When a highly potent new opioid formulation was approved by his
agency on Nov. 2, FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., downplayed safety
concerns about AcelRx's Dsuvia. He stressed the importance of the painkiller
for military use and the "very tight restrictions being placed on the
distribution and use of this product."
In general, PBM and health plan experts say such restrictions
likely will hold and keep the drug within its proper niche, and the regulatory
green light for Dsuvia shouldn't interfere with broad ongoing efforts to better
manage opioid use in the U.S.
Dsuvia is a sublingual formulation of an established drug,
sufentanil, that is delivered through a disposable, pre-filled, single-dose
applicator. It's seen as ideally suited for certain special circumstances where
patients may not be able to swallow oral medication, and where access to
intravenous pain relief is not possible, including its potential use on the
battlefield. Gottlieb notes that this opioid formulation, along with Dsuvia's
delivery device, was "a priority medical product" for the Pentagon
because it fills a specific, though limited, unmet medical need.
"A single-dose applicator could potentially prevent abuse
due to the complexity of removing it [i.e., the medication] from the
applicator," says Mesfin Tegenu, R.Ph., president of PerformRx, LLC.
"However, because it is 10 times more potent than fentanyl and 1,000 times
more potent than morphine, the diversion of even one tablet can be risky."
Tegenu adds that restricting the sites where Dsuvia can be
administered "is a good step in preventing misuse. However, there is no
guarantee that such a diversion will not occur and contribute to the opioid
crisis."
Yet Sharon Jhawar, Pharm.D., chief pharmacy officer for SCAN
Health Plan, doesn't anticipate a significant problem with diversion of the
strong medication.
"Our perspective on Dsuvia is it's been approved only in
specific health care settings by someone who is medically trained, and is
really for severe, acute pain in which other opioids would not be enough,"
she says. "And because of the requirement of the setting and who needs to
give it, this isn't a medication you're going to see insurers have on their
formulary."
No comments:
Post a Comment