Patent Grant
8822487
Opioids, also known as opioid agonists, are a group of drugs that exhibit opium or morphine-like properties. The opioids are employed primarily as moderate to strong analgesics, but have many other pharmacological effects as well, including drowsiness, respiratory depression, changes in mood and mental clouding without a resulting loss of consciousness. Opioids act as agonists, interacting with stereospecific and saturable binding sites in the brain and other tissues. Endogenous opioid-like peptides are present particularly in areas of the central nervous system that are presumed to be related to the perception of pain; to movement, mood and behavior, and to the regulation of neuroendocrinological functions. Opium contains more than twenty distinct alkaloids. Morphine, codeine and papaverine are included in this group.
By the middle of the nineteenth century, the use of pure alkaloids such as morphine rather than crude opium preparations began to spread throughout the medical world. Parenteral use of morphine tended to produce a more severe variety of compulsive drug use. The problem of addiction to opioids stimulated a search for potent analgesics that would be free of the potential to produce addiction. By 1967, researchers had concluded that the complex interactions among morphine-like drugs, antagonists, and what was then called “mixed agonist-antagonise” could best be explained by postulating the existence of more than one type of receptor for opioids and related drugs. With the advent of new totally synthetic entities with morphine-like actions, the term “opioid” was generally retained as a generic designation for all exogenous substances that bind stereo-specifically to any of several subspecies of opioid receptors and produce agonist actions.
The potential for the development of tolerance and physical dependence with repeated opioid use is a characteristic feature of all the opioid drugs, and the possibility of developing psychological dependence (i.e., addiction) is one of the major concerns in the use of the treatment of pain with opioids, even though iatrogenic addiction is rare. Another major concern associated with the use of opioids is the diversion of these drugs from the patient in pain to another (non-patient) for recreational purposes, e.g., to an addict.
The overall abuse potential of an opioid is not established by any one single factor. Instead, there is a composite of factors, including, the capacity of the drug to produce the kind of physical dependence in which drug withdrawal causes sufficient distress to bring about drug-seeking behavior; the ability to suppress withdrawal symptoms caused by withdrawal from other agents; the degree to which it induces euphoria similar to that produced by morphine and other opioids; the patterns of toxicity that occur when the drug is dosed above its normal therapeutic range; and physical characteristics of the drugs such as water solubility. Such physical characteristics may determine whether the drug is likely to be abused by the parenteral route.
In the United States, the effort to control the compulsive drug user includes efforts to control drug availability by placing restrictions on the use of opioids in the treatment of pain of compulsive drug users. In practice, the physician is often faced with a choice of administering potent opioid analgesics even to persons who seem predisposed to develop psychological dependence, i.e., addiction, on such drugs. In view of this problem, it has been recommended that these patients should not be given an opioid when another drug without a potential for abuse will suffice; and further that these patients should not be permitted to self-administer such drugs parenterally and should only be given a few days' supply at a time.
At least three basic patterns of opioid use and dependence have been identified. The first involves individuals whose drug use begins in the context of medical treatment and who obtain their initial supplies through, e.g., physicians. Another pattern begins with experimental or “recreational” drug use and progresses to more intensive use. A third pattern involves users who begin in one or another of the preceding ways but later switch to oral opioids such as methadone, obtained from organized addiction treatment programs.
Tolerance refers to the need to increase the dose of opioid over a period of time in order to achieve the same level of analgesia or euphoria, or the observation that repeated administration of the same dose results in decreased analgesia, euphoria, or other opioid effects. It has been found that a remarkable degree of tolerance develops to the respiratory depressant, analgesic, sedative, emetic and euphorigenic effects of opioids. However, the rate at which this tolerance may develop in either an addict or in a patient requiring treatment of pain, depends on the pattern of use. If the opioid is used frequently, it may be necessary to increase the dose. Tolerance does not develop equally or at the same rate to all the effects of opioids, and even users who are highly tolerant to respiratory depressant effects continue to exhibit miosis and constipation. Tolerance to opioids largely disappears when the withdrawal syndrome has been completed.
Physical dependence may develop upon repeated administrations or extended use of opioids. Physical dependence is gradually manifested after stopping opioid use or is precipitously manifested (e.g., within 20 minutes) after administration of a narcotic antagonist (referred to “precipitated withdrawal”). Depending upon the drug to which dependence has been established and the duration of use and dose, symptoms of withdrawal vary in number and kind, duration and severity. The most common symptoms of the withdrawal syndrome include anorexia, weight loss, pupillary dilation, chills alternating with excessive sweating, abdominal cramps, nausea, vomiting, muscle spasms, hyperirritability, lachrymation, rinorrhea, goose flesh and increased heart rate. Abstinence syndrome typically begins to occur 24-48 hours after the last dose, and the syndrome reaches its maximum intensity about the third day and may not begin to decrease until the third week.
Psychological dependence (i.e., addiction) on opioids is characterized by drug-seeking behavior directed toward achieving euphoria and escape from, e.g., psychosocioeconomic pressures. An addict will continue to administer opioids for non-medicinal purposes and in the face of self-harm.
Pharmacologically, opioid antagonists typically block or reverse all of the effect of opioid agonists. One use of opioid antagonists is as a once-a-day treatment of naltrexone to block euphoric effects that might be otherwise obtained upon administration of opioids to addicts. Small doses of opioid antagonists have been used to determine whether individuals are physically dependent on opioids. Most commonly, opioid antagonists are used to reverse the effects of opoids on individuals who have overdosed on opioid agonist drugs.
There have previously been attempts in the art to control the abuse potential associated with opioid analgesics. Typically, a particular dose of an opioid analgesic is more potent when administered parenterally as compared to the same dose administered orally. Therefore, one popular mode of abuse of oral medications involves the extraction of the opioid from the dosage form, and the subsequent injection of the opioid (using any “suitable” vehicle for injection) in order to achieve a “high.” Attempts to curtail abuse have therefore typically centered around the inclusion in the oral dosage form of an opioid antagonist which is not orally active but which will substantially block the analgesic effects of the opioid if one attempts to dissolve the opioid and administer it parenterally.
For example, the combination of pentazocine and naloxone has been utilized in tablets available in the United States, commercially available as Talwin® Nx from Sanofi-Winthrop. Talwin® Nx contains pentazocine hydrochloride equivalent to 50 mg base and naloxone hydrochloride equivalent to 0.5 mg base. Talwin® Nx is indicated for the relief of moderate to severe pain. The amount of naloxone present in this combination has no action when taken orally, and will not interfere with the pharmacologic action of pentazocine. However, this amount of naloxone given by injection has profound antagonistic action to narcotic analgesics. Thus, the inclusion of naloxone is intended to curb a form of misuse of oral pentazocine which occurs when the dosage form is solubilized and injected. Therefore, this dosage has lower parenteral misuse than previous oral pentazocine formulations. However, it is still subject to patient misuse and abuse by the oral route, for example, by the patient taking multiple doses at once.
Sunshine, et al. “Analgesic Efficacy of Pentazocine Versus a Pentazocine-Naloxone Combination Following Oral Administration”, Clin. J. Pain, 1988:4:35-40, reported on the effect of the addition of 0.5 mg naloxone on the analgesic efficacy of pentazocine 50 mg. The combination was found to be significantly less efficacious than pentazocine for the sum of the pain intensity difference (SPID), and for relief and pain intensity difference (PID) at the fourth hour. For patients with moderate baseline pain, the combination produced significantly less pain relief than pentazocine for SAD and for relief and PID at hours 3 and 4. In patients with severe baseline pain, there was no significant difference found between pentazocine and the combination of pentazocine plus naloxone.
Wang, et al. “Crossover and Parallel Study of Oral Analgesics”, J. Clin Pharmacol 1981; 21:162-8, studied the combination of naloxone 0.25 mg and Percodan® (composed of 4.5 mg oxycodone HCl, oxycodone terephthalate 0.28 mg, aspirin 224 mg, phenacetin 160 mg, and caffeine 32 mg) compared to Percodan® alone, and placebo in a crossover study of patients with chronic pain. The combination had lower mean scores than Percodan® alone for most of the analgesic hourly parameters in the later hours of the trial. However, for the summary variables, the combination showed no significant difference from either placebo or Percodan®.
A fixed combination of buprenorphine and naloxone was introduced in 1991 in New Zealand (Temgesic®Nx, Reckitt & Colman) for the treatment of pain.
A fixed combination therapy comprising tilidine (50 mg) and naloxone (4 mg) has been available in Germany for the management of severe pain since 1978 (Valoron®N, Goedecke). The rationale for the combination of these drugs is effective pain relief and the prevention of tilidine addiction through naloxone-induced antagonisms at the morphine receptor.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,773,955 (Pachter, et al.) described orally effective analgetic compositions which upon parenteral administration do not produce analgesia, euphoria, or physical dependence, and thereby prevent parenteral abuse of the analgetic agents. Such compositions contained from about 0.1 mg to about 10 mg naloxone per analgetic oral dose. This reference was not concerned with oral abuse of opioids.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,493,657 (Lewenstein, et al.) described compositions comprising naloxone and morphine or oxymorphone, which compositions were said to provide a strong analgesic effect without the occurrence of undesired side effects such as hallucinations.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,457,933 (Gordon, et al.) described a method for decreasing both the oral and parenteral abuse potential of strong analgetic agents such as oxycodone, propoxyphene and pentazocine, by combining an analgesic dose of the opioid with naloxone in a specific, relatively narrow range. Oxycodone-naloxone compositions having a ratio of 2.5-5:1 parts by weight and pentazocine-naloxone compositions having a ratio of 16-50:1 parts by weight were preferred. The dose of naloxone which was to be combined with the opioid is stated to substantially eliminate the possibility of either oral or parenteral abuse of the opioid without substantially affecting the oral analgesic activity thereof.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,582,835 (Lewis) describes a method of treating pain by administering a sublingually effective dose of buprenorphine with naloxone. Lewis describes dosage ratios of naloxone to buprenorphine from 1:3 to 1:1 for parenteral administration, and from 1:2 to 2:1 for sublingual administration.
It has been increasingly recognized in the art that oral opioid formulations are not only being abused by the parenteral route, but also via the oral route when the patient or addict orally self-administers more than the prescribed oral dose during any dosage interval. There is therefore a need for the development of a formulation for the treatment of pain which is administrable orally and which provides a lower potential for oral abuse.
To the inventors' knowledge, a ratio of opioid agonist to opioid antagonist which would be analgesically effective when the combination is administered orally, but which is aversive in a physically dependent subject has not been recognized to date.
It is an object of the invention to provide an oral dosage form of an opioid analgesic which is subject to less abuse potential via the oral route than prior commercially available dosage forms.
It is a further object of the present invention to provide an oral dosage form of an opioid analgesic and method which provides therapeutic analgesia and which also provides a negative, “aversive” experience when a large amount of the opioid, e.g., about 2-3 times the usually prescribed dose, is taken by or administered to a physically dependent subject.
It is a further object of the present invention to provide an oral dosage form of an opioid analgesic and a method for providing therapeutic analgesia in a manner which is not as positively reinforcing in non-physically dependent subjects taking more than the usually prescribed dose, e.g., about 2-3 times the usually prescribed dose of the opioid, as compared to the same amount of opioid without the antagonist.
It is a further object of the invention to provide a method of treating pain in human patients with an oral dosage form of an opioid analgesic while reducing the oral abuse potential of dosage form.
It is a further object of the invention to provide a method of manufacturing an oral dosage form of an opioid analgesic such that it has less oral abuse potential.
It is a further object of the invention to provide a formulation which has the above benefits, and which further includes an effective amount of acetaminophen, such that the dosage form provides pain relief when administered.
It is a further object of the invention to provide a method of treating pain in human patients with an oral dosage form of an opioid analgesic and acetaminophen while reducing the oral abuse potential of dosage form.
The above objects and others are achieved by the present invention, which is directed in part to the surprising finding that there exists a ratio of opioid antagonist to opioid agonist (analgesic) which is analgesically effective when the combination is administered orally, but which is aversive in a physically dependent subject. To the inventor's knowledge, this was not even considered by those skilled in the art, e.g., an addictionologist, analgesiologist, a clinical pharmacologist. It is surprising that one combination product (of combined antagonist/agonist) could in essence be therapeutic to one population (patients in pain), while being unacceptable (aversive) in a different population (e.g., physically dependent subjects) when administered at the same dose or at a higher dose than the usually prescribed dosage, e.g., about 2-3 times the usually prescribed dose of the opioid.
The present invention is directed in part to an oral dosage form comprising an orally analgesically effective amount of an opioid agonist and an opioid antagonist in a ratio which maintains analgesic efficacy by the opioid analgesic but which may decrease analgesia somewhat as assessed by direct measurement in patients or by the use of one or more surrogate measures of opioid efficacy (analgesia) in human subjects. Surrogate measures of opioid efficacy (analgesia) include sedation, respiratory rate and/or pupil size (via pupillometry), and visual analogue scale (“VAS”) for “drug effect”. Such surrogate measures are affected in a direction which indicates reduced opioid effect, as compared to the same dose of opioid without the concommitant dose of opioid antagonist.
In certain preferred embodiments where the opioid is hydrocodone and the antagonist is naltrexone, the oral dosage form includes hydrocodone in the form of its bitartrate salt and naltrexone in the form of its hydrochloride salt.
In certain preferred embodiments where the opioid is hydrocodone and the antagonist is naltrexone, the ratio of naltrexone to hydrocodone is preferably from about 0.03-0.27:1 by weight, and more preferably from about 0.05-0.20:1 by weight.
The present invention is directed to a method of preventing oral abuse of an oral opioid formulation by a subject, comprising preparing an oral dosage form which comprises an orally analgesically effective amount of an opioid agonist and an opioid antagonist in a ratio which maintains analgesic efficacy by the opioid analgesic but which may decrease analgesia somewhat as assessed by direct measurement in patients or by the use of one or more surrogate measures of opioid effect in human subjects. When the oral dosage form is taken by a physically dependent subject at a relatively large dosage, e.g., about 2-3 times the usually prescribed dose, that use is aversive in a physically dependent human subject and preferably not as positively reinforcing as the opioid (ingested alone) in a non-physically dependent human subject.
The present invention is also directed to a method of treatment, comprising orally administering an orally analgesically effective amount of an opioid agonist together with an opioid antagonist in a ratio which maintains analgesic efficacy by the opioid analgesic but which decrease analgesia somewhat by direct measurement in patients or by the use of one or more surrogate measures of opioid effect in human subjects.
The present invention is further directed in part to oral dosage forms comprising a combination of an orally analgesically effective amount of an opioid agonist and an orally active opioid antagonist, the opioid antagonist being included in an amount (i) which does not cause a reduction in the level of analgesia elicited from the dosage form upon oral administration to a non-therapeutic level and (ii) which provides at least a mildly negative, “aversive” experience in physically dependent subjects (e.g., precipitated abstinence syndrome) when the subjects attempt to take at least twice the usually prescribed dose at a time (and often 2-3 times that dose or more), as compared to a comparable dose of the opioid without the opioid antagonist present. Preferably, the amount of naltrexone included in the oral dosage form is less positively reinforcing (e.g., less “liked”) to a non-physically dependent opioid addict than a comparable oral dosage form without the antagonist included. Preferably, the formulation provides effective analgesia when orally administered.
For purposes of the present invention, the phrase “which may decrease analgesia somewhat as assessed by direct measurement in patients or by the use of one or more surrogate measures of opioid analgesic efficacy in human subjects” means that the patient in pain may or may not appreciably notice the difference between the formulation administered in accordance with the invention (i.e., combination of opioid agonist/antagonist) and a similar formulation which includes the same dose of opioid agonist without the opioid antagonist, but will obtain an analgesic effect from the combination. The pharmacodynamic effect (analgesia) of the formulations administered in accordance with the invention can be described by means of, for example, scores from an analgesic questionnaire reported by the patients at serial times following administration of the dosage form. Summary measures of analgesia include the sum of pain intensity difference (SPID) and total pain relief (TOTPAR).
In certain preferred embodiments, the amount of opioid antagonist included in the dosage form may cause a clinically significant reduction in the level of analgesia elicited from the dosage form upon oral administration, e.g., as measured by surrogate measures such as a Visual Analogue Scale (“VAS”) for “drug effect”. In other embodiments, the amount of opioid antagonist included in the oral dosage form may cause a noticeable reduction in the level of analgesia elicted from the dosage form upon oral administration, but does not reduce the level of analgesia provided to a subtherapeutic level.
Preferably, the amount of antagonist included in the oral dosage form is less positively reinforcing (e.g., less “liked”) by a non-physically dependent opioid subject than a comparable oral dosage form without the antagonist included.
The present invention is also directed to a method of preparing an oral dosage form of an opioid analgesic intended for the treatment of pain in human patients in a manner which minimizes the likelihood of oral abuse of the dosage form, combining an orally analgesically effective amount of an opioid agonist together with an opioid antagonist in a ratio which maintains analgesic efficacy by the opioid analgesic but which may decrease analgesia somewhat by direct measurement in patients or by the use of one or more surrogate measures of analgesia in human subjects. In certain embodiments, the combination when orally administered provides a clinically significant reduction in the level of analgesia elicited from the dosage form upon oral administration (as compared to the same dose of opioid alone), and provides at least a mildly negative, “aversive” experience in a physically dependent subject (e.g., precipitated abstinence syndrome) when the subject takes more than the usually prescribed or usual dose of opioid. The subject may be, for example, an addict who attempts to achieve euphoria (a “high”) by taking more than (e.g., at least 2-3 times) the usually prescribed dose at a time. The amount of opioid antagonist included in the dosage form may or may not cause a noticeable reduction in the level of analgesia elicited from the dosage form upon oral administration, e.g., as measured by pharmacodynamic parameters such as a Visual Analogue Scale (“VAS”) for drug effect, but preferably allows the dosage form to nevertheless provide effective analgesia. In certain preferred embodiments of the method, the dose of opioid antagonist appreciably affects a surrogate measure of opioid analgesic effect. In certain preferred embodiments, the amount of antagonist included in the oral dosage form is less positively reinforcing (e.g., less “liked”) by a non-physically dependent subject than a comparable oral dosage form without the antagonist included.
The oral pharmaceutical compositions containing the inventive combination of drugs set forth herein may be in the form of tablets, liquids, troches, lozenges, aqueous or oily suspensions, multiparticulate formulations including dispersable powders, granules, matrix spheroids or coated inert beads, emulsions, hard or soft capsules or syrups or elixirs, microparticles (e.g., microcapsules, microspheres and the like), buccal tablets, etc. The dosage forms of the present invention may include any desired pharmaceutically acceptable excipients known to those skilled in the art. The dosage forms may further provide an immediate release of the opioid agonist and the opioid antagonist. In certain preferred embodiments, the dosage forms provide a sustained release of the opioid agonist, and provide the part or all of the dose of opioid antagonist in (i) immediate release form, (ii) sustained release form, or (iii) both immediate and sustained release form. Such embodiments may further comprise a portion of the opioid agonist in immediate release form. Sustained release may be accomplished in accordance with formulations/methods of manufacture known to those skilled in the art of pharmaceutical formulation, e.g., via the incorporation of a sustained release carrier into a matrix containing the opioid agonist and opioid antagonist; or via a sustained release coating of a matrix containing the opioid agonist and opioid antagonist.
The invention may provide for a safer product (e.g., less respiratory depression) as well as one with a slower rate of opioid tolerance and physical dependency development.
In certain other preferred embodiments, the opioid included in the dosage form is a different orally active opioid agonist than hydrocodone. The ratio of naltrexone included in such formulations can be readily determined based on a simple calculation, taking into account the known equianalgesic dosages of various opioid analgesics as compared to hydrocodone. Equianalgesic dosages of various opioid analgesics are provided below, and are otherwise known to those skilled in the art, e.g., from Foley, K. “The Treatment of Cancer Pain;” N. Engl. J. Med. 1985; 313:84-95, hereby incorporated by reference. In yet further aspects of this embodiment, a different opioid antagonist is substituted for naltrexone, using equiantagonistic doses thereof.
In certain embodiments, a combination of two opioid analgesics is included in the formulation. In further embodiments, one or more opioid analgesics is included and a further non-opioid drug is also included, in addition to the opioid antagonist. Such non-opioid drugs would preferably provide additional analgesia, and include, for example, aspirin, acetaminophen, non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (“MAIDS”), NMDA antagonists, and cyclooxygenase-II inhibitors (“COX-II inhibitors”). In yet further embodiments, a non-opioid drug can be included which provides a desired effect other than analgesia, e.g., antitussive, expectorant, decongestant, or antihistamine drugs, and the like.
It is yet a further object to provide a method and pharmaceutical formulation (medicament) for the effective treatment of pain in patients by augmenting the analgesic effect of an opioid analgesic and/or acetaminophen when included in the opioid agonist/opioid antagonist formulations of the invention.
The term “parenterally” as used herein includes subcutaneous injections, intravenous, intramuscular, intrasternal injection or infusion techniques.
The term “effective analgesia” is defined for purposes of the present invention as a satisfactory reduction in or elimination of pain, along with a tolerable level of side effects, as determined by the human patient.
The term “sustained release” is defined for purposes of the present invention as the release of the drug (opioid analgesic) from the oral formulation at such a rate that blood (e.g., plasma) concentrations (levels) are maintained within the therapeutic range (above the minimum effective analgesic concentration or “MEAL”) but below toxic levels over a period of time indicative of a twice-a-day or a once-a-day formulation.
The term “steady state” refers to a time when the rate of elimination of a drug is the same as the rate of absorption of that drug into the body.
For purposes of the present invention, the term “opioid agonist” is interchangeable with the term “opioid” or “opioid analgesic” and shall include the base of the opioid, mixed agonist-antagonists, partial agonists, pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof, stereoisomers thereof, ethers and esters thereof, and mixtures thereof.
For purposes of the present invention, the term “opioid antagonist” shall include the base, pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof, stereoisomers thereof, ethers and esters thereof, and mixtures thereof.
The following drawings are illustrative of embodiments of the invention and are not meant to limit the scope of the invention as encompassed by the claims.
It has been postulated that there exists at least three subspecies of opioid receptors, designated mu, kappa, and delta. Within this framework, the mu receptor is considered to be involved in the production of superspinal analgesia, respiratory depression, euphoria, and physical dependence. The kappa receptor is considered to be involved in inducing spinal analgesia, miosis and sedation. Activation of the gamma receptors causes dysphoria and hallucinations, as well as respiratory and vasomotor stimulatory effects. A receptor distinct from the mu receptor and designated gamma has been described in the mouse vas deferens, Lord, et al. Nature, 1977, 267, 495-99. Opioid agonists are thought to exert their agonist actions primarily at the mu receptor and to a lesser degree at the kappa receptor. There are a few drugs that appear to act as partial agonists at one receptor type or another. Such drugs exhibit a ceiling effect. Such drugs include nalorphine, propiram, and buprenorphine. Still other drugs act as competitive antagonists at the mu receptor and block the effects of morphine-like drugs, by exerting agonist actions at the kappa and omega receptors. The term “agonist-antagonist” has evolved to describe such mechanism of actions. The concept of antagonism to the actions of opioids is considered to be complex.
It has been found with the administration of opioid agonist-antagonists and partial agonists that tolerance develops to the agonist effects but not to the antagonist effects of the drugs. Even after prolonged administration of high doses, discontinuance of naloxone is not characterized by any recognizable withdrawal syndrome, and withdrawal of naltrexone, another relatively pure opioid antagonist, produces very few signs and symptoms. However, after prolonged administration of high dosage, abrupt discontinuation of opioid agonist-antagonists nalorphine or cyclazocine causes a characteristic withdrawal syndrome that is similar for both drags.
Naloxone is an opioid antagonist which is almost void of agonist effects. Subcutaneous doses of up to 12 mg of naloxone produce no discernable subjective effects, and 24 mg naloxone causes only slight drowsiness. Small doses (0.4-0.8 mg) of naloxone given intramuscularly or intravenously in man prevent or promptly reverse the effects of morphine-like opioid agonist. One mg of naloxone intravenously has been reported to completely block the effect of 25 mg of heroin. The effects of naloxone are seen almost immediately after intravenous administration. The drug is absorbed after oral administration, but has been reported to be metabolized into an inactive form rapidly in its first passage through the liver such that it has been reported to be only one fiftieth as potent as when parenterally administered. Oral dosage of more than 1 g have been reported to be almost completely metabolized in less than 24 hours.
Other opioid antagonists, for example, cyclazocine and naltrexone, both of which have cyclopropylmethyl substitutions on the nitrogen, retain much of their efficacy by the oral route and their durations of action are much longer, approaching 24 hours after oral doses. A most preferred opioid antagonist is naltrexone. However, equiantagonistic oral doses of other opioid antagonists, including but not limited to naloxone, nalmephene, cyclazocine, and levallorphan can be utilized in accordance with the present invention. The ratio of such other antagonists to a particular opioid agonist can be readily determined without undue experimentation by one skilled in art who desires to utilize a different opioid antagonist than naltrexone, the ratio of which to opioid agonists is exemplified and discussed in detail herein. Those skilled in the art may determine such ratios of other antagonists to opioid agonists, e.g., by conducting the same or similar clinical studies set forth in the examples appended herein. Thus, combinations of opioid antagonists/opioid agonists which are orally administered in ratios which are equivalent to the ratio of, e.g., naltrexone to hydrocodone set forth herein are considered to be within the scope of the present invention and within the scope of the appended claims. For example, in certain embodiments of the invention, naloxone is utilized as the opioid antagonist, the amount of naloxone included in the dosage form being large enough to provide an equiantagonistic effect as if naltrexone were included in the combination.
In the treatment of patients previously addicted to opioids, naltrexone has been used in large oral doses (over 100 mg) to prevent euphorigenic effects of opioid agonists. Naltrexone has been reported to exert strong preferential blocking action against mu over delta sites. Naltrexone is known as a synthetic congener of oxymorphone with no opioid agonist properties, and differs in structure from oxymorphone by the replacement of the methyl group located on the nitrogen atom of oxymorphone with a cyclopropylmethyl group. The hydrochloride salt of naltrexone is soluble in water up to about 100 mg/cc. The pharmacological and pharmacokinetic properties of naltrexone have been evaluated in multiple animal and clinical studies. See, e.g., Gonzalez J P, et al. Naltrexone: A review of its Pharmacodynamic and Pharmacokinetic Properties and Therapeutic Efficacy in the Management of Opioid Dependence. Drugs 1988; 35:192-213, hereby incorporated by reference. Following oral administration, naltrexone is rapidly absorbed (within 1 hour) and has an oral bioavailability ranging from 5-40%. Naltrexone's protein binding is approximately 21% and the volume of distribution following single-dose administration is 16.1 L/kg.
Naltrexone is commercially available in tablet form (Revia®, DuPont) for the treatment of alcohol dependence and for the blockade of exogenously administered opioids. See, e.g., Revia (naltrexone hydrochloride tablets). Physician's Desk Reference 51st ed., Montvale, N.J. “Medical Economics” 1997; 51:957-959. A dosage of 50 mg ReVia® blocks the pharmacological effects of 25 mg IV administered heroin for up to 24 hours.
It is known that when coadministered with morphine, heroin or other opioids on a chronic basis, naltrexone blocks the development of physical dependence to opioids. It is believed that the method by which naltrexone blocks the effects of heroin is by competitively binding at the opioid receptors. Naltrexone has been used to treat narcotic addiction by complete blockade of the effects of opioids. It has been found that the most successful use of naltrexone for a narcotic addiction is with good prognosis narcotic addicts as part of a comprehensive occupational or rehabilitative program involving behavioral control or other compliance enhancing methods. For treatment of narcotic dependence with naltrexone, it is desirable that the patient be opioid-free for at least 7-10 days. The initial dosage of naltrexone for such purposes has typically been about 25 mg, and if no withdrawal signs occur, the dosage may be increased to 50 mg per day. A daily dosage of 50 mg is considered to produce adequate clinical blockade of the actions of parenterally administered opioids. Naltrexone has also been used for the treatment of alcoholism as an adjunct with social and psychotherapeutic methods.
In the dosage forms and methods of the invention, the amount of naltrexone included is significantly less than the dosages previously commercially available. This is in part because the use of naltrexone is different in the present invention: the goal is not to block opioid effects, but rather to provide a negative, “aversive” experience when a large amount of the combination product, e.g., about 2-3 times the usually prescribed dose, is taken by or administered to a physically dependent subject.
Thus, for example, in formulations of the present invention in which the opioid is hydrocodone bitartrate 15 mg, the amount of naltrexone hydrochloride included in the formulation is from about 0.5 mg to about 4 mg, and preferably from about 0.75 mg to about 3 mg naltrexone per 15 mg hydrocodone.
Opioid analgesics which are useful in the present invention include all opioid agonists or mixed agonist-antagonists, partial agonists, including but not limited to alfentanil, allylprodine, alphaprodine, anileridine, benzylmorphine, bezitramide, buprenorphine, butorphanol, clonitazene, codeine, desomorphine, dextromoramide, dezocine, diampromide, diamorphone, dihydrocodeine, dihydromorphine, dimenoxadol, dimepheptanol, dimethylthiarnbutene, dioxaphetyl butyrate, dipipanone, eptazocine, ethoheptazine, ethylmethylthiambutene, ethylmorphine, etonitazene, fentanyl, heroin, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, hydroxypethidine, isomethadone, ketobemidone, levorphanol, levophenacylmorphan, lofentanil, meperidine, meptazinol, metazocine, methadone, metopon, morphine, myrophine, narceine, nicomorphine, norlevorphanol, normethadone, nalorphine, nalbuphene, normorphine, norpipanone, opium, oxycodone, oxymorphone, papaveretum, pentazocine, phenadoxone, phenomorphan, phenazocine, phenoperidine, piminodine, piritramide, propheptazine, promedol, properidine, pro-, poxyphene, sufentanil, tilidine, tramadol, mixtures of any of the foregoing, salts of any of the foregoing, and the like.
In certain preferred embodiments, the opioid agonist or analgesic is selected from the group consisting of hydrocodone, morphine, hydromorphone, oxycodone, codeine, levorphanol, meperidine, methadone, oxymorphone, dihydrocodiene, tramadol or salts thereof, or mixtures thereof. In certain preferred embodiments, the opioid agonist is hydrocodone. Equianalgesic doses of certain these opioids, in comparison to a 15 mg dose of hydrocodone, are set forth in Table 1 below. Equianalgesic doses of the remaining opioids mentioned herein (and others) are known to those skilled in the art.
Based on the preferred ratio of naltrexone in an amount from about 0.5 to about 4 mg per 15 mg of hydrocodone, the approximate ratio of naltrexone to 1 mg of each opioid is set forth in Table 2:
Based on the more preferred ratio of about 0.75 mg to about 3 mg naltrexone per 15 mg hydrocodone of naltrexone, the approximate ratio of naltrexone to 1 mg of each opioid is set forth in Table 3:
Although hydrocodone is effective in the management of pain, there has been an increase in its abuse by individuals who are psychologically dependent on opioids or who misuse opioids for non-therapeutic reasons. Previous experience with other opioids has demonstrated a decreased abuse potential when opioids are administered in combination with a narcotic antagonist especially in patients who are ex-addicts. Weinhold L L, et al. Buprenorphine Alone and in Combination with Naltrexone in Non-Dependent Humans, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 1992; 30:263-274; Mendelson J., et. al., Buprenorphine and Naloxone Interactions in Opiate-Dependent Volunteers, Clin Pharm Ther 1996; 60:105-114; both of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
Hydrocodone is a semisynthetic narcotic analgesic and antitussive with multiple central nervous system and gastrointestinal actions. Chemically, hydrocodone is 4,5-epoxy-3-methoxy-17-methylmorphinan-6-one, and is also known as dihydrocodeinone. Like other opioids, hydrocodone may be habit forming and may produce drug dependence of the morphine type. In excess doses hydrocodone, like other opium derivatives, will depress respiration.
Oral hydrocodone is also available in Europe (Belgium, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway and Switzerland) as an antitussive agent. A parenteral formulation is also available in Germany as an antitussive agent. For use as an analgesic, hydrocodone bitartrate is commercially available in the United States only as a fixed combination with non-opiate drugs (i.e., ibuprofen, acetaminophen, aspirin, etc.) for relief of moderate or moderately severe pain.
A common dosage form of hydrocodone is in combination with acetaminophen, and is commercially available, e.g., as Lortab® in the U.S. from UCB Pharma, Inc. as 2.5/500 mg, 5/500 mg, 7.5/500 mg and 10/500 mg hydrocodone/acetaminophen tablets. Tablets are also available in the ratio of 7.5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate and 650 mg acetaminophen; and 7.5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate and 750 mg acetaminophen. Hydrocodone in combination with aspirin is given in an oral dosage form to adults generally in 1-2 tablets every 4-6 hours as needed to alleviate pain. The tablet form is 5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate and 224 mg aspirin with 32 mg caffeine; or 5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate and 500 mg aspirin. A relatively new formulation comprises hydrocodone bitartrate and ibuprofen. Vicoprofen®, commercially available in the U.S. from Knoll Laboratories, is a tablet containing 7.5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate and 200 mg ibuprofen. The present invention is contemplated to encompass all such formulations, with the inclusion of the orally active opioid antagonist within the inventive amounts set forth herein.
The abuse potential of opioid analgesics such as hydrocodone is surprisingly curtailed by the inventive combinations of the present invention. More particularly, it has been discovered that it is possible to combine in a single oral dosage form an opioid analgesic together with a small amount of opioid antagonist, to achieve a product which still provides analgesia but which substantially negates the possibility that a physically dependent human subject will continue to abuse the drug by taking more than one tablet at a time, e.g., 2-3 times more than the usually prescribed dose.
The oral dosage forms of the invention comprise an orally therapeutically effective amount of an opioid agonist, together with an opioid antagonist such as naltrexone in an amount (i) which does not cause a reduction in the level of analgesia elicited from the dosage form upon oral administration to a non-therapeutic level and (ii) which provides at least a mildly negative, “aversive” experience in physically dependent human subjects, for example, physically dependent addicts (e.g., precipitated abstinence syndrome) when taking more than the usually prescribed dose at a time. Preferably, the amount of antagonist included in the oral dosage form is (iii) less positively reinforcing (e.g., less “liked”) by a non-physically dependent human subject, e.g., opioid addict, than a comparable oral dosage form without the antagonist included.
The amount of antagonist which is useful to achieve parameters (i)-(iii) set forth in the preceding paragraph may be determined at least in part, for example, through the use of “surrogate” tests, such as a VAS scale (where the subject grades his/her perception of the effect of the dosage form) and/or via a measurement such as pupil size (measured by pupillometry). Such measurements allow one skilled in the art to determine the dose of antagonist relative to the dose of agonist which causes a diminution in the opiate effects of the agonist. Subsequently, one skilled in the art can determine the level of opioid antagonist that causes aversive effects in physically dependent subjects as well as the level of opioid antagonist that minimizes “liking scores” or opioid reinforcing properties in non-physically dependent addicts. Once these levels of opioid antagonist are determined, it is then possible to determine the range of antagonist dosages at or below this level which would be useful in achieving parameters (i)-(iii) set forth in the preceding paragraph.
The present invention is related in part to analgesic pharmaceutical compositions comprising an opioid analgesic/opioid antagonist combination which further includes acetaminophen. The combination can be administered orally, via implant, parenterally, sublingually, rectally, topically, via inhalation, etc. Acetaminophen is an analgesic/antipyretic drug which has been utilized for treating mild to moderate pain such as headache, neuralgia, and musculoskeletal pain. The recommended daily adult dose of acetaminophen is about 325 to about 650 mg every 4 hours, not to exceed a total dose of 4 g in 24 hours. The maximum dose of immediate release acetaminophen is generally considered to be about 1000 mg. In the dosage forms of the present invention, it is contemplated that acetaminophen can be included in amounts ranging from about 10 mg to about 2000 mg. In certain preferred embodiments, dosage ranges of acetaminophen ranging from about 25 mg to about 1000 mg are contemplated, and in further preferred embodiments, dosage ranges from about 325 mg to about 1000 mg are contemplated, for dosing 1 to 4 times per day for an average (70 kg) human, although it is apparent that activity of individual compounds of the invention will vary as will the pain being treated.
It is known that acetaminophen can act synergistically with certain opioids. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,336,691 (Raffa, et al.), hereby incorporated by reference, describes formulations which include tramadol and acetaminophen. The compositions are said to be pharmacologically useful in treating pain and tussive conditions. The compositions are also said to be subject to less opioid side-effects such as abuse liability, tolerance, constipation and respiratory depression. Furthermore, where the components of the compositions are within certain ratios the pharmacological effects of the compositions are said to be superadditive (synergistic). A. Pircio et al., Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn., 235, 116 (1978) report superadditive analgesia with a 1:125 mixture of butorphanol, an opioid analgesic, and APAP, whereas a 1:10 mixture did not show a statistically significant superadditive effect.
It is contemplated that the combination formulations and methods of the present invention may include such acetaminophen doses as those set forth above, or lower doses per 4 hour dosing interval. Thus, it is possible that sustained release formulations prepared in accordance with the present invention include a greater total dose than the approximate 10-2000 mg dose, but that dose will be released over a longer dosing interval (e.g., over 8 hours or more).
It is contemplated that the dosage of acetaminophen and opioid analgesic in the formulations and method of the present invention may be similar or the same as dosages which are already commercially available and accepted by clinicians. Acetaminophen is commercially available in the United States in fixed combination with opioid analgesics, namely, codeine, oxycodone and hydrocodone. Typical oral capsule dosages of acetaminophen/codeine combinations include 325 mg acetaminophen and 15 mg codeine phosphate (#2), 325 mg acetaminophen and 30 mg codeine phosphate (#3) and 325 mg acetaminophen and 60 mg codeine phosphate (#4). Tablets typically include 300 mg acetaminophen and 7.5 mg codeine phosphate (#1), 300 mg acetaminophen and 15 mg codeine phosphate (#2), 300 mg acetaminophen and 30 mg codeine phosphate (#3), and 300 mg acetaminophen and 60 mg codeine phosphate (#4). Hydrocodone/acetaminophen capsules are typically available in fixed combinations of 5 mg hydrocodone (as the bitartrate salt) and 500 mg acetaminophen. Hydrocodone/acetaminophen tablets are typically available in fixed combinations of 500 mg acetaminophen and 2.5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate, 500 mg acetaminophen and 5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate, 500 mg acetaminophen and 7.5 mg hydrocodone, 7.5 mg hydrocodone bitartrate and 650 or 750 mg acetaminophen, and 10 mg hydrocodone bitartrate and 500, 650, 660 mg acetaminophen. Oxycodone/acetaminophen capsules and caplets are available in fixed combination of 5 mg oxycodone (as the hydrochloride salt) and 500 mg acetaminophen, and in tablets as 5 mg oxycodone hydrochloride and 325 mg acetaminophen.
The fixed combinations described above are for information purposes only and are not meant to limit the possible relative amounts of opioid and acetaminophen contained in the formulations encompassed within the present invention. As disclosed herein and in accordance with the present invention, it is contemplated that in certain embodiments, the opioid agonist/opioid antagonist/acetaminophen combinations encompassed herein will have greater or lesser dosages of either the opioid agonist or acetaminophen, and that the ratio of opioid agonist to acetaminophen will vary based on the particular opioid agonist and opioid antagonist chosen for a formulation and the amount of opioid antagonist included therein, among other things.
In certain embodiments, the invention allows for the use of lower doses of the opioid analgesic or acetaminophen (apparent one-way synergy), or lower doses of both drugs (two-way synergy) than would normally be required when either drug is used alone. By using lower amounts of either or both drugs, the side effects associated with effective pain management in humans are significantly reduced.
In certain preferred embodiments, the dosage form may provide an analgesic effect which is greater than that obtained with the dose of opioid analgesic alone. In such embodiments, the combinations display what is referred to herein as an “apparent one-way synergy”, meaning that the dose of acetaminophen potentiates the effect of the opioid analgesic, but the dose of opioid analgesic does not appear to significantly potentiate the effect of the acetaminophen. In certain embodiments, the potentiation exhibited between the acetaminophen and the opioid analgesic is such that the dosage of opioid analgesic would be sub-therapeutic if administered without the dosage of acetaminophen. In other preferred embodiments, the present invention relates to a pharmaceutical composition comprising an analgesically effective dose of an opioid analgesic together with a dose of acetaminophen effective to augment the analgesic effect of the opioid analgesic, i.e., the dose of opioid potentiates the effect of the acetaminophen.
In certain embodiments, the acetaminophen potentiates the effect of the opioid analgesic, and the opioid analgesic potentiates the effect of the acetaminophen. In such combinations of acetaminophen and an opioid analgesic, it is contemplated that the dose of each drug may be reduced due to the potentiation demonstrated between the drugs, and the analgesia derived from the combination of drugs in reduced doses is surprisingly enhanced. The two-way synergism is not always readily apparent in actual dosages due to the potency ratio of the opioid analgesic to the acetaminophen (meaning that the opioid generally displays much greater relative analgesic potency).
In certain embodiments, the invention is directed to pharmaceutical formulations comprising acetaminophen in an amount sufficient to render a therapeutic effect together with a dose of codeine which is analgetic if administered without the acetaminophen. Such a dose of codeine is preferably from about 15 to about 360 mg, and preferably greater than 20 mg.
In certain embodiments, the invention is directed to pharmaceutical formulations comprising acetaminophen in an amount sufficient to render a therapeutic effect together with a dose of hydrocodone which is analgetic if administered without the acetaminophen. Such a dose of hydrocodone is preferably from about 15 to about 120 mg.
The invention further relates to the use of a pharmaceutical combination of an opioid analgesic/antagonist combination in accordance with the present invention together with a dose of acetaminophen sufficient to provide pain relief in humans.
The invention further relates to the use of acetaminophen in the manufacture of a pharmaceutical preparation containing an opioid analgesic and an opioid antagonist as described herein for the treatment of pain.
The invention is also directed to a method for providing effective pain management in humans, comprising administering an analgesically effective or sub-therapeutic amount of an opioid analgesic; an opioid antagonist in a fashion as described herein; and administering an effective amount of acetaminophen in an amount effective to augment the analgesic effect provided by the opioid analgesic. Preferably, the opioid antagonist and opioid agonist are formulated into the dosage form in a manner which causes the release of these drugs to substantially coincide over the course of the dosing interval. In certain preferred embodiments, the acetaminophen is also formulated into the dosage form which causes the release of acetaminophen at a rate which provides an augmentation of the effect of the opioid analgesic.
It is well known that acetaminophen is only poorly soluble in water. Thus, for effective administration, it is desirable to employ methods designed to improve the availability of the acetaminophen, such as, grinding the acetaminophen to a small particle size or using a surface active agent to stabilize the suspension and/or act as a solubilizing agent. Suitable such agents include well known surfactants such as glyceryl monooleate, polyoxyethylene sorbitan fatty acid esters, polyvinyl alcohol, sorbitan esters, benzaikonium chloride, benzethonium chloride, cetrimide, docusate sodium and sodium lauryl sulfate. Suitable such agents may also include solubilizing agents/wetting agents such as polyoxyethylene castor oil derivatives, poloxamer, polyoxyethylene stearates, polyoxyethylene alkylene ethers, stearic acid, lecithin, glyceryl monostearate, cyclodextrins and benzyl benzoate. Suitable such agents may also be emulsifying agents such as acacia, anionic emulsifying wax, carbomer, cetostearyl alcohol, cetyl alcohol, cholesterol, diethanolamine, hydrous lanolin, hydroxypropyl cellulose lanolin, lanolin alcohols, methyl cellulose, mineral oil, monobasic sodium phosphate, monoethanolamine, nonionic emulsifying wax, oleic acid, propylene glycol alginate and triethanolamine. Persons skilled in the art can easily determine how much of such a surface active agent to employ. Generally, there might be used from about 0.05 to about 2.5% by weight of such surface active agent based on the total weight of APAP and dimenhydrinate. Surface active agents are generally described in the HANDBOOK OF PHARMACEUTICAL EXCIPIENTS, 2nd Edition, APhA, 1994.
The method of treatment and pharmaceutical formulations of the present invention may further include one or more drugs in addition to the opioid analgesic and opioid antagonist, or the opioid analgesic/opioid antagonist/acetaminophen combination, which additional drug(s) may or may not act synergistically with any or all of these drugs. Thus, in certain embodiments, a combination of two opioid analgesics may be included in the formulation, in addition to the opioid antagonist. For example, the dosage form may include two opioid analgesics having different properties, such as half-life, solubility, potency, and a combination of any of the foregoing. In yet further embodiments, one or more opioid analgesics is included and a further non-opioid drug is also included, in addition to the opioid antagonist. Such non-opioid drugs would preferably provide additional analgesia, and include, for example, aspirin; acetaminophen; non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (“NSAIDS”), e.g., ibuprofen, ketoprofen, etc.; N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, e.g., a morphinan such as dextromethorphan or dextrorphan, or ketamine; cyclooxygenase-II inhibitors (“COX-II inhibitors”); and/or glycine receptor antagonists.
In certain preferred embodiments of the present invention, additional agents may be included in the formulations of opioid agonist/opioid antagonist, or combinations of opioid agonist/opioid antagonist/acetaminophen as disclosed herein, which agents may or may not provide additive, synergistic (superadditive) effects. The invention allows for the use of lower doses of the opioid analgesic by virtue of the inclusion of an additional non-opioid agonist, such as an NSAID or a COX-2 inhibitor. By using lower amounts of either or both drugs, the side effects associated with effective pain management in humans are reduced.
Suitable non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, including ibuprofen, diclofenac, naproxen, benoxaprofen, flurbiprofen, fenoprofen, flubufen, ketoprofen, indoprofen, piroprofen, carprofen, oxaprozin, pramoprofen, muroprofen, trioxaprofen, suprofen, aminoprofen, tiaprofenic acid, fluprofen, bucloxic acid, indomethacin, sulindac, tolmetin, zomepirac, tiopinac, zidometacin, acemetacin, fentiazac, clidanac, oxpinac, mefenamic acid, meclofenamic acid, flufenamic acid, niflumic acid, tolfenamic acid, diflurisal, flufenisal, piroxicam, sudoxicam or isoxicam, and the like. Useful dosages of these drugs are well known to those skilled in the art.
Such additional agents include NMDA antagonists. U.S. Pat. No. 6,007,841 (Caruso), hereby incorporated by reference, describes formulations which are said to alleviate pain in mammals. The formulations include (a) an analgesia-effective amount of at least one narcotic agonist-antagonist analgesic; and, (b) a narcotic agonist-antagonist analgesic-potentiating amount of at least one nontoxic antagonist, or blocker, for the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor. U.S. Pat. No. 5,919,826 (Caruso), also incorporated by reference, describes formulations in which the activity of tramadol is said to be significantly enhanced by administering tramadol with the administration of an analgesia-enhancer which is a nontoxic NMDA receptor blocker and/or a nontoxic substance that blocks at least one major intracellular consequence of NMDA receptor activation. N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists are well known in the art, and encompass, for example, morphinans such as dextromethorphan or dextrorphan, ketamine, d-methadone or pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof. For purposes of the present invention, the term “NMDA antagonist” is also deemed to encompass drugs that block a major intracellular consequence of NMDA-receptor activation, e.g. a ganglioside such as GM1 or GT1b a phenothiazine such as trifluoperazine or a naphthalenesulfonamide such as N-(6-aminothexyl)-5-chloro-1-naphthalenesulfonamide. These drugs are stated to inhibit the development of tolerance to and/or dependence on addictive drugs, e.g., narcotic analgesics such as morphine, codeine, etc. in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,321,012 and 5,556,838 (both to Mayer, et. al.), and to treat chronic pain in U.S. Pat. No. 5,502,058 (Mayer, et. al.), all of which are hereby incorporated by reference. The NMDA antagonist may be included alone, or in combination with a local anesthetic such as lidocaine, as described in these Mayer, et. al. patents.
Glycine receptor antagonists may also be included. The treatment of chronic pain via the use of glycine receptor antagonists and the identification of such drugs is described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,514,680 (Weber, et al.), hereby incorporated by reference.
COX-2 inhibitors may also be included. COX-2 inhibitors have been reported in the art and many chemical structures are known to produce inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2. COX-2 inhibitors are described, for example, in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,616,601; 5,604,260; 5,593,994; 5,550,142; 5,536,752; 5,521,213; 5,475,995; 5,639,780; 5,604,253; 5,552,422; 5,510,368; 5,436,265; 5,409,944; and 5,130,311, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference. Certain preferred COX-2 inhibitors include celecoxib (SC-58635), DUP-697; flosulide (CGP-28238), meloxicam, 6-methoxy-2 naphthylacetic acid (6-MNA), MK-966, nabumetone (prodrug for 6-MNA), nimesulide, NS-398, SC-5766, SC-58215, T-614; or combinations thereof. Dosage levels of COX-2 inhibitor on the order of from about 0.005 mg to about 140 mg per kilogram of body weight per day are therapeutically effective in combination with an opioid analgesic. Alternatively, about 0.25 mg to about 7 g per patient per day of a COX-2 inhibitor is administered in combination with an opioid analgesic.
Another such agent is dimenhydrinate. U.S. Pat. No. 5,739,139 (Hough, et al.), hereby incorporated by reference, describes compositions comprising acetaminophen (APAP) and dimenhydrinate and methods for their use in analgesia. When acetaminophen and dimenhydrinate are within certain ratios, e.g., from about 1/50 to about 1/200 parts by weight dimenhydrinate or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof for each part by weight acetaminophen, their pharmacological effects are said to be superadditive.
Other such agents are olanzapine, certain phenyl oxazoles and/or phenyl thiazoles. U.S. Pat. No. 5,945,416 (Shannon, et al.), hereby incorporated by reference, describes formulations for the treatment of pain in which the drug olanzapine is said to provide a synergistic effect when administered with one or more drugs useful in the treatment of pain (including acetaminophen and opioids). U.S. Pat. No. 5,942,530 (Panetta, et al.), hereby incorporated by reference, describes formulations for the treatment of pain in which certain phenyl oxazoles or phenyl thiazoles are said to provide a synergistic effect when administered with one or more drugs useful in the treatment of pain (including acetaminophen and opioids).
A further agent which may be included in the formulations of the present invention is capsaicin or a capsaicin analogue. U.S. Pat. No. 4,812,466 (Brand), hereby incorporated by reference, describes formulations for the treatment of pain in which the drug capsaicin or a capsaicin analogue and an analgesic selected in administered in combination with acetaminophen, which combination is stated to exhibit unexpectedly enhanced analgesic activity in humans and lower animals without a corresponding increase in undesirable side effects.
In yet further embodiments, anon-opioid drug can be included which provides a desired effect other than analgesia, e.g., antitussive, expectorant, decongestant, antihistamine drugs, local anesthetics, and the like.
The lists provided above are not meant to be exclusive. Any other additional agents which may provide additional benefits to the dosage forms of the invention, whether it be to provide additive or synergistic analgetic effects, or treatment of additional conditions, are deemed encompassed by this disclosure and the appended claims.
The combination of opioid analgesic, opioid antagonist and optional additional drug (e.g., opioid analgesic, opioid antagonist and acetaminophen) can be employed in admixtures with conventional excipients, i.e., pharmaceutically acceptable organic or inorganic carrier substances suitable for oral, parenteral, nasal, intravenous, subcutaneous, enteral, or any other suitable mode of administration, known to the art. An oral dosage form according to the invention may be provided as, for example, granules, spheroids, beads, pellets (hereinafter collectively referred to as “multiparticulates”). An amount of the multiparticulates which is effective to provide the desired dose of opioid over time may be placed in a capsule or may be incorporated in any other suitable oral solid form. Alternatively, the oral dosage form may be in the form of a tablet.
Immediate Release Dosage Forms
The combination of the invention can be employed in admixtures with conventional excipients, i.e., pharmaceutically acceptable organic or inorganic carrier substances suitable for oral administration, known to the art. Suitable pharmaceutically acceptable carriers include but are not limited to water, salt solutions, alcohols, gum arabic, vegetable oils, benzyl alcohols, polyethylene glycols, gelate, carbohydrates such as lactose, amylose or starch, magnesium stearate talc, silicic acid, viscous paraffin, perfume oil, fatty acid monoglycerides and diglycerides, pentaerythritol fatty acid esters, hydroxymethylcellulose, polyvinylpyrrolidone, etc. The pharmaceutical preparations can be sterilized and if desired mixed with auxiliary agents, e.g., lubricants, preservatives, stabilizers, wetting agents, emulsifiers, salts for influencing osmotic pressure buffers, coloring, flavoring and/or aromatic substances and the like. They can also be combined where desired with other active agents, e.g., other analgesic agents. For oral administration, particularly suitable are tablets, dragees, liquids, drops, suppositories, or capsules, caplets and gelcaps. The compositions intended for oral use may be prepared according to any method known in the art and such compositions may contain one or more agents selected from the group consisting of inert, non-toxic pharmaceutically excipients which are suitable for the manufacture of tablets. Such excipients include, for example an inert diluent such as lactose; granulating and disintegrating agents such as cornstarch; binding agents such as starch; and lubricating agents such as magnesium stearate. Because of their ease in administration, tablets and capsules represent the most advantageous oral dosage unit form, in which case solid pharmaceutical carriers are obviously employed. If desired, tablets may be sugar coated or enteric coated by standard techniques. The tablets may be uncoated or they may be coated by known techniques for elegance or to delay release of the active ingredients. Formulations for oral use may also be presented as hard gelatin capsules wherein the active ingredient is mixed with an inert diluent.
Aqueous suspensions contain the above-identified combination of drugs and that mixture has one or more excipients suitable as suspending agents, for example pharmaceutically acceptable synthetic gums such as hydroxypropylmethylcellulose or natural gums. Oily suspensions may be formulated by suspending the above-identified combination of drugs in a vegetable oil or mineral oil. The oily suspensions may contain a thickening agent such as beeswax or cetyl alcohol. A syrup, elixir, or the like can be used wherein a sweetened vehicle is employed. Injectable suspensions may also be prepared, in which case appropriate liquid carriers, suspending agents and the like may be employed.
To prepare the pharmaceutical compositions of this invention, the compounds of the invention are intimately admixed with a pharmaceutical carrier according to conventional pharmaceutical compounding techniques, which carrier may take a wide variety of forms depending of the form of preparation desired for administration, e.g., oral or parenteral such as intra muscular. In preparing the compositions in oral dosage form, any of the usual pharmaceutical media may be employed. Thus, for liquid oral preparations, such as for example, suspensions, elixirs and solutions, suitable carriers and additives include water, glycols, oils, alcohols, flavoring agents, preservatives, coloring agents and the like; for solid oral preparations such as, for example, powders, capsules and tablets, suitable carriers and additives include starches, sugars, diluents, granulating agents, lubricants, binders, disintegrating agents and the like.
For parenterals, the carrier will usually comprise sterile water, through other ingredients, for example, for purposes such as aiding solubility or for preservation, may be included. Injectable suspensions may also be prepared, in which case appropriate liquid carriers, suspending agents and the like may be employed. The pharmaceutical compositions herein will contain, per dosage unit, e.g., tablet, capsule, powder, injection, teaspoonful and the like, an amount of the active ingredient necessary to deliver an effective dose as described above. Of course, instead of administering the active ingredients as a single composition, they may be administered simultaneously of sequentially as separate compositions. To obtain the advantages described herein, it is only important that the active ingredients be administered in combination, regardless of whether they are in the same tablet, capsule, powder, injection or elixir.
Controlled Release Dosage Forms
The opioid agonist/opioid antagonist combination can be formulated as a controlled or sustained release oral formulation in any suitable tablet, coated tablet or multiparticulate formulation known to those skilled in the art. The sustained release dosage form may optionally include a sustained release carrier which is incorporated into a matrix along with the opioid agonist and opioid antagonist, or may be applied as a sustained release coating.
In embodiments in which the opioid analgesic comprises hydrocodone, the sustained release oral dosage forms may include analgesic doses from about 8 mg to about 50 mg of hydrocodone per dosage unit. In sustained release oral dosage forms where hydromorphone is the therapeutically active opioid, it is included in an amount from about 2 mg to about 64 mg hydromorphone hydrochloride. In another embodiment, the opioid analgesic comprises morphine, and the sustained release oral dosage forms of the present invention include from about 2.5 mg to about 800 mg morphine, by weight. In yet another embodiment, the opioid analgesic comprises oxycodone and the sustained release oral dosage forms include from about 2.5 mg to about 800 mg oxycodone. The opioid analgesic may comprise tramadol and the sustained release oral dosage forms may include from about 25 mg to 800 mg tramadol per dosage unit. The dosage form may contain more than one opioid analgesic to provide a substantially equivalent therapeutic effect. Alternatively, the dosage form may contain molar equivalent amounts of other salts of the opioids useful in the present invention.
In one preferred embodiment of the present invention, the sustained release dosage form comprises such particles containing or comprising the active ingredient, wherein the particles have diameter from about 0.1 mm to about 2.5 mm, preferably from about 0.5 mm to about 2 mm.
The particles are preferably film coated with a material that permits release of the opioid agonist/antagonist combination at a sustained rate in an aqueous medium. The film coat is chosen so as to achieve, in combination with the other stated properties, a desired in-vitro release rate. The sustained release coating formulations of the present invention should be capable of producing a strong, continuous film that is smooth and elegant, capable of supporting pigments and other coating additives, non-toxic, inert, and tack-free.
In certain embodiments, the particles comprise normal release matrixes containing the opioid analgesic with the opioid antagonist.
The dosage forms of the present invention may optionally be coated with one or more materials suitable for the regulation of release or for the protection of the formulation. In one embodiment, coatings are provided to permit either pH-dependent or pH-independent release, e.g., when exposed to gastrointestinal fluid. A pH-dependent coating serves to release the opioid in desired areas of the gastro-intestinal (GI) tract, e.g., the stomach or small intestine, such that an absorption profile is provided which is capable of providing at least about eight hours and preferably about twelve hours to up to about twenty-four hours of analgesia to a patient. When a pH-independent coating is desired, the coating is designed to achieve optimal release regardless of pH-changes in the environmental fluid, e.g., the GI tract. It is also possible to formulate compositions which release a portion of the dose in one desired area of the GI tract, e.g., the stomach, and release the remainder of the dose in another area of the GI tract, e.g., the small intestine.
Formulations according to the invention that utilize pH-dependent coatings to obtain formulations may also impart a repeat-action effect whereby unprotected drug is coated over the enteric coat and is released in the stomach, while the remainder, being protected by the enteric coating, is released further down the gastrointestinal tract. Coatings which are pH-dependent may be used in accordance with the present invention include shellac, cellulose acetate phthalate (CAP), polyvinyl acetate phthalate (PVAP), hydroxypropylmethylcellulose phthalate, and methacrylic acid ester copolymers, zein, and the like.
In certain preferred embodiments, the substrate (e.g., tablet core bead, matrix particle) containing the opioid analgesic (with or without the COX-2 inhibitor) is coated with a hydrophobic material selected from (i) an alkylcellulose; (ii) an acrylic polymer; or (iii) mixtures thereof. The coating may be applied in the form of an organic or aqueous solution or dispersion. The coating may be applied to obtain a weight gain from about 2 to about 25% of the substrate in order to obtain a desired sustained release profile. Coatings derived from aqueous dispersions—are described, e.g., in detail in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,273,760 and 5,286,493, assigned to the Assignee of the present invention and hereby incorporated by reference.
Other examples of sustained release formulations and coatings which may be used in accordance with the present invention include Assignee's U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,324,351; 5,356,467, and 5,472,712, hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Alkylcellulose Polymers
Cellulosic materials and polymers, including alkylcelluloses, provide hydrophobic materials well suited for coating the beads according to the invention. Simply by way of example, one preferred alkylcellulosic polymer is ethylcellulose, although the artisan will appreciate that other cellulose and/or alkylcellulose polymers may be readily employed, singly or in any combination, as all or part of a hydrophobic coating according to the invention.
One commercially-available aqueous dispersion of ethylcellulose is Aquacoat® (FMC Corp., Philadelphia, Pa., U.S.A.). Aquacoat® is prepared by dissolving the ethylcellulose in a water-immiscible organic solvent and then emulsifying the same in water in the presence of a surfactant and a stabilizer. After homogenization to generate submicron droplets, the organic solvent is evaporated under vacuum to form a pseudolatex. The plasticizer is not incorporated in the pseudolatex during the manufacturing phase. Thus, prior to using the same as a coating, it is necessary to intimately mix the Aquacoat® with a suitable plasticizer prior to use.
Another aqueous dispersion of ethylcellulose is commercially available as Surelease® (Colorcon, Inc., West Point, Pa., U.S.A.). This product is prepared by incorporating plasticizer into the dispersion during the manufacturing process. A hot melt of a polymer, plasticizer (dibutyl sebacate), and stabilizer (oleic acid) is prepared as a homogeneous mixture, which is then diluted with an alkaline solution to obtain an aqueous dispersion which can be applied directly onto substrates.
Acrylic Polymers
In other preferred embodiments of the present invention, the hydrophobic material comprising the controlled release coating is a pharmaceutically acceptable acrylic polymer, including but not limited to acrylic acid and methacrylic acid copolymers, methyl methacrylate copolymers, ethoxyethyl methacrylates, cyanoethyl methacrylate, poly(acrylic acid), poly(methacrylic acid), methacrylic acid alkylamide copolymer, poly(methyl methacrylate), polymethacrylate, poly(methyl methacrylate) copolymer, polyacrylamide, aminoalkyl methacrylate copolymer, poly(methacrylic acid anhydride), and glycidyl methacrylate co-polymers.
In certain preferred embodiments, the acrylic polymer is comprised of one or more ammonia methacrylate copolymers. Ammonia methacrylate copolymers are well known in the art, and are described in NF XVII as fully polymerized copolymers of acrylic and methacrylic acid esters with a low content of quaternary ammonium groups.
In order to obtain a desirable dissolution profile, it may be necessary to incorporate two or more ammonia methacrylate copolymers having differing physical properties, such as different molar ratios of the quaternary ammonium groups to the neutral (meth)acrylic esters.
Certain methacrylic acid ester-type polymers are useful for preparing pH-dependent coatings which may be used in accordance with the present invention. For example, there are a family of copolymers synthesized from diethylaminoethyl methacrylate and other neutral methacrylic esters, also known as methacrylic acid copolymer or polymeric methacrylates, commercially available as Eudragit® from Röhm Tech, Inc. There are several different types of Eudragit®. For example, Eudragit® E is an example of a methacrylic acid copolymer which swells and dissolves in acidic media. Eudragit® L is a methacrylic acid copolymer which does not swell at about pH<5.7 and is soluble at about pH>6. Eudragit® S does not swell at about pH<6.5 and is soluble at about pH>7. Eudragit® RL and Eudragit® RS are water swellable, and the amount of water absorbed by these polymers is pH-dependent, however, dosage forms coated with Eudragit® RL and RS are pH-independent.
In certain preferred embodiments, the acrylic coating comprises a mixture of two acrylic resin lacquers commercially available from Rohm Pharma under the Tradenames Eudragit® RL30D and Eudragit® RS30D, respectively. Eudragit® RL30D and Eudragit® RS30D are copolymers of acrylic and methacrylic esters with a low content of quaternary ammonium groups, the molar ratio of ammonium groups to the remaining neutral (meth)acrylic esters being 1:20 in Eudragit® RL30D and 1:40 in Eudragit® RS30D. The mean molecular weight is about 150,000. The code designations RL (high permeability) and RS (low permeability) refer to the permeability properties of these agents. Eudragit® RL/RS mixtures are insoluble in water and in digestive fluids. However, coatings formed from the same are swellable and permeable in aqueous solutions and digestive fluids.
The Eudragit® RL/RS dispersions of the present invention may be mixed together in any desired ratio in order to ultimately obtain a sustained release formulation having a desirable dissolution profile. Desirable sustained release formulations may be obtained, for instance, from a retardant coating derived from 100% Eudragit® RL, 50% Eudragit® RL and 50% Eudragit® RS, and 10% Eudragit® RL:Eudragit® 90% RS. Of course, one skilled in the art will recognize that other acrylic polymers may also be used, such as, for example, Eudragit® L.
Plasticizers
In embodiments of the present invention where the coating comprises an aqueous dispersion of a hydrophobic material, the inclusion of an effective amount of a plasticizer in the aqueous dispersion of hydrophobic material will further improve the physical properties of the sustained release coating. For example, because ethylcellulose has a relatively high glass transition temperature and does not form flexible films under normal coating conditions, it is preferable to incorporate a plasticizer into an ethylcellulose coating containing sustained release coating before using the same as a coating material. Generally, the amount of plasticizer included in a coating solution is based on the concentration of the film-former, e.g., most often from about 1 to about 50 percent by weight of the film-former. Concentration of the plasticizer, however, can only be properly determined after careful experimentation with the particular coating solution and method of application.
Examples of suitable plasticizers for ethylcellulose include water insoluble plasticizers such as dibutyl sebacate, diethyl phthalate, triethyl citrate, tributyl citrate, and triacetin, although it is possible that other water-insoluble plasticizers (such as acetylated monoglycerides, phthalate esters, castor oil, etc.) may be used. Triethyl citrate is an especially preferred plasticizer for the aqueous dispersions of ethyl cellulose of the present invention.
Examples of suitable plasticizers for the acrylic polymers of the present invention include, but are not limited to citric acid esters such as triethyl citrate NF XVI, tributyl citrate, dibutyl phthalate, and possibly 1,2-propylene glycol. Other plasticizers which have proved to be suitable for enhancing the elasticity of the films formed from acrylic films such as Eudragit® RL/RS lacquer solutions include polyethylene glycols, propylene glycol, diethyl phthalate, castor oil, and triacetin. Triethyl citrate is an especially preferred plasticizer for the aqueous dispersions of ethyl cellulose of the present invention.
It has further been found that the addition of a small amount of talc reduces the tendency of the aqueous dispersion to stick during processing, and acts as a polishing agent.
When a hydrophobic material is used to coat inert pharmaceutical beads such as nu panel 18/20 beads, a plurality of the resultant solid controlled release beads may thereafter be placed in a gelatin capsule in an amount sufficient to provide an effective controlled release dose when ingested and contacted by an environmental fluid, e.g., gastric fluid or dissolution media.
The controlled release bead formulations of the present invention slowly release the therapeutically active agent, e.g., when ingested and exposed to gastric fluids, and then to intestinal fluids. The controlled release profile of the formulations of the invention can be altered, for example, by varying the amount of overcoating with the hydrophobic material, altering the manner in which the plasticizer is added to the hydrophobic material, by varying the amount of plasticizer relative to hydrophobic material, by the inclusion of additional ingredients or excipients, by altering the method of manufacture, etc. The dissolution profile of the ultimate product may also be modified, for example, by increasing or decreasing the thickness of the retardant coating.
Spheroids or beads coated with a therapeutically active agent are prepared, e.g., by dissolving the therapeutically active agent in water and then spraying the solution onto a substrate, for example, nu pariel 18/20 beads, using a Wuster insert. Optionally, additional ingredients are also added prior to coating the beads in order to assist the binding of the opioid to the beads, and/or to color the solution, etc. For example, a product which includes hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, etc. with or without colorant (e.g., Opadry®, commercially available from Colorcon, Inc.) may be added to the solution and the solution mixed (e.g., for about 1 hour) prior to application of the same onto the beads. The resultant coated substrate, in this example beads, may then be optionally overcoated with a barrier agent, to separate the therapeutically active agent from the hydrophobic controlled release coating. An example of a suitable barrier agent is one which comprises hydroxypropylmethylcellulose. However, any film-former known in the art may be used. It is preferred that the barrier agent does not affect the dissolution rate of the final product.
The beads may then be overcoated with an aqueous dispersion of the hydrophobic material. The aqueous dispersion of hydrophobic material preferably further includes an effective amount of plasticizer, e.g. triethyl citrate. Pre-formulated aqueous dispersions of ethyl-cellulose, such as Aquacoat® or Surelease®, may be used. If Surelease® is used, it is not necessary to separately add a plasticizer. Alternatively, pre-formulated aqueous dispersions of acrylic polymers such as Eudragit® can be used.
The coating solutions of the present invention preferably contain, in addition to the film-former, plasticizer, and solvent system (i.e., water), a colorant to provide elegance and product distinction. Color may be added to the solution of the therapeutically active agent instead, or in addition to the aqueous dispersion of hydrophobic material. For example, color may be added to Aquacoat® via the use of alcohol or propylene glycol based color dispersions, milled aluminum lakes and opacifiers such as titanium dioxide by adding color with shear to water soluble polymer solution and then using low shear to the plasticized Aquacoat®. Alter-natively, any suitable method of providing color to the formulations of the present invention may be used. Suitable ingredients for providing color to the formulation when an aqueous dispersion of an acrylic polymer is used include titanium dioxide and color pigments, such as iron oxide pigments. The incorporation of pigments, may, however, increase the retard effect of the coating.
Plasticized hydrophobic material may be applied onto the substrate comprising the therapeutically active agent by spraying using any suitable spray equipment known in the art. In a preferred method, a Wurster fluidized-bed system is used in which an air jet, injected from underneath, fluidizes the core material and effects drying while the acrylic polymer coating is sprayed on. A sufficient amount of the hydrophobic material to obtain a predetermined controlled release of said therapeutically active agent when the coated substrate is exposed to aqueous solutions, e.g. gastric fluid, is preferably applied, taking into account the physical characteristics of the therapeutically active agent, the manner of incorporation of the plasticizer, etc. After coating with the hydrophobic material, a further overcoat of a film-former, such as Opadry®, is optionally applied to the beads. This overcoat is provided, if at all, in order to substantially reduce agglomeration of the beads.
The release of the therapeutically active agent from the controlled release formulation of the present invention can be further influenced, i.e., adjusted to a desired rate, by the addition of one or more release-modifying agents, or by providing one or more passageways through the coating. The ratio of hydrophobic material to water soluble material is determined by, among other factors, the release rate required and the solubility characteristics of the materials selected.
The release-modifying agents which function as pore-formers may be organic or inorganic, and include materials that can be dissolved, extracted or leached from the coating in the environment of use. The pore-formers may comprise one or more hydrophilic materials such as hydroxypropylmethylcellulose.
The sustained release coatings of the present invention can also include erosion-promoting agents such as starch and gums.
The sustained release coatings of the present invention can also include materials useful for making microporous lamina in the environment of use, such as polycarbonates comprised of linear polyesters of carbonic acid in which carbonate groups reoccur in the polymer chain.
The release-modifying agent may also comprise a semi-permeable polymer.
In certain preferred embodiments, the release-modifying agent is selected from hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, lactose, metal stearates, and mixtures of any of the foregoing.
The sustained release coatings of the present invention may also include an exit means comprising at least one passageway, orifice, or the like. The passageway may be formed by such methods as those disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,845,770; 3,916,889; 4,063,064; and 4,088,864 (all of which are hereby incorporated by reference). The passageway can have any shape such as round, triangular, square, elliptical, irregular, etc.
In other embodiments of the present invention, the controlled release formulation is achieved via a matrix having a controlled release coating as set forth above. The present invention may also utilize a controlled release matrix that affords in-vitro dissolution rates of the opioid within the preferred ranges and that releases the opioid in a pH-dependent or pH-independent manner. The materials suitable for inclusion in a controlled release matrix will depend on the method used to form the matrix.
For example, a matrix in addition to the opioid analgesic and (optionally) COX-2 may include:
Hydrophilic and/or hydrophobic materials, such as gums, cellulose ethers, acrylic resins, protein derived materials; the list is not meant to be exclusive, and any pharmaceutically acceptable hydrophobic material or hydrophilic material which is capable of imparting controlled release of the active agent and which melts (or softens to the extent necessary to be extruded) may be used in accordance with the present invention.
Digestible, long chain (C8-C50, especially C12-C40), substituted or unsubstituted hydrocarbons, such as fatty acids, fatty alcohols, glyceryl esters of fatty acids, mineral and vegetable oils and waxes, and stearyl alcohol; and polyalkylene glycols.
Of these polymers, acrylic polymers, especially Eudragit® RSPO—the cellulose ethers, especially hydroxyalkylcelluloses and carboxyalkylcelluloses, are preferred. The oral dosage form may contain between 1% and 80% (by weight) of at least one hydrophilic or hydrophobic material.
When the hydrophobic material is a hydrocarbon, the hydrocarbon preferably has a melting point of between 25° and 90° C. Of the long chain hydrocarbon materials, fatty (aliphatic) alcohols are preferred. The oral dosage form may contain up to 60% (by weight) of at least one digestible, long chain hydrocarbon.
Preferably, the oral dosage form contains up to 60% (by weight) of at least one polyalkylene glycol.
The hydrophobic material is preferably selected from the group consisting of alkylcelluloses, acrylic and methacrylic acid polymers and copolymers, shellac, zein, hydrogenated castor oil, hydrogenated vegetable oil, or mixtures thereof. In certain preferred embodiments of the present invention, the hydrophobic material is a pharmaceutically acceptable acrylic polymer, including but not limited to acrylic acid and methacrylic acid copolymers, methyl methacrylate, methyl methacrylate copolymers, ethoxyethyl methacrylates, cyanoethyl methacrylate, aminoalkyl methacrylate copolymer, poly(acrylic acid), poly(methacrylic acid), methacrylic acid alkylamine copolymer, poly(methyl methacrylate), poly(methacrylic acid) (anhydride), polymethacrylate, polyacrylamide, poly(methacrylic acid anhydride), and glycidyl methacrylate copolymers. In other embodiments, the hydrophobic material is selected from materials such as hydroxyalkylcelluloses such as hydroxypropylmethylcellulose and mixtures of the foregoing.
Preferred hydrophobic materials are water-insoluble with more or less pronounced hydrophilic and/or hydrophobic trends. Preferably, the hydrophobic materials useful in the invention have a melting point from about 30° to about 200° C., preferably from about 45° to about 90° C. Specifically, the hydrophobic material may comprise natural or synthetic waxes, fatty alcohols (such as lauryl, myristyl, stearyl, cetyl or preferably cetostearyl alcohol), fatty acids, including but not limited to fatty acid esters, fatty acid glycerides (mono-, di-, and tri-glycerides), hydrogenated fats, hydrocarbons, normal waxes, stearic aid, stearyl alcohol and hydrophobic and hydrophilic materials having hydrocarbon backbones. Suitable waxes include, for example, beeswax, glycowax, castor wax and carnauba wax. For purposes of the present invention, a wax-like substance is defined as any material which is normally solid at room temperature and has a melting point of from about 30° to about 100° C.
Suitable hydrophobic materials which may be used in accordance with the present invention include digestible, long chain (C8-C50, especially C12-C40), substituted or unsubstituted hydrocarbons, such as fatty acids, fatty alcohols, glyceryl esters of fatty acids, mineral and vegetable oils and natural and synthetic waxes. Hydrocarbons having a melting point of between 25° and 90° C. are preferred. Of the long chain hydrocarbon materials, fatty (aliphatic) alcohols are preferred in certain embodiments. The oral dosage form may contain up to 60% (by weight) of at least one digestible, long chain hydrocarbon.
Preferably, a combination of two or more hydrophobic materials are included in the matrix formulations. If an additional hydrophobic material is included, it is preferably selected from natural and synthetic waxes, fatty acids, fatty alcohols, and mixtures of the same. Examples include beeswax, carnauba wax, stearic acid and stearyl alcohol. This list is not meant to be exclusive.
One particular suitable matrix comprises at least one water soluble hydroxyalkyl cellulose, at least one C12-C36, preferably C14-C22, aliphatic alcohol and, optionally, at least one polyalkylene glycol. The at least one hydroxyalkyl cellulose is preferably a hydroxy (C1 to C6) alkyl cellulose, such as hydroxypropylcellulose, hydroxypropylmethylcellulose and, especially, hydroxyethylcellulose. The amount of the at least one hydroxyalkyl cellulose in the present oral dosage form will be determined, inter alia, by the precise rate of opioid release required. The at least one aliphatic alcohol may be, for example, lauryl alcohol, myristyl alcohol or stearyl alcohol. In particularly preferred embodiments of the present oral dosage form, however, the at least one aliphatic alcohol is cetyl alcohol or cetostearyl alcohol. The amount of the at least one aliphatic alcohol in the present oral dosage form will be determined, as above, by the precise rate of opioid release required. It will also depend on whether at least one polyalkylene glycol is present in or absent from the oral dosage form. In the absence of at least one polyalkylene glycol, the oral dosage form preferably contains between 20% and 50% (by wt) of the at least one aliphatic alcohol. When at least one polyalkylene glycol is present in the oral dosage form, then the combined weight of the at least one aliphatic alcohol and the at least one polyalkylene glycol preferably constitutes between 20% and 50% (by wt) of the total dosage.
In one embodiment, the ratio of, e.g., the at least one hydroxyalkyl cellulose or acrylic resin to the at least one aliphatic alcohol/polyalkylene glycol determines, to a considerable extent, the release rate of the opioid from the formulation. A ratio of the at least one hydroxyalkyl cellulose to the at least one aliphatic alcohol/polyalkylene glycol of between 1:2 and 1:4 is preferred, with a ratio of between 1:3 and 1:4 being particularly preferred.
The at least one polyalkylene glycol may be, for example, polypropylene glycol or, which is preferred, polyethylene glycol. The number average molecular weight of the at least one poly-alkylene glycol is preferred between 1,000 and 15,000 especially between 1,500 and 12,000.
Another suitable controlled release matrix would comprise an alkylcellulose (especially ethyl cellulose), a C12 to C36 aliphatic alcohol and, optionally, a polyalkylene glycol.
In another preferred embodiment, the matrix includes a pharmaceutically acceptable combination of at least two hydrophobic materials.
In addition to the above ingredients, a controlled release matrix may also contain suitable quantities of other materials, e.g. diluents, lubricants, binders, granulating aids, colorants, flavorants and glidants that are conventional in the pharmaceutical art.
In order to facilitate the preparation of a solid, controlled release, oral dosage form according to this invention, any method of preparing a matrix formulation known to those skilled in the art may be used. For example incorporation in the matrix may be effected, for example, by (a) forming granules comprising at least one water soluble hydroxyalkyl cellulose and opioid or an opioid salt; (b) mixing the hydroxyalkyl cellulose containing granules with at least one C12-C36 aliphatic alcohol; and (c) optionally, compressing and shaping the granules. Preferably, the granules are formed by wet granulating the hydroxyalkyl cellulose/opioid with water. In a particularly preferred embodiment of this process, the amount of water added during the wet granulation step is preferably between 1.5 and 5 times, especially between 1.75 and 3.5 times, the dry weight of the opioid.
In yet other alternative embodiments, a spheronizing agent, together with the active ingredient can be spheronized to form spheroids. Microcrystalline cellulose is preferred. A suitable microcrystalline cellulose is, for example, the material sold as Avicel PH 101 (Trade Mark, FMC Corporation). In such embodiments, in addition to the active ingredient and spheronizing agent, the spheroids may also contain a binder. Suitable binders, such as low viscosity, water soluble polymers, will be well known to those skilled in the pharmaceutical art. However, water soluble hydroxy lower alkyl cellulose, such as hydroxypropylcellulose, are preferred. Additionally (or alternatively) the spheroids may contain a water insoluble polymer, especially an acrylic polymer, an acrylic copolymer, such as a methacrylic acid-ethyl acrylate co-polymer, or ethyl cellulose. In such embodiments, the sustained release coating will generally include a hydrophobic material such as (a) a wax, either alone or in admixture with a fatty alcohol; or (b) shellac or zein.
Melt Extrusion Matrix
Sustained release matrices can also be prepared via melt-granulation or melt-extrusion techniques. Generally, melt-granulation techniques involve melting a normally solid hydrophobic material, e.g. a wax, and incorporating a powdered drug therein. To obtain a sustained release dosage form, it may be necessary to incorporate an additional hydrophobic substance, e.g. ethylcellulose or a water-insoluble acrylic polymer, into the molten wax hydrophobic material. Examples of sustained release formulations prepared via melt-granulation techniques are found in U.S. Pat. No. 4,861,598, assigned to the Assignee of the present invention and hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
The additional hydrophobic material may comprise one or more water-insoluble wax-like thermoplastic substances possibly mixed with one or more wax-like thermoplastic substances being less hydrophobic than said one or more water-insoluble wax-like substances. In order to achieve constant release, the individual wax-like substances in the formulation should be substantially non-degradable and insoluble in gastrointestinal fluids during the initial release phases. Useful water-insoluble wax-like substances may be those with a water-solubility that is lower than about 1:5,000 (w/w).
In addition to the above ingredients, a sustained release matrix may also contain suitable quantities of other materials, e.g., diluents, lubricants, binders, granulating aids, colorants, flavorants and glidants that are conventional in the pharmaceutical art. The quantities of these additional materials will be sufficient to provide the desired effect to the desired formulation. In addition to the above ingredients, a sustained release matrix incorporating melt-extruded multiparticulates may also contain suitable quantities of other materials, e.g. diluents, lubricants, binders, granulating aids, colorants, flavorants and glidants that are conventional in the pharmaceutical art in amounts up to about 50% by weight of the particulate if desired.
Specific examples of pharmaceutically acceptable carriers and excipients that may be used to formulate oral dosage forms are described in the Handbook of Pharmaceutical Excipients, American Pharmaceutical Association (1986), incorporated by reference herein.
Melt Extrusion Multiparticulates
The preparation of a suitable melt-extruded matrix according to the present invention may, for example, include the steps of blending the opioid analgesic, together with at least one hydrophobic material and preferably the additional hydrophobic material to obtain a homogeneous mixture. The homogeneous mixture is then heated to a temperature sufficient to at least soften the mixture sufficiently to extrude the same. The resulting homogeneous mixture is then extruded to form strands. The extrudate is preferably cooled and cut into multiparticulates by any means known in the art. The strands are cooled and cut into multiparticulates. The multiparticulates are then divided into unit doses. The extrudate preferably has a diameter of from about 0.1 to about 5 mm and provides sustained release of the therapeutically active agent for a time period of from about 8 to about 24 hours.
An optional process for preparing the melt extrusions of the present invention includes directly metering into an extruder a hydrophobic material, a therapeutically active agent, and an optional binder; heating the homogenous mixture; extruding the homogenous mixture to thereby form strands; cooling the strands containing the homogeneous mixture; cutting the strands into particles having a size from about 0.1 mm to about 12 mm; and dividing said particles into unit doses. In this aspect of the invention, a relatively continuous manufacturing procedure is realized.
The diameter of the extruder aperture or exit port can also be adjusted to vary the thickness of the extruded strands. Furthermore, the exit part of the extruder need not be round; it can be oblong, rectangular, etc. The exiting strands can be reduced to particles using a hot wire cutter, guillotine, etc.
The melt extruded multiparticulate system can be, for example, in the form of granules, spheroids or pellets depending upon the extruder exit orifice. For purposes of the present invention, the terms “melt-extruded multiparticulate(s)” and “melt-extruded multiparticulate system(s)” and “melt-extruded particles” shall refer to a plurality of units, preferably within a range of similar size and/or shape and containing one or more active agents and one or more excipients, preferably including a hydrophobic material as described herein. In this regard, the melt-extruded multiparticulates will be of a range of from about 0.1 to about 12 mm in length and have a diameter of from about 0.1 to about 5 mm. In addition, it is to be understood that the melt-extruded multiparticulates can be any geometrical shape within this size range. Alternatively, the extrudate may simply be cut into desired lengths and divided into unit doses of the therapeutically active agent without the need of a spheronization step.
In one preferred embodiment, oral dosage forms are prepared to include an effective amount of melt-extruded multiparticulates within a capsule. For example, a plurality of the melt-extruded multiparticulates may be placed in a gelatin capsule in an amount sufficient to provide an effective sustained release dose when ingested and contacted by gastric fluid.
In another preferred embodiment, a suitable amount of the multiparticulate extrudate is compressed into an oral tablet using conventional tableting equipment using standard techniques. Techniques and compositions for making tablets (compressed and molded), capsules (hard and soft gelatin) and pills are also described in Remington's Pharmaceutical Sciences, (Arthur Osol, editor), 1553-1593 (1980), incorporated by reference herein.
In yet another preferred embodiment, the extrudate can be shaped into tablets as set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 4,957,681 (Klimesch, et. al.), described in additional detail above and hereby incorporated by reference.
Optionally, the sustained release melt-extruded multiparticulate systems or tablets can be coated, or the gelatin capsule can be further coated, with a sustained release coating such as the sustained release coatings described above. Such coatings preferably include a sufficient amount of hydrophobic material to obtain a weight gain level from about 2 to about 30 percent, although the overcoat may be greater depending upon the physical properties of the particular opioid analgesic compound utilized and the desired release rate, among other things.
The melt-extruded unit dosage forms of the present invention may further include combinations of melt-extruded multiparticulates containing one or more of the therapeutically active agents disclosed above before being encapsulated. Furthermore, the unit dosage forms can also include an amount of an immediate release therapeutically active agent for prompt therapeutic effect. The immediate release therapeutically active agent may be incorporated, e.g., as separate pellets within a gelatin capsule, or may be coated on the surface of the multiparticulates after preparation of the dosage forms (e.g., controlled release coating or matrix-based). The unit dosage forms of the present invention may also contain a combination of controlled release beads and matrix multiparticulates to achieve a desired effect.
The sustained release formulations of the present invention preferably slowly release the therapeutically active agent, e.g., when ingested and exposed to gastric fluids, and then to intestinal fluids. The sustained release profile of the melt-extruded formulations of the invention can be altered, for example, by varying the amount of retardant, i.e., hydrophobic material, by varying the amount of plasticizer relative to hydrophobic material, by the inclusion of additional ingredients or excipients, by altering the method of manufacture, etc.
In other embodiments of the invention, the melt extruded material is prepared without the inclusion of the therapeutically active agent, which is added thereafter to the extrudate. Such formulations typically will have the therapeutically active agent blended together with the extruded matrix material, and then the mixture would be tableted in order to provide a slow release formulation. Such formulations may be advantageous, for example, when the therapeutically active agent included in the formulation is sensitive to temperatures needed for softening the hydrophobic material and/or the retardant material.
The following examples illustrate various aspects of the present invention. They are not to be construed to limit the claims in any manner whatsoever.
A direct comparison of the competitive antagonist properties of naltrexone following its coadministration with various opioid agonists has not been undertaken previous to the present invention, to the knowledge of the inventors. However, dose-ranging studies have been conducted evaluating the opioid antagonist properties in subjects receiving either heroin or morphine challenges. In general, preadministration of naltrexone 50 mg 24 hours prior to 25 mg of intravenous heroin challenge completely blocked or attenuated the opioid agonist effects. See Gonzalez J P, Brogden R N. “Naltrexone: A Review of its Pharmacodynamic and Pharmacokinetic Properties and Therapeutic Efficacy in the Management of Opioid Dependence.” Drugs 1988; 35:192-213; Resnick R R, Valavka J, Freedman A M, Thomas M. “Studies of EN-1639A (Naltrexone): A New Narcotic Antagonist.” Am. J. Psychiatry 1974; 131:646-650, both of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
In Example 1, a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose, four-way crossover study was conducted which assessed whether naltrexone oral solution 6.4 mg would block opioid agonist properties of hydrocodone 15 mg in 6 normal, healthy, female volunteers. The study population included only females because previous observations have indicated that females have an increased sensitivity to the opioid agonist effects as compared to males. The four treatments were HYIR/APAP (2 tablets of hydrocodone 7.5 and acetaminophen 750 mg, Vicodin ES®) and naltrexone oral solution 3.2 mg, HYIR/APAP (2×7.5 mg) and naltrexone oral solution 6.4 mg, HYIR comparator tablets (2×750 mg Trilisate® tablets) and naltrexone oral solution (placebo), and HYIR/APAP (2 tablets of Vicodin ES®) and naltrexone oral solution (placebo). All treatments were administered under fasted conditions. A 48-hour washout period occurred between doses. Subjects were randomly assigned to four treatment sequences of the four treatment groups. Subjects reported to the testing facility the evening prior to the first dose and remained confined there until completion of the 24-hour post-dose assessment of the last dose. Safety measurements consisted of reports of adverse events, vital signs, abnormal laboratory values, abnormal physical examination and ECG results. Pharmacodynamic parameters (pupil size and Modified Specific Drug Effect Questionnaire) were also assessed.
Test Treatments
The four treatments were as follows:
Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) and naltrexone oral solution 3.2 mg.
Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) and naltrexone oral solution 6.4 mg.
Hydrocodone immediate-release comparator tablets and placebo naltrexone oral solution.
Placebo hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) and placebo naltrexone oral solution.
Test Products
The products evaluated in this study include Vicodin ES® (hydrocodone bitartrate 7.5 mg and acetaminophen 750 mg, Knoll Pharmaceuticals), Trilisate® (choline magnesium trisalicylate 750 mg, Purdue Frederick) which served as the comparator, and naltrexone powder. Vicodin ES® was selected as the active treatment since the acetaminophen portion within this product is expected to have no effect on the central nervous system or pupillary measurement. Trilisate was selected to be used as the “comparator” since its physical appearance is similar to Vicodin ES® and it has no effect on the central nervous system or pupillary measurement. Naltrexone powder formulation was selected rather than the commercially approved tablet formulation (Revia® 50 mg tablets, DuPont) to improve the overall precision in the preparation of the oral solution. An on-site research pharmacist reconstituted the oral solution from the naltrexone powder in a sterile environment utilizing appropriate pharmaceutical techniques. Naltrexone powder (Mallinckrodt Chemical) was used to formulate the naltrexone solution. Individual stock solutions of naltrexone were prepared using a modification of the method proposed by Tsang and Holtsman. Tsang B K, Holtsman R. “Room Temperature Stability of Liquid Naltrexone.” Anesthesiology 1995:83:A864, hereby incorporated by reference. Immediately prior (<60 minutes) to each dosing period, a naltrexone stock solution was prepared by weighing out 32 mg and 64 mg of naltrexone powder. Each of these portions was dissolved in 50 mL of distilled water and 50 mL of simple syrup, NF for a vinal volume of 100 mL. The concentration of the final solutions was 0.32 mg/mL (32 mg/100 mL) and 0.64 mg/mL (64 mg/100 mL), respectively. These concentrations allowed the same volume (10 mL) of naltrexone oral solution to be administered during each dosing period. The naltrexone oral solution placebo was prepared in the same vehicle as the active solution. The addition of a bittering agent, Bitterguard (denatonium benzoate, NF) powder, was added to provide a taste similar to the active solution.
Pharmacodynamic Measurements
a. Pupil Size—Measured by Pupillometry.
Pupillary diameter measurements were made with the Polaroid CU-5 camera with a 75 mm lens and built-in electronic ring flash using Polacolor ER 669 instant pack film.12. This method has become accepted as a safe and accurate way to study pupils and is commonly regarded as being second only to the infrared television pupillometric technique (a more versatile and sophisticated, but also much more expensive and cumbersome, method). The Polaroid CU-5 method is said to be accurate to within 0.1 millimeters. See Czarnecki J S, Pilley S F, Thompson H S. “The Use of Photography in the Clinical Evaluation of Unequal Pupils.” Canad J Ophthal 1979; 14:297-302; hereby incorporated by reference.
Pupil diameters were measured as follows: The camera was modified by covering two small sections of the ring flash at 3 and 9 o'clock so that the corneal reflection of the flash does not obscure the horizontal pupillary margin. The camera was centered in front of the subject's face with 3 inch frame against the lateral orbital rims and the eyes occupying the very top of the field (to minimize upgaze). The subject was asked to look just over the camera body and to fixate on a non-accommodative target in the distance, thereby minimizing the near reflex. With the volunteer fixing in the distance, the photo was taken. All photographs were taken in constant ambient light. The pupillary latency was such that the flash will not affect pupillary diameter. Tonic constriction of the pupil after the flash does occur, but is of short duration; therefore, it did not interfere with the measurements necessary for this trial. See Smith S A, Dewhist R R. “A Single Diagnostic Test for Pupillary Abnormality in Diabetic Autonomic Neuropathy.” Diabetic Medicine 1988; 3:38-41; hereby incorporated by reference. Development of the print for the recommended length of time (approximately one (1) minute, varying with ambient temperature) will produce a one-to-one photograph of the volunteer's midface, with the pupils at the top of the print. Horizontal pupillary diameter is then measured using a simple plus magnifier with a built-in reticule calibrated to 0.1 millimeter. Only the left eye was used to measure pupillary effects at each time period specified in the protocol.
b. A Modified Specific Drug Effect Questionnaire.
The questionnaire is a modification of the 22 item questionnaire used by Jasinski and Preston. See Jasinski D R. “Assessment of the Abuse Potential of Morphine-Like Drugs (methods used in man).” In: Drug Addiction I (Martin, W. R., ed.), 1997:197-258. Springer-Verlag, New York; Preson K L, Jasinski D R, Testa M. “Abuse Potential and Pharmacological Comparison of Tramadol and Morphine.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 1991; 27:7-17; both of which are hereby incorporated by reference. The present questionnaire consisted of 10 items rated by the subject 10 minutes prior to blood sampling. The item is related to signs of opiate agonist drugs and was as follows: Subject questions: 1) do you feel any effects from the drugs?, 2) does your skin feel itchy?, 3) do you feel relaxed?, 4) do you feel sleepy?, 5) do you feel drunk?, 6) do you feel nervous?, 7) do you feel full of energy?, 8) do you feel you need to talk?, 9) do you feel sick to your stomach?, 10) do you feel dizzy? The subject then rated the item by placing a vertical mark along a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) anchored on one end by “not at all” and at the other end by “an awful lot”.
Pupil size of the left eye made at baseline (within 30 minutes prior to dosing), and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12 hours post-dose was measured, and the subject rated drug effect scores as measured on a visual analog scale for the Modified Specified Drug Effect Questionnaire (“MSDEQ”) at baseline, and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12 hours post-dose.
Separate graphs for the eleven responses (MSDEQ questions and pupillary diameter measurement) versus naltrexone dose were visually and statistically examined to determine the nominally effective dose of naltrexone in combination with the hydrocodone dose used in the study.
The adverse events reported were those commonly associated with the administration of opioid analgesics, and most were classified as “mild”. No serious adverse events or deaths occurred, and no patients were discontinued from the study secondary to adverse events.
Results are presented in
In Example 2, a ten period, randomized, crossover, single-blind study evaluating the ratio of oral naltrexone to oral hydrocodone that would nominally minimize the opioid agonist effects was conducted in normal, healthy, female volunteers. Twenty-one subjects enrolled in the study, and 16 completed the study. The ten treatments included HYIR/APAP (2 tablets of hydrocodone 7.5 and acetaminophen 750 mg per tablet, Vicodin ES®) with the following doses of naltrexone oral solution: 0.4 mg/10 mL, 0.8 mg/10 mL, 1.6 mg/10 mL, 3.2 mg/10 mL, 4.8 mg/10 mL, 6.4 mg/10 mL, 9.6 mg/10 mL, 12.8 mg/10 mL, and placebo naltrexone oral solution, as well as hydrocodone immediate-release comparator tablets (2×750 mg Trilisate® tablets) with placebo naltrexone oral solution. All treatments were administered under fasted conditions. A 48-hour washout period occurred between doses. Subjects were randomly assigned to ten treatment sequences of the ten treatment groups. Subjects reported to the testing facility the evening prior to the first dose and remained confined there until completion of the 24-hour post-dose assessment of the last dose. Safety measurements consisted of reports of adverse events, vital signs, abnormal laboratory values, abnormal physical examination and ECG results. Plasma hydrocodone, naltrexone and 6-β-naltrexol levels were obtained, and pharmacokinetic values will be calculated and analyzed. Pharmacodynamic parameters (pupil size and Modified Specific Drug Effect Questionnaire) were also assessed.
Dosing Regimen
The dosing regimen was as follows:
Hydrocodone immediate-release comparator (placebo) tablets were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (placebo) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (placebo) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (0.4 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (0.8 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (1.6 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (3.2 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (4.8 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (6.4 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (9.6 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose; Hydrocodone immediate-release tablets (2×7.5 mg) were administered with 10 mL naltrexone oral solution (12.8 mg) at approximately 08:00 on the dosing day in Periods 1 through 10 following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose.
The subjects observed an 8 hour fast preceding and fasted for four (4) hours following each dose administration of the assigned drug on each dosing day. A baseline blood sample (for Plasma Hydrocodone, Naltrexone and 6-(3-naltrexol) was obtained prior to dosing (within 30 minutes) administration of initial dose (0 hr) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 and 9 hours post-dose. All samples were collected within ±2 minute of the scheduled time. Measurements of the following pharmacodynamic parameters were made just prior to blood sampling at baseline (within 30 minutes prior to dosing), and at 0.5 hr, 1 hr, 2 hr, 4 hr, 6 hr and 9 hr post-dose.
Immediately prior to each dosing period, 8 individual naltrexone stock solutions were prepared by weighing out 4, 8, 16, 32, 48, 64, 96, and 128 mg of naltrexone powder. Each of these portions were dissolved in 50 ml of distilled water and 50 ml of simple syrup. The final solution was 100 mL at a concentration of 0.04, 0.08, 0.16, 0.32, 0.48, 0.96, and 1.28 mg/mL. These concentrations allowed the same volume (10 ml) of naltrexone solution to be administered during each dosing period. The naltrexone placebo solution was be prepared in the same vehicles as the active solution. The addition of a bittering agent, Bitterguard Powder (denatonium benzoate), was added to provide a taste similar to the active solution.
Pharmacodynamic Measurements
Pharmacodynamic measurements for Example 2 were obtained in accordance with the procedures set forth with respect to Example 1 above.
The mean “drug effect” VAS score and pupil diameter over time for each of the treatments are presented in
The results suggest that even with the inclusion of 0.4 mg naltrexone, there was a diminution of pharmacologic effects of the dose of hydrocodone. Approximately 0.4 mg of naltrexone minimally antagonized the 15 mg hydrocodone dose. Dosages above naltrexone 0.4 mg began to show increasing diminution of the effect of the hydrocodone dose.
The adverse events reported were those commonly associated with the administration of opioid analgesics, and most were classified as “mild”. A total of five subjects (5/21) discontinued the study. Three subjects discontinued due to adverse events. Two of these subjects experienced adverse events which were classified as non-serious. One subject developed anemia which was classified as serious, and required iron therapy. Another two subjects were discontinued from the study because their physicians felt there was information in their medical history that did not make it possible for them to participate. No deaths occurred in this study.
In general, the single-dose administration of 15 mg hydrocodone immediate-release tablets with increasing doses of naltrexone oral solution (range 0 mg-12.8 mg) resulted in an overall decrease in “drug effect” VAS score and an increase in pupil diameter.
Example 3 presents the results of a study evaluating precipitated withdrawal in morphine dependent volunteers receiving hydrocodone immediate-release tablets and naltrexone oral solution. The study was a single-blind, single-dose, placebo-controlled naltrexone dose ascending study in subjects physically dependent on opioids. The experimental subjects (5) were opioid-dependent as determined by Narcan challenge, Addiction Severity Index scores, physical examination, observation and urine drug screen results, and were not currently seeking treatment for their addiction. To evaluate precipitated withdrawal following the coadministration of hydrocodone immediate release and naltrexone, a 30 mg dose of hydrocodone immediate release was selected to simulate a dose level used by individuals who abuse hydrocodone. This is also a dose which is considered to be equianalgesic to other commonly used opioids in opioid naive patients. The relative analgesic potency of hydrocodone is believed to be similar to that of oxycodone and about two times that of oral morphine.
Test Treatments
The treatments were as follows:
Hydrocodone/acetaminophen immediate-release (HYIR/APAP) tablets 30 mg (Lortab® 3×10 mg) and increasing doses of naltrexone oral solutions 0, 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, 1.0 mg and 2.0 mg. Hydrocodone/acetaminophen immediate-release (HYIR/APAP) tablets 30 mg (Lortab® 3×10 mg) and naltrexone placebo oral solution. The naltrexone oral solution and placebo solution were prepared in accordance with Examples 1-2.
The subjects were stabilized for 5 days by administering 15 mg morphine sulphate i.m. at regular intervals: 6 and 10 A.M., and 4 and 10 P.M. daily. Fifteen mg morphine sulphate i.m. is equivalent to 30 mg hydrocodone given orally. The study medications were administered after stabilization at 10 AM on study medication dosing days, and observations were made over the next six hours. After six hours, if precipitated withdrawal was not observed, the administration of morphine sulfate 15 mg intramuscularly resumed with the 4 PM dose. The subjects were stabilized 48 hours before the next study drug administration. Following each treatment (1-4), if precipitated withdrawal was not observed, the subject received study medication from the next treatment in the following ascending order:
Treatment No. 1: HYIR/APAP tablets 30 mg (Lortab® 3×10 mg) administered with placebo naltrexone (10 mL) oral solution at approximately 10:00 on the dosing day following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose.
Treatment No. 2: HYIR/APAP tablets 30 mg (Lortab® 3×10 mg) administered with 0.25 mg naltrexone (10 mL) oral solution at approximately 10:00 on the dosing day following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose.
Treatment No. 3: HYIR/APAP tablets 30 mg (Lortab® 3×10 mg) administered with 0.5 mg naltrexone (10 mL) oral solution at approximately 10:00 on the dosing day following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose.
Treatment No. 4: HYIR/APAP tablets 30 mg (Lortab® 3×10 mg) administered with 1.0 mg naltrexone (10 mL) oral solution at approximately 10:00 on the dosing day following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose.
Treatment No. 5: HYIR/APAP tablets 30 mg (Lortab® 3×10 mg) administered with 2.0 mg naltrexone (10 mL) oral solution at approximately 10:00 on the dosing day following an 8-hour fast. The fast continued for an additional four (4) hours post-dose.
Blood samples were collected at 0.5 hours pre-dose, and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours post-dose. Pupil diameter measurements were obtained using a Pupilscan pupillometer and recorded in millimeters to the nearest millimeter. There was a 48 hour washout period following each test period. Four subjects completed the study, one subject was terminated. The effect of naltrexone was a slight abstinence (symptoms of withdrawal) at 1 and 2 mg.
The protocol was amended and twelve experimental subjects participated in the protocol, which was identical to the study outlined above except for the increased ratio of naltrexone. Naltrexone doses in the revised protocol were 0, 1, 2, 4 and 8 mg. Eight of the experimental subjects completed the study, while four withdrew.
Vital signs for each subject were monitored, and subjects were monitored for signs and symptoms of opioid withdrawal. Withdrawal signs include stuffiness or running nose, tearing, yawning, sweating, tremors, vomiting, piloerection, mydriasis, irritability and restlessness. Withdrawal symptoms include feeling of temperature change, joint, bone or muscle pain, abdominal cramps, skin crawling, nausea, and the subject's reporting the subjective experience of the aforementioned symptoms.
To provide a measure of the subjective experience of the drug combination, the subjects answered questionnaires throughout the study period. The responses to questions were graded on the Visual Analog Scale as described in Example 1. The subjective experiences that were assessed were as follows: like/dislike of the drug, ability to perceive drug effect, sweating, restlessness, shakiness, watery eyes, gooseflesh, stomach upset, nasal congestion, sleepiness, cold, hot, muscle ache, tenseness or relaxation, confusion, fearfulness, irritability, talkativeness, sensations of withdrawal, sensations of sickness. The subjects were also observed for the following symptoms: yawning, scratching, relaxed, nasal congestion, irritability, withdrawal. In addition, blood pressure, pulse rate, respiration rate, pupil size and body temperature were monitored.
The data for five of the subjects are presented below.
The clinical study demonstrates that hydrocodone, in combination with naltrexone, has an onset of <0.5 hours, peaks within 0.5 to 1 hour and is markedly diminished within 3 to 4 hours. A shallow dose-response curve was observed. The addition of naltrexone decreased the favorable subjective experience of hydrocodone, increased the subjective experience of dislike for hydrocodone and increased the subjective experience of sickness and withdrawal from the effects of hydrocodone. These experiences are clearly aversive.
While the invention has been described and illustrated with reference to certain preferred embodiments thereof, those skilled in the art will appreciate that obvious modifications can be made herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Such variations are contemplated to be within the scope of the appended claims.
This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 09/992,936, filed Nov. 5, 2001, which is a continuation of application Ser. No. 09/503,020, filed Feb. 11, 2000, which issued on Apr. 23, 2002 as U.S. Pat. No. 6,375,957, which is a continuation-in-part of application Ser. No. 09/218,662, filed Dec. 22, 1998, which issued on Aug. 21, 2001 as U.S. Pat. No. 6,277,384, which claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/068,480, filed Dec. 22, 1997, the contents of all of which are incorporated herein in their entireties by reference thereto.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2770569 | Fromherz et. al. | Nov 1956 | A |
| 3133132 | Loeb et al. | May 1964 | A |
| 3173876 | Zobrist et al. | Mar 1965 | A |
| 3173877 | Jackson et al. | Mar 1965 | A |
| 3276586 | Rosaen et al. | Oct 1966 | A |
| 3332950 | Blumberg et al. | Jul 1967 | A |
| 3493657 | Lewenstein et al. | Feb 1970 | A |
| 3541005 | Strathmann et al. | Nov 1970 | A |
| 3541006 | Bixler et al. | Nov 1970 | A |
| 3546876 | Fokker et al. | Dec 1970 | A |
| 3676557 | Lachman et al. | Jul 1972 | A |
| 3773955 | Pachter et al. | Nov 1973 | A |
| 3845770 | Theeuines et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
| 3879555 | Pachter et al. | Apr 1975 | A |
| 3916889 | Russell et al. | Nov 1975 | A |
| 3916899 | Theeuwes et al. | Nov 1975 | A |
| 3950508 | Mony et al. | Apr 1976 | A |
| 3966940 | Pachter et al. | Jun 1976 | A |
| 4063064 | Saunders et al. | Dec 1977 | A |
| 4088864 | Theeulnes et al. | May 1978 | A |
| 4126684 | Robson et al. | Nov 1978 | A |
| 4160020 | Ayer et al. | Jul 1979 | A |
| 4176186 | Goldberg | Nov 1979 | A |
| 4200098 | Ayer et al. | Apr 1980 | A |
| 4237140 | Dudzinski | Dec 1980 | A |
| 4285987 | Ayer et al. | Aug 1981 | A |
| 4293539 | Ludwig et al. | Oct 1981 | A |
| 4401672 | Portoghese | Aug 1983 | A |
| 4451470 | Ganti | May 1984 | A |
| 4457933 | Gordon et al. | Jul 1984 | A |
| 4464378 | Hussain et al. | Aug 1984 | A |
| 4573995 | Chen et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
| 4582835 | Lewis et al. | Apr 1986 | A |
| 4608376 | Pasternak | Aug 1986 | A |
| 4661492 | Lewis et al. | Apr 1987 | A |
| 4668685 | Shami | May 1987 | A |
| 4719215 | Goldberg | Jan 1988 | A |
| 4722928 | Boswell et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
| 4730048 | Portoghese et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
| 4760069 | Rzeszotarski et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
| 4769372 | Kreek et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
| 4785000 | Kreek et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
| 4803208 | Pasternak | Feb 1989 | A |
| 4806341 | Chien et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
| 4806543 | Choi | Feb 1989 | A |
| 4806558 | Wuest et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
| 4844910 | Leslie et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
| 4861598 | Oshlack | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4861781 | Goldberg | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4873076 | Fishman et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
| 4882335 | Sinclair | Nov 1989 | A |
| 4889860 | Rzeszotarski et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
| 4935428 | Lewis | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4957681 | Klimesch et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
| 5075341 | Mendelson et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5086058 | Sinclair et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
| 5096715 | Sinclair | Mar 1992 | A |
| 5102887 | Goldberg | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5130311 | Guillaumet et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5149538 | Granger et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5225440 | London et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
| 5236714 | Lee et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5256669 | Askanazi et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
| 5273760 | Oshlack et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
| 5316759 | Rose et al. | May 1994 | A |
| 5317022 | Borsodi et al. | May 1994 | A |
| 5321012 | Mayer et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5324351 | Oshlack et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5336691 | Raffa et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5352680 | Portoghese et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5352683 | Mayer et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5356900 | Bihari et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5376662 | Ockert | Dec 1994 | A |
| 5409944 | Black et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5426112 | Zagon et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
| 5436265 | Black et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5457208 | Portoghese et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5472712 | Oshlack et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
| 5472943 | Crain et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
| 5474995 | Ducharme et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
| 5486362 | Kitchell et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5502058 | Mayer et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5510368 | Lau et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5512578 | Crain et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5514680 | Weber et al. | May 1996 | A |
| 5521213 | Prasit et al. | May 1996 | A |
| 5534492 | Aston et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5536752 | Ducharme et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5550142 | Ducharme et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5552422 | Gauthier et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5556838 | Mayer et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5574052 | Rose et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5578725 | Portoghese et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5580578 | Oshlack et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5580876 | Crain et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5585348 | Crain et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5593994 | Batt et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5604253 | Lau et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5604260 | Guay et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5616601 | Khanna et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5624932 | Qin et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5633259 | Qin et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5639780 | Lau et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5692500 | Gaston-Johansson | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5767125 | Crain et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5858017 | Demopulos et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5860950 | Demopulos et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5866154 | Bahal et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5866164 | Kuczynski et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5880132 | Hill | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5942241 | ChaSin et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5968547 | Reder et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5972954 | Foss | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5998434 | Mitch et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6096756 | Crain et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6114326 | Schueler | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6194382 | Crain et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6207142 | Odds et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6228863 | Kaiko et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6258042 | Factor et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6277384 | Kaiko et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6310072 | Smith et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6362194 | Crain et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6375957 | Kaiko et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6395705 | Crain et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
| 6419959 | Walter et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6475494 | Kaiko et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
| 6579536 | Hirsch et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6596900 | Blakemore et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6602868 | McBrinn et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
| 6627635 | Palermo et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6696066 | Kaiko et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
| 6696088 | Oshlack et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
| 6706281 | Oshlack et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6716449 | Oshlack et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6743442 | Oshlack et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6765010 | Crain et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 7172767 | Kaiko et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7332182 | Sackler | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7419686 | Kaiko et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7749542 | Kaiko et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 8105631 | Kaiko et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 20010006967 | Crain et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
| 20010018413 | Crain et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010053777 | Brecht | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020006964 | Young et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020010127 | Oshlack et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020031552 | McTeigue et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20030004177 | Kao et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030044458 | Wright, IV et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030065002 | Caruso et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030092759 | Abuzzahab, Sr. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030118641 | Maloney et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030178031 | DuPen et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030191147 | Sherman et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20040052731 | Hirsh et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20050063909 | Wright et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050163856 | Maloney et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050245483 | Brogmann et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050245556 | Brogmann et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050272776 | Buehler | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20070185146 | Fleischer et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20080145429 | Leyendecker et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 200205559 | Nov 2002 | AU |
| 2382648 | Mar 2001 | CA |
| 2478515 | Oct 2003 | CA |
| 2478523 | Oct 2003 | CA |
| 2372025 | Sep 2007 | CA |
| 2138593 | Mar 1972 | DE |
| 2222039 | Nov 1972 | DE |
| 04325465 | Feb 1995 | DE |
| 29719704 | Feb 1997 | DE |
| 19651551 | Jun 1998 | DE |
| 19857766 | Dec 1999 | DE |
| 19859636 | Jun 2000 | DE |
| 19918325 | Oct 2000 | DE |
| 0193355 | Sep 1986 | EP |
| 0205282 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 0352361 | Jan 1990 | EP |
| 0527638 | Feb 1993 | EP |
| 0576643 | Jun 1993 | EP |
| 624366 | Nov 1994 | EP |
| 0631781 | Jan 1995 | EP |
| 0647448 | Apr 1995 | EP |
| 0699436 | Mar 1996 | EP |
| 0913152 | Jun 1999 | EP |
| 19938823 | Feb 2001 | EP |
| 1201233 | May 2002 | EP |
| 1348429 | Oct 2003 | EP |
| 1364649 | Nov 2003 | EP |
| 1604666 | Dec 2005 | EP |
| 1041987 | Apr 2006 | EP |
| 1695700 | Aug 2006 | EP |
| 1813276 | Aug 2007 | EP |
| 1353815 | May 1974 | GB |
| 1390772 | Apr 1975 | GB |
| H10-251149 | Sep 1998 | JP |
| 260408 | May 1996 | NZ |
| 264953 | Nov 1996 | NZ |
| 260883 | Jun 1997 | NZ |
| 294897 | Oct 1998 | NZ |
| 544181 | Dec 2008 | NZ |
| 98102450 | Jul 1996 | RU |
| 2222260 | Jan 2004 | RU |
| WO 8303197 | Sep 1983 | WO |
| WO 9310765 | Jun 1993 | WO |
| WO 9406426 | Mar 1994 | WO |
| WO 9523804 | Feb 1995 | WO |
| WO 9602251 | Feb 1996 | WO |
| WO 9614058 | May 1996 | WO |
| WO 9614059 | May 1996 | WO |
| WO 9733566 | Sep 1997 | WO |
| WO 9745091 | Dec 1997 | WO |
| WO 9825613 | Jun 1998 | WO |
| WO 9835679 | Aug 1998 | WO |
| WO 9901111 | Jan 1999 | WO |
| WO 9905960 | Feb 1999 | WO |
| WO 9922737 | May 1999 | WO |
| WO 9932119 | Jul 1999 | WO |
| WO 9932120 | Jul 1999 | WO |
| WO 0025821 | May 2000 | WO |
| WO 0041683 | Jul 2000 | WO |
| WO 0038649 | Jul 2000 | WO |
| WO 0051592 | Sep 2000 | WO |
| WO 0067739 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| WO 0158451 | Aug 2001 | WO |
| WO 0158477 | Aug 2001 | WO |
| WO 0185150 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| WO 02087512 | Nov 2002 | WO |
| WO 02092059 | Nov 2002 | WO |
| WO 02092060 | Nov 2002 | WO |
| WO 03003541 | Jan 2003 | WO |
| WO 03004009 | Jan 2003 | WO |
| WO 03007802 | Jan 2003 | WO |
| WO 03013476 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| WO 03013479 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| WO 03013538 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| WO 03020124 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| WO 03024429 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| WO 03024430 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| WO 03026676 | Apr 2003 | WO |
| WO 03073937 | Sep 2003 | WO |
| WO 03084504 | Oct 2003 | WO |
| WO 03084520 | Oct 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004026262 | Apr 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004064807 | Aug 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004091623 | Oct 2004 | WO |
| WO 2005000310 | Jan 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005025621 | Mar 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005079760 | Sep 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005120506 | Dec 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005120507 | Dec 2005 | WO |
| WO 2006024881 | Mar 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006079550 | Aug 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006089970 | Aug 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006089973 | Aug 2006 | WO |
| WO 2007047935 | Apr 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007085637 | Aug 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007088489 | Aug 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007111945 | Oct 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007123865 | Nov 2007 | WO |
| WO 2008025790 | Mar 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008030567 | Mar 2008 | WO |
| WO 2009040394 | Apr 2009 | WO |
| WO 2010003963 | Jan 2010 | WO |
| WO 2010103039 | Sep 2010 | WO |
| WO 2012020097 | Feb 2012 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Abstract, cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. (1998) 42(4):287-91. |
| Cappel et al., “Enhancement of Naloxone Induced Analgesia by Pretreatment with Morphine” Pharma. Bioch. & Behay. (1989), 34:425-427. |
| Chih-Cheng Chien et al., “Sigma Antagonists Potentiate Opioid Analgesia in Rats”, Neuroscience Letters 190 (1995), 137-139. |
| Complaint for Declaratory Judgment filed in the United States District Court for the Western District Court of Virginia on Nov. 17, 2008, Civil Action No. 1:08CV00050. |
| Crain et al., “Ultra-Low Concentrations of Naloxone Selectively Antagonize Excitory Effects of Morphine on Sensory Neurons, Thereby Increasing Its Antinociceptive Potency and Attenuating Tolerance/Dependence During Chronic Cotreatment,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (1995) 92:10540-10544. |
| Foss et al., “Dose related Antagonism of the Emetic Effect of Morphine by Methylnaltrexone in Dogs”,J. Clin Pharmacol (1993), 33:747-751. |
| Gan et al., “Opioid-Sparing Effects of a Low-Dose Infusion of Naloxone in Patient-Administered Morphine Sulfate,” Anesthesiology (1997), 87(5):1075-1080. |
| Gonzalez et al., “Naltrexone: A Review of its Pharmacodynamic and Pharmacokinetic Properties and Therapeutic Efficacy in the Management of Opioid Dependence,” Drugs (1988), 35:192-213. |
| Hanson Analgesic, Antipyretic and Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Remington's Science and Practice of Pharmacy (1995), 2:1207. |
| Holmes et al., “Inhibiting Spinal Dynorphin a Component Enhances Intrathecal Morphine Antinociception in Mice”, Anesth. Analg. (1993), 77:1166-73. |
| Judson et al., “The Naloxone Test for Opiate Dependence,” Clin. Pharmacol. Ther., vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 492-501, (1980). |
| Kanof et al., “Clinical characteristics of naloxone-precipitated withdrawal in human opioid-dependent subjects,” J. Pharmacol. Exp. Therapeut., vol. 260, No. 1, pp. 355-363 (1992). |
| Kanof et al., “Levels of Opioid Physical Dependence in Heroin Addicts,” Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 27 (1991) 253-262. |
| Lapierre “Acetaminophen Boosts Liver Toxicity Alone, as Combination Therapy-Jama” Health News Daily, vol. 18 Issue 128 dated Jul. 6, 2006. |
| Lorcet, Physicians' Desk Reference 48th ed., 1994; pp. 2388-2390. |
| Lortab, Physicians' Desk Reference 48th ed., 1994; pp. 2498-2500. |
| Medzon, R, “Naltrexone and Nalmefene,” Clinical Toxicology Review, vol. 19, No. 3, Dec. 1996. |
| Mendelson J., et al, “Buprenorphine and Naloxone Interactions in Opiate Dependent Volunteers,” Clin. Phar. Ther. (1996), 60:105-114. |
| Miaskowski et al., “Inhibition of Spinal Opioid Analgesia by Supraspinal Administration of Selective Opioid Antagonists”, Brain Research (1992), 596:41-45). |
| Nutt et al., “Methadone-naloxone mixture for use in methadone maintenance programs”; Clin Pharm and Ther. vol. 15, no. 2., pp. 156-166 (1974). |
| Peachey et al., “Assessment of Opioid Dependence with Naloxone,” British Journal of Addiction (1988) 83(2), 193-201. |
| Physician's Desk Reference (2001) see “Revia,” pp. 1146-1149. |
| Physician's Desk Reference 48th ed.; 1994; “Talwin,” 2120-2121, Montvale, NJ. |
| Resnick et al., “Naloxone Precipitated Withdrawal: A Method for Rapid Induction Onto Naltrexone,” Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 409-413; received for publication Nov. 16, 1976. |
| Shen et al., “Ultra-Low Doses of Naltrexone or Etorphine Increase Morphine's Antinocieceptive Potencey and Attenuate Tolerance/Dependence in Mice,” Brain Research (1997), 757:176-190. |
| Sunshine et al., “Analgesic Efficacy of Pentazocine Versus a Pentazocine-Naloxone Combination Following Oral Administration,” Clin. J. Pain (1988), 4:35-40. |
| Vaccarino et al.,“Analgesia Produced by Normal Doses of Opioid Antagonists Alone and in Combination with Morphine”, Pain (1989), 36:103-109. |
| Vicodin, Physicians' Desk Reference 48th ed., 1994; pp. 1143-1145. |
| Walsh et al., “Effects of Naltrexone on Response to Intravenous Cocain, Hydromorphone and their Combination in Humans,” (1996). |
| Wang et al., “Crossover and Parallel Study of Oral Analgesics,” J. Clin. Pharmacol (1981), 21:162-168. |
| Wang et al., “Rating the Presence and Severity of Opiate Dependence,” Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 653-657; received for publication Jan. 21, 1974. |
| Watkins et al. “Aminotransferase Elevations in Healty Adults Receiving 4 Grams of Acetaminophen Daily” Jama, Jul. 5, 2006 vol. 296 No. 1. |
| Weinhold et al., “Buprenorphine Alone and in Combination with Naltrexone in Non-Dependent Humans,” Drug and Alcohol Dependence (1992), 30:263-274. |
| Weisen et al., “The safety and value of naloxone as a therapeutic aid,” Drug and Alcohol dependence (1977) vol. 2, pp. 123-130. |
| Wilmington, Del., Pr Newswire; New Data Published Describing Favorable Safety Profile of REVIA (Naltrexone Hydrochloride Tablets) When Used to Treat Alcohol Dependence,' Dec. 1997. |
| Yuan et al., “Efficacy of Orally Administered Methylnaltrexone in Decreasing Subjective Effects After Intravenous Morphine”, Drug and Alcohol Dependence (1998); 52:161-165. |
| Yuan et al., “The Safety and Efficacy of Oral Methylnaltrexone in Preventing Morphine-induced Delay in Oral-Cecal Transit Time”, Clinical Trials and Therapeutics (1997), 61:467-475. |
| Abernethy et al., Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled crossover trial of sustained release morphine for the management of refractory dyspnoea, BMJ, vol. 327, 6 pages. (2003). |
| Amati et al., “In vitro effects of naloxone on T-lymphocyte-dependent antibacterial activity in hepatitis C virus (HCV) infected patients and in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patient,” lmmunopharmacology and lmmonotoxicology, vol. 23, No. 1 (2001), pp. 1-11 (2001). |
| Azamari et al., “Thermal treating as a tool for sustained release of indomethacin from Eudragit RS and RL matrices,” International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 246, 171-177 (2002). |
| Beauford et al., “Effects of Nebulized Morphine Sulfate on the Exercise Tolerance Ventilatory Limited COPD Patient,” Chest, vol. 104, No. 1, pp. 175-178 (1993). |
| Benziger et al., “Differential effects of food on the bioavailability of controlled release oxycodone tablets and it oxycodone solution” J Pharm Sciences, vol. 85, No. 4, pp. 407-410 (1996). |
| Berkow, R. (ed.) Merck Manual of Medical Information, pp. 528-530 (1997). |
| Berkow, R. (ed.) The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy (1997), extract (English Translation from Russian). |
| Bloom et al., “Clinical Studies with Naloxone/Methadone in a Ratio of 1:20”; 5th National Conference on Methadone Treatment (1973) vol. 2, p. 1342-1349. |
| Briscoe et al., “Methoclocinnamox: Time Course of Changes in Alfetnanil-Reinforced Rhesus Monkeys”; Psychopharmacology (2000) 148:393-399. |
| Bromm et al., “A Sensitive Method to Evaluate Effects of Analgesics in Man”; Meth and Find Exptl Clin Pharmacol 5 (8) (1983) p. 545-551 (abstract). |
| Bullingham et al., “Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Narcotic Agonist-Antagonist Drugs”; Clinical Pharm (1983) 8: 332-343. |
| Caldwell et al., “Treatment of Osteoarthritis Pain with Controlled Release Oxycodone or Fixed Combination Oxycodone Plus Acetaminophen Added to Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs: A Double Blind, Randomized, Multicenter, Placebo Controlled Trial,” J Rheumatol. vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 862-9 (1999). |
| Calimlim, et al. “Effect of Naloxone on the Analgesic Activity of Methadone in a 1:10 Oral Combination”; Clin Pharmacol and There (1974) vol. 15; No. 6 pp. 556-564. |
| Caruso et al., “Methadone and Naloxone in Combination (Naldone®) for the Treatment of Heroin Addicts”; Bristol Laboratories, pp. 1336-1341 (1973). |
| Chambers Dictionary of Science and Technology, Ed. P.M.B. Walker, Chambers, 1999, p. 803. |
| Chen et al., “Challenges and New Technologies of Oral Controlled Release,” Oral Controlled Release Formulation Design and Drug Delivery: Theory to Practice (2010) pp. 257-277. |
| Chen et al., “Oral naloxone reverses opioid-associated constipation,” Foreign Medical Sciences: Anesthesiology and Resuscitation, vol. 21, No. 5, p. 319 (2000). |
| Cherny Nathan I., “Opioid Analgesics”; Drugs May 1996:51 (5) pp. 713-737. |
| Cherry et al., “Opioids in Pain Therapy,” The Frankfurt Consensus, STK—Special Issue 2001 Article 2 (3 pages) (in German, w/ English translation). |
| Chiang et al. “Clinical Evaluation of a Naltrexone Sustained-Release Preparation”; Drug and Alcohol Dependence (1985) 16, pp. 1-8. |
| Choi et al., “Opioid Antagonists: A Review of Their Role in Palliative care, Focusing on Use in Opioid-Related Constipation,” J. of Pain and Symptom Management, vol. 24(1): 71-90. |
| Citron et al., “Long-term administration of controlled release oxycodone tablets for the treatment of cancer pain,” Cancer Investigation, vol. 16, No. 8, pp. 562-571 (1998). |
| Clark et al., “Symptom indexes to assess outcomes of treatment for early prostate cancer” Medical Care (2001) 39(10) 1118-1130. |
| Clemens et al., “Combined oral prolonged-release oxycodone and naloxone in opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: review of efficacy and safety data in the treatment of patients experiencing chronic pain,” Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 11(2):297-310 (2010). |
| Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (1988). |
| Culpepper-Morgan et al., “Treatment of opioid-induced constipation with oral naloxone: A pilot study.” Clinical Trials and Therapeutics, (1992) vol. 52(1): 90-95. |
| Davies, S., “Rising to the pain challenge,” Drug News Perspect, 19(10):653-8 (2006). |
| Delbarre et al., Naloxone effects on blood pressure, analgesia and dieresis in spontaneous hypertensive and normotensive rats; Neuroscience Letters, vol. 30; pp. 167-172 (1982). |
| Deyo et al. “Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation” Cont. Clin. Trials (1991) 12:142S-158S. |
| Dictionary of Modern Computer Terms, S.-P.: BHV-Petersburg, p. 215 (2004). |
| Drossman et al. “Rome II: The Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders,” 2nd ed. (2000) McLean, VA: Degon Associates. |
| Ebell et al., “The management of pain in cancer patients,” Supportive Measures in Oncology, Jehn et al., eds., 1994, vol. 3 (in German, w/ English translation). |
| Eissenberg et al. “Buprenophine's physical dependence potential: Antagonist-precipitated withdrawal in humans,” J. Pharmacol. Exp. Therapeut. vol. 276, No. 2, p. 449 (1996). |
| EP Application No. EP05020579.8: Communication forwarding the European Search Report dated Feb. 7, 2006. |
| EP Application No. EP05020580.6: Communication forwarding the European Search Report dated Feb. 8, 2006. |
| EP Application No. EP06111805.5: Jul. 10, 2008 Response to Office Communication dated Feb. 19, 2008. |
| EP Application No. EP10176078.3: Communication forwarding the European Search Report dated Mar. 8, 2011. |
| EP Application No. EP10180364.1: Office Communication and European Search Report, dated Dec. 10, 2010. |
| EP Application No. EP10180425.0: Office Communication and European Search Report, dated Dec. 10, 2010. |
| EP Application No. EP10180494.6: Communication forwarding the European Search Report dated Mar. 9, 2011. |
| EP Application No. EP10180495.3: Communication forwarding the European Search Report dated Feb. 25, 2011. |
| EP Application No. EP10180496.1: Communication forwarding the European Search Report dated Mar. 9, 2011. |
| EP Application No. EP10180498.7: Communication forwarding the European Search Report dated Mar. 9, 2011. |
| EP Application No. EP11177513.6: European Search report and Search opinion dated Feb. 2, 2012. |
| EP Application No. EP11177516.9: European Search report and Search opinion dated Feb. 2, 2012. |
| EP Application No. EP11177518.5: European Search report and Search opinion dated Feb. 2, 2012. |
| EP Application No. EP11177520.1: European Search report and Search opinion dated Feb. 2, 2012. |
| European Patent No. EP1492506: Hexal Opposition (English Translation only) dated Sep. 30, 2009 (12 pages). |
| Excerpt from Industrial Pharmacy, “Classification of drug delivery systems,” 1996 (English translation). |
| Forth et al., General and Special Pharmacology and Toxicology, 7th rev. ed., 1996, pp. 207-217 (In German w/English Translation). |
| Goliber (Benchtop Evaluations of Tampering with Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms, Opioid Abuse Resistance Conference, Oct. 2005—Accessed from http://www.thci.org/opioid/oct05docs/TAB%205.8%020Gober.%20Benchtop%20Evaluations%20of%20Tampering%20with%20Pharmaceutical%20Disage%20Forms.pdf on Nov. 17, 2010. |
| Goodman and Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics (Tenth Edition (2001), McGraw Hill. |
| Goodridge et al., “Factors associated with opioid dispensation for patients with COPD and lung cancer in the last year of life: A retrospective analysis,” Int. J. of COPD, 2010, 5:99-105. |
| Grimm, “Extension of the International Conference on Harmonization Tripartite Guideline for Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products to Countries of Climatic Zones III and IV,” Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy, vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 312-324 (1998). |
| Guyatt et al. “Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments” J. Chron Dis. (1987) 40(2):171-178. |
| Guyatt et al., “Interpreting treatment effects in randomized trials,” Br. Med. Jnl, (1998) 316(7132): 690-693. |
| Hagen, et al. “Efficacy, Safety, and Steady-State Pharmacokinetics of Once-A-Day Controlled-Release Morphine (MS Contin XL) in Cancer Pain,” Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (2005) vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 80-90. |
| Hays et al. “Assessing reliability and validity of measurement in clinical trials” in Staquet et al. (eds.) Quality of Life in Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice (1998) Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
| Hening et al., “Dyskinesias while awake and periodic movements in sleep in restless legs syndrome: Treatment with opioids,” Neurology, vol. 36, pp. 1363-1366 (1986). |
| Holzer et al., “Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction in cancer-related pain: causes, consequences and a novel approach for its management,” Journal of Opioid Management, 5(3): 145-151 (2009). |
| Hopp et al., “Analgesic efficacy of oxycodone in combination with naloxone as prolonged release (PR) tablets in patients with moderate to severe chronic pain [abstract PT 226],” Presented at the 12th World Congress on Pain, International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), Glasgow, Scotland, UK, MIS 4789879, Aug. 17-22, 2008. |
| Hopp et al., “Pain 2: Oral prolonged-release (PR) oxycodone/naloxone combination reduces opiod-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) in chronic pain patients [abstract 40],” Presented at the 5th Research Forum of the European Association for Palliative Care, Palliat. Med., 22(4):441 (2008). |
| Hughes et al., “Buprenorphine for pain relief in a patient with drug abuse,” The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 451-455 (1991). |
| Hussain M.A. “Improved buccal delivery of opioid analgesics and antagonists with bitterless prodrugs.” Pharm. Res. 1988, 5(9):615-618. |
| Inoue, “On the Treatment of Restless Legs Syndrome,” Progress in RLS Research, vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 892-897 (2004). |
| Iyakuhin Tenkabutu Jiten, Japanese Pharmaceutical Excipients Directory, p. 181 (1994). |
| Kapoor, S., “Emerging New Therapeutic Options for the Management of Opioid Induced Constipation,” J. of Pain and Palliative Case Pharmacotherapy, 24(1):98-99 (2010). |
| Kazis et al. “Effects sizes for interpreting changes in health status,” Med. Care 27(3 Suppl.):S178-S189 (1989). |
| Kreek et al., “Drug Interactions with Methadone,” Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 281, 350-371 (1976). |
| Krylov, Drug Register of Russia, Encyclopedia of Drugs, (2001) entries for “Nalbuphine,” “Naloxone,” and “Naltrexone” (English Translation). |
| Kurz et al., “Opioid-Induced Bowel Dysfunction: Pathophysiology and Potential New Therapies,” Drugs, vol. 63, No. 7, pp. 649-671 (2003), abstract. |
| Latasch et al., “Aufhebun einer Morphin-induzierten Obstipation durch orales Naloxon,” with translation (“Oral Naloxone Antagonizes Morphine-Induced Constipation”), Anaesthesist, 46, 191-194 (1997). |
| Leehey et al., Naloxone increases water and electrolyte excretion after water loading in patients with cirrhosis and ascites, J of lab and din med; vol. 118, No. 5, pp. 484-491 (1991). |
| Leidy et al., “Recommendations for evaluating the validity of quality of life claims for labeling and promotion,” Value in Health 2(2): 113-127 (1999). |
| Levy M.H., Eur J Pain.vol. 5, Suppl. A, pp. 113-116 (2001), abstract. |
| Light et al., “Effects of Oral Morphine in Breathlessness and Exercise tolerance in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease,” Am. Rev. Respir. Dis., (1989) vol. 139, pp. 126-133. |
| Liu et al., “Low dose oral naloxone reverses opioid-induced constipation and analgesia”; Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 48-53 (2002). |
| Lowenstein et al., “Combined prolonged release oxycodone and naloxone improves bowel function in patients receiving opioids for moderate-to-severe non-malignant chronic pain: a randomized controlled trial,” Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 10(4):531-543 (2009). |
| Meissner et al., “A randomized controlled trial with prolonged-release oral oxycodone and naloxone to prevent and reverse opioid-induced constipation,” Eur. J. Pain, vol. 13, pp. 56-64 (2009). |
| Meissner et al., “Oral naloxone reverses opioid-associated constipation”, Pain, vol. 84, pp. 105-109 (2000). |
| Mikus, G., “Combining Opioid Agonists and Antagonists as a Solution for Opioid-induced Constipation,” European Gastroenterology and Hepatology Review, 4(2):71-74 (2008). |
| MIMS, Jan. 2005, pp. 120-125. |
| Mueller-Lissner, “Fixed Combination of Oxycodone with Naloxone: a New Way to Prevent and Treat Opioid-Induced Constipation.” Adv. Ther. (2010) 27(9):581-590. |
| Muller-Lissner et al., “Oral Prolonged release (PR) oxycodone/naloxone combination reduced opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) in patients with severe chronic pain (abstract 189),” Presented at the 2nd International Congress on Neuropathic Pain, Berlin, Germany, Published in Eur. J. Pain, 11(S1):S82, Jun. 7-10, 2007. |
| Mundipharma Clinical Studies Report A2-3759, “Validation of Bowel Function Index,” Jun. 15, 2005 (Rev. Jul. 12, 2005). |
| Mundipharma Clinical Studies Report OXN 2401, “Optimization of Naloxone-Oxycodone Ration in Pain Patients.” Jun. 3, 2005. |
| Mundipharma Clinical Study Results for Controlled Release of Oxycodone/Naloxone Formulations, Phase II Study (undated). |
| Mundipharma's Opposition to Endo's Australian Patent Application No. AU2002305559, filed Oct. 1, 2008. |
| Nadstawek et al., “Patient assessment of a novel therapeutic approach for the treatment of severe, chronic pain,” Int. J. Clin. Pract., vol. 62, No. 8, pp. 1159-1167 (2008). |
| Nadstawek et al., “Patient assessment of the efficacy and tolerability of coadministered prolonged release oral oxycodone and naloxone in severe chronic pain (abstract SAT0375),” Presented at the 8th Annual European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR 2007), Barcelona, Spain, Published in Ann. Rheum. Dis., 66(Suppl. 2):543, Jun. 13-16, 2007. |
| Neuenschwander et al., Palliative Medicine at a Glance, 1999 (whole book). |
| Nichols et al., “Improved bowel function with a combination of oxycodone and naloxone (OXN) as prolonged-release (PR) tablets in patients with moderate to severe chronic pain (abstract PT225),” Presented at the 12th World Congress on Pain, International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), Glasgow, Scotland, UK, Aug. 17-22, 2008. |
| Nolte, T., “Prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone is effective and safe in clinical use (abstract 275),” Encore presentation at the 5th Research Forum of the European Association for Palliative Care, Published in Palliative Medicine, 22(4):484-5 (2008). |
| Nolte, T., “Prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone is effective and safe in cancer pain (abstract 66),” Encore presentation at the 12th World Congress on Pain, International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), Glasgow, Scotland, UK, Aug. 17-22, 2008. |
| Nolte, T., “Prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone is effective and safe in clinical use (abstract PO325),” Presented at the 28th German Congress on Cancer, Published in Onkologie, Berlin, Germany, 31(Suppl. 1):165-6, Feb. 20-23, 2008. |
| Norman et al., “Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation.” Med. Care 41:582-592 (2003). |
| Nunnally et al. Psychometric Theory (3rd Edition) NY: McGraw-Hill (1994). |
| Oppermann M., “Neue Arzneimittel zur Behandlung der Opioid-induzierten Obstipation: der Mechanismus-basierte Ansatz von Methylnaltrexon, Naloxon and Alvimopan,” Fortbildungstelegramm Pharmazie; 1 Mai 2009; pp. 117-131. |
| Oxygesic® Product Information, 1997-2001 (in German, w/ English translation). |
| Package Insert for OxyContin®, Purdue Pharma L.P. (Mar. 18, 2004). |
| Paille et al., “An open six-month study of the safety of Transipeg for treating constipation in community medicine,” J. Clin. Res., vol. 2, pp. 65-76 (1999). |
| Pamuk et al., “Revalidation of description of constipation in terms of recall bias and visual scale analog questionnaire,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (2003), 18, 1417-1422. |
| Pappagallo, M., “Incidence, prevalence, and management of opioid bowel dysfunction,” Am. J. Surg. (2001) 182 suppl. 11S-18S. |
| PCT Application PCT/EP2003/003541: International Preliminary Examination Report dated Jul. 6, 2004. |
| PCT Application PCT/EP2005/006155: International Search Report dated Aug. 25, 2005 (2 pages). |
| PCT/EP2009/058630: Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration (with International Search Report, and Written Opinion) dated Oct. 9, 2009. |
| Philippe et al., “Mu opoid receptor expression is increased in inflammatory bowel diseases: implications for homeostatic intestinal inflammation”. GUT, vol. 55, No. 6, pp. 815-823 (2006). |
| Poole et al., “The Effect of Sustained-Release Morphine on Breathlessness and Quality of Life in Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease,” Am J Respir Crit Care Med, vol. 157, pp. 1877-1880 (1998). |
| Portenoy et al., “Breakthrough pain: characteristics and impact in patients with cancer pain,” PAIN, pp. 129-134 (1999). |
| Portenoy et al., “Breakthrough pain: definition, prevalence and characteristics,” PAIN, vol. 41, pp. 273-281 (1990). |
| Rawal, et al., “An experimental study of urodynamic effects of epidural morphine and of naloxone reversal”, Anesth Analg. Jul. 1983;62(7):641-647. |
| Reents et al., “Naloxone and Naltrexone* Application in COPD,” Chest, vol. 93, No. 1, pp. 217-219 (1988). |
| Reimer et al., “Meeting the challenges of opioid-induced constipation in chronic pain management—a novel approach,” Pharmacology, 83:10-17 (2009). |
| Rentz et al., “Validation of the Bowel Function Index to detect clinically meaningful changes in opioid-induced constipation,” Journal of Medical Economics (JME), 12(0):371-383 (2009). |
| Revicki et al., “Recommendation on health-related quality of life research to support labeling and promotional claims in the United States” QOL Research 9(8): 887-900 (2000). |
| Rosow et al., Reversal of opioid-induced bladder dysfunction by intravenous naloxone and methylnaltrexone, Clin Pharm & Ther. vol. 82, No. 1, pp. 48-53 (2007). |
| Rote Liste 2004, Jan. 1, 2004; Frankfurt/Main, vol. 2004, pp. 05001-05033. |
| Sandner F., “Hope for patients with chronic pain: naloxone and oxycodone fixed combination offers analgesia and prevention of constipation also during sleep,” J of Pham and Therapy, vol. 16; No. 6; pp. 179-180 (2007). |
| Sandner-Kiesling et al., “Long-term efficacy and safety of combined prolonged-release oxycodone and naloxone in the management of non-cancer chronic pain,” International Journal of Clinical Practice, 64(6):763-774 (2010). |
| Schenck et al., “Severe, childhood-onset, idiopathic, life-long insomnia responding selectively to opiate therapy: case report with 19 year follow-up,” Sleep Med., vol. 2, No. 6, pp. 531-536 (2001). |
| Schenck et al., Letter to the Editor, Sleep Med., vol. 4, No. 3, p. 251 (2003). |
| Schmidt, W.K. “Alvimopan (ADL 8-2698) Is a Novel Peripheral Opioid Antagonist,” The American Journal of Surgery, 182 (Suppl. to Nov. 2001) 27S-38S (2001). |
| Schutter et al., “Innovative pain therapy with a fixed combination of prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone: a large observational study under conditions of daily practice,” Current Medical Research and Opinion, 26(6):1377-1387 (2010). |
| Simpson et al., “Fixed-ratio combination oxycodone/naloxone compared with oxycodone alone for the relief of opiod induced constipation in moderate-to-severe non-cancer pain,” Current Medical Research and Opinion (CMRO), 24(12):3503-3512 (2008). |
| Smith et al., “Low-dose naltrexone as a treatment for active Crohn's disease,” AGA Abstracts, S1397, XP009095749, p. A-218 (2006). |
| Smith et al., “Low-dose naltrexone therapy improves active Crohn's disease,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 102, No. 4 pp. 820-828 (2007). |
| Smith et al., “Single and multiple-dose pharmacokinetic evaluation of oxycodone and naloxone in an opioid agonist/antagonist prolonged-release combination in healthy adult volunteers,” Clinical Therapeutics, 30(11):2051-2068(2008). |
| Smith et al., “Prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone tablets: Dose-proportional pharmacokinetics (abstract PW 256),” Presented at the 12th World Congress on Pain, International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), Glasgow, Scotland, UK (MIS 4790606), Aug. 17-22, 2008. |
| Sykes “An investigation of the ability of oral naloxone to correct opioid-related constipation in patients with advanced cancer,” Palliative Medicine (1996), 10:134-144. |
| Sykes “Oral naloxone in opioid-associated constipation,” Lancet (1991) vol. 337 p. 1475. |
| Sykes, N.P., “Using Oral Naloxone in Management of Opioid Bowel Dysfunction,” in Handbook of Opioid Bowel Syndrome, Chapter 9, (Yuan, C.-S. ed., The Haworth Medical Press 2005). |
| Tai et al., “Naltrexone: An Antagonist Therapy for Heroin Addiction”; NIDA (1997) 5 pages. |
| Trzepacz et al., “Response to Opioids in Three Patients with Restless Legs Syndrome,” Am. J. Psychiatry, vol. 141, pp. 993-999 (1984). |
| Umbricht et al., “Naltrexone shortened opioid detoxification with buprenorphine”; Drug and Alcohol Dependence (1999) vol. 56 pp. 181-190. |
| Valoron® Product Information, 1997-2001 (in German, w/ English translation). |
| Vondrackova et al. “Analgesic efficacy and safety of oxycodone in combination with naloxone as prolonged release tablets in patients with moderate to severe chronic pain,” Journal of Pain, vol. 9, No. 12 pp. 1144-1154 (2008). |
| Walters et al., “Successful Treatment of the Idiopathic Restless Legs Syndrome in a Randomized Double-Blind Trial of Oxycodone Versus Placebo,” Sleep, vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 327-332 (1993). |
| Wells et al., “In vivo Pharmacological Characterization of SoRI 9409, a Nonpeptidic Opioid-Agonist/-Antagonist that Produces Limited Antinociceptive Tolerance and Attenuates Morphione Physical Dependence”; J. Pharm and Exper Thera (2001) vol. 297, No. 2, pp. 597-605. |
| Wikler et al., “N-Allylnormorphine: Effects of single dose and Precipitation of Acute “Abstinence Syndromes” during addiction to morphine, methadone or heroin in man (post addicts)”; N-Allylnormorphine During Narcotic Addiction (1953) pp. 8-20. |
| Wilkinson “The Dynamics of Drug Absorption, Distribution, and Elimination,” Goodman and Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Chapter 1, Pharmacokinetics, copyright page and pp. 3-29 (2001). |
| Wodak Alex, “Drug Treatment for Opioid Dependence”; Australian Prescriber (2001) vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 4-6. |
| Woodcock et al., “Effects of Dihydrocodeine, Alcohol, and Caffeine on Breathlessness and Exercise Tolerance in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease and Normal Blood Cases,” N. Engl. J. Med., (1981) vol. 305, No. 27, pp. 1611-1616. |
| Woodcock et al., Correspondence, N. Engl. J. Med., (1982) vol. 306, pp. 1363-1364. |
| Woodward et al., “Prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone tablets: Pharmacokinetics in the elderly (abstract),” Presented at the 12th World Congress on Pain, International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), Glasgow, Scotland, UK, Abstract PW 255, (MIS 4789067), Aug. 17-22, 2008. |
| Wright et al., “Acute physical dependence in Humans; repeated naloxone-precipitated withdrawal after a single-dose of methadone”; Drug and Alcohol Dependence (1991) vol. 27, pp. 139-148. |
| Wyrwich et al. “Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life” J. Clin. Epidemiol. 52:861-873 (1991). |
| Yakuri-gaku, Pharmacology, edited by Hiroshi Kaneto et al., Hirokawa Publishing, pp. 70-71 (1992). |
| Yoburn et al., “Opioid Antagonist-induced Receptor Upregulation: Effects of Concurrent Agonist Administration”; Brain Research Bulletin (1994), vol. 33, pp. 237-240. |
| Yoburn et al., “Supersensitivity to Opioid Analgesics Following Chronic Opioid Antagonist Treatment: Relationship to Receptor Sensitivity”; Pharmacology Bio Beh (1995) vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 535-539. |
| Zaks et al., “Naloxone Treatment of Opiate Dependence”; JAMA (1971) vol. 215, No. 13, pp. 2108-2110. |
| Zech et al., “Validation of World Health Organization Guidelines for Cancer Pain Relief: a 10-year Prospective Study,” Pain, Oct. 1995:63(1):65-76. |
| Zeppetella et al., “Opioids for cancer breakthrough pain: A pilot study reporting patient assessment of time to meaningful pain relief,” J of Pain and Symptom Management, vol. 25, No. 5, pp. 563-567 (2008). |
| Zhou et al. “A clinical analysis of 18 cases of naloxone treating pruritis due to cholestia, hebei,” Modern Journal of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine, vol. 8, No. 1, p. 43 (1999) (English translation). |
| Zhu et al., “Naltrexone-precipitated morphine withdrawal in infant rat is attenuated by acute administration if NOS inhibitors but not NMDA receptor antagonists”; Psychopharmacology (2000) vol. 150, pp. 325-336. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20130165418 A1 | Jun 2013 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60068480 | Dec 1997 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 09992936 | Nov 2001 | US |
| Child | 13708736 | US | |
| Parent | 09503020 | Feb 2000 | US |
| Child | 09992936 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 09218662 | Dec 1998 | US |
| Child | 09503020 | US |
