Drug AbuseDeterrence

AbusePotential,Pharmacokinetics,Pharmacodynamics,andSafetyofIntranasallyAdministeredCrushedOxycodone

HClAbuse‐DeterrentControlled‐ReleaseTabletsinRecreationalOpioidUsers

TheJournal ofClinicalPharmacology54(4)468–477

©2013TheAuthors.TheJournalofClinicalPharmacologyPublishedby

WileyPeriodicals,Inc.onbehalfofTheAmericanCollegeofClinicalPharmacology

DOI:10.1002/jcph.235

StephenC.Harris,MD1,PeterJ.Perrino,MS1,IraSmith,MD2,MeganJ.Shram,PhD3,SalvatoreV.Colucci,MS1†,

CynthiaBartlett,MMath2,andEdwardM.Sellers,MD,PhD,FRCPC4‡

Abstract

Theobjective ofthisstudy was toevaluate abuse potential, pharmacokinetics,pharmacodynamics, and safetyofintranasallyadministered,crushedreformulatedOxyContin1(oxycodoneHClcontrolled‐release)tablets(ORF),relativetocrushedoriginalOxyContin1(OC),oxycodonepowder(OxyAPI),andOCplacebo.Thisrandomized,double‐blind,positive‐andplacebo‐controlledcrossoverstudyenrolledhealthy,adult,nonphysicallydependentrecreationalopioiduserswithrecenthistoryofintranasaldrugabuse(N¼27).Activetreatmentscontainedoxycodone(30mg).

Pharmacokinetics,pharmacodynamics(e.g.,OverallDrugLiking[ODL],TakeDrugAgain[TDA],andHighVisualAnalogScales[VAS];SubjectiveDrugValue [SDV];pupillometry;intranasal irritation),andsafety(e.g.,adverseevents,vitalsigns,laboratory tests)wereassessed to24hourspostdose.

CrushedORFadministrationyieldedreducedoxycodoneCmax andincreasedTmaxversuscrushedOCandOxyAPI.PeakeffectsforpharmacodynamicmeasuresweredelayedwithORF(1–2hours)versusOCandOxyAPI(0.5–1hour).ODL,TDA,HighVAS,andSDVEmaxvaluesweresignificantlylower

(P::;.05)andsomeintranasalirritationratingsweregreaterforORFversusOCandOxyAPI.Nosignificantorunexpectedsafetyfindingswereobserved.ComparedwithOCandOxyAPI,intranasallyadministeredORFwasassociatedwithloweranddelayedpeakplasmaconcentrations,decreaseddrug‐liking,anddecreasedintranasaltolerability.ThissuggeststhatORFhasadecreasedpotentialforintranasaloxycodoneabuse.Therewere

nosignificantorunexpectedsafetyfindings.Asistrueforallabusepotentialstudies,epidemiologicalorotherappropriatepost‐marketingstudiesare

requiredtoassesstheimpactofthereductioninintranasaloxycodoneabusepotentialobservedinthepresentstudyonreal‐worldpatternsofORF

misuse,abuse,anddiversion.

Keywords

oxycodone,OxyContin,reformulation,abusedeterrent,abusepotential,pharmacokinetic,pharmacodynamic,tamperresistant

ThedirectandindirectcostsofchronicpainintheUnitedStateshavebeenestimatedatmorethan$100billionannuallyinmedicalexpenses,lostwages,andlostproductivity.1Prescriptionopioidsareanimportanttreatmentoptionforthemanagementofchronicpain,buttheirmisuseandabuseconstituteasubstantialmedicalandpublichealthproblem.2While opioids are often abused via intact oraladministration,opioiddosageformsarealsofrequentlytamperedwithandthenabusedorallyorviaalternateroutesofadministration(predominantlyintranasaland

intravenousroutes)thatproviderapidopioiddeliverytothecentralnervoussystem.3–5Inanefforttoreduceabuseviaalternateroutes,opioidformulationshavebeencreated

withfeaturesdesignedtodetertampering,suchasphysicalbarriers(e.g.,excipientsthatresistmanipulation)andinclusionofantagonists(e.g.,naloxoneornaltrexone)thatblockopioideffects.6Itisrecognized thatnoopioidformulationisimmunetotamperingbyknowledgeabledrugabusers,6buttamper‐deterrentformulations mayservetodecreasethepublichealthburdenofopioidabuse

1PurduePharmaL.P.,Stamford,CT,USA

2INCResearchToronto,Toronto,Ontario,Canada3AltreosResearchPartners,Toronto,Ontario,Canada4DLGlobalPartners,Toronto,Ontario,Canada

ThisisanopenaccessarticleunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivsLicense,whichpermitsuseanddistributioninanymedium,providedtheoriginalworkisproperlycited,theuseisnon–commercialandnomodificationsoradaptationsaremade.

Submittedforpublication11July2013;accepted14November2013.

CorrespondingAuthor:

StephenC.Harris,MD,ClinicalPharmacology,PurduePharmaL.P.,OneStamfordForum,Stamford,CT06901,USA

Email:

†Mr.ColucciiswiththeBiostatisticsdepartmentatPurdue.

‡HonoraryFellowoftheAmericanCollegeofClinicalPharmacology.

bymakingabusemoredifficult,moretimeconsuming,andlesseffectivetotheabuser.

TheoriginalformulationofOxyContin1 (OC)was

approvedin1995bytheFoodandDrugAdministration(FDA)foruseinthetreatmentofmoderatetoseverepain.The originalformulation providedno inherentresistancetotampering,andthecontrolofoxycodonereleasecouldbeeasilydefeatedbycrushingthetabletintoafinepowder.By2001,OChadbeenidentifiedasonecomponentofthegrowingproblemofprescriptiondrug

abuse.7–9TheFDArespondedtothisproblem,inpart,by

workingwithindustrytodevelopproactiveriskmitigationstrategies.SuchstrategiesforOCincludedaddingablackboxwarningtoproductlabellingandinitiatingaproactivesurveillanceprogamforprescriptionopioidabuseanddiversion.7

Tofurtheraddresstheproblemofmisuse,abuse,anddiversionofOC,anabuse‐deterrentreformulationofOxyContin1(ORF)wasdeveloped.ORFwasdesignedto

bebioequivalenttoOCfollowingintactoraladministra-tionandtoresistphysicalandchemicalmanipulationsintendedtodefeatthecontrolofoxycodonerelease.InvitrotamperingstudiesdemonstratedthatORFresists

crushingandotherparticlesize reductionefforts.ORFis

commerciallyavailable.TheresultsofthisstudyapplystrictlytoORF.

Methods

EthicalConduct

Thisstudywasconductedat INCResearchToronto Inc.,Toronto,Canada,inaccordancewiththeDeclarationofHelsinkianditsamendmentsasoutlinedbytheInternationalConferenceonHarmonisation.Priortostudyinitiation,theInstitutionalReviewBoard,IRBServices,Aurora,Canada,approvedinformedconsentformsandthestudyprotocolinaccordancewithGoodClinicalPracticeandapplicableregulatoryrequirements.

Subjects

Thestudyenrolledeligiblehealthymaleandfemaleadults(aged18–55years,inclusive)whoreportedahistoryofnonmedicaluseofopioidsviatheintranasalroute,thoughreportsofotherroutes ofadministrationdidnotprecludeparticipation.Theabsenceofopioidphysicaldependencewasassessedbyinterviewandconfirmedbytheresultsof

analoxonechallenge.Subjects wereexcludediftheyhad

14

anticipated todiscouragetampering andintranasaloxyco-

anObjectiveOpiateWithdrawalScale(OOWS)

score3

doneabuse.Firstly,tamperingwithORFrequiressignifi-canttimeandeffort.Secondly,theparticlesproducedbytamperingwithORFmayretainsomecontrolled‐release

properties.Thirdly,thesizeoftheparticlesmayserveto

increaseboththelikelihoodofincompletedosingandtheseverityofnasalirritationassociatedwithinsufflation.Lastly,whenORFisdissolvedinsmallvolumesforintravenousadministration,itformsaviscoussolutionthatcannotbeeffectivelydrawnintoasyringe.10However,sinceORFisdesignedtodeliveroxycodoneovertimewhentakenasdirected,itcanbeabusedbytakingintacttabletsorallywithoutlegitimatepurpose.

Thisstudyofrecreationalopioidusersevaluatedtheabusepotential,pharmacokinetics,pharmacodynamics,andsafetyoffinelyandcoarselycrushed,intranasallyadministeredORFtabletsrelativetofinelycrushedOC,oxycodonepowder(OxyAPI),andOCplacebo.Itexaminedintranasaladministration(i.e.,snorting)ofcrushedORFandOCforthreereasons:becauseintranasaladministrationhasbeenfoundtobearoutepreferredamongabusersfordeliveryofopioids,includingoxyco-done5,11 and OC specifically12; because intranasal

administrationinvolvesthecrushingorpulverizingofORF,whichmaycompromiseitscontrolled‐releaseproperties13; and because the accelerated absorption

affordedbyintranasaladministrationmayposeagreaterrisktotheabuser.

ORFistheonlyavailablecontrolled‐releaseformulaofoxycodoneatpresent.Otherproductsareindevelopment

byothercompanies,butnonearecurrentlyapprovedor

orgreaterfollowingthenaloxonechallengetest,self‐

reporteddrugdependence(past2years),orapositive

urinedrugscreenorbreathalcoholtest.Keyrestrictionsincludedabstainingfromalcoholconsumptionfor48hourspriortoeachvisitandfromrecreationaldrugusefromscreeningthroughstudycompletion.Alsonotpermittedwerecaffeineconsumptionfor24hourspriortoclinicadmissionandnicotineconsumptionfrom11PMthenightbefore until 8hoursaftereachdoseadministration.

OverallStudyDesign

Thiswasarandomized,double‐blind,positive‐andplacebo‐controlled,five‐treatmentcrossoverstudythatevaluatedtheabusepotential,pharmacodynamics,phar-

macokinetics,andsafetyprofileoffinelyandcoarselycrushedORFversusOCandOxyAPIaccordingtocurrentguidelinesforstudiesofabuseliability.15,16Thestudyconsistedof:ascreeningphase,aqualificationphase,atreatmentphase,andafollow‐upvisit(2–4daysfollowingthelasttreatmentvisitorafterearlywithdrawal).Thescreeningphaseincludedanaloxonechallengetodeterminephysicaldependence.

Inthequalificationphase,subjectsself‐administeredintranasaldosesof30‐mgOxyAPIandvolume‐matchedlactose powder placebo in a randomized crossover

fashion,withapproximately24hoursbetweenadminis-trations.Subjectswereeligibletoenterthedouble‐blindtreatmentphaseiftheytolerated30‐mgOxyAPI.Additionally,thefulfillmentofoneofthefollowingthree

criteriawasrequired:(1)subjectshadbothapeakscore

forlactosepowderplacebo::;55ona0–100pointbipolarDrugLikingvisualanalogscale(VAS)where50representeda“neutral”response,ANDapeakscore

::;10ontheunipolar0–100HighVASwhere0representeda“noeffects”response;OR(2)subjectshadbothapeakDrugLikingVASscorefor30‐mgOxyAPIpowder

greaterthanOCplacebobyatleast15pointsANDapeak

HighVASscoregreaterthanOCplacebobyatleast30 points.Finally,subjectswereeligibletoenterthetreatmentphaseiftheirresponsestoOxyAPIandOCplacebo werejudged tobeacceptableby theinvestigatoronVASforDrugLiking,GoodEffects,BadEffects,andHigh.

In the double‐blind treatment phase, subjects self‐administeredintranasaldosesofthefivestudytreatments

inarandomizedcrossoverfashion,withawashoutperiodof at least 48hours between treatments. The five

treatmentswerelactosepowderOCplacebo,30‐mgfinelycrushedORF,30‐mgcoarselycrushedORF,30‐mgfinelycrushedOC,and30‐mgOxyAPIpowder.CoarselycrushedOCwasnottestedbecausesimplecrushingofOC

readilyproducesafinepowder.OCplaceboconsistedoffinelygroundOCplacebotabletsthatwerepreparedinthesamemannerastheactiveOCtablets.

Pharmacokinetic Assessments

Plasmaoxycodoneconcentrationswerequantifiedfromvenousbloodsamplescollectedviaanindwellingcannulaorbydirectvenipunctureatpredose,andat0.25,0.5,1,2,

3,4,6,8,and24hourspostdose.Asolid‐phaseextractionmethod was used to extract oxycodone from 200mL

plasmasamples.TheextractedsampleswereanalyzedbyLC‐MS/MS using a Phenomenex Luna Si, 5mm,2mmx100mm,normalphasecolumn.Themobilephaseusedwas85:15(0.1%formicacidinacetonitrile:0.2%formicacidin20mMammoniumformatebuffer,v/v).

Themassspectrometerwasoperatedinthemultiplereactionmonitoring(MRM)modewithpositiveiondetection.Thelower limitofquantitation (LOQ)foroxycodonewas0.1ng/mL.

Pharmacodynamic Assessments

Thevariouscomputer‐administered“100‐point”VASusedtoevaluatethedrugadministrationexperiencearedetailedinTable1,whichalsoincludestimepointsofVAS

assessments.SubjectiveDrugValue(SDV)wasadminis-teredat8and24hourspostdose.Pupillometrywasassessedpredoseand0.5,1,2,3,4,6,and8hourspostdose.Subjectswereinstructedtobasetheirresponses

Table1.BipolarandUnipolarVisualAnalogScales

0–100VAS

VASType

050100

DrugLikingaBipolarAtthismoment,mylikingforthisdrugis:

StrongDislikingNeutralStrongLiking

OverallDrugLikingbOverall,mylikingforthisdrugis:

StrongDislikingNeutralStrongLiking

TakeDrugAgainbIwouldtakethisdrugagain:

DefinitelyNotNeutralDefinitelySo

Alertness/DrowsinesscIamfeeling:

VeryDrowsyNeutralVeryAlert

HighcUnipolarIamfeelinghigh:

DefinitelyNotDefinitelySo

GoodEffectsaIcanfeelgooddrugeffects:

DefinitelyNotDefinitelySo

Bad EffectsaIcanfeelbaddrugeffects:

DefinitelyNotDefinitelySo

AnyEffectsaIcanfeelanydrugeffect:

DefinitelyNotDefinitelySo

VAS,visualanalogscale.SubjectscompletedVASendpointsviacomputerbyusingthemousetopositionacursorattheappropriateplaceoneachscaleandclicking“OK.”

aAdministered at 0.5,1,2,3,4, 6,8,and 24hourspostdose.

bAdministeredat8and24hourspostdose.

cAdministered predoseandat0.5,1,2,3,4,6,8,and24hourspostdose.

oncumulativeoroverallassessmentofdrugeffectsforOverallDrugLikingVAS,TakeDrugAgainVAS,andSDV.ForotherVAS,subjectsbasedtheirresponsesoneffects“atthismoment.”

TheSDVassessmentinvolvedaseriesofindependent,

hypotheticalforcedchoicesbetweenthestudydrugadministeredanddifferentmonetaryamounts.Subjectswereaskedtochoosebetweenreceivinganotherdoseofthesamedrugtotakehomeoranenvelopecontaininga

specifiedamountof money ($0.25–$50.00). Subjectsdidnotreceiveeitherthestudydrugorthemoneydescribedin

thechoices.ThistestwasadaptedfromasimilarprocedureextensivelyutilizedbyGriffithsetal.17,18

Pupillometry19 andintranasalphotographyservedas

twoadditionalmeasuresofpharmacologicandphysico-chemicaleffects.Anear,nose,andthroatspecialistassessedintranasalirritationusingendoscopyandintra-nasalphotography.Intranasalirritationwasassessedafterobservingthesubjectforatleast3minutes.Subjectratedassessmentofintranasalirritation(SRAII)assessedfivecategories (burning,needtoblow nose,runnynose/nasaldischarge,facialpain/pressure,andnasalcongestion)on

thesame6‐pointscale:0¼notobserved/noproblem;1¼very mild problem; 2¼mild/slight problem; 3¼

moderateproblem;4¼severeproblem;or5¼verysevereproblem/“asbadascanbe.”

Inapost‐hocanalysis,eachindividualstudysubject

wasassessedforpercentreductioninDrugLikingVAS

betweenOCandORF.AsimilaranalysisassessedpercentreductioninDrugLikingVASbetweenOxyAPIpowderandORF.

SafetyAssessments

Safetyassessmentsconsistedofadverseevents(AEs),vitalsigns,laboratoryassessments,and12‐leadelectro-cardiogram (ECG). AE reports and vital signs were

collectedfromthetimeofthesigningoftheinformedconsentformthroughtotheendofthefollow‐upphase.LaboratoryassessmentsandECGreadingswerecompleted

duringscreening,atadmissiontoeachtreatmentphasevisit,andatfollow‐up.

StatisticalAnalysis

Pharmacokineticanalyseswereconductedonthephar-macokineticpopulation(i.e.,allsubjectswhowererandomized,receivedactivestudydrug,andhadatleastonevalidpharmacokineticmetric).Pharmacokineticparameterswerederivedusingnoncompartmentalmeth-ods.Pharmacokineticmetricswere:maximumplasmaconcentration(Cmax),timetomaximumplasmaconcen-tration(Tmax),areaundertheconcentrationtimecurve

fromtimezerotoinfinity(AUCinf),andterminalhalf‐life

(t1/2).Abusequotient(AQ¼Cmax/Tmax),ameasureofthe

averagerateofincreaseinplasmaoxycodoneconcentra-

tionovertheintervalbetweentreatmentadministrationandthetimeofmaximum oxycodone concentration,wasalsocalculated.5,20

Abusequotientswerecalculatedasaposthocanalysisusinggenerallinearmodelwithtreatmentandsubjectasindependent variables.Pairwise comparisonsoftreat-mentswereperformed.

Meanscoresformaximumandminimumeffect(EmaxandEmin)werederivedforDrugLikingVAS;meanEmaxandEminwerealsomeasuredat8and24hoursforOverallDrugLikingVAS,TakeDrugAgainVAS,andSDV.EmaxwasderivedforHighVAS,GoodEffectsVAS,andSRAII.Eminwasderivedforpupillometry.TimetoEminandtimetoEmaxwerealsocalculatedforVASandpupillometrymeasures.Pharmacodynamicderivedparameterswereanalyzedusingamixed‐effectmodelforacrossoverstudy.Themodelincludedtreatment,period, sequence, andfirst‐order carryovereffectsasfixedeffects,baseline(predose)measurementsascovariate,whereappropriate,andsubjectnestedwithintreatmentsequenceasarandomeffect.Forthepurposesofstudyvalidation,asassessedbycomparisonof Oxy API versus OC placebo and OC versus OC

placebo,theprimary pharmacodynamic endpointswereEmaxofDrugLikingVAS,OverallDrugLikingVAS,andSDV.However,relativeabusepotentialconclusionswerebasedonresponsesonallpharmacody-namicmeasures.

Safetyanalyseswereconductedonthesafetypopula-tion (i.e., all subjectswho took atleastone doseofstudydrug in thetreatment phase).

Results

DispositionandDemographicData

Thirtysubjectsmetqualificationcriteriaandwererandomizedtothetreatmentphase.Ofthese,threesubsequentlywithdrewfromthestudy.Therefore,27metallprotocol‐specificproceduresandassessmentsandweredesignatedasstudy completers.

Subjects werepredominantlymale(86.7%)andwhite(86.7%).Themean(standarddeviation[SD])agewas

32.1(8.99)years,witharangeof18–48years,andthebodymassindexrangedfrom19.0to29.7kg/m2.All

subjectsreportedahistoryofrecreationalopioiduse(codeine,dihydrocodeine,heroin,hydromorphone,mor-phine, opium, OxyContin, oxycodone, oxycodone‐

acetaminophen, acetaminophen‐codeine). Recreational

use of other psychoactive drugs was reported by

86.7%ofsubjectsforcannabinoids(hashish, marijuana),53.3.%forstimulants(amphetamines,cocaine,MDMA),30.0%fordepressants(benzodiazepines,lorazepam,alprazolam), 30.0%fordissociative anesthetics(keta-mine),and23.3%forhallucinogens(LSD,psychedelicmushrooms).

Figure1.(a–d)Timecourseofpharmacokineticandpharmacodynamiceffects.(a)Meanplasmaoxycodoneconcentrationovertime(pharmacokineticpopulation).(b)Meanpupilsizeovertime(pharmacodynamicpopulation).

(c)MeanDrugLikingVASovertime(“atthismoment,mylikingforthisdrugis”)(pharmacodynamicpopulation).(d)MeanHighVASovertime(“Iamfeelinghigh…”)(pharmacodynamicpopulation).h,hour;OC,finelycrushedOC;ORF‐C,coarselycrushedORF;ORF‐F,finelycrushedORF;OxyAPI,oxycodonepowder;VAS,VisualAnalogScale.*Pupillometrywas

collected for8hours after dosing.

Pharmacokinetics

Dosing.Incompletedosingoccurredin9/28subjectsreceivingORF‐C(32%),10/29subjectsreceivingORF‐F(34%),2/28subjectsreceivingOC(7%),0/29subjects

receivingOxyAPI,and3/29subjectsreceivingOCplacebo(10%).

PharmacokineticParameters.Figure1aillustratesmeanplasmaoxycodoneconcentrationsovertime,andTable2summarizesderivedpharmacokineticparametersbyactivetreatment.CmaxvalueswerelowerforfinelyandcoarselycrushedORFthanforOCandOxyAPI.MedianTmaxvaluesforfinelyandcoarselycrushedORFwereapproximatelytwiceaslongasthoseobservedforOCandOxyAPI.MeanAUCinfvalueswerecomparableacrossallactivetreatments.Mediant1/2valuesweresomewhathigherandmorevariableforfinelyandcoarselycrushedORFcomparedwiththatofOCandOxyAPI.

AQ.AbusequotientswerefivefoldhigherforOxyAPIandOC(102.15and94.75ng/mL/h,respectively)comparedwithfinelyandcoarselycrushedORF(17.57and16.96ng/mL/h,respectively).AQforfinelyandcoarsely crushed ORF were significantly lower

(P.0001)thancrushedOxyAPIandOC.

Pharmacodynamics

Acrossallsubjectivepharmacodynamicmeasures,re-sponseswerelargestforthepositivecontrols,smallestforOCplacebo,andintermediateforfinelyandcoarselycrushedORF,withfinelycrushedORFgenerallyshowinglargerresponsesthancoarselycrushedORF.Thelargerresponsesseenforthepositivecontroltreatmentsupportedthevalidityofthestudydesign.

Pupillometry.IntranasaladministrationofOxyAPIandOCresultedinoxycodone‐inducedmiosis(i.e.,reducedpupil size)thatpeakedat 0.5–1hourpostdoseversusOCplacebo.Meanpupilsizethenincreasedslightlybeginning

at3hourspostdose(Figure1b).Nonotabledifferencesinpeak scores were observed between positive control

treatments.EminvaluesforOxyAPIandOCweresignificantlylowerthanOCplacebo(P.001foreach).Comparedwithpositivecontroltreatment,ORFadminis-trationshowedamoregradualonsetinpupil‐sizereduction,peakingatapproximately2–3hourspostdose.MeanEminvaluesweresignificantlylowerforbothfinely

andcoarselycrushedORFcomparedwiththatforOxyAPIandOCandsignificantlyhigherthanthatforOCplacebo (P.001 for all comparisons). No notable

differenceswereobserved inpupil‐size scores across

timewithOCplacebotreatment.

SubjectiveEffects

Qualificationphase.Duringthequalification phase,subjectsdemonstratedtheabilitytodistinguishbetweenOxyAPIandOCplacebotreatments.Mean(SD)EmaxvaluesforOxyAPIandOCplacebo,respectively,were,fortheprimary measures:94.3(11.0)and45.1(18.6)for

Table2.PharmacokineticandPharmacodynamicParameters(PharmacokineticandPharmacodynamicPopulations)

ORF‐F / ORF‐C / OC / OxyAPI
Pharmacokineticparameters
Cmax (ng/mL)Mean(SD) / 29.4 (7.71) / 29.8(12.2) / 59.6(16.2) / 52.1(13.0)
GeometricMean(%CV) / 28.4 (26.2) / 27.0(51.0) / 57.5(28.3) / 50.6(25.0)
Tmax(h)
Median(range)AUCinf(ng/mL/h)
Mean(SD) / 2.08(1.07–6.07)
339(101) / 2.62(0.25–8.1)
376(182) / 1.10 (0.25–3.13)
385(102) / 1.00 (0.25–4.10)
350(69.6)
Geometricmean(%CV) / 323(33.8) / 320(74.1) / 372(27.5) / 343(20.6)

t1/2(h)

Median(range)5.6(3.4–12.1)6.6(4.1–12.5)4.2(3.18–7.1)4.07 (3.39–5.99)AQ

Mean(SD)17.57(9.59)16.96(19.66)94.75 (91.87)102.15 (95.73)

ORF‐FORF‐COCOxyAPIOCPlacebo

Pharmacodynamic parameters

OverallDrugLikingVAS(“Overall,mylikingforthisdrugis…”)Emax

Mean(SD)69.7(29.4)61.1(25.8)87.4(22.2)84.8(18.9)48.9(14.8)

Take DrugAgainVASEmax

Mean(SD)64.0(38.2)52.8(37.4)89.6(20.7)86.6(23.5)28.2(24.3)

SubjectiveDrugValueEmax

Mean(SD)$17.01($16.39)$17.25 ($17.93)$27.95($16.03)$27.30 ($17.40)$0.37 ($0.60)

AUCinf,areaundertheconcentration timecurvefromtimezerotoinfinity;AQ, abusequotient(i.e., Cmax/Tmax); Cmax,maximumplasmaconcentration; CV,coefficientofvariation;Emax,maximumeffect;OC,finelycrushedOC;ORF‐C,coarselycrushedORF;ORF‐F,finelycrushedORF;OxyAPI,oxycodonepowder;SDV,SubjectiveDrugValue;Tmax,timetomaximumplasmaconcentration;t12,terminaleliminationhalflife;VAS,visualanalogscale.

DrugLikingVAS;90.0(16.30)and41.0(19.24)forOverallDrugLikingVAS;and$30.90($16.40)and$0.25

Table 3.Overall Subjective Drug Effects (PharmacodynamicPopulation)

($0)forSDV.

TreatmentPhase.ForbothDrugLikingandHighVAS,Emaxresponseswerehighestforthepositivecontrols,andtheseoccurredwithin1hourpostdose(Figure1c,d).Thepositivecontrolsshowedcomparablepeakscoresandtimecourses.LowerpeakresponseswereseenwithbothfinelyandcoarselycrushedORF,andtheseoccurredlaterthanforthepositivecontrols.ResponsesforthepositivecontrolsandforORFwereallhigherthanforOCplacebo.ThepeakresponseandtimecourseofcoarselycrushedORFwerelowerthanforfinelycrushedORF.

ForOverallDrugLikingVAS,TakeDrugAgainVAS,andSDV,responsesremainedrelativelyconsistentat8 and24hourspostdose(Table3).Thehighestresponseswereseenforthepositivecontrols,thelowestresponsewasseenforOCplacebo,andintermediateresponseswereseenforfinelyandcoarselycrushedORF,withcoarselycrushedORFshowinglowerresponsesthanfinelycrushedORF.

PharmacodynamicmeasureN

8hoursmean (SD)

24hoursmean(SD)

Table2presentsmean(SD)Emax valuesforOverallDrugLikingVAS,TakeDrugAgainVAS,andSDV.All

OC,finelycrushedOC;ORF‐C,coarselycrushedORF;ORF‐F,finelycrushedORF;OxyAPI,oxycodonepowder.

activetreatmentshadEmaxvaluesthatweresignificantlygreaterversusOCplacebo(P::;.003)exceptcoarselycrushedORF,whichdidnotdifferfromOCplaceboonOverallDrugLiking(P¼.07).FinelyandcoarselycrushedORFhadsignificantlylowerEmaxvaluesversuspositivecontrolsforallthreeglobalmeasuresofdrugeffect(P::;.002).Emax valuesforfinelyandcoarselycrushedORFdidnotdiffersignificantlyfromeachotheronTakeDrugAgainVASandSDV.TheEmaxvalueforOverallDrugLikingVASwassignificantlylowerforcoarselycrushedversusfinelycrushedORF(P¼.043).Similarly,OCandOxyAPIwereassociatedwithmean(SD)SDVEmax of$27.95(16.03)and$27.30(17.40),

respectively,whereasmeanSDVEmax forcoarselyand

finelycrushedORFwerelower($17.25[$17.93]and

$17.01[$16.39],respectively),andOCplacebowasthelowest($0.37[$0.60]).Positivecontrolsdidnotdiffersignificantlyfromeachother(P�.437)onallthreemeasures.

Thepattern of responsesfor High VAS,GoodEffectsVAS,andARCIMBG(datanotshown)provedsimilarforboth positive controls; both treatments demonstrated

prominent,statisticallysignificantresponsesversusOCplacebo(P.001forall).ORFscoreswereintermediate,andOCplaceboscoreswerethelowest.

Apost‐hocresponderanalysisofEmax21fordruglikingofORFcomparedtoOCfoundthat,amongsubjectswho

insufflatedbothfinelycrushedORFandfinelycrushedOC,acumulative57%(n¼16)hadsomereduction(i.e.,

0%)indrugliking,36%(n¼10)hadareductionofatleast30%,and29%(n¼8)hadareductionofatleast50%

(Figure2a).AsimilaranalysiscomparingORFtoOxyAPIfoundthatacumulative56%(n¼15)hadsomereductioninEmaxofdruglikingoffinelycrushedORFcomparedwithOxyAPI,33%(n¼9)hadareductionofatleast30%,and22%(n¼6)hadareductionof50%(Figure2b).

IntranasalTolerability.Overall,scoreswerelowforalltreatmentsonallmeasures(i.e.,themajorityofscoreswere1.0),butgreaternasalirritationwasseenwithcoarselyandfinelycrushedORF.ComparedtoOCplacebo,finelycrushedORFhadsignificantlyhigherEmaxonmeasuresofNeedtoBlowNose(P¼.017)andNasalCongestion (P¼.014), whereas Oxy API, OC, and

Figure2.(a)Responderanalysis:percentreductionprofilesfor EmaxofDrugLikingVAS(finelycrushedORFcomparedwithfinelycrushedOC).

(b)Responderanalysis:percentreductionprofilesforEmaxofDrugLikingVAS(finelycrushedORFcomparedwithOXYAPI).

coarselycrushedORFdidnot.ComparedtoOxyAPI,bothfinelyandcoarselycrushedORFhadsignificantly

higherEmaxonbothofthesemeasures(P0.01forallcomparisons).Compared toOC, finely crushed ORFhad

significantlyhigherEmaxonbothmeasures,andcoarselycrushedORFhad significantly higherEmaxforNasalCongestiononly(P¼0.001).

Safety

Nodeaths,severeTEAEs,orotherseriousAEsoccurred.TheoverallincidenceofreportedTEAEs,fromhighesttolowestincidence,was96.4%forfinelycrushedOCand89.7%forOxyAPI(positivecontrols),86.2%forfinelycrushedORF,75.0%for coarselycrushedORF,and41.4%forOCplacebo.MostTEAEswereofmildintensity.Only1subjectexperiencedamoderatelyintenseTEAE(respiratorydepressionfollowingfinelycrushedOCintranasaladministration).ThemostcommonTEAEswereconsistentwiththeknowneffectsofoxycodone

(Table4). Allmean laboratoryvaluesand vital signsfellwithinthenormalrangeatbaselineandfollow‐up,withno notablechangesfrombaseline observed.

Discussion

Theabuse‐deterrenteffectsofORFwereevident,inpart,inthepharmacokineticprofilesfortamperedORFversusOC,whichindicatedlesspotentialforabuse ofORFcompared

withOCbaseduponadecreaseintherateandextentofoxycodoneaborption in thefirsthoursfollowingadminis-tration.ThepharmacodynamicdatacollectedfollowingORFdemonstratedareductioninabusepotentialcomparedtoOC.ThesefindingsprovideevidencethatthedifferenceinformulationcharacteristicsbetweenOCandORFobserved in in vitro tampering experiments translated

intotheintendedabuse‐deterrenteffectsonpharmacoki-neticandpharmacodynamicpropertiesofORF.10 Safety

findingsprovedconsistentwiththeknowneffectsofopioiduseandnounexpectedsafetyfindingsemerged.

ConsistentwithrecentFDAdraftguidance,21thisstudy

ofabusepotentialwasvalidatedbycomparingtheresponsestothepositivecontroltreatmentswithresponsestotheOCplacebotreatment.Intranasaladministrationofbothpositivecontrols,OCandOxyAPI,resultedinsignificantincreasesinEmaxforDrugLikingVAS,OverallDrugLikingVAS,andSubjectiveDrugValue.

Theelementsofthisstudyareconsistentwiththoserecommendedinseveralpublishedguidelines,including:double‐blinding;theuseofactiveandOCplacebotreatmentsinapopulationofnondependentrecreationalopioiduserswhowereabletodiscriminatebetweenthemviatherelevantrouteofadministration;aqualification

phasethatincludedanaloxonechallenge;theuseofopaquevialsandparticlesofcrushedtreatmentsthatappearedsimilaracrossalltreatments;primarymeasuresofdrug‐likingcaptured onbipolarVASandexpressed intermsofEmax;appropriatepharmacokineticmeasures(includingtherateoftheriseofdrugconcentration);andappropriate

additionalpharmacodynamicmeasures(includingadequateassessmentsofintranasaltolerability).16,21–25Finally,thisstudywaspartofalargerprogramdevelopedtocharacterize

theabusepotentialofORF.

ThecomprehensiveanalysisoftheabusepotentialofORFincludesabatteryofinvitrotamper‐testingstudiesaswellasinvivopharmacokineticandabusepotentialstudies.10,26,27Italsoincludesasuiteofreal‐worldepidemiologicalstudiesthatcompareratesofmisuse,abuse,anddiversionoverthe2‐yearperiodsincetheintroductionofORFwitha15‐monthpre‐introductionbaselineperiodofOCrates.28 Recentlyreportedresults

Table4.TEAEsReportedby�5%ofSubjectsforAnyTreatmentatOnsetbyMedDRAPreferredTerm(SafetyPopulation)

TEAEs / Placebo(n¼29) / ORF‐F (n¼29) / ORF‐C (n¼28) / OC(n¼28) / OxyAPI(n¼29)
AnyTEAE / 12(41.4) / 25(86.2) / 21(75.0) / 27(96.4) / 26(98.7)
Dizziness / 2(6.9) / 1(3.4) / 1(3.6) / 3(10.7) / 3(10.3)
Drymouth / 0 / 0 / 1(3.6) / 1(3.6) / 2(6.9)
Epistaxis / 1(3.4) / 0 / 1(3.6) / 2(7.1) / 1(3.4)
Euphoricmood / 1(3.4) / 17(58.6) / 12(42.9) / 23(82.1) / 24(82.8)
Fatigue / 0 / 2(6.9) / 0 / 1(3.6) / 0
Feelinghot / 0 / 1(3.4) / 1(3.6) / 2(7.1) / 3(10.3)
Feelingofrelaxation / 1(3.4) / 1(3.4) / 1(3.6) / 2(7.1) / 1(3.4)
Headache / 0 / 2(6.9) / 3(10.7) / 1(3.6) / 0
Nasalcongestion / 2(6.9) / 9(31.0) / 5(17.9) / 2(7.1) / 1(3.4)
Nausea / 1(3.4) / 0 / 0 / 3(10.7) / 1(3.4)
Pruritus / 0 / 6(20.7) / 4(14.3) / 4(14.3) / 8(27.6)
Pruritusgeneralized / 0 / 2(6.9) / 0 / 7(25.0) / 6(20.7)
Somnolence / 3(10.3) / 11(37.9) / 7(25.0) / 9(32.1) / 9(31.0)
Vomiting / 1(3.4) / 0 / 0 / 1(3.6) / 2(6.9)

MedDRA,MedicalDictionaryforRegulatoryActivities,version9.1;OC,finelycrushedoriginalOC;ORF‐C,coarselycrushedORF;ORF‐F,finelycrushedORF;OxyAPI,oxycodonepowder;TEAEs,treatment‐emergentadverseevents.

fromthesemultiple,ongoingepidemiologicstudiessupportthefindingspresentedhere.Theepidemiologicstudyresultsavailabletodatehaveshownreductionsinoverallandtamper‐relatedabuseofOxyContin sincetheintroductionofthereformulationofOxyContin(ORF)in

2010,29–31aswellasinitsstreetprice,32anddiversion.33Incommonwith limitations ofallabuse potential

studies,34theresultsofthisstudydonotprovideinformationrelatingtheintroductionofthisabuse‐deterrentformulationtochangesinreal‐worldabuse.Another limitation is that current recommendations

suggestthatcognitiveandpsychomotormeasuresbeincludedinopioidabusepotentialstudies,althoughitisacknowledgedthatspecifictestshavenotyetbeenidentifiedforrecommendation.35Anadditionallimitationisthat,despitemeasurestakentoreducetheopportunityforsubjectstomakephysicalcomparisonsamongthestudytreatments(e.g.,treatmentswereheldinopaquevialswithpreinsertedtubesforinsufflation),itwasnotpossibletofullypreventsuchcomparisonsbeingmade,whichmayhavecompromisedblindingtosomeextent.Finally,theoutcomemeasuresofthisstudyareacknowl-edgedtobemeasuresofrelativeabusepotentialandnotabsolutemeasurements.Whilethemethodsthemselvesappear tohave validity, they do nottake into accountthesocialcontextinwhichORFappears,includingculturalnormsandlegalstricturesonavailability.Therefore,theresults of this study should be interpreted in proper

context:astudythatcomparesanabuse‐deterrentreformulation of a product with a product that was

previouslysubjecttosignificantmisuseand abuse.

Conclusions

ReformulatedOxyContin(ORF)hasphysicochemicalpropertiesintendedtodetertamperingforthepurposesofintranasaloxycodoneabusebymakingcrushingbothmoredifficultandlesseffective,resultinginareductionintherateandextentofoxycodoneabsorptioninthefirsthoursafteradministration.ThepharmacokineticandpharmacodynamiceffectsofORFwereseeninthisstudyofhealthyadultswhowerenonphysicallydependent,recreationalopioidusers.IntranasaladministrationofcrushedORFwasassociatedwithreducedCmax,increasedTmax,andlowerabusequotientscorescomparedwithOxyAPIandcrushedOC.ComparedwithbothoriginalOxyContin(OC)andOxyAPI,peakeffectsoffinelyandcoarselycrushedORFweresignificantlyloweronmostsubjectiveandobjectivemeasures(includingOverallDrugLikingVAS,TakeDrugAgainVAS,HighVAS,SubjectiveDrugValue,andpupillometry),andthesepeakeffectsoccurredlatercomparedwiththepositivecontrols.SignificantincreasesinthesesubjectiveandobjectivemeasuresforOCandOxyAPIcomparedtoOCplaceboconfirmedthevalidityofthestudydesign.ORFexhibited

asafetyprofileconsistentwithintranasalopioiduseinthispopulation.ThereducedintranasaloxycodoneabusepotentialofORFindicatedbythefindingsofthepresentstudyareconsistentwiththefindingsofreductionsinintranasaloxycodoneabusereportedinepidemiologic

studiesofreformulatedOxyContin.28–33

Acknowledgments

TheauthorsthankMichaelL.Pucci,PhD,ofSCIScientificCommunicationsInformationandHudaAbdullah,PhD,formerlyofSCI, for preparing this manuscript on behalfof Purdue Pharma L.P., One Stamford Forum, Stamford,

Connecticut.FurtherwritingandeditorialassistancewasprovidedbyHenryAndrewCaporoso,MA,afull‐timeemployeeof PurduePharma L.P.

DeclarationofConflictingInterests

AllauthorsaffiliatedwithPurduePharmaL.P.arefull‐timeemployees.Dr.Smithwastheprimaryinvestigatorforthisstudy.

Dr.ShramandMs.Bartlettwereinvolvedindatainterpretationandpreparationoftheclinicalstudyreport.Dr.SellerswasaninvestigatorforthisstudyandisaconsultantforPurduePharma

L.P.Dr.ShramwasanemployeeofINCResearchTorontoatthetimethisstudywasconducted.

Funding

ThisstudywassponsoredbyPurduePharmaL.P.

References

1.Schneider JP,Matthews M,JamisonRN.Abuse‐deterrentandtamper‐resistantopioidformulations:whatistheirroleinaddressingprescription opioidabuse? CNSDrugs.2010;24:805–810.

2.KatzNP,AdamsEH,ChilcoatH,etal.Challengesinthedevelopmentofprescriptionopioidabuse‐deterrentformulations.ClinJPain.2007;23:648–660.

3.StrangJ,BearnJ,FarrellM,etal.Routeofdruguseandits

implications for drug effect, risk of dependence and healthconsequences.DrugAlcoholRev.1998;17:197–211.

4.ButlerSF,BlackRA,CassidyTA,DaileyTM,BudmanSH.Abuserisksandroutesofadministrationofdifferentprescriptionopioidcompounds and formulations.HarmReductJ.2011;8:29.

5.KatzN,DartRC,BaileyE,TrudeauJ,OsgoodE,PaillardF.Tampering with prescription opioids: nature and extent of theproblem,healthconsequences,andsolutions.AmJDrugAlcoholAbuse.2011;37:205–217.

6.HamedE,MoeD.Developmentoftamperdeterrentformulations:

state of the pharmaceutical industry. Curr Drug Abuse Rev.

2010;3:139–146.

7.CiceroTJ,InciardiJA,MuñozA.TrendsinAbuseofOxyContin©andotheropioidanalgesicsintheUnitedStates:2002–2004.JPain.2005;662–672.

8.LofwallMR,MoodyDE,FangWB,NuzzoPA,WalshSL.PharmacokineticsofintranasalcrushedOxyContinandintravenousoxycodoneinnondependentprescriptionopioidabusers.JClinPharmacol.2012;600–606.

9.WhelanE,AsbridgeM.TheOxyContincrisis:problematisationand

responsibilisationstrategiesinaddiction,pain,andgeneralmedicinejournals. IntJDrugPolicy.2013;402–411.

10.ConeEJ,GiordanoJ,WeingartenB.Aniterativemodelforinvitrolaboratoryassessmentoftamperdeterrentformulations.DrugAlcoholDepend.2013;131:100–105.

11.OsgoodED,EatonTA,TrudeauJJ,KatzNP.Abriefsurveyto

characterizeoxycodoneabusepatternsinadolescentsenrolledintwosubstanceabuse recovery high schools.Am JDrug Alcohol Abuse.2012;38:166–170.

12.YoungAM,HavensJR,LeukefeldCG.Routeofadministrationfor

illicitprescriptionopioids:acomparisonofruralandurbandrugusers.Harm ReductJ.2010;7:24.

13.LugoRA,KernSE.Thepharmacokineticsofoxycodone.JPainPalliatCarePharmacother.2004;18:17–30.

14.HandelsmanL,CochraneKJ,AronsonMJ,NessR,RubinsteinKJ,

KanofPD.Twonewratingscalesforopiatewithdrawal.AmJDrugAlcoholAbuse.1987;13:293–308.

15.USDepartmentofHealthandHumanServices.Guidanceforindustry:assessmentofabusepotentialofdrugs. AccessedSeptember11, 2012.

16.SchoedelKA,SellersEM.Assessingabuseliabilityduringdrugdevelopment:changingstandardsandexpectations.ClinPharmacolTher.2008;83:622–626.

17.GriffithsRR,TroisiJR,SilvermanK,MumfordGK.Multiple‐choice

procedure:anefficientapproachforinvestigatingdrugreinforce-ment in humans.Behav Pharmacol.1993;4:3–13.

18.GriffithsRR,RushCR,PuhalaKA.Validationofthemultiple‐

choiceprocedureforinvestigatingdrugreinforcementinhumans.

ExpClin Psychopharmacol. 1996;4:97–106.

19.KnaggsRD,CrightonIM,CobbyTF,FletcherAJ,HobbsGJ.The

pupillaryeffectsofintravenousmorphine,codeine,andtramadolinvolunteers.AnesthAnalg.2004;99:108–112.

20.WebsterLR.Oxycodoneextended‐releaseusinggel‐captechnologytoresistalterationandabuseforthetreatmentofmoderate‐to‐severepain. PainManage.2011;1:417–425.

21.USDepartmentofHealthandHumanServices.GuidanceforIndustry:abuse‐deterrentopioids—evaluationandlabeling.

formation/Guidances/UCM334743.pdf.AccessedMarch19,2013.

22.ChenL,TsongY.Designandanalysisfordrugabusepotentialstudies:issuesandstrategiesforimplementingacrossoverdesign.DIAJ. 2007;41:481–489.

23.Griffiths RR, Bigelow GE, Ator NA. Principles of initial

experimentaldrug abuse liability assessmentinhumans.DrugAlcoholDepend.2003;70:S41–S54.

24.SadockBJ,SadockVA,SussmanN.Bupropion.In:KaplanSadock’sPocketHandbookofPsychiatricDrugTreatment4thed.,illustrated.Philadelphia,PA:LippincottWilliamsWilkins;2005:80–84.

25.USDepartmentofHealth,HumanServices.GuidanceforIndustry

AssessmentofAbusePotentialofDrugs.DraftGuidance.ttp:// Accessed May 23,2013.

26.PerrinoPJ,ColucciS,HarrisS,SellersE.Evaluationofabusepotentialofcrushedandintranasallyadministeredoxycodonetablets.AbstractpresentedattheCollegeonProblemsofDrugDependence’s

74thAnnualMeeting.June10–14,2012;PalmSprings,CA.

27.ColucciS,HarrisS,PerrinoPJ,ApseloffG.Safety,tolerability,andpharmacokineticsofcrushedintranasaloxycodonetamper‐resistanttabletsandoxycontininhealthyadults.AbstractpresentedattheCollegeon Problemsof DrugDependence’s 74thAnnualMeeting.June10–14,2012;PalmSprings,CA. Accessed June 26,

2013.Abstract114.

28.CoplanPM,KaleH,SandstromLE,ChilcoatHD.Changesafterreformulationofextended‐releaseoxycodoneincallstoUSpoison

centersforoxycodoneandheroin.Abstractpresentedat:Interna-tionalAssociationfortheStudyofPain14thWorldCongress;August27–31,2012;Milan,Italy.

iasp/view.php?nu¼110444&type¼abstract&terms¼coplan.Accessed

June26,2013.AbstractPF012.

29.DeVeaugh‐GeissA, Leukefeld C, Havens J,CoplanP, ChilcoatH.OpioidabuseinKentuckyafterOxyContinreformulation.Abstractpresentedat:TheAmericanAcademyofPainMedicine28thAnnual

Meeting. February 23–26,2012;PalmSprings, CA.

30.ButlerSF,ChilcoatHD,CassidyTA,etal.Differencesinratesofabuseandroutesofadministrationfororiginalandreformulatedextended‐release oxycodone among individuals assessed for

substanceabuse.Abstractpresentedat:InternationalAssociation

fortheStudyofPain’s14thWorldCongressonPain;August27–21,2012;Milan,Italy.

nu¼110489&type¼abstract&terms¼chilcoat.AccessedJune26,2013.AbstractPF010.

31.ChilcoatH,CoplanP,CassidyT,etal.ImpactofreformulatedOxyContin1 onabusethroughoral andnon‐oralroutesamongindividuals assessed in substance abuse treatment. Abstractpresentedat:AmericanSocietyofPainEducators’PainWeek;September5–8,2012;LasVegas,NV. June26,2013.Abstract9.

32.Bucher‐BartelsonB,SevertsonS,DavisJ,etal.AcomparisonofthestreetpriceoforiginalandreformulatedERoxycodone.Abstractpresentedat:InternationalAssociationfortheStudyofPain’s14thWorld Congress onPain; August 27–21, 2012; Milan, Italy. AccessedJune26,2013.AbstractPF085.

33.SevertsonS, Bucher‐BartelsonB,Chilcoat H,CoplanP, Surratt H,DartR.AcomparisonofthestreetpriceoforiginalandreformulatedOxyContin1andimmediaterelease(IR)oxycodoneproducts[abstract].J Pain.2012;13:S26.Abstract201.

34.TurkDC,O’ConnorAB,DworkinRH,etal.Researchdesignconsiderationsforclinicalstudiesofabuse‐deterrentopioidanalgesics:IMMPACTrecommendations.Pain.2012;153:1997–2008.

35.ComerSD,ZacnyJP,DworkinRH,etal.Coreoutcomemeasuresforopioidabuseliabilitylaboratoryassessmentstudiesinhumans:IMMPACTrecommendations.Pain.2012;153:2315–2324.