Santos-Toscano Raquel, Guirguis Amira, Davidson Colin
School of Pharmacy & Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Clinical & Biomedical Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, UK.
Swansea University Medical School, Institute of Life Sciences 2, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2020 Mar;86(3):452-481. doi: 10.1111/bcp.14224. Epub 2020 Feb 23.
Novel psychoactive substances (NPS) are new drugs of abuse. Over the last 10 years 50-100 new NPS have been detected for the first time each year. This has led to numerous deaths and challenges to healthcare providers and law-makers worldwide. We review preclinical studies of NPS and discuss how these studies have influenced legislative decisions. We focus on the UK legal system but include experiences from Europe. We reviewed manuscripts from 2008-2019 and have summarised the in vitro and in vivo data on NPS, highlighting how these studies define pharmacological mechanisms and how they might predict harm in humans. We found that only a small percentage of NPS have been examined in preclinical studies. Most preclinical studies of NPS focus on basic pharmacological mechanisms (46% of studies reviewed) and/or addictive liability (32%) rather than toxicity and harm (24%). Very few preclinical studies into NPS include data from chronic dosing schedules (9%) or female rodents (4%). We conclude that preclinical studies can predict harm to humans, but most of the predictions are based on basic pharmacology rather than demonstrated toxicity. Some of these studies have been used to make changes to the law in the UK and Europe and perhaps, because of the paucity of toxicology data, most NPS have been placed in the highly dangerous schedule 1 or Class A category in the UK. We suggest that in silico studies and high throughput toxicology screens might be the most economical way forward to rapidly screen the health harms of NPS.
新型精神活性物质(NPS)是新出现的滥用药物。在过去10年中,每年首次检测到50 - 100种新型精神活性物质。这已导致众多死亡事件,并给全球医疗保健提供者和立法者带来了挑战。我们回顾了新型精神活性物质的临床前研究,并讨论了这些研究如何影响立法决策。我们重点关注英国法律体系,但也包括欧洲的经验。我们查阅了2008 - 2019年的手稿,总结了新型精神活性物质的体外和体内数据,强调这些研究如何界定药理机制以及它们如何预测对人类的危害。我们发现,在临床前研究中仅对一小部分新型精神活性物质进行了检测。大多数新型精神活性物质的临床前研究集中在基本药理机制(占所审查研究的46%)和/或成瘾倾向(32%),而非毒性和危害(24%)。极少有针对新型精神活性物质的临床前研究纳入长期给药方案的数据(9%)或雌性啮齿动物的数据(4%)。我们得出结论,临床前研究可以预测对人类的危害,但大多数预测是基于基础药理学而非已证实的毒性。其中一些研究已被用于促使英国和欧洲的法律做出改变,或许由于毒理学数据匮乏,大多数新型精神活性物质在英国被列入高度危险的1类或A类。我们建议,计算机模拟研究和高通量毒理学筛选可能是快速筛查新型精神活性物质对健康危害的最经济有效的方法。