Elmar Friderichs

Bio: Elmar Friderichs is an academic researcher from Grünenthal GmbH. The author has contributed to research in topics: Opioid & Cyclohexane. The author has an hindex of 21, co-authored 108 publications receiving 3402 citations.

Opioid and nonopioid components independently contribute to the mechanism of action of tramadol, an 'atypical' opioid analgesic.

Abstract: Tramadol hydrochloride produced dose-related antinociception in mouse abdominal constriction [ED50 = 1.9 (1.2-2.6) mg/kg i.p.], hot-plate [48 degrees C, ED50 = 21.4 (18.4-25.3) mg/kg s.c.; 55 degrees C, ED50 = 33.1 (28.2-39.1) mg/kg s.c.] and tail-flick [ED50 = 22.8 (19.2-30.1) mg/kg s.c.] tests. Tramadol also displayed antinociceptive activity in the rat air-induced abdominal constriction [ED50 = 1.7 (0.7-3.2) mg/kg p.o.] and hot-plate [51 degrees C, ED50 = 19.5 (10.3-27.5) mg/kg i.p.] tests. The antinociceptive activity of tramadol in the mouse tail-flick test was completely antagonized by naloxone, suggesting an opioid mechanism of action. Consistent with this, tramadol bound with modest affinity to opioid mu receptors and with weak affinity to delta and kappa receptors, with Ki values of 2.1, 57.6 and 42.7 microM, respectively. The pA2 value for naloxone obtained with tramadol in the mouse tail-flick test was 7.76 and was not statistically different from that obtained with morphine (7.94). In CXBK mice, tramadol, like morphine, was devoid of antinociceptive activity after intracerebroventricular administration, suggesting that the opioid component of tramadol-induced antinociception is mediated by the mu-opioid receptor. In contrast to the mouse tail-flick test and unlike morphine or codeine, tramadol-induced antinociception in the mouse abdominal constriction, mouse hot-plate (48 degrees or 55 degrees C) or rat hot-plate tests was only partially antagonized by naloxone, implicating a nonopioid component. Further examination of the neurochemical profile of tramadol revealed that, unlike morphine, it also inhibited the uptake of norepinephrine (Ki = 0.79 microM) and serotonin (0.99 microM). The possibility that this additional activity contributes to the antinociceptive activity of tramadol was supported by the finding that systemically administered yohimbine or ritanserin blocked the antinociception produced by intrathecal administration of tramadol, but not morphine, in the rat tail-flick test. These results suggest that tramadol-induced antinociception is mediated by opioid (mu) and nonopioid (inhibition of monoamine uptake) mechanisms. This hypothesis is consistent with the clinical experience of a wide separation between analgesia and typical opioid side effects.

Complementary and synergistic antinociceptive interaction between the enantiomers of tramadol.

Abstract: The explanation for the co-existence of opioid and nonopioid components of tramadol-induced antinociception appears to be related to the different, but complementary and interactive, pharmacologies of its enantiomers. The (+) enantiomer had Ki values of only 1.33, 62.4 and 54.0 microM at mu, delta and kappa receptors, respectively. The (-) enantiomer had even lower affinity at the mu and delta sites (Ki = 24.8, 213 and 53.5 microM, respectively. The (+) enantiomer was the most potent inhibitor of serotonin uptake (Ki = 0.53 microM) and the (-) enantiomer was the most potent inhibitor of norepinephrine uptake (Ki = 0.43 microM). Basal serotonin release was preferentially enhanced by the (+) enantiomer and stimulation-evoked norepinephrine release was preferentially enhanced by the (-) enantiomer. The (+) and (-) enantiomers each independently produced centrally mediated antinociception in the acetylcholine-induced abdominal constriction test (ED50 = 14.1 and 35.0 micrograms i.t., respectively). Racemic tramadol was significantly more potent (P < .05) than the theoretical additive effect of the enantiomers (antinociceptive synergy). Synergy was also demonstrated (P < .1) in the mouse 55 degrees C hot-plate test (i.p. route) and (P < .05) the rat Randall-Selitto yeast-induced inflammatory nociception model (i.v. and i.p. routes). Critically, the enantiomers interacted less than synergistically in two side-effects of inhibition of colonic propulsive motility and impairment of rotarod performance. The racemate and the (+) enantiomer were active in a chronic (arthritic) inflammatory pain model. Taken together, these findings provide a rational explanation for the coexistence of dual components to tramadol-induced antinociception and might form the basis for understanding its clinical profile.

(-)-(1R,2R)-3-(3-dimethylamino-1-ethyl-2-methyl-propyl)-phenol hydrochloride (tapentadol HCl): a novel mu-opioid receptor agonist/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor with broad-spectrum analgesic properties.

Abstract: (–)-(1 R ,2 R )-3-(3-Dimethylamino-1-ethyl-2-methyl-propyl)-phenol hydrochloride (tapentadol HCl) is a novel μ-opioid receptor (MOR) agonist ( K i = 0.1 μM; relative efficacy compared with morphine 88% in a [ 35 S]guanosine 5′-3- O -(thio)triphosphate binding assay) and NE reuptake inhibitor ( K i = 0.5 μM for synaptosomal reuptake inhibition). In vivo intracerebral microdialysis showed that tapentadol, in contrast to morphine, produces large increases in extracellular levels of NE (+450% at 10 mg/kg i.p.). Tapentadol exhibited analgesic effects in a wide range of animal models of acute and chronic pain [hot plate, tail-flick, writhing, Randall-Selitto, mustard oil colitis, chronic constriction injury (CCI), and spinal nerve ligation (SNL)], with ED 50 values ranging from 8.2 to 13 mg/kg after i.p. administration in rats. Despite a 50-fold lower binding affinity to MOR, the analgesic potency of tapentadol was only two to three times lower than that of morphine, suggesting that the dual mode of action of tapentadol may result in an opiate-sparing effect. A role of NE in the analgesic efficacy of tapentadol was directly demonstrated in the SNL model, where the analgesic effect of tapentadol was strongly reduced by the α 2 -adrenoceptor antagonist yohimbine but only moderately attenuated by the MOR antagonist naloxone, whereas the opposite was seen for morphine. Tolerance development to the analgesic effect of tapentadol in the CCI model was twice as slow as that of morphine. It is suggested that the broad analgesic profile of tapentadol and its relative resistance to tolerance development may be due to a dual mode of action consisting of both MOR activation and NE reuptake inhibition.

1-Phenyl-3-dimethylamino-propane derivatives having pharmacological activity

Abstract: 3-Phenyl-N,N-dimethyl-propylamine derivs. of formula (I) and their isomers and acid-addn. salts are new; X = H, OH, F, Cl or 2-4C alkanoyloxy; R1 = 1-4C alkyl; R2 = H or 1-4C alkyl; R3 = H or 1-4C n-alkyl; or CR2R3 = 4-7C cycloalkylidene; R4 and R5 = gps. defined as follows: when R5 = H, R4 = meta-O-Z, meta-S-C1-3-alkyl, meta-Cl, meta-F, meta-CR9R10R11, ortho-OH, ortho-O-C2-3-alkyl, para-F or para-CR9R10R11; or when R5 = Cl, F, OH or O-C1-3-alkyl in the para position, R4 = Cl, F, OH or O-C1-3-alkyl in the meta position; or R4+R5 = 3,4-OCH=CH or 3,4-OCH=CHO-; Z = H, 1-3C-alkyl, PO(O-C1-4-alkyl)2, CO(OC1-5-alkyl), CONH-C6H4-(C1-3-alkyl), CO-C6H4-R7; R7 = ortho-OCOC1-3-alkyl or meta- or para-CH2N(R8)2; R8 = 1-4C-alkyl or 4-morpholino; R9, R10 and R11 = H or F.

Animal Models of Nociception

Abstract: The study of pain in awake animals raises ethical, philosophical, and technical problems. We review the ethical standards for studying pain in animals and emphasize that there are scientific as well as moral reasons for keeping to them. Philosophically, there is the problem that pain cannot be monitored directly in animals but can only be estimated by examining their responses to nociceptive stimuli; however, such responses do not necessarily mean that there is a concomitant sensation. The types of nociceptive stimuli (electrical, thermal, mechanical, or chemical) that have been used in different pain models are reviewed with the conclusion that none is ideal, although chemical stimuli probably most closely mimic acute clinical pain. The monitored reactions are almost always motor responses ranging from spinal reflexes to complex behaviors. Most have the weakness that they may be associated with, or modulated by, other physiological functions. The main tests are critically reviewed in terms of their sensitivity, specificity, and predictiveness. Weaknesses are highlighted, including 1) that in most tests responses are monitored around a nociceptive threshold, whereas clinical pain is almost always more severe; 2) differences in the fashion whereby responses are evoked from healthy and inflamed tissues; and 3) problems in assessing threshold responses to stimuli, which continue to increase in intensity. It is concluded that although the neural basis of the most used tests is poorly understood, their use will be more profitable if pain is considered within, rather than apart from, the body's homeostatic mechanisms.

The Endocannabinoid System as an Emerging Target of Pharmacotherapy

Abstract: The recent identification of cannabinoid receptors and their endogenous lipid ligands has triggered an exponential growth of studies exploring the endocannabinoid system and its regulatory functions in health and disease. Such studies have been greatly facilitated by the introduction of selective cannabinoid receptor antagonists and inhibitors of endocannabinoid metabolism and transport, as well as mice deficient in cannabinoid receptors or the endocannabinoid-degrading enzyme fatty acid amidohydrolase. In the past decade, the endocannabinoid system has been implicated in a growing number of physiological functions, both in the central and peripheral nervous systems and in peripheral organs. More importantly, modulating the activity of the endocannabinoid system turned out to hold therapeutic promise in a wide range of disparate diseases and pathological conditions, ranging from mood and anxiety disorders, movement disorders such as Parkinson9s and Huntington9s disease, neuropathic pain, multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injury, to cancer, atherosclerosis, myocardial infarction, stroke, hypertension, glaucoma, obesity/metabolic syndrome, and osteoporosis, to name just a few. An impediment to the development of cannabinoid medications has been the socially unacceptable psychoactive properties of plant-derived or synthetic agonists, mediated by CB 1 receptors. However, this problem does not arise when the therapeutic aim is achieved by treatment with a CB 1 receptor antagonist, such as in obesity, and may also be absent when the action of endocannabinoids is enhanced indirectly through blocking their metabolism or transport. The use of selective CB 2 receptor agonists, which lack psychoactive properties, could represent another promising avenue for certain conditions. The abuse potential of plant-derived cannabinoids may also be limited through the use of preparations with controlled composition and the careful selection of dose and route of administration. The growing number of preclinical studies and clinical trials with compounds that modulate the endocannabinoid system will probably result in novel therapeutic approaches in a number of diseases for which current treatments do not fully address the patients9 need. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview on the current state of knowledge of the endocannabinoid system as a target of pharmacotherapy.

Descending control of pain.

Abstract: Thanks largely to the study of the brainstem nuclei that mediate stimulation analgesia, the involvement of the monoamines in the descending control of pain is now well established. The periaqueductal grey, the raphe nuclei (NRM and DRN) and the locus coeruleus are all key brainstem sites for the control of nociceptive transmission in the spinal cord. Although the initial emphasis was on 5-HT as the transmitter mediating this control at spinal levels, it is clear from more recent work that NA has an equally important part to play. How (or even if) the two amines differ in their roles and actions in analgesia is, however, still an open question. The small size and complexity of the brainstem areas from which analgesia may be elicited by electrical stimulation complicates the interpretation of the data. Stimulating currents may spread to surrounding regions mediating opposite effects to that of the main region stimulated. Opiates and GABA are clearly involved in descending control at both brainstem and spinal levels, although the relative roles of the different types of amino-acid and opiate receptors is still hotly debated. Despite the fact that the first report on stimulation analgesia appeared more than a quarter of a century ago in 1969, the precise connections and cord synaptology are still the basis of ongoing research. It is perhaps ironic, in an issue dedicated to new molecules and mechanisms, that those transmitters most involved in descending inhibition should be such old and familiar friends.