Roi Treister1,2, Jeremiah J Trudeau3, Richard Van Inwegen2, Judith K Jones4,5,6, Nathaniel P Katz2,7. 1. Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Analgesic Solutions, Natick, Massachusetts. 3. Boehringer Ingelheim, Ridgefield, Connecticut. 4. The Degge Group, Fairfax, Virginia. 5. Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, District of Columbia. 6. University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 7. Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Inappropriate use of analgesic drugs has become increasingly pervasive over the past decade. Currently, drug abuse potential is primarily assessed post-marketing; no validated tools are available to assess this potential in phase II and III clinical trials. This paper describes the development and feasibility testing of a Misuse, Abuse, and Diversion Drug Event Reporting System (MADDERS), which aims to identify potentially abuse-related events and classify them according to a recently developed classification scheme, allowing the quantification of these events in clinical trials. METHODS: The system was initially conceived and designed with input from experts and patients, followed by field-testing to assess its feasibility and content validity in both completed and ongoing clinical trials. RESULTS: The results suggest that MADDERS is a feasible system with initial validity. It showed higher rates of the triggering events in subjects taking medications with known abuse potential than in patients taking medications without abuse potential. Additionally, experts agreed on the classification of most abuse-related events in MADDERS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: MADDERS is a new systematic approach to collect information on potentially abuse-related events in clinical trials and classify them. The system has demonstrated feasibility for implementation. Additional research is ongoing to further evaluate its validity. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Currently, there are no validated tools to assess drug abuse potential during clinical trials. Because of its ease of implementation, its systematic approach, and its preliminary validation results, MADDERS could provide such a tool for clinical trials. (Am J Addict 2016;25:641-651).
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Inappropriate use of analgesic drugs has become increasingly pervasive over the past decade. Currently, drug abuse potential is primarily assessed post-marketing; no validated tools are available to assess this potential in phase II and III clinical trials. This paper describes the development and feasibility testing of a Misuse, Abuse, and Diversion Drug Event Reporting System (MADDERS), which aims to identify potentially abuse-related events and classify them according to a recently developed classification scheme, allowing the quantification of these events in clinical trials. METHODS: The system was initially conceived and designed with input from experts and patients, followed by field-testing to assess its feasibility and content validity in both completed and ongoing clinical trials. RESULTS: The results suggest that MADDERS is a feasible system with initial validity. It showed higher rates of the triggering events in subjects taking medications with known abuse potential than in patients taking medications without abuse potential. Additionally, experts agreed on the classification of most abuse-related events in MADDERS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:MADDERS is a new systematic approach to collect information on potentially abuse-related events in clinical trials and classify them. The system has demonstrated feasibility for implementation. Additional research is ongoing to further evaluate its validity. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Currently, there are no validated tools to assess drug abuse potential during clinical trials. Because of its ease of implementation, its systematic approach, and its preliminary validation results, MADDERS could provide such a tool for clinical trials. (Am J Addict 2016;25:641-651).
Authors: Shannon M Smith; Judith K Jones; Nathaniel P Katz; Carl L Roland; Beatrice Setnik; Jeremiah J Trudeau; Stephen Wright; Laurie B Burke; Sandra D Comer; Richard C Dart; Raymond Dionne; J David Haddox; Jerome H Jaffe; Ernest A Kopecky; Bridget A Martell; Ivan D Montoya; Marsha Stanton; Ajay D Wasan; Dennis C Turk; Robert H Dworkin Journal: J Pain Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: John Markman; Jeffrey Gudin; Richard Rauck; Charles Argoff; Michael Rowbotham; Eva Agaiby; Joseph Gimbel; Nathaniel Katz; Stephen K Doberstein; Mary Tagliaferri; Lin Lu; Suresh Siddhanti; Martin Hale Journal: Pain Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 7.926
Authors: Nathaniel Katz; Robert H Dworkin; Richard North; Simon Thomson; Sam Eldabe; Salim M Hayek; Brian H Kopell; John Markman; Ali Rezai; Rod S Taylor; Dennis C Turk; Eric Buchser; Howard Fields; Gregory Fiore; McKenzie Ferguson; Jennifer Gewandter; Chris Hilker; Roshini Jain; Angela Leitner; John Loeser; Ewan McNicol; Turo Nurmikko; Jane Shipley; Rahul Singh; Andrea Trescot; Robert van Dongen; Lalit Venkatesan Journal: Pain Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Jeffrey Gudin; Richard Rauck; Charles Argoff; Eva Agaiby; Joseph Gimbel; Nathaniel Katz; Stephen K Doberstein; Mary Tagliaferri; Margit Tagliaferri; Jeffrey Potts; James Wild; Lin Lu; Suresh Siddhanti; Martin Hale; John Markman Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-11-07 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Jack E Henningfield; Jeffrey Gudin; Richard Rauck; Joseph Gimbel; Mary Tagliaferri; Stephen K Doberstein; Carlo Di Fonzo; Lin Lu; Nathaniel Katz; Suresh Siddhanti; Sidney Schnoll Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 3.750