Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26108255›Full record

Trial reportPain medicine (Malden, Mass.)2015

Comparing the Effect of Tampering on the Oral Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Two Extended-Release Oxycodone Formulations with Abuse-Deterrent Properties.

Jeff Gudin, Naama Levy-Cooperman, Ernest A Kopecky, Alison B Fleming

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Oral Human Abuse Potential of Oxycodone DETERxJournal of clinical pharmacology · 2017
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Nonmedical Use of XtampzaJournal of pain research · 2021
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Oxycodone DETERxDrugs · 2016
    Review
  19. Oxycodone DETERxPain and therapy · 2016
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jeff GudinPain Management Center, Englewood Hospital and Medical Center, Englewood, New Jersey, USA.
Naama Levy-CoopermanAltreos Research Partners Inc, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ernest A KopeckyCollegium Pharmaceutical, Canton, Massachusetts, USA.
Alison B FlemingCollegium Pharmaceutical, Canton, Massachusetts, USA.
Collegium Pharmaceutical (United States) · USEnglewood Hospital and Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOxycodone DETERx® is an extended-release (ER), microsphere-in-capsule abuse-deterrent-formulation designed to retain its extended-release properties following tampering or misuse (e.g., chewing, crushing). This study assessed the safety and pharmacokinetics of orally administered intact and crushed Oxycodone DETERx® capsules compared with intact and crushed reformulated OxyContin® tablets and crushed immediate-release oxycodone tablets (IR oxycodone).

methodsThis was a randomized, open-label, active-controlled, cross-over study. Healthy subjects received five oxycodone treatments (40 mg) with a standardized high-fat, high-calorie meal: Oxycodone DETERx® (intact or crushed), OxyContin® (intact or crushed), and IR oxycodone (crushed). Blood samples were collected for assessment of oxycodone plasma concentrations.

resultsThirty-eight subjects completed the study. Both crushed and intact Oxycodone DETERx® resulted in lower peak plasma concentrations when compared with IR oxycodone. Crushed Oxycodone DETERx® was bioequivalent to intact Oxycodone DETERx® and exhibited a numerically lower Cmax . Also, median Tmax was unchanged by crushing. In contrast, mean peak plasma oxycodone concentrations for crushed OxyContin® were significantly higher compared with intact OxyContin® and were bioequivalent to IR oxycodone. Median Tmax for crushed OxyContin® was the same as IR oxycodone and 3.25 hours shorter than intact OxyContin®.

conclusionsThese data demonstrate that when crushed and taken orally, Oxycodone DETERx® maintains its EXTENDED-release profile, while crushed OxyContin® shows a pharmacokinetic profile similar to an immediate-release product. These results suggest that Oxycodone DETERx® may be less attractive to illicit drug users compared with existing abuse-deterrent-formulations, while providing a safer option for patients who may unknowingly crush their medication such as those who have difficulty swallowing.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdultAnalgesics, OpioidChemistry, PharmaceuticalCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOpioid-Related DisordersOxycodoneTherapeutic EquivalencyYoung AdultAnalgesics, OpioidOxycodoneAbuseAbuse-DeterrentExtended-ReleaseOpioidsOxycodone DETERx®OxyContin®PharmacokineticsTamper

Identifiers

PMID26108255
OpenAlexW1570042072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.