Fentanyl delivery from an electrotransport system: Delivery is a function of total current, not duration of current

Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 38, Issue 10, 1998, Pages 951-958

  Gupta, Suneel K ^a   Bernstein, Keith J ^b   Noorduin, Henk ^c   Van Peer, Achiel ^c   Sathyan, Gayatri ^a   Haak, Ron ^a  

^a ALZA CORPORATION   (United States)

^b JANSSEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

^c JANSSEN RESEARCH FOUNDATION   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FENTANYL; NALTREXONE;

ADULT; ANALGESIA; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; DRUG SAFETY; ERYTHEMA; HEADACHE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; PATIENT CONTROLLED ANALGESIA; TRANSDERMAL DRUG ADMINISTRATION; TREATMENT INDICATION;

EID: 0031759147     PISSN: 00912700     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1998.tb04392.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Lehmann KA: New developments in patient-controlled postoperative analgesia. Ann Med 1995;27:271-282.
2. Kluger MT, Owen H: Patients' expectations of patient-controlled analgesia. Anaesthesia 1990;45:1072-1074.
3. Yee LY, Lopez JR: Transdermal fentanyl. Ann Pharmacother 1992;26:1393-1399.
4. Berti JJ, Lipsky JJ: Transcutaneous drug delivery: a practical review. Mayo Clin Proc 1995;70:581-586.
5. Haak R, Gupta SK: Pulsatile drug delivery from electrotransport therapeutic systems. In, Gurny R, Junginger HE, Peppas NA (eds.): Pulsatile Drug Delivery: Current Applications and Future Trends. Stuttgart, Germany: Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 1993;99-112.
6. Singh P, Maibach HI: Transdermal iontophoresis: pharmacokinetic considerations. Clin Pharmacokinet 1994;26:327-334.
7. Gupta S, Southam M, Sathyan G, Klausner M: Effect of current density on pharmacokinetics following continuous or intermittent input from a fentanyl electrotransport system. J Pharm Sci (in press).
8. Woestenborghs JH, Stanski DR, Scott JC, Heykants JJP: Assay methods for fentanyl in serum: gas-liquid chromatography versus radioimmunoassay. Anesthesiology 1987;67:85-90.
9. United States Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research: COSTART: Coding Symbols for Thesaurus of Adverse Reaction Terms. Rockville, MD: Office of Epidemiology Biostatistics, 1970.
10. Phipps JB, Padmanabhan RV, Lattin GA: Iontophoretic delivery of model inorganic and drug ions. J Pharm Sci 1989;78:365-369.
11. Craane-van Hinsberg WHM, Bax L, Flinterman NHM, Verhoef J, Junginger HE, Bodde HE: Iontophoresis of a model peptide across human skin in vitro: effects of iontophoresis protocol, pH, and ionic strength on peptide flux and skin impedance. Pharm Res 1994:11:1296-1300.
12. Jaffe JH, Martin WR: Opioid analgesics and antagonists. In, Gilman AG, Rall TW, Nies AS, Taylor P (eds.): Goodman and Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. Eighth edition. New York: Pergamon Press, 1990;485-521, 1680.
13. Lee MC, Wagner HN, Tanada S, Frost JJ, Bice AN, Dannals RF: Duration of occupancy of opiate receptors by naltrexone. J Nucl Med 1988;29:1207-1211
14. Vereby K, Volavka J, Mule SJ, Resnick RB: Naltrxone: disposition, metabolism, and effects after acute and chronic dosing. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1976;20:315-328.
15. Sifton DW (ed.): Physician's Desk Reference. Fifty-second edition. Montvale, NJ: Medical Economics Data, 1998.