Pharmacokinetic Determinants of Drug Abuse and Dependence
- 48 Downloads
Drugs that produce physical dependence or have similar pharmacological profiles to highly abused drugs are unlikely to be considered acceptable for marketing. Thus, the prediction of abuse and dependence becomes an important issue in the development of new psychotropic drugs.
Both pharmacokinetic and non-pharmacokinetic factors play an important role in predicting dependence and abuse liability of drugs. Evidence for the importance of pharmacological factors includes: (a) the demonstration of drug binding to receptors of abused drugs; (b) tolerance; (c) ability to maintain self-administration; and (d) spontaneous or antagonist precipitated withdrawal. The pharmacokinetic properties that presumably contribute to persistent self-administration and abuse include rapid delivery of drug to the central nervous system (CNS), rapid absorption, low protein binding and high free drug clearance. The pharmacokinetic properties of a drug associated with dependence will include long half-life, low free drug clearance and presence of the drug in the body at high enough concentrations and for sufficient time to permit tolerance to develop.
These properties have important clinical implications for treatment and research in the area of abuse and dependence liability of psychoactive drugs.
KeywordsMorphine Cocaine Heroin Phenobarbitone Physical Dependence
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Armor DJ, Polich JM, Stambul HB. Alcoholism and treatment, Wiley, New York, 1978Google Scholar
- Babor TF, Mendelson JH, Gallant D, Kuehule JC. Interpersonal behaviour in group discussion during marijuana intoxication. International Journal of Addictions 13: 89–102, 1978Google Scholar
- Busto U, Naranjo CA, Cappell HD, Simpkins J, Sanchez-Craig M, et al. Differences in patterns of benzodiazepine abuse. Proceedings II World Conference on Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Washington, D.C., August, 1983Google Scholar
- Cappell H, LeBlanc AE. Tolerance to and physical dependence on ethanol. Why do we study them? Drugs and Alcohol Dependence 4: 15–31, 1979Google Scholar
- Eriksson K. Alcohol inhibition and behaviour: A comparative genetic approach. In B. Eleftherious (Ed.) Plenum Press, New York, 1975Google Scholar
- Eriksson K. Inherited metabolism and behaviour towards alcohol: critical evaluation of human and animal research. In Eriksson, Sinclair & Kiianmoa (Eds) Animal models in alcohol research, pp. 3–21, Academic Press, London, 1980Google Scholar
- Goodwin DW. The question of a genetic basis for alcoholism: A response. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol 34: 1345–1347, 1973Google Scholar
- Greenblatt DJ, Abernethy DR, Divoll M, Harmatz JS, Shader RI. Pharmacokinetic profile of benzodiazepine hypnotics. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology 3: 129–132, 1982Google Scholar
- Griffiths RR, Bigelow GE, Henningfield JE. Similarities in animal and human drug taking behaviour. In N.K. Mellow (Ed.) Advances in substance abuse: behavioural and biological research, pp. 1–90, Jai Press, Greenwich, Connecticut, 1980Google Scholar
- Johanson CE, Schuster CR. Procedures for the pre-clinical assessment of abuse potential of psychotropic drugs in animals. In T. Thompson & K. Unna (Eds) Predicting dependence liability of stimulant and depressant drugs, pp. 203–231, University Park Press, Baltimore, 1977Google Scholar
- Johanson CE, Schuster CR. Animal models of drug self-administration. In N.K. Mello (Ed.) Advances in substance abuse: behavioural and biological research, Jai Press, Greenwich, Connecticut, 1981Google Scholar
- Kalant H, Le Blanc AE, Gibbins RJ. Tolerance to, and dependence on, some nonopiate psychotropic drugs. Pharmacology Review 23: 135–191, 1971Google Scholar
- Pickens R, Thompson T. Self-administration of amphetamines and cocaine by rats. 29th Annual Meeting of the Committee on Problems of Drug Dependence, NAS-NRC, 1967Google Scholar
- Sellers EM, Marshman JA, Kaplan HL, Giles HG, Kapur BM, et al. Acute and chronic drug abuse emergencies in Metropolitan Toronto. International Journal of Addictions 16: 283, 1981Google Scholar
- Smith RB, Dittert LW, Griffen WO, Doluisio JT. Pharmacokinetics of pentobarbital after intravenous and oral administration. Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics 1: 5–16, 1973Google Scholar
- Winger G, Stitzer ML, Woods JH. Barbiturate-reinforced responding in rhesus monkeys: comparisons of drugs with different durations of action. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics 195: 504–514, 1975Google Scholar
- Woods JH, Schuster CR. Reinforcement properties of morphine, cocaine and SPA as a function of unit dose. International Journal of Addictions 3: 231–237, 1968Google Scholar
- World Health Organization, Technical Report Series No. 407, 1969Google Scholar
- World Health Organization, Sixth Review of Psychoactive Substances for International Control, Geneva, 1982Google Scholar
- World Health Organization, Eighth Review of Psychoactive Substances for International Control, Geneva, 1983Google Scholar