Search

Purpose The N- and C-terminal regions of dynorphin (Dyn) A (1-17) activate opioid and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors, respectively. Earlier studies demonstrated that Dyn-converting enzyme cleaved Dyn A (1-17) mainly at the [Arg.sup.6]-[Arg.sup.7] bond, resulting in the production of N- and C-terminal region peptide fragments, and that this enzyme was not inhibited by a mixture of the three peptidase inhibitors (PIs) amastatin (A), captopril (C), and phosphoramidon (P). The purpose of the present study was to evaluate antinociceptive potential and toxicity with intracerebroventricular administration of Dyn A (1-17) or (1-13) under pretreatment with a mixture of A, C, and P and/or Dyn-converting enzyme inhibitor (p-hydroxymercuribenzoate). Methods Peptide fragments from Dyn A (1-17) following incubation with membrane preparation under pretreatment with a mixture of the three PIs was identified by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometer (MALDI-TOF-MS). Infusion of drugs and peptides into the third ventricle in rats was performed via indwelling cannulae. Induction of antinociception and toxicity by Dyn A (1-17), Dyn A (1-13), Dyn A (1-6), or Dyn A (7-17) were determined by the tail-flick test and induction of barrel rotation, respectively. The effects of the PIs on antinociception and toxicity were evaluated by a dose-response study and a comparison of differences among various combinations of Dyn A (1-17) or Dyn A (1-13) and the three PIs and p-hydroxymercuribenzoate. Results MALDI-TOF-MS analysis identified Dyn A (1-6) and Dyn A (1-10) fragments as products following incubation of Dyn A (1-17) with membrane preparation of rat midbrain under pretreatment with a mixture of the three PIs. Pretreatment with a mixture of the three PIs produced an approximately 30-fold augmentation in antinociception induced by low-dose intracerebroventricular administration of Dyn A (1-17) or (1-13) in a [mu]-, [delta]- and [kappa]-opioid receptor antagonist-reversible manner, but without signs of toxicity such as barrel rotation in the rat. Dyn A (1-17)-induced antinociception and toxicity was greater than that of Dyn A (1-6), Dyn A (1-13), or Dyn A (7-17) at the same dose. Dyn A (1-17)-induced antinociception and toxicity under pretreatment with various combinations of the three PIs and p-hydroxymercuribenzoate was greater than that with a mixture of the three PIs alone. Conclusion These findings suggest that administration of a mixture of the three PIs increases Dyn A (1-17)- or (1-13)-induced antinociception under physiological conditions without toxicity. Keywords Dynorphin A * Peptidase * Dynorphin-converting enzyme * Antinociception * Toxicity, Introduction Dynorphin (Dyn) A (1-17) activates both opioid and nonopioid receptors, with its N- and C-terminal regions activating opioid and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, respectively. At physiological concentrations, Dyn A (1-17) [...]

Purpose Previous in vitro studies have shown that degradation of opioid peptides during incubation with cerebral membrane preparations is almost completely prevented by a mixture of three peptidase inhibitors (PIs), namely, amastatin, captopril, and phosphoramidon. In the present in vivo study, we evaluate the effects of intrathecal administration of these PIs on antinociception by [[Met.sup.5]]-enkephalin (ME) or PIs themselves. Methods Drugs were administered into the thoracolumbar level of the spinal cord in the intrathecal space in rat. Induction of antinociception was measured by the tail immersion assay, with 55 °C as the nociceptive stimulus. Effects of PIs on antinociception were evaluated by doseresponse study (ME, 1-20 nmol; PIs, 1-20 nmol each), by comparison of differences among two combinations of PIs (amastatin and captopril; captopril and phosphoramidon; amastatin and phosphoramidon) and three PIs (amastatin, captopril, and phosphoramidon), and by using opioid receptor selective antagonists. Results Intrathecal administration of ME with these three PIs or PIs alone significantly and dose dependently increased antinociception in a μ- and δ-opioid receptor antagonist-reversible manner; moreover, the degree of antinociception with a combination of any two of these was less than that with all three, indicating that any residual single peptidase could inactivate significant amounts of ME. Conclusion The present data, together with those of earlier studies, clearly demonstrate that amastatin-, captopril-, and phosphoramidon-sensitive enzymes play an important role in inactivation of opioid peptides at the spinal level. Keywords Antinociception * Peptidase-inhibitors * Methionine-enkephalin * Tail-flick response, Introduction Endogenous opioid peptide levels depend on the activity of opioid peptide-degrading enzymes, which terminate their action at the synaptic cleft. Enkephalins are hydrolyzed by five types of peptidase [1, [...]

Objectives: Ease of denture cleaning is of paramount importance in geriatric patients and those with limited dexterity. We have previously investigated methods of coating dentures with titanium dioxide (TiO2 ) and reported the effects (self-cleaning and antibacterial) of such treatments in in vitro studies. This study was to verify the biocompatibility of a TiO2 -coated acrylic resin produced by the new coating method with spray-coating technique.Methods: Specimens were prepared from denture base acrylic resin and polished up to grit #1000. The TiO2 -coating agent was sprayed onto the specimens using an airbrush gun. Specimens were then divided into 'polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)', 'primer-coated PMMA' and 'TiO2 -coated PMMA' groups to be evaluated for biological safety using a hamster oral mucosa irritation test, a guinea pig skin sensitisation test and a rabbit intracutaneous test. The biological reaction was scored.Results: Reaction scores were considerably <1.0, the acceptable limit set by the ISO, in all three tests. Indeed, in most samples, there was no deleterious effect at all.Conclusion: These results tested on animals demonstrate that denture base resin coated with TiO2 by this method does not cause irritation or sensitisation of the oral mucosa, skin or intracutaneous tissue and is therefore good biocompatibility for use in close proximity to oral mucosa and skin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]