Hydromorphone: evolving to meet the challenges of today's health care environment.

BACKGROUND: Hydromorphone, a potent analogue of morphine, has long had an important role in pain management and is included in several international guidelines for managing pain. Advances in hydromorphone formulations and the ways in which hydromorphone is being used clinically today warrant a review of the drug's pharmacotherapeutic utility. OBJECTIVE: The history and recent advances in hydromorphone pharmacotherapy are reviewed. Areas covered include the pharmacologic and metabolic profile of hydromorphone, the role of hydromorphone in pain management, formulations and routes of administration, and issues related to relative opioid potencies, equianalgesic ratios, and opioid rotation. Because hydromorphone, like all opioids, carries a risk of misuse, abuse, and illicit diversion, the related issues of tamper-resistant formulations and "dose-dumping" of extended-release formulations are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the epidemic of prescription opioid overdoses associated with prescription opioid abuse in the United States, development of tamper-resistant opioid formulations that avoid dose-dumping issues has become a significant goal of pharmaceutical manufacturers. The current formulation of hydromorphone extended-release potentially provides the benefits of long-acting hydromorphone (ie, continuous pain control, increased quality of life, freedom to perform daily activities) to appropriate patients, while reducing the risks of abuse and without compromising safety.

Chronic pain perspectives: Sickle cell disease: Gaining control over the pain.

Ongoing adjustments to the medication regimen and careful attention to lifestyle and support systems are critical to helping patients manage the pain of sickle cell disease.

Pharmacokinetics of azithromycin and the combination of ivermectin and albendazole when administered alone and concurrently in healthy volunteers.

Azithromycin is a critical component of an integrated disease elimination program against trachoma. This study was conducted to evaluate whether azithromycin has a pharmacokinetic interaction with the combination of ivermectin and albendazole. Eighteen healthy volunteers were administered single doses of azithromycin, ivermectin/albendazole, and the combination of the three agents in random, crossover fashion. To assess the presence of interactions, test (combination) and reference (single dose) data were compared using an estimation approach. Compared with reference phases, the geometric mean values for the combination arm's azithromycin AUC(0-t) and C(max) were increased approximately 13% and 20%, respectively, albendazole AUC(0-t) decreased by approximately 3% and C(max) increased approximately 3%, and ivermectin AUC(0-t) and C(max) were increased 31% and 27%, respectively. Albendazole sulfoxide AUC(0-t) and C(max) were decreased approximately 16% and 14%, respectively. All treatments were well tolerated. The interactions for azithromycin and albendazole were minimal although the increase in ivermectin exposure requires further study.