Absence of Evidence for Sustained Effects of Daily Cannabidiol Administration on Anandamide Plasma Concentration in Individuals with Cocaine Use Disorder: Exploratory Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Cannabidiol (CBD) has been proposed to have a therapeutic potential over a wide range of neuropsychiatric disorders, including substance use disorders. Pre-clinical evidence suggests that CBD can increase anandamide (AEA) plasma concentration, possibly mediating some of its therapeutic properties. Whether CBD exerts such an effect on AEA in individuals with cocaine use disorder (CUD) remains unknown. Aims: To explore the sustained effects of daily CBD administration on AEA plasma concentrations compared with placebo in CUD. Methods: We used data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating CBD's efficacy in CUD. Seventy-eight individuals were randomized to receive a daily oral dose of 800 mg CBD (n = 40) or a placebo (n = 38). Participants stayed in an inpatient detoxification setting for 10 days, after which they were followed in an outpatient setting for 12 weeks. AEA plasma concentration was measured at baseline and at 23-h post CBD ingestion on day 8 and week 4. A generalized estimating equation model was used to assess CBD's effects on AEA, and sensitivity analyses were computed using Bayesian linear regressions. Results: Sixty-four participants were included in the analysis. Similar mean AEA plasma concentrations in both treatment groups (p = 0.357) were observed. At day 8, mean AEA plasma concentrations (± standard deviation) were 0.26 (± 0.07) ng/mL in the CBD group and 0.29 (± 0.08) ng/mL in the placebo group (p = 0.832; Bayes factor [BF] = 0.190). At week 4, they were 0.27 (± 0.09) ng/mL in the CBD group and 0.30 (± 0.09) ng/mL in the placebo group (p = 0.181; BF = 0.194). Conclusion: While not excluding any potential acute and short-term effect, daily CBD administration did not exert a sustained impact on AEA plasma concentrations in individuals with CUD compared with placebo. Registration: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02559167).

Impact of Depressive Symptom Severity on Buprenorphine/Naloxone and Methadone Outcomes in People With Prescription-Type Opioid Use Disorder: Results From a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of depressive symptom severity on opioid use and treatment retention in individuals with prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD). METHOD: We analyzed data from a multi-centric, pragmatic, open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing buprenorphine/naloxone to methadone models of care in 272 individuals with POUD. Opioid use was self-reported every two weeks for 24 weeks using the Timeline Followback. Depressive symptom severity was self-reported with the Beck Depression Inventory at baseline, week 12 and week 24. RESULTS: Baseline depressive symptom severity was not associated with opioid use nor treatment retention. At week 12, moderate depressive symptoms were associated with greater opioid use while mild to severe depressive symptoms were associated with lowered treatment retention. At week 24, moderate depressive symptoms were associated with greater opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing depressive symptoms lead to poorer outcomes in POUD. Clinicians are encouraged to use integrative approaches to optimize treatment outcomes. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03033732) on January 27th, 2017, prior to participants enrollment.

Associations Between Buprenorphine\Naloxone and Methadone Treatment and non-Opioid Substance Use in Prescription-Type Opioid Use Disorder: Secondary Analyses From the OPTIMA Study: Associations entre le traitement avec la buprénorphine/naloxone et avec la méthadone et l'utilisation de substances non opioïdes dans le trouble lié à l'usage d'opioïdes de type sur ordonnance : analyses secondaires de l'étude OPTIMA.

OBJECTIVES: There is limited evidence on how opioid agonist treatment (OAT) may affect psychoactive non-opioid substance use in prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD) and whether this effect might explain OAT outcomes. We aimed to assess the effect of methadone on non-opioid substance use compared to buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX), to explore whether non-opioid substance use is associated with opioid use and retention in treatment, and to test non-opioid use as a moderator of associations between methadone with retention in OAT and opioid use compared to BUP/NX. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data from the OPTIMA trial, an open-label, pragmatic, parallel, two-arm, pan-Canadian, multicentre, randomized-controlled trial to compare standard methadone model of care and flexible take-home dosing BUP/NX for POUD treatment. We studied the effect of methadone and BUP/NX on non-opioid substance use evaluated by urine drug screen (UDS) and by classes of non-opioid substances (i.e., tetrahydrocannabinol [THC], benzodiazepines, stimulants) (weeks 2-24) using adjusted generalized estimation equation (GEE). We studied the association between non-opioid substance-positive UDS and opioid-positive UDS and retention in treatment, using adjusted GEE and logistic regressions. RESULTS: Overall, methadone was not associated with non-opioid substance-positive UDS compared to BUP/NX (OR: 0.78; 95%CI, 0.41 to 1.48). When non-opioid substances were studied separately, methadone was associated with lower odds of benzodiazepine-positive UDS (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.98) and THC-positive UDS (OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.77), but not with different odds of stimulant-positive UDS (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.16) compared to BUP/NX. Substance-positive UDS, overall and separate classes, were not associated with opioid-positive UDS or retention in treatment. CONCLUSION: Methadone did not show a significant effect on overall non-opioid substance use in POUD compared to BUP/NX treatment but was associated with lower odds of benzodiazepine and THC use in particular. Non-opioid substance use did not predict OAT outcomes. Further research is needed to ascertain whether specific patterns of polysubstance use (quantity and frequency) may affect treatment outcomes.

Differential effect of cannabis use on opioid agonist treatment outcomes: Exploratory analyses from the OPTIMA study.

INTRODUCTION: Conflictual evidence exists regarding the effects of cannabis use on the outcomes of opioid agonist therapy (OAT). In this exploratory analysis, we examined the effect of recent cannabis use on opioid use, craving, and withdrawal symptoms, in individuals participating in a trial comparing flexible buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX) take-home dosing model to witnessed ingestion of methadone. METHODS: We analyzed data from a multi-centric, pragmatic, 24-week, open label, randomized controlled trial in individuals with prescription-type opioid use disorder (n = 272), randomly assigned to BUP/NX (n = 138) or methadone (n = 134). The study measured last week cannabis and opioid use via timeline-follow back, recorded at baseline and every two weeks during the study. Craving symptoms were measured using the Brief Substance Craving Scale at baseline, and weeks 2, 6, 10, 14, 18 and 22. The study measured opioid withdrawal symptoms via Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale at treatment initiation and weeks 2, 4, and 6. RESULTS: The mean maximum dose taken during the study was 17.3 mg/day (range = 0.5-32 mg/day) for BUP/NX group and 67.7 mg/day (range = 10-170 mg/day) in the methadone group. Repeated measures generalized linear mixed models demonstrated that cannabis use in the last week (mean of 2.3 days) was not significantly associated with last week opioid use (aß ± standard error (SE) = -0.06 ± 0.04; p = 0.15), craving (aß ± SE = -0.05 ± 0.08, p = 0.49), or withdrawal symptoms (aß ± SE = 0.09 ± 0.1, p = 0.36). Bayes factor (BF) for each of the tested models supported the null hypothesis (BF < 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: The current study did not demonstrate a statistically significant effect of cannabis use on outcomes of interest in the context of a pragmatic randomized-controlled trial. These findings replicated previous results reporting no effect of cannabis use on opioid-related outcomes.

Effects of Buprenorphine/Naloxone and Methadone on Depressive Symptoms in People with Prescription Opioid Use Disorder: A Pragmatic Randomised Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of flexible take-home dosing of buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX) and methadone standard model of care in reducing depressive symptoms in people with prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD). This trial also evaluated whether improvements in depressive symptoms were mediated by opioid use. METHODS: Analyzed data came from the OPTIMA study (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03033732), a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing flexible take-home dosing of BUP/NX and methadone standard model of care for reducing opioid use in people with POUD. A total of 272 participants were recruited in four Canadian provinces. Participants were randomised 1:1 to BUP/NX or methadone. After treatment induction, past two-week opioid use was measured using the Timeline Followback every two weeks for a total of 24 weeks. Depressive symptoms were measured with the Beck Depression Inventory at baseline, weeks 12 and 24. RESULTS: Both BUP/NX and methadone significantly reduced depressive symptoms at week 12 (aß ± SE = -3.167 ± 1.233; P < 0.001) and week 24 (aß ± SE = -7.280 ± 1.285; P < 0.001), with no interaction between type of treatment and time (P = 0.284). Improvements in depressive symptoms were only partially mediated by a reduction in opioid use (proportion mediated = 36.8%; 95% confidence interval = -1.158 to -0.070; P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: BUP/NX and methadone showed similar effectiveness in decreasing comorbid depressive symptoms in people with POUD. This effect was partially explained by a reduction in opioid use. As both treatments seem equally effective, clinicians are encouraged to tailor the selection of OAT to patients' needs and characteristics.

Impact of an Accelerated Pretreatment Evaluation on Linkage-to-Care for Hepatitis C-infected Persons Who Inject Drugs.

Background: Historically, hepatitis C virus (HCV) pretreatment evaluation has required multiple visits, frequently resulting in loss to follow-up and a delayed initiation of treatment. New technologies can accelerate this process. We investigated the feasibility of a single-day evaluation program and its impact on evaluation completion, treatment eligibility awareness, and treatment initiation among people who inject drugs (PWIDs). Methods: HCV-infected PWID who were unaware if they were eligible for treatment were recruited in a prospective evaluation of an accelerated model of care between 2017 and 2019 and compared to a historical cohort. The patients underwent a medical evaluation, rapid HCV viral load testing, and transient elastography during a single visit, at the end of which they were informed whether they were eligible for treatment. A historical cohort of patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria and evaluated with the usual standard of care spanning several visits who were examined at the addiction medicine clinic from 2014 to 2016 served as the comparison group. Results: The accelerated and historical cohorts included 99 and 76 patients, respectively. The cohorts did not differ significantly by age and gender, but more patients in the historical cohort were undergoing opioid agonist therapy, while more patients in the accelerated cohort injected drugs in the last month. An accelerated evaluation resulted in a higher rate of evaluation completion (100% vs 67.1%; P < .001). Among those eligible for treatment, the proportion of those initiating treatment was similar between the groups (51/64 (79.7%) vs. 26/37 (70.3%); P = .28). The delay in the initiation of treatment was shorter in the accelerated cohort than in the historical cohort (69 (IQR: 49-106) days vs. 219 (IQR: 141-416) days; P < .001). Conclusions: Accelerated evaluation enhanced the awareness of eligibility and reduced the time to initiation among eligible patients. Trial Registration: This study is registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02755402).

Buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone effectiveness for reducing craving in individuals with prescription opioid use disorder: Exploratory results from an open-label, pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Craving reduction is an important target in the treatment of prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD). In this exploratory analysis, we compared the effectiveness of BUP/NX flexible model of care relative to methadone for craving reduction in individuals with POUD. METHODS: We analyzed data from a multicentric, pragmatic, 24-week open-label randomized controlled trial conducted in participants with POUD (N = 272) who were randomly assigned to BUP/NX model of care with flexible take-home dosing (n = 138) or the standard model of care with closely supervised methadone (n = 134). Treatments were prescribed and administered according to local guidelines, in diverse clinical settings. Craving was measured using the Brief Substance Craving Scale at baseline, week 2, 6, 10, 14, 18 and 22. RESULTS: Cravings decreased in both treatment groups over 22 weeks (BUP/NX adjusted mean difference = -5.52, 95% CI = -6.91 to -4.13; methadone adjusted mean difference = -3.95, 95% CI = -5.28 to -2.63; p < 0.001), and were overall lower in the BUP/NX group (adjusted mean = 4.04, 95% CI = 3.43-4.64) than the methadone group (adjusted mean = 5.13, 95% CI = 4.51-5.74; p < 0.001). The time by treatment group interaction (favoring BUP/NX) was statistically significant at week 2 (adjusted mean difference = -1.58, 95% CI = -3.13 to -0.03; p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the standard methadone model of care, flexible take-home dosing of BUP/NX was associated with lower craving in individuals with POUD. These findings can contribute to guiding shared decision-making regarding OAT treatment in this population.

Flexible Buprenorphine/Naloxone Model of Care for Reducing Opioid Use in Individuals With Prescription-Type Opioid Use Disorder: An Open-Label, Pragmatic, Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Extensive exposure to prescription-type opioids has resulted in major harm worldwide, calling for better-adapted approaches to opioid agonist therapy. The authors aimed to determine whether flexible take-home buprenorphine/naloxone is as effective as supervised methadone in reducing opioid use in prescription-type opioid consumers with opioid use disorder. METHODS: This seven-site, pan-Canadian, 24-week, pragmatic, open-label, noninferiority, two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial involved treatment-seeking adults with prescription-type opioid use disorder. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to treatment with sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (target dosage, 8 mg/2 mg to 24 mg/6 mg per day; flexible take-home dosing) or oral methadone (≈60-120 mg/day; closely supervised). The primary outcome was the proportion of opioid-free urine drug screens over 24 weeks (noninferiority margin, 15%). All randomized participants were analyzed, excluding one who died shortly after randomization, for the primary analysis (modified intention-to-treat analysis). RESULTS: Of 272 participants recruited (mean age, 39 years [SD=11]; 34.2% female), 138 were randomized to buprenorphine/naloxone and 134 to methadone. The mean proportion of opioid-free urine drug screens was 24.0% (SD=34.4) in the buprenorphine/naloxone group and 18.5% (SD=30.5) in the methadone group, with a 5.6% adjusted mean difference (95% CI=-0.3, +∞). Participants in the buprenorphine/naloxone group had 0.47 times the odds (95% CI=0.24, 0.90) of being retained in the assigned treatment compared with those in the methadone group. Overall, 24 drug-related adverse events were reported (12 in the buprenorphine/naloxone group [N=8/138; 5.7%] and 12 in the methadone group [N=12/134; 9.0%]) and mostly included withdrawal, hypogonadism, and overdose. CONCLUSIONS: The buprenorphine/naloxone flexible model of care was safe and noninferior to methadone in reducing opioid use among people with prescription-type opioid use disorder. This flexibility could help expand access to opioid agonist therapy and reduce harms in the context of the opioid overdose crisis.

Cannabidiol effects on cognition in individuals with cocaine use disorder: Exploratory results from a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cocaine use disorder (CUD) is associated with various cognitive deficits that impede patients' functionality, prognosis and therapeutic outcomes. New pharmacological treatments for CUD that could improve cognition are needed. OBJECTIVE: To explore whether cannabidiol (CBD) is superior to placebo to improve cognitive functioning in individuals with CUD. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory analysis of a single site, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating CBD's efficacy in reducing craving, cocaine use and relapse in individuals with CUD. Seventy-eight individuals diagnosed with CUD were randomized to receive either CBD (800 mg) or placebo for 92 days. We used the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) to assess inhibition (Stop Signal Task; SST), risky decision making (Cambridge Gambling Task; CGT) and visual memory (Pattern Recognition Memory; PRM). This assessment was made on day 1, day 7 and at week 6. We controlled for sex, severity of dependence and baseline cognitive scores in our generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS: Both groups performed similarly on the PRM (correct answers: p = 0.080), SST (stop signal reaction time: p = 0.644) and CGT (quality of decision making: p = 0.994; deliberation time: p = 0.507; delay aversion: p = 0.968; risk taking: p = 0.914) tests. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence for 800 mg of CBD to be more efficacious than placebo for improving cognitive outcomes. Clinical trials evaluating pharmacological treatments for CUD should continue to be a research priority.

Cannabidiol Effect on Anxiety Symptoms and Stress Response in Individuals With Cocaine Use Disorder: Exploratory Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Individuals with a cocaine use disorder (CUD) are more likely to present anxiety, which in turn negatively impacts substance use outcomes. Some evidence suggests that cannabidiol (CBD) presents anxiolytic properties and could be a treatment for substance use disorders. This study explores CBD's effect on stress biomarker (cortisol) and anxiety symptoms in people with CUD. METHODS: Exploratory analyses were conducted using data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating CBD's efficacy to treat CUD. We randomized 78 individuals with CUD into receiving a daily oral dose up to 800 mg CBD (n = 40) or placebo (n = 38). The trial was divided into 2 phases: an inpatient detoxification lasting 10 days and an outpatient follow-up lasting 12 weeks. Anxiety symptoms and stress response were assessed using a visual analog scale, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and cortisol levels at multiple time points throughout the study. We also measured anxiety after a stressful and a cocaine-cue scenarios. We used generalized estimating equations models and multiple linear regression to assess CBD's effects on anxiety and cortisol levels. RESULTS: Both treatment groups had similar mean anxiety scores according to the Beck Anxiety Inventory ( P = 0.27) and the visual analog scale ( P = 0.18). CBD did not decrease anxiety after a stressful ( P = 0.14) and a cocaine ( P = 0.885) scenarios compared with placebo. No statistically significant group difference was found in cortisol levels ( P = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence for 800 mg of CBD to be more efficacious than placebo for modulating anxiety symptoms and cortisol levels in individuals with CUD.

A multi-methods and longitudinal study of patients' perceptions in injectable opioid agonist treatment: Implications for advancing patient-centered methodologies in substance use research.

BACKGROUND: Patients' perceptions are vital to the delivery and evaluation of substance use treatment. They are most frequently collected at one time-point and measured using patient satisfaction questionnaires or qualitative methodologies. Interestingly, the findings of these studies often diverge, as satisfaction scores tend to be highly positive, while qualitative findings suggest dissatisfaction and areas for improvement. This divergence limits current understandings of patients' perceptions and their potential change over time in treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study explores the relationship between open-ended positive and negative perceptions of treatment and patient satisfaction scores over time. METHODS: The RUTH (Research on the Utilization of Therapeutic Hydromorphone) prospective cohort study included 131 participants receiving injectable diacetylmorphine or hydromorphone in Canada's first injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) program. The study collected the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8) at eight time-points over an 18-month period. Following a multi-methods approach, the study complemented the CSQ-8 with open-ended positive and negative comments of iOAT. The research team analyzed these comments thematically at each time-point to develop positive and negative perception themes. We then used growth curve modeling to explore the relationship between positive and negative perception themes and patient satisfaction over time. FINDINGS: Over the eight time-points, six positive and eight negative perception themes emerged, broadly reflecting structural (e.g., expansion of iOAT), process (e.g., schedules), relational (e.g., interactions with providers), and outcome-related (e.g., met/unmet needs) perceptions of iOAT. On average, participants reported high satisfaction (grand mean = 29.2 out of 32), and scores did not significantly change over time. However, we did find significant unexplained variation within participants in their satisfaction trajectories and between participants in their initial satisfaction scores. In conditional growth curve models, the theme "unfavorable interactions with providers" had the strongest independent effect on overall satisfaction trajectories. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an example of how open-ended comments can be integrated with patient satisfaction questionnaire data to gather a comprehensive and patient-centered evaluation of substance use treatment. Considering the iOAT context specifically, relational dynamics and daily treatment access were significant predictors of patient satisfaction over time and may be attributes of iOAT that require further investigation.

Preferences for research design and treatment of comorbid depression among patients with an opioid use disorder: A cross-sectional discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Up to 74 % of people with an opioid use disorder (OUD) will experience depression in their lifetime. Understanding and addressing the concept of preference for depression treatments and clinical trial designs may serve as an important milestone in enhancing treatment and research outcomes. Our goal is to evaluate preferences for depression treatments and clinical trial designs among individuals with an OUD and comorbid depression. METHODS: We evaluated preferences for depression treatments and clinical trial designs using an online cross-sectional survey including a best-best discrete choice experiment. We recruited 165 participants from opioid agonist treatment clinics and community-based services in Calgary, Charlottetown, Edmonton, Halifax, Montreal, Ottawa, Quebec City, St. John's and Trois-Rivières, Canada. RESULTS: Psychotherapy was the most accepted (80.0 %; CI: 73.9-86.1 %) and preferred (31.5 %; CI: 24.4-38.6 %) treatment. However, there was a high variability in acceptability and preferences of depression treatments. Significant predictors of choice for depression treatments were administration mode depending on session duration (p < 0.001), access mode (p < 0.001) and treatment duration (p < 0.001). Significant predictors of choice for clinical trial designs were allocation type (p = 0.008) and monetary compensation (p = 0.033). Participants preferred participating in research compared to non-participation (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Accessibility and diversity of depression interventions, including psychotherapy, need to be enhanced in addiction services to ensure that all patients can receive their preferred treatment. Ensuring proper monetary compensation and comparing an intervention of interest with an active treatment might increase participation of depressed OUD patients in future clinical research initiative.

Exploring cannabidiol effects on inflammatory markers in individuals with cocaine use disorder: a randomized controlled trial.

Cocaine use disorder (CUD) is a major public health issue associated with physical, social, and psychological problems. Excessive and repeated cocaine use induces oxidative stress leading to a systemic inflammatory response. Cannabidiol (CBD) has gained substantial interest for its anti-inflammatory properties, safety, and tolerability profile. However, CBD anti-inflammatory properties have yet to be confirmed in humans. This exploratory study is based on a single-site randomized controlled trial that enrolled participants with CUD between 18 and 65 years, randomized (1:1) to daily receive either CBD (800 mg) or placebo for 92 days. The trial was divided into a 10-day detoxification (phase I) followed by a 12-week outpatient follow-up (phase II). Blood samples were collected from 48 participants at baseline, day 8, week 4, and week 12 and were analyzed to determine monocytes and lymphocytes phenotypes, and concentrations of various inflammatory markers such as cytokines. We used generalized estimating equations to detect group differences. Participants treated with CBD had lower levels of interleukin-6 (p = 0.017), vascular endothelial growth factor (p = 0.032), intermediate monocytes CD14+CD16+ (p = 0.024), and natural killer CD56negCD16hi (p = 0.000) compared with participants receiving placebo. CD25+CD4+T cells were higher in the CBD group (p = 0.007). No significant group difference was observed for B lymphocytes. This study suggests that CBD may exert anti-inflammatory effects in individuals with CUD.

Cannabidiol as a treatment for craving and relapse in individuals with cocaine use disorder: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cocaine use disorder (CUD) is a significant public health concern for which no efficacious pharmacological interventions are available. Cannabidiol (CBD) has attracted considerable interest as a promising treatment for addiction. This study tested CBD efficacy for reducing craving and preventing relapse in people with CUD. DESIGN: Single-site double-blind randomized controlled superiority trial comparing CBD with placebo. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Canada. Seventy-eight adults (14 women) with moderate to severe CUD participated. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned (1 : 1) by stratified blocks to daily 800 mg CBD (n = 40) or placebo (n = 38). They first underwent an inpatient detoxification phase lasting 10 days. Those who completed this phase entered a 12-week outpatient follow-up. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were drug-cue-induced craving during detoxication and time-to-cocaine relapse during subsequent outpatient treatment. FINDINGS: During drug-cue exposure, craving scores [mean ± standard deviation (SD)] increased from baseline by 4.69 (2.89) versus 3.21 (2.78) points, respectively, in CBD (n = 36) and placebo (n = 28) participants [confidence interval (CI) = -0.33 to 3.04; P = 0.069; Bayes factor = 0.498]. All but three participants relapsed to cocaine by week 12 with similar risk for CBD (n = 34) and placebo (n = 27) participants (hazard ratio = 1.20, CI = 0.65-2.20, P = 0.51; Bayes factor = 0.152). CBD treatment was well tolerated and associated mainly with diarrhoea. CONCLUSIONS: CBD did not reduce cocaine craving or relapse among people being treated for CUD.

Longitudinal patterns of cocaine use among patients receiving injectable hydromorphone or diacetylmorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder: A growth curve modeling approach.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cocaine use is prevalent among people receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment. Investigations of cocaine use in this population have been descriptive and the potential heterogeneity existing in patterns of use have not been characterized. As such, among patients receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment, this study aimed to: 1) quantify intra- and inter-individual variation in cocaine use over 24-months and; 2) determine how predictors of interest explained this variation. METHODS: Participants were patients receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment for opioid use disorder. Study visits were completed at baseline prior to receiving treatment, and 3,6,9,12,18, and 24 months after baseline. A multi-level regression approach to growth curve modeling was employed to estimate and explain intra- (within-person) and inter-individual (between-person) variation in cocaine use. RESULTS: Significant intra and inter-individual variation in cocaine use was identified over 24-months. Treatment engagement was on average associated with reductions in the prior month number of days of cocaine use (range: 0-30)(Estimate (standard error): -0.05(0.02), p = 0.003). On average, men reported less cocaine use compared to women (Estimate (standard error): -5.91(1.57), p=<0.001), and participants reporting ever regularly using cocaine at baseline reported more cocaine use over 24-months compared to participants reporting never regularly using cocaine (Estimate (standard error): 4.72 (1.91), p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Significant reductions in cocaine use were observed and significant heterogeneity in patterns of cocaine use was identified. These heterogeneous cocaine use profiles suggest that an individualized approach to care will be critical in responding to patients' cocaine use in injectable opioid agonist treatment.

Physician Communication in Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment: Collecting Patient Ratings With the Communication Assessment Tool.

OBJECTIVE: Patient ratings of physician communication in the setting of daily injectable opioid agonist treatment are reported. Associations between communication items and demographic, health, drug use, and treatment characteristics are explored. METHODS: Participants (n = 121) were patients receiving treatment for opioid use disorder with hydromorphone (an opioid analgesic) or diacetylmorphine (medical grade heroin). Ratings of physician communication were collected using the 14-item Communication Assessment Tool. Items were dichotomized and associations were explored using univariate and multivariable logistic regression models for each of the 14 items. RESULTS: Ratings of physician communication were lower than reported in other populations. In nearly all of the 14 multivariable models, participants with more physical health problems and with lower scores for treatment drug liking had lower odds of rating physician communication as excellent. CONCLUSIONS: In physician interactions with patients with opioid use disorder, there is a critical need to address comorbid physical health problems and account for patient medication preferences. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Findings reinforce the role physicians can play in communicating with patients about their comorbid conditions and about medication preferences. In the patient-physician interaction efforts to meet patients' evolving treatment needs and preferences can be made by offering patients access to all available evidence-based treatments.

Treatment with injectable hydromorphone: Comparing retention in double blind and open label treatment periods.

BACKGROUND: In a double-blind, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial injectable hydromorphone, a licensed short acting opioid analgesic, was shown to be as effective as diacetylmorphine for the treatment of severe opioid use disorder. An appropriate question is whether hydromorphone offered open-label can attract and retain patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective study, using daily prescription data from the Crosstown Clinic in Vancouver, Canada. Treatment retention among participants who had the opportunity to receive open-label injectable hydromorphone for at least 90 consecutive days (n = 108) before having the choice of receiving open-label diacetylmorphine, was compared to their retention outcomes with double-blind injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT). McNemar tests analyzed differences in proportions; a conditional logistic model estimated exact odds ratios; Pairwise t-tests analyzed differences in total number of treatment days; and Kaplan-Meier curves and clustered log-rank tests compared time to first 30 continuous days without injectable treatment. RESULTS: A total of 74 participants (68.5%) were retained in both open-label hydromorphone and double-blind iOAT. Open-label hydromorphone was not significantly associated with lower retention (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.2, 1.1; p = .10). Participants attended a mean of 84.4 (SD = 15.8) days of iOAT in the trial and 80.5 (SD = 22.0) days in open-label hydromorphone (mean difference of -3.9; 95% CI = -8.9, 1.1). Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: As treatment with injectable hydromorphone expands across Canada, our study contributes in a unique manner by providing evidence that the high retention rates observed during the clinical trial were maintained when participants started open-label hydromorphone.

Adverse Events During Treatment Induction With Injectable Diacetylmorphine and Hydromorphone for Opioid Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVES: The present study aims to describe a 3-day induction protocol for injectable hydromorphone (HDM) and diacetylmorphine (DAM) used in 3 Canadian studies and examine rates of opioid-related overdose and somnolence during this induction phase. METHODS: The induction protocol and associated data on opioid-related overdose and somnolence are derived from 2 clinical trials and one cohort study conducted in Vancouver and Montreal (2005-2008; 2011-2014; 2014-2018). In this analysis, using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities coding system we report somnolence (ie, drowsiness, sleepiness, grogginess) and opioid overdose as adverse events. Overdoses requiring intervention with naloxone are coded as severe adverse events. RESULTS: Data from the 3 studies provides a total of 1175 induction injections days, with 700 induction injection days for DAM, and 475 induction injection days for HDM. There were 34 related somnolence and adverse event (AE) overdoses (4.899 per 100 injection days) in DAM and 6 (1.467 per 100 days) in HDM. Four opioid overdoses requiring naloxone (0.571 per 100 injection days) were registered in DAM and 1 in HDM (0.211 per 100 injection days), all safely mitigated onsite. The first week maximum daily dose patients received were on average 433.62 mg [standard deviation (SD) = 137.92] and 223.26 mg (SD = 68.06) for DAM and HDM, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A 3-day induction protocol allowed patients to safely reach high doses of injectable hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine in a timely manner. These findings suggest that safety is not an evidence-based barrier to the implementation of treatment with injectable hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine.

The association between nicotine dependence and physical health among people receiving injectable diacetylmorphine or hydromorphone for the treatment of chronic opioid use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: People with chronic opioid use disorder often present to treatment with individual and structural vulnerabilities and remain at risk of reporting adverse health outcomes. This risk is greatly compounded by tobacco smoking, which is highly prevalent among people with chronic opioid use disorder. Despite the known burden of tobacco smoking on health, the relationship between nicotine dependence and health has not been studied among those receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment. As such, the present study aims to explore the association between nicotine dependence and physical health among participants of the Study to Assess Longer-Term Opioid Medication Effectiveness (SALOME) at baseline and six-months. METHODS: SALOME was a double-blind phase III clinical trial testing the non-inferiority of injectable hydromorphone to injectable diacetylmorphine for chronic opioid use disorder. Participants reporting tobacco smoking were included in a linear regression analysis of physical health at baseline (before receiving treatment) and at six-months. RESULTS: At baseline, nicotine dependence score, lifetime history of emotional, physical, or sexual abuse and prior month safe injection site access were independently and significantly associated with physical health. At six-months nicotine dependence score was the only variable that maintained this significant and independent association with physical health. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that after six-months, the injectable treatment effectively brought equity to patients' physical health status, yet the association with nicotine dependence remained. Findings could inform whether the provision of treatment for nicotine dependence should be made a priority in settings where injectable opioid agonist treatment is delivered to achieve improvements in overall physical health in this population.

A pilot, open-label, 8-week study evaluating desvenlafaxine for treatment of major depression in methadone-maintained individuals with opioid use disorder.

Depression is one of the most prevalent psychiatric disorders among opioid-dependent individuals. Clinical trials testing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors among depressed patients on methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) failed to show efficacy, whereas those on tricyclic antidepressants produced mixed results with potential for cardiotoxicity. Desvenlafaxine (DESV) is a SNRI with minimal cardiotoxicity and drug interactions. This study sought to assess feasibility and tolerability of using DESV in depressed patients on MMT. A total of 18 depressed individuals on MMT received DESV (50-100 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Participants were assessed for the following: (a) Safety of DESV using Systematic Assessment for Treatment Emergent Events-GI, ECG [corrected Q-T (QTc) interval measurement] and methadone serum levels; (b) depressive symptoms using Montgomery-Äsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS); and (c) other outcomes including anxiety, suicidality, craving, substance use, quality of life, and other depression scales. Registration number on ClinicalTrials.gov is NCT02200406. Among participants who completed the study, MADRS scores significantly decreased at week 8 compared with baseline. Responders and remitters on MADRS at week 8 were 61 and 50%, respectively. There was no significant change in [corrected Q-T (QTc) interval measurement] between baseline and week 4. DESV was well tolerated and associated with improvement of depressive symptoms. DESV may be a promising contender to treat depression in individuals on MMT and deserves further exploration in a randomized double-blinded clinical trial.