Restricting Opioid Doses Won’t Help the Overdose Crisis

By Roger Chriss, Columnist

As the overdose crisis worsens, new strategies and policies are being considered, including a recent petition to remove so-called high-dose opioids from the market.

The petition asks the FDA to ban opioid pills that, when taken as directed, would add up to a daily dose equivalent to more than 90mg of morphine. It is signed by leaders of several anti-opioid activist groups, including Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP).

"The existence of these products implies that they're safe. They're not,” says Andrew Kolodny, MD, Executive Director and founder of PROP. "These are not medicines. These are lethal weapons that should be removed from the market.”

Before we start removing access to pain medication, it’s incumbent upon us to analyze the question of prescription opioid doses and what role, if any, they have in the overdose crisis.

First, higher doses of opioids are more dangerous. That is obvious, since most substances become dangerous at a sufficiently high dose, or as the Swiss physician Paracelsus supposedly said, “The dose makes the poison.” It is reasonable to conclude that higher doses of an opioid would be riskier.

But there is no inherent implication about safety in the existence of any substance. There is nothing "safe" about chemotherapy drugs, anti-seizure medication or anti-anxiety drugs, just as there is nothing safe about tobacco or alcohol.

Moreover, the opposite of safe is not necessarily dangerous, since something that is "dangerous" can still be clinically beneficial. Open heart surgery is dangerous, but beneficial to someone dying from heart disease.

Conspicuously absent from the signatories of the PROP petition are any physician groups or doctors involved in pain management. Asked to comment on the petition, the President of the Society of Palliative Care Pharmacists told Pharmacy Times that while she agreed that opioid abuse is an urgent concern, she dose not believe that removing high-dose opioids from the market would be the best way to combat the overdose crisis.

“Let’s put our efforts together in an interdisciplinary approach and train providers to accurately assess their patients rather than pulling certain drugs from the market, because there may be cancer patients or others who are truly benefiting from these high-dose opioids,” said Rabia Atayee, PharmD.

The petition argues that people who currently take high-dose opioid medication can simply take two or more lower-dose pills. This would supposedly reduce the risk of overdose when high-dose pills are stolen or diverted.

“Removing UHDU (ultra-high dosage unit) orally-administered opioids from the market will result in patients having to swallow more tablets or capsules. But this is unlikely to result in a significant inconvenience or hardship for patients,” the petition states.

In other words, there would be a trade off. The risk of an overdose would be lower for a person who gets an opioid analgesic from a friend to deal with severe pain. But a person with a disorder like achalasia that impairs swallowing or a GI disorder that impairs absorption may be harmed by having to take more pills.

Unintended Consequences

The strength of the arguments is only one factor here. The unintended consequences of this petition should also be considered. One obvious effect would be an increase in the total number of pills, which would exacerbate concerns about over-prescribing. There would be more pills to steal or divert, and more potential problems in securing the opioid supply chain from manufacturer to pharmacy, a major source of diverted pills that often goes unremarked and unpunished.

Another likely effect is increased activity on the black market. In 2010, when Purdue Pharma brought out its abuse deterring form of OxyContin, some abusers started switching to illegal drugs, including heroin. An uncomfortable outcome of this well-intentioned change is that a public health policy meant to prevent abuse and addiction may have made the overdose crisis worse.

A similar outcome could result from this petition: Drug abusers who are intent on having a high-dose opioid pill may shift to street drugs.

Another possible outcome is that opioid doses keep getting smaller and smaller. If a daily dose of pills containing 90mg of a morphine equivalent (MME) is considered “dangerous,” then what about 80 MME? Or 70 MME? If the changes recommended in this petition do not work, will we try more restrictions in doses and prescribing? Clear measures of the success or failure of the proposal should be defined in a petition like this one, but they are not.

We already have vast quantities of data about the opioid crisis. According to the CDC, opioid prescribing peaked in 2010 and has been in decline ever since, yet overdose rates keep rising. 

The average daily dose of opioids started falling even earlier, in 2006. By 2015, it had declined to nearly 48 MME -- well below the dose sought in the petition.

AVERAGE DAILY PER CAPITA MORPHINE EQUIVALENT DOSE (MME)

Source: CDC/QuintilesIMS

In other words, reducing the amount and dose of prescription opioids is inversely correlated with the number of overdoses. Of course, correlation is not causation, but the negative correlation does not bode well for the effects of this petition. Based on this data, the best we can reasonably hope for is small benefits on the margins of the overdose crisis, at the expense of people who benefit from high-dose prescription opioids.

And this petition will do nothing to improve treatment for people suffering from opioid use disorder or to reduce the risks of people overdosing on heroin or illicit fentanyl. These are key features of the opioid crisis, and a policy that claims to beat addiction without addressing them should be greeted with skepticism.

Instead of new restrictions, perhaps the CDC and state guidelines can be updated to include recommendations that physicians and pharmacists discuss with patients the safe storage and disposal of opioid medications.

Before we ban a medication for having too much of a chemically active ingredient for people who abuse it, we should do whatever we can to ensure that the people who benefit from it are not harmed.

To make a comment on the PROP petition to the FDA, click here.

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society.

Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Petition Calls on FDA to Ban High Dose Opioids

By Pat Anson, Editor

A group of anti-opioid activists has filed a citizen petition with the Food and Drug Administration, asking the agency to remove most high dose opioid pain medications from the market.

The petition would apply to all opioid pills that exceed a daily dose of 90mg morphine equivalent units (MMEs), which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention set last year as the highest recommended dose for primary care physicians and their patients.  

Such a ceiling, if adopted by the FDA, would take all OxyContin 80mg tablets off the market, as well as many other high-dose oral painkillers. A single OxyContin 80mg tablet, according to the petition, is equivalent to 160 MME.

Another example cited in the petition would be immediate release oxycodone 30mg tablets. If four such pills are taken daily, as they are often prescribed, that adds up to 180 MME.

The petition claims high dose opioid pills raise the risk of overdose and addiction, and are especially harmful to children.

“These products are just too dangerous, there's no need for them," said Pete Jackson, who lost his teenage daughter to an OxyContin overdose.

"These are not medicines. These are lethal weapons that should be removed from the market," said Andrew Kolodny, MD, an addiction treatment specialist and Executive Director of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), one of five anti-opioid activists who signed the petition. None are considered experts in pain management.

“Removing UHDU (ultra-high dosage unit) orally-administered opioids from the market will result in patients having to swallow more tablets or capsules. But this is unlikely to result in a significant inconvenience or hardship for patients,” the petition states. “For patients that may have difficulty swallowing it is important to note that opioid analgesics are available in liquid preparations, sublingual preparations, patches and suppositories.”

Opioids ‘Can Be Appropriate’

In a rare acknowledgement that opioids "can be appropriate" for some pain patients, Kolodny and the other petitioners wrote that "the benefits of prescribing high doses may outweigh the risks when treating severe pain from a life-limiting illness."

But then they make the dubious claim that flooding the market with lower-dose pills will somehow be safer. Reducing the potency of painkillers would mean patients need more to get pain relief – resulting in more pills being prescribed, stored in medicine cabinets, and possibly stolen or diverted – hardly a prescription for reducing abuse.

Having to take more pills could also be risky to patients.  

"With a very large number of pills to manage, they are going to be at more risk of taking the wrong number of pills and of having some of those pills swiped by others without them noticing," Stefan Kertesz, MD, an Alabama primary care physician, told the Associated Press.

“Given the significance of the nation’s opioid crisis, this petition and issue should be discussed by the scientific experts at FDA and we look forward to participating in such a discussion,” Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, said in a statement. “It is critical that we seek the appropriate balance of treating pain severe enough that requires opioid treatment for which alternative treatments are inadequate, with efforts combating the opioid crisis.”

The FDA had no immediate comment on the petition.  Any U.S. citizen can file a petition with the agency to seek the removal of a drug or medical device for safety issues.

In June, the FDA asked Endo Pharmaceuticals to take Opana ER off the market because it was being abused, the first time that sales of an opioid painkiller have been halted. FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, has hinted the agency could take other painkillers off the market.

“We will continue to take regulatory steps when we see situations where an opioid product’s risks outweigh its benefits, not only for its intended patient population but also in regard to its potential for misuse and abuse,” Gottlieb said in June.

To make a comment on the PROP petition to the FDA, click here.

Kratom Petition Reaches Goal, But Now What?

By Pat Anson, Editor

Supporters of a citizens' petition that calls on the Obama administration to reverse a decision that will make the sale and possession of kratom illegal have reached their goal of 100,000 signatures.

But the move is largely symbolic and will probably not prevent the Drug Enforcement Administration from classifying kratom as a Schedule I controlled substance at the end of the month.

The DEA filed notice in the federal register last week for an emergency scheduling of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, the two main active ingredients in kratom, which comes from the leaves of a tree that grows in southeast Asia.

Kratom is used in teas and supplements as a natural treatment for pain, depression, anxiety and other medical conditions. The DEA claims kratom is also used recreationally for its "psychoactive effects" and has even been used as a substitute for heroin. Kratom supporters say its no stronger than a cup of coffee.

Under its "We the People" petition rules, the Obama Administration promises to "take action" on an issue whenever supporters are able to gather at least 100,000 signatures online within 30 days.

"We will do our best to respond to petitions that cross the signature threshold within 60 days, however, depending on the topic and the overall volume of petitions from We the People, responses may be delayed," the White House says in a statement on its website.

According to the website whpetitions.info, the average response time for a successful petition is 118 days. Six petitions -- including the kratom petition -- are currently waiting for a response.

Barring a last minute legal challenge, the DEA scheduling of kratom as a controlled substance, alongside heroin, LSD and marijuana, will begin September 30.

"This may go into effect before we get a response from the White House," says Susan Ash, founder of the American Kratom Association, a volunteer organization of kratom users. "That's one of the reasons why we are doing our rally September 13th in front of the White House, so that we can bring this issue to their attention prior to them being required to give us a response."

The Obama administration began hosting "We the People" petitions on the White House website in 2011. Although the petitions have been criticized as a public relations gimmick, some have resulted in federal action, such as legislation allowing consumers to use their mobile devices on any network they choose.

At other times, however, the White House response to a petition has been a statement that only reaffirms current policy. That was the case in 2011, when petitioners asked the administration to legalize marijuana.

"Like many, we are interested in the potential marijuana may have in providing relief to individuals diagnosed with certain serious illnesses," wrote Gil Kerlikowske, Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, in the official White House response to the petition.

"That is why we ardently support ongoing research into determining what components of the marijuana plant can be used as medicine. To date, however, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine have found smoked marijuana to meet the modern standard for safe or effective medicine for any condition."

The DEA is taking a similar stance on kratom, saying it has no medically accepted use.