Current FDA regulatory guidance on the conduct of drug discrimination studies for NDA review: Does the scientific literature support recent recommendations?

Drug discrimination learning: Interoceptive stimulus control of behavior and its implications for regulated and dysregulated drug intake

Drug discrimination research has generated rich evidence for the capacity of interoceptive drug stimuli to control behavior by serving as discriminative cues. Owing to its neuropharmacological specificity, drug discrimination learning has been widely used to characterize the stimulus effects and neuropharmacological underpinning of drugs. Apart from such utility, discriminative drug stimuli may help regulate drug use by disambiguating conditioned associations and post-intake outcomes. First, this review summarizes the evidence supporting interoceptive regulation of drug intake from the literature of exteroceptive discriminative control of drug-related behavior, effects of drug priming, and self-titration of drug intake. Second, an overview of interoceptive control of reward-seeking and the animal model of discriminated goal-tracking is provided to illustrate interoceptive stimulus control of the initiation and patterning of drug intake. Third, we highlight the importance of interoceptive control of aversion-avoidance in the termination of drug-use episodes and describe the animal model of discriminated taste avoidance that supports such a position. In bridging these discriminative functions of drug stimuli, we propose that interoceptive drug stimuli help regulate intake by disambiguating whether intake will be rewarding, nonrewarding, or aversive. The reflection and discussion on current theoretical formulations of interoceptive control of drug intake may further scientific advances to improve animal models to study the mechanisms by which interoceptive stimuli regulate drug intake, as well as how alterations of interoceptive processes may contribute to the transition to dysregulated drug use.

Ulotaront, a novel TAAR1 agonist with 5-HT1A agonist activity, lacks abuse liability and attenuates cocaine cue-induced relapse in rats

BACKGROUND

Ulotaront (SEP-363856) is a trace amine-associated receptor 1 (TAAR1) agonist with 5-hydroxytryptamine type 1A (5-HT1A) agonist activity that is currently in Phase 3 clinical development for the treatment of schizophrenia. Unlike available antipsychotics, the efficacy of ulotaront is not mediated by blockade of dopamine D2 or serotonin 5-HT2A receptors. In a short-term randomized clinical trial, ulotaront has demonstrated significant efficacy in the treatment of adults with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Given ulotaront's novel mechanism of action a series of preclinical studies were performed to evaluate its potential abuse liability.

METHODS

A battery of studies were conducted in male and female rats to evaluate whether ulotaront produces behavioral changes suggestive of human abuse potential. In addition, studies were undertaken to probe the potential for ulotaront to block reinstatement of cocaine-seeking behavior in male rats.

RESULTS

Ulotaront was not self-administered by rats trained to self-administer amphetamine, cocaine, or heroin. The subjective qualities of ulotaront were distinct from those produced by amphetamine in a drug discrimination procedure. Ulotaront, and buspirone, a non-scheduled anxiolytic with 5-HT1A agonism, partially generalized to the interoceptive cue elicited by 3, 4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). In addition, ulotaront demonstrated a trend to reduce cocaine-primed induced reinstatement, and dose-dependently reduced cue-reinstated responding.

CONCLUSION

The current results suggest that the TAAR1/5-HT1A agonist ulotaront is not likely to pose a risk for recreational abuse in humans and may have potential therapeutic utility as a treatment of substance use disorders.

Study design criteria for regulatory-based drug control action: Drug discrimination

This "methods paper" focusses on one specific and limited aspect of drug safety evaluations required for all new drug entities that affect the central nervous system - the drug discrimination (DD) assay. We focus on three critical factors involved in experimental design and protocol development for the conduct of DD studies for abuse liability risk assessment that comply with the Good Laboratory Practice Guidelines (GLPs). The selection of 1) the reference drug(s) choice, 2) training dose selection, and 3) the selected route-of-administration will determine the applicability of the data to meet the regulatory expectations of the 8-factors determinative of schedule control recommendations. The study conduct and resulting data submission to the FDA are intended for drug scheduling review by the Controlled Substances Staff in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) at the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA). These animal studies are required to meet the statutory requirements of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. The abuse liability study is conducted during Phase II and III of human clinical trials. Procedural or method-based errors this late in drug development can result in a significant economic and business threat to the program.

Evaluating the abuse potential of psychedelic drugs as part of the safety pharmacology assessment for medical use in humans

Psychedelics comprise drugs come from various pharmacological classes including 5-HT_2A agonists, indirect 5-HT agonists, e.g., MDMA, NMDA antagonists and κ-opioid receptor agonists. There is resurgence in developing psychedelics to treat psychiatric disorders with high unmet clinical need. Many, but not all, psychedelics are schedule 1 controlled drugs (CDs), i.e., no approved medical use. For existing psychedelics in development, regulatory approval will require a move from schedule 1 to a CD schedule for drugs with medical use, i.e., schedules 2-5. Although abuse of the psychedelics is well documented, a systematic preclinical and clinical evaluation of the risks they pose in a medical-use setting does not exist. We describe the non-clinical tests required for a regulatory evaluation of abuse/dependence risks, i.e., drug-discrimination, intravenous self-administration and physical dependence liability. A synopsis of the existing data for the various types of psychedelics is provided and we describe our findings with psychedelic drugs in these models. FDA recently issued its guidance on abuse/dependence evaluation of drug-candidates (CDER/FDA, 2017). We critically review the guidance, discuss the impact this document will have on non-clinical abuse/dependence testing, and offer advice on how non-clinical abuse/dependence experiments can be designed to meet not only the expectations of FDA, but also other regulatory agencies. Finally, we offer views on how these non-clinical tests can be refined to provide more meaningful information to aid the assessment of the risks posed by CNS drug-candidates for abuse and physical dependence. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'Psychedelics: New Doors, Altered Perceptions'.

Mu-opioid peptide (MOP) and nociceptin/orphanin FQ peptide (NOP) receptor activation both contribute to the discriminative stimulus properties of cebranopadol in the rat

The novel potent analgesic cebranopadol is an agonist at nociceptin/orphanin FQ peptide (NOP) and classical opioid receptors, with the highest in-vitro activity at NOP and mu-opioid peptide (MOP) receptors, and somewhat lower activity at kappa-opioid peptide (KOP) and delta-opioid peptide (DOP) receptors. We addressed the question of which of these pharmacological activities contribute to the stimulus properties of cebranopadol using a rat drug discrimination procedure. First, cebranopadol was tested in generalization tests against a morphine cue, including receptor-specific antagonism. Second, cebranopadol was established as a cue, and MOP, NOP, KOP and DOP receptor-selective agonists were tested in generalization tests. Third, cebranopadol in combination with receptor-selective antagonists was tested against the cebranopadol cue. Cebranopadol generalized to the morphine cue. Full generalization was only seen at clearly supra-analgesic doses. The effect of cebranopadol was reduced by naloxone, but was enhanced by the NOP receptor antagonist J-113397. In cebranopadol-trained rats, cebranopadol as well as morphine produced generalization. A NOP receptor agonist did not, while a DOP receptor agonist and a KOP receptor agonist weakly generalized to the cebranopadol cue. Conversely, generalization of cebranopadol was reduced by naloxone and J-113397, but not by a DOP or a KOP receptor antagonist. These results suggest a contribution of MOP receptor activity and a relative lack of contribution of DOP and KOP receptor activity to cebranopadol's stimulus properties. The findings regarding the contribution of NOP receptor activity were equivocal, but interestingly, the morphine-like stimulus property of cebranopadol appears to be reduced by its intrinsic NOP receptor activity.