Vincent Wartenweiler1, Grace Chung, Amy Stewart2, Cody Wenthur3. 1. School of Pharmacy, University of WI - Madison, 777 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA. 2. Department of Pharmacy, UW-Health, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, USA. 3. School of Pharmacy, University of WI - Madison, 777 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA. wenthur@wisc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As opioid use disorder (OUD) incidence and its associated deaths continue to persist at elevated rates, the development of novel treatment modalities is warranted. Recent strides in this therapeutic area include novel anti-opioid vaccine approaches. This work compares logistical and ethical considerations surrounding currently available interventions for opioid use disorder with an anti-opioid vaccine approach. METHODS: The opinions of student pharmacists and practicing pharmacists assessing knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes toward current and future OUD management strategies were characterized using a staged, multi-modal research approach incorporating a focus group, pilot survey development and refinement, and final survey deployment. Survey responses were assessed using one- and two-way parametric and non-parametric analyses where appropriate, and multi-dimensional matrix profiles were compared using z-tests following an exhaustive combinatorial sum of differences calculation between items within each compared matrix. RESULTS: Focus group content analysis revealed a high level of agreeableness among participants regarding anti-opioid vaccine technology and a sense of shared ownership regarding solutions to the opioid epidemic at large. Pilot survey results demonstrated subject ability to consider both pragmatic and ethical considerations related to current therapeutics and novel interventions in a single instrument, with high endurance amongst engaged subjects. Access inequality was the most concerning ethical consideration identified for anti-opioid vaccines. Support for anti-opioid vaccine implementation across various clinical scenarios was strongest for voluntary use amongst individuals in recovery, and lowest for mandatory use in at-risk individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Ethical and logistical concerns surrounding anti-opioid vaccines were largely similar to those for current OUD therapeutics overall. Anti-opioid vaccines were endorsed as helpful potential additions to current OUD therapeutic approaches, particularly for voluntary use in the later stages of clinical progression.
BACKGROUND: As opioid use disorder (OUD) incidence and its associated deaths continue to persist at elevated rates, the development of novel treatment modalities is warranted. Recent strides in this therapeutic area include novel anti-opioid vaccine approaches. This work compares logistical and ethical considerations surrounding currently available interventions for opioid use disorder with an anti-opioid vaccine approach. METHODS: The opinions of student pharmacists and practicing pharmacists assessing knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes toward current and future OUD management strategies were characterized using a staged, multi-modal research approach incorporating a focus group, pilot survey development and refinement, and final survey deployment. Survey responses were assessed using one- and two-way parametric and non-parametric analyses where appropriate, and multi-dimensional matrix profiles were compared using z-tests following an exhaustive combinatorial sum of differences calculation between items within each compared matrix. RESULTS: Focus group content analysis revealed a high level of agreeableness among participants regarding anti-opioid vaccine technology and a sense of shared ownership regarding solutions to the opioid epidemic at large. Pilot survey results demonstrated subject ability to consider both pragmatic and ethical considerations related to current therapeutics and novel interventions in a single instrument, with high endurance amongst engaged subjects. Access inequality was the most concerning ethical consideration identified for anti-opioid vaccines. Support for anti-opioid vaccine implementation across various clinical scenarios was strongest for voluntary use amongst individuals in recovery, and lowest for mandatory use in at-risk individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Ethical and logistical concerns surrounding anti-opioid vaccines were largely similar to those for current OUD therapeutics overall. Anti-opioid vaccines were endorsed as helpful potential additions to current OUD therapeutic approaches, particularly for voluntary use in the later stages of clinical progression.
Entities:
Keywords:
Drug development; Ethics; Logistics; Opioid; Stakeholder; Vaccine
Authors: Sabina H L de Villiers; Katherine E Cornish; Andrew J Troska; Marco Pravetoni; Paul R Pentel Journal: Vaccine Date: 2013-10-29 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Brian Godman; Anna Bucsics; Patricia Vella Bonanno; Wija Oortwijn; Celia C Rothe; Alessandra Ferrario; Simone Bosselli; Andrew Hill; Antony P Martin; Steven Simoens; Amanj Kurdi; Mohamed Gad; Jolanta Gulbinovič; Angela Timoney; Tomasz Bochenek; Ahmed Salem; Iris Hoxha; Robert Sauermann; Amos Massele; Augusto Alfonso Guerra; Guenka Petrova; Zornitsa Mitkova; Gnosia Achniotou; Ott Laius; Catherine Sermet; Gisbert Selke; Vasileios Kourafalos; John Yfantopoulos; Einar Magnusson; Roberta Joppi; Margaret Oluka; Hye-Young Kwon; Arianit Jakupi; Francis Kalemeera; Joseph O Fadare; Oyvind Melien; Maciej Pomorski; Magdalene Wladysiuk; Vanda Marković-Peković; Ileana Mardare; Dmitry Meshkov; Tanja Novakovic; Jurij Fürst; Dominik Tomek; Corrine Zara; Eduardo Diogene; Johanna C Meyer; Rickard Malmström; Björn Wettermark; Zinhle Matsebula; Stephen Campbell; Alan Haycox Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2018-12-05
Authors: Elissa R Weitzman; Joe Kossowsky; Laura M Blakemore; Rachele Cox; David J Dowling; Ofer Levy; Emma W Needles; Sharon Levy Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 20.999