Are itch and scratching the nausea and vomiting of skin?

Physiology and Pathophysiology of Itch

Itch is a topic to which everyone can relate. The physiological roles of itch are increasingly understood and appreciated. The pathophysiological consequences of itch impact quality of life as much as pain. These dynamics have led to increasingly deep dives into the mechanisms that underlie and contribute to the sensation of itch. When the prior review on the physiology of itching was published in this journal in 1941, itch was a black box of interest to a small number of neuroscientists and dermatologists. Itch is now appreciated as a complex and colorful Rubik's cube. Acute and chronic itch are being carefully scratched apart and reassembled by puzzle solvers across the biomedical spectrum. New mediators are being identified. Mechanisms blur boundaries of the circuitry that blend neuroscience and immunology. Measures involve psychophysics and behavioral psychology. The efforts associated with these approaches are positively impacting the care of itchy patients. There is now the potential to markedly alleviate chronic itch, a condition that does not end life, but often ruins it. We review the itch field and provide a current understanding of the pathophysiology of itch. Itch is a disease, not only a symptom of disease.

Small molecule drugs for the treatment of pruritus in patients with atopic dermatitis

Chronic pruritus is a cardinal symptom of the inflammatory skin disease atopic dermatitis (AD). Pathogenic mechanisms in the periphery, spinal cord and the brain have been implicated in AD-related pruritus. Therefore, both systemic and topical administration of drugs could potentially provide relief. Despite efforts to elucidate the mechanisms behind AD-related pruritus and the relative contribution of peripheral nervous system and central nervous system (CNS), specific and successful treatment options have not yet been developed. Several small molecule drugs are currently being investigated to treat AD and AD-related pruritus. These small molecule drugs can be applied systemically but also topically, as they are able to penetrate into the skin due to their small size. Small molecule drugs specifically targeting peripheral itch transmission, e.g. peripherally selective κ-opioid receptors agonists and neurokinin 1 receptors antagonists, have so far been unable to improve AD-related pruritus when applied systemically, possibly because of the lack of CNS activity. Current evidence from clinical and preclinical trials with centrally acting or peripherally selective oral κ-opioid receptors agonists implies that CNS activity is required for an antipruritic effect. CNS activity is, however, directly associated with CNS-mediated side-effects. On the other hand, topical application of small molecules with anti-inflammatory activity such as Janus kinase inhibitors and phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors, and also of κ-opioid receptor agonists, has shown promising results regarding their ability to reduce AD-related pruritus. In conclusion, topical application of anti-inflammatory compounds appears to be a highly promising strategy for the treatment of AD-related pruritus.

The brain-penetrating, orally bioavailable, ghrelin receptor agonist HM01 ameliorates motion-induced emesis in Suncus murinus (house musk shrew)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

HM01, a novel, orally bioavailable, brain-penetrating agonist of ghrelin receptors, ameliorates emesis in Suncus murinus. This study compared HM01's activity against motion sickness with that of the less brain-penetrating ghrelin receptor agonist, HM02.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

The potential of HM01 and HM02 to relax isolated mesenteric arteries and to increase feeding was investigated. Radio telemetry was used to record gastric slow waves and body temperature. Plethysmography was used to measure respiratory function. HM01 and HM02 were administered p.o. 1 hr prior to provocative motion, and c-Fos expression in brain sections was assessed.

KEY RESULTS

HM01 and HM02 both relaxed precontracted arteries, yielding EC₅₀ values of 2.5 ± 0.5 and 3.5 ± 0.4 nM respectively. HM01 increased feeding, but HM02 did not. Both compounds caused hypothermia and bradygastria. Motion induced 123 ± 24 emetic events. HM01, but not HM02, reduced motion-induced emesis by 67.6%. Motion increased c-Fos expression in the nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS), dorsal motor nucleus of the vagus (DMNV), medial vestibular nucleus (MVe), central nucleus of the amygdala, and paraventricular hypothalamic nucleus (PVH). HM01 alone increased c-Fos expression in the area postrema, NTS, DMNV, PVH, and arcuate hypothalamic nucleus; HM02 had a similar pattern except it did not increase c-Fos in the PVH. Both compounds antagonized the motion-induced increases in c-Fos expression in the MVe.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

HM01 is more effective than HM02 in preventing motion-induced emesis. The difference in potency may relate to activation of ghrelin receptors in the PVH.