The solute conformation of opioid ligands of the 4‐arylpiperidine class: α‐Promedol and related compounds

Casy, A. F.

doi:10.1002/mrc.1260301011

Narcotic Analgesics

Aldrich

¹

,

Vigil‐Cruz

²

2003

Burger's Medicinal Chemistry and Drug Discovery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Narcotic analgesics such as morphine have been the mainstay for the treatment of severe pain, although these drugs are associated with serious adverse effects, most notably addiction liability and respiratory depression. Therefore there has been an intensive effort to find new therapeutic agents that retain the effectiveness of morphine, but do not have its undesired side effects. Compounds have been identified from a wide variety of chemical classes, from the rigid morphinan alkaloids to the flexible phenylpiperidines and the opioid peptides, which have affinity for opioid receptors. In recent years considerable effort has focused on identifying ligands, both agonists and antagonists, with affinity for delta (δ) and kappa (κ) opioid receptors as pharmacological tools and as potential therapeutic agents that would not have the side‐effect profile of morphine and other agonists that interact with mu (μ) opioid receptors. After the identification of the closely related opioid receptor‐like (ORL1) receptor and its endogenous ligand orphanin FQ/nociceptin, there has been considerable effort directed toward identifying agonists and antagonists for this receptor as well. This review discusses the structure‐activity relationships for each of the major classes of compounds that interact with the opioid receptors, along with ligands for the ORL1 receptors.

show abstract

Opioid Receptor Ligands

McCurdy

¹

,

Prisinzano

²

2010

Burger's Medicinal Chemistry and Drug Discovery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opioid agonists, exemplified by morphine, have been the most prescribed class of drugs for the management of moderate to severe pain for many years. These drugs have significant liabilities of addiction and constipation over long‐term use and acute overdoses can result in respiratory depression. For over thousands of years, opium and opium‐derived drugs have nonetheless been utilized for their therapeutic and recreational benefits. Due to their liabilities, medicinal chemists and clinicians have worked for years to discover novel agents or treatment courses that would be devoid of these side effects. Still to this day, there are no agents that meet these criteria. Therefore, efforts continue vigorously in the quest for drugs with potent analgesic effects without abuse or side‐effect potential. Many chemical classes have been sought after in this quest and the range from peptides to synthetic compounds to natural products. Morphine offered a template that was rigid and able to provide an enormous amount of structure–function relationships that many of the market analgesics are based on. To complicate matters, the endogenous opioid system is comprised of four distinct receptor subtypes. These receptors are all members of the G‐protein superfamily and are designated as mu (μ, MOP), delta (δ, DOP), kappa (κ, KOP), and nociception (ORL1, NOP). It has been realized over the years that a combination of activities at these receptors may result in agents that could be devoid of liabilities. Intensive efforts have been directed at improved probes for each receptor subtype and combinations of agonists and antagonists for combinations of these receptors. This review will discuss the structure–activity relationships, as they are currently understood, with regard to each of the major classes of compounds that interact with these protein targets.

show abstract

Opioid Receptor Ligands

McCurdy¹,

Prisinzano²

2021

Burger's Medicinal Chemistry and Drug Discovery

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opioid agonists, exemplified by morphine, have been the most prescribed class of drugs for the management of moderate to severe pain for many years. These drugs have significant liabilities of addiction and constipation over long‐term use and acute overdoses can result in respiratory depression. For over thousands of years, opium and opium‐derived drugs have nonetheless been utilized for their therapeutic and recreational benefits. Due to their liabilities, medicinal chemists and clinicians have worked for years to discover novel agents or treatment courses that would be devoid of these side effects. Still to this day, there are no agents that meet these criteria. Therefore, efforts continue vigorously in the quest for drugs with potent analgesic effects without abuse or side‐effect potential. Many chemical classes have been sought after in this quest and the range from peptides to synthetic compounds to natural products. Morphine offered a template that was rigid and able to provide an enormous amount of structure–function relationships that many of the market analgesics are based on. To complicate matters, the endogenous opioid system is comprised of four distinct receptor subtypes. These receptors are all members of the G‐protein superfamily and are designated as mu (μ, MOP), delta (δ, DOP), kappa (κ, KOP), and nociception (ORL1, NOP). It has been realized over the years that a combination of activities at these receptors may result in agents that could be devoid of liabilities. Intensive efforts have been directed at improved probes for each receptor subtype and combinations of agonists and antagonists for combinations of these receptors. This review will discuss the structure–activity relationships, as they are currently understood, with regard to each of the major classes of compounds that interact with these protein targets.

show abstract

The solute conformation of opioid ligands of the 4‐arylpiperidine class: α‐Promedol and related compounds

Cited by 4 publications

References 18 publications

Narcotic Analgesics

Narcotic Analgesics

Opioid Receptor Ligands

Opioid Receptor Ligands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About