Patent Application
20120237603
This disclosure relates to abuse resistant opioid compositions.
Morphine, a classic opioid, has been known as a very powerful analgesic compound for many years. Its potential as a target of abuse has been known for almost as long. Morphine and other opioids and derivatives are used in the pharmaceutical industry as narcotic analgesics, hypnotics, sedatives, anti-diarrheals, anti-spasmodics, and anti-tussives. Most often, they are used as powerful analgesics. Opioids are well known to have addictive effects. Despite the potential for addiction and abuse, opioids are widely used due to their superior, powerful analgesic properties. Such opioids include codeine, dihydrocodeine, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, levorphanol, meperidine, buprenorphine, fentanyl, fentanyl derivatives, dipipanone, heroin, tramadol, etorphine, dihydroetorphine, butorphanol, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, and propoxyphene. In the past, abuse of opioids has been generally limited to illicit drugs made in illegal laboratories. Abuse of pharmaceutical opioids was quite limited. Accordingly, action by makers of pharmaceutical opioids would, in the past, have little or no effect on illegal abuse of opioids.
Recently, however, the trend has been changing. Abuse of pharmaceutical opioids has been increasing. This is especially true in the case of extended release opioid dosage forms. Extended release opioid dosage forms are intended for decreased frequency of dosing. Therefore, each tablet must contain the amount of opioid which would be contained in several immediate release tablets. This results in the production of dosage forms having substantially increased amounts of opioid. A single extended release tablet can provide much more opioid to the potential abuser than low dose, immediate release dosage forms. This results in stronger feeling of euphoria, or “high” from controlled release tablets than an abuser would get from an immediate release tablet. This makes such tablets more desirable for an abuser.
Previous attempts at abuse resistant opioid compositions for oral administration have included an opioid which has substantial activity orally as well as activity when administered by injection, in combination with an opioid antagonist which is less effective orally than by injection. This helps prevent abuse involving crushing and dissolving the composition followed by injection. Most prescription opioid analgesic pharmaceutical compositions are tablets designed for oral administration. Therefore opioid antagonists which have very low oral bioavailability, have little action when taken orally at parenterally effective doses. Therefore, the antagonist has little effect when the tablet is taken as intended but greatly enhanced effect if the tablet is abused parenterally.
Such opioid antagonists have substantially increased effect when taken directly into the blood stream. Thus, abusing the opioid by crushing the tablet, dissolving it, and injecting or snorting (intranasal administration), would cause the antagonist to have its full effect, essentially blocking the opioid receptors, preventing the abuser from receiving an opioid effect, and inducing withdrawal in opioid-dependent individuals.
Furthermore, in the past, tablets were relatively low-dosage, and contained low levels of opioid compared to the extended release tablets in use today, and many more tablets were needed for abusers Therefore oral abuse was more difficult and less common. With the increase in oral abuse of extended release opioid compositions, it would be beneficial to develop a tablet that would make oral abuse more difficult, less desirable, and aversive for opioid abusers. One patent application which describes attempts to solve the problem of abuse of controlled release of opioids is PCT patent application publication WO 01/58451 to Euroceltique, S. A. This publication discusses a tamper-resistant oral opioid agonist formulation having an opioid agonist in releasable form, and a sequestered opioid antagonist that is substantially not released when the dosage form is administered intact. The ratio of the amount of opioid antagonist released from the dosage form after tampering to the amount of the antagonist released from the intact dosage form is 4:1 or greater. However, while this may help deter abuse involving the crushing of a tablet, there is still a need for abuse resistant opioid formulations. We disclose such a tablet.
We provide a pharmaceutical dosage form including an opioid antagonist surrounded by a controlled release matrix and an opioid agonist in a surrounding matrix.
Our disclosure relies on the principle that certain substances are undesirable when an opioid is abused orally or parenterally. One group of such substances, opioid antagonists, reverses and blocks the opioid response. Opioid antagonists can block a response regardless of how administered, but some are much more potent when administered parenterally than orally. Thus, if any antagonist is introduced in sufficient quantities with an opioid to an intended abuser, the antagonist will block the desired euphoric effect and may induce withdrawal, depending on the dose given. If such an antagonist is introduced into a pharmaceutical tablet, once abusers determine that the tablet will not produce a euphoric effect, and may induce withdrawal, abusers may cease to abuse the tablet as it will not help them achieve their goal of obtaining a euphoric effect. If the tablet induces withdrawal in an addict, the addict will eschew the tablet, as induction of withdrawal is a particularly disturbing event. Induced withdrawal for an opioid addict can present itself with symptoms including nausea, vomiting, cold sweats, chills, anxiety, paranoia, aches, cramps, muscle spasms, and a host of other uncomfortable symptoms. A tablet which induces withdrawal would be undesirable to an addict. Therefore, the production of such a tablet or other dosage form will curb abuse. Of course, the tablet must, at the same time, be effective for a patient taking the tablet or other dosage form for its therapeutic analgesic effect. Although reference is made herein to “tablets,” one skilled in the art will recognize that the our disclosure can be applied equally to capsules or other dosage forms.
Our tablet is an analgesic opioid pharmaceutical dosage form for oral administration. The dosage form is, in some ways, similar to those already produced and used for relief of moderate to severe pain in individuals. Often, the currently-marketed tablets are used for pain relief in cancer patients and other patients experiencing severe pain. However, our tablet differs from prior art tablets by including a mechanism for deterring abuse. This mechanism centers around opioid antagonists included in the tablet. The antagonists can be in a matrix which provides a reduced release rate, or in a matrix which provides essentially little or no release of the agent when the tablet is taken orally. Thus the antagonist is sequestered. Additional antagonist is added for immediate release with the opioid. This additional antagonist may be the same as or different from the first agonist.
One problem with prior art tablets, even those having a sequestered antagonist, is that careful dissolution of the tablet without crushing (such as by leaving the tablet in water overnight) will extract opioid without antagonist, allowing abuse. Addicts are surprisingly resourceful at devising methods of abuse. Therefore, this route to abuse should be closed.
Accordingly, we include opioid agonist and two different portions of opioid antagonist. The first matrix contains opioid antagonist and is either a controlled release matrix, or is otherwise prepared in such a manner so as to sequester and slow or prevent completely the release of the antagonist. The first matrix can be in the form of microparticles, dispersed evenly throughout the second matrix, or it can take another form. The second matrix generally forms the bulk of the tablet and includes the opioid agonist. The second matrix is a standard matrix for a tablet of the type desired (either controlled release for long-acting tablets, or immediate release for normal (4 hour) tablets). Where the first matrix is in another form, it can, for instance, form a solid core of the tablet with the second matrix surrounding it, or it may form a layer, in a multi-layer tablet. Where the first matrix is in the form of small particles, or where it forms the core of the tablet, a coating may be used to slow the release of the opioid antagonist from the first matrix. In either case, it is important that crushing the tablet will release the opioid antagonist in the first matrix, whereas dissolving the tablet slowly (as occurs when the tablet is taken by a patient) will not. Further antagonist is provided in immediate release form to prevent careful dissolution and abuse of the tablet.
As mentioned above, the tablet includes a second dose of opioid antagonist. Specifically, the tablet includes an antagonist in an immediate release form. This antagonist is released when a patient takes the tablet. Preferably, this antagonist is induced in the tablet at a low level, such that taking the tablet in a normal fashion will not antagonize the analgesic property of the opioid. However, if an abuser dissolves the tablet slowly and administers the resulting supernatant liquid parenterally, the antagonist will antagonize the opioid and may induce withdrawal in dependent individuals. This operates to deter the careful dissolution and abuse of the tablet. The immediate release antagonist can be contained either in a coating or in a separate immediate release matrix layer. The antagonist used in the immediate release form can be any suitable antagonist, including naloxone, naltrexone, nalorphine, diprenorphine, levallorphan, pentazocine, metazocine, cyclazocine, etazocine, N-cyclopropylmethyl-7,8-dihydro-14-hydroxynormorphinone, or 21-cyclopropyl z,-(1-hydroxy-1-methylethyl)-6,14-endo-ethano-tetrahydrooripavine (or diphenorphine).
In a preferred embodiment, a different opioid antagonist is used in the first matrix from that in the third matrix or coating. Specifically, it is preferred to use naloxone in the third matrix or coating. Naloxone has a very high oral:parenteral ratio. Naloxone exhibits very low bioavailability when administered orally, yet exhibits high bioavailability and effectiveness when administered parenterally. Therefore, including naloxone in the third matrix or coating will allow a patient using the tablet to receive naloxone orally. Yet due to its low bioavailability, the naloxone will have little or no effect on the patient. However, should an abuser dissolve the tablet slowly and administer the resulting solution parenterally, the naloxone will have full antagonistic activity. The term “parenteral” as used herein is intended to include any administration where the opioid is not absorbed through the digestive track. This includes, without limitation, intravenous, sublingual and intra-nasal administration.
In this embodiment, it is preferred to use an opioid antagonist other than naloxone in the first matrix. Preferred antagonists for the first matrix include naltrexone, nalmefene, levallorphan, cyclazacine, or mixtures thereof. These antagonists exhibit good antagonistic effect when administered orally. Therefore, the antagonist will produce undesirable effects upon an abuser who chews or crushes the tablet and administers it orally. Alternatively, additional naloxone can be included to overcome low oral bioavailability, but this will have an unintended increased effect if administered parenterally.
The third matrix should contain sufficient antagonist to prevent abuse. This amount may vary with tablet strength, but generally, at least about 0.2 mg, preferably at least about 1 mg, more preferably at least 2 mg, most preferably at least about 10 mg antagonist should be used in the third matrix of the tablet. The third matrix should include sufficient antagonist to prevent parenteral abuse, but not enough to cause an effect on the oral user. For example, the tablet, when intact, is adapted to release at least about 30% of the total opioid antagonist in the first hour. This release rate may be based on dissolution accordingly to USP XXIV Apparatus I, basket method at 100 rpm using 0.1 N HCl as dissolution medium at 37.5° C.
The first, sequestering, matrix containing the antagonist in our tablet substantially prevents release of the antagonist under normal circumstances (i.e. when the intact tablet is taken orally). Therefore, the tablet may be loaded with a sufficient dosage of the antagonist that, despite the reduced oral efficacy of the antagonist, should the tablet be crushed or chewed and taken orally, the dose of antagonist will be sufficient to prevent the euphoric opioid effect and may also induce withdrawal. Thus, our tablet will also prevent oral abuse of orally administered controlled release tablets, which are becoming more commonly abused. With oral abuse, abusers chew or crush a controlled release opioid tablet to convert the tablet to immediate release in order to obtain a euphoria or high. In this circumstance, or if the tablet is dissolved and injected, the opioid antagonist will prevent the abuser from receiving a euphoric high and may also cause withdrawal in opioid-dependent individuals, thus, deterring abuse. Thus our tablet should prevent abuse by administration of the tablet in any altered form, whether crushed or dissolved, and whether swallowed, snorted, or injected. Furthermore, this tablet is compatible with other abuse-deterring agents or systems.
Our tablet can be used with a wide range of opioids. Specifically, it is most preferable to use our tablet with opioids having a high potential for abuse. Opioid agonists used can be any agonist in general use as an analgesic, including but not limited to codeine, dihydrocodeine, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, levorphanol, meperidine, buprenorphine, fentanyl, fentanyl derivatives, dipipanone, heroin, tramadol, etorphine, dihydroetorphine, butorphanol, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, and propoxyphene and pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof. Specifically, any addictive opioid in an oral tablet form is our target. Most particularly, controlled release oxycodone has recently been the target of abuse and would therefore make a good candidate for use in our disclosure. However, while controlled release tablets have recently been a particular problem, our tablet may be used for immediate release tablets as well as those in a controlled release format.
In our tablet, the opioid antagonist is contained in a separate matrix from the opioid agonist. That separate matrix can be formed in many different ways. One appropriate configuration is a uniform controlled release matrix with the opioid antagonist dispersed therein. That controlled release matrix is formulated and granulated into very small granules. These granules are then incorporated into the main matrix of the tablet. In this way, the antagonist is contained in a separate controlled release matrix that forms part of the entire tablet. The granules can also be coated to further sequester the antagonist prior to incorporation into the tablet. Upon ingestion, the low, orally-ineffective dose of opioid antagonist would, dissolve, along with the (the matrix may/may not dissolve) the opioid agonist. This dissolution releases the opioid agonist and the granules containing the orally-effective dose of opioid antagonist in a reduced release or non-release matrix. The antagonist-containing granules then pass through and out of the body, releasing only minimal therapeutically ineffective amounts of opioid antagonist, or not at all.
Another possible configuration for our tablet incorporates the opioid antagonist into an immediate release matrix. The matrix can then be granulated and coated with a non-release coating, such as an acrylic polymer. The granules are then incorporated into either an immediate release or a controlled release opioid tablet. The tablet is then coated with antagonist. Upon administration, the tablet releases antagonist and opioid at a predetermined rate, but the coated granules releases no antagonist. Rather, the granules pass through the intestines and are then eliminated from the patient. In this way, the coated granules act as an excipient and, under normal circumstances, have no pharmacological effect whatsoever. Any suitable controlled or immediate release matrix can be used to sequester the opioid antagonist provided that the proper non-release coating is used along and that the matrix and agent are compatible.
Alternatively, a reduced release rate granule could be formed using an immediate release matrix with a reduced release rate coating over the formed granules. Although we describe a “non-release” matrix in one embodiment, it is possible that some leakage of opioid antagonist may occur where “non-release” is specified. This is acceptable as long as the release rate is very low (lower than necessary to have a significant pharmalogical effect). This is particularly significant where the antagonist has high oral bioavailability and can affect the therapeutic action of the tablet if released. Thus, the definition of non-release, as used herein, should include any reduced release matrix which allows less than 30 percent of an opioid antagonist to be released over a 12-hour period under normal conditions of oral administration. Of course, none of the “non-release” matrices described herein are intended to fully encapsulate the opioid antagonist or other agents so as to prevent release when the tablet is crushed or dissolved. Furthermore, a suitable non-release coating can be formed by using several known coatings together on a granulated matrix containing opioid antagonist. For instance, the agonist-containing granules can be covered with a coating which allows for release of material only at a pH below 5 (or 3), which is then covered by a coating which allows release of material only at above a pH of 5 (or 7 or even 9). In that way, when the tablet is ingested, the outer coating will prevent release of agonist while the granules reside in the stomach, and the inner coating will prevent release of material once the tablet has passed through the stomach into the intestines, where the pH rises sufficiently to dissolve the outer coating. One skilled in the art would be able to formulate a suitable matrix for use in our tablet.
The amount of antagonist used in the tablet will vary with the amount of opioid agonist used (i.e., with the tablet strength), the therapeutic dose of the antagonist, and the route of administration to be prevented. In the case of injection or intranasal administration, only about 0.2-0.4 mg naloxone is needed to antagonize the opioid effect, to induce abstinence in dependent individuals, and to prevent abuse. However, because of the reduced efficacy of naloxone when taken orally, substantially greater amounts are needed to prevent oral abuse when naloxone is used as the sequestered antagonist. Accordingly, there should be at least about 0.1 mg, preferably at least 1.0 mg, more preferably at least about 5.0 mg, and most preferably at least about 20 mg per tablet to prevent oral abuse. Small amounts of antagonists with greater oral bioavailability can be used. The amount of naloxone in each tablet will vary with tablet strength, both because a greater amount of opioid in the tablet can require a larger amount of antagonist to counteract, but also because, with higher strength tablets, abusers may divide the tablets into several smaller doses, and it would be most desirable to ensure that each dose has sufficient antagonist to prevent abuse. Thus, a 160 mg oxycodone tablet should have more opioid antagonist than a 10 or 20 mg oxycodone tablet. The ratio of opioid:opioid antagonist may vary from 1:3 to 2:1 because the naloxone is used in a reduced-rate release matrix, or in a non-release matrix, allowing large amounts of naloxone to be incorporated into a tablet. Thus, a tablet could incorporate 100 mg of naloxone or more in a non-release format.
Regarding opioid antagonists, the foregoing has been described with respect to naloxone, but we intended to encompass the use of any appropriate known opioid antagonist, including, but not limited to: naloxone, naltrexone, nalorphine, diprenorphine, levallorphan, pentazocine, metazocine, cyclazocine, etazocine, N-cyclopropylmethyl-7,8-dihydro-14-hydroxynormorphinone, or 21-cyclopropyl z,-(1-hydroxy-1-methylethyl)-6,14-endo-ethano-tetrahydrooripavine (or diphenorphine) and the pharmaceutically acceptable acid addition salts thereof. Preferably, the antagonist is one which, like naloxone, has substantially greater effectiveness when administered by injection than when administered orally.
Our opioid antagonist is not encapsulated and dispersed in the body of the tablet, but rather is contained in the center of the tablet and surrounded with a controlled release matrix. The surrounding matrix contains an opioid agonist. When the tablet is swallowed whole, the surrounding matrix releases opioid at a controlled rate. The rate is selected such that the tablet is eliminated from the body prior to release of the antagonist in the center of the tablet. Alternatively, additional layers may be used to further control release of the opioid. For example, the outermost level may release large dose of opioid, to provide fast pain relief, followed by a slower release to provide continued relief over time. The layers could alternatively release opioid agonist and opioid antagonist. For instance, the tablet could be layered to produce a slow release of opioid followed by a fast spike of antagonist, followed by a slow release of opioid and then a fast spike of antagonist. In this manner, the slow release of opioid will first occupy receptors and the spike of antagonist will occur in insufficient quantity and will undergo faster metabolism, and thus will not affect the action of the opioid. If the tablet is crushed, a large bolus of antagonist would be released, interfering with the action of the agonist, deterring future abuse.
The following examples, while not intended to limit our disclosure in any way, are illustrative.
Naloxone NR Granules A
Tablet A
Immediate Release Naloxone Coating
Dissolution was conducted according to USP XXIV Apparatus II (Paddle Method.) at 75 rpm using 0.1N HCI as dissolution medium. The bath temperature is set at 37.5° C. The HPLC parameters are set as follows: Column—Inertsil ODS 3, 50 mm×4.6 mm, 3 μm particle size. Mobile phase: 80% 30 mM sodium hexanesulfonate pH 3.0+/−1, 20% acetonitrile. Injection volume is 75 μL. Column temperature is 35° C. Flow rate is set at 1.0 mL/min. Wavelength is set at 225 nm. Run time is 5.5 minutes.
Naloxone NR Granules B
Tablet B-NR Layer
Tablet B-IR/NR Bi-Layers
Dissolution was conducted according to USP XXIV Apparatus I (Basket Method.) at 100 rpm using Simulated Gastric Fluid at pH 1.2 (0.1N HCl with Sodium Chloride) without enzyme in the first hour and Simulated Intestine Fluid at pH 6.8 (10 mM Phosphate Buffer without enzyme) from 2 to 12 hours as dissolution medium. The bath temperature is set at 37.5° C. The HPLC parameters is set as follows: Column—Inertsil ODS 3, 50 mm×4.6 mm, 3 μm particle size. Mobile phase: 80% 30 mM sodium hexanesulfonate pH 3.0+/−1, 20% acetonitrile. Injection volume is 75 μL. Column temperature is 35° C., Flow rate is set at 1.0 mL/min. Wavelength is set at 225 nm. Run time is 5.5 minutes.
This is a continuation of U.S. application. Ser. No. 12/894,614, filed Sep. 30, 2010, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/143,140, filed on May 10, 2002, which claims priority of U.S. Application Ser. No. 60/290,438 filed May 11, 2001, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60290438 | May 2001 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 13033899 | Feb 2011 | US |
| Child | 13480737 | US | |
| Parent | 12894614 | Sep 2010 | US |
| Child | 13033899 | US | |
| Parent | 10143140 | May 2002 | US |
| Child | 12894614 | US |
