Human Abuse Potential of an Abuse-Deterrent (AD), Extended-Release (ER) Morphine Product Candidate (Morphine-ADER Injection-Molded Tablets) versus Extended-Release Morphine Administered Orally in Nondependent Recreational Opioid Users

Pharmacokinetics of Buprenorphine Buccal Film and Orally-administered Oxycodone in a Respiratory Study: An Analysis of Secondary Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters and oxygen saturation as markers of abuse potential after administration of buprenorphine buccal film (BBF) and immediate-release (IR) oxycodone.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of data from a phase I randomized controlled trial. A total of 19 healthy subjects who self-identified as recreational opioid users were enrolled, with 15 completing the study. Subjects were administered 300, 600, and 900 µg BBF; 30 and 60 mg orally-administered oxycodone; and placebo. For PK analysis, blood samples were collected before dosing and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 h postdose. Respiratory drive/ventilatory response to hypercapnia and oxygen saturation were evaluated before dosing and up to 8 h after administration of test drugs.

RESULTS

Median time to maximum concentration (T_max) was 2.17 h for 900 µg BBF and 1.17 h for 60 mg oxycodone and was similar across all doses for each drug. Mean maximum concentration (C_max) was 1.06 ng/mL for 900 µg BBF and 132 ng/mL for 60 mg oxycodone. The abuse quotient, defined as C_max/T_max, was substantially higher for oxycodone compared to BBF. Respiratory depression (maximum decrease in minute ventilation) was similar for all 3 doses of BBF, consistent with a potential ceiling effect. In addition, respiratory depression occurred sooner with oxycodone vs BBF, and a greater mean decrease in oxygen saturation was observed for oxycodone 30- and 60-mg doses, compared with BBF.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that BBF may have a decreased risk of abuse and respiratory depression compared with the full µ-opioid receptor agonist oxycodone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03996694.

Association of partial systemic exposure and abuse potential for opioid analgesics with abuse deterrence labeling claims supporting product-specific guidance

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, U.S. FDA has approved 10 opioid analgesics in abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs). ADFs are intended to reduce abuse of a prescription opioid through manipulation of the product to use one or more routes of abuse. Although it is critically needed for evaluation of the abuse deterrent properties of an opioid product, the relationship between systemic exposure and likelihood of abuse of the opioid has not been fully characterized. To fill the current knowledge gap, we have evaluated the association of subjective measures predictive of abuse potential (e.g., scores of "drug liking," "take drug again"), which are referred to as 'pharmacodynamic (PD)' responses for measuring abuse potential, with systemic exposure of the opioid using the data from all the clinical abuse potential trials submitted to FDA in support of the approval of innovator ADFs.

METHODS

Extensive pharmacokinetic (PK) and subjective response data from 11 clinical abuse potential trials in recreational opioid users following oral and nasal administration of intact and manipulated oxycodone, hydrocodone and morphine products from the FDA internal database were utilized for the present analysis. This retrospective study used data collected from January 11^th, 2010 until March 25^th, 2015. The potential relationship between PK metrics, especially those for early exposure measures, and the subjective measures of drug liking and take drug again as PD metrics of abuse potential were explored using linear and logistic regression analyses. Heterogeneity analysis was conducted to assess study-to-study variation and multi-level logistic regression analysis was used to affirm the identified PK-PD relationship based on pooled data.

FINDINGS

Following oral and nasal administration of intact and manipulated opioids, the maximum visual analogue scale (VAS) for Drug Liking was generally achieved no later than the time to peak plasma drug concentration. Both heterogeneity analysis and multi-level logistic regression indicated insignificant inter study variability for the evaluated PK-PD relationships. Duration of Drug Liking response (i.e., VAS ≥ 65) lasted for 2 to 4 h after drug administration. The early portion of the systemic area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC), e.g., partial AUCs in the first 3 h and 4 h were found to be associated with abuse potential measures including maximum Drug Liking VAS and maximum Taking Drug Again VAS. Neither a formulation factor (e.g., immediate-release vs. extended-release, intact vs. manipulated) nor a route of administration was identified as a significant factor together with early partial AUCs to predict the probability of maximum Drug Liking or maximum Take Drug Again responses being greater than or equal to 65.

INTERPRETATION

Our assessment indicates that the measure of early systemic drug exposure of opioids is the best predictor of the abuse potential response in recreational opioid users following oral or nasal administration of a single dose of an intact or manipulated abuse deterrent opioids. Our findings support FDA's recommendation of comparative PK studies with early partial AUCs as a supportive PK metric for the assessment of abuse deterrent properties of generic opioid drug products in the general and product-specific guidance's of ADFs.

FUNDING

The study was partially funded by Fiscal Year 2017 Critical Path of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

An overview of abuse-deterrent opioids and recommendations for practical patient care

Despite advances in the treatment of severe intractable pain, opioids remain a critical and appropriate component of treatment. However, abuse, misuse, and diversion of prescription opioids are significant public health concerns. Opioid abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs) are one component of an opioid risk management plan to manage patient’s pain relief and quality of life while offering some protection against potentially harmful consequences of opioids from misuse and abuse. Opioid ADFs are designed to make manipulation more difficult and administration via non-oral routes less appealing. There are currently nine extended-release and one immediate-release opioid pain medications with US Food and Drug Administration-approved ADF labeling. All use physical/chemical barriers or agonist/antagonist combinations to deter manipulation and abuse. Evidence suggests that opioid ADFs decrease rates of abuse and diversion of opioids in the USA; however, some opioid ADFs are not yet commercially available or have not been on the market long enough to undergo post-marketing data analyses. Opioid ADFs along with the use of prescription drug monitoring programs, clinical assessment tools, toxicology testing, and co-prescribing of naloxone are all tools that can be used to reduce opioid abuse. Patient education on the risks of abuse and diversion is vital and includes a discussion of appropriate use of medication and proper storage. Physician assistants and nurse practitioners are on the “front lines” in battling opioid abuse and serve a key role in recognizing and mitigating the risks of prescription opioid diversion, abuse, and misuse (intentional and unintentional) and in identifying patients at risk for abuse while still providing pain relief to patients.

The ALERRT® instrument: a quantitative measure of the effort required to compromise prescription opioid abuse-deterrent tablets

BACKGROUND

US FDA guidance recommends measuring the degree of effort needed to manipulate abuse-deterrent (AD) opioids. The ALERRT^® instrument (PinneyAssociates; Bethesda, MD) uses visual analog scales to assess the labor, effort, and resources necessary to physically compromise AD product candidates in standardized settings.

OBJECTIVE

Use the ALERRT^® instrument for testing morphine abuse-deterrent, extended-release, injection-molded tablets (ADER-IMT) 60 and 100 mg and the comparators immediate-release (IR) morphine sulfate 30 mg and extended-release (ER) morphine sulfate 60 mg.

METHODS

Four technicians tested the products using 10 household tools. The ALERRT instrument quantified effort (all tools) and time (3 preselected tools) required for manipulation.

RESULTS

Morphine-ADER-IMT 60 and 100 mg were difficult to manipulate, as demonstrated by high scores (mean range, 71.0-99.0 and 77.0-99.5, respectively). IR and ER morphine sulfate were easy to manipulate (low scores; mean range, 2.0-14.8 and 2.3-17.5, respectively). Statistically significant mean differences between morphine-ADER-IMT and comparators' ALERRT scores were observed. Manipulations of morphine-ADER-IMT 60 and 100 mg for 300 seconds failed to produce substantial powdering. Manipulations of IR morphine sulfate (mean range, 65.5-175.8 seconds) and ER morphine sulfate (49.3-163.0 seconds) produced substantial to complete powdering in 92% of tablets.

CONCLUSIONS

Morphine-ADER-IMT was extremely difficult to manipulate versus non-AD formulations of morphine. The ALERRT system differentiated the degree of effort for manipulation of morphine-ADER-IMT and non-AD morphine formulations, indicating sensitivity of this instrument as part of Category 1 testing. By measuring the degree of effort required for manipulation, the ALERRT instrument provides an empirical assessment into the relative difficulty of manipulating opioid analgesics for abuse.