Impact of physical manipulation on in vitro and in vivo release profiles of oxycodone DETERx®: an extended-release, abuse-deterrent formulation

A Cross-Sectional Study of Tampering in Xtampza ER, an Abuse-Deterrent Formulation of an Extended-Release Opioid, in a Treatment Center Population

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

While the current landscape of opioid use disorder (OUD) is complicated by the increase in use of non-prescription opioids, prescription opioids continue to be frequently used in non-medical ways. In response to this abuse, pharmaceutical companies have developed abuse deterrent formulations (ADFs) for extended-release (ER) opioids. To test the effectiveness of Xtampza ER ADF (oxycodone myristate) at reducing tampering, its rate of tampering in a treatment-center population was compared to immediate release (IR) single entity (SE) oxycodone, other ER oxycodone opioids, and ER oxymorphone.

METHODS

Data were collected between the third quarter of 2018 and the third quarter of 2021 from individuals entering nationally distributed opioid treatment programs. To determine odds of tampering with Xtampza ER compared to each comparator, a logistic model was fit with a random intercept allowing for multiple drugs in each subject. Within-subject correlation was assumed to have a compound symmetric relationship.

RESULTS

Overlap among the categories of drug tampering was high. Logistic regression analyses found that oxycodone myristate had lower odds of tampering when compared to both IR SE oxycodone (OR = 0.23 [95% CI 0.11, 0.50], p = 0.0002) and ER oxymorphone (OR = 0.30 [95% CI 0.14, 0.67], p = 0.0038). Oxycodone myristate was not significantly different from other ER oxycodone opioids (OR = 0.5 [95% CI 0.24, 1.03], p = 0.0612). These findings did not change when the estimates were adjusted for age and sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Drugs employing ADF technology may reduce the likelihood of tampering when compared to non-ADF formulations in a treatment-center population, which represents an opportunity for intervention in OUD among those still requiring pain management.

Nonmedical Use of Xtampza® ER and Other Oxycodone Medications in Adults Evaluated for Substance Abuse Treatment: Real-World Data from the Addiction Severity Index-Multimedia Version (ASI-MV®)

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate real-world data related to past 30-day nonmedical use (NMU) and routes of administration of Xtampza^® ER and comparator oxycodone medications in the US as captured within the Addiction Severity Index-Multimedia Version^® (ASI-MV^®).

Methods

Data were collected from July 2016 through December 2019 from 647 centers located in 44 states using the ASI-MV, a clinical instrument used to evaluate substance use and treatment planning. Demographic characteristics were assessed using Pearson's chi-square test for categorical data and quarterly NMU rates were calculated. Distribution of route of administration was studied using a proportional reporting ratio (PRR) analysis.

Results

Of 192,810 assessments, 42,279 (21.9%) indicated past 30-day NMU of at least one prescription opioid, including Xtampza ER (N=73, 0.2%), other oxycodone ER (n=3802, 9.0%) and oxycodone IR (n=14,579, 34.5%). All quarterly Xtampza ER NMU rates per 100 ASI-MV assessments were significantly lower than those for other oxycodone ER and oxycodone IR. Overall, quarterly Xtampza ER NMU drug utilization adjusted rates were significantly lower than quarterly rates observed for other oxycodone ER NMU but not consistently significantly lower than oxycodone IR NMU. Although not all statistically significant, all ratios from the PRR analysis were less than 1.0, indicating that rates of use of any alternate route, any non-oral route, snorting, and injecting were higher for other oxycodone ER and oxycodone IR than for Xtampza ER.

Conclusion

Xtampza ER had significantly lower rates of NMU than other oxycodone ER products and oxycodone IR products, as well as significantly lower rates of non-oral NMU than oxycodone IR products, in a population of individuals seeking substance abuse treatment. Understanding risks associated with different opioid medications is important for prescribers as they manage risks of opioid misuse and abuse with effective pain therapy.

Assessing Drug Release from Manipulated Abuse Deterrent Formulations

There is a need to develop in vitro dissolution methods that discriminate for particle size of the manipulated abuse deterrent formulation (ADF) and that can be used for in vivo predictive models since dissolution methods developed for intact formulation might not be suitable for manipulated ones. A vertical diffusion cell (VDC) and United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Apparatus 1, 2, and 4 were evaluated for measuring the dissolution of intact and manipulated metoprolol succinate tablets with abuse deterrent-like properties. These tablets were physically manipulated to produce fine (106-500 μm) and coarse (500-1000 μm) powder samples. The VDC method was not able to discriminate the effect of particle size on drug release with varied stirring rate (200 to 800 rpm), molecular weight cut-off (MWCO, 3-5 kDa to 12-14 kDa) of the diffusion membrane, or composition and ionic strength (0.45% and 0.9%) of receiver medium. Standard and modified USP Apparatus 1 and 2 methods were assessed; however, large variations (RSD > 20%) were observed with USP Apparatus 1 for manipulated product dissolution and floating powder samples caused failure of auto-sampling when using standard USP Apparatus 2. For the USP Apparatus 4 dissolution method, packing configuration (1, 3, 8 layers and blend), ionic strength of dissolution medium (0.017, 0.077, and 0.154 M additional NaCl), and flow rate (4, 8, 16 mL/min) were studied to discriminate the effect of particle size on release. The USP Apparatus 4 dissolution method was optimized by using a packaging configuration of 8 layers with 8 mL/min flow rate which exhibited low variability and complete drug release and it could be used for in vivo predictive models. The dissolution method variables can be optimized for a specific product for desirable reproducibility and discriminatory power when using USP Apparatus 4.

Abuse-deterrent opioid analgesics: a guide for clinicians

The US FDA has encouraged the development of abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs) of opioid analgesics as one component in a comprehensive effort to combat prescription opioid abuse. Guidance issued by the FDA outlines three types of premarket studies for evaluating abuse deterrence: laboratory-based in vitro manipulation and extraction studies, pharmacokinetic studies and human abuse potential studies. After approval, postmarket studies are needed to evaluate the impact of an ADF product on abuse in real-world settings. This review summarizes the regulatory issues involved in the development of ADF opioids and clarifies abuse-deterrence claims in product labels, in order to assist clinicians in critically evaluating the available evidence pertaining to the abuse-deterrent features of opioid analgesics.

Mitigation of IV Abuse Through the Use of Abuse-Deterrent Opioid Formulations: An Overview of Current Technologies

Providers who treat patients with chronic pain face a dual challenge: providing adequate access to opioid therapies for appropriate pain management while adopting strategies to minimize the risk for abuse. Commonly prescribed opioids have substantial abuse potential when administered intravenously, and extended‐release (ER)/long‐acting (LA) opioids may be targeted for intravenous (IV) abuse because of the higher per‐dose medication level. The consequences of IV opioid abuse are severe and increase the risks for adverse outcomes, including mortality due to acute health events, serious infections, and deep vein thrombosis, to name a few. To reduce the potential for abuse of prescription opioids by both recreational and experienced drug abusers, abuse‐deterrent formulations (ADFs) of opioid medications employ either physical/chemical barriers or agonist‐antagonist combinations. Here we review the development and use of opioid ADFs as a harm‐reduction strategy, and their potential for mitigating IV opioid abuse. The approved ER/LA opioids with ADF labeling in the United States include formulations of oxycodone, hydrocodone, and morphine. Findings from in vitro laboratory tests of abuse deterrence for opioid ADFs are described herein, as are data from human abuse potential studies for IV abuse of those ADF products, for which such studies are feasible (ie, abuse‐deterrent agonist‐antagonist formulations). The available ADF opioids may decrease both the attractiveness and the feasibility of IV abuse. The adoption of ADF opioids represents one tactic for providing access to needed medication for patients with chronic pain, while potentially reducing the risk for opioid abuse, in a comprehensive effort to combat the opioid epidemic.

Analgesic efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a long-acting abuse-deterrent formulation of oxycodone for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain in subjects successfully switched from immediate-release oxycodone

OBJECTIVES

This post hoc analysis of data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched-enrollment randomized-withdrawal Phase III study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and analgesic efficacy of Oxycodone DETERx extended-release (ER), abuse-deterrent capsules (Xtampza® ER) in subjects with chronic low back pain who were successfully transitioned from immediate-release (IR) oxycodone.

METHODS

Continuous outcomes were analyzed using a mixed-model repeated-measures approach; binomial outcomes were analyzed using chi-squared; and time-to-event outcomes using Kaplan-Meier analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 110 subjects previously prescribed IR oxycodone entered the Open-label Titration Phase. Forty-four subjects were randomized to Oxycodone DETERx (n=22) or placebo (n=22) in the 12-week Double-blind Maintenance Phase. Efficacy results in this subgroup showed a statistically significant difference between Oxycodone DETERx and placebo in average pain intensity scores from Randomization Baseline to Week 12 (least squares mean [± standard error], -1.88 [0.70]; P=0.0078). Additional efficacy results indicated that Oxycodone DETERx vs placebo was associated with a statistically significant benefit in durability of effect from Week 2 through Week 12 (P<0.01), numbers of subjects with a ≥30% (n [%] 10 [45.5%] vs 0 [0%]; P=0.0004) and ≥50% (10 [45.5%] vs 0 [0%]; P=0.0004) improvement in pain intensity, longer time-to-exit (P=0.0014), a greater number of subjects who completed the study (14 [63.6%] vs 4 [18.2%]), and less rescue medication use (acetaminophen; mean [SD], 163.5 [337.8] mg) vs 216.2 [377.3] mg). Adverse event profiles were consistent with opioid class effects and results from the original study; Oxycodone DETERx was well tolerated in subjects previously treated with short-acting oxycodone.

CONCLUSIONS

Oxycodone DETERx resulted in clinically meaningful and statistically significant efficacy in subjects with chronic low back pain who were previously prescribed IR oxycodone and were successfully switched to ER Oxycodone DETERx.

Abuse-deterrent opioids: an update on current approaches and considerations

OBJECTIVE

Abuse and misuse of prescription opioids is a significant public health concern. This review examines the strategies used to confer abuse-deterrent properties on opioid abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs), the characteristics and supporting data for each of the available ADFs, and the role of opioid ADFs as part of a comprehensive opioid risk management plan.

METHODS

A PubMed search was performed for articles published within the last 10 years using the search terms "abuse deterrent opioids". Articles were limited to clinical studies and reviews focusing on United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved opioid ADFs in the US.

RESULTS

There are currently nine extended-release and one immediate-release opioid pain medications with US FDA-approved ADF labelling. All use either physical and chemical barriers or agonist/antagonist combinations to deter manipulation and abuse. Evidence is mounting that introduction of opioid ADFs has been associated with decreased rates of abuse and diversion of opioids in the US.

CONCLUSIONS

Although not sufficient by themselves to prevent prescription opioid abuse and misuse, opioid ADFs are an important component of a healthcare provider's comprehensive opioid risk management plan (along with utilization of prescription drug monitoring programs, clinical assessment tools, urine tests, co-prescribing of naloxone to patients at risk of an overdose, access to non-pharmacological treatments and addiction/mental health resources, among others). Adoption of opioid ADFs should be considered as part of an overall public health opioid risk management plan involving all stakeholders to balance legitimate safe and effective use of opioids against misuse and abuse.

In Vitro Drug Release After Crushing: Evaluation of Xtampza® ER and Other ER Opioid Formulations

Background and Objective

Extended-release (ER) opioids are associated with high rates of abuse. Recreational opioid users often manipulate ER formulations to achieve a high plasma concentration in a short amount of time, resulting in a more rapid and intense high. Patients may also manipulate ER tablets to facilitate swallowing, without recognizing that manipulation could increase release rate. The goal of this study was to assess the ability of oxycodone DETERx (Xtampza^® ER, Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc., Canton, MA, USA) and other commercially available ER opioid formulations with and without physicochemical abuse-deterrent characteristics to be manipulated by crushing in an in vitro setting.

Methods

In vitro dissolution techniques were used to compare the opioid release from a variety of ER opioid formulations. Dissolution was assessed for intact and crushed dosage forms. Opioid release was quantified using high-performance liquid chromatography.

Results

Intact formulations exhibited drug release rates characteristic of 12- or 24-h dosage forms. After crushing using commonly available household tools, only Xtampza ER maintained ER of opioid.

Conclusions

Xtampza ER maintained its ER characteristics after crushing, unlike many other commercially available opioid formulations, including some formulated with abuse-deterrent properties. As such, Xtampza ER may be less appealing to abusers and offer a margin of safety for patients who manipulate dosage forms to facilitate swallowing.

Tolerability, Safety, and Effectiveness of Oxycodone DETERx in Elderly Patients ≥65 Years of Age with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Trial Design

This was a phase III, randomized withdrawal, double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched enrollment, parallel-group, multicenter study intended to demonstrate the safety, tolerability, and analgesic efficacy of oxycodone DETERx^® (Xtampza™ ER) compared with matching placebo.

Methods

This post hoc analysis was performed using data from a subpopulation of enrolled patients who were ≥65 years of age. The study enrolled male and female patients with a clinical diagnosis of moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain for a minimum of 6 months prior to screening who required around-the-clock opioid therapy. To be eligible for enrollment, patients were required to have an average 24-h pain intensity score of ≥5 and ≤9 on an 11-point (0–10) Pain Intensity—Numerical Rating Scale at the screening visit. The study enrolled both opioid-experienced and opioid-naïve patients. The study consisted of an open-label titration phase followed by a 12-week double-blind maintenance phase. The dose range was 40–160 mg oxycodone hydrochloride equivalent per day. This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of oxycodone DETERx among patients ≥65 years of age. The effectiveness of oxycodone DETERx was evaluated based on average pain intensity scores, Patient Global Impression of Change, responder analysis, and Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. The safety and tolerability of oxycodone DETERx were also evaluated. Patients were randomized to either oxycodone DETERx or placebo using a blocked randomization scheme in a 1:1 ratio. Randomization was stratified by previous opioid use (naïve or experienced). The study drug was coded in a manner that maintained the blinding. Study personnel and patients remained blinded to the assigned treatments throughout the study.

Results

For this post-hoc analysis, the intent-to-treat and randomized safety populations included 52 patients ≥65 years old, 26 each in the oxycodone DETERx and placebo groups, who participated in the study during the titration phase and were randomized to the double-blind maintenance phase. Clinically important pain reduction from screening was achieved with oxycodone DETERx, with the median pain intensity score decreasing from 7.50 at screening to 2.69 at Week 12. A clinically meaningful treatment difference of −0.9 in pain score between oxycodone DETERx and placebo was observed. All 18 elderly patients who completed the study reported improvement in pain, with 62% showing ≥30% improvement and 54% showing ≥50% improvement in pain intensity compared with patients on placebo (p = 0.0128 and p = 0.0501, respectively). Patients on oxycodone DETERx remained in the study longer than those on placebo. Of the 26 patients ≥65 years old randomized to continue oxycodone DETERx during the double-blind maintenance phase, 18 (69%) completed the study; only two patients (8%) in the oxycodone DETERx group discontinued due to adverse events. The safety and tolerability profiles showed no new or unexpected safety concerns. The adverse event profiles were similar between the titration and double-blind maintenance phases.

Conclusions

Oxycodone DETERx was efficacious and generally well tolerated in patients ≥65 years old.

Trial Registration

The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01685684).

The comparative pharmacokinetics of physical manipulation by crushing of Xtampza® ER compared with OxyContin®

AIM

To further characterize the pharmacokinetics of Xtampza^® ER.

SUBJECTS & METHODS

This was an open-label, randomized, active-controlled, five-treatment, five-period, naltrexone-blocked, cross-over study. Healthy subjects received five equivalent oxycodone doses: Xtampza ER (intact or crushed), OxyContin^® (intact or crushed) or immediate-release (IR) oxycodone (crushed). Blood samples were collected to assess oxycodone concentrations.

RESULTS

Crushed and intact Xtampza ER resulted in lower peak plasma concentrations compared with crushed oxycodone IR; crushed and intact Xtampza ER were bioequivalent. Crushed OxyContin exhibited a rapid increase in plasma oxycodone and was bioequivalent to crushed oxycodone IR.

CONCLUSION

This second pharmacokinetic study demonstrated that Xtampza ER maintains its ER properties after crushing, unlike OxyContin, which failed to retain its ER properties after crushing. ANZCTR registration number: ACTRN12614000613606.

Oxycodone DETERx®: A Novel Abuse-Deterrent, Extended-Release Analgesic Option for the Treatment of Patients with Chronic Pain

BACKGROUND

Extended-release (ER) opioid analgesics are commonly used to provide safe and effective pain relief to treat pain severe enough to require around-the-clock, long-term dosing. These ER opioid formulations usually contain more drug per dosage unit than immediate-release (IR) agents, and therefore bring with them challenges related to both opioid abuse and misuse, often through manipulation of the dosage form. Oxycodone DETERx® (Xtampza® ER, Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc.) is a novel abuse-deterrent, ER formulation developed to deter common methods of manipulation. In addition to having abuse-deterrent properties, oxycodone DETERx was developed to provide alternative modes of administration for patients with chronic pain and difficulty swallowing.

SCOPE

Using published articles, abstracts, and prescribing information, data supporting the use of oxycodone DETERx are reviewed.

FINDINGS

Oxycodone DETERx was effective at reducing chronic pain in patients enrolled in a pivotal clinical trial, and had a tolerability profile expected of opioids. In addition to administration of the intact capsule, oxycodone DETERx can also be administered by sprinkling directly into the mouth from a dosing cup, onto soft foods, or through nasogastric or gastrostomy tubes, thus providing flexible dosing options for patients who have difficulty swallowing. In vitro studies demonstrated the reduced ability of oxycodone DETERx to be manipulated by common techniques used by abusers to defeat the ER characteristics or prepare the formulation for injection. Pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated that the ER characteristics of oxycodone DETERx are maintained if chewed or crushed. As a result, oxycodone DETERx is currently the only ER-formulated opioid without a boxed warning against crushing or chewing. Human abuse-potential studies conducted in a population of recreational opioid users demonstrated lower drug-liking scores for oxycodone DETERx administered intranasally and orally when compared with IR oxycodone.

FUNDING

Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc.

An abuse-deterrent, microsphere-in-capsule formulation of extended-release oxycodone: alternative modes of administration to facilitate pain management in patients with dysphagia

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic pain may experience difficulty swallowing, in part due to worsening disease, comorbid conditions, iatrogenic etiology, or age. Patients or caregivers may manipulate extended-release (ER) opioid formulations to facilitate oral dosing due to a lack of therapeutic options that allow for sprinkle or enteral feeding tube administration. If crushed or broken, current oral ER opioids can be associated with adverse sequelae, including risk of potentially fatal overdose.

OBJECTIVE

To review the safety, in vitro dissolution data, and in vivo pharmacokinetic data that support alternative modes of administration of oxycodone DETERx (Xtampza ER) via sprinkling onto soft foods for oral ingestion or via enteral feeding tubes.

METHODS

A review of oxycodone DETERx data from in vitro and in vivo studies was conducted to demonstrate support for alternative routes and modes of administration.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the dissolution profile when administered with various soft foods or when mixed with various liquid vehicles and administered via nasogastric (NG) or gastrostomy (G) tubes, based on in vitro studies. When sprinkled onto applesauce and administered orally, the microspheres were bioequivalent to the intact oxycodone capsules. When crushed or chewed, the formulation maintained its pharmacokinetic profile; no bolus dose of opioid was released. The sprinkle-dose study was limited by the single-dose study design, as well as the small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Oxycodone DETERx is the first ER oxycodone formulation that can be administered either intact, sprinkled onto soft foods, or via NG/G tubes, thereby providing options for treating pain in patients who have difficulty swallowing.

Oral Human Abuse Potential of Oxycodone DETERx® (Xtampza® ER)

Oxycodone DETERx^® (Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc, Canton, Massachusetts) is an extended‐release, microsphere‐in‐capsule, abuse‐deterrent formulation designed to retain its extended‐release properties after tampering (eg, chewing/crushing). This randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, triple‐dummy study evaluated the oral abuse potential of intact and chewed oxycodone DETERx capsules compared with crushed immediate‐release oxycodone. Subjects with a history of recreational opioid use who were nondependent/nontolerant to opioids were enrolled. Treatments included intact oxycodone DETERx (high‐fat, high‐calorie meal and fasted), chewed oxycodone DETERx (high‐fat, high‐calorie meal and fasted), crushed immediate‐release oxycodone (fasted), and placebo (high‐fat, high‐calorie meal). Plasma samples were collected to determine pharmacokinetic parameters. The primary endpoint was drug liking at the moment; other endpoints included drug effects questionnaire scores, Addiction Research Center Inventory/Morphine Benzedrine Group score, pupillometry measurements, and safety. Thirty‐eight subjects completed the study. Chewed and intact oxycodone DETERx were bioequivalent, unlike crushed immediate‐release oxycodone, which yielded higher peak oxycodone plasma concentrations compared with all methods of oxycodone DETERx administration. The mean maximum (peak) effect (E_max) for drug liking was significantly lower for chewed and intact oxycodone DETERx than for crushed immediate‐release oxycodone (P < .01). The time to E_max was significantly longer for chewed and intact oxycodone DETERx than for crushed immediate‐release oxycodone (P < .0001). Scores for feeling high and Addiction Research Center Inventory/Morphine Benzedrine Group scores demonstrated lower abuse potential for chewed and intact oxycodone DETERx compared with crushed immediate‐release oxycodone. Study treatments were well tolerated; no subjects experienced serious adverse events. These results demonstrate the lower oral abuse potential of chewed and intact oxycodone DETERx than crushed immediate‐release oxycodone.

A phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, safety, tolerability, and efficacy study of Xtampza ER in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain

Opioid analgesics are commonly used for the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP); however, abuse potential is a major concern. This study used a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched-enrollment randomized-withdrawal study design to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and analgesic efficacy of an abuse-deterrent formulation of extended-release oxycodone, Xtampza ER, in opioid-naive and opioid-experienced adults with moderate-to-severe CLBP. Patients entered an open-label titration phase (N = 740); those who were successfully titrated on Xtampza ER (≥40 to ≤160 mg oxycodone hydrochloride equivalent per day) were randomized to active drug (N = 193) or placebo (N = 196) for 12 weeks. Primary efficacy results showed a statistically significant difference in average pain intensity from randomization baseline to treatment week 12 between the Xtampza ER and placebo groups (mean [±SE], -1.56 [0.267]; P < 0.0001). All sensitivity analyses results supported the primary result of the study. Secondary efficacy outcomes indicated that Xtampza ER vs placebo had more patients with improvement in patient global impression of change (26.4% vs 14.3%; P < 0.0001), longer time-to-exit from the study (58 vs 35 days; P = 0.0102), and a greater proportion of patients with ≥30% (49.2% vs 33.2%; P = 0.0013) and ≥50% (38.3% vs 24.5%; P = 0.0032) improvement in pain intensity. There was less rescue medication (acetaminophen) use in the Xtampza ER treatment group than in the placebo group. Xtampza ER had an adverse event profile consistent with other opioids and was well tolerated; no new safety concerns were identified. In conclusion, Xtampza ER resulted in clinically and statistically significant efficacy in patients with CLBP.

Evaluation of the durability of pain relief throughout a 12 hour dosing interval of a novel, extended-release, abuse-deterrent formulation of oxycodone

BACKGROUND

Abuse deterrent formulations (ADF) are designed to prevent the misuse of opioids by tampering (e.g. physical and chemical manipulation) in order to ingest the opioid in a manner other than intended. Extended-release (ER) formulations are formulated with a larger drug load than immediate-release (IR) formulations, which makes ER opioids more desirable to drug abusers than I.R. formulations. ADFs, therefore, are particularly useful with ER opioid agents, which are designed to produce consistent analgesia over prolonged dosing intervals. However, the drug release properties of these formulations vary and sometimes may not provide adequate pain relief throughout the intended dosing interval, requiring patients to take additional medication for pain relief. Oxycodone DETERx* (Xtampza ER * ) is a novel, microsphere-in-capsule opioid formulation, which allows for twice daily dosing (i.e. every 12 hours) and mitigates the ability to tamper with the formulation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the durability of pain relief of a novel formulation of oxycodone throughout the 12 hour dosing interval.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This study is a post-hoc analysis of 193 subjects in a Phase 3 randomized withdrawal, double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched-enrollment, parallel-group, multicenter, 12-week clinical study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The analysis evaluated the frequency and distribution of use of oxycodone ER and rescue medication during the Double-blind Maintenance Phase of the study.

RESULTS

Usage patterns captured by an electronic diary indicated limited overall and limited per-day use of rescue medication with no increase in rescue medication consumption 8 to 12 hours post-dose, suggesting that subjects did not experience end-of-dose failure during this time period.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited in that it is a post-hoc analysis based on data gathered electronically from a large, prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 clinical study.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of dosing patterns indicates that this ER oxycodone capsule formulation has durability of effect over the entire 12-hour dosing interval. These data support the use of abuse-deterrent oxycodone ER as a 12-hour dosing formulation.

Patients with chronic pain and dysphagia (CPD): unmet medical needs and pharmacologic treatment options

BACKGROUND

For properly selected patients experiencing chronic pain, extended-release opioid formulations may represent an appropriate pain management choice. For the many adults, elderly, and children who have medical conditions that make swallowing solid, oral-dose formulations difficult (dysphagia) or painful (odynophagia), this option may be limited. The combination of chronic pain with dysphagia (CPD) presents a challenge to physicians and patients alike when oral opioid analgesia is needed to control pain, but patients are unable to swallow solid, oral dosage forms.

METHODS

A Medline search was performed (1990 to 2013) using the search terms swallowing difficulties, dysphagia, odynophagia, adults, pediatrics, elderly, chronic pain, pain, and opioids. The following websites were searched: American Dysphagia Network, Dysphagia Research Society, World Health Organization, American Pain Society, International Association for the Study of Pain, American Academy of Pain Medicine, and American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians. Chronic pain guidelines from the following professional organizations were searched: American Pain Society, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians, British Geriatric Society, European Society of Medical Oncology, World Health Organization, and the European Association for Palliative Care.

FINDINGS

There is an unmet medical need for greater recognition of dysphagia, awareness of potential problems with medication administration in these patients, recognition of alternative drug formulations that are available for use in CPD, and an appreciation that there are new, solid, oral-dose, opioid formulations in development that can mitigate these issues associated with swallowing difficulty while still providing practical, effective analgesia. Current pharmacologic treatments have limitations; new, prospective opioid formulations in clinical development may offer physicians and patients with CPD effective treatment options while mitigating accidental exposure and abuse liability.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of patients with CPD may be larger than is currently anticipated by healthcare providers. Physicians should proactively include a discussion of dysphagia as part of the patient examination. CPD is an unmet medical need. There are novel opioid formulations in clinical development that address the limitations of current opioid treatments. This manuscript reviews the problems associated with dysphagia on medication administration and adherence, currently available treatment options, and opioid analgesic formulations currently in clinical development.