Overriding the blockade of antinociceptive actions of opioids in rats treated with extended-release naltrexone

Perioperative Naltrexone Management: A Scoping Review by the Perioperative Pain and Addiction Interdisciplinary Network

Substance use disorders, including alcohol use disorder, are a public health concern that affect more than 150 million people globally. The opioid antagonist naltrexone is being increasingly prescribed to treat opioid use disorder, alcohol use disorder, and chronic pain. Perioperative management of patients on naltrexone is inconsistent and remains a controversial topic, with mismanagement posing a significant risk to the long-term health of these patients. This scoping review was conducted to identify human studies in which the perioperative management of naltrexone was described. This review includes a systematic literature search involving Medline, Medline In-Process, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Seventeen articles that describe perioperative naltrexone management strategies were included, including thirteen guidelines, one case report, and three randomized trials. Despite its use in patients with alcohol use disorder and chronic pain, no clinical studies, case reports, or guidelines addressed naltrexone use in these clinical populations. All of the guideline documents recommended the preoperative cessation of naltrexone, irrespective of dose, indication, or route of administration. None of these guideline documents were designed on the basis of a systematic literature search or a Delphi protocol. As described by the primary studies, perioperative pain relief varied depending on naltrexone dose and route of administration, time since last naltrexone administration, and underlying substance use disorder. None of the studies commented on the maintenance of recovery for the patient's substance use disorder in the context of perioperative naltrexone management. The current understanding of the risks and benefits of continuing or stopping naltrexone perioperatively is limited by a lack of high-quality evidence. In patients with risk factors for return to use of opioids or alcohol, the discontinuation of naltrexone should have a strong rationale. Future studies and guidelines should seek to address both acute pain management and maintaining recovery when discussing perioperative naltrexone management strategies.

Treatment of Acute Pain in Patients on Naltrexone: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The tissue damage and trauma associated with surgery almost always result in acute postoperative pain. The intensity of postoperative pain can range from mild to severe. Naltrexone is suitable for patients who do not wish to be on an agonist treatment such as methadone or buprenorphine. However, naltrexone has been shown to complicate postoperative pain management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple studies have found that the use of naltrexone can increase the opioid requirement for postoperative pain control. Other modalities exist that can help outside of opioids such as ketamine, lidocaine/bupivacaine, duloxetine, and non-pharmacological management can help manage pain. Multimodal pain regiments should also be employed in patients. In addition to traditional methods for postoperative pain management, other methods of acute pain control exist that can help mitigate opioid dependence and help control pain in patients who use naltrexone for their substance use disorders.

Opioid use disorder in anaesthesia and intensive care: Prevention, diagnosis and management

Opioid misuse is common, as is opioid agonist treatment of opioid dependence. Almost 3% of Australians and over 3.5% of those living in New Zealand report misuse of analgesics. Over 50,000 Australians receive opioid agonist treatment with methadone or buprenorphine for management of severe opioid use disorder.The perioperative period is an opportunity to identify pre-existing opioid misuse, and to introduce interventions to reduce the risk of development of opioid use disorder. Challenges of acute perioperative pain management or intensive care management of patients receiving opioid agonist treatment include opioid tolerance and ongoing prescribing of methadone or buprenorphine. There has been some ambiguity about the optimal perioperative management of buprenorphine, a partial agonist at the mu receptor.In this article, a framework to identify emerging opioid misuse problems, identify risk of overdose and to manage the opioid-dependent patient on opioid agonist treatment perioperatively or in the intensive care unit is provided. Diagnostic criteria and risk stratification criteria are presented. Management strategies include trauma-informed care, care planning and care coordination with community practitioners and opioid agonist treatment providers. Continuing methadone or buprenorphine perioperatively with additional opioid and non-opioid analgesia is generally recommended. Increased opioid agonist treatment doses may be required on discharge. An algorithm for decisions about opioid agonist treatment management in the intensive care unit based on the risks of opioid withdrawal and toxicity is considered. Strategies for managing the opioid-dependent patient who is not in treatment are also discussed.

Pain Management Considerations in Patients with Opioid Use Disorder Requiring Critical Care

The opioid epidemic has resulted in increased opioid-related critical care admissions, presenting challenges in acute pain management. Limited guidance exists in the management of critically ill patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). This narrative review provides the intensive care unit (ICU) clinician with guidance and treatment options, including non-opioid analgesia, for patients receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and for patients actively misusing opioids. Verification and continuation of the patient's outpatient MOUD regimen, specifically buprenorphine and methadone formulations, assessment of pain and opioid withdrawal, and treatment of acute pain with non-opioid analgesia, nonpharmacologic strategies, and short-acting opioids as needed, are all essential to adequate management of acute pain in patients with OUD. A multidisciplinary approach to treatment and discharge planning in patients with OUD may be beneficial to engage patients with OUD early in their hospital stay to prevent withdrawal, stabilize their OUD, and to reduce the risk of unplanned discharge and other associated morbidity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Management of Sedation and Analgesia in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Long-Acting Naltrexone Therapy for Opioid Use Disorder

The explosion of the opioid epidemic in the United States and across the world has been met with advances in pharmacologic therapy for the treatment of opioid use disorder. Long-acting naltrexone is a promising strategy, but its use has important implications for critical care, as it may interfere with or complicate sedation and analgesia. Currently, there are two available formulations of long-acting naltrexone, which are distinguished by different administration routes and distinct pharmacokinetics. The use of long-acting naltrexone may be identified through a variety of strategies (such as physical examination, laboratory testing, and medical record review), and is key to the safe provision of sedation and analgesia during critical illness. Perioperative experience caring for patients receiving long-acting naltrexone informs management in the intensive care unit. Important lessons include the use of multimodal analgesia strategies and anticipating patients' demonstrating variable sensitivity to opioids. For the critically ill patient, however, there are important distinctions to emphasize, including changes in drug metabolism and medication interactions. By compiling and incorporating the currently available literature, we provide critical care physicians with recommendations for the sedation and analgesia for critically ill patients receiving long-acting naltrexone therapy.

Perioperative Pain Management and Opioid Stewardship: A Practical Guide

Surgical procedures are key drivers of pain development and opioid utilization globally. Various organizations have generated guidance on postoperative pain management, enhanced recovery strategies, multimodal analgesic and anesthetic techniques, and postoperative opioid prescribing. Still, comprehensive integration of these recommendations into standard practice at the institutional level remains elusive, and persistent postoperative pain and opioid use pose significant societal burdens. The multitude of guidance publications, many different healthcare providers involved in executing them, evolution of surgical technique, and complexities of perioperative care transitions all represent challenges to process improvement. This review seeks to summarize and integrate key recommendations into a "roadmap" for institutional adoption of perioperative analgesic and opioid optimization strategies. We present a brief review of applicable statistics and definitions as impetus for prioritizing both analgesia and opioid exposure in surgical quality improvement. We then review recommended modalities at each phase of perioperative care. We showcase the value of interprofessional collaboration in implementing and sustaining perioperative performance measures related to pain management and analgesic exposure, including those from the patient perspective. Surgery centers across the globe should adopt an integrated, collaborative approach to the twin goals of optimal pain management and opioid stewardship across the care continuum.

Combining a Candidate Vaccine for Opioid Use Disorders with Extended-Release Naltrexone Increases Protection against Oxycodone-Induced Behavioral Effects and Toxicity

Opioid use disorders (OUDs) and opioid-related fatal overdoses are a significant public health concern in the United States and worldwide. To offer more effective medical interventions to treat or prevent OUD, antiopioid vaccines are in development that reduce the distribution of the targeted opioids to brain and subsequently reduce the associated behavioral and toxic effects. It is of critical importance that antiopioid vaccines do not interfere with medications that treat OUD. Hence, this study tested the preclinical proof of concept of combining a candidate oxycodone vaccine [oxycodone-keyhole limpet hemocyanin (OXY-KLH)] with an FDA-approved extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) depot formulation in rats. The effects of XR-NTX on oxycodone-induced motor activity and antinociception were first assessed in nonvaccinated naïve rats to establish a baseline for subsequent studies. Next, OXY-KLH and XR-NTX were coadministered to determine whether the combination would affect the efficacy of each individual treatment, and it was found that the combination of OXY-KLH and XR-NTX offered greater efficacy in reducing oxycodone-induced motor activity, thigmotaxis, antinociception, and respiratory depression over a range of repeated or escalating oxycodone doses in rats. These data support the feasibility of combining antibody-based therapies with opioid receptor antagonists to provide greater or prolonged protection against opioid-related toxicity or overdose. Combining antiopioid vaccines with XR-NTX may provide prophylactic measures to subjects at risk of relapse and accidental or deliberate exposure. Combination therapy may extend to other biologics (e.g., monoclonal antibodies) and medications against substance use disorders. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Opioid use disorders (OUDs) remain a major problem worldwide, and new therapies are needed. This study reports on the combination of an oxycodone vaccine [oxycodone-keyhole limpet hemocyanin (OXY-KLH)] with a currently approved OUD therapy, extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). Results demonstrated that XR-NTX did not interfere with OXY-KLH efficacy, and combination of low doses of XR-NTX with vaccine was more effective than each individual treatment alone to reduce behavioral and toxic effects of oxycodone, suggesting that combining OXY-KLH with XR-NTX may improve OUD outcomes.

Effectiveness and selectivity of a heroin conjugate vaccine to attenuate heroin, 6-acetylmorphine, and morphine antinociception in rats: Comparison with naltrexone

BACKGROUND

One emerging strategy to address the opioid crisis includes opioid-targeted immunopharmacotherapies. This study compared effectiveness of a heroin-tetanus toxoid (TT) conjugate vaccine to antagonize heroin, 6-acetylmorphine (6-AM), morphine, and fentanyl antinociception in rats.

METHODS

Adult male and female Sprague Dawley rats received three doses of active or control vaccine at weeks 0, 2, and 4. Vaccine pharmacological selectivity was assessed by comparing opioid dose-effect curves in 50 °C  warm-water tail-withdrawal procedure before and after active or control heroin-TT vaccine. Route of heroin administration [subcutaneous (SC) vs. intravenous [IV)] was also examined as a determinant of vaccine effectiveness. Continuous naltrexone treatment (0.0032-0.032 mg/kg/h) effects on heroin, 6-AM, and morphine antinociceptive potency were also determined as a benchmark for minimal vaccine effectiveness.

RESULTS

The heroin-TT vaccine decreased potency of SC heroin (5-fold), IV heroin (3-fold), and IV 6-AM (3-fold) for several weeks without affecting IV morphine or SC and IV fentanyl potency. The control vaccine did not alter potency of any opioid. Naltrexone dose-dependently decreased antinociceptive potency of SC heroin, and treatment with 0.01 mg/kg/h naltrexone produced similar, approximate 8-fold decreases in potencies of SC and IV heroin, IV 6-AM, and IV morphine. The combination of naltrexone and active vaccine was more effective than naltrexone alone to antagonize SC heroin but not IV heroin.

CONCLUSIONS

The heroin-TT vaccine formulation examined is less effective, but more selective, than chronic naltrexone to attenuate heroin antinociception in rats. Furthermore, these results provide an empirical framework for future preclinical opioid vaccine research to benchmark effectiveness against naltrexone.

Monoclonal Antibodies for Combating Synthetic Opioid Intoxication

Opioid abuse in the United States has been declared a national crisis and is exacerbated by an inexpensive, readily available, and illicit supply of synthetic opioids. Specifically, fentanyl and related analogues such as carfentanil pose a significant danger to opioid users due to their high potency and rapid acting depression of respiration. In recent years these synthetic opioids have become the number one cause of drug-related deaths. In our research efforts to combat the public health threat posed by synthetic opioids, we have developed monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against the fentanyl class of drugs. The mAbs were generated in hybridomas derived from mice vaccinated with a fentanyl conjugate vaccine. Guided by a surface plasmon resonance (SPR) binding assay, we selected six hybridomas that produced mAbs with 10^-11 M binding affinity for fentanyl, yet broad cross-reactivity with related fentanyl analogues. In mouse antinociception models, our lead mAb (6A4) could blunt the effects of both fentanyl and carfentanil in a dose-responsive manner. Additionally, mice pretreated with 6A4 displayed enhanced survival when subjected to fentanyl above LD₅₀ doses. Pharmacokinetic analysis revealed that the antibody sequesters large amounts of these drugs in the blood, thus reducing drug biodistribution to the brain and other tissue. Lastly, the 6A4 mAb could effectively reverse fentanyl/carfentanil-induced antinociception comparable to the opioid antagonist naloxone, the standard of care drug for treating opioid overdose. While naloxone is known for its short half-life, we found the half-life of 6A4 to be approximately 6 days in mice, thus monoclonal antibodies could theoretically be useful in preventing renarcotization events in which opioid intoxication recurs following quick metabolism of naloxone. Our results as a whole demonstrate that monoclonal antibodies could be a desirable treatment modality for synthetic opioid overdose and possibly opioid use disorder.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pain Management in Acute Musculoskeletal Injury

PURPOSE

We aimed to produce comprehensive guidelines and recommendations that can be utilized by orthopaedic practices as well as other specialties to improve the management of acute pain following musculoskeletal injury.

METHODS

A panel of 15 members with expertise in orthopaedic trauma, pain management, or both was convened to review the literature and develop recommendations on acute musculoskeletal pain management. The methods described by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group were applied to each recommendation. The guideline was submitted to the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) for review and was approved on October 16, 2018.

RESULTS

We present evidence-based best practice recommendations and pain medication recommendations with the hope that they can be utilized by orthopaedic practices as well as other specialties to improve the management of acute pain following musculoskeletal injury. Recommendations are presented regarding pain management, cognitive strategies, physical strategies, strategies for patients on long term opioids at presentation, and system implementation strategies. We recommend the use of multimodal analgesia, prescribing the lowest effective immediate-release opioid for the shortest period possible, and considering regional anesthesia. We also recommend connecting patients to psychosocial interventions as indicated and considering anxiety reduction strategies such as aromatherapy. Finally, we also recommend physical strategies including ice, elevation, and transcutaneous electrical stimulation. Prescribing for patients on long term opioids at presentation should be limited to one prescriber. Both pain and sedation should be assessed regularly for inpatients with short, validated tools. Finally, the group supports querying the relevant regional and state prescription drug monitoring program, development of clinical decision support, opioid education efforts for prescribers and patients, and implementing a department or organization pain medication prescribing strategy or policy.

CONCLUSIONS

Balancing comfort and patient safety following acute musculoskeletal injury is possible when utilizing a true multimodal approach including cognitive, physical, and pharmaceutical strategies. In this guideline, we attempt to provide practical, evidence-based guidance for clinicians in both the operative and non-operative settings to address acute pain from musculoskeletal injury. We also organized and graded the evidence to both support recommendations and identify gap areas for future research.

Perioperative Considerations for the Patient with Opioid Use Disorder on Buprenorphine, Methadone, or Naltrexone Maintenance Therapy

As part of a national effort to combat the current US opioid epidemic, use of currently Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs for the treatment of opioid use disorder/opioid addiction (buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone) is on the rise. To provide optimal pain control and minimize the risk of relapse and overdose, providers need to have an in-depth understanding of how to manage these medications in the perioperative setting. This article reviews key principles and discusses perioperative considerations for patients with opioid use disorder on buprenorphine, methadone, or naltrexone.

Opioid Use Disorders: Perioperative Management of a Special Population

Opioid-related overdose deaths have reached epidemic levels within the last decade. The efforts to prevent, identify, and treat opioid use disorders (OUDs) mostly focus on the outpatient setting. Despite their frequent overrepresentation, less is known about the inpatient management of patients with OUDs. Specifically, the perioperative phase is a very vulnerable time for patients with OUDs, and little has been studied on the optimal management of acute pain in these patients. The preoperative evaluation should aim to identify those with OUDs and assess factors that may interfere with OUD treatment and pain management. Efforts should be made to provide education and assistance to patients and their support systems. For those who are actively struggling with opioid use, the perioperative phase can be an opportunity for engagement and to initiate treatment. Buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone medication treatment for OUD and opioid tolerance complicate perioperative pain management. A multidisciplinary team approach is crucial to provide clinically balanced pain relief without jeopardizing the patient's recovery. This article reviews the existing literature on the perioperative management of patients with OUDs and provides clinical suggestions for the optimal care of this patient population.

Challenges in the perioperative management of the patient receiving extended-release naltrexone

Patients receiving extended-release (XR) naltrexone who are having surgery present unique challenges to anesthesia providers, the most obvious of which is an altered response to the effects of opioid agonists. Based on the timing of the last XR naltrexone dose, patients may be refractory to the effects of opioid agonists or potentially more sensitive to dangerous side effects due to receptor upregulation and hypersensitivity. Complicating matters, redosing XR naltrexone soon after opioid use may precipitate opioid withdrawal. We present a case of a 22-year-old woman receiving XR naltrexone for a history of heroin abuse undergoing a thyroidectomy and neck dissection. We discuss the intraoperative and postoperative anesthetic and analgesic planning, as well as solutions to some of the challenges these patients pose.

Effects of oral loperamide on efficacy of naltrexone, baclofen and AM-251 in blocking ethanol self-administration in rats

Naltrexone is a μ-opioid receptor antagonist that has been extensively studied for its ability to block the rewarding effects of ethanol. Opioid receptors are widely distributed within the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). Typically, naltrexone is administered by parenteral routes in nonclinical studies. We initially tested if opioid receptors within the GIT would influence the ability of oral naltrexone to inhibit ethanol oral self-administration in rats using the co-administration of oral loperamide, a peripherally restricted opioid agonist. As expected, oral naltrexone only had modest effects on ethanol intake, and the response was not dose-dependent. However in rats, treatment with loperamide prior to the administration of naltrexone resulted in a suppression of ethanol intake which approached that observed with naltrexone given by the subcutaneous (SC) route. Importantly, administration of loperamide prior to administration of naltrexone did not alter blood concentrations of naltrexone. We then evaluated if oral loperamide would enhance effects of baclofen (a GABA(B) receptor agonist) and AM-251 (a CB-1 receptor antagonist) and found that pre-treatment with loperamide did potentiate the action of both drugs to reduce ethanol self-administration. Finally, the specific opioid receptor type involved was investigated using selective μ- and κ-receptor antagonists to determine if these would affect the ability of the AM-251 and loperamide combination to block ethanol drinking behavior. The effect of loperamide was blocked by ALKS 37, a peripherally restricted μ-receptor antagonist. These data suggest an important role for opioid receptors within the GIT in modulating central reward pathways and may provide new insights into strategies for treating reward disorders, including drug dependency.

Intramuscular extended-release naltrexone: current evidence

Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; Vivitrol), developed to address poor adherence in addictive disorders, is approved for use in alcohol and opioid-dependence disorders. In alcohol-dependent adults with ≥ 4-day initial abstinence, XR-NTX increased initial and 6-month abstinence. An fMRI study found that XR-NTX attenuated the salience of alcohol visual and olfactory cues in the absence of alcohol, and post hoc analyses demonstrated efficacy even during high cue-exposure holiday periods. Safety and tolerability have generally been good, without adverse hepatic impact or intractable acute pain management. XR-NTX use appears feasible in primary care and public systems, and retrospective claims analyses have found cost savings and decreased intensive service utilization relative to oral agents. In opioid dependence, following detoxification, XR-NTX shows efficacy for maintaining abstinence, improving retention, decreasing craving, and preventing relapse. Trials are also exploring its use for the treatment of stimulant dependence. XR-NTX appears compatible with counseling and self-help attendance. While more research is needed, current findings suggest that a formulation of naltrexone that was sought beginning over three decades ago is fulfilling its promise as an extended-release pharmacotherapeutic.

Injectable extended-release naltrexone for opioid dependence: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Opioid dependence is associated with low rates of treatment-seeking, poor adherence to treatment, frequent relapse, and major societal consequences. We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of an injectable, once monthly extended-release formulation of the opioid antagonist naltrexone (XR-NTX) for treatment of patients with opioid dependence after detoxification.

METHODS

We did a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, 24-week trial of patients with opioid dependence disorder. Patients aged 18 years or over who had 30 days or less of inpatient detoxification and 7 days or more off all opioids were enrolled at 13 clinical sites in Russia. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to either 380 mg XR-NTX or placebo by an interactive voice response system, stratified by site and gender in a centralised, permuted-block method. Participants also received 12 biweekly counselling sessions. Participants, investigators, staff , and the sponsor were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the response profile for confirmed abstinence during weeks 5–24, assessed by urine drug tests and self report of non-use. Secondary endpoints were self-reported opioid-free days, opioid craving scores, number of days of retention, and relapse to physiological opioid dependence. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00678418.

FINDINGS

Between July 3, 2008, and Oct 5, 2009, 250 patients were randomly assigned to XR-NTX (n=126) or placebo (n=124). The median proportion of weeks of confirmed abstinence was 90·0% (95% CI 69·9–92·4) in the XR-NTX group compared with 35·0% (11·4–63·8) in the placebo group (p=0·0002). Patients in the XR-NTX group self-reported a median of 99·2% (range 89·1–99·4) opioid-free days compared with 60·4% (46·2–94·0) for the placebo group (p=0·0004). The mean change in craving was –10·1 (95% CI –12·3 to –7·8) in the XR-NTX group compared with 0·7 (–3·1 to 4·4) in the placebo group (p<0·0001). Median retention was over 168 days in the XR-NTX group compared with 96 days (95% CI 63–165) in the placebo group (p=0·0042). Naloxone challenge confirmed relapse to physiological opioid dependence in 17 patients in the placebo group compared with one in the XR-NTX group (p<0·0001). XR-NTX was well tolerated. Two patients in each group discontinued owing to adverse events. No XR-NTX-treated patients died, overdosed, or discontinued owing to severe adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

XR-NTX represents a new treatment option that is distinct from opioid agonist maintenance treatment. XR-NTX in conjunction with psychosocial treatment might improve acceptance of opioid dependence pharmacotherapy and provide a useful treatment option for many patients.

FUNDING

Alkermes.

Favorable mortality profile of naltrexone implants for opiate addiction

Several reports express concern at the mortality associated with the use of oral naltrexone for opiate dependency. Registry controlled follow-up of patients treated with naltrexone implant and buprenorphine was performed. In the study, 255 naltrexone implant patients were followed for a mean (+/- standard deviation) of 5.22 +/- 1.87 years and 2,518 buprenorphine patients were followed for a mean (+/- standard deviation) of 3.19 +/- 1.61 years, accruing 1,332.22 and 8,030.02 patient-years of follow-up, respectively. The crude mortality rates were 3.00 and 5.35 per 1,000 patient-years, respectively, and the age standardized mortality rate ratio for naltrexone compared to buprenorphine was 0.676 (95% confidence interval = 0.014 to 1.338). Most sex, treatment group, and age comparisons significantly favored the naltrexone implant group. Mortality rates were shown to be comparable to, and intermediate between, published mortality rates of an age-standardized methadone treated cohort and the Australian population. These data suggest that the mortality rate from naltrexone implant is comparable to that of buprenorphine, methadone, and the Australian population.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2008

This paper is the 31st consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2008 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurologic disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); and immunological responses (Section 17).

Route of administration affects the ability of naltrexone to reduce amphetamine-potentiated brain stimulation reward in rats

Opioid receptor antagonism has been shown to attenuate behavioral and neurochemical effects of amphetamine in humans and rodents. The effects of acute (oral or subcutaneous) or extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) were tested on the reward-enhancing effects of amphetamine using the intracranial self-stimulation (ICSS) paradigm. Acute exposure to drugs of abuse reduces the locus of rise (LOR) in the ICSS procedure, reflecting enhanced brain stimulation reward (BSR). Rats were treated once a day with naltrexone orally (PO; 5.0 mg/kg) or subcutaneously (SC; 0.5 mg/kg) for four consecutive days and tested with D-amphetamine (0.5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal) in the ICSS paradigm 30 minutes later on days 1 and 4. Separate groups of rats received XR-NTX (50 mg/kg, SC) or placebo microspheres (similar mass to XR-NTX, SC) on day 0 and tested with D-amphetamine in the ICSS paradigm on days 4, 14, 21, 28 and 41 after administration. Naltrexone plasma concentrations were determined for each amphetamine testing session using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). In rats pretreated with naltrexone acutely, amphetamine-potentiated BSR did not differ from vehicle-pretreated rats on either day 1 or day 4 (25-30% decrease in LOR). In XR-NTX-pretreated rats, amphetamine-potentiated BSR was reduced by 64 and 70% on days 4 and 14, respectively, compared to placebo microsphere-treated controls. This effect dissipated by day 21. Naltrexone plasma concentrations were comparable across all treatment groups (14-30 ng/ml) on days 1, 4 and 14. In summary, an extended-release formulation of naltrexone results in significant attenuation of psychostimulant-enhanced BSR that is not observed with acute naltrexone.

Precipitated withdrawal during maintenance opioid blockade with extended release naltrexone

Background There has been increasing interest in the use of extended release injectable naltrexone for the treatment of opioid dependence. Case description We report a case of precipitated withdrawal in a 17-year-old adolescent female receiving extended release naltrexone (Vivitrol) for opioid dependence, following her third serial monthly dose of the medication, several days after using oxycodone with mild intoxication. Conclusions This case suggests that, in some circumstances, the opioid blockade may be overcome when naltrexone levels drop towards the end of the dosing interval, producing vulnerability to subsequent naltrexone-induced withdrawal. This may provide cautionary guidance for clinical management and dosing strategies.