The influence of age on propofol pharmacodynamics.

BACKGROUND: The authors studied the influence of age on the pharmacodynamics of propofol, including characterization of the relation between plasma concentration and the time course of drug effect. METHODS: The authors evaluated healthy volunteers aged 25-81 yr. A bolus dose (2 mg/kg or 1 mg/kg in persons older than 65 yr) and an infusion (25, 50, 100, or 200 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) of the older or the new (containing EDTA) formulation of propofol were given on each of two different study days. The propofol concentration was determined in frequent arterial samples. The electroencephalogram (EEG) was used to measure drug effect. A statistical technique called semilinear canonical correlation was used to select components of the EEG power spectrum that correlated optimally with the effect-site concentration. The effect-site concentration was related to drug effect with a biphasic pharmacodynamic model. The plasma effect-site equilibration rate constant was estimated parametrically. Estimates of this rate constant were validated by comparing the predicted time of peak effect with the time of peak EEG effect. The probability of being asleep, as a function of age, was determined from steady state concentrations after 60 min of propofol infusion. RESULTS: Twenty-four volunteers completed the study. Three parameters of the biphasic pharmacodynamic model were correlated linearly with age. The plasma effect-site equilibration rate constant was 0.456 min(-1). The predicted time to peak effect after bolus injection ranging was 1.7 min. The time to peak effect assessed visually was 1.6 min (range, 1-2.4 min). The steady state observations showed increasing sensitivity to propofol in elderly patients, with C50 values for loss of consciousness of 2.35, 1.8, and 1.25 microg/ml in volunteers who were 25, 50, and 75 yr old, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Semilinear canonical correlation defined a new measure of propofol effect on the EEG, the canonical univariate parameter for propofol. Using this parameter, propofol plasma effect-site equilibration is faster than previously reported. This fast onset was confirmed by inspection of the EEG data. Elderly patients are more sensitive to the hypnotic and EEG effects of propofol than are younger persons.

Pharmacokinetics of intravenous dynorphin A(1-13) in opioid-naive and opioid-treated human volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Dynorphin A(1-13) is a fragment of the endogenous opioid neuropeptide dynorphin A. Previous research suggested that intravenously administered dynorphin A(1-13) has the ability to modulate morphine-induced analgesia. We designed this study to characterize the disposition of intravenous dynorphin immunoreactivity in humans and to determine whether concomitant long-term opioid therapy influenced the pharmacokinetics or side-effects profile of dynorphin A(1-13). METHODS: The study subjects comprised 20 volunteers divided into two groups of 10 each, stratified by dose (low dose, 250 micrograms/kg; high dose, 1000 micrograms/kg). There were four volunteers receiving long-term opioid therapy and six opioid-naive volunteers (nonopioid group) within each dosing group. Dynorphin A(1-13) was infused over 10 minutes, and arterial blood samples were drawn and assayed for dynorphin immunoreactivity. A population modeling approach was used to characterize the pharmacokinetics. Dynorphin effects on heart rate and arterial blood pressure were also studied. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetics of dynorphin immunoreactivity were linear over the dose range studied and were best described by a three-compartment mammillary model whose parameters were volume 1, 5.0 L; volume 2, 0.80 L; volume 3, 12 L; clearance 1, 6.0 L/min; clearance 2, 0.054 L/min; and clearance 3, 0.044 L/min. Concomitant opioid medication did not affect the disposition of dynorphin immunoreactivity. Tachycardia and flushing were commonly observed side effects. The incidence of side effects was dose dependent and was not influenced by long-term opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenously administered dynorphin A(1-13) is very rapidly metabolized, on the basis of the time course of immunoreactivity in the blood. Long-term opioid therapy did not influence either the pharmacokinetics or incidence of side effects.

The influence of method of administration and covariates on the pharmacokinetics of propofol in adult volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Unresolved issues with propofol include whether the pharmacokinetics are linear with dose, are influenced by method of administration (bolus vs. infusion), or are influenced by age. Recently, a new formulation of propofol emulsion, containing disodium edetate (EDTA), was introduced in the United States. Addition of EDTA was found by the manufacturer to significantly reduce bacterial growth. This study investigated the influences of method of administration, infusion rate, patient covariates, and EDTA on the pharmacokinetics of propofol. METHODS: Twenty-four healthy volunteers aged 26-81 yr were given a bolus dose of propofol, followed 1 h later by a 60-min infusion. Each volunteer was randomly assigned to an infusion rate of 25, 50, 100, or 200 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). Each volunteer was studied twice under otherwise identical circumstances: once receiving propofol without EDTA and once receiving propofol with EDTA. The influence of the method of administration and of the volunteer covariates was explored by fitting a three-compartment mamillary model to the data. The influence of EDTA was investigated by direct comparison of the measured concentrations in both sessions. RESULTS: The concentrations of propofol with and without EDTA were not significantly different. The concentration measurements after the bolus dose were significantly underpredicted by the parameters obtained just from the infusion data. The kinetics of propofol were linear within the infusion range of 25-200 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). Age was a significant covariate for Volume2 and Clearance2, as were weight, height, and lean body mass for the metabolic clearance. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that method of administration (bolus vs. infusion), but not EDTA, influences the pharmacokinetics of propofol. Within the clinically relevant range, the kinetics of propofol during infusions are linear regarding infusion rate.

Pharmacokinetic parameters relevant to recovery from opioids.

BACKGROUND: Several recent studies have suggested that the terminal half-lives of many drugs do not predict the rate of washout of drug after the relatively short durations of infusions used in anesthesia. Many anesthetic drugs fit a three-compartment mamillary model, with three volumes of distribution (central [V1] and peripheral [V2 and V3]) and three clearances (elimination or metabolic [Cl1] and distribution [Cl2 and Cl3]). It has been suggested that a large V3:Cl3 ratio contributes to rapid recovery after infusion. We investigated the role of each of these primary pharmacokinetic parameters to determine values of each that would contribute to rapid recovery after various dosing schemes. METHODS: Three sets of computer simulations were performed based on a three-compartment mamillary model for fentanyl, alfentanil, and sufentanil. Set I predicted the change in plasma concentration of each drug after a bolus if each pharmacokinetic parameter were independently increased by 5%. Set II predicted the time for an 80%, 50%, or 20% decrease in plasma concentration after infusions of varying duration (the 80%, 50%, and 20% decrement time, respectively) if each pharmacokinetic parameter were independently increased by 5%. Set III calculated the percent change in each pharmacokinetic parameter alone that would give a 30% shorter decrement time after infusions of varying duration. RESULTS: Set I demonstrated that after a bolus dose to obtain identical initial plasma concentrations, the drug with a larger V1 had a higher plasma concentration than did the parent drug at all subsequent times. The drug with a larger Cl1 had a lower plasma concentration than did the parent drug at all times. A larger V2, V3, Cl2, or Cl3 led to a lower plasma concentration at times soon after the bolus and subsequently to a higher plasma concentration than did the parent drug. Set II demonstrated that after an infusion, increasing V1 led to a longer decrement time and increasing Cl1 led to a shorter decrement time for infusions of all durations. Increasing V2, V3, Cl2, or Cl3 led to a shorter decrement time when the infusion had been short and when a small decrease in plasma concentration was desired. Increasing each of these four parameters led to a longer decrement time when the infusion had been long and when a larger decrease in plasma concentration was desired. Set III demonstrated that a smaller V1 or a larger Cl1 always led to a shorter decrement time. For infusions of short duration and for a small decrease in plasma concentration, a larger V2, V3, Cl2, or Cl3 led to the desired decrease in decrement time. For infusions of longer duration and for larger decreases in plasma concentration, a smaller V2, V3, Cl2, or Cl3 was able to decrease the decrement time by 30%. CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes qualitative guidelines for pharmacokinetic properties desirable in anesthetic drugs. If a rapid decrease in plasma concentration is desired after an infusion, it is always beneficial to have a small V1 and a large Cl1. For infusions of short duration, after which only a small decrease in plasma concentration is required, it is beneficial to have a larger V2, V3, Cl2, and Cl3. For infusions of longer duration, after which a large decrease in plasma concentration is desired, it is beneficial to have a smaller V2, V3, Cl2, and Cl3. These proposals may be beneficial for planning clinical trials of new drugs.