Pharmacopsychiatry 2020; 53(03): 115-121
DOI: 10.1055/a-1083-6842
Original Paper
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Buprenorphine/Naloxone Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: Clinical Feasibility and Optimizing Assay Precision

Hesham Farouk Elarabi
1   National Rehabilitation Center, UAE, Shakhbout City, United Arab Emirates
2   King’s College London, Addictions, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
,
Nael Hasan
1   National Rehabilitation Center, UAE, Shakhbout City, United Arab Emirates
,
John Marsden
2   King’s College London, Addictions, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
,
Doaa Radwan
1   National Rehabilitation Center, UAE, Shakhbout City, United Arab Emirates
3   Faculty of Medicine, Institue of Psychiatry, Ain Shams University Cairo, Egypt
,
Abdu Adem
4   Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, UAE University College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
,
Samya Almamari
1   National Rehabilitation Center, UAE, Shakhbout City, United Arab Emirates
,
Abuelgasim Elrasheed
1   National Rehabilitation Center, UAE, Shakhbout City, United Arab Emirates
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 27 May 2019
revised 24 November 2019

accepted 06 December 2019

Publication Date:
30 January 2020 (online)

Abstract

Introduction Compliance with sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (SL-BUP/NX) is associated with higher abstinence from illicit opioid use. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has been recommended for adherence monitoring of buprenorphine (BUP) maintenance treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), but to date there have been no reported clinical applications. In this TDM feasibility study, we investigated BUP assay precision in 15 adults with OUD who had been stabilized on buprenorphine/naloxone.

Methods Using solid phase extraction, BUP recovery was contrasted at 100 mMol and 1 Molar of acetic acid wash solution. Precision was determined by applying the condition generating highest recovery using 0.2 ng/mL and 10 ng/mL standards. Four blood samples were drawn to examine the BUP peak and trough plasma concentrations, and BUP elimination rate was estimated. BUP recovery was examined again in a random sample and contrasted with the concentration predicted applying first-order kinetics.

Results Higher BUP recovery was achieved with 1 Molar wash (94.3%; p=0.05). Precision ranged from 15–20%. The estimated limit of detection (LoD) and limit of quantitation (LoQ) were 0.02 and 0.069 ng/mL, respectively. BUP peak and trough concentrations were successfully examined, and BUP trough concentrations were replicated confirming steady state. BUP concentrations were predicted at a variance of −7.20% to 1.54 %.

Conclusions TDM for BUP maintenance treatment of OUD is feasible, and simple adjustment of the assay conditions enhances BUP recovery.

Supporting Information

 
  • References

  • 1 American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic Statistical Manual 5 (DSM-5) Handbook of Differential Diagnosis. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association; 2013
  • 2 Degenhardt L, Whiteford HA, Ferrari AI. et al. Global burden of disease attributable to illicit drug use and dependence: finding from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2010; 382: 1564-1574
  • 3 Baumberg B. The global economic burden of alcohol: a review and some suggestions. Drug Alcohol Rev 2006; 25: 537-551
  • 4 World Health Organization Guidelines for the Psychosocially Assisted Pharmacological Treatment of Opioid Dependence. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009
  • 5 Blum K, Han D, Edward J. et al. A systematic, intensive statistical investigation of data from the comprehensive analysis of reported drugs (card) for compliance and illicit opioid abstinence in substance addiction treatment with buprenorphine/naloxone. Subst Use Mmisuse 2018; 53: 220-229
  • 6 Tkacz J, Severt J, Cacciola J. et al. Compliance with buprenorphine medication-assisted treatment and relapse to opioid use. Am J Addict 2012; 21: 55-62
  • 7 Nosyk B. A call for evidence-based medical treatment of opioid dependence in the United States and Canada. Health Affairs 2013; 32: 1462-1469
  • 8 Gerra G, Saenz E, Busse A. et al. Supervised daily consumption, contingent take-home abuse and diversion of buprenorphine sublingual tablets and film. JSAT 2014; 47: 27-34
  • 9 Hiemke C, Bergemann N, Clement HW. et al. AGNP consensus guidelines for therapeutic drug monitoring in psychiatry: Update 2017. Pharmacopsychiatry 2017; 51: 9-62
  • 10 Laib AK. Therapeutic drug monitoring in substitution therapy. Pharmacopsychiatry 2016; 26–O19
  • 11 Brunen S, Vincent P, Baumann P. et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring for drugs used in treatment of substance-related disorders: Literature review using a therapeutic drug monitoring appropriateness rating scale. Ther Drug Monit 2011; 33: 561-572
  • 12 Sargent M. Guide to achieving reliable quantitative LC-MS measurements. RSC Analytical Methods Committee. 2013; ISBN 978-0- 948926-27-3
  • 13 Moody D, Laycock J, Spanbauer A. et al. Determination of buprenorphine in human plasma by gas chromatography positive ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. J Anal Toxicol 1997; 21: 406-414
  • 14 Elarabi H, Alrasheed A, Ali A. et al. Suboxone Treatment and Recovery Trial (STAR-T): Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of opioid medication assisted treatment with adjunctive medication management using therapeutic drug monitoring and contingency management. J Addict. 2019; Available at: DOI: 10.1155/2019/2491063.
  • 15 https://www.unitedchem.com . United Chemical Technologies. Buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine in blood, plasma/serum, urine, tissue by lc-ms/ms or gc-ms clean screen solid phase extraction column 206. Available at https://sampleprep.unitedchem.com/media/at_assets/tech_doc_info/BUPRENORPHINE_AND_NORBUPRENORPHINE_IN_BLOOD.pdf&#x00022 https://sampleprep.unitedchem.com/media/at_assets/tech_doc_info/BUPRENORPHINE_AND_NORBUPRENORPHINE_IN_BLOOD.pdf&#x00022 Accessed April 2019
  • 16 Center for Veterinary Medicine, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration Bioanalytical Method Validation Guidance for Industry. New Hampshire: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2008. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/files/drugs/published/Bioanalytical-Method-Validation-Guidance-for- Industry.pdf Accessed September 2019
  • 17 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) Bioanlytical method validation. European Medicine Agency. 2011; Available at https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-methodvalidation_ en.pdf Accessed September 2019
  • 18 Compton P, Ling W, Chiang CN. et al. Pharmacokinetics of buprenorphine: A comparison of sublingual tablet versus liquid after chronic dosing. J Addict Med 2007; 1: 88-95
  • 19 Lüthi G, Blangy V, Eap CB. et al. Buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine quantification in human plasma by simple protein precipitation and ultra-high performance chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. J Pharmaceut Biomed 2013; 77: 1-8
  • 20 Regina KJ, Kharasch ED. High-sensitivity analysis of buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine glucuronide, and norbuprenorphine glucuronide in plasma and urine by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr B 2013; 939: 23-31
  • 21 Elkader A, Sproule B. Buprenorphine: Clinical pharmacokinetics in the treatment of opioid dependence. Clin Pharmacokinet 2005; 44: 661-680
  • 22 Huang W, Moody D, McCance-Katzw EF. The in vivo gluco-uronidation of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine determined by liquid chromatograph electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry. Ther Drug Monit 2006; 28: 245-251
  • 23 Wang P, Stone JA, Chen KH. et al. Incomplete recovery of prescription opioids in urine using enzymatic hydrolysis of glucuronide metabolites. J Anal Toxicol 2006; 30: 570-575