A comparison among tapentadol tamper-resistant formulations (TRF) and OxyContin® (non-TRF) in prescription opioid abusers

Authors

  • Suzanne K. Vosburg,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA
    • Division on Substance Abuse, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jermaine D. Jones,

    1. Division on Substance Abuse, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
    2. Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jeanne M. Manubay,

    1. Division on Substance Abuse, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
    2. Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Judy B. Ashworth,

    1. Grünenthal GmbH, Aachen, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Douglas Y. Shapiro,

    1. Janssen R&D LLC, Titusville, NJ, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Sandra D. Comer

    1. Division on Substance Abuse, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
    2. Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA
    Search for more papers by this author

Correspondence to: Suzanne K. Vosburg, Division on Substance Abuse, New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Drive, Unit 120, New York, NY 10032, USA. E-mail: skv2001@columbia.edu

Abstract

Aims

To examine whether tamper-resistant formulations (TRFs) of tapentadol hydrochloride extended-release (ER) 50 mg (TAP50) and tapentadol hydrochloride 250 mg (TAP250) could be converted into forms amenable to intranasal (study 1) or intravenous abuse (study 2).

Design

Randomized, repeated-measures study designs were employed. A non-TRF of OxyContin® 40 mg (OXY40) served as a positive control. No drug was taken in either study.

Setting

The studies took place in an out-patient setting in New York, NY.

Participants

Twenty-five experienced, healthy ER oxycodone abusers participated in each study.

Measurements

The primary outcome for study 1 was the percentage of participants who indicated that they would snort the tampered tablets, while the primary outcome for study 2 was the percentage yield of active drug in solution. Other descriptive variables, such as time spent manipulating the tablets, were also examined to characterize tampering behaviors more clearly.

Findings

Tampered TRF tablets were less desirable than the tampered OXY40 tablets. Few individuals were willing to snort the TRF particles (TAP50: 24%, TAP250: 16%; OXY40: 100% P < 0.001). There was less drug extracted from the TAP50 tablet than from the OXY40 tablet (3.52 versus 37.02%, P = 0.008), and no samples from the TAP250 tablets contained analyzable solutions of the drug. It took participants longer to tamper with the TAPs (study 1: TAP50 versus OXY40, P < 0.01; TAP250 versus OXY40, P < 0.01; study 2: TAP250 versus OXY40, P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Tamper-resistant formulations of taptentadol (pain relief) tablets do not appear to be well-liked by individuals who tamper regularly with extended-release oxycodone tablets. Employing tamper-resistant technology may be a promising approach towards reducing the abuse potential of tapentadol extended-release.

Ancillary