Displaying all 7 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Chin KY, Mark-Lee WF
    Curr Drug Targets, 2018;19(12):1359-1365.
    PMID: 28950813 DOI: 10.2174/1389450118666170925154025
    Mitragyna speciosa is a tropical plant with narcotic effects. The antinociceptive effects of its crude extracts, bioactive compounds and structurally modified derivatives have been examined in rodent models. This review aims to summarize the evidence on the antinociceptive effects of M. speciosa and its derivatives and explore whether they can offer an alternative to morphine in pain management. Methanolic and alkaloid extracts of M. speciosa were shown to attenuate the nociceptive response in rodents. Mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine offered better antinociceptive effects than crude extracts. Structurally modified derivatives of 7-hydroxymitragynine, such as MGM-9, MGM- 15, MGM-16, demonstrated superior antinociceptive effects compared to morphine. M. speciosa and its derivatives mainly act on the opioid receptor, but receptor subtypes specificity differs between each compound. The tolerance and adverse side effects of M. speciosa and its derivatives are similar with morphine. The affinity of MGM-9 on kappa-opioid receptor could potentially limit the effects of drug dependence. In conclusion, M speciosa derivatives can offer alternatives to morphine in controlling chronic pain. Structural modification of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine can generate compounds with higher potency and lesser side-effects. Human clinical trials are required to validate the use of these compounds in clinical setting.
    Matched MeSH terms: Narcotic Antagonists/adverse effects
  2. Harun N, Johari IS, Mansor SM, Shoaib M
    Psychopharmacology (Berl), 2020 Mar;237(3):855-867.
    PMID: 31832720 DOI: 10.1007/s00213-019-05418-6
    RATIONALE: Kratom is proposed to exhibit therapeutic potential as an opium substitute, but little is known about its dependence-producing profile, particularly of its main psychoactive compound, mitragynine (MG).

    OBJECTIVES: This study examined the dependence-producing effects of MG using operant-scheduled behaviour in rats and investigated the potential therapeutic effect of MG by comparing effects to buprenorphine in morphine-dependent rats using the same schedule-controlled behavioural task.

    METHODS: The effects of acutely administered MG and morphine were determined in rats trained to respond under fixed-ratio (FR) 10 schedule of food reinforcement. Next, the rats were administered MG and morphine twice daily for 14 consecutive days to determine if physiological dependence would develop by examining cessation of drug treatment and following antagonist-precipitated withdrawal. The study then examined the effects of MG substitution to suppress naloxone-precipitated morphine withdrawal effects on scheduled responding.

    RESULTS: Acute doses of MG did not produce dose-related decreases on FR schedules of responding compared to morphine. Unlike morphine, MG-treated rats showed no suppression of response rates following cessation of MG treatment. However, withdrawal effects were evident for MG after precipitation by either naloxone or SR141716A (rimonabant), similar to morphine-treated rats. MG in higher doses (10 and 30 mg/kg) attenuated the naloxone-precipitated morphine withdrawal effects while smaller doses of buprenorphine (0.3 and 1.0 mg/kg) were necessary to alleviate these effects.

    CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that MG does not induce physiological dependence but can alleviate the physical symptoms associated with morphine withdrawal which represent the desired characteristics of novel pharmacotherapeutic interventions for managing opioid use disorder (OUD).

    Matched MeSH terms: Narcotic Antagonists/adverse effects
  3. Ramli FF, Syed Hashim SA, Mohd Effendy N
    Int J Med Sci, 2021;18(2):575-581.
    PMID: 33390827 DOI: 10.7150/ijms.52201
    Background: Long-term opioid therapy is a risk factor for low bone mineral density (BMD). However, other factors may also contribute to low BMD. Several studies have examined the variables that might contribute to low BMD in patients receiving opioid replacement therapy (OST). However, to our knowledge, there was no systemic review conducted to address this particular issue. Thus, we reviewed the articles on the factors associated with low BMD in the population of opioid use disorder receiving substitution therapy. Methods: The articles that examined correlates or risk factors of low BMD in OST population were retrieved from OVID, SCOPUS, and PUBMED from inception until July 2020 by two independent investigators. Results: A total of 429 articles from three databases were retrieved initially. After screening based on eligibility criteria, five articles were included in the final analysis. The risk factors or correlates found to be significantly associated with low BMD in the OST population include male gender, low body mass index, low testosterone level, methadone or heroin use, and longer duration of heavy alcohol use. The review limitations include small sample sizes and inconsistent definition of variables. Conclusion: OST patients should be screened for BMD and its associated factors. Guidelines and training of practitioners involving in the OST service should be provided to increase the detection of low BMD in the OST population.
    Matched MeSH terms: Narcotic Antagonists/adverse effects*
  4. Schottenfeld RS, Chawarski MC, Mazlan M
    Lancet, 2008 Jun 28;371(9631):2192-200.
    PMID: 18586174 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60954-X
    BACKGROUND: Expansion of access to effective treatments for heroin dependence is a worldwide health priority that will also reduce HIV transmission. We compared the efficacy of naltrexone, buprenorphine, and no additional treatment, in patients receiving detoxification and subsequent drug counselling, for maintenance of heroin abstinence, prevention of relapse, and reduction of HIV risk behaviours.

    METHODS: 126 detoxified heroin-dependent patients, from an outpatient research clinic and detoxification programme in Malaysia, were randomly assigned by a computer-generated randomisation sequence to 24 weeks of manual-guided drug counselling and maintenance with naltrexone (n=43), buprenorphine (n=44), or placebo (n=39). Medications were administered on a double-blind and double-dummy basis. Primary outcomes, assessed by urine testing three times per week, were days to first heroin use, days to heroin relapse (three consecutive opioid-positive urine tests), maximum consecutive days of heroin abstinence, and reductions in HIV risk behaviours over 6 months. The study was terminated after 22 months of enrolment because buprenorphine was shown to have greater efficacy in an interim safety analysis. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00383045.

    FINDINGS: We observed consistent, linear contrasts in days to first heroin use (p=0.0009), days to heroin relapse (p=0.009), and maximum consecutive days abstinent (p=0.0007), with all results best for buprenorphine and worst for placebo. Buprenorphine was associated with greater time to first heroin use than were naltrexone (hazard ratio 1.87 [95% CI 1.21-2.88]) or placebo (2.02 [1.29-3.16]). With buprenorphine, we also recorded significantly greater time to heroin relapse (2.17 [1.38-3.42]), and maximum consecutive days abstinent than with placebo (mean days 59 [95% CI 43-76] vs 24 [13-35]; p=0.003); however, for these outcomes, differences between buprenorphine and naltrexone were not significant. Differences between naltrexone and placebo were not significant for any outcomes. HIV risk behaviours were significantly reduced from baseline across all three treatments (p=0.003), but the reductions did not differ significantly between the three groups.

    INTERPRETATION: Our findings lend support to the widespread dissemination of maintenance treatment with buprenorphine as an effective public-health approach to reduce problems associated with heroin dependence.

    Matched MeSH terms: Narcotic Antagonists/adverse effects
  5. Bruce RD, Govindasamy S, Sylla L, Kamarulzaman A, Altice FL
    Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse, 2009;35(2):68-72.
    PMID: 19212931 DOI: 10.1080/00952990802585406
    Diversion of buprenorphine (BPN) has been described in settings where it is legally prescribed and has resulted in increasing concern. To address this concern, co-formulation of buprenorphine/naloxone (BPN/NLX) replaced buprenorphine alone in Malaysia in December 2006.
    Matched MeSH terms: Narcotic Antagonists/adverse effects
  6. Springer SA, Di Paola A, Azar MM, Barbour R, Biondi BE, Desabrais M, et al.
    J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2018 05 01;78(1):43-53.
    PMID: 29373393 DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001634
    OBJECTIVE: To determine whether extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) would improve or maintain viral suppression (VS) among prisoners or jail detainees with HIV and opioid use disorder (OUD) transitioning to the community.

    DESIGN: A 4-site, prospective randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted among prison and jail inmates with HIV and OUD transitioning to the community from September 2010 through March 2016.

    METHODS: Eligible participants (N = 93) were randomized 2:1 to receive 6 monthly injections of XR-NTX (n = 66) or placebo (n = 27) starting at release and observed for 6 months. The primary outcome was the proportion that maintained or improved VS (<50 copies/mL) from baseline to 6 months.

    RESULTS: Participants allocated to XR-NTX significantly improved to VS (<50 copies/mL) from baseline (37.9%) to 6 months (60.6%) (P = 0.002), whereas the placebo group did not (55.6% at baseline to 40.7% at 6 months P = 0.294). There was, however, no statistical significant difference in VS levels at 6 months between XR-NTX (60.6%) vs. placebo (40.7%) (P = 0.087). After controlling for other factors, only allocation to XR-NTX (adjusted odds ratio = 2.90; 95% confidence interval = 1.04 to 8.14, P = 0.043) was associated with the primary outcome. Trajectories in VS from baseline to 6 months differed significantly (P = 0.017) between treatment groups, and the differences in the discordant values were significantly different as well (P = 0.041): the XR-NTX group was more likely than the placebo group to improve VS (30.3% vs. 18.5%), maintain VS (30.3% vs. 27.3), and less likely to lose VS (7.6% vs. 33.3%) by 6 months.

    CONCLUSIONS: XR-NTX improves or maintains VS after release to the community for incarcerated people living with HIV with OUD.

    Matched MeSH terms: Narcotic Antagonists/adverse effects
  7. Schottenfeld RS, Chawarski MC, Sofuoglu M, Chooi WT, Zaharim NM, M Yasin MA, et al.
    Drug Alcohol Depend, 2018 05 01;186:130-137.
    PMID: 29573648 DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.01.017
    BACKGROUND: Amphetamine type stimulants (ATS) use is highly prevalent and frequently co-occurs with opioid dependence in Malaysia and Asian countries. No medications have established efficacy for treating ATS use disorder. This study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and potential efficacy of atomoxetine for treating ATS use disorder.

    METHODS: Participants with opioid and ATS dependence (N = 69) were enrolled in a pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial; all received buprenorphine/naloxone and behavioral counseling and were randomized to atomoxetine 80 mg daily (n = 33) or placebo (n = 33). The effect size of the between-group difference on the primary outcome, proportion of ATS-negative urine tests, was estimated using Cohen's d for the intention-to-treat (ITT) sample and for higher adherence subsample (≥60 days of atomoxetine or placebo ingestion).

    RESULTS: Participants were all male with mean (SD) age 39.4 (6.8) years. The proportion of ATS-negative urine tests was higher in atomoxetine- compared to placebo-treated participants: 0.77 (0.63-0.91) vs. 0.67 (0.53-0.81, d = 0.26) in the ITT sample and 0.90 (0.75-1.00) vs. 0.64 (0.51-0.78, d = 0.56) in the higher adherence subsample. The proportion of days abstinent from ATS increased from baseline in both groups (p 

    Matched MeSH terms: Narcotic Antagonists/adverse effects
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links