Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24243216›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical pharmacology2014

Abuse potential, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of intranasally administered crushed oxycodone HCl abuse-deterrent controlled-release tablets in recreational opioid users.

Stephen C Harris, Peter J Perrino, Ira Smith, Megan J Shram, Salvatore V Colucci, Cynthia Bartlett, Edward M Sellers

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of clinical pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Oral Human Abuse Potential of Oxycodone DETERxJournal of clinical pharmacology · 2017
    Trial
  9. Observational
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Opioid Dose- and Route-Dependent Efficacy of Oxycodone and Heroin Vaccines in Rats.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephen C HarrisPurdue Pharma L.P., Stamford, CT, USA.
Peter J Perrino
Ira Smith
Megan J Shram
Salvatore V Colucci
Cynthia Bartlett
Edward M Sellers
Purdue Pharma (Canada) · CAINC Research (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate abuse potential, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of intranasally administered, crushed reformulated OxyContin® (oxycodone HCl controlled-release) tablets (ORF), relative to crushed original OxyContin® (OC), oxycodone powder (Oxy API), and OC placebo. This randomized, double-blind, positive- and placebo-controlled crossover study enrolled healthy, adult, nonphysically dependent recreational opioid users with recent history of intranasal drug abuse (N = 27). Active treatments contained oxycodone (30 mg). Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics (e.g., Overall Drug Liking [ODL], Take Drug Again [TDA], and High Visual Analog Scales [VAS]; Subjective Drug Value [SDV]; pupillometry; intranasal irritation), and safety (e.g., adverse events, vital signs, laboratory tests) were assessed to 24 hours postdose. Crushed ORF administration yielded reduced oxycodone Cmax and increased Tmax versus crushed OC and Oxy API. Peak effects for pharmacodynamic measures were delayed with ORF (1-2 hours) versus OC and Oxy API (0.5-1 hour). ODL, TDA, High VAS, and SDV Emax values were significantly lower (P ≤ .05) and some intranasal irritation ratings were greater for ORF versus OC and Oxy API. No significant or unexpected safety findings were observed. Compared with OC and Oxy API, intranasally administered ORF was associated with lower and delayed peak plasma concentrations, decreased drug-liking, and decreased intranasal tolerability. This suggests that ORF has a decreased potential for intranasal oxycodone abuse. There were no significant or unexpected safety findings. As is true for all abuse potential studies, epidemiological or other appropriate post-marketing studies are required to assess the impact of the reduction in intranasal oxycodone abuse potential observed in the present study on real-world patterns of ORF misuse, abuse, and diversion.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidOxycodoneAdministration, IntranasalAdolescentAdultCross-Over StudiesDelayed-Action PreparationsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansIllicit DrugsMaleMiddle AgedOpioid-Related DisordersYoung AdultAnalgesics, OpioidDelayed-Action PreparationsIllicit DrugsOxycodoneabuse deterrentabuse potentialoxycodoneOxyContinpharmacodynamicpharmacokineticreformulationtamper resistant

Identifiers

PMID24243216
PMCPMC4263153
OpenAlexW2082095891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.