![]() |
|
|
Vol. 295, Issue 2, 546-551, November 2000
The Departments of Anesthesiology (Y.A.K.) and Neurology (I.C., G.W.P.), Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Topical drugs avoid many of the problematic side effects of systemic agents. Immersion of the tail of a mouse into a solution of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-containing morphine produces a dose-dependent, naloxone-sensitive, analgesia (ED50 6.1 mM; CL 4.3, 8.4) limited to the portion of the tail exposed to the drug. DMSO alone in this paradigm had no analgesic activity. Like morphine, the opioids levorphanol (ED50 5.0 mM; CL 3.8, 7.8) and buprenorphine (ED50 1.1 mM; CL 0.7, 1.5) were effective topical analgesics. Lidocaine also was active in the tail-flick assay (ED50 2.5 mM; CL 2.0, 3.4), with a potency greater than morphine. As expected, the free base of lidocaine was more potent than its salt. Combinations of a low dose of lidocaine with a low dose of an opioid yielded significantly greater than additive effects for all opioids tested. Isobolographic analysis confirmed the presence of synergy between lidocaine and morphine, levorphanol and buprenorphine. These studies demonstrate a potent interaction peripherally between opioids and a local anesthetic and offer potential advantages in the clinical management of pain.
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Topical
treatments offer many advantages over systemic drugs. By limiting the
exposure of a drug to the periphery, central side effects can be
markedly reduced. For opioids, this might decrease limiting side
effects, such as sedation, respiratory depression, and nausea. Further
limiting the drug to the actual site of action has even more
advantages, by avoiding peripherally mediated side effects, such as
constipation. In earlier studies, we demonstrated the activity of
topical morphine in the radiant heat tail-flick assay after immersion
in a dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) solution (Kolesnikov and Pasternak,
1999a
). The analgesic actions seen with topical morphine were limited
to the region of the tail exposed to the drug and were not seen in more
proximal areas not exposed to the drug. DMSO alone was inactive in this paradigm. Other opioid ligands acting through kappa and delta receptors
have activity peripherally in the radiant heat tail-flick assay as well
(Kolesnikov et al., 1996a
; Kolesnikov and Pasternak, 1999b
). Thus,
topical opioids might be useful in pain control.
Synergy is important in opioid action. First described between
supraspinal and spinal sites (Yeung and Rudy, 1980
), it has also been
described between brainstem nuclei (Rossi et al., 1993
) and between
peripheral and central sites (Kolesnikov et al., 1996b
). Synergy
has been observed between opioids of different classes (Horan et al.,
1992
; Adams et al., 1993
; Rossi et al., 1994
; He and Lee, 1998
).
Opioid actions also can be modulated by nonopioid classes of drugs. For
example, opioid tolerance can be prevented or reversed by
N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)
antagonists (Trujillo and Akil, 1991
; Ben-Eliyahu et al., 1992
; Tiseo
and Inturrisi, 1993
; Elliott et al., 1994
) and nitric oxide synthase
inhibitors (Kolesnikov et al., 1992
, 1993
). Unfortunately, NMDA
antagonists have proven difficult to use systemically due to their
profound psychomimetic and dysphoric actions. These problems might be
avoided by a topical approach. We were able to demonstrate in our
topical paradigm that the combination of an NMDA antagonist with an
opioid blocked tolerance to the opioid (Kolesnikov and Pasternak,
1999a
,c
). This activity of NMDA antagonists topically presumably would
avoid the limiting side effects that preclude their use systemically.
Lidocaine, a local anesthetic, is active topically, by blocking sodium
channels, a mechanism distinct from the opioids (Woosley and
Funck-Brentano, 1988
). Clinical studies have shown advantages to the
combination of intrathecal lidocaine and opioids (Atanassoff et al.,
1997
; Saito et al., 1998a
,b
), leading us to question whether similar
advantages might be seen topically. We therefore have examined the
activity of topical lidocaine in the tail-flick assay alone and in
combination with a number of opioids.
| |
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Male Crl:CD-1(ICR)BR mice (25-30 g; Charles River Breeding Laboratory, Bloomington, MA) were maintained on a 12-h light/dark cycle with food and water available ad libitum. Mice were housed in groups of five until testing. Opioids were generously provided by the Research Technology Branch of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (Rockville, MD). Lidocaine was purchased from Sigma Chemical Co. (St. Louis, MO). Lidocaine base was used in all experiments unless indicated otherwise.
Topical Administration.
Drugs were administered topically
and analgesia assessed as previously described (Kolesnikov and
Pasternak, 1999a
). In this procedure, the distal portion of the tail
(2-3 cm) is immersed in a DMSO solution containing the indicated drugs
for the stated time, typically 2 min (Kolesnikov and Pasternak, 1999a
).
Prior studies have documented that DMSO alone has no effect when tested in this manner in the radiant heat tail-flick assay (Kolesnikov and
Pasternak, 1999a
). Furthermore, DMSO provides an effective way of
solubilizing a wide range of drugs and facilitating their transport
through the skin. The onset of analgesia is rapid, with peak effects
seen immediately after the removal of the tail from the treatment
solution. Therefore, we tested animals immediately after termination of
topical administration.
Radiant Heat Tail-Flick Test.
Testing was performed on the
portion of the tail immersed in the treatment solution, because the
analgesic actions of agents administered in this manner are restricted
to the exposed portions of the tail; proximal regions are not affected
(Kolesnikov and Pasternak, 1999a
). Antinociception, or analgesia, was
defined quantally as a tail-flick latency for an individual animal that was twice its baseline latency or greater. Baseline latencies typically
ranged from 2.5 to 3.0 s, with a maximum cutoff latency of 10 s to minimize tissue damage in analgesic animals. Group comparisons
were performed with the Fisher's exact test.
ED50 values were determined with the Bliss
program (Finney, 1976
; Umans and Inturrisi, 1981
), as previously
reported (Kolesnikov et al., 1999a
).
Drug Interactions.
Isobolographic analysis was used to
determine drug interactions (Talaradia et al., 1997
).
ED50 values were determined for each agent alone.
They were then tested together at various doses at a constant ratio
based on their respective ED50 values. In the
figures, all points represent ED50 values.
Values on the axes represent the ED50 values for
the indicated drug alone, and the line connecting them corresponds to
simple additive interactions. Points lying below the line of additivity
indicate synergism. Significance was assumed by the lack of overlap of
the confidence limits of the combination value with the confidence
limits of the line of additivity.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Topical Lidocaine and Morphine Interactions.
First, we
assessed the activity of topical lidocaine using the same
administration paradigm previously shown active for opioids and NMDA
antagonists (Kolesnikov and Pasternak, 1999a
). Earlier studies
emphasized the importance of exposure time in the activity of morphine.
Similarly, the analgesic response to lidocaine was dependent on the
exposure time (Fig. 1A). The response
from a constant concentration of lidocaine increased from 20% at
30 s to 70% at 2 min. Time action curves revealed a maximal
response immediately after removal of the tail from the solution, with a gradual decrease to baseline levels within 20 min (Fig. 1B). This
response was slightly shorter in duration than a morphine dose giving
the same maximal response. A lower lidocaine dose gave both a decreased
maximal response and a shorter duration of action.
|
|
|
|
|
Topical Lidocaine and Other Opioids.
We next explored whether
the synergy seen with morphine/lidocaine combinations extended to other
opioids with other receptor mechanisms of action, including levorphanol
and buprenorphine. Topically, levorphanol and buprenorphine both
yielded full analgesic responses, with ED50
values of 5.0 and 1.1 mM, respectively (Fig. 4; Table 1).
|
|
Isobolographic Analysis of Lidocaine/Opioid Interactions.
We
next examined the combinations of the additional opioids
isobolographically using dose-response curves with fixed ratios of the
two drugs in combination (Fig. 6; Table
1). Combining levorphanol with lidocaine enhanced their relative
potencies over 5-fold, which was more than the enhancement of morphine
by lidocaine. Isobolographic analysis was consistent with synergy (Fig.
6A). Buprenorphine and lidocaine together shifted their individual ED50 values approximately 6-fold. Again,
isobolographic analysis indicated synergy (Fig. 6B).
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Lidocaine is a widely used local anesthetic (Woosley and
Funck-Brentano, 1988
). It acts through the blockade of sodium channels, a mechanism distinct from the opioids. In the current study, lidocaine was effective topically in the radiant heat tail-flick assay, working
only on the portion of the tail exposed to the drug and with a potency
greater than morphine. As anticipated, the free base was more effective
than the salt, presumably due to its greater lipophilicity. However,
its dose-response curve was biphasic, with concentrations greater than
20 mM giving a progressive decrease in response. The reasons for this
are not clear, but it is interesting that lidocaine concentrations
above 15 mM can be toxic to neurons in primary culture (Gold et al.,
1998
).
All of the opioids tested were effective topical analgesics. The
activity of levorphanol and buprenorphine extends the activity to drugs
working on opioid systems other than simply mu receptors. Levorphanol
elicits analgesia through both mu and kappa3
receptors (Moulin et al., 1988
; Tive et al., 1992
). Buprenorphine has a complex mechanism of action that is not entirely clear (Leander, 1987
;
Kamei et al., 1995a
,b
, 1997
; Walker et al., 1995
). Although it has high
affinity for virtually all classes of opioid receptors in binding
studies, it also has widely varying efficacies for the various classes
of receptors. Topically, buprenorphine was particularly effective, with
a potency 5-fold greater than that of morphine. The limited ability of
naloxone to reverse the combination of buprenorphine and lidocaine
implies that at least a portion of the response from buprenorphine was
evoked from non-mu-opioid receptors.
Opioid analgesic synergy has been well established. Initially, it was
observed among regions simultaneously exposed to opioid (Yeung and
Rudy, 1980
; Rossi et al., 1993
, 1994
; Kolesnikov et al., 1996b
),
followed by the demonstration of synergy between different classes of
opioids (Adams et al., 1993
). Morphine also has been reported to
demonstrate synergy with lidocaine centrally (Saito et al., 1998a
,b
).
We now find synergy peripherally between topical opioids and a local anesthetic.
The combination of a low dose of morphine and lidocaine clearly revealed activity far beyond simple additive interactions, as did similar studies with the other opioids. These strongly suggested synergy among the opioids with lidocaine. This was not unexpected. Synergistic interactions might be more likely when drugs act on different mechanisms, as shown here with the opioids and lidocaine. Isobolographic analysis confirmed synergy between lidocaine and the opioids. The most impressive interaction was between buprenorphine and lidocaine, which had the greatest potentiation and the longest duration of action. However, it is not clear whether this resulted from its receptor selectivity or other factors such as its greater lipophilicity, which would enhance its ability to become diffused through the skin.
The demonstration of synergy between lidocaine and more than one opioid receptor ligand deserves more study. It will be of interest to define the opioid receptor mechanisms involved more clearly. However, even without a full understanding of how these agents interact, the demonstration of topical synergy between a local anesthetic and opioids opens many clinical possibilities in pain management.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Accepted for publication June 28, 2000.
Received for publication April 17, 2000.
1 This work was supported, in part, by a research grant (DA07241) and a Senior Scientist Award (DA00220) (to G.W.P.) and a Mentored Scientist Award (DA00405) (to Y.A.K.) from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, as well as a core grant (CA08748) from the National Cancer Institute and a grant from EpiCept Corporation.
Send reprint requests to: Gavril W. Pasternak, M.D., Ph.D., Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave., New York, NY 10021. E-mail: pasterng{at}mskmail.mskcc.org
| |
Abbreviations |
|---|
DMSO, dimethyl sulfoxide; NMDA, N-methyl-D-aspartate; CL, confidence limits.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
opioid synergy between the periaqueductal gray and the rostro-ventral medulla.
Brain Res
665:
85-93[Medline].This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y. A. Kolesnikov, R. S. Wilson, and G. W. Pasternak The Synergistic Analgesic Interactions Between Hydrocodone and Ibuprofen Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2003; 97(6): 1721 - 1723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. A. Kolesnikov, M. Cristea, and G. W. Pasternak Analgesic Synergy Between Topical Morphine and Butamben in Mice Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2003; 97(4): 1103 - 1107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. L. Cichewicz and E. A. McCarthy Antinociceptive Synergy between Delta 9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Opioids after Oral Administration J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., March 1, 2003; 304(3): 1010 - 1015. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. A. Bolan, R. J. Tallarida, and G. W. Pasternak Synergy between {micro} Opioid Ligands: Evidence for Functional Interactions among {micro} Opioid Receptor Subtypes J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., November 1, 2002; 303(2): 557 - 562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||