OxyContin that's harder to abuse? FDA debates new version

phr

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
36,649
Location
St. Charles, IL
OxyContin that's harder to abuse? FDA debates new version
LAURAN NEERGAARD
The AP
5.1.08



(05-01) 13:36 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

The government is evaluating a new version of OxyContin — the potent painkiller sometimes called "hillbilly heroin" — designed to be harder to abuse.

A plastic-like coating fuses to the tablet, making it harder to crush — and turning into a gooey mess if abusers try to inject it, maker Purdue Pharma LP said in documents released by the Food and Drug Administration Thursday.

The FDA will ask its scientific advisers on Monday if the reformulated drug seems tamper-resistant enough to allow on the market, before the required long-term studies are done to see if the changes thwart at least some abuse.

"These are clearly difficult questions for which there are no easy answers," Dr. Bob Rappaport, FDA's chief of painkilling drugs, wrote the advisory panel.

OxyContin was hailed as a breakthrough in the treatment of severe chronic pain when it was introduced in 1996. A time-release version of the old narcotic oxycodone, it was designed to be swallowed whole and digested over 12 hours to keep a steady state of the painkiller in the bodies of seriously ill patients.

But abusers rapidly discovered the tablets can produce a heroin-like high if crushed and snorted or injected, thus dumping the dose all at once instead of letting it seep in slowly.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration found the number of oxycodone-related deaths nationwide had quintupled by 2001, as OxyContin prescriptions soared. The DEA cracked down, but OxyContin abuse steadily spread across the country. And a year ago, Purdue Pharma and some of its executives pleaded guilty to misleading the public about OxyContin's risk of addiction earlier in the decade, and agreed to millions in fines to settle state complaints that it encouraged over-prescribing of the drug.

Against that contentious backdrop, the FDA had urged drug companies to develop more abuse-resistant versions of important painkillers, recognizing, in Rappaport's words, "the importance of maintaining the availability of these important drug products for the millions of patients in this country who suffer from chronic pain."

The remade OxyContin marks the first application for a reformulated painkiller that purports to do that, he wrote.

Purdue Pharma said its laboratory studies show the new OxyContin is equivalent to the original in how well the painkiller dissolves if used correctly.

If someone tries to crush it, the plastic-like coating makes the tablet more likely to break into large fragments instead of a powder, the Stamford, Conn.-based company wrote. The coating renders the drug "a gelatinous mess" when mixed with alcohol or other solvents in attempts to dissolve and inject it, the documents say.

But the FDA cited concerns, including:

_Some people who died from OxyContin abuse swallowed the drug without crushing it. Would the new version mislead doctors or patients into thinking OxyContin is less risky than it really is?

_Lower doses are set to be reformulated initially, with higher doses converted in the future. Does that increase risk from the higher doses in the meantime?

Moreover, "there is no perfect formulation that can resist all forms of tampering," FDA's Rappaport wrote. If approved, the new version's label "would have to be carefully crafted so as to avoid the publication of a road map describing how to defeat these changes."

Two other companies, Pain Therapeutics Inc. and King Pharmaceuticals, also are developing an abuse-resistant form of the drug. Called Remoxy, it would provide a thick gelatin-like version of oxycodone.

Link!
 
Looks like the wheels are finally in motion...


Interesting how they're starting out with the low dose versions first.
 
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration found the number of oxycodone-related deaths nationwide had quintupled by 2001, as OxyContin prescriptions soared. The DEA cracked down, but OxyContin abuse steadily spread across the country. And a year ago, Purdue Pharma and some of its executives pleaded guilty to misleading the public about OxyContin's risk of addiction earlier in the decade, and agreed to millions in fines to settle state complaints that it encouraged over-prescribing of the drug.

But did they really have to tell people this? I mean is there a non-habit forming opioid? And its a shame no over perscribing is going on today.
 
^ I think the problem is they said it wasn't addictive, or "wasn't as addictive" or something along those lines. I don't know why anybody would believe that, and let that statement go through...
 
The vast majority of people who use their opiates as prescribed are not addicted. Dependant, yes, but not addicted.

Most people don't understand the difference.
 
There is one that apparently does not cause the physical manifestations of addiction, herkinorin, a salvinorin B derivative with much less kappa selectivity and much more mu affinity than salvinorin A.

And people desperate enough, or people with a brain, will just take to trying to crack the polymers used to fuck with the pills like meth cooks make sport out of extracting supposedly unextractable pseudoephedrine formulations.
 
You want a non-addictive opiate? Take out the euphoria. Sounds easy, but it's a difficult proposition since their analgesia go hand in hand with euphoria...


I'd much prefer a non-dependence inducing opiate.
 
phrozen said:
Looks like the wheels are finally in motion...


Interesting how they're starting out with the low dose versions first.

I'd imagine this is because there are MUCH higher quantities of the lower-dose OC's Rx'd than there are of the 80's, or even 40's. For every OC80 Rx I see, I see literally 25-30 Rx's for OC10 or OC20.
 
how is this abuse proof? i am almost 100% confident this will be bypassed, most likely with a solvent of some sort that will suspend the gooey crap and dilute the goodness or vice versa.


Fuck the FDA!! Their so damn corrupt & ignorant.
 
id be willing to bet that more people would be hurt/killed from trying to use these "tamper-proof" versions because theyd try to use them without knowing what to do
 
foodisgood said:
id be willing to bet that more people would be hurt/killed from trying to use these "tamper-proof" versions because theyd try to use them without knowing what to do
People will just take larger doses orally. The long onset certainly has potential to cause OD's from frequent redoses. Kinda like what you have with methadone. :\
 
phrozen said:
The vast majority of people who use their opiates as prescribed are not addicted. Dependant, yes, but not addicted.

Most people don't understand the difference.
What makes someone addicted to a drug then? I don't like how the definition of addiction went from one thing to something totally different, it seems pretty retarded to me. Addiction should refer to physical dependency, psychological dependency is the reason why I can't stop masturbating to transexual porn.
 
No, I don't think that's right. You could be dependent physically, but not psychologically addicted. Also, you could be addicted psychologically and not chemically dependent. (You could notice that with addiction to drugs that don't cause dependence.)

As for what my definition of addiction is, it's all psychological. Basically, it's using a drug compulsively regardless of the negative shit it does to you.

But yeah, when you're talking about recreational opiate use, they typically go hand in hand.
 
I know what the definition of addiction is. The original definition of addiction was in reference to the physical dependency of opiates, yet over the years it somehow changed to psychological dependency. I don't even see how you can define addiction as it is now. If you use opiates recreationally on a regular basis are you addicted? If you have no problem stopping are you not addicted? It seems like a relative term more than a scientific term. Am I addicted to food? Am I addicted to sex? Am I addicted to the computer? It seems like everything someone enjoys doing on a regular basis is an addiction. If they don't cause any health consequences does that make it any different? I can huff nitrous and poppers all day long with little health consequences, and my grandpa can eat OCs all day with little health consequences as well.
Basically, it's using a drug compulsively regardless of the negative shit it does to you.
Thats drug use in general, not just addiction. Why would anyone do any drug considering the legal and health risks? Because people want to feel good, and are willing to make sacrifices to achieve it.
 
People are injecting temazepam jellies with bad results.... making injection dangerous won't stop them I'd imagine....
 
halla said:
People are injecting temazepam jellies with bad results.... making injection dangerous won't stop them I'd imagine....

I absolutely agree. Making pills harder to abuse will not stop people from abusing them. It will just lead to more people hurting themselves with all of the extra shit in there while attempting to abuse them. I wonder how many people are going to eventually die from injecting uninjectable pills.
 
Top