Safety and Tolerability of Biphasic Immediate‐Release/Extended‐Release Oxycodone/Acetaminophen Tablets: Analysis of 11 Clinical Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To characterize the safety of immediate-release (IR)/extended-release (ER) oxycodone (OC)/acetaminophen (APAP). METHODS: Data were assessed from 9 phase 1 trials in healthy volunteers and recreational users of prescription opioids (N = 405), including 5 single-dose and 3 multidose open-label pharmacokinetic studies of IR/ER OC/APAP and active comparators; and 1 randomized, controlled, single-dose human abuse potential (HAP) study comparing IR/ER OC/APAP, IR OC/APAP, and placebo in recreational users of opioids; and 2 phase 3 trials (N = 701) including a 48-hour placebo-controlled safety and efficacy study in patients with moderate to severe postbunionectomy pain with a 14-day open-label safety extension and a long-term (≤ 35 days) open-label safety study in patients with chronic osteoarthritis pain or chronic low back pain. RESULTS: Adverse events (AEs) experienced by ≥ 10% of participants receiving IR/ER OC/APAP in all trials were pruritus, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, headache, and somnolence; these AEs occurred with similar frequency for equianalgesic doses of IR OC/APAP and IR OC but less frequently for IR tramadol HCl/APAP. In the HAP study, crushing IR/ER or IR OC/APAP tablets did not increase frequency of AEs. Constipation was experienced by < 10% of participants receiving IR/ER OC/APAP. No serious (SAE) or severe AEs were reported in phase 1 trials. In phase 3 trials of 8 reported SAEs, only 1 treatment-related SAE (hypersensitivity to placebo) required treatment discontinuation. No clinically meaningful changes in vital signs, oxygen saturation, electrocardiograms, or laboratory values were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Safety and tolerability of IR/ER OC/APAP are similar to other low-dose opioid/APAP analgesics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".