Do Formulation Differences Alter Abuse Liability of Methylphenidate?

Abstract

The primary objective of this study was to determine if the abuse liability of methylphenidate is governed by formulation differences that affect rates of drug delivery. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover study, subjects with a history of recreational drug use received single oral doses of placebo, 60 mg of immediate-release methylphenidate (IR) and 108 mg of extended-release methylphenidate (osmotic release oral system [OROS]). Over 24 hours after dosing, blood was collected to determine plasma concentrations of methylphenidate, and subjects completed subjective assessments of abuse liability (Addiction Research Center Inventory, Drug Rating Questionnaire-Subject, and Subjective Drug Value). The abuse-related subjective effects of IR and OROS methylphenidate were statistically significantly different from placebo, confirming the overall validity of the study. Although a higher dose of OROS methylphenidate was used compared with IR methylphenidate (108 mg vs 60 mg), subjective effects were consistently lower for OROS compared with IR methylphenidate (statistically significant for 3 of 6 measures of positive effects), particularly at early time points. In general, pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic parameters were correlated from a poor to modest degree, with greater correlations observed for IR methylphenidate. In addition, a post hoc "qualification" method was developed, which demonstrated that pharmacological qualification might improve the assessment of subjective effects. Although requiring epidemiological confirmation, the results suggest that OROS methylphenidate, with its characteristic slow ascending plasma concentration profile, may have lower abuse potential. This conclusion is reflected by lower subjective responses during early hours as compared with the IR formulation with its rapid drug delivery and accompanying greater subjective effects.

Agonist Replacement for Stimulant Dependence: A Review of Clinical Research

“…However, until a more acceptable and effective medication is available, there are few options available to clinicians to manage stimulant dependence. Extended-release formulations of agonist replacements (e.g., Concerta® or Dexedrine Spansule®) are available and should be considered until effective alternatives are identified, particularly because extended-release preparations are less likely to be misused [153, 154, 155]. …”

Ethanol Interactions With Dexmethylphenidate and dl-Methylphenidate Spheroidal Oral Drug Absorption Systems in Healthy Volunteers

“…22,39 Increasing the rate of d-MPH absorption, 32,33,58,59 and consequently the rate of delivery to the central nervous system, 19,60,61 strongly influences the stimulatory effects underlying the reward value of MPH-ethanol co-abuse. 1–10 Accordingly, the PK and psychopharmacological findings reported here provide guidance for rational drug selection and individualization when treating ADHD with or without comorbid AUD.…”

“…21,32,33 However, the 50% IR-MPH component in the SODAS formulations represents the highest IR percent of any of the several existing MR-MPH products 34 and consequently results in a PK profile closely resembling the distinct dual plasma d-MPH concentration peaks of a typical twice daily IR-MPH regimen. 35,36 …”

Methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and drug relapse in criminal offenders with substance dependence: a 24‐week randomized placebo‐controlled trial

“…Another important factor is the formulation of the medication. The reinforcing effects of stimulants are associated with rapid changes in serum concentration 39, and extended-release preparations of MPH are associated with less stimulant-like drug effects in healthy subjects 40. Of relevance to this specific psychiatric population is the fact that the OROS MPH is more difficult to use via a non-oral route (e.g.…”