National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network Meeting Report: Managing Patients Exposed to Xylazine-Adulterated Opioids in Emergency, Hospital and Addiction Care Settings.

Used as a veterinary sedative and not approved for human use, xylazine has been increasingly linked with opioid overdose deaths in the United States. A growing number of people have been exposed to xylazine in the illicit opioid supply (especially fentanyl) or in other drugs, particularly in some areas of the Northeast. Xylazine is an α-2 adrenergic agonist that decreases sympathetic nervous system activity. When combined with fentanyl or heroin, it is purported to extend the duration of the opioid's sedative effect and to cause dependence and an associated withdrawal syndrome; however, data to support these concerns are limited. Despite the escalating frequency of detection of xylazine in people with nonfatal and fatal opioid overdose, direct links to these outcomes have not been identified. Because the strongest causal link is to fentanyl coexposure, ventilatory support and naloxone remain the cornerstones of overdose management. Xylazine is also associated with severe tissue injury, including skin ulcers and tissue loss, but little is known about the underlying mechanisms. Nonetheless, strategies for prevention and treatment are emerging. The significance and clinical effects of xylazine as an adulterant is focused on 4 domains that merit further evaluation: fentanyl-xylazine overdose, xylazine dependence and withdrawal, xylazine-associated dermal manifestations, and xylazine surveillance and detection in clinical and nonclinical settings. This report reflects the Proceedings of the National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for the Clinical Trials Network convening of clinical and scientific experts, federal staff, and other stakeholders to describe emerging best practices for treating people exposed to xylazine-adulterated opioids. Participants identified scientific gaps and opportunities for research to inform clinical practice in emergency departments, hospitals, and addiction medicine settings.

PERSPECTIVE: Health Economic Interests at NIMH and NIDA to Improve Delivery of Behavioral Health Services.

BACKGROUND: Effective financing mechanisms are essential to ensuring that people can access and utilize effective treatments and services. Financing mechanisms are needed not only to pay for the delivery of those treatments and services, but also ancillary costs, while also keeping care affordable. AIMS: This article highlights key areas of the interest of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) in supporting applied health economics and health care financing research. Specifically, this article discusses the long-range impact of NIH's earlier investments in applied health economics research, and NIH's ongoing efforts to communicate its interests in health economics research. We discuss the 2023 NIMH-NIDA-sponsored health economics conference, and the ideas presented there for developing and assessing innovative behavioral health care financing models; three of the presented papers were recently published in the Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics. METHODS: We describe the history and impact of NIMH- and NIDA-sponsored economic research and identify current research interests as identified in the NIMH and NIDA Strategic Plans and recent funding announcements. We examine themes presented at the NIMH-NIDA Health Economics conference. The conference included over 300 participants from 20 countries, from six continents. RESULTS: The topics highlighted at the conference highlight the ways in which NIH-funded research has promoted the development of innovative health care financing methods, both from the supply side (e.g., providers and payers) and demand side (e.g., service users and families). Invited speakers discussed the findings from NIH-supported research in the topic areas of payment and financing, behavioral economics and social determinants of health. Keynote speakers highlighted emerging topics in the field, including the economics of health equity, biases in mental health models in health care, and value-based insurance design. DISCUSSION: We demonstrate a resurgence of and explicit interest in health economics and policy research at NIMH and NIDA. However, more work is needed in order to design funding mechanisms that fully provide access to and facilitate use of effective evidence-based practices to improve mental health outcomes. For example, it is important that policy and health economic research projects include decision makers who will be the end users of data and study results, to ensure that results can be meaningfully put into practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE: Designing effective and efficient funding mechanisms can help ensure that service users have access to effective treatments and that clinicians and provider organizations are adequately compensated for their work. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Federal, state, and local policies, as well as policies of payers and health care organizations, can influence the type of care that is supported and incentivized. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: As demonstrated by the research interests as outlined in their respective Strategic Plans and funding announcements, NIMH and NIDA continue to fund health economic and policy research that aims to improve health care access, quality and outcomes for people with or at risk of developing behavioral health conditions in the US and around the world.

National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) research priorities to support the development of incentive-based treatments for substance use disorders.

The purpose of this commentary is to highlight current research priorities of National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Division of Therapeutics and Medical Consequences (DTMC) regarding the development and testing of incentive-based interventions for the treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs). This manuscript summarizes the NIH Stage Model for behavioral intervention development, briefly reviews existing research on incentive-based treatments for SUDs that falls within the scope of DTMC at NIDA and highlights the development of digital therapeutics-based incentive interventions as an exemplar and high priority area. We briefly review how digital therapeutics approaches may address some common limitations to dissemination of incentive-based interventions and highlight opportunities for integrating incentive-based approaches into pharmacotherapy efficacy trials. Finally, we mention several related funding opportunities for researchers interested in developing incentive-based approaches for SUD treatment. The overall goal of this commentary is to inform the research community of current NIDA priority areas for intervention development and funding.

National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network Meeting Report: Advancing Emergency Department Initiation of Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder.

Opioid use disorder and opioid overdose deaths are a major public health crisis, yet highly effective evidence-based treatments are available that reduce morbidity and mortality. One such treatment, buprenorphine, can be initiated in the emergency department (ED). Despite evidence of efficacy and effectiveness for ED-initiated buprenorphine, universal uptake remains elusive. On November 15 and 16, 2021, the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network convened a meeting of partners, experts, and federal officers to identify research priorities and knowledge gaps for ED-initiated buprenorphine. Meeting participants identified research and knowledge gaps in 8 categories, including ED staff and peer-based interventions; out-of-hospital buprenorphine initiation; buprenorphine dosing and formulations; linkage to care; strategies for scaling ED-initiated buprenorphine; the effect of ancillary technology-based interventions; quality measures; and economic considerations. Additional research and implementation strategies are needed to enhance adoption into standard emergency care and improve patient outcomes.

NIDA Boosts Research and Development of Medical Devices for Substance use Disorder via the NIH Blueprint MedTech Initiative.

Background: Deaths from drug overdose have reached a crisis level, with more than 100,000 reported from April 2020 to April 2021. Novel approaches to address it are urgently needed. Objectives: National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) is leading novel comprehensive efforts to develop safe and effective products that address the needs of the citizens affected by SUD. NIDA aims to support research and development of medical devices intended to monitor, diagnose, or treat substance use disorders. Results: NIDA participates in Blueprint MedTech program is part of the large NIH Blueprint for Neurological Research Initiative. It supports the research and development of new medical devices through product optimization, pre-clinical testing, and human subject studies, including clinical trials. The program is structured in two main components - Blueprint MedTech Incubator and Blueprint MedTech Translator. It offers free to the researcher services that are typically unavailable in academic environment - business expertise facilities and staffing to successfully develop minimum viable devices, pre-clinical bench testing, clinical studies, planning and executing in manufacturing, as well as regulatory expertise. Conclusions: Through Blueprint MedTech, NIDA provides innovators with expanded resources to ensure the success of the research.

Data management in substance use disorder treatment research: Implications from data harmonization of National Institute on Drug Abuse-funded randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Secondary analysis of data from completed randomized controlled trials is a critical and efficient way to maximize the potential benefits from past research. De-identified primary data from completed randomized controlled trials have been increasingly available in recent years; however, the lack of standardized data products is a major barrier to further use of these valuable data. Pre-statistical harmonization of data structure, variables, and codebooks across randomized controlled trials would facilitate secondary data analysis, including meta-analyses and comparative effectiveness studies. We describe a pre-statistical data harmonization initiative to standardize de-identified primary data from substance use disorder treatment randomized controlled trials funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse available on the National Institute on Drug Abuse Data Share website. METHODS: Standardized datasets and codebooks with consistent data structures, variable names, labels, and definitions were developed for 36 completed randomized controlled trials. Common data domains were identified to bundle data files from individual randomized controlled trials according to relevant concepts. Variables were harmonized if at least two randomized controlled trials used the same instruments. The structures of the harmonized data were determined based on the feedback from clinical trialists and substance use disorder research experts. RESULTS: We have created a harmonized database of variables across 36 randomized controlled trials with a build-in label and a brief definition for each variable. Data files from the randomized controlled trials have been consistently categorized into eight domains (enrollment, demographics, adherence, adverse events, physical health measures, mental-behavioral-cognitive health measures, self-reported substance use measures, and biologic substance use measures). Standardized codebooks and concordance tables have also been developed to help identify instruments and variables of interest more easily. CONCLUSION: The harmonized data of randomized controlled trials of substance use disorder treatments can potentially promote future secondary data analysis of completed randomized controlled trials, allowing combining data from multiple randomized controlled trials and provide guidance for future randomized controlled trials in substance use disorder treatment research.

Increasing evidence-based substance use interventions globally: The National Institute on Drug Abuse postdoctoral fellowships.

As of April 2020, 121 individuals from 47 nations had completed 124 NIDA International Program INVEST Drug Abuse Research Fellowships. This is the first comprehensive effort to assess the fellowships from the combined perspectives of career outcomes, migration patterns, publications, cost per publication, and funding. We searched electronic sources such as university websites, ResearchGate, LinkedIn, PubMed, and NIH databases to find current curriculum vitae, journal articles published in 2018 and 2019, and funding records. We found electronic records for 94.2% of former NIDA INVEST fellows (n = 114); 55.5% were male (n = 67). The majority are at least partially involved in addiction research, prevention, or treatment (85.9%; n = 98), primarily at academic institutions (73.7%, n = 84) as faculty members (65.8%, n = 75) conducting research (86%, n = 98). Nearly three-fourths (74.6%, n = 85) are still working in their home countries; and 74.6% (n = 85) coauthored at least one research article indexed in PubMed during 2018 or 2019. Of the 656 unique research articles, 52.4% (n = 344) were published by multinational groups. The average cost to NIDA for each peer-reviewed publication was $19,677. More than half (53.5%, n = 61) of the fellows received funding through 431 unique grants-led by NIDA (55), other NIH Institutes and Centers (57) and other U.S. funders (55). Using the measures of career outcomes, migration patterns, publications, cost per publication, and funding INVEST fellowships are cost-effective mechanisms to advance scientific knowledge, build addiction research capacity, foster international cooperation, and promote adoption of evidence-based addiction policies and interventions around the world.

Research priorities for expanding access to methadone treatment for opioid use disorder in the United States: A National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network Task Force report.

In the US, methadone treatment can only be provided to patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) through federal and state-regulated opioid treatment programs (OTPs). There is a shortage of OTPs, and racial and geographic inequities exist in access to methadone treatment. The National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network convened the Methadone Access Research Task Force to develop a research agenda to expand and create more equitable access to methadone treatment for OUD. This research agenda included mechanisms that are available within and outside the current regulations. The task force identified 6 areas where research is needed: (1) access to methadone in general medical and other outpatient settings; (2) the impact of methadone treatment setting on patient outcomes; (3) impact of treatment structure on outcomes in patients receiving methadone; (4) comparative effectiveness of different medications to treat OUD; (5) optimal educational and support structure for provision of methadone by medical providers; and (6) benefits and harms of expanded methadone access. In addition to outlining these research priorities, the task force identified important cross-cutting issues, including the impact of patient characteristics, treatment, and treatment system characteristics such as methadone formulation and dose, concurrent behavioral treatment, frequency of dispensing, urine or oral fluid testing, and methods of measuring clinical outcomes. Together, the research priorities and cross-cutting issues represent a compelling research agenda to expand access to methadone in the US.

Chemical Interventions for the Opioid Crisis: Key Advances and Remaining Challenges.

The present United States opioid crisis requires urgent and innovative scientific intervention. This perspective highlights a role for the chemical sciences by expounding upon three key research areas identified as priorities by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Specifically, important advances in chemical interventions for overdose reversal, strategies for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment, including immunopharmacotherapies, and next-generation alternatives for pain management will be discussed. Ultimately, progress made will be presented in light of remaining challenges for the field.

Emissions of Free Radicals, Carbonyls, and Nicotine from the NIDA Standardized Research Electronic Cigarette and Comparison to Similar Commercial Devices.

E-cigarettes (e-cigs) are a diverse and continuously evolving group of products with four generations currently in the market. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) standardized research e-cigarette (SREC) is intended to provide researchers with a consistent e-cig device with known characteristics. Thus, we conducted laboratory-based characterizations of oxidants and nicotine in aerosols produced from SREC and other closed-system, breath-activated, commercially available e-cigs (Blu and Vuse). We hypothesized that oxidant and nicotine production will be significantly affected in all devices by changes in puffing parameters. All e-cigs were machine vaped and the aerosols generated were examined for nicotine, carbonyls, and free-radicals while varying the puff-volumes and puff-durations to reflect typical human usage. The data were normalized on a per puff, per gram aerosol, and per milligram nicotine basis. We found that aerosol production generally increased with increasing puff-duration and puff-volume in all e-cigs tested. Increased puff-duration and puff-volume increased nicotine delivery for Blu and Vuse but not the SREC. We report, for the first time, reactive free-radicals in aerosols from all closed-system e-cigs tested, albeit at levels lower than cigarette smoke. Formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, and propionaldehyde were detected in the aerosols of all tested e-cigs. Carbonyl and free radical production is affected by puff-duration and puff volume. Overall, SREC was more efficient at aerosol and nicotine production than both Blu and Vuse. In terms of carbonyl and free radical levels, SREC delivered lower or similar levels to both other devices.

US Adult Cigar Smoking Patterns, Purchasing Behaviors, and Reasons for Use According to Cigar Type: Findings From the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, 2013-2014.

Introduction: The US cigar market is diverse, yet until recently most research studies and tobacco surveillance systems have not reported behavioral and related outcomes by cigar type. Methods: The 2013-2014 Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study collected data separately for filtered cigars (FCs), cigarillos, and traditional cigars, which were further distinguished as premium or nonpremium. Descriptive statistics for adult established current smokers of each cigar type and cigarettes were calculated for demographic characteristics, tobacco use patterns, purchasing behaviors and reasons for use. Adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs) using a marginal predictions approach with logistic regression assessed correlates of dual cigar and cigarette smoking. Results: Age, sex, race/ethnicity, education level, and poverty status of smokers varied according to cigar type. Daily cigar smoking prevalence and number of cigars smoked per day were higher for FCs (37.3%; median: 1.6 cigars/day, respectively), than all other cigar types (6.7%-25.3%, all p < .01; 0.1-0.4 cigars/day, all p < .01, respectively); daily smoking and cigars per day were similar for nonpremium cigars and cigarillos (p = .11; p = .33, respectively). Cigarette smoking was twice as common among smokers of nonpremium cigars, cigarillos, and FCs (58.0%-66.0%) than among premium cigars (29.9%). Among current cigar smokers, FC smokers (APR = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09-1.39), other tobacco product users (APR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.15-1.41), and those with a GED/high school diploma or less (APR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.09-1.33) were more likely to also smoke cigarettes. Conclusion: User characteristics, cigar smoking patterns, and dual smoking with cigarettes varied by cigar type highlighting the importance of adequately describing the cigar type studied and, where appropriate, differentiating results by cigar type. Implications: Despite the diversity of the cigar market place, historically many research studies and tobacco surveillance systems have treated cigars as a single product type. This study describes similarities and differences in the user characteristics, tobacco use patterns, and purchasing behaviors of premium, nonpremium, cigarillo, and filtered cigar smokers. To enhance tobacco regulatory science, sufficient descriptions of the cigar type(s) studied and, where appropriate, differentiation of the particular cigar type(s) studied should be undertaken to improve the interpretation of study findings, understanding of cigar use patterns and related behaviors and future approaches to reducing cigar-attributable morbidity and mortality.

An opportune and unique research to evaluate the public health impact of electronic cigarettes.

In response to the growing public health concern regarding the risks or benefits of electronic cigarettes (e-cig) use relative to smoking, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) has recently introduced the first standardized- and well- characterized e-cig device to the research community (see, https://www.drugabuse.gov/funding/supplemental-information-nida-e-cig ). E-cig are promoted as safe alternatives to conventional tobacco cigarettes and/or as aides to smoking cessation. E-cig are highly popular among cigarette smokers who are unable/unwilling to quit but are willing to switch to putatively less-harmful tobacco substitutes. E-cig are also becoming increasingly popular among youth who have never experimented with combustible cigarettes. However, chemical analyses of e-cig juices (both in liquid form and after being heated into vapor) have shown that many carcinogens present in cigarette smoke are also found in a range of e-cig products. To date, the cancer-causing potential of e-cig has not been investigated in e-cig users (i.e., vapers). Use of e-cig without a prior history of smoking is currently a rare phenomenon in adults, but is increasingly common among youth. Consequently, investigating the carcinogenic potential of e-cig in nonsmoking youth provides a unique opportunity to verify the health impact of e-cig use, without the confounding effects of cigarette smoking. Within this context, the availability of the NIDA Standard Research e-cig offers a unique research opportunity with tremendous public health implications. Comparing and contrasting the cancer-causing potentials of standard vaping and smoking in youth will help determine the health risks or benefits of e-cig use relative to cigarette smoking. This information will be instrumental in making scientifically based decisions on the development and evaluation of policies and regulations on e-cig manufacture, marketing, and distribution. Ultimately, evidence-based guidelines and legislations on e-cig will help reduce the burden of tobacco-related diseases, particularly on minors and vulnerable populations.

Data Collection and Harmonization in HIV Research: The Seek, Test, Treat, and Retain Initiative at the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Large-scale, multisite data sets offer the potential for exploring the public health benefits of biomedical interventions. Data harmonization is an emerging strategy to increase the comparability of research data collected across independent studies, enabling research questions to be addressed beyond the capacity of any individual study. The National Institute on Drug Abuse recently implemented this novel strategy to prospectively collect and harmonize data across 22 independent research studies developing and empirically testing interventions to effectively deliver an HIV continuum of care to diverse drug-abusing populations. We describe this data collection and harmonization effort, collectively known as the Seek, Test, Treat, and Retain Data Collection and Harmonization Initiative, which can serve as a model applicable to other research endeavors.

Research Priorities to Improve Treatment of Patients Exposed to Xylazine-fentanyl: Rapid Communication from a National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for the Clinical Trials Network Meeting.

ABSTRACT: In response to the rapid escalation in the detection of xylazine in the unregulated drug supply, in April 2023, the White House designated fentanyl contaminated with xylazine an "emerging threat." The National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network convened a multidisciplinary meeting of stakeholders, federal staff members, researchers, and clinicians caring for patients with fentanyl and xylazine exposures. This convening focused on the most critical areas of concern with the goal of describing current practices and a xylazine-fentanyl research agenda. Discussions focused on the domains of epidemiology and laboratory detection, xylazine withdrawal and overdose, and dermal manifestations. The authors were involved in planning and moderating the program and providing a summary of the proceedings.

Characterization of peer support services for substance use disorders in 11 US emergency departments in 2020: findings from a NIDA clinical trials network site selection process.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency departments (ED) are incorporating Peer Support Specialists (PSSs) to help with patient care for substance use disorders (SUDs). Despite rapid growth in this area, little is published regarding workflow, expectations of the peer role, and core components of the PSS intervention. This study describes these elements in a national sample of ED-based peer support intervention programs. METHODS: A survey was conducted to assess PSS site characteristics as part of site selection process for a National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network (CTN) evaluating PSS effectiveness, Surveys were distributed to clinical sites affiliated with the 16 CTN nodes. Surveys were completed by a representative(s) of the site and collected data on the PSS role in the ED including details regarding funding and certification, services rendered, role in medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and naloxone distribution, and factors impacting implementation and maintenance of ED PSS programs. Quantitative data was summarized with descriptive statistics. Free-text fields were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 11 surveys were completed, collected from 9 different states. ED PSS funding was from grants (55%), hospital funds (46%), peer recovery organizations (27%) or other (18%). Funding was anticipated to continue for a mean of 16 months (range 12 to 36 months). The majority of programs provided "general recovery support (81%) Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) services (55%), and assisted with naloxone distribution to ED patients (64%). A minority assisted with ED-initiated buprenorphine (EDIB) programs (27%). Most (91%) provided services to patients after they were discharged from the ED. Barriers to implementation included lack of outpatient referral sources, barriers to initiating MOUD, stigma at the clinician and system level, and lack of ongoing PSS availability due to short-term grant funding. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of ED-based PSSs were funded through time-limited grants, and short-term grant funding was identified as a barrier for ED PSS programs. There was consistency among sites in the involvement of PSSs in facilitation of transitions of SUD care, coordination of follow-up after ED discharge, and PSS involvement in naloxone distribution.