Jones Jermaine D, Madera Gabriela, Comer Sandra D
Division on Substance Abuse, New York Psychiatric Institute and Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University, 1051 Riverside Drive, Unit 120, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Division on Substance Abuse, New York Psychiatric Institute and Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University, 1051 Riverside Drive, Unit 120, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2014 Jul;122:299-306. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2014.04.012. Epub 2014 May 2.
Abuse of buprenorphine (BUP) by the intravenous (IV) route has been documented in several studies, and reports of intranasal (IN) abuse are increasing. However, no studies have directly compared the effects of BUP when it is administered intranasally and intravenously. The present secondary analysis used data from two separate studies to compare the reinforcing and subjective effects of IV and IN buprenorphine. One study evaluated IV buprenorphine (N=13) and the other evaluated IN buprenorphine (N=12). Participants were maintained on 2 mg sublingual (SL) BUP and tested with each intranasal or intravenous buprenorphine test dose (0 mg, 2 mg, 4 mg, 8 mg, and 16 mg). During morning laboratory sessions, participants received money (US $20) and sample doses of IN or IV BUP, and then completed subjective effects questionnaires. Later that day, they completed a self-administration task to receive 10% portions of the drug and/or money they previously sampled. In general, positive subjective ratings for both IV and IN BUP were significantly greater than placebo, with IV BUP having a greater effect than IN BUP. All active BUP doses (IV and IN) maintained significantly higher progressive ratio breakpoint values than placebo, but breakpoint values for IV BUP were greater than for IN BUP. Buprenorphine is an effective maintenance treatment for opioid dependence, valued for its ability to reduce the positive subjective effects of other opioids. Nevertheless, the present data demonstrate that in participants maintained on a low dose of SL BUP, the medication itself has abuse liability when used intravenously or intranasally.
多项研究记录了静脉注射(IV)滥用丁丙诺啡(BUP)的情况,鼻内(IN)滥用的报告也在增加。然而,尚无研究直接比较鼻内和静脉注射丁丙诺啡的效果。本二次分析使用来自两项独立研究的数据,比较静脉注射和鼻内丁丙诺啡的强化和主观效果。一项研究评估静脉注射丁丙诺啡(N = 13),另一项研究评估鼻内丁丙诺啡(N = 12)。参与者维持服用2毫克舌下(SL)丁丙诺啡,并分别用每种鼻内或静脉注射丁丙诺啡测试剂量(0毫克、2毫克、4毫克、8毫克和16毫克)进行测试。在上午的实验室环节中,参与者获得金钱(20美元)和鼻内或静脉注射丁丙诺啡的样本剂量,然后完成主观效果问卷。当天晚些时候,他们完成一项自我给药任务,以获得他们之前采样的10%剂量的药物和/或金钱。总体而言,静脉注射和鼻内丁丙诺啡的积极主观评分均显著高于安慰剂,静脉注射丁丙诺啡的效果大于鼻内丁丙诺啡。所有活性丁丙诺啡剂量(静脉注射和鼻内)维持的渐进比率断点值均显著高于安慰剂,但静脉注射丁丙诺啡的断点值大于鼻内丁丙诺啡。丁丙诺啡是一种有效的阿片类药物依赖维持治疗药物,因其能够降低其他阿片类药物的积极主观效果而受到重视。尽管如此,目前的数据表明,在维持服用低剂量舌下丁丙诺啡的参与者中,该药物本身在静脉注射或鼻内使用时具有滥用可能性。