Safety and efficacy of an oxycodone vaccine: Addressing some of the unique considerations posed by opioid abuse

Among vaccines aimed at treating substance use disorders, those targeting opioids present several unique medication development challenges. 1) Opioid overdose is a common complication of abuse, so it is desirable for an opioid vaccine to block the toxic as well as the addictive effects of opioids. 2) It is important that an opioid vaccine not interfere with the action of opioid antagonists used to reverse opioid overdose or treat addiction. 3) Some opioids are immunosuppressive and chronic ongoing opioid use could interfere with vaccine immunogenicity. 4) Although antibody-bound oxycodone is unable to enter the brain because of its size, it might still be able to activate peripheral opioid receptors. To assess vaccine impact on opioid toxicity, rats vaccinated with oxycodone conjugated to keyhole limpet hemocyanin subunit dimer (OXY-dKLH) adsorbed to alum or controls vaccinated with dKLH were compared with regard to oxycodone-induced hotplate analgesia and oxycodone-induced respiratory depression and bradycardia. Vaccination shifted the dose-response curves to the right, representing protection, for each of these endpoints. Naloxone was equally effective in both OXY-dKLH and control groups, providing complete and rapid reversal of respiratory depression. The administration of a long-acting naltrexone formulation during vaccination did not impair vaccine immunogenicity in mice. Similarly, serum anti-oxycodone antibody titers were not altered by continuous morphine infusion during vaccination compared to opioid-naïve controls. Competitive ELISA assay showed negligible or low affinity of immune antiserum for endogenous opioids or opioid antagonists. In vitro receptor binding assays showed that antibody-bound oxycodone does not activate mu opioid receptors. These data support further study of OXY-dKLH as a potential treatment for oxycodone abuse and suggest that vaccination might also reduce the severity of oxycodone overdose

A Vaccine against Nicotine for Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Tobacco dependence is the leading cause of preventable death and disabilities worldwide and nicotine is the main substance responsible for the addiction to tobacco. A vaccine against nicotine was tested in a 6-month randomized, double blind phase II smoking cessation study in 341 smokers with a subsequent 6-month follow-up period. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 229 subjects were randomized to receive five intramuscular injections of the nicotine vaccine and 112 to receive placebo at monthly intervals. All subjects received individual behavioral smoking cessation counseling. The vaccine was safe, generally well tolerated and highly immunogenic, inducing a 100% antibody responder rate after the first injection. Point prevalence of abstinence at month 2 showed a statistically significant difference between subjects treated with Nicotine-Qbeta (47.2%) and placebo (35.1%) (P = 0.036), but continuous abstinence between months 2 and 6 was not significantly different. However, in subgroup analysis of the per-protocol population, the third of subjects with highest antibody levels showed higher continuous abstinence from month 2 until month 6 (56.6%) than placebo treated participants (31.3%) (OR 2.9; P = 0.004) while medium and low antibody levels did not increase abstinence rates. After 12 month, the difference in continuous abstinence rate between subjects on placebo and those with high antibody response was maintained (difference 20.2%, P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Whereas Nicotine-Qbeta did not significantly increase continuous abstinence rates in the intention-to-treat population, subgroup analyses of the per-protocol population suggest that such a vaccination against nicotine can significantly increase continuous abstinence rates in smokers when sufficiently high antibody levels are achieved. Immunotherapy might open a new avenue to the treatment of nicotine addiction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Swiss Medical Registry 2003DR2327; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00369616

Preferences and practices among renters regarding smoking restrictions in apartment buildings

Objective: This study assessed renters' preferences for official smoking policies in their buildings and their practices concerning restricting tobacco smoking in their apartments. Design: Renters (n = 301) living in large apartment complexes in a suburb of Minneapolis, Minnesota, completed a mail survey. Main outcome measures: The survey asked about the official smoking policies in place in their apartment buildings, their preferences for policies, whether they had smelled tobacco smoke coming into their apartments from without, and, if so, what they had done about it. Results: The majority of non-smokers (79%) preferred that their building be smoke-free. When asked to identify the current smoking policy in their buildings, residents disagreed substantially. Most renters (60%) reported smoke-free policies in their own apartments and another significant proportion (23%) restricted smoking to certain areas or occasions or persons. 75% thought that enforcing a smoke-free policy for guests would not be difficult. 53% of those in non-smoking households had smelled tobacco smoke in their apartments; most of these reported being bothered by it. However, very few complained to the building owner or manager (15.5%) or to the smoker (6.9%). Conclusions: The majority of non-smokers preferred that their buildings be smoke-free. A failure to report problems to apartment managers might be an impediment to instituting smoke-free policies in apartment buildings. The considerable disagreement among residents within apartment complexes about the current official smoking policy in their buildings suggests that policies are lacking or are not well communicated