Search

Aim: Oliceridine, a new class of μ-opioid receptor agonist, is selective for G-protein signaling (analgesia) with limited recruitment of β-arrestin (associated with adverse outcomes) and may provide a cost-effective alternative versus conventional opioid morphine for postoperative pain. Patients & methods: Using a decision tree with a 24-h time horizon, we calculated costs for medication and management of three most common adverse events (AEs; oxygen saturation Results: Using oliceridine, the cost for managing AEs was US$528,424 versus $852,429 for morphine, with a net cost savings of $324,005. Conclusion: Oliceridine has a favorable overall impact on the total cost of postoperative care compared with the use of the conventional opioid morphine.

Optimal pain relief requires a balance between adequate analgesia and risk of adverse effects. Opioids remain the cornerstone for managing moderate to severe pain, but are associated with opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) and gastrointestinal complications. Opioids exert their analgesic effects predominantly via G-protein signaling, however, adverse effects including OIRD are mediated by the β-arrestin pathway. Oliceridine is the first of a new class of biased opioid agonists that preferentially activate G-protein signaling over β-arrestin, which would theoretically improve analgesia and reduce the risk of adverse effects. Oliceridine is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain. The efficacy of Oliceridine was mainly established in two randomized controlled Phase III clinical trials of patients experiencing moderate to severe pain after bunionectomy (APOLLO-1) and abdominoplasty (APOLLO-2). The results of the APOLLO studies demonstrate that Oliceridine, when administered via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) demand boluses of 0.35mg and 0.5mg, provides superior analgesia compared to placebo, and is equianalgesic to PCA morphine 1mg demand boluses, without significant difference in the incidence of respiratory complications. In a more pragmatic trial of surgical and non-surgical patients, the ATHENA observational cohort study reported rapid onset of analgesia with Oliceridine given with or without multimodal analgesia. However, these studies were designed to evaluate analgesic efficacy, and it is still uncertain if Oliceridine has a better safety profile than conventional opioids. Although several post hoc analyses of pooled data from the APOLLO and ATHENA trials reported that Oliceridine was associated with lower OIRD and gastrointestinal complications compared to morphine, prospective studies are needed to elucidate if biased agonists such as Oliceridine reduce the risk of adverse effects compared to conventional opioids.

Oliceridine (Olinvyk™, Trevena, Inc.) is a novel μ opioid agonist that was recently approved in the USA for use in adults for the management of acute pain severe enough to require an intravenous opioid analgesic and for whom alternative treatments are inadequate. Unlike opioid agonists currently in use, the interaction of oliceridine with the opioid receptor is selective to the G protein pathway, with low potency for β-arrestin recruitment, which may lead to fewer opioid-related adverse events. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of oliceridine leading to this first approval.

Background and Objective Opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) is a potentially fatal complication associated with conventional opioids. Currently, there is a paucity of validated endpoints available to measure respiratory safety. Oliceridine, an investigational intravenous (IV) opioid, is a G-protein selective μ-agonist with limited activity on β-arrestin2, a signaling pathway associated with adverse events including OIRD. In controlled phase III trials, oliceridine 0.35 mg and 0.5 mg demand doses demonstrated comparable analgesia to morphine 1 mg with favorable improvements in respiratory safety. In this exploratory analysis, we report dosing interruption (DI) and average cumulative duration of DI (CDDI) for both oliceridine and morphine. Methods Patients requiring analgesia after bunionectomy or abdominoplasty were randomized to IV demand doses of placebo, oliceridine (0.1 mg, 0.35 mg, or 0.5 mg), or morphine (1 mg), administered via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), following a loading dose (oliceridine 1.5 mg, morphine 4 mg, volume-matched placebo) with a 6-min lockout interval. Certified nurse anesthetists monitored each patient and withheld study medication according to the patient’s respiratory status. For each patient, the duration of all DIs was summed and reported as CDDI. A zero-inflated gamma mixture model was used to compute the mean CDDI for each treatment. Results Proportion of patients with DI was lower with oliceridine (0.1 mg: 3.2%, 0.35 mg: 13.9%, 0.5 mg: 15.1%) versus morphine (22%). The CDDI was also lower across all demand doses of oliceridine versus morphine. Conclusion Using DI as a surrogate for OIRD indicates improved respiratory safety with oliceridine versus morphine that merits further investigation. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40261-020-00936-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

INTRODUCTION Postoperative pain is a distressful experience and remains to be a significant concern after surgery. Current agents either fail to prevent or minimize postoperative pain or cause a series of adverse effects, addiction, or abuse. Opioids have been the gold standard in the treatment of postoperative pain despite their well-described adverse effects. Many new agents with different mechanisms of action have been recently introduced to address this issue. AREAS COVERED This current review summarizes the list of new and emerging drugs investigated for their efficacy in controlling the postoperative pain and decreasing the need for rescue opioid use, adverse effect profile, abuse, and addiction potential. EXPERT OPINION Opioids have unrivaled analgesic efficacy. However adverse effects of opioids led to the search for better options. In mild pain most of the emerging drugs have been shown to control postoperative pain and decrease the use of rescue opioid, however fail to control pain after major surgeries causing severe pain. Specific agents such as Oliceridine, new local anesthetics, etc., are effective in controlling severe pain and hold a promise to replace opioids in the near future.

INTRODUCTION Despite the advances in regional anesthesia and non-opioid systemic analgesia, opioids remain the primary rescue analgesic for moderate to severe pain. However, the risks and side effects of opioid medications are well documented. Oliceridine is a novel opioid receptor agonist which is thought to have less risk of adverse events, such as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and respiratory depression. AREAS COVERED In this review, the authors discuss the limitations of the current opioid and non-opioid analgesic options. They also review the pharmacokinetics of oliceridine, its analgesic efficacy, and risk of adverse events; and its added clinical value in managing moderate to severe pain. EXPERT OPINION Despite the advances in regional anesthesia and multimodal systemic analgesia, opioid free analgesia is only feasible in selected procedures and patients. Oliceridine is effective in the management of moderate to severe pain and appears to be associated with lower risk of nausea and vomiting. The risk of sedation and respiratory depression associated with oliceridine will require further study. The availability of an opioid agonist with a better side effect profile could potentially change the current paradigm of opioid avoidance in postoperative pain management.

Sergio D Bergese,1 Marek Brzezinski,2 Gregory B Hammer,3 Timothy L Beard,4 Peter H Pan,5 Sharon E Mace,6 Richard D Berkowitz,7 Kristina Cochrane,8 Linda Wase,8 Harold S Minkowitz,9 Ashraf S Habib10 1School of Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA; 2School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, VA Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA; 3Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA; 4Clinical Research, Summit Medical Group/Bend Memorial Clinic, Bend, OR, USA; 5Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 6Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine at Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA; 7Phoenix Clinical Research, Tamarac, FL, USA; 8Trevena, Inc., Chesterbrook, PA, USA; 9HD Research Corporation, Houston, TX, USA; 10Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USACorrespondence: Sergio D BergeseSchool of Medicine, Stony Brook University, Health Sciences Center, Level 4, Room 060, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USATel +1 631-444-2979Fax +1-631-444-2907Email Sergio.Bergese@stonybrookmedicine.eduBackground: Pain management with conventional opioids can be challenging due to dose-limiting adverse events (AEs), some of which may be related to the simultaneous activation of β-arrestin (a signaling pathway associated with opioid-related AEs) and G-protein pathways. The investigational analgesic oliceridine is a G-protein-selective agonist at the μ-opioid receptor with less recruitment of β-arrestin. The objective of this phase 3, open-label, multi-center study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability, of IV oliceridine for moderate to severe acute pain in a broad, real-world patient population, including postoperative surgical patients and non-surgical patients with painful medical conditions.Methods: Adult patients with a score ≥4 on 11-point NRS for pain intensity received IV oliceridine either by bolus or PCA; multimodal analgesia was permitted. Safety was assessed using AE reports, study discontinuations, clinical laboratory and vital sign measures.Results: A total of 768 patients received oliceridine. The mean age (SD) was 54.1 (16.1) years, with 32% ≥65 years of age. Most patients were female (65%) and Caucasian (78%). Surgical patients comprised the majority of the study population (94%), most common being orthopedic (30%), colorectal (15%) or gynecologic (15%) procedures. Multimodal analgesia was administered to 84% of patients. Oliceridine provided a rapid reduction in NRS pain score by 2.2 ± 2.3 at 30 mins from a score of 6.3 ± 2.1 (at baseline) which was maintained to the end of treatment. No deaths or significant cardiorespiratory events were reported. The incidence of AEs leading to early discontinuation and serious AEs were 2% and 3%, respectively. Nausea (31%), constipation (11%), and vomiting (10%) were the most common AEs. AEs were mostly of mild (37%) or moderate (25%) severity and considered possibly or probably related to oliceridine in 33% of patients.Conclusion: Oliceridine IV for the management of moderate to severe acute pain was generally safe and well tolerated in the patients studied.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02656875.Keywords: acute pain, analgesia, patient-controlled, clinical trial &nbsp

Significance Agonists of the μ-opioid receptor (MOPr) are currently the gold standard for pain treatment. However, their therapeutic usage is greatly limited by side effects including respiratory depression, constipation, tolerance, and dependence. Functionally selective MOPr agonists that mediate their effects preferentially through G proteins rather than β-arrestin signaling are believed to produce fewer side effects. Here, we present the discovery of 3 unusual tetrapeptides with a unique stereochemical arrangement of hydrophobic amino acids from an Australian estuarine isolate of Penicillium species. Building on these natural templates we developed bilorphin, a potent and selective highly G protein-biased agonist of the MOPr. Further, through the addition of a simple sugar moiety, we generated bilactorphin that is an effective analgesic in vivo., An Australian estuarine isolate of Penicillium sp. MST-MF667 yielded 3 tetrapeptides named the bilaids with an unusual alternating LDLD chirality. Given their resemblance to known short peptide opioid agonists, we elucidated that they were weak (Ki low micromolar) μ-opioid agonists, which led to the design of bilorphin, a potent and selective μ-opioid receptor (MOPr) agonist (Ki 1.1 nM). In sharp contrast to all-natural product opioid peptides that efficaciously recruit β-arrestin, bilorphin is G protein biased, weakly phosphorylating the MOPr and marginally recruiting β-arrestin, with no receptor internalization. Importantly, bilorphin exhibits a similar G protein bias to oliceridine, a small nonpeptide with improved overdose safety. Molecular dynamics simulations of bilorphin and the strongly arrestin-biased endomorphin-2 with the MOPr indicate distinct receptor interactions and receptor conformations that could underlie their large differences in bias. Whereas bilorphin is systemically inactive, a glycosylated analog, bilactorphin, is orally active with similar in vivo potency to morphine. Bilorphin is both a unique molecular tool that enhances understanding of MOPr biased signaling and a promising lead in the development of next generation analgesics.

OBJECTIVES The clinical utility of conventional IV opioids is limited by the occurrence of opioid-related adverse events. Oliceridine is a novel G protein-biased μ-opioid receptor agonist designed to provide analgesia with an improved safety and tolerability profile. This phase III, double-blind, randomized trial (APOLLO-2 [NCT02820324]) evaluated the efficacy and safety of oliceridine for acute pain following abdominoplasty. METHODS Patients received a loading dose of either placebo, oliceridine (1.5 mg), or morphine (4 mg), followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg oliceridine; 1 mg morphine; or placebo) with a 6-minute lockout interval. The primary endpoint was the proportion of treatment responders over 24 hours for oliceridine regimens compared to placebo. Secondary outcomes included a predefined composite measure of respiratory safety burden (RSB, representing the cumulative duration of respiratory safety events) and the proportion of treatment responders vs. morphine. RESULTS A total of 401 patients were treated with study medication. Effective analgesia was observed for all oliceridine regimens, with responder rates of 61.0%, 76.3%, and 70.0% for the 0.1-, 0.35-, and 0.5-mg regimens, respectively, compared with 45.7% for placebo (all P 0.05 vs. placebo: 0.60 [2.82]). The RSB measure for morphine was 1.72 (3.86) (P

Eugene R Viscusi,1 Franck Skobieranda,2 David G Soergel,2 Emily Cook,2 David A Burt,2 Neil Singla3 1Department of Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 2Trevena Inc., Chesterbrook, PA, USA; 3Lotus Clinical Research, LLC, Pasadena, CA, USA Purpose: Oliceridine is a novel G protein-biased µ-opioid receptor agonist designed to provide intravenous (IV) analgesia with a lower risk of opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs) than conventional opioids. Patients and methods: APOLLO-1 (NCT02815709) was a phase III, double-blind, randomized trial in patients with moderate-to-severe pain following bunionectomy. Patients received a loading dose of either placebo, oliceridine (1.5mg), or morphine (4mg), followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (0.1, 0.35, or 0.5mg oliceridine, 1mg morphine, or placebo). The primary endpoint compared the proportion of treatment responders through 48 hours for oliceridine regimens and placebo. Secondary outcomes included a composite measure of respiratory safety burden (RSB, representing the cumulative duration of respiratory safety events) and the proportion of treatment responders vs morphine. Results: Effective analgesia was observed for all oliceridine regimens, with responder rates of 50%, 62%, and 65.8% in the 0.1 mg, 0.35 mg, and 0.5 mg regimens, respectively(allP

Opioid drug binding to specialized G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) can lead to analgesia upon activation via downstream Gi protein signaling and to severe side effects via activation of the β-arrestin signaling pathway. Knowledge of how different opioid drugs interact with receptors is essential, as it can inform and guide the design of safer therapeutics. We performed quantum and classical mechanical computations to explore the potential energy landscape of four opioid drugs: morphine and its derivatives heroin and fentanyl and for the unrelated oliceridine. From potential energy profiles for bond twists and from interactions between opioids and water, we derived a set of force-field parameters that allow a good description of structural properties and intermolecular interactions of the opioids. Potential of mean force profiles computed from molecular dynamics simulations indicate that fentanyl and oliceridine have complex energy landscapes with relatively small energy penalties, suggesting that interactions with the receptor could select different binding poses of the drugs.

Problems with the treatment of acute pain may arise when a patient is opioid-tolerant, such as those on chronic therapy with opioids or opiate replacement therapy, those who misuse opioids, and those who are in recovery. While some of the adverse effects of opioid medications are well known, it is also important to recognize the roles of tolerance and hyperalgesia. Oliceridine can target and modulate a novel μ-receptor pathway. The G protein-biased agonism of oliceridine allows for effective re-sensitization and desensitization of the mu-opioid receptor, which decreases the formation of opioid tolerance in patients. Oliceridine has been demonstrated to be an effective and relatively safe intravenous analgesic for the treatment of postoperative pain and is generally well tolerated with a favorable side effect profile when compared to morphine. As the prevalence of pain increases, it is becoming increasingly important to find safe and effective analgesics.

IntroductionAdvanced age and obesity are reported to increase the risk of opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD). Oliceridine, an intravenous opioid, is a G-protein-biased agonist at the µ-opioid receptor that may provide improved safety. The recent phase 3 ATHENA open-label, multicenter study evaluated postoperative use of oliceridine in patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain. This exploratory analysis of the ATHENA data examined the incidence of OIRD in older (≥ 65years) and/or obese (BMI ≥ 30kg/m2) patients and analyzed risk factors of OIRD.MethodsPatients aged ≥ 18years with a score ≥ 4 on an 11-point numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) received IV oliceridine as needed via bolus dosing and/or patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). OIRD occurring within 48h of last dose of oliceridine was defined using two established definitions: (1) naloxone use, (2) respiratory rate

Intravenous opioids are a mainstay for the management of moderate to severe acute pain. Opioid administration provides effective pain control at the cost of significant side effects. Commonly used opioids like morphine are nonselective μ-receptor agonists, which stimulate both the G-protein pathway, associated with the analgesic effect, and the β-arrestin pathway, associated with the side effects. Oliceridine is a G-protein selective ligand at the μ-receptor with less activation of the β-arrestin pathway. The drug has recently been US FDA approved. This review will focus on the efficacy and safety of intravenous oliceridine in the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain.

Use of parenteral opioids is a major risk factor for postoperative nausea and vomiting. Conventional opioids bind to µ-opioid receptors (MOR), stimulate both the G-protein signaling (achieving analgesia); and the β-arrestin pathway (associated with opioid-related adverse effects). Oliceridine, a next-generation IV opioid, is a G-protein selective MOR agonist, with limited recruitment of β-arrestin. In two randomized, placebo- and morphine-controlled phase 3 studies of patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain following bunionectomy or abdominoplasty, oliceridine at demand doses of 0.1, 0.35, and 0.5 mg provided rapid and sustained analgesia vs. placebo with favorable gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability. In this exploratory analysis, we utilized a clinical endpoint assessing gastrointestinal tolerability, “complete GI response” defined as the proportion of patients with no vomiting and no use of rescue antiemetic to characterize the GI tolerability profile of oliceridine vs. morphine. A logistic regression model was utilized to compare oliceridine (pooled regimens) vs. morphine, after controlling for analgesia (using the sum of pain intensity difference [SPID]-48/24 [bunionectomy/abdominoplasty] with pre-rescue scores carried forward for 6 h). This analysis excluded patients receiving placebo and was performed for each study separately and for pooled data from both studies. In the unadjusted analysis, a significantly greater proportion of patients in the placebo (76.4%), oliceridine 0.1 mg (68.0%), and 0.35 mg (46.2%) demand dose achieved complete GI response vs. morphine 1 mg (30.8%), p ≤ 0.005. In the adjusted analysis, after controlling for analgesia, the odds ratio of experiencing a complete GI response with oliceridine (pooled regimens) vs. morphine was 3.14 (95% CI: 1.78, 5.56; p

Oliceridine is an opioid with a different mechanism of action compared to classical opioid agonists, e.g. morphine, as it does not act through active metabolites and activates the β-arrestin pathway to a small extent, thereby reducing dangerous side effects and broadening the therapeutic window. This is particularly important as, despite the wide availability of drugs from various therapeutic groups, the effectiveness of analgesics in many patients remains low. Oliceridine is a novel and effective analgesic providing rapid analgesia, with a favourable safety and tolerability profile concerning respiratory and gastrointestinal adverse effects compared to morphine, and may provide a new treatment option for patients with moderate to severe postoperative pain where an intravenous opioid is required.

Opioids such as morphine—acting at the mu opioid receptor—are the mainstay for treatment of moderate to severe pain and have good efficacy in these indications. However, these drugs produce a plethora of unwanted adverse effects including respiratory depression, constipation, immune suppression and with prolonged treatment, tolerance, dependence and abuse liability. Studies in β-arrestin 2 gene knockout (βarr2(−/−)) animals indicate that morphine analgesia is potentiated while side effects are reduced, suggesting that drugs biased away from arrestin may manifest with a reduced-side-effect profile. However, there is controversy in this area with improvement of morphine-induced constipation and reduced respiratory effects in βarr2(−/−) mice. Moreover, studies performed with mice genetically engineered with G-protein-biased mu receptors suggested increased sensitivity of these animals to both analgesic actions and side effects of opioid drugs. Several new molecules have been identified as mu receptor G-protein-biased agonists, including oliceridine (TRV130), PZM21 and SR–17018. These compounds have provided preclinical data with apparent support for bias toward G proteins and the genetic premise of effective and safer analgesics. There are clinical data for oliceridine that have been very recently approved for short term intravenous use in hospitals and other controlled settings. While these data are compelling and provide a potential new pathway-based target for drug discovery, a simpler explanation for the behavior of these biased agonists revolves around differences in intrinsic activity. A highly detailed study comparing oliceridine, PZM21 and SR–17018 (among others) in a range of assays showed that these molecules behave as partial agonists. Moreover, there was a correlation between their therapeutic indices and their efficacies, but not their bias factors. If there is amplification of G-protein, but not arrestin pathways, then agonists with reduced efficacy would show high levels of activity at G-protein and low or absent activity at arrestin; offering analgesia with reduced side effects or ‘apparent bias’. Overall, the current data suggests—and we support—caution in ascribing biased agonism to reduced-side-effect profiles for mu-agonist analgesics.

Opioid agonists elicit their analgesic action mainly via μ opioid receptors; however, their use is limited because of adverse events including constipation and respiratory depression. It has been shown that analgesic action is transduced by the G protein-mediated pathway whereas adverse events are by the β-arrestin-mediated pathway through μ opioid receptor signaling. The first new-generation opioid TRV130, which preferentially activates G protein- but not β-arrestin-mediated signal, was constructed and developed to reduce adverse events. TRV130 and other G protein-biased compounds tend to elicit desirable analgesic action with less adverse effects. In clinical trials, the intravenous TRV130 (oliceridine) was evaluated in Phase I, II and III clinical studies. Here we review the discovery and synthesis of TRV130, its main action as a novel analgesic having less adverse events, its up-to-date status in clinical trials, and additional concerns about TRV130 as demonstrated in the literature.

Chronic pain is a common condition that is being increasingly recognized, diagnosed, and treated in a variety of settings. Opioids can be used to treat chronic pain but at the cost of adverse effects and risk of dependence. Recently, there has been a movement to improve analgesic care in the setting of the opioid epidemic and the overprescribing of opioids, causing over-accessibility, dependence, and large numbers of overdose deaths. Opioid-specific receptors, including the μ, δ, κ, and opioid receptor like-1 (ORL-1) receptors, are each 7-transmembrane spanning proteins, which affect the G-protein and β-arrestin cascades. Each opioid class can act differently on the receptors, resulting in full, partial, or antagonizing effects. This comprehensive review looks at different agents in major classes, nonselective and mixed/partial agonists/antagonists, including the nonselective partial agonists, levorphanol and tramadol. Mixed partial agonists/antagonists include buprenorphine, pentazocine, nalbuphine, and butorphanol. Oliceridine is the only current selective partial agonist that agonizes specific pathways to promote analgesic effects and discourage adverse effects.

Biased agonism at G protein–coupled receptors describes the phenomenon whereby some drugs can activate some downstream signaling activities to the relative exclusion of others. Descriptions of biased agonism focusing on the differential engagement of G proteins versus β-arrestins are commonly limited by the small response windows obtained in pathways that are not amplified or are less effectively coupled to receptor engagement, such as β-arrestin recruitment. At the μ-opioid receptor (MOR), G protein–biased ligands have been proposed to induce less constipation and respiratory depressant side effects than opioids commonly used to treat pain. However, it is unclear whether these improved safety profiles are due to a reduction in β-arrestin–mediated signaling or, alternatively, to their low intrinsic efficacy in all signaling pathways. Here, we systematically evaluated the most recent and promising MOR-biased ligands and assessed their pharmacological profile against existing opioid analgesics in assays not confounded by limited signal windows. We found that oliceridine, PZM21, and SR-17018 had low intrinsic efficacy. We also demonstrated a strong correlation between measures of efficacy for receptor activation, G protein coupling, and β-arrestin recruitment for all tested ligands. By measuring the antinociceptive and respiratory depressant effects of these ligands, we showed that the low intrinsic efficacy of opioid ligands can explain an improved side effect profile. Our results suggest a possible alternative mechanism underlying the improved therapeutic windows described for new opioid ligands, which should be taken into account for future descriptions of ligand action at this important therapeutic target.

Stimulation of the mu-opioid receptor (MOR) on nociceptors with fentanyl can produce hyperalgesia (opioid-induced hyperalgesia, OIH) and hyperalgesic priming, a model of transition to chronic pain. We investigated if local and systemic administration of biased MOR agonists (PZM21 and TRV130 [oliceridine]), which preferentially activate G-protein over β-arrestin translocation, and have been reported to minimize some opioid side effects, also produces OIH and priming. Injected intradermally (100 ng), both biased agonists induced mechanical hyperalgesia and, when injected at the same site, 5 days later, prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) produced prolonged hyperalgesia (priming). OIH and priming were both prevented by intrathecal treatment with an oligodeoxynucleotide (ODN) antisense (AS) for MOR mRNA. Agents that reverse Type I (the protein translation inhibitor cordycepin) and Type II (combination of Src and mitogen-activated protein kinase [MAPK] inhibitors) priming, or their combination, did not reverse priming induced by local administration of PZM21 or TRV130. While systemic PZM21 at higher doses (1 and 10 mg/kg) induced analgesia, lower doses (0.001, 0.01, 0.1, and 0.3 mg/kg) induced hyperalgesia; all doses induced priming. Hyperalgesia, analgesia and priming induced by systemic administration of PZM21 were also prevented by MOR AS-ODN. And, priming induced by systemic PZM21 was also not reversed by intradermal cordycepin or the combination of Src and MAPK inhibitors. Thus, maintenance of priming induced by biased MOR agonists, in the peripheral terminal of nociceptors, has a novel mechanism.

In the past few years, several biased ligands acting at the mu-opioid receptor were reported in the literature. These agonists are aimed at reducing pain while having fewer side effects than morphine, the gold standard of opioid analgesics. In this mini-review, we describe and discuss the recent advances in mu-biased ligands actually in preclinical and clinical development stages, including the latest U.S. Food and Drug Administration review of oliceridine, a biased mu-agonist for moderate to severe acute pain treatment developed by the company Trevena.

Neil Singla,1 Harold S Minkowitz,2 David G Soergel,3 David A Burt,3 Ruth Ann Subach,3 Monica Y Salamea,3 Michael J Fossler,3 Franck Skobieranda3 1Lotus Clinical Research, Pasadena, CA, 2Memorial Hermann Memorial City Medical Center, Houston, TX, 3Trevena, Inc, King of Prussia, PA, USA Background: Oliceridine (TRV130), a novel µ-receptor G-protein pathway selective (µ-GPS) modulator, was designed to improve the therapeutic window of conventional opioids by activating G-protein signaling while causing low β-arrestin recruitment to the µ receptor. This randomized, double-blind, patient-controlled analgesia Phase IIb study was conducted to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oliceridine compared with morphine and placebo in patients with moderate to severe pain following abdominoplasty (NCT02335294; oliceridine is an investigational agent not yet approved by the US Food and Drug Administration). Methods: Patients were randomized to receive postoperative regimens of intravenous oliceridine (loading/patient-controlled demand doses [mg/mg]: 1.5/0.10 [regimen A]; 1.5/0.35 [regimen B]), morphine (4.0/1.0), or placebo with treatment initiated within 4 hours of surgery and continued as needed for 24 hours. Results: Two hundred patients were treated (n=39, n=39, n=83, and n=39 in the oliceridine regimen A, oliceridine regimen B, morphine, and placebo groups, respectively). Patients were predominantly female (n=198 [99%]) and had a mean age of 38.2 years, weight of 71.2 kg, and baseline pain score of 7.7 (on 11-point numeric pain rating scale). Patients receiving the oliceridine regimens had reductions in average pain scores (model-based change in time-weighted average versus placebo over 24 hours) of 2.3 and 2.1 points, respectively (P=0.0001 and P=0.0005 versus placebo); patients receiving morphine had a similar reduction (2.1 points; P

Prescription opioids are a mainstay in the treatment of acute moderate to severe pain. However, chronic use leads to a host of adverse consequences including tolerance and opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH), leading to more complex treatment regimens and diminished patient compliance. Patients with OIH paradoxically experience exaggerated nociceptive responses instead of pain reduction after chronic opioid usage. The development of OIH and tolerance tend to occur simultaneously and, thus, present a challenge when studying the molecular mechanisms driving each phenomenon. We tested the hypothesis that a G protein-biased µ-opioid peptide receptor (MOPR) agonist would not induce symptoms of OIH, such as mechanical allodynia, following chronic administration. We observed that the development of opioid-induced mechanical allodynia (OIMA), a model of OIH, was absent in β-arrestin1-/- and β-arrestin2-/- mice in response to chronic administration of conventional opioids such as morphine, oxycodone and fentanyl, whereas tolerance developed independent of OIMA. In agreement with the β-arrestin knockout mouse studies, chronic administration of TRV0109101, a G protein-biased MOPR ligand and structural analog of oliceridine, did not promote the development of OIMA but did result in drug tolerance. Interestingly, following induction of OIMA by morphine or fentanyl, TRV0109101 was able to rapidly reverse allodynia. These observations establish a role for β-arrestins in the development of OIH, independent of tolerance, and suggest that the use of G protein-biased MOPR ligands, such as oliceridine and TRV0109101, may be an effective therapeutic avenue for managing chronic pain with reduced propensity for opioid-induced hyperalgesia.

Binding and signaling kinetics have previously proven important in validation of biased agonism at GPCRs. Here we provide a comprehensive kinetic pharmacological comparison of clinically relevant μ-opioid receptor agonists, including the novel biased agonist oliceridine (TRV130) which is in clinical trial for pain management. We demonstrate that the bias profile observed for the selected agonists is not time-dependent and that agonists with dramatic differences in their binding kinetic properties can display the same degree of bias. Binding kinetics analyses demonstrate that buprenorphine has 18-fold higher receptor residence time than oliceridine. This is thus the largest pharmacodynamic difference between the clinically approved drug buprenorphine and the clinical candidate oliceridine, since their bias profiles are similar. Further, we provide the first pharmacological characterization of (S)-TRV130 demonstrating that it has a similar pharmacological profile as the (R)-form, oliceridine, but displays 90-fold lower potency than the (R)-form. This difference is driven by a significantly slower association rate. Finally, we show that the selected agonists are differentially affected by G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 and 5 (GRK2 and GRK5) expression. GRK2 and GRK5 overexpression greatly increased μ-opioid receptor internalization induced by morphine, but only had modest effects on buprenorphine and oliceridine-induced internalization. Overall, our data reveal that the clinically available drug buprenorphine displays a similar pharmacological bias profile in vitro compared to the clinical candidate drug oliceridine and that this bias is independent of binding kinetics suggesting a mechanism driven by receptor-conformations. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'New Vistas in Opioid Pharmacology'.

We identified (5R)-6-methyl-5-phenyl-1,3,4,5,6,7-hexahydro-2,5-methano-2,6-benzodiazonine (DS21980956: 4-(R)) as a novel [5.2.1]bicyclic basic compound. The scaffold was inspired by fentanyl or pethidine, which possess potent analgesic activities. DS21980956 had potent analgesic activity in the mouse acetic acid writhing test or tail flick test without agonistic activity at the µ opioid receptor (MOR). The mechanism of analgesic action of DS21980956 was considered to differ from a biased ligand, for example, TRV-130 (3, oliceridine).

Between 2000 and 2005 several studies revealed that morphine is more potent and exhibits fewer side effects in beta-arrestin 2 knockout mice. These findings spurred efforts to develop opioids that signal primarily via G protein activation and do not, or only very weakly, recruit beta-arrestin. Development of such molecules targeting the mu opioid receptor initially outpaced those targeting the kappa, delta and nociceptin opioid receptors, with the G protein-biased mu opioid agonist oliceridine/TRV130 having completed phase III clinical trials with improved therapeutic window to treat moderate-to-severe acute pain. Recently however, there has been a sharp increase in the development of novel G protein-biased kappa agonists. It is hypothesized that G protein-biased kappa agonists can reduce pain and itch, but exhibit fewer side effects, such as anhedonia and psychosis, that have thus far limited the clinical development of unbiased kappa opioid agonists. Here we summarize recently discovered G protein-biased kappa agonists, comparing structures, degree of signal bias and preclinical effects. We specifically reviewed nalfurafine, 22-thiocyanatosalvinorin A (RB-64), mesyl-salvinorin B, 2-(4-(furan-2-ylmethyl)-5-((4-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)benzyl)thio)-4H-1,2,4-triazol-3-yl)pyridine (triazole 1.1), 3-(2-((cyclopropylmethyl)(phenethyl)amino)ethyl)phenol (HS666), N-n-butyl-N-phenylethyl-N-3-hydroxyphenylethyl-amine (compound 5/BPHA), 6-guanidinonaltrindole (6'GNTI), and collybolide. These agonists encompass a variety of chemical scaffolds and range in both their potency and efficacy in terms of G protein signaling and beta-arrestin recruitment. Thus unsurprisingly, the behavioral responses reported for these agonists are not uniform. Yet, it is our conclusion that the kappa opioid field will benefit tremendously from future studies that compare several biased agonists and correlate the degree of signaling bias to a particular pharmacological response.

Summary Analgesic design and evaluation have been driven by the desire to create high-affinity high-selectivity mu (μ)-opioid peptide (MOP) receptor agonists. Such ligands are the mainstay of current clinical practice, and include morphine and fentanyl. Advances in this sphere have come from designing pharmacokinetic advantage, as in rapid metabolism for remifentanil. These produce analgesia, but also the adverse-effect profile that currently defines this drug class: ventilatory depression, tolerance, and abuse liability. The MOP receptor is part of a family, and there are significant functional interactions between other members of the family (delta [δ]-opioid peptide [DOP], kappa [κ]-opioid peptide [KOP], and nociceptin/orphanin FQ receptor [NOP]). Experimentally, MOP agonism and DOP antagonism produce anti-nociception (animals) with no tolerance, and low doses of MOP and NOP ligands synergise to antinociceptive advantage. In this latter context, the lack of effect of NOP agonists on ventilation is an additional advantage. Recent development has been to move towards low-selectivity multifunctional ‘mixed ligands', such as cebranopadol, or ligand mixtures, such as Targinact®. Moreover, the observation that β-arrestin coupling underlies the side-effect profile for MOP ligands (from knockout animal studies) led to the discovery of biased (to G-protein and away from β-arrestin intracellular signalling) MOP ligands, such as oliceridine. There is sufficient excitement in the opioid field to suggest that opioid analgesics without significant side-effects may be on the horizon, and the ‘opioid Holy Grail' might be in reach.

A major advancement in the field of analgesic pharmacology has been the development of G-protein-biased opioid agonists that display less respiratory depression than conventional drugs. It is uncertain, however, whether these new drugs cause less tolerance, hyperalgesia, and other maladaptations when administered repeatedly.The archetypical µ-opioid receptor agonist morphine and, separately, the G-protein-biased µ-opioid receptor agonist oliceridine were administered to mice. These drugs were used in models of acute analgesia, analgesic tolerance, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, reward, and physical dependence. In addition, morphine and oliceridine were administered for 7 days after tibia fracture and pinning; mechanical allodynia and gait were followed for 3 weeks. Finally, the expression of toll-like receptor-4 and nacht domain-, leucine-rich repeat-, and pyrin domain-containing protein 3 (NALP3) and interleukin-1β mRNA were quantified in spinal tissue to measure surgical and drug effects on glia-related gene expression.We observed using the tail flick assay that oliceridine was a 4-fold more potent analgesic than morphine, but that oliceridine treatment caused less tolerance and opioid-induced hyperalgesia than morphine after 4 days of ascending-dose administration. Using similar analgesic doses, morphine caused reward behavior in the conditioned place preference assay while oliceridine did not. Physical dependence was, however, similar for the 2 drugs. Likewise, morphine appeared to more significantly impair the recovery of nociceptive sensitization and gait after tibial fracture and pinning than oliceridine. Furthermore, spinal cord toll-like receptor-4 levels 3 weeks after fracture were higher in fracture mice given morphine than those given oliceridine.Aside from reduced respiratory depression, G-protein-biased agonists such as oliceridine may reduce opioid maladaptations and enhance the quality of surgical recovery.

Oliceridine is a next-generation investigational intravenous opioid that is a G protein-selective agonist at the μ-opioid receptor. The G protein selectivity of this compound results in potent analgesia with substantially reduced recruitment of β-arrestin, a signaling pathway associated with opioid-related adverse events. In randomized, placebo- and active-controlled clinical studies, use of oliceridine for the management of moderate to severe acute pain provided potent analgesic effect superior to that observed with placebo, with lower incidence of adverse events, including respiratory events and gastrointestinal events of nausea and vomiting, compared with morphine. Here, we provide a review of the preclinical and clinical data of intravenous oliceridine, a selective agonist, which has the potential to offer a wider therapeutic window than conventional opioids.

TRV130 is a G protein-biased ligand at the µ-opioid receptor. In preclinical studies it was potently analgesic while causing less respiratory depression and gastrointestinal dysfunction than morphine, suggesting unique benefits in acute pain management. A first-in-human study was conducted with ascending doses of TRV130 to explore its tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics in healthy volunteers. TRV130 was well-tolerated over the dose range 0.15 to 7 mg administered intravenously over 1 hour. TRV130 geometric mean exposure and Cmax were dose-linear, with AUC0–inf of 2.52 to 205.97 ng h/mL and Cmax of 1.04 to 102.36 ng/mL across the dose range tested, with half-life of 1.6–2.7 hours. A 1.5 mg dose of TRV130 was also well-tolerated when administered as 30, 15, 5, and 1 minute infusions. TRV130 pharmacokinetics were modestly affected by CYP2D6 phenotype: clearance was reduced by 53% in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers.TRV130 caused dose- and exposure-related pupil constriction, confirming central compartment µ-opioid receptor engagement. Marked pupil constriction was noted at 2.2, 4, and 7 mg doses. Nausea and vomiting observed at the 7 mg dose limited further dose escalation. These findings suggest that TRV130 may have a broad margin between doses causing µ-opioid receptor-mediated pharmacology and doses causing µ-opioid receptor-mediated intolerance.

Nearly all of the roughly 64,000 Americans who died from opioid overdoses in 2016 succumbed because their breathing shut down, triggered by the effects of the drugs on important receptors in the brain stem. When they are activated, μ-opioid receptors potently relieve pain. They also control respiration. Now, for the first time, a drug that in binding these receptors causes powerful pain relief with less respiratory suppression is being evaluated for marketing approval by the Food and Drug Administration. Biotech company Trevana’s drug, oliceridine, acts as a μ-opioid receptor to activate a pain-relieving signaling pathway with less triggering of a separate path that leads to depressed breathing. Oliceridine is the first so-called “biased opioid” to emerge from human clinical trials. There will certainly be more: In a paper published in Cell this week, scientists at the Scripps Research Institute in Jupiter, Florida, have rigorously demonstrated for the first time in mice that the more biased a compound is toward activating the pain-relieving pathway, the less it suppresses breathing.

Efficacy of conventional opioids can be limited by adverse events (AEs). TRV130 is a structurally novel biased ligand of the μ-opioid receptor that activates G protein signaling with little β-arrestin recruitment. In this phase 2, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled study, we investigated the efficacy and tolerability of TRV130 in acute pain after bunionectomy. We used an adaptive study design in which 144 patients experiencing moderate-to-severe acute pain after bunionectomy were randomized to receive double-blind TRV130, placebo, or morphine in a pilot phase. After pilot phase analysis, 195 patients were randomized to receive double-dummy TRV130 0.5, 1, 2, or 3 mg every 3 hours (q3h); placebo; or morphine 4 mg q4h intravenously. The primary end point was the time-weighted average change in numeric rating scale pain intensity over the 48-hour treatment period. Secondary end points included stopwatch and categorical assessments of pain relief. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. TRV130 2 and 3 mg q3h, and morphine 4 mg q4h produced statistically greater mean reductions in pain intensity than placebo over 48 hours (P < 0.005). TRV130 at 2 and 3 mg produced significantly greater categorical pain relief than morphine (P < 0.005) after the first dose, with meaningful pain relief occurring in under 5 minutes. TRV130 produced no serious AEs, with tolerability similar to morphine. These results demonstrate that TRV130 rapidly produces profound analgesia in moderate-to-severe acute pain, suggesting that G-protein-biased μ-opioid receptor activation is a promising target for development of novel analgesics.

Morphine is an alkaloid from the opium poppy used to treat pain. The potentially lethal side effects of morphine and related opioids-which include fatal respiratory depression-are thought to be mediated by μ-opioid-receptor (μOR) signalling through the β-arrestin pathway or by actions at other receptors. Conversely, G-protein μOR signalling is thought to confer analgesia. Here we computationally dock over 3 million molecules against the μOR structure and identify new scaffolds unrelated to known opioids. Structure-based optimization yields PZM21-a potent Gi activator with exceptional selectivity for μOR and minimal β-arrestin-2 recruitment. Unlike morphine, PZM21 is more efficacious for the affective component of analgesia versus the reflexive component and is devoid of both respiratory depression and morphine-like reinforcing activity in mice at equi-analgesic doses. PZM21 thus serves as both a probe to disentangle μOR signalling and a therapeutic lead that is devoid of many of the side effects of current opioids.

Morphine is a potent analgesic, yet, like most opioid narcotics, it exerts unwanted side effects such as constipation and respiratory suppression, thereby limiting its clinical utility. Pharmacological approaches taken to preserve the analgesic properties, while eliminating the unwanted side effects, have met with very limited success. Here, we provide evidence that altering mu opioid receptor regulation may provide a novel approach to discriminate morphine's beneficial and deleterious effects in vivo. We have previously reported that mice lacking the G protein-coupled receptor regulatory protein, beta-arrestin 2, display profoundly altered morphine responses. beta-Arrestin 2 knockout mice have enhanced and prolonged morphine analgesia with very little morphine tolerance. In this report, we examine whether the side effects of morphine treatment are also augmented in this animal model. Surprisingly, the genetic disruption of opioid receptor regulation, while enhancing and prolonging analgesia, dramatically attenuates the respiratory suppression and acute constipation caused by morphine.

Morphine is a powerful pain reliever, but also a potent inducer of tolerance and dependence. The development of opiate tolerance occurs on continued use of the drug such that the amount of drug required to elicit pain relief must be increased to compensate for diminished responsiveness. In many systems, decreased responsiveness to agonists has been correlated with the desensitization of G-protein-coupled receptors. In vitro evidence indicates that this process involves phosphorylation of G-protein-coupled receptors and subsequent binding of regulatory proteins called beta-arrestins. Using a knockout mouse lacking beta-arrestin-2 (beta arr2-/-), we have assessed the contribution of desensitization of the mu-opioid receptor to the development of morphine antinociceptive tolerance and the subsequent onset of physical dependence. Here we show that in mice lacking beta-arrestin-2, desensitization of the mu-opioid receptor does not occur after chronic morphine treatment, and that these animals fail to develop antinociceptive tolerance. However, the deletion of beta-arrestin-2 does not prevent the chronic morphine-induced up-regulation of adenylyl cyclase activity, a cellular marker of dependence, and the mutant mice still become physically dependent on the drug.

The ability of morphine to alleviate pain is mediated through a heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide binding protein (G protein)-coupled heptahelical receptor (GPCR), the mu opioid receptor (muOR). The efficiency of GPCR signaling is tightly regulated and ultimately limited by the coordinated phosphorylation of the receptors by specific GPCR kinases and the subsequent interaction of the phosphorylated receptors with beta-arrestin 1 and beta-arrestin 2. Functional deletion of the beta-arrestin 2 gene in mice resulted in remarkable potentiation and prolongation of the analgesic effect of morphine, suggesting that muOR desensitization was impaired. These results provide evidence in vivo for the physiological importance of beta-arrestin 2 in regulating the function of a specific GPCR, the muOR. Moreover, they suggest that inhibition of beta-arrestin 2 function might lead to enhanced analgesic effectiveness of morphine and provide potential new avenues for the study and treatment of pain, narcotic tolerance, and dependence.

The concept of "ligand bias" at G protein coupled receptors has been introduced to describe ligands which preferentially stimulate one intracellular signaling pathway over another. There is growing interest in developing biased G protein coupled receptor ligands to yield safer, better tolerated, and more efficacious drugs. The classical μ opioid morphine elicited increased efficacy and duration of analgesic response with reduced side effects in β-arrestin-2 knockout mice compared to wild-type mice, suggesting that G protein biased μ opioid receptor agonists would be more efficacious with reduced adverse events. Here we describe our efforts to identify a potent, selective, and G protein biased μ opioid receptor agonist, TRV130 ((R)-30). This novel molecule demonstrated an improved therapeutic index (analgesia vs adverse effects) in rodent models and characteristics appropriate for clinical development. It is currently being evaluated in human clinical trials for the treatment of acute severe pain.

The concept of ligand bias at G protein-coupled receptors broadens the possibilities for agonist activities and provides the opportunity to develop safer, more selective therapeutics. Morphine pharmacology in β-arrestin-2 knockout mice suggested that a ligand that promotes coupling of the μ-opioid receptor (MOR) to G proteins, but not β-arrestins, would result in higher analgesic efficacy, less gastrointestinal dysfunction, and less respiratory suppression than morphine. Here we report the discovery of TRV130 ([(3-methoxythiophen-2-yl)methyl]({2-[(9R)-9-(pyridin-2-yl)-6-oxaspiro[4.5]decan-9-yl]ethyl})amine), a novel MOR G protein-biased ligand. In cell-based assays, TRV130 elicits robust G protein signaling, with potency and efficacy similar to morphine, but with far less β-arrestin recruitment and receptor internalization. In mice and rats, TRV130 is potently analgesic while causing less gastrointestinal dysfunction and respiratory suppression than morphine at equianalgesic doses. TRV130 successfully translates evidence that analgesic and adverse MOR signaling pathways are distinct into a biased ligand with differentiated pharmacology. These preclinical data suggest that TRV130 may be a safer and more tolerable therapeutic for treating severe pain.

There is no ideal opioid available in present clinical practice. Characteristics of an ideal opioid should be rapid onset of action, short acting, minimal respiratory depression, least peripheral side effects like constipation, urinary retention and devoid of dependence or tolerance with chronic use.