Further investigation of the rapid-onset and short-duration action of the G protein-biased µ-ligand oliceridine.

TRV130 (oliceridine), a G protein-biased ligand for µ-opioid receptor, has recently been synthesized. It is considered to have strong antinociceptive effects and only minor adverse effects. However, whether or not oliceridine actually exhibits an ideal pharmacological profile as an analgesic has not yet been fully clarified in animal studies. This study examined the pharmacological profile of oliceridine in cells and animals. Oliceridine (10 µM) did not produce any µ-opioid receptor internalization in cells even though it increased impedance, which reflects the activation of Gi protein using the CellKey™ system, and inhibited the formation of cAMP. In mice, oliceridine (0.3-10 mg/kg) produced a dose-dependent antinociceptive effect with a rapid-onset and short-duration action in the hot-plate test, as well as antihyperalgesia after sciatic nerve ligation without the development of antinociceptive tolerance using the thermal hyperalgesia test. On the other hand, oliceridine inhibited gastrointestinal transit. Furthermore, oliceridine produced rapid-onset hyperlocomotion at antinociceptive doses; sensitization developed in mice and an emetic effect was observed in ferrets. These results indicate that, although oliceridine may produce dopamine-related behaviors even through selective stimulation of the G-protein-biased µ-opioid receptor pathway, it still offers advantages for breakthrough pain without antinociceptive tolerance with adequate doses.

Evaluation of aprepitant and fosaprepitant in pediatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Single-dose i.v. fosaprepitant has been approved as an alternative to 3 day oral aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and improves prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Because fosaprepitant has shown similar efficacy to aprepitant in adult patients only, this study compared the efficacy and safety of aprepitant and fosaprepitant in pediatric patients. METHODS: Children younger than 18 years who received aprepitant or fosaprepitant to manage CINV between January 2015 and March 2018 at the National Cancer Center Hospital (Tokyo) were recruited to this study. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no vomiting/rescue medication) between 0 and 120 h after the start of chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints were safety based on the frequency of severe adverse events, and evaluation of patient characteristics as risk factors (effect of age and sex). RESULTS: A total of 125 chemotherapy cycles were evaluated. In the aprepitant group, CR was observed in 36 of 80 treatment cycles (45.0%), whereas in the fosaprepitant group, it was observed in 19 of 45 cycles (42.2%; P = 0.852). No treatment-related severe adverse events were observed in either group. The number of non-CR was greater than that of CR in patients aged 6-14 years. The difference in CR rate between male and female patients was not statistically significant (47.1% vs 40.0%, respectively; P = 0.471). CONCLUSIONS: Aprepitant and fosaprepitant were safely used and may be equally useful for pediatric patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. CR rate may be associated with patient age.

Usefulness for the combination of G-protein- and ß-arrestin-biased ligands of µ-opioid receptors: Prevention of antinociceptive tolerance.

Background: µ-Opioid receptor internalization is considered to be critically linked to antinociceptive tolerance. Although µ-opioid receptor agonists have been administered simultaneously with other drugs to control pain, little information is available regarding opioid­opioid interactions. Therefore, the present study was designed to further investigate the utility of a new G protein-biased ligand for µ-opioid receptors, TRV130, which has an antinociceptive effect without ß-arrestin-dependent µ-opioid receptor internalization, and its combination with fentanyl using µ-opioid receptor-expressing cells and mice. Results: In the present study, we confirmed that fentanyl produced a profound increase in ß-arrestin-2 recruitment accompanied by µ-opioid receptor internalization, whereas TRV130 did not induce either the recruitment of ß-arrestin-2 or µ-opioid receptor internalization in µ-opioid receptor-expressing cells. Under these conditions, ß-arrestin-2 recruitment accompanied by µ-opioid receptor internalization induced by fentanyl was abolished by TRV130, whereas TRV130 did not alter the reduction of cyclic adenosine monophosphate formation by fentanyl in µ-opioid receptor-expressing cells. In a behavioral assay, TRV130 exerted an antinociceptive effect in a hot-plate test in mice. In a combination test, the antinociceptive effect of TRV130 was synergistically increased by fentanyl. Fentanyl induced antihyperalgesia and development of its tolerance under a neuropathic pain-like state following sciatic nerve ligation. However, treatment of mice with an antinociceptive dose of TRV130 did not induce the rapid development of tolerance to its antihyperalgesic effect under a neuropathic pain-like state. Furthermore, the rapid development of tolerance to the antihyperalgesic effect induced by fentanyl plus TRV130 in mice with sciatic nerve ligation was not observed, unlike in the case of fentanyl alone. Conclusions: These findings provide evidence that activation of the G protein-biased pathway through µ-opioid receptors can alter signaling in the ß-arrestin-2 pathway linked to the stimulation of µ-opioid receptors. Furthermore, the combination of G protein-biased and ß-arrestin-biased ligands of µ-opioid receptors exerts an ideal antinociceptive effect without the rapid development of antinociceptive tolerance.

Characterization of methadone as a ß-arrestin-biased µ-opioid receptor agonist.

BACKGROUND: Methadone is a unique µ-opioid receptor agonist. Although several researchers have insisted that the pharmacological effects of methadone are mediated through the blockade of NMDA receptor, the underlying mechanism by which methadone exerts its distinct pharmacological effects compared to those of other µ-opioid receptor agonists is still controversial. In the present study, we further investigated the pharmacological profile of methadone compared to those of fentanyl and morphine as measured mainly by the discriminative stimulus effect and in vitro assays for NMDA receptor binding, µ-opioid receptor-internalization, and µ-opioid receptor-mediated ß-arrestin recruitment. RESULTS: We found that fentanyl substituted for the discriminative stimulus effects of methadone, whereas a relatively high dose of morphine was required to substitute for the discriminative stimulus effects of methadone in rats. Under these conditions, the non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 did not substitute for the discriminative stimulus effects of methadone. In association with its discriminative stimulus effect, methadone failed to displace the receptor binding of MK801 using mouse brain membrane. Methadone and fentanyl, but not morphine, induced potent µ-opioid receptor internalization accompanied by the strong recruitment of ß-arrestin-2 in µ-opioid receptor-overexpressing cells. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that methadone may, at least partly, produce its pharmacological effect as a ß-arrestin-biased µ-opioid receptor agonist, similar to fentanyl, and NMDA receptor blockade is not the main contributor to the pharmacological profile of methadone.