Henningfield Jack E, Ashworth Judy, Heal David J, Smith Sharon L
PinneyAssociates, Inc, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
J Psychopharmacol. 2023 Jan;37(1):33-44. doi: 10.1177/02698811221140004. Epub 2023 Jan 1.
Psychedelics are an increasingly active area of research and pharmaceutical development. This includes abuse potential assessment to better understand their pharmacological mechanisms and effects and guide controlled substance regulation. Psychedelics pose challenges to abuse assessments to ensure valid, reliable, and generalizable outcomes and safe study conduct.
Key nonclinical techniques, for example, receptor binding and functional assays in vitro, and nonclinical physical dependence determinations, are easily adaptable to psychedelics. However, the entactogens (weak reinforcers) and hallucinogens (non-reinforcers) require more flexible approaches than typically recommended by regulatory agencies. Phase 1 pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic safety studies and Phases 2/3 efficacy/safety trials with systematic monitoring of abuse-related adverse events are readily applicable to psychedelics. Human abuse trials require modification because supratherapeutic doses may not be safe and procedures, for example, personal monitors to manage serious adverse events, might bias outcomes.
Abuse-related studies for psychedelics requiring approval by Food and Drug Administration and other agencies should take into consideration existing knowledge that will vary from extensive, for example, psilocybin, to zero for novel hallucinogens and entactogens. Many abuse assessments can be reasonably applied to animals and humans without compromising scientific integrity. Modification of existing techniques and incorporating a broader range of nonclinical tests should ensure generalizable outcomes. Human abuse studies merit reconsideration and possible modification to ensure safety and validity for psychedelic drug evaluation. Other nonclinical and clinical methods can provide evaluations of the pharmacological equivalence of test drugs to known drugs of abuse to provide context to the abuse assessment and guide drug scheduling.
迷幻药是一个研究和药物开发日益活跃的领域。这包括对其滥用可能性进行评估,以更好地理解其药理机制和作用,并指导管制药品的监管。迷幻药对滥用评估提出了挑战,以确保获得有效、可靠且可推广的结果,并确保研究安全进行。
关键的非临床技术,例如体外受体结合和功能测定,以及非临床身体依赖性测定,很容易适用于迷幻药。然而,与情欲增进剂(弱强化剂)和致幻剂(非强化剂)相比,监管机构通常推荐的方法需要更灵活的方法。1期药代动力学/药效学安全性研究以及2/3期疗效/安全性试验,并系统监测与滥用相关的不良事件,很容易适用于迷幻药。人体滥用试验需要修改,因为超治疗剂量可能不安全,而且一些程序,例如用于处理严重不良事件的个人监测器,可能会使结果产生偏差。
需要美国食品药品监督管理局和其他机构批准的迷幻药相关滥用研究,应考虑到现有知识的差异,从广泛的(例如裸盖菇素)到新型致幻剂和情欲增进剂为零的情况。许多滥用评估可以合理地应用于动物和人类,而不会损害科学完整性。修改现有技术并纳入更广泛的非临床测试应可确保获得可推广的结果。人体滥用研究值得重新考虑并可能进行修改,以确保迷幻药评估的安全性和有效性。其他非临床和临床方法可以提供受试药物与已知滥用药物的药理等效性评估,为滥用评估提供背景信息并指导药物分类。