Revisiting Preaddiction.

ABSTRACT: The directors of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism have proposed new efforts to enable earlier identification and intervention for harmful substance use and its consequences. As editors of The ASAM Principles of Addiction Medicine, we fully support this goal. The word "preaddiction" has been suggested as a diagnostic label to describe individuals who would be targeted for early intervention. In this commentary, we offer that "unhealthy substance use" would be a better descriptor than "preaddiction" and review several potential barriers to be addressed in order to maximize the impact of introducing this new paradigm.

Experience Starting an Addiction Medicine Practice-Based Research Network.

OBJECTIVES: This paper outlines the experience developing Addiction Medicine Practice-Based Research Network (AMNet), which promotes the adoption of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and measurement-based care in outpatient addiction treatment practices and creates a platform for quality improvement and research. METHODS: From August 2019 to July 2023, the AMNet team selected patient-reported outcome measures for implementation in the American Psychiatric Association's clinical data registry (PsychPRO), recruited addiction medicine providers, and collected PROMs data. RESULTS: AMNet selected 12 PROMs for implementation in PsychPRO. Through July 2023, 1565 providers expressed interest, of whom 216 of the 929 eligible providers (23%) attended an onboarding call/webinar. Two hundred six providers (95%) from 54 practices returned Participation Agreements. Subsequently, 65 providers (32%) from 39 practices withdrew, resulting in 141 (68%) providers from 15 practices. From November 2020 to July 2023, 38 providers submitted PROMs data using 1 of 3 PsychPRO patient portals. Sixteen of the 53 providers (30%) who signed up for the initial portal collected data from 468 patients. As of July 2023, 83 of the 141 providers (59%) opted to submit PROMs data from their own portal or electronic health record. CONCLUSIONS: Next steps will include continued recruitment of providers, addressing barriers to data transfer and integrating data from providers' portals into the registry to create a platform for future research.

Efficacy and Safety of Esmethadone (REL-1017) in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder and Inadequate Response to Standard Antidepressants: A Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objective: To test esmethadone (REL-1017) as adjunctive treatment in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and inadequate response to standard antidepressants.Methods: In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, outpatients with MDD (DSM-5) were randomized to daily oral esmethadone (75 mg on day 1, followed by 25 mg daily on days 2 through 28) or placebo between December 2020 and December 2022. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline (CFB) to day 28 in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score. The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants. The per-protocol (PP) population included completers without major protocol deviations impacting assessment. Post hoc analyses included participants with severe depression (baseline MADRS score ≥35).Results: For the ITT analysis (n = 227), mean CFB was 15.1 (SD 11.3) for esmethadone (n = 113) and 12.9 (SD 10.4) for placebo (n = 114), with a mean difference (MD) of 2.3, which was not statistically significant (P = .154; Cohen effect size [ES] = 0.21). Remission rates were 22.1% and 13.2% (P = .076), and response rates were 39.8% and 27.2% (P = .044) with esmethadone and placebo, respectively. For the PP analysis (n = 198), mean CFB was 15.6 (SD 11.2) for esmethadone (n = 101) and 12.5 (SD 9.9) for placebo (n = 97), with an MD of 3.1 (P = .051; ES =0.29). In post hoc analyses of patients with baseline MADRS ≥35 in the ITT population (n = 112), MD was 6.9; P = .0059; ES = 0.57, and for the PP population (n = 98), MD was 7.9; P = .0015; ES = 0.69. Adverse events (AEs) were predominantly mild or moderate and transient, with no significant differences between groups.Conclusions: The primary end point was not met. Esmethadone showed stronger efficacy in PP than in ITT analyses, with the discrepancy not attributable to AEs impacting treatment adherence. Significant efficacy occurred in post hoc analyses of patients with severe depression. Esmethadone was well tolerated, consistent with prior studies.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04688164.

Patient Engagement in and Adaptations to Delivery of Outpatient Care for Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated adaptations to outpatient care delivery and changes in treatment demand and engagement among patients receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in the months after the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency in 2020. METHODS: Data were collected through an online survey (June-November 2020) of outpatient MOUD prescribers. The survey obtained information on outpatient practices' adaptations to MOUD treatment and urine drug screening (UDS) and elicited provider views on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient demand for, and engagement in, treatment. Multivariable regression analyses were used to examine associations among practice characteristics, patient engagement, and service adaptations. RESULTS: Of 516 respondents, 74% reported adaptations to MOUD delivery during the pandemic. Most respondents implemented virtual visits for initial (67%) and follow-up (77%) contacts. Prescribers of buprenorphine were more likely than those who did not prescribe the medication to report MOUD adaptations. Among respondents reporting any MOUD adaptation, 77% made adaptations to their UDS practices. Among 513 respondents who answered COVID-19-related questions, 89% reported that the pandemic had affected the treatment and engagement of their patients. Of these respondents, 30% reported increased difficulty with patient engagement, and 45% reported that their patients preferred virtual visits during this period, whereas 18% endorsed patient preference for in-person visits. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth and federal regulatory easements in response to the COVID-19 pandemic enabled providers to continue treating patients for opioid use disorder in 2020. The results suggest that care adaptations and changes in patient demand and engagement were common in the practices surveyed.

The novel uncompetitive NMDA receptor antagonist esmethadone (REL-1017) has no meaningful abuse potential in recreational drug users.

Esmethadone (REL-1017) is the opioid-inactive dextro-isomer of methadone and a low-affinity, low-potency uncompetitive NMDA receptor antagonist. In a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, esmethadone showed rapid, robust, and sustained antidepressant effects. Two studies were conducted to evaluate the abuse potential of esmethadone. Each study utilized a randomized, double-blind, active-, and placebo-controlled crossover design to assess esmethadone compared with oxycodone (Oxycodone Study) or ketamine (Ketamine Study) in healthy recreational drug users. Esmethadone 25 mg (proposed therapeutic daily dose), 75 mg (loading dose), and 150 mg (Maximum Tolerated Dose) were evaluated in each study. Positive controls were oral oxycodone 40 mg and intravenous ketamine 0.5 mg/kg infused over 40 min. The Ketamine study included oral dextromethorphan 300 mg as an exploratory comparator. The primary endpoint was maximum effect (Emax) for Drug Liking, assessed using a bipolar 100-point visual analog scale (VAS). A total of 47 and 51 participants completed the Oxycodone Study and the Ketamine Study, respectively (Completer Population). In both studies, esmethadone doses ranging from therapeutic (25 mg) to 6 times therapeutic (150 mg) had a meaningful and statistically significantly (p < 0.001) lower Drug Liking VAS Emax compared with the positive control. Results were consistent for all secondary endpoints in both studies. In both studies, all doses of esmethadone were statistically equivalent to placebo on Drug Liking VAS Emax (p < 0.05). In the Ketamine Study, Drug Liking VAS Emax scores for esmethadone at all tested doses were significantly lower vs. dextromethorphan (p < 0.05) (exploratory endpoint). These studies indicate no meaningful abuse potential for esmethadone at all tested doses.

Psychedelic drug abuse potential assessment research for new drug applications and Controlled Substances Act scheduling.

New medicines containing classic hallucinogenic and entactogenic psychedelic substance are under development for various psychiatric and neurological disorders. Many of these, including psilocybin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) are Schedule I controlled substances of the United States Controlled Substances Act (US CSA), and similarly controlled globally. The implications of the CSA for research and medicines development, the path to approval of medicines, and their subsequent removal from Schedule I in the US are discussed. This entire process occurs within the framework of the CSA in the US and its counterparts internationally in accordance with international drug control treaties. Abuse potential related research in the US informs the eight factors of the CSA which provide the basis for rescheduling actions that must occur upon approval of a drug that contains a Schedule I substance. Abuse-related research also informs drug product labeling and the risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) will likely be required for approved medicines. Human abuse potential studies typically employed in CNS drug development may be problematic for substances with strong hallucinogenic effects such as psilocybin, and alternative strategies are discussed. Implications for research, medicinal development, and controlled substance scheduling are presented in the context of the US CSA and FDA requirements with implications for global regulation. We also discuss how abuse-related research can contribute to understanding mechanisms of action and therapeutic effects as well as the totality of the effects of the drugs on the brain, behavior, mood, and the constructs of spirituality and consciousness.

Novel rapid-acting sublingual nicotine tablet as a cigarette substitution strategy.

RATIONALE: Current nicotine replacement products provide a much slower onset of nicotine delivery than cigarettes, and hence are only marginally effective at supplanting cigarette smoking. Therefore, more effective forms of nicotine replacement are needed. OBJECTIVES: This initial investigation characterized the pharmacokinetic (PK) and subjective effects of a novel sublingual (SL) nicotine tablet designed to deliver nicotine more rapidly to the bloodstream of smokers. METHODS: Study 1 (N = 6) characterized the pharmacokinetics of a 2 mg nicotine SL tablet in comparison to an FDA-approved, marketed 2 mg nicotine lozenge. Study 2 (N = 24) assessed subjective responses of smokers to a single use of a 1 mg and 2 mg SL tablet. RESULTS: Study 1 found that the time to maximum blood nicotine concentrations was significantly shorter for the SL tablet (14 min) than for the lozenge (82 min), and the initial rate of nicotine absorption was higher (0.4 ng/mL*min vs. 0.0 ng/mL*min), supporting the hypothesis that the SL tablet delivered nicotine more rapidly. Study 2 found that participants reported immediate relief of nicotine withdrawal symptoms after tablet administration, and craving reduction after the 2 mg tablet approached the degree reported for their usual brands of cigarettes (4.2 vs. 4.6 on a 7-point scale). Other subjective responses showed the tablet to be an appealing alternative to smoking. CONCLUSIONS: The novel SL tablet studied shows promise as a nicotine substitution strategy for tobacco harm reduction and smoking cessation treatment. Additional studies are warranted to further investigate the potential of this new approach.

Addiction Medicine Practice-Based Research Network (AMNet): Assessment Tools and Quality Measures.

INTRODUCTION: The need for innovative approaches to address the opioid epidemic in the United States is widely recognized. Many challenges exist to addressing this epidemic, including the obstacles outpatient substance use treatment practices face in implementing measurement-based care (MBC), quality measurement systems, and evidence-based treatments. Also, there are insufficient opportunities for clinicians in these settings to participate in research, resulting in diminished translation of research findings into community-based practice. To address these challenges, the Addiction Medicine Practice-Based Research Network (AMNet) was developed to facilitate the uptake of MBC in outpatient practices via implementation of patient-reported assessments and quality of care performance measures to improve patient outcomes. This network will offer clinicians in outpatient settings (not incuding opioid treatment programs [OTPs]) the opportunity to participate in future substance use disorder treatment research studies. METHODS: A key step in the development of AMNet was the selection of substance use-specific assessment tools and quality of care performance measures for incorporation into the American Psychiatric Association's mental health patient registry, PsychPRO. A scoping review and multi-step consensus-based process were used to identify, review and select candidate assessment tools and quality of care performance measures for opioid use disorders (OUD) and substance use disorders (SUD). RESULTS: Following a consensus-based methodology, 12 standardized assessment tools and 3 quality of care performance measures for OUD and SUD were selected to help facilitate the implementation of MBC and quality improvement for AMNet participants. These tools were further categorized as core and optional. CONCLUSION: By offering a collection of carefully vetted assessment tools and quality measures through PsychPRO, AMNet will help participating clinicians with the systematic uptake of MBC and delivery of evidence-based treatment for patients with SUD. Also, AMNet will act as a centralized repository of data collected from patients and clinicians in non-OTP outpatient addiction medicine practices and serve as a platform for opioid treatment research.

Addiction Medicine Practice-Based Research Network (AMNet): Building Partnerships.

This column describes the collaboration among the American Psychiatric Association (APA), American Society of Addiction Medicine, Friends Research Institute, and the National Institute on Drug Abuse to create the Addiction Medicine Practice-Based Research Network (AMNet). The collaboration, which aims to address the opioid overdose epidemic in the United States, leverages the APA's clinical data registry (PsychPRO) and is recruiting office-based addiction medicine and addiction psychiatry practices for AMNet. AMNet aims to address knowledge gaps regarding patient care in such practices, facilitate performance improvement efforts, and serve as a research platform.

A clinical protocol of a comparative effectiveness trial of extended-release naltrexone versus extended-release buprenorphine with individuals leaving jail.

This study is a randomized, open label, controlled trial of extended-release buprenorphine (XR-B; BRIXADI™ formulation) versus extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) in Maryland jails. A 7-site, open-label, equivalence design will randomly assign 240 adults with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD), stratified by gender and jail, who are nearing release to one of two treatment arms: 1) XR-B in jail or 2) XR-NTX in jail, both followed by 6 monthly injections postrelease at a community treatment program. The primary aim is to determine the rate of pharmacotherapy adherence (number of monthly injections received) of XR-B compared to XR-NTX. The proposed study is innovative because it will be the first randomized clinical trial in the U.S. assessing the effectiveness of receiving XR-B vs. XR-NTX in county jails. The public health impact of the study will be highly significant and far-reaching because most individuals with OUD do not receive treatment while incarcerated, thereby substantially raising their likelihood of relapse to drug use, overdose death, and re-incarceration. Understanding how to expand acceptance of medications for OUD in jails, particularly extended-release medications, and supporting treatment engagement and medication adherence in transition to the community, has far-reaching implications for improving treatment access and success in this population.

Health and economic outcomes of treatment with extended-release naltrexone among pre-release prisoners with opioid use disorder (HOPPER): protocol for an evaluation of two randomized effectiveness trials.

BACKGROUND: Persons with an opioid use disorder (OUD) who were incarcerated face many challenges to remaining abstinent; concomitantly, opioid-overdose is the leading cause of death among this population, with the initial weeks following release proving especially fatal. Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is the most widely-accepted, evidence-based OUD pharmacotherapy in criminal justice settings, and ensures approximately 30 days of protection from opioid overdose. The high cost of XR-NTX serves as a barrier to uptake by many prison/jail systems; however, the cost of the medication should not be viewed in isolation. Prison/jail healthcare budgets are ultimately determined by policymakers, and the benefits/cost-offsets associated with effective OUD treatment will directly and indirectly affect their overall budgets, and society as a whole. METHODS: This protocol describes a study funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) to: evaluate changes in healthcare utilization, health-related quality-of-life, and other resources associated with different strategies of XR-NTX delivery to persons with OUD being released from incarceration; and estimate the relative "value" of each strategy. Data from two ongoing, publicly-funded, randomized-controlled trials will be used to evaluate these questions. In Study A, (XR-NTX Before vs. After Reentry), participants are randomized to receive their first XR-NTX dose before release, or at a nearby program post-release. In Study B, (enhanced XR-NTX vs. XR-NTX), both arms receive XR-NTX prior to release; the enhanced arm receives mobile medical (place of residence) XR-NTX treatment post-release, and the XR-NTX arm receives referral to a community treatment program post-release. The economic data collection instruments required to evaluate outcomes of interest were incorporated into both studies from baseline. Moreover, because the same instruments are being used in both trials on comparable populations, we have the opportunity to not only assess differences in outcomes between study arms within each trial, but also to merge the data sets and test for differences across trials. DISCUSSION: Initiating XR-NTX for OUD prior to release from incarceration may improve patient health and well-being, while also producing downstream cost-offsets. This study offers the unique opportunity to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiple strategies, according to different stakeholder perspectives.

Longitudinal analysis of HIV-risk behaviors of participants in a randomized trial of prison-initiated buprenorphine.

BACKGROUND: It has been estimated that approximately 15% of people who are incarcerated in the US have histories of opioid use disorder. Relapse to opioid use after release from prison poses a serious risk of HIV infection. Prison-initiated buprenorphine may help to reduce HIV infection given the association between opioid use and HIV-risk behaviors. METHODS: The present study is a secondary analysis of longitudinal data gathered from a randomized controlled trial of buprenorphine-naloxone for people who were incarcerated (N = 211) between 2008 and 2012. It compares the impact of assignment to initiate buprenorphine in prison (N = 106 randomized, N = 104 analyzed) versus in the community (N = 107 randomized, N = 107 analyzed) and whether or not participants entered community treatment on the frequency of HIV-risk behaviors in the 12 months following release from prison. Data were analyzed hierarchically and for each outcome variable, a multilevel, over-dispersed Poisson model was fit to the data. Outcome variables were the number of times the following behaviors occurred in the last 30 days: (1) having sex without a condom (2) injecting drugs (3) using unsterilized needles, and (4) sharing injection paraphernalia. RESULTS: Participants assigned to begin buprenorphine in the community experienced a greater decrease in injection drug use over time compared to participants assigned to begin buprenorphine in prison. There were no significant associations between treatment assignment or community treatment entry and instances of having sex without a condom, sharing injection paraphernalia, or using unsterilized needles. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the present study did not find support for the initiation of buprenorphine in prison (as opposed to the community) as a means to reduce incidences of HIV-risk behaviors. Avenues for future research in the nexus of HIV-risk reduction, criminal justice, and pharmacotherapy are discussed. Trial registration This study was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Buprenorphine for Prisoners (PI: Kinlock; R01DA021579). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00574067.

A randomized controlled trial of buprenorphine for probationers and parolees: Bridging the gap into treatment.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine can be effective in a variety of community substance use treatment settings outside of methadone programs, including outpatient programs and medical practices. In these settings, it has been found to be effective in reducing opioid use and retaining patients in treatment. Despite its effectiveness and safety, it is rarely provided to individuals with opioid use disorders in probation and parole settings. METHODS: Male and female individuals under probation or parole supervision (N = 320) with histories of opioid use disorder will be enrolled in this randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomized to one of two study arms: Buprenorphine Bridge Treatment (BBT): Participants will begin buprenorphine using the MedicaSafe dispensing device immediately after an on-site intake at a community supervision office and continue such treatment until they are transitioned to a community program; or Treatment as Usual (TAU): Participants will receive a referral to buprenorphine pharmacotherapy treatment in the community. Treatment outcomes will be: (a) illicit opioid oral saliva drug test results; and (b) treatment adherence (i. entered community based treatment; ii. number of days receiving opioid treatment). RESULTS: We describe the background and rationale for the study, its aims, hypotheses, and study design. CONCLUSIONS: If shown to increase compliance rates with conditions of probation and parole, buprenorphine treatment co-located at community supervision field offices could have a major impact on delivery of buprenorphine treatment to the criminal justice population. The public health impact of the proposed study would be widespread because this intervention could be implemented throughout areas of the US.

A cholecystokinin B receptor antagonist and cocaine interaction, phase I study.

AIMS: RPR 102681, a cholecystokinin-B antagonist, increased dopamine (DA) release and reduced cocaine self-administration in animals. This pilot study sought to assess the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of co-administration of RPR 102681 and cocaine, and to confirm the DA release mechanism of RPR 102681. METHODS: Sixteen cocaine-dependent participants were randomized to either placebo or RPR102681 at 3 ascending doses; cocaine was co-administered at steady state of RPR 102681. [11 C]raclopride positron emission tomography scans were conducted at baseline and at each RPR102681 dose. RESULTS: RPR 102681 was well tolerated, and safe to co-administer with cocaine. RPR 102681 did not alter the PK of either cocaine or its metabolite benzoylecgonine and showed no intrinsic abuse liability. There was a trend toward reduction of cocaine craving scores. In contrast to animal studies, RPR 102681 significantly increased the binding potential of [11 C]raclopride in the ventral striatum (t test, P < .001) and caudate nucleus (t test, P < .0001) in a small subset of patients, suggesting that it may reduce intrasynaptic striatal DA. CONCLUSION: Overall, this pilot study suggests that RPR 102681 would be unlikely candidate, as an agonist medication for the treatment for cocaine addiction but worth investigating further for possible role in reducing craving.

Initiating buprenorphine treatment prior to versus after release from prison: Arrest outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This secondary analysis of a randomized trial examines the association between initiation of buprenorphine treatment prior to, versus post-release, and rearrests during the 12-months following release. METHODS: Official rearrest data (N = 199) for the 12-months post-release were examined. Four outcomes were measured: (1) rearrested (yes/no), (2) time to rearrest, (3) number of rearrests, and (4) severity of charges (less severe vs. severe). RESULTS: A minority (43.1%) of the sample were rearrested (N = 91). There were no significant differences between study conditions in the proportion of rearrested participants [P = 0.28] nor in the mean number of arrests [P  = 0.15]. Likewise, the condition was not a significant predictor of the hazard of rearrest [p = 0.10]. The mean number of days until rearrest for the in prison vs. post-release buprenorphine conditions were not significantly different (205.8 days (SD  = 104.6) vs. 170.8 days (SD  = 113.1), respectively; P  = 0.13]. Treatment condition was not a significant predictor of the likelihood of rearrest for a severe crime compared to a less severe crime [P  = 0.09]. CONCLUSION: Despite the parent study finding of higher rates of post-release drug treatment entry in the group assigned to start buprenorphine treatment prior to, compared to post-release, there were no significant differences in the proportion of individuals arrested, the mean number of arrests, the time to first arrest, or the severity of their charges.

Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) for opioid use disorder in clinical practice: Vivitrol's Cost and Treatment Outcomes Registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), a µ-opioid receptor antagonist for prevention of relapse to opioid dependence, has demonstrated efficacy compared with placebo and comparative effectiveness with buprenorphine-naloxone. We report outcomes for XR-NTX in Vivitrol's Cost and Treatment Outcomes Registry. DESIGN: Observational, open-label, single-arm, multi-center registry assessing baseline characteristics and clinical and health-related quality-of-life outcomes associated with XR-NTX treatment in clinical practice. SETTING: 32 US treatment centers from 2011 to 2013. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with opioid dependence who were prescribed XR-NTX treatment and then enrolled into the registry. MEASUREMENTS: Monthly visits were evaluated for the full population and for patient ubgroups retrospectively, defined by injection number, focusing on the period between baseline and month 6 (1-, 2/3- or 6-XR-NTX). FINDINGS: Of 403 enrolled patients, 395 were analyzed. Most patients (n = 349) received out-patient care. On average, patients received five injections (median = 3; range = 1-25). The median number of injections administered within 6 months was higher in patients who at baseline were employed (three versus two unemployed, P = 0.02) or had private insurance (five versus two self-payment, P = 0.005; versus two state-funded, P < 0.001). The 1-, 2/3- and 6-XR-NTX groups had 132, 152 and 111 patients, respectively. At baseline, the 6-XR-NTX patients were more likely to meet normal/minimal mental illness criteria and attend school and less likely to report recent drug use. Within 6 months, the 6-XR-NTX group demonstrated improvements in employment, mental health and psychosocial functioning, and decreases in opioid craving, drug use and drug-related behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Among opioid-dependent people receiving XR-NTX treatment, better mental health, higher education and lower recent drug use at baseline are associated with greater treatment duration; in turn, longer treatment duration is associated with lower relapse rates and improved outcomes generally.

Avatar-assisted therapy: a proof-of-concept pilot study of a novel technology-based intervention to treat substance use disorders.

BACKGROUND: Avatar-assisted therapy (AAT) is a novel and emerging technology that uses the Internet to enable clinicians and clients in substance abuse treatment to participate in group counseling sessions from separate and remote locations in real time through the use of avatars and virtual environments. OBJECTIVES: The current study is a pilot proof-of-concept feasibility study involving individuals in outpatient substance abuse treatment. This report addresses two questions: (1) are individuals who present for substance abuse treatment interested in receiving AAT and (2) what factors are associated with better treatment success. METHODS: Individuals who presented at the treatment clinic who met study eligibility criteria, and provided their written informed consent to participate, were included in the current study (N = 59; 78% male). RESULTS: Twenty-eight (47.5%) participants completed 16 weeks of treatment and attended more sessions compared to non-completers (M = 14.3 vs. 7.5 p < .05). Those individuals who completed treatment were less likely to have a positive urine drug screen at baseline (21.5 vs. 78.6%; p < .05). Furthermore, those individuals who successfully completed treatment were less likely to have positive urine drug screens during treatment compared to those who did not complete (29.7% vs. 70.3%, p < .05). There were no arrests during treatment for completers and non-completers. CONCLUSION: Poor retention in substance use disorder treatment has long been a major problem for public health. AAT is a feasible approach that has the potential to expand treatment to individuals who might have difficulty accessing treatment. Moreover, AAT may be appealing to clients who are concerned about anonymity and confidentiality.

A randomized clinical trial of buprenorphine for prisoners: Findings at 12-months post-release.

BACKGROUND: This study examined whether starting buprenorphine treatment prior to prison and after release from prison would be associated with better drug treatment outcomes and whether males and females responded differently to the combination of in-prison treatment and post-release service setting. METHODS: Study design was a 2 (In-Prison Treatment: Condition: Buprenorphine Treatment: vs. Counseling Only)×2 [Post-Release Service Setting Condition: Opioid Treatment: Program (OTP) vs. Community Health Center (CHC)]×2 (Gender) factorial design. The trial was conducted between September 2008 and July 2012. Follow-up assessments were completed in 2014. Participants were recruited from two Baltimore pre-release prisons (one for men and one for women). Adult pre-release prisoners who were heroin-dependent during the year prior to incarceration were eligible. Post-release assessments were conducted at 1, 3, 6, and 12-month following prison release. RESULTS: Participants (N=211) in the in-prison treatment condition effect had a higher mean number of days of community buprenorphine treatment compared to the condition in which participants initiated medication after release (P=0.005). However, there were no statistically significant hypothesized effects for the in-prison treatment condition in terms of: days of heroin use and crime, and opioid and cocaine positive urine screening test results (all Ps>0.14) and no statistically significant hypothesized gender effects (all Ps>0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Although initiating buprenorphine treatment in prison compared to after-release was associated with more days receiving buprenorphine treatment in the designated community treatment program during the 12-months post-release assessment, it was not associated with superior outcomes in terms of heroin and cocaine use and criminal behavior.