首页> 外文期刊>Therapeutic Drug Monitoring >The influence of the route of administration: a comparative study at steady state of oral sustained release morphine and morphine sulfate suppositories.
【24h】

The influence of the route of administration: a comparative study at steady state of oral sustained release morphine and morphine sulfate suppositories.

机译:给药途径的影响:口服吗啡和硫酸吗啡栓剂口服稳定释放状态的比较研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Steady state pharmacokinetics of morphine (M), morphine-3-glucuronide (M3G) and morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G) were investigated in 6 patients with intractable cancer pain administered orally with MST (Mundipharma, Limburg, Germany) and, subsequently, rectally with MSR to make a judgment whether orally administered morphine can be replaced by rectally administered morphine. The parent drug and glucuronide metabolites were measured simultaneously using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and native fluorescence detection. The mean morphine area under the curve (AUC) value (0-8 h) was smaller (434.3 +/- 170.2 nmolL(-1)h) in the oral administration than in the rectal administration (574.8 +/- 285.0 nmolL(-1)h) (p < 0.05). The rectal administration resulted in less production of M3G and M6G. There were no significant differences in the mean steady state concentrations (C(ss)) of morphine, M3G, and M6G between the oral and rectal administrations (p > 0.05). The median AUC ratio--M3G/M and M6G/M, 12.58 and 1.85--following MSR rectal administration was smaller than following MST oral administration in 6 patients (19.97 and 2.59; p < 0.05), whereas the median AUC ratio M3G/M6G in the rectal dosing was 6.24 (range 5.2-7.6) was almost the same as the median ratio M3G/M6G in the oral dosing was 6.49 (range 5.8-8.5; p > 0.1). Four of the 6 patients had a greater Cmax of M3G and M6G after oral administration than after rectal administration. The same 4 had lower fluctuation rates for morphine, M3G (p < 0.05), and M6G (p < 0.05) after rectal administration. Therefore, during chronic morphine treatment, it still seems difficult to decide whether oral administration can be replaced by rectal administration.
机译:在6例口服MST的顽固性癌痛患者中研究了吗啡(M),吗啡3-葡萄糖醛酸(M3G)和吗啡-6-葡萄糖醛酸(M6G)的稳态药动学(Mundipharma,Limburg,Germany)通过MSR进行直肠检查,以判断口服吗啡是否可以被口服吗啡代替。使用高效液相色谱(HPLC)和天然荧光检测法同时测量母体药物和葡糖醛酸苷代谢物。口服(曲线)(AUC)值(0-8 h)下的平均吗啡面积比直肠给药(574.8 +/- 285.0 nmolL(-)小(434.3 +/- 170.2 nmolL(-1)h) 1)h)(p <0.05)。直肠给药导致M3G和M6G的产生减少。口服和直肠给药之间吗啡,M3G和M6G的平均稳态浓度(C(ss))没有显着差异(p> 0.05)。 MSR直肠给药后中位AUC比值M3G / M和M6G / M,12.58和1.85小于MST口服后(19.97和2.59; p <0.05),而中位AUC比值M3G /直肠给药中的M6G为6.24(范围为5.2-7.6),与口服给药中的M3G / M6G的中位数比为6.49(范围为5.8-8.5; p> 0.1)。 6名患者中有4名在口服后比直肠给药后具有更高的M3G和M6G Cmax。直肠给药后,相同的4个患者的吗啡,M3G(p <0.05)和M6G(p <0.05)的波动率较低。因此,在慢性吗啡治疗期间,仍然难以决定是否可以通过直肠给药来代替口服给药。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号