4.6 Review

Ziconotide: Neuronal calcium channel blocker for treating severe chronic pain

期刊

CURRENT MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 11, 期 23, 页码 3029-3040

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/0929867043363884

关键词

ziconotide; PRIALT; SNX-111; N-type calcium channels; pain; analgesia; analgesic; conopeptide; conotoxin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ziconotide (PRIALT((R))) is a neuroactive peptide in the final stages of clinical development as a novel non-opioid treatment for severe chronic pain. It is the synthetic equivalent of omega-MVIIA, a component of the venom of the marine snail, Conus magus. The mechanism of action underlying ziconotide's therapeutic profile derives from its potent and selective blockade of neuronal N-type voltage-sensitive calcium channels (N-VSCCs). Direct blockade, of N-VSCCs inhibits the activity of a subset of neurons, including pain-sensing primary nociceptors. This mechanism of action distinguishes ziconotide from all other analgesics, including opioid analgesics. In fact, ziconotide is potently anti-nociceptive in animal models of pain in which morphine exhibits poor anti-nociceptive activity. Moreover, in contrast to opiates, tolerance to ziconotide is not observed. Clinical studies of ziconotide in more than 2,000 patients reveal important correlations to ziconotide's non-clinical pharmacology. For example, ziconotide provides significant pain relief to severe chronic pain sufferers who have failed to obtain relief from opiate therapy and no evidence of tolerance to ziconotide is seen in these patients. Contingent on regulatory approval, ziconotide will be the first in a new class of neurological drugs: the N-type calcium channel blockers, or NCCBs. Its novel mechanism of action as a non-opioid analgesic suggests ziconotide has the potential to play a valuable role in. treatment regimens for severe chronic pain. If approved for clinical use, ziconotide will further validate the neuroactive venom peptides as a source of new and useful medicines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据