Abstract
Objective The primary objective of this study was to explore fentanyl and fentanyl derivative distribution patterns from 2010 and 2019 across the United States (US). This study builds upon previous literature that has analyzed the trends in opioid distribution and assesses changes in opioid prescription preferences.
Methods The amount of fentanyl base distributed in the US from 2010-2019 was obtained from the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Automated Reports and Consolidated Ordering System (ARCOS). Fentanyl derivatives (sufentanil, alfentanil, remifentanil) were also analyzed using ARCOS from 2010-2017, the most recent date reported. Census data from the American Community Survey was used to correct for population. Prescriptions, units, and reimbursement of fentanyl and fentanyl citrate formulations for 2010 and 2019 were obtained from Medicaid and prescriber specialty in Medicare Part D.
Results Total grams of fentanyl distributed in the US from 2010 to 2019 decreased by 63%. Correspondingly, there was a 65% decrease in the milligrams per person distributed when correcting for population. From a regional perspective, Ohio had the greatest decrease (−79.3%) while Mississippi saw the smallest (−44.5%). Medicaid reimbursement in 2019 was $165 million for over eight hundred-thousand prescriptions with the majority to generic (99.7%) and injectable (77.6%) formulations. Interventional pain management and anesthesia were over-represented, and hematology/oncology under-represented for fentanyl in Medicare.
Conclusion The production and distribution of fentanyl-based substances has decreased, although not uniformly, in the US over the last decade. Additionally, the most prescribed formulations of fentanyl have transitioned away from transdermal, potentially in an effort to regulate its availability. Although impactful, the overdose deaths attributed to synthetic opioid deaths continue to increase highlighting the need for public health interventions beyond the pharmaceutical and medical communities.
Competing Interest Statement
BJP is part of an osteoarthritis research team supported by Pfizer and Eli Lilly. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Clinical Trial
Not applicable
Funding Statement
No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Procedures were approved as exempt by the IRB of the University of New England.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Raw DEA ARCOS and Medicaid data may be found at the links below.
https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/prescription-drugs/state-drug-utilization-data/index.html
https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/arcos/retail_drug_summary/index.html
