A comparison among tapentadol tamper-resistant formulations (TRF) and OxyContin® (non-TRF) in prescription opioid abusers

Tapentadol dependence through intravenous injection ('shooting') of crushed tablets associated with cutaneous pseudoallergic reactions

Tapentadol is a synthetic opioid analgesic with a low risk of abuse and diversion. The rising trend of abuse of tapentadol is largely attributable to its intrinsic pharmacological profile and easy availability due to poor regulatory control. We report a case of intravenous injection of crushed tapentadol tablets that presented with cutaneous adverse drug reactions. Cutaneous adverse reactions are common in injection drug abuse, and clinical examination is a must to inspect the injection sites. Stringent regulatory measures are required to restrict the increasing abuse of tapentadol in India.

Intranasal Use of Prescription Stimulants Among Adults Aged 18 to 30: Results From A Crowdsourcing Platform

OBJECTIVE

Few studies of prescription stimulant non-oral, non-medical use (NMU) (defined by use not as prescribed) have been conducted in adults beyond the college population. The purpose of this study was to characterize prescription stimulant non-oral use, specifically intranasal (IN) use (snorting) in young adults.

METHOD

Amazon's MTurk platform was used to recruit participants for an online survey. Data were collected from March to April 2020.

RESULTS

Thirty-two percent (n = 157) of survey respondents (N = 975), aged 18 to 30, reported IN prescription stimulant use (average of 32.1 episodes of lifetime IN use). Adderall was the most-reported prescription stimulant used intranasally (89.2%). Most IN users (82%; n = 68) reported spending no more than 5 minutes tampering with prescription stimulants. Intranasal users said they would take the medication orally if unable to tamper or manipulate medication for IN use.

CONCLUSION

These data help quantify a complex public health issue of ongoing IN use of prescription stimulants and suggest a potential role for manipulation-deterrent medications.

Preferential Oxycodone Loss of Physically Manipulated Abuse Deterrent Oxycodone HCl Extended Release Tablets Prepared for Nasal Insufflation Studies

A method to reproducibly mill abuse deterrent oxycodone hydrochloride (HCl) extended release (ER) tablets was developed for a nasal insufflation pharmacokinetic (PK) study. Several comminution methods were explored before determining that a conical mill resulted in controlled milling of tablets to a size range equal to or below 1000 μm. However, milling resulted in significant loss of oxycodone from abuse deterrent oxycodone HCl ER tablets compared to minimal oxycodone loss from oxycodone HCl immediate release (IR) tablets. Characterization of milled tablet powder showed that loss of oxycodone was not attributed to analytical procedures or oxycodone phase change during high intensity milling processes. The content uniformity of oxycodone in the milled tablet powder varied when ER and IR tablets were milled to a particle size distribution equal to or below 500 μm but did not vary when particles were sized above 500 µm to equal to or below 1000 μm. In addition, the initial excipient weight to drug substance weight ratio impacted the amount of oxycodone lost from the respective formulation. However, dissolution demonstrated that when oxycodone HCl ER tablets are milled, differences in excipient weight to drug substance weight ratio and particle size distribution of milled tablets did not result in significantly different release of oxycodone.

Abuse-deterrent properties and cytotoxicity of poly(ethylene oxide) after thermal tampering

Poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) is the most common deterring agent used in the abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs). In this study, we investigated the PEO's abuse-deterrent properties and its potential cytotoxicity after being heated at high temperatures (80 °C and 180 °C). The results indicated a significant loss in both crush and extraction resistance features of the polymer, which is primarily associated with the polymer degradation at the higher temperatures. The heat-treated PEO at the high temperature was also found to lose its controlled-release feature, upon which over 80% of the drug was released after one hour in the simulated gastric fluid. The cytotoxicity of the PEO was further assessed to evaluate the safety of the polymer following the thermal treatment. Our findings revealed a substantial loss in the viability of the cells exposed to the PEO treated at higher temperatures. Taken all, heating PEO at high temperatures can lead to a significant loss in both the crush/extraction resistance characteristics and the safety of the polymer. These findings reemphasize the fact that more appropriate and stricter test and regulations will be needed to assure that the abuse deterrent formulations are safe and effective under severe conditions of abuse.

Identification of factors influencing tampering of codeine-containing medicines in England: a qualitative study

Background

Tampering of psychoactive medicines presents challenges to regulation and public health. However, little is currently known about what influences the decisions to treat codeine-containing medicines (CCM) with cold water extraction (CWE) from the perspective of individuals employing these techniques. The article identifies factors influencing utilisation of CWE to separate codeine from compounded analgesics, such as paracetamol and ibuprofen, found in CCM.

Methods

Purposive sampling of 27 participants residing in England who took part in a qualitative interview. Of these, 14 individuals (11 males and 3 females) reported tampering of psychoactive medicines, and the relevant transcripts were included in the analyses for the study. Participants were recruited from one addiction treatment service and from an online survey. The mean age of the participants was 31.5 years (range = 18–42 years). Qualitative data analysis followed the processes of iterative categorization (IC). The codes ‘harm reduction’, ‘information sources’ and ‘changes on the drug markets’ were grouped and summarised. The coding of the data was done in a Microsoft® Word document.

Results

Two groups of participants were identified in the data analysis: (i) individuals who used CCM (n = 5), and (ii) individuals who used CCM and heroin (n = 9). Participants in both groups used CWE due to concerns of paracetamol overdose from the use of excessive dosages of CCM. For both of them, information obtained from the internet encouraged the use of CWE. Participants using CCM described how the many steps involved in conducting CWE, including sourcing codeine boxes from pharmacies (over the counter), presented a barrier against using CWE. Participants using CCM and heroin explained how reduced availability in the local heroin supply influenced utilisation of CWE techniques to maintain their use of opioids and avoid withdrawal. Withdrawal symptoms and cravings outweighed the concerns about the quality of the extracted codeine mixtures in this participant group, especially the ability of CWE to remove paracetamol and tablet fillers.

Conclusions

Utilisation of CWE of codeine was influenced by several factors including drug market supply, the availability of detailed information on the internet about CWE and restrictions on codeine sourcing in pharmacies. Risks identified with CWE include consumption of unknown doses of paracetamol if the CWE techniques are not used correctly. Attempts at extracting codeine from CCM should be considered in risk assessments of opioid medicines.

Behavioral economic demand metrics for abuse deterrent and abuse potential quantification

INTRODUCTION

Behavioral economics provides a framework for quantifying drug abuse potential that can inform public health risk, clinical treatment, and research. Hypothetical purchase task (HPT) questionnaires may provide a low-cost and sensitive method by which to measure and predict the appeal of pharmaceutical drugs that differ by formulation. However, the validity of this type of analysis must be empirically established by comparing the "essential value" (EV) of different drugs across subgroups.

PROCEDURES

This pilot study used HPT assessments and the Exponential Model of Demand to quantify the EV of opioid medications-specifically, easily tampered formulations versus (vs.) abuse-deterrent formulations-in patients with a history of opioid abuse.

MAIN FINDINGS

Participants had more inelastic demand for opioid pills than for cigarettes and alcohol. Participants with experience manipulating pills (M group) had more inelastic demand for standard pills vs. participants with no manipulation experience (NM group), and the M group had a more elastic demand for the abuse-deterrent opioid pill than for the standard pill. There was no effect of formulation in the NM group and there was no difference in demand elasticity for abuse-deterrent pills between the two groups. There was a positive correlation between the EVs of different drugs, and between some behavioral economic indices and treatment variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that HPTs may provide a sensitive measure of abuse potential that can distinguish between different formulations in at-risk populations.

In Vitro Assessment of Nasal Insufflation of Comminuted Drug Products Designed as Abuse Deterrent Using the Vertical Diffusion Cell

In vitro evaluation of abuse deterrent formulations (ADFs) is a challenge since real abuse situations are variable and ADF technology is evolving. Specifically, an assessment of an ADF to deter nasal insufflation would be valuable. In this study, a vertical diffusion cell (VDC) was used to evaluate polyethylene oxide (PEO)-based tablets manipulated by three different forces. The commercially available products Oxycontin®, an ADF, Opana®, and metoprolol tartrate tablet formulations made in our laboratory were studied. Particle size distribution and percent recovery of manipulated tablets were measured. Grinding produced the lowest recovery and the smallest particle size distribution. Drug release was examined using a VDC by placing the dry comminuted particles on an enclosed wetted cellulose membrane. Dispensing dry particles on a VDC is atypical but includes some key features associated with an abuse situation where once the particles are snorted, the moisture in the nasal mucosa activates hydration and swelling of the polymers in the formulation, retarding drug release. Drug release from OxyContin®, Opana®, and metoprolol tablets were analyzed for the cutting, grinding, and milling modes of abuse. The analysis showed that in most cases, the mode of abuse produced different particle sizes with different release rates. Statistically different release rates were observed for metoprolol tablets made with different molecular weight PEO and with different porosities. These results indicate that within detection limits, the VDC can be used to quantitate release differences due to various modes of abuse used in this study.

Tapentadol Extended Release in the Treatment of Severe Chronic Low Back Pain and Osteoarthritis Pain

Tapentadol is a novel pain reliever with apparently synergistic dual mechanisms of action, capable of addressing both nociceptive and neuropathic components of chronic pain. As an effective analgesic with good tolerability, tapentadol may be appropriate for patients suffering from severe chronic pain associated with low back pain (LBP) or osteoarthritis (OA). Efficacy studies of tapentadol in populations of patients with severe chronic LBP or OA pain suggest that tapentadol is non-inferior to oxycodone. Its tolerability, especially with respect to gastrointestinal (GI) side effects, may be better than that of other strong opioids in clinical trials and analyses of multiple trials. Patient satisfaction with tapentadol extended release for chronic noncancer pain syndromes is good. Although tapentadol has an opioid component with abuse liability, it appears to be a difficult opioid for tampering with less appeal to abusers than other opioids. For patients with severe LBP and OA pain, tapentadol appears to hold promise as a safe, effective therapeutic option.

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.

Pharmaceutical opioid use among oral and intravenous users in Australia: A qualitative comparative study

BACKGROUND

Between 1992 and 2012 dispensing episodes for pharmaceutical opioids (PO) in Australia increased from 500000 to 7500000. In the US, increases in the prescription of PO have been linked to increases in opioid-related morbidity and mortality and transitions to heroin injection. However, Australian data indicate that morbidity and mortality related to PO are relatively low, particularly when compared to heroin and other drugs. This paper explores the characteristics and patterns of non-medical pharmaceutical opioid (NMPO) use among a sample of young people in Sydney, Australia.

METHODS

During 2015, we conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 34 young people who use PO non-medically by oral (n=22) and intravenous (n=12) routes of administration.

RESULTS

Oral NMPO users were a more affluent group who clustered around the Northern, Inner and Eastern suburbs of Sydney, while the intravenous users came from a range of locations including rural/regional areas of NSW and socioeconomically disadvantaged suburbs of South Western Sydney. Oral users were characterised by intermittent and largely self-limiting NMPO use and reported few health and social consequences. Intravenous users reported heavy and frequent drug, including NMPO, use and a range of adverse health and social consequences including overdose, injecting risk behaviour, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and residential instability.

CONCLUSION

Results highlight the significance of social and structural factors in trajectories of opioid use and related harms. Factors such as stable housing and family relationships, disposable income and close social networks observed in young oral NMPO users may help to explain differences in patterns of NMPO use and related outcomes between the two groups.

Tapentadol: Can It Kill Two Birds with One Stone without Breaking Windows?

Tapentadol is a novel oral analgesic with a dual mode of action as an agonist of the µ-opioid receptor (MOR), and as a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (NRI) all in a single molecule. Immediate release (IR) tapentadol shows its analgesic effect quickly, at around 30 minutes. Its MOR agonistic action produces acute nociceptive pain relief; its role as an NRI brings about chronic neuropathic pain relief. Absorption is rapid, with a mean maximal serum concentration at 1.25-1.5 h after oral intake. It is present primarily in the form of conjugated metabolites after glucuronidation, and excretes rapidly and completely via the kidneys. The most common adverse reactions are nausea, dizziness, vomiting, and somnolence. Constipation is more common in use of the ER formulation. Precautions against concomitant use of central nervous system depressants, including sedatives, hypnotics, tranquilizers, general anesthetics, phenothiazines, other opioids, and alcohol, or use of tapentadol within 14 days of the cessation of monoamine oxidase inhibitors, are advised. The safety and efficacy have not been established for use during pregnancy, labor, and delivery, or for nursing mothers, pediatric patients less than 18 years of age, and cases of severe renal impairment and severe hepatic impairment. The major concerns for tapentadol are abuse, addiction, seeking behavior, withdrawal, and physical dependence. The presumed problem for use of tapentadol is to control the ratio of MOR agonist and NRI. In conclusion, tapentadol produces both nociceptive and neuropathic pain relief, but with worries about abuse and dependence.

How Resistant to Tampering are Codeine Containing Analgesics on the Market? Assessing the Potential for Opioid Extraction

Introduction

Misuse of opioid analgesics, in combination with diversion, dependence, and fatal overdoses, presents a serious problem for public health, which affects many countries worldwide. Within this context, tampering with opioids has been associated with serious harm. The aim of the present study was to assess the tampering potential of codeine combination analgesics on the market (containing codeine/non-opioid analgesics) by the extraction of codeine.

Methods

Codeine was extracted from three combination formulations sold lawfully from licensed pharmacies without a medical prescription in Denmark and the UK. Extraction of codeine followed tampering procedures available on the Internet. The amounts of codeine and accompanying non-opioid analgesics in tampering products were analysed with liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS).

Results

LC–MS/MS showed recoveries of the total amounts of codeine in tampering products of 81–84% from Product 1 (codeine/acetylsalicylic acid); 61–67% from Product 2 (codeine/ibuprofen); and 42–71% from Product 3 (codeine/paracetamol). Recoveries of non-opioid analgesics ranged between: 57–73% acetylsalicylic acid; 5.5–8.5% ibuprofen, and 5.0–9.2% paracetamol.

Conclusion

With the tampering procedures used, high amounts of codeine were separated from the accompanying analgesics in some, but not in all of the codeine containing formulations. Evidence-based medicine regulation, treatment for opioid dependence, and information to minimise risks to the public are essential components of an effective public health strategy to address the harms of tampering and misuse.

Funding

Marie Pedersen and Jensine Heiberg Foundation.

Diversion and Illicit Sale of Extended Release Tapentadol in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Prescription opioid analgesics are commonly prescribed for moderate to severe pain. An unintended consequence of prescribing opioid analgesics is the abuse and diversion of these medications. Tapentadol ER is a recently approved centrally acting analgesic with synergistic mechanisms of action: μ-opioid receptor agonism and inhibition of norepinephrine reuptake. We assessed the amount of diversion and related cost of obtaining tapentadol IR (Nucynta®) and tapentadol ER (Nucynta ER®) as well as other Schedule II opioid medications in street transactions in the United States using the Researched Abuse, Diversion and Addiction-Related Surveillance (RADARS®) System.

METHODS

The Drug Diversion Program measures the number of cases opened by 260 drug diversion investigators in 49 states. StreetRx(TM) uses a crowd-sourcing Website to collect the prices paid for licit or illicit drugs.

RESULTS

The population-based rates of diversion were 0.003 (tapentadol IR), 0.001 (tapentadol ER), and 1.495 (other Schedule II opioid tablets) reports per 100,000 population. The tapentadol ER rate was lower than the other Schedule II opioid tablets (P < 0.001) and tapentadol IR (P= 0.004). Diversion rates based on drug availability were 0.03 (tapentadol IR), 0.016 (tapentadol ER), and 0.172 (other Schedule II opioid tablets) per 1,000 prescriptions dispensed. The median street price per milligram was $0.18 (tapentadol IR), $0.10 (tapentadol ER), and $1.00 (other Schedule II opioid tablets).

DISCUSSION

Our results indicate that tapentadol ER is rarely sold illicitly in the United States. When sold illicitly, tapentadol ER costs less than other Schedule II opioid products.

Development and impact of prescription opioid abuse deterrent formulation technologies

BACKGROUND

Millions of patients are treated with opioid analgesics (OpAs) to relieve pain. Unfortunately, these medications are subject to abuse and/or unintended misuse. Abuse deterrent formulations (ADFs) represent an intervention strategy to decrease abuse/misuse without affecting patient access. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued Draft Guidance "Abuse deterrent opioids, Evaluation and Labeling" and is currently actively pursuing scientific input on this issue.

METHODS

The development of ADF technologies was reviewed using peer reviewed journals describing OpA post marketing studies, web sites containing FDA announcements on product approvals and manufacturer product use profiles.

RESULTS

Reviewed is the FDA recent approval of a product label describing the abuse deterrent characteristics of OxyContin(®) (physical barrier formulation), and the FDA determination that studies were insufficient for an Opana(®) (physical barrier) ADF label. Additional reviewed marketed OpAs with ADF technologies include: Suboxone(®) and Embeda(®) (opioid agonist/antagonist combinations), Oxecta(®) (aversion technology), and Nucynta(®) (physical barrier). Reviewed ADF technologies currently in development include: new physical barrier and aversion technologies, an innovative extended release formulation as well as novel polymer-opioid conjugates. As ADF technologies are part of a comprehensive intervention strategy to promote safe OpA use, additional components including governmental, community, and educational initiatives are reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of the recent ADF labeling applications for OxyContin(®) (Tier 3 approval) and Opana(®) (non-approval) suggest that the threshold for ADF labeling will be appropriately high. The presented findings indicate that ADF technologies can be a critical component of a comprehensive strategy to promote the safe and effective use of OpAs.

A review of human drug self-administration procedures

Drug self-administration procedures in laboratory settings allow us to closely model drug-taking behavior in real-world settings. This review provides an overview of many of the common self-administration methods used in human laboratory research. Typically, self-administration studies provide a quantifiable measure of the reinforcing effect of a drug, which is believed to be predictive of its potential for abuse. Several adaptations of the self-administration paradigm exist, the simplest of which allows participants free access to the drug under investigation. Free-access procedures allow investigators to observe patterns of drug self-administration and drug effects in a controlled setting. Allowing participants to choose between two simultaneously available reinforcers (choice procedures) is another well-established method of assessing the reinforcing effects of a drug. Offering a choice between two reinforcers (e.g. two different doses of the same drug, two different drugs, or drug and nondrug reinforcers) provides researchers with a point of comparison (e.g. between a drug of known abuse potential and a novel drug). When combined with other endpoints, such as subjective effects ratings, physiological responses, and cognitive performance, human self-administration paradigms have contributed significantly to our understanding of the factors that contribute to, maintain, and alter drug-taking behavior including: craving, positive subjective effects, toxicity, drug interactions and abstinence. This area of research has also begun to incorporate other techniques such as imaging and genetics to further understand the multifaceted nature of substance abuse. The present paper summarizes the different self-administration techniques that are commonly used today and the application of other procedures that may complement interpretation of the drug self-administration findings.