JPET

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SUMWALT, M.
Right arrow Articles by MILLER, A. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by SUMWALT, M.
Right arrow Articles by MILLER, A. T.
Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics, Vol. 73, Issue 3, 246-257, 1941
Copyright © 1941 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics


THE RESPIRATORY EFFECTS OF MORPHINE, CODEINE, AND RELATED SUBSTANCES IX. THE EFFECT OF MUZZLING THE PHENOLIC HYDROXYL

MARGARET SUMWALT 1, CHARLES I. WRIGHT 1, and AUGUSTUS T. MILLER 1

1 From the Laboratory of Pharmacology, University of Michigan Medical School, and the National Institute of Health, Washington

The depressant effects upon rabbits' respiration are given for 7 derivatives of morphine in which the phenolic hydroxyl group, at carbon-3, has been muzzled by ethyl, methoxymethyl, benzyl, or dinitrophenyl. Using the "threshold" dose for depressing minute volume as a criterion of potency, we have compared these and 8 related drugs whose effects have been previously described, to ascertain whether the loss of potency associated with substitution at that point depends upon the intactness of the phenolic hydroxyl radical per se, or upon the special properties of the substituent. Dinitrophenylmorphine was stronger than morphine in small doses though weaker in doses larger than about 0.3 mgm. The remaining codeine-like compounds were all weaker than their morphine-like analogs. Among them, it seemed to make little difference whether the substituent was methyl, ethyl, methoxymethyl, or benzyl, except in one instance, when methyl (in dihydrodesoxycodeine-D, #16) proved much more depressant than benzyl (in benzyldihydrodesoxymorphine-D, #312).

Submitted on April 19, 1941







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
 Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 1941 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.