Flupirtine enhances the anti-hyperalgesic effects of morphine in a rat model of prostate bone metastasis

Objective Current treatments for cancer pain are often inadequate, particularly when metastasis to bone is involved. The addition to the treatment regimen of another drug that has a complementary analgesic effect may increase the overall analgesia without the necessity to increase doses, thus avoiding dose-related side effects. This project investigated the synergistic effect of the addition of the potassium channel (KCNQ2–3) modulator flupirtine to morphine treatment in a rat model of prostate cancer-induced bone pain. Design Syngeneic prostate cancer cells were injected into the right tibia of male Wistar rats under anesthesia. This led to expanding tumor within the bone in 2 weeks, together with the concurrent development of hyperalgesia to noxious heat. Paw withdrawal thresholds from noxious heat were measured before and after the maximum non-sedating doses of morphine and flupirtine given alone and in combinations. Dose-response curves for morphine (0.13–5.0 mg/kg ip) and flupirtine (1.25–10.0 mg/kg ip) given alone and in fixed-dose combinations were plotted and subjected to an isobolographic analysis. Results Both morphine (ED50 = 0.74 mg/kg) and flupirtine (ED50 = 3.32 mg/kg) caused dose-related anti-hyperalgesia at doses that did not cause sedation. Isobolographic analysis revealed that there was a synergistic interaction between flupirtine and morphine. Addition of flupirtine to morphine treatment improved morphine anti-hyperalgesia, and resulted in the reversal of cancer-induced heat hyperalgesia. Conclusions These results suggest that flupirtine in combination with morphine may be useful clinically to provide better analgesia at lower morphine doses in the management of pain caused by tumors growing in bone.

The regional distribution of anxiety disorders : implications for the Global Burden of Disease Study, 2010

Anxiety disorders are increasingly acknowledged as a global health issue however an accurate picture of prevalence across populations is lacking. Empirical data are incomplete and inconsistent so alternate means of estimating prevalence are required to inform estimates for the new Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. We used a Bayesian meta-regression approach which included empirical epidemiological data, expert prior information, study covariates and population characteristics. Reported are global and regional point prevalence for anxiety disorders in 2010. Point prevalence of anxiety disorders differed by up to three-fold across world regions, ranging between 2.1% (1.8-2.5%) in East Asia and 6.1% (5.1-7.4%) in North Africa/Middle East. Anxiety was more common in Latin America; high income regions; and regions with a history of recent conflict. There was considerable uncertainty around estimates, particularly for regions where no data were available. Future research is required to examine whether variations in regional distributions of anxiety disorders are substantive differences or an artefact of cultural or methodological differences. This is a particular imperative where anxiety is consistently reported to be less common, and where it appears to be elevated, but uncertainty prevents the reporting of conclusive estimates.