Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26814256›Full record

Trial reportPain medicine (Malden, Mass.)2016

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Study to Evaluate the Intranasal Human Abuse Potential and Pharmacokinetics of a Novel Extended-Release Abuse-Deterrent Formulation of Oxycodone.

Lynn R Webster, Ernest A Kopecky, Michael D Smith, Alison B Fleming

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Oxycodone DETERxPain and therapy · 2016
    Review
  10. Oxycodone DETERxDrugs · 2016
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lynn R Webster*Early Development Services, Scientific Affairs, PRA Health Sciences, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA; WebsterLynn@prahs.com.
Ernest A KopeckyClinical Development and.
Michael D Smith*Early Development Services, Scientific Affairs, PRA Health Sciences, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA;
Alison B FlemingProduct Development, Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc., Canton, Massachusetts, USA.
PRA Health Sciences · USCollegium Pharmaceutical (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEvaluate the human abuse potential (HAP) of an experimental, microsphere-in-capsule formulation of extended-release oxycodone (oxycodone DETERx®) (herein "DETERx").

designRandomized, double-blind, double-dummy, positive- and placebo-controlled, single-dose, four-phase, four-treatment, crossover study.

settingClinical research site. SUBJECTS: There were 39 qualifying subjects (72% male, 85% white, mean age of 27 years) with 36 completing all four Double-blind Treatment Periods.

methodsThe four phases encompassed: 1) Screening; 2) Drug Discrimination; 3) Double-blind Treatment; and 4) Follow-up. Drug Discrimination tests ensured that subjects could distinguish placebo from opioid. The four Double-blind Treatments compared DETERx-administered as either a crushed intranasal (IN) or an intact oral (PO) preparation-with immediate-release oxycodone IN (OXY-IR IN) and with an intact IN and PO placebo DETERx control.

resultsFor primary pharmacokinetic (PK) assessments, abuse quotient (Cmax/Tmax) was lower with DETERx IN than DETERx PO; both treatments were substantially lower than OXY-IR IN (6.24, 8.60, and 69.6 ng/mL/h, respectively). For drug liking, the primary subjective pharmacodynamic (PD) endpoint, both DETERx IN and DETERx PO produced significantly lower scores than OXY-IR IN (P ≤ 0.0001 for each); DETERx IN was less liked than DETERx PO (P ≤ 0.05), mirroring the PK relationships. Objectively assessed pupillometry corroborated the more rapid and significantly greater effect of OXY-IR IN than either DETERx IN or DETERx PO (P ≤ 0.007 for each). Overall safety profiles of DETERx and OXY-IR were comparable and both were well tolerated.

conclusionsPharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic outcomes suggest that DETERx IN has relatively low HAP; continued research in larger populations is suggested.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalAdultAnalgesics, OpioidCross-Over StudiesDelayed-Action PreparationsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOpioid-Related DisordersOxycodoneYoung AdultAnalgesics, OpioidDelayed-Action PreparationsOxycodoneAbuse-DeterrentAbuse-LiabilityDETERxExtended-Release OpioidIntranasalOxycodonePharmacodynamicPharmacokinetic

Identifiers

PMID26814256
PMCPMC4894244
OpenAlexW2296164904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.