Comparative Assessment of the Effectiveness of Noncompetitive NMDA Receptor Antagonists Amantadine and Hemantane in Morphine Withdrawal Syndrome Model.

Activities of noncompetitive NMDA receptor antagonists (aminoadamantane derivatives) were assessed in random-bred rats with modeled morphine withdrawal syndrome. A single intraperitoneal injection of hemantane (10 or 20 mg/kg) significantly and dose-dependently moderated some behavioral symptoms (teeth-chattering, ptosis, and vocalization) and reduced total score of morphine withdrawal syndrome. In morphine-abstinent rats, hemantane partially prevented the decrease in the thresholds of tactile sensitivity, but had no effect on locomotor activity and body weight loss. Under conditions of morphine withdrawal, intraperitoneal injection of amantadine (10 or 20 mg/kg) decreased motor activity and promoted body weight loss in parallel with the development of mechanical allodynia, but had no effect on the total withdrawal score. Comparison of aminoadamantane derivatives by behavioral and physiological parameters demonstrated the advantage of hemantane during morphine abstinence indicating the need of its study as a promising anti-addiction remedy.

Validation of a New Scoring Scale for Behavioral Assessment of L-Dopa-Induced Dyskinesia in the Rat: A New Tool for Early Decision-Making in Drug Development.

The 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP)-treated nonhuman primate (NHP) has been described as the most translatable model for experimental reproduction of L-dopa-induced dyskinesia (LID). However, from a drug discovery perspective, the risk associated with investment in this type of model is high due to the time and cost. The 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) rat dyskinesia model is recommended for testing compounds but relies on onerous, and nonstandard behavioral rating scales. We sought to develop a simplified and sensitive method aiming at assessing LID in the rat. The purpose was to validate a reliable tool providing earlier insight into the antidyskinetic potential of compounds in a time/cost-effective manner before further investigation in NHP models. Unilaterally 6-OHDA-lesioned rats were administered L-dopa (20 mg/kg) and benserazide (5 mg/kg) daily for 3 weeks starting 4 weeks postlesion, then coadministered with amantadine (20-30-40 mg/kg). An adapted rating scale was used to score LID frequency and a severity coefficient was applied depending on the features of the observed behavior. A gradual increase (about 3-fold) in LID score was observed over the 3 weeks of L-dopa treatment. The rating scale was sensitive enough to highlight a dose-dependent amantadine-mediated decrease (about 2.2-fold) in LID score. We validated a simplified method, able to reflect different levels of severity in the assessment of LID and, thus, provide a reliable tool for drug discovery.

Simultaneous detection of oseltamivir- and amantadine-resistant influenza by oligonucleotide microarray visualization.

Presently, the resistance of Influenza A virus isolates causes great difficulty for the prevention and treatment of influenza A virus infection. It is important to establish a drug-resistance detection method for epidemiological study and personalized medicine in the clinical setting. Consequently, a cost-effective oligonucleotide microarray visualization method, which was based on quantum dot-catalyzed silver deposition, was developed and evaluated for the simultaneous detection of neuraminidase H275Y and E119V; matrix protein 2 V27A and S31N mutations of influenza A (H3N2), seasonal influenza A (H1N1), and 2009 influenza A (H1N1). Then, 307 clinical throat swab specimens were detected and the drug-resistance results showed that 100% (17/17) of influenza A (H3N2) and 100% (259/259) of 2009 influenza A (H1N1) samples were resistant to amantadine and susceptible to oseltamivir; and 100% (5/5) of seasonal influenza A (H1N1) samples were resistant to both amantadine and oseltamivir.

Perspectives on antiviral use during pandemic influenza.

Antiviral agents could potentially play a major role in the initial response to pandemic influenza, particularly with the likelihood that an effective vaccine is unavailable, by reducing morbidity and mortality. The M2 inhibitors are partially effective for chemoprophylaxis of pandemic influenza and evidence from studies of interpandemic influenza indicate that the neuraminidase inhibitors would be effective in prevention. In addition to the symptom benefit observed with M2 inhibitor treatment, early therapeutic use of neuraminidase inhibitors has been shown to reduce the risk of lower respiratory complications. Clinical pharmacology and adverse drug effect profiles indicate that the neuraminidase inhibitors and rimantadine are preferable to amantadine with regard to the need for individual prescribing and tolerance monitoring. Transmission of drug-resistant virus could substantially limit the effectiveness of M2 inhibitors and the possibility exists for primary M2 inhibitor resistance in a pandemic strain. The frequency of resistance emergence is lower with neuraminidase inhibitors and mathematical modelling studies indicate that the reduced transmissibility of drug-resistant virus observed with neuraminidase inhibitor-resistant variants would lead to negligible community spread of such variants. Thus, there are antiviral drugs currently available that hold considerable promise for response to pandemic influenza before a vaccine is available, although considerable work remains in realizing this potential. Markedly increasing the quantity of available antiviral agents through mechanisms such as stockpiling, educating health care providers and the public and developing effective means of rapid distribution to those in need are essential in developing an effective response, but remain currently unresolved problems.

Zanamivir. No noticeable progress against influenza.

* Zanamivir (Relenza((R)), Glaxo Wellcome) an antiviral drug, is marketed for treatment of influenza during outbreaks.* The clinical file consists mainly of three doubleblind, placebo-controlled trials.* When administered to patients with symptoms of influenza, at an inhaled dose of 10 mg twice daily, zanamivir has no clear benefit, or very limited benefit (hastening clinical recovery by 0.7 to 1.5 days) provided treatment is started within 30 hours of symptom onset. Zanamivir seems to act on influenza virus types A and B. No reliable data are available on the effect of zanamivir on overall intensity of symptoms during episodes or on time required to resume normal activities. The value of zanamivir for preventing complications in people at risk remains to be demonstrated.* Zanamivir has not been compared with another antiviral drug, amantadine, which has been available for nearly 30 years for the same indication. The two drugs have similar efficacy regarding time to recovery. Amantadine acts only on influenza virus type A.* In clinical trials, incidence of adverse events was not significantly higher with zanamivir than with placebo, but some patients with asthma and chronic obstructive airways disease experienced bronchospasm following zanamivir administration. Amantadine, which has been in use for about 30 years, has a relatively good safety profile.* Zanamivir is a costly preparation.