They compare that compound to morphine in many of the experiments. Also I wouldn’t describe it as peripherally selective as much as selective against receptor complexes in the VTA.
No, I simply mean that periperal activity of opioids was ignored or not understood for many decades. Then the protocol changed in that instead of 'any large muscle' to specifically close to the site of injury. It certainly appered to work in that battlefiled medicine is rough and ready but just for once, someone reassesed it's activity and that protocol was change (in quite a hurry).
I've always been cautious of animal models because they are so often wrong. Did you calculate the pKa of the ligand? I only have access to estimation tools;
The predicted pKa of etonitazene is 9.90 ± 0.25
The predicted pKa of N-desethyl etonetazine is 9.85 ± 0.19
The predicted pKa of fluetonitezine is 8.5 ± 1
I'm just wondering if that secondary amine being a HBD and the terminal -F being a (weak) HBA somehow alters that pKa.
Are mice commenly used when modelling the human brain for the purposes of MOR domains? It's been so long that when I touched this stuff, we got to play with microtomes BUT not with 18F tracers, sad to say.
I agree with the conclusion. It's context that matters. I know of a case in which someone who had bone cancer was on some tremendous amount of opioids to the point where they became toxic. So the patient ended up in hospital and after consultation with an anaesthetist, a syringe-driver containing sufentanil was use to control the pain. So they at least didn't die in agony.
The sudden opioid panic in the US saw the development of sufentanil patches abandoned. Yet the TI of sufentanil is ≈ 26,700, compared with 280 for fentanyl, 70 for morphine and 5 for pethidine.
I have a hypothesis that sufentanil is a duellist. Certainly swapping the N-methyl of morphine with a 2-(2-thienylethyl) moiety results in a compound that is less selective. So increased analgesia BUT mediated by acting on all of the opiate receptors. I checked my working by then looking at the 2-(2-furanylethyl) homologue and that appears totally unselective - so on paper, it may look attractive to an RC vendor, but my hypothesis is that the subjective effects will not be as euphoric, or at least any euhproia would only be experienced at dangerously high doses.