapyGoethe-UniversityFrankfurtGermany
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and Mathematics, Data Bionics Research GroupUniversity of MarburgMarburgGermany
  4. 4.Fraunhofer Project Group Translational Medicine and Pharmacology (IME-TMP)FrankfurtGermany
  5. 5.Institute for Translational Medicine and Therapeutics, Department of PharmacologyUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of MedicinePhiladelphiaUSA
  6. 6.Department of Nephrology and Rheumatology, Krankenhaus der Barmherzigen BrüderTeaching Hospital of the University of MainzTrierGermany

Personalised recommendations