de Vos J W, Ufkes J G, Kaplan C D, Tursch M, Krause J K, van Wilgenburg H, Woodcock B G, Staib A H
Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eur Addict Res. 1998 Sep;4(3):134-41. doi: 10.1159/000018936.
The clinical effectiveness of l-methadone maintenance treatment (LMMT) carried out using d,l-methadone or l-methadone have been compared with ambulatory heroin-dependent subjects. A total of 40 heroin-dependent subjects, previously maintained on l-methadone in Frankfurt am Main, were divided into two groups under randomised double-blind conditions and received either an equivalent dose of l-methadone as d,l-methadone or remained on the previous l-methadone treatment. Requests for a change in the dose of d,l-methadone and l-methadone were recorded, urine samples for determination of illicit drug use were collected and the individual level of opiate craving was determined over a 22-day observation period. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the number requests for a dose change (dose increase <10%). However, there was a significant increase in heroin use in the group which continued to receive l-methadone. Although there was less variability in opiate craving in the group receiving d,l-methadone, the mean intensity of opiate craving did not differ between the two groups. The mean l-methadone dose:l-methadone plasma concentration ratio, an index of the bioavailability of l-methadone in individual subjects, showed no significant change when the treatment was changed to d,l-methadone. The mean d-methadone:l-methadone plasma concentration ratio was 1.17. There was no significant difference between these ratios for day 15 and day 22. The mean l-methadone:EDDP plasma concentration ratio in the l-methadone group was 22.2 and the d,l-methadone:EDDP plasma concentration ratio was 18.4 . The plasma EDDP concentration in the d,l-methadone group increased 3-fold after starting treatment with d, l-methadone. These findings suggest that d,l-methadone can be used in methadone maintenance treatment of heroin-dependent subjects but that further studies are required to evaluate pharmacokinetic interactions between methadone enantiomers.
已将使用消旋美沙酮或左旋美沙酮进行的左旋美沙酮维持治疗(LMMT)的临床效果与非住院海洛因依赖者进行了比较。共有40名之前在美因河畔法兰克福接受左旋美沙酮维持治疗的海洛因依赖者,在随机双盲条件下被分为两组,分别接受与消旋美沙酮等效剂量的左旋美沙酮或继续之前的左旋美沙酮治疗。记录了消旋美沙酮和左旋美沙酮剂量变化的请求,收集了用于测定非法药物使用情况的尿液样本,并在22天的观察期内测定了个体的阿片类药物渴求水平。两组在剂量变化请求数量上无显著差异(剂量增加<10%)。然而,继续接受左旋美沙酮治疗的组中,海洛因使用量有显著增加。虽然接受消旋美沙酮治疗的组中阿片类药物渴求的变异性较小,但两组之间阿片类药物渴求的平均强度并无差异。左旋美沙酮剂量与左旋美沙酮血浆浓度之比是个体受试者中左旋美沙酮生物利用度的一个指标,当治疗改为消旋美沙酮时,该指标无显著变化。右旋美沙酮与左旋美沙酮血浆浓度之比的平均值为1.17。第15天和第22天这些比值之间无显著差异。左旋美沙酮组中左旋美沙酮与EDDP血浆浓度之比的平均值为22.2,消旋美沙酮与EDDP血浆浓度之比为18.4。在开始使用消旋美沙酮治疗后,消旋美沙酮组中的血浆EDDP浓度增加了3倍。这些发现表明,消旋美沙酮可用于海洛因依赖者的美沙酮维持治疗,但需要进一步研究来评估美沙酮对映体之间的药代动力学相互作用。