Hard to Assess Opioid Deterrence: FDA
A team of FDA researchers says that it can be difficult to interpret post-marketing surveillance studies on the effectiveness of opioid abuse deterrent properties because the underlying sampling mechanisms can bias the results in unpredictable ways. Writing online in Pharmacoepidemial Drug Safety, the researchers say that using comparators has the potential to disentangle the effect due to the abuse-deterrence properties from those due to other interventions. However, they say, identifying a meaningful comparator can be very difficult.
The article addresses two important issues stemming from use of surveillance data — the ability to make statements about association in the community using data from a sample (estimability), and the ability to make statements about the cause of an observed association (causality).
According to the researchers, pre-market evaluations may suggest an expectation of reduced abuse, but they don’t ensure that there will be reduced abuse in the population, either overall or via specific routes. Thus, the purpose of post-marketing studies is to assess whether an abuse-deterrent formulation has caused a meaningful reduction in abuse of the product in the population.
“Ideally, if we have a well-defined population and if we could count all abuse events in that population, we could make statements about association between abuse deterrent formulations and abuse deterrence over time,” the article says. “Obtaining population-level data with information about which particular opioids were abused is challenging. An alternative is to select a probability sample from a well-defined population that can then be used as a basis for making statements about association in that population using weights and other design information that reflect the sampling scheme.”