Search

What Is Known and Objective: Although pain is one of the most common afflictions, it is often inadequately managed because the available analgesic options are relatively limited due to insufficient efficacy, unacceptable adverse effects or the potential for misuse or abuse. However, recent publications suggest that an alternative approach-indirect enhancement of endogenous pain-relieving pathways-might be desirable. We review this approach, in particular the dual enkephalinase inhibitors (DENKIs)., Methods: Published literature and Internet sources were searched for information related to the basic science and clinical data on inhibition of metabolic pathways of endogenous analgesic agents. The identified sources were reviewed, assessed and synthesized. Emphasis was placed on the benefits of the approach, as well as on the individual agents., Results: Inhibition of the enzymes that degrade the endogenous opioid ligands Met- and Leu-enkephalin results in an increased synaptic concentration of the enkephalins and an analgesic effect in a variety of animal models of pain and in preliminary trials in humans. The design of compounds that inhibit both of the two major enkephalin-degrading enzymes (neprilysin and aminopeptidase N) has been found to be better than those that inhibit only one of the enzymes. These dual-acting enkephalinase inhibitors yield analgesia with less adverse effects than current opioid drugs., What Is New and Conclusion: Unlike currently available analgesics, inhibitors of the metabolic degradation of endogenous analgesic substances attempt to elicit a more "natural" and targeted analgesic effect. This indirect approach offers an opportunity for novel additions to the otherwise relatively limited choice of analgesic classes., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is Known and Objective: Advances in pain research have led to an understanding that many pains are driven by more than one underlying (patho)physiologic cause (ie, they are "multimechanistic") and that better pain relief is obtained with fewer adverse effects when an analgesic is correspondingly multimechanistic. At least two of the more-modern analgesics combine opioid and non-opioid mechanisms, and have become known as "atypical opioids." Less well known is that just as Nature evolved opioids, it also evolved atypical opioids, presaging modern drug discovery efforts., Comment: Traditional (typical) opioids are extracts or analogs of substances derived from the poppy plant. They produce their analgesic and adverse effects primarily through a single, opioid mechanism (albeit with individual differences). Two most recent analgesics were developed to have both an opioid mechanism and, a second, non-opioid mechanism of action (inhibition of monoamine neurotransmitter reuptake). Little known is that Nature had already evolved a plant source of compounds with the same properties., What Is New and Conclusion: As debate about the use and abuse potential of kratom swirls, conflicting, often contradicting, opinions are expressed. A review of the basic pharmacology of kratom reveals the explanation for the bifurcation in viewpoints: kratom has both opioid and non-opioid properties. Fascinatingly, just as the poppy plant (Papaver) evolved the typical opioids, Mitragyna evolved the mitragynines-Nature's "atypical opioids.", (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is Known and Objective: Beginning in the 1950s, a family of potent opioids was synthesized and developed (fentanyl and analogues). They continue to serve as valuable analgesic agents. But the recent spike and notoriety of their abuse has raised alarm, even calls for tighter control. We review the trajectory of these compounds., Comment: To rectify shortcomings of the then available opioid analgesics, an analogue family of compounds was synthesized having a piperidine ring (presumptive principal active moiety in morphine and meperidine). The result was more potent and rapid-acting compounds, including alfentanil, carfentanil, fentanyl, sufentanil and others. These properties, plus availability in formulations for multiple routes of administration, impart broad therapeutic utility. They also unfortunately favour abuse., What Is New and Conclusion: The abuse of fentanyl and its analogues (legal and illicit) serves as a case study for the dilemma and difficulties balancing a medical need against psychosocial realities. The fentanyl family provides relief for severe pain, but their very properties also engender abuse., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is Known and Objective: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have published guidelines for opioid prescribing, with the goal of helping guide clinicians to make safe prescribing choices. In the form of 12 statements, the CDC offers guidance that at times is not supported by the evidence or introduces new concepts (such as a requirement that opioids improve function). Our objective was to examine the new guidelines in terms of how well they could strike the balance between keeping opioids accessible to those who need them while appropriately restricting their use., What Is New and Conclusion: The CDC guidelines offer some reasonable and laudable guidance, but they also make some recommendations which are not supported by current scientific evidence. We also noted that the urgent need for greater education among opioid prescribers was not addressed in the new guidelines., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is Known and Objective: Optimal utilization of opioid analgesics is significantly limited by the central nervous system adverse effects and misuse/abuse potential of currently available drugs. It has been postulated that opioid-associated adverse effects and abuse potential would be greatly reduced if opioids could be excluded from reaching the brain. We review the basic science and clinical evidence of one such approach - peripherally restricted kappa-opioid receptor (KOR) agonists (pKORAs)., Methods: Published and unpublished literature, websites and other sources were searched for basic science and clinical information related to the potential benefits and development of peripherally restricted kappa-opioid receptor agonists. Each source was summarized, reviewed and assessed., Results: The historical development of pKORAs can be traced from the design of increasingly KOR-selective agonists, elucidation of the pharmacologic attributes of such compounds and strategies to restrict passage across the blood-brain barrier. Novel compounds are under development and have progressed to clinical trials., What Is New and Conclusions: The results from recent clinical trials suggest that peripherally restricted opioids can be successfully designed and that they can retain analgesic efficacy with a more favourable adverse effect profile., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is Known and Objective: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is one of the most common opioid-induced adverse effects. Pregnancy also predisposes to bowel dysfunctions due to the associated endocrine changes. Pregnant women are thus at greater risk of OIC. We review the non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment options as a guide for achieving a clinically optimal strategy for the management of OIC during pregnancy., Methods: The published literature was searched for current therapeutic options, including non-pharmacologic dietary modifications, laxatives, and the peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs). Each was assessed for efficacy and safety, particularly as they relate to pregnancy., Results and Discussion: Non-pharmacologic approaches such as dietary change are generally safe, but generally insufficient when used alone to control OIC in pregnancy. Laxatives (bulking, osmotic, stimulant) can be effective, but have potential adverse effects that might be particularly troublesome during pregnancy (e.g. electrolyte disturbances, dehydration, abdominal pain, and pulmonary oedema or hypermagnesaemia in the extreme). PAMORAs, which attenuate OIC without affecting opioid-induced analgesia, have been associated with only minimal side effects during the clinical studies to date., What Is New and Conclusions: Conventional non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic options for the management of OIC in pregnancy are often suboptimal due to insufficient efficacy or adverse effects particularly troublesome during pregnancy. The PAMORA strategy appears to provide a safe and effective new option superior to conventional therapies for the management of OIC during pregnancy., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is Known and Objective: Pain is a prevalent, and due to the ageing population, increasing medical problem. Opioids are frequently prescribed to meet the unmet medical need. Unfortunately, with the increase in the legitimate use of opioids, there has been a corresponding increase in abuse. A practical way to retain the pain relief afforded by opioids while decreasing opportunities for abuse is to make it more difficult to extract the opioid from the product or to make it less desirable to do so by designing an abuse-deterrent formulation (ADF). We provide a brief overview of the strategies and early evidence related to opioid ADFs., Methods: Published and unpublished literature, websites, and other sources were searched for current opioid formulation options, including immediate-release and extended-release products. Each was summarized, reviewed and assessed., Results: The strategies that have been used to design the current opioid ADFs involve one or more of four approaches: a physical barrier; incorporation of an opioid receptor antagonist (e.g. naloxone) that self-limits opioid action when taken in excess amount; inclusion of a noxious agent that is released during inappropriate use; or a pro-drug., What Is New and Conclusions: Legitimate use of opioid analgesics carries with it certain risks, including the risk of abuse. The new ADFs utilize four major strategies and provide innovative additions to the armamentarium. They likely will become an important part of a comprehensive approach to limiting, although not eliminating, opioid misuse and abuse., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is Known and Objective: Based on in vitro assays and select animal models, buprenorphine is commonly called a 'partial agonist'. An implication is that it should produce less analgesic effect in humans than so-called 'full agonists' such as morphine or fentanyl. However, buprenorphine has a multimechanistic pharmacology, and thus partial agonism at a specific receptor is not particularly relevant to its overall analgesic action. We review published clinical trials that directly compared the magnitude of buprenorphine's analgesic effect to analgesics commonly considered full agonists., Comment: Due to different signal transduction pathways, a drug can be a full agonist on one endpoint and a partial agonist on another. Therefore, we limited the present review to buprenorphine's analgesic effect., What Is New and Conclusion: Twenty-four controlled clinical trials were identified, plus a case report and dose-response curve. Based on complete or comparable pain relief, in buprenorphine had full clinical analgesic efficacy in 25 of the 26 studies., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: A multi-mechanistic approach offers potential enhancement of analgesic efficacy, but therapeutic gain could be offset by an increase in adverse events. The centrally acting analgesic tapentadol [(-)-(1R,2R)-3-(3-dimethylamino-1-ethyl-2-methyl-propyl)-phenol hydrochloride] combines μ-opioid receptor (MOR) agonism and neuronal noradrenaline reuptake inhibition (NRI), both of which contribute to its analgesic effects. Previously, isobolographic analysis of occupation-effect data and a theoretically equivalent methodology determining interactions from the effect scale demonstrated pronounced synergistic interaction between the two mechanisms of action of tapentadol in two models of antinociception (low-intensity tail-flick and spinal nerve ligation). The present study investigated the nature of interaction of the two mechanisms on a surrogate measure for gastrointestinal adverse effect (inhibition of gastrointestinal transit)., Methods: Dose-response curves were generated in rats for tapentadol alone or in combination with the opioid receptor antagonist, naloxone, or the α2 -adrenoceptor antagonist, yohimbine, to reveal the effect of tapentadol based upon MOR agonism, NRI, and combined mechanisms., Results: The dose-effect curve of tapentadol was shifted to the right by both antagonists, thereby providing data to distinguish between MOR agonism and NRI. Analysis revealed a simple additive interaction between the two mechanisms on this endpoint, in contrast to the synergistic interaction previously demonstrated for antinociception., Conclusions: We believe this is the first published evaluation of mechanistic interaction for a surrogate measure of adverse effect of a single compound with two mechanisms of action, and the results suggest that there is a greater separation between the analgesic and gastrointestinal effects of tapentadol than expected based upon its analgesic efficacy., (© 2014 European Pain Federation - EFIC®)

What Is Known and Objective: The phenomenon of opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH), an increased sensitivity to pain attributed to the very opioid drugs administered to manage the pain, is well established in animal models, and there is concern that it also occurs in patients. Our objective is to briefly summarize the basic science and clinical evidence about OIH as background to consider the possible benefit of using a multi-mechanistic analgesic approach., Comment: It is unclear how OIH occurs, or even why; presumably, it is part of an adaptive response. But development of OIH poses a serious treatment dilemma. OIH differs from tolerance, which also presents as reduced analgesic effect, in that tolerance is addressed by judicious and monitored increase in opioid dose, but OIH would be treated by a decrease in opioid dose. Therefore, it is important to avoid induction of OIH. Currently, it is not clear which patients are at greater risk of developing OIH, or which drugs are at greater risk of producing it., What Is New and Conclusion: We suggest that multi-mechanistic analgesia, accomplished within either a single drug or a combination of drugs, is a logical approach that might result in a reduced development of OIH., (© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Tramadol is a centrally acting analgesic in widespread use throughout the world. Although there is extensive preclinical, clinical, post-marketing and epidemiological data indicating relatively low--but not zero--abuse/dependence, questions continue to arise about its abuse potential and appropriate regulatory classification. This article considers these questions from the point of view of the basic pharmacology of tramadol. There is nothing unique about tramadol in this regard, but its multimodal mechanism of action, pharmacologically active enantiomers, and active metabolite make it a particularly instructive and relevant example.

The in vivo metabolism of both tramadol-N-oxide (TNO) and tramadol was investigated in urine pools obtained from 0-24 h after a single 300 mg kg-1 oral dose administration of each compound to specific pathogen-free and axenic mice. Unchanged TNO (< or =42% of the initial drug sample), tramadol, and 23 metabolites from TNO-treated mice and unchanged tramadol (< or =15% of the sample) plus 20 metabolites from tramadol-treated mice were profiled, quantified and tentatively identified on the basis of atmospheric pressure ionization mass spectrometry (API-MS) and tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) data. Of the tramadol metabolites, five (M1-5) have been previously identified in mice. Of the tramadol and TNO metabolites, six (M18-23) are new metabolites. The tramadol and TNO metabolites were formed via the following seven metabolic pathways: N-oxide reduction (TNO), O/N-demethylation, cyclohexyloxidation, oxidative N-dealkylation, dehydration (TNO), N-oxidation (tramadol), and glucuronidation. Pathways 1-3 appear to be predominant steps forming four major O/N-desmethyl and hydroxycyclohexyl metabolites, and in conjunction with pathway 7, formed six minor glucuronides. Both tramadol-N-oxide and tramadol are extensively metabolized in mice, and no significant qualitative or quantitative differences in metabolism were observed between specific pathogen-free and axenic mice with the exception of a greater amount of unchanged TNO in axenic mice than in specific pathogen-free mice, more M2 in specific pathogen-free mice than in axenic mice in the TNO-dosed mice, and visa versa for M2 of tramadol-dosed mice.

Tramadol-N-oxide (TNO, RWJ-38705) is a new analgesic agent, which is believed to produce its analgesic effect following metabolic conversion to tramadol. In the present study, API ionspray-MS and MS/MS techniques were used to profile the in vitro metabolism of TNO in mouse, rat, and human hepatic S9 fractions in the presence of an NADPH generating system. Unchanged TNO represented 60, 24, and 26% of the sample in mouse, rat, and human, respectively. Tramadol, and seven other metabolites were profiled and tentatively identified on the basis of MS analysis and by comparison to synthetic reference samples. TNO metabolites were formed via four Phase I reactions: (1) N-oxide reduction, (2) O-demethylation, (3) N-demethylation, and (4) cyclohexylhydroxylation. TNO was found to be substantially metabolized in hepatic S9 from all three species. The metabolism of TNO to tramadol via N-oxide reduction was greater in rat and human than in mouse.

Objective: To investigate a possible differential brain uptake of tramadol vs. its major metabolite (O-desmethyl tramadol; M1) in mice and rats., Methods: An extraction and measurement technique (gas chromatograph equipped with a nitrogen phosphorus detector) was used to measure plasma and brain levels of tramadol and M1 at intervals 10-300 min after oral dosing of tramadol hydrochloride to mice and rats., Results: For all doses of tramadol administered (5, 10, 20, or 40 mg/kg), tramadol and M1 plasma levels were greatest 10 min after dosing: in mice, peak tramadol plasma levels were 47.75-736.72 ng/mL and peak M1 levels were 75.30-1084.92 ng/mL; in rats, peak tramadol plasma levels were 185.03-455.81 ng/mL and peak M1 levels were 106.74-455.70 ng/mL. Tramadol brain levels were also greatest 10 min after dosing. In mice, peak tramadol brain levels were 226.42-1847.46 ng/g. Peak M1 levels (72.17-572.97 ng/g) occurred 20-60 min after dosing. In rats, peak tramadol brain levels were 258.50-1777.37 ng/g and peak M1 levels were 80.35-289.60 ng/g. In mice, the ratio of tramadol/M1 in plasma was 0.5-1.0 throughout the measurements, whereas the ratio in brain was about 10 at 10 min and about 2 from 20 to 50 min. In rats, the ratio of tramadol/M1 in plasma was 0.5-1.5, whereas the ratio in brain was about 15 at 10 min and about 4-7 thereafter., Conclusion: In mice and rats, there appears to be preferential brain vs. plasma distribution of tramadol over M1.

A method that allows the measurement of plasma and brain levels of the centrally-acting analgesic tramadol and its major metabolite (O-desmethyl tramadol) in mice and rats was developed using gas chromatography equipped with nitrogen-phosphorus detection (GC-NPD). Plasma samples were extracted with methyl tert.-butyl ether (MTBE) and were injected directly into the GC system. Brain tissue homogenates were precipitated with methanol, the resulting supernatant was dried then acidified with hydrochloric acid. The aqueous solution was washed with MTBE twice, alkalinized, and extracted with MTBE. The MTBE layer was dried, reconstituted and injected into the GC system. The GC assay used a DB-1 capillary column with an oven temperature ramp (135 to 179 degrees C at 4 degrees C/min). Dextromethorphan was used as the internal standard. The calibration curves for tramadol and O-desmethyl tramadol in plasma and brain tissue were linear in the range of 10 to 10000 ng/ml (plasma) and ng/g (brain). Assay accuracy and precision of back calculated standards were within +/- 15%.

1. Metabolism of the analgesic agent, tramadol hydrochloride, was investigated after a single oral administration of 14C-tramadol to four rats (50)mgkg(-1) and two dogs (20)mg kg(-1). 2. Recovery of total radioactivity in rat and dog urine samples over 24 h was 73 and 65% of the radioactive dose, respectively. 3. Unchanged tramadol and a total of 24 metabolites, consisting of 16 Phase I metabolites and eight conjugates (seven glucuromides, one sulphate), were isolated and tentatively identified, which accounted for > 52% of the dose in urine of both species. 4. Of the metabolites, five (M1-5) were previously identified. 5. The metabolites were formed via the following six metabolic pathways: O-demethylation, N-demethylation, cyclohexyl oxidation, oxidative N-dealkylation, dehydration and conjugation. 6. Pathways 1-3 appear to be major steps, forming seven O-desmethyl/N-desmethyl and hydroxy-cyclohexyl metabolites in major quantities. 7. Pathways 1-3 in conjunction with pathway 6 produced four glucuronides along with four minor conjugates. 8. In addition, the in vitro metabolism of tramadol was conducted using rat hepatic S9 fraction in the presence of an NADPH-generating system. Unchanged tramadol (30% of the sample) plus nine metabolites, M1-7, tramadol-N-oxide (M31) and OH-cyclohexyl-M1 (M32), were profiled and tentatively identified based on MS and MS/MS data.

Opioid receptors are located throughout the respiratory tract. Yet, these have received relatively scant attention compared to other opioid receptors. The most abundant sites within the respiratory tract appear localized within the alveolar walls, other sites appear to line the smooth muscle within the trachea and main bronchi near the lumen. There is about 100-times greater [3H]morphine binding density within the bronchioles and lobes than in the main bronchi or trachea. In addition to the usual mu, delta and kappa types of opioid receptors, 'non-conventional' opioid binding sites have been suggested, although the function of these or of the other opioid receptors in the pulmonary tract is not known. However, they might explain the otherwise counterintuitive apparent utility of morphine treatment of dyspnea. Dyspnea is a common and distressing symptom in terminally-ill cancer patients and patients with chronic lung disease. It results from multiple causes, is difficult to treat and is a significant precipitating factor for late-stage hospital or hospice admissions. Nebulized morphine or other opioids have been reported to have beneficial effect, but the mechanism by which opioids might produce this seemingly contradictory effect is not clear. We review here lung opioid receptor distribution, pharmacology and possible clinical relevance in the treatment of dyspnea.

The co-administration of morphine at spinal (i.th.) and supraspinal (i.c.v.) sites to the same rat produces antinociceptive synergy, a phenomenon which may underlie the clinical analgesic utility of this drug. In animals with peripheral nerve injury, however, the antinociceptive potency and efficacy of i.th. morphine is significantly decreased. Here, the possible loss of spinal/supraspinal morphine antinociceptive synergy and relationship to elevation of spinal dynorphin content was studied. Ligation of lumbar spinal nerves resulted in elevated dynorphin in the ipsilateral lumbar and sacral spinal cord. In sham-operated rats supraspinal/spinal co-administration of morphine produced synergistic antinociception which was unaffected by i.th. MK-801 or dynorphin A((1-17)) antiserum. In nerve-injured rats, i.th. morphine was inactive against tactile allodynia and showed diminished in potency against acute nociception without supraspinal/spinal antinociceptive synergy. Antiserum to dynorphin A((1-17)) or the non-competitive NMDA antagonist MK-801 increased the antinociceptive potency of i.th. morphine, restored supraspinal/spinal morphine antinociceptive synergy and elicited a dose-related i.th. morphine antiallodynic action. These agents did not demonstrate antinociceptive or antiallodynic activity alone and did not alter morphine actions in sham-operated animals. The loss of spinal/supraspinal antinociceptive synergy and lack of antiallodynic activity of spinal morphine appear to be due to the elevation across multiple spinal segments of dynorphin following nerve injury. Pathological actions of elevated dynorphin may directly or indirectly modulate the NMDA receptor, result in a loss of supraspinal/spinal morphine synergy and may thus account for the decreased clinical analgesic efficacy of morphine in peripheral neuropathies., (Copyright 1999 Elsevier Science B.V.)

Distinguishing between pharmacologically additive and synergistic drug combinations requires experimental designs and statistical analyses that often require appreciable numbers of animals and much experimenter time. The current study employed a design in which individual dose-effect data from each drug were translated into theoretically additive total dose combinations, in a fixed drug proportion, in order to produce a composite additive dose-effect relation that could be compared with that of an actual mixture having the same proportion. Results from this approach, using a combination of intrathecal doses of morphine and clonidine, were virtually identical to those using isobolographic analysis of the same data set. Both analyses showed significant synergism for this combination and, in each method, it was not necessary to constrain the drug regression lines to parallelism. In contrast to the isobole approach, the use of the composite additive dose-effect relation also allows observation of the interaction over a range of effects while reducing the size of the data sets needed.

To date in the United States when a patient has presented with a complaint of pain requiring some form of pharmacologic relief, the physician has had the choice of two broad classes of drugs: peripherally acting (i.e., NSAID) or centrally acting (i.e., opioid) analgesics. The antidepressant monoamine reuptake inhibitors, particularly when combined with an opioid analgesic, have also proven efficacious in treating certain types of pain conditions. A new approach, available for almost 20 years in Europe and recently approved for use in the United States, is the centrally acting synthetic analgesic tramadol HCI. Preclinical evidence suggests that tramadol produces its antinociceptive effect in animals and analgesic effect in humans through a complementary dual mechanism of action. One mechanism relates to its weak affinity for mu-opioid receptors (6,000-fold less than morphine, 100-fold less than d-propoxyphene, 10-fold less than codeine, and equivalent to dextromethorphan). A metabolite (O-desmethyltramadol; M1) binds to opioid receptors with a greater affinity than the parent compound and could contribute to this component. However, in most animal tests and human clinical trials, the analgesic effect of tramadol is only partially blocked by the opioid antagonist naloxone, suggesting an important nonopioid mechanism. This nonopioid mechanism possibly relates to an increase in central neuronal synaptic levels of two neurotransmitters, 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT; serotonin) and norepinephrine. The opioid and nonopioid mechanisms appear to combine in a supra-additive manner in several tests of antinociception, but only in an additive or even counteracting manner in measures of adverse-effect liability. In sum, the apparent dual mechanism of action of tramadol suggests a possible new approach to pain relief.

In the same mice in which the intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) administration of antisense oligodeoxyribonucleotide (oligo) directed against the Gi2alpha (but not Gi1alpha, Gi3alpha or G(s)alpha) G-protein subunits attenuated i.c.v. morphine-induced antinociception in the tail-flick test, none of the oligos altered naloxone-precipitated jumping (acute dependence). Likewise, none of the oligos significantly altered morphine-induced constipation. Hence, i.c.v. morphine-induced antinociception might be preferentially mediated via transduction pathway(s) different from constipation or acute dependence, offering novel opportunities for drug discovery.

Although it is well established that the analgesic effects of morphine are mediated by opioid receptors, previous studies have shown that some opioids additionally inhibit the uptake of serotonin and norepinephrine. The present investigation of a diverse group of opioids revealed that structurally identifiable subgroups inhibited the neuronal reuptake of these monoamines. Phenanthrene opioids with an oxygen bridge between C4 and C5, such as morphine and naloxone (group I), did not block norepinephrine or serotonin uptake, whereas phenanthrene opioids without the oxygen bridge and the C6-OH moiety, such as levorphanol and levomethorphan (group II), did inhibit uptake, as did nonphenanthrene opioids, such as d-propoxyphene and methadone (group III). Affinity at the mu opioid receptor correlated with antinociceptive potency (r = 0.87, P < .05). Although the antinociceptive activity of the "active enantiomers" of group II and III compounds also correlated with their affinity at the mu opioid receptor (r = 0.85, P = .007), additional consideration of serotonin uptake inhibiting activity (but not of norepinephrine uptake inhibiting activity) significantly improved the correlation between antinociceptive potency and the in vitro activity of these compounds (r = 0.915, P = .0017). Additionally, for group II and III (but not group I) compounds, smaller differences between enantiomers in antinociceptive potency than in mu receptor affinity were noted, presumably because of the contribution of uptake inhibition to the antinociceptive activity of group II and III compounds. Evidence also is provided suggesting a broader role for the combination of mu opioid affinity and 5-hydroxytryptamine uptake inhibition in the activity of other antinociceptive agents.