Inpatient Low-dose Transitions From Full Agonist Opioids Including Methadone Onto Long-acting Depot Buprenorphine: Case Series From a Multicenter Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) suffer disproportionately from morbidity and mortality related to serious addiction-related infections requiring hospitalization. Long-acting buprenorphine (LAB) is an underused medication for OUD that may facilitate linkage to care and treatment retention when administered before hospital discharge. Transition onto buprenorphine in the inpatient setting is often complicated by pain, active infection management, potential surgical interventions, and risk of opioid withdrawal in transition from full agonists to a partial agonist. METHODS: The COMMIT Trial is a randomized controlled trial evaluating LAB administered by infectious disease physicians and hospitalists compared with treatment as usual for persons with OUD hospitalized with infections. We report a case series of participants on full agonist opioids including methadone who were transitioned to sublingual buprenorphine using low-dose ( microdosing ) strategies followed by LAB injection. RESULTS: Seven participants with current opioid use disorder and life-threatening infections, all with significant concurrent pain and many requiring surgical intervention, underwent low-dose transitions starting at buccal buprenorphine doses ranging from 225 µg to 300 µg 3 times a day on the first day. All were well tolerated with average time to LAB injection of 7.5 days (range, 5-10 days). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient low-dose buprenorphine transition from full agonist opioids including methadone onto LAB is feasible even in those with complex hospitalizations for concurrent infections and/or surgery. This strategy facilitates dosing of LAB before hospital discharge when risk of opioid relapse and overdose are significant.

Sexual orientation differences among men in a randomized clinical trial of extended-release naltrexone and bupropion for methamphetamine use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine use disorder (MethUD) disproportionately affects men who have sex exclusively with men or with men and women (collectively MSM/W), compared to men who have sex with women (MSW). This study is the first MethUD medication trial to compare treatment effect for these groups, hypothesizing that extended-release injectable naltrexone 380mg every 3 weeks plus oral extended-release bupropion 450mg daily would be less effective for MSM/W than MSW. METHODS: Data come from men (N = 246) in a multi-site, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with sequential parallel comparison design. In Stage 1 (6-weeks), participants were randomized to active treatment or placebo. In Stage 2 (6-weeks), Stage 1 placebo non-responders were rerandomized. Treatment response was ≥3 methamphetamine-negative urine samples, out of four obtained at the end of Stages 1 and 2. Treatment effect was the active-versus-placebo between-group difference in the weighted average Stages 1 and 2 responses. RESULTS: MSM/W (n = 151) were more likely than MSW (n = 95) to be Hispanic, college-educated, and living with HIV. Adjusting for demographics, among MSM/W, response rates were 13.95 % (active treatment) and 2.78 % (placebo) in Stage 1; 23.26 % (active treatment) and 4.26 % (placebo) in Stage 2. Among MSW, response rates were 7.69 % (active treatment) and 5.80 % (placebo) in Stage 1; 3.57 % (active treatment) and 0 % (placebo) in Stage 2. Treatment effect was significantly larger for MSM/W (h = 0.1479) than MSW (h = 0.0227) (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest efficacy of extended-release naltrexone plus bupropion for MSM/W, a population heavily burdened by MethUD. While a secondary outcome, this intriguing finding merits testing in prospective trials.

Factors Associated with Medical Cannabis Use After Certification: A Three-Month Longitudinal Study.

Background: Over the past decade, there has been increased utilization of medical cannabis (MC) in the United States. Few studies have described sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with MC use after certification and more specifically, factors associated with use of MC products with different cannabinoid profiles. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal cohort study of adults (N=225) with chronic or severe pain on opioids who were newly certified for MC in New York State and enrolled in the study between November 2018 and January 2022. We collected data over participants' first 3 months in the study, from web-based assessment of MC use every 2 weeks (unit of analysis). We used generalized estimating equation models to examine associations of sociodemographic and clinical factors with (1) MC use (vs. no MC use) and (2) use of MC products with different cannabinoid profiles. Results: On average, 29% of the participants used predominantly high delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) MC products within the first 3 months of follow-up, 30% used other MC products, and 41% did not use MC products. Non-Hispanic White race, pain at multiple sites, and past 30-day sedative use were associated with a higher likelihood of MC use (vs. no MC use). Current tobacco use, unregulated cannabis use, and enrollment in the study during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with a lower likelihood of MC use (vs. no MC use). Among participants reporting MC use, female gender and older age were associated with a lower likelihood of using predominantly high-THC MC products (vs. other MC products). Conclusion: White individuals were more likely to use MC after certification, which may be owing to access and cost issues. The findings that sedative use was associated with greater MC use, but tobacco and unregulated cannabis were associated with less MC use, may imply synergism and substitution that warrant further research. From the policy perspective, additional measures are needed to ensure equitable availability of and access to MC. Health practitioners should check patients' history and current use of sedative, tobacco, and unregulated cannabis before providing an MC recommendation and counsel patients on safe cannabis use. clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03268551).

COVID-19 complications among patients with opioid use disorder: a retrospective cohort study across five major NYC hospital systems.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) suffer disproportionately from COVID-19. To inform clinical management of OUD patients, research is needed to identify characteristics associated with COVID-19 progression and death among this population. We aimed to investigate the role of OUD and specific comorbidities on COVID-19 progression among hospitalized OUD patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of merged electronic health records (EHR) from five large private health systems. SETTING: New York City, New York, USA, 2011-21. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with a COVID-19 encounter and OUD or opioid overdose diagnosis between March 2020 and February 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Primary exposure included diagnosis of OUD/opioid overdose. Risk factors included age, sex, race/ethnicity and common medical, substance use and psychiatric comorbidities known to be associated with COVID-19 severity. Outcomes included COVID-19 hospitalization and subsequent intubation, acute kidney failure, severe sepsis and death. FINDINGS: Of 110 917 COVID-19+ adults, 1.17% were ever diagnosed with OUD/opioid overdose. OUD patients had higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization [adjusted risk ratio (aRR) = 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.33, 1.47], intubation [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.05, 95% CI = 1.74, 2.42], kidney failure (aRR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.34, 1.70), sepsis (aRR = 2.30, 95% CI = 1.88, 2.81) and death (aRR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.84, 2.40). Among hospitalized OUD patients, risks for worse COVID-19 outcomes included being male; older; of a race/ethnicity other than white, black or Hispanic; and having comorbid chronic kidney disease, diabetes, obesity or cancer. Protective factors included having asthma, hepatitis-C and chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid use disorder patients appear to have a substantial risk for COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality, with particular comorbidities and treatments moderating this risk.

Safety and tolerability of progesterone treatment for women with cocaine use disorder: a pilot treatment trial.

Background: Problematic cocaine use remains a significant public health issue, particularly among women. However, no concerted efforts have been made to target a pharmacological treatment option for women with cocaine use disorder (CUD) despite preclinical, human laboratory, and a limited number of clinical studies demonstrating that progesterone can attenuate the effects of cocaine to a greater extent in women than men.Objectives: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of progesterone for treating women with CUD.Methods: A 10-week double-blind randomized treatment trial was conducted. Prior to randomization, participants were required to achieve cocaine abstinence (1 week) before assignment to progesterone (up to 400 mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy outcomes were days to relapse and cocaine abstinence during the last 3 weeks of the trial. The frequency of side effects was also assessed.Results: 227 women were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-five women entered treatment and 21 were randomized to progesterone (n = 11) or placebo (n = 10). The majority of women relapsed in less than 4 days with no differences between the two groups. Further, there were no significant differences between the progesterone and placebo groups in terms of cocaine abstinence during the last 3 weeks of the trial (27% and 10% respectively). The most commonly reported side effects were headache and fatigue, but no group differences were noted.Conclusions: Progesterone was well tolerated and safe and supports further study is in a larger sample to determine if exogenous progesterone is an effective treatment option for women with CUD.(ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00632099).

[International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder]. / Internationale Konsenserklärung zu Screening, Diagnostik und Behandlung von Jugendlichen und Heranwachsenden mit Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung und gleichzeitigen Störungen durch Substanzgebrauch.

International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder Abstract. Background: Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for substance misuse and substance use disorder (SUD) in adolescence and (early) adulthood. ADHD and SUD also frequently co-occur in treatment-seeking adolescents, which complicates diagnosis and treatment and is associated with poor treatment outcomes. Research on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on the prevention of adolescent SUD is inconclusive, and studies on the diagnosis and treatment of adolescents with ADHD and SUD are scarce. Thus, the available evidence is generally not sufficient to justify robust treatment recommendations. Objective: The aim of the study was to obtain a consensus statement based on a combination of scientific data and clinical experience. Method: A modified Delphi study to reach consensus based upon the combination of scientific data and clinical experience with a multidisciplinary group of 55 experts from 17 countries. The experts were asked to rate a set of statements on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on adolescent SUD and on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of adolescents with comorbid ADHD and SUD. Results: After 3 iterative rounds of rating and adapting 37 statements, consensus was reached on 36 of these statements representing 6 domains: general (n = 4), risk of developing SUD (n = 3), screening and diagnosis (n = 7), psychosocial treatment (n = 5), pharmacological treatment (n = 11), and complementary treatments (n = 7). Routine screening is recommended for ADHD in adolescent patients in substance abuse treatment and for SUD in adolescent patients with ADHD in mental healthcare settings. Long-acting stimulants are recommended as the first-line treatment of ADHD in adolescents with concurrent ADHD and SUD, and pharmacotherapy should preferably be embedded in psychosocial treatment. The only remaining no-consensus statement concerned the requirement of abstinence before starting pharmacological treatment in adolescents with ADHD and concurrent SUD. In contrast to the majority, some experts required full abstinence before starting any pharmacological treatment, some were against the use of stimulants in the treatment of these patients (independent of abstinence), while some were against the alternative use of bupropion. Conclusion: This international consensus statement can be used by clinicians and patients together in a shared decision-making process to select the best interventions and to reach optimal outcomes in adolescent patients with concurrent ADHD and SUD.

Design and methods of a multi-site randomized controlled trial of an integrated care model of long-acting injectable buprenorphine with infectious disease treatment among persons hospitalized with infections and opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization with co-occurring opioid use disorder (OUD) and infections presents a critical time to intervene to improve outcomes for these intertwined epidemics that are typically managed separately. A surge in life-threatening infectious diseases associated with injection drug use, including bacterial and fungal infections, HIV, and HCV accounts for substantial healthcare utilization, morbidity, and mortality. Infectious Disease (ID) specialists manage severe infections that require hospitalization and are a logical resource to engage patients in medication treatment for OUD (MOUD). An injectable long-acting monthly formulation of buprenorphine (LAB) has a potential advantage for initiating MOUD within hospital settings and bridging to treatment after discharge. METHODS: A randomized multi-site trial tests a new model of care (ID/LAB) in which OUD and infections are managed by ID specialists and hospitalists using LAB coupled with referrals to community resources for long-term MOUD. A sample of 200 adults admitted to three U.S. hospitals for OUD and infections are randomly assigned 1:1 to ID/LAB or treatment as usual (TAU). The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients enrolled in effective MOUD at 12 weeks after randomization. Secondary outcomes include relapse to opioid use, adherence to infectious disease treatment, infection morbidity and mortality, and drug overdose. RESULTS: We describe the design, procedures, statistical analysis, and early implementation issues of this randomized trial. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings will provide insight into the feasibility and effectiveness of integrated treatment of OUD and serious infections and have the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality in this vulnerable population.

5HT-2C agonist lorcaserin decreases cannabis self-administration in daily cannabis smokers.

There are no FDA-approved treatments for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Preclinical research has shown that the 5HT-2C agonist lorcaserin attenuates cue-induced reinstatement of THC seeking and self-administration. The goal of this placebo-controlled, counterbalanced, within-subject human laboratory study was to examine lorcaserin's effects on cannabis intoxication and self-administration. Lorcaserin (10 mg BID) was administered during one of two 13-day inpatient phases and placebo during the other; each phase was separated by ≥7 days of washout. Inpatient phases comprised (1) standardized cannabis administration (7.0% THC) at no financial cost (intoxication), counterbalanced with (2) the option to self-administer cannabis following either 0 or 3 days of abstinence. Cognitive task performance, food intake, subjective ratings of drug effects, objective/subjective sleep measures, and tobacco cigarette use were also assessed. Fifteen normal-weight, daily cannabis users (4F, 11M) not seeking treatment for CUD completed the study. Lorcaserin significantly reduced cannabis self-administration following 0 and 3 days of cannabis abstinence and also reduced craving for cannabis during abstinence. Lorcaserin produced small but significant increases in positive cannabis ratings and body weight relative to placebo. Lorcaserin also reduced tobacco cigarette smoking on days of cannabis administration relative to placebo. During abstinence, subjective but not objective measures of sleep quality worsened during lorcaserin maintenance. Overall, lorcaserin's ability to decrease drug taking and cannabis craving in nontreatment-seeking cannabis users supports further investigation of 5HT-2C agonists as potential pharmacotherapies for CUD.

Quetiapine treatment for cannabis use disorder.

BACKROUND: Pharmacotherapy for cannabis use disorder (CUD) is an important unmet public health need. METHODS: In a 12-week randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, the efficacy of quetiapine (300 mg nightly) for the treatment of CUD was tested in 130 outpatients. Weekly cannabis use was categorized into three groups: heavy use (5-7 days), moderate use (2-4 days) and light use (0-1 days). RESULTS: At baseline both groups were considered heavy users (using days per week: median = 7.0; interquartile range (IQR): 6.5-7.0; daily dollar value: median = $121.4; IQR: 73.8-206.3). The week-by-treatment interaction was marginally significant (χ2(2) = 5.56, P = .06). With each week, the odds of moderate compared to heavy use significantly increased in the quetiapine group (OR=1.17, P < .0001), but not significantly in the placebo group (OR=1.05, P = .16). The odds of light versus heavy use did not significantly differ over time (P = .12). Treatment was also associated with reduced cannabis withdrawal symptoms by 10.4% each week (95% CI: 8.9-11.8). No serious adverse events occurred during the study and no evidence of development of a movement disorder was detected. Adverse effects were not significantly different between the quetiapine and placebo treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: The use of quetiapine to treat CUD was associated with an increased likelihood of heavy frequency use transitioning to moderate use, but not light use. The clinical significance of reductions in cannabis use, short of abstinence warrants further study.

[Recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and treatment of patients with comorbid attention deficit hyperactivity- and substance use disorder].

Among patients with substance use disorders (SUD), adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most frequently co-occuring disorder. Those SUD patients with comorbid ADHD show earlier onset of substance use, more severe SUD and poor treatment outcomes. Therefore, early recognition of ADHD is highly rele - vant within this patient population. The results of available screening instruments may lay the foundation of timely ADHD diagnosis. Considering the integrated treatment of patients with a dual ADHD+SUD diagnosis, the applica tion of combined pharmaco- and psychotherapy is recommended. Based on the evidence-and consensus-based suggestions, prescription of long-acting methylphenidate, extended-release amphetamines and atomoxetine with up-titration might be the best choice in the treatment of patients who are either unresponsive to standard dose or characterized by therapy resistance. The main purpose of this manuscript is to establish a standing-ground for the effective screening, diagnosis and treatment of ADHD+SUD patients.

Prescription psychostimulants for the treatment of stimulant use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

RATIONALE: Agonist-based pharmacologic intervention is an accepted approach in treatment of opioid and tobacco use disorders. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate usefulness of an agonist approach as treatment of (psycho)stimulant use disorder (PSUD). METHODS: We reviewed PubMed/Medline, LILACS, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases searching for randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design studies evaluating outcomes of individuals treated for cocaine- or amphetamine-type substance use disorder. We combined results of all trials that included the following prescription psychostimulants (PPs): modafinil, methylphenidate, or amphetamines (mixed amphetamine salts, lisdexamphetamine, and dextroamphetamine). The combined sample consisted of 2889 patients. Outcomes of interest included the following: drug abstinence (defined as 2-3 weeks of sustained abstinence and the average maximum days of consecutive abstinence), percentage of drug-negative urine tests across trial, and retention in treatment. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and assessed quality of evidence using the GRADE system. RESULTS: Thirty-eight trials were included. Treatment with PPs increases rates of sustained abstinence [risk ratio (RR) = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) = (1.10, 1.92)] and duration of abstinence [mean difference (MD) = 3.34, 95% CI = (1.06, 5.62)] in patients with PSUD, particularly those with cocaine use disorder (very low-quality evidence). Prescription amphetamines were particularly efficacious in promoting sustained abstinence in patients with cocaine use disorder [RR = 2.44, 95% CI = (1.66, 3.58)], and higher doses of PPs were particularly efficacious for treatment of cocaine use disorder [RR = 1.95, 95% CI = (1.38, 2.77)] (moderate-quality evidence). Treatment with prescription amphetamines also yielded more cocaine-negative urines [MD = 8.37%, 95% CI = (3.75, 12.98)]. There was no effect of PPs on the retention in treatment. CONCLUSION: Prescription psychostimulants, particularly prescription amphetamines given in robust doses, have a clinically significant beneficial effect to promote abstinence in the treatment of individuals with PSUD, specifically the population with cocaine use disorder.

International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for substance misuse and substance use disorder (SUD) in adolescence and (early) adulthood. ADHD and SUD also frequently co-occur in treatment-seeking adolescents, which complicates diagnosis and treatment and is associated with poor treatment outcomes. Research on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on the prevention of adolescent SUD is inconclusive, and studies on the diagnosis and treatment of adolescents with ADHD and SUD are scarce. Thus, the available evidence is generally not sufficient to justify robust treatment recommendations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to obtain a consensus statement based on a combination of scientific data and clinical experience. METHOD: A modified Delphi study to reach consensus based upon the combination of scientific data and clinical experience with a multidisciplinary group of 55 experts from 17 countries. The experts were asked to rate a set of statements on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on adolescent SUD and on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of adolescents with comorbid ADHD and SUD. RESULTS: After 3 iterative rounds of rating and adapting 37 statements, consensus was reached on 36 of these statements representing 6 domains: general (n = 4), risk of developing SUD (n = 3), screening and diagnosis (n = 7), psychosocial treatment (n = 5), pharmacological treatment (n = 11), and complementary treatments (n = 7). Routine screening is recommended for ADHD in adolescent patients in substance abuse treatment and for SUD in adolescent patients with ADHD in mental healthcare settings. Long-acting stimulants are recommended as the first-line treatment of ADHD in adolescents with concurrent ADHD and SUD, and pharmacotherapy should preferably be embedded in psychosocial treatment. The only remaining no-consensus statement concerned the requirement of abstinence before starting pharmacological treatment in adolescents with ADHD and concurrent SUD. In contrast to the majority, some experts required full abstinence before starting any pharmacological treatment, some were against the use of stimulants in the treatment of these patients (independent of abstinence), while some were against the alternative use of bupropion. CONCLUSION: This international consensus statement can be used by clinicians and patients together in a shared decision-making process to select the best interventions and to reach optimal outcomes in adolescent patients with concurrent ADHD and SUD.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Increases Nicotine Addiction Severity in Adults Seeking Treatment for Substance Use Disorders: The Role of Personality Disorders.

AIMS: To examine the role of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and impulsive personality disorders in nicotine addiction severity among treatment-seeking substance use disorder (SUD) patients. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, we examined data from the second International ADHD in Substance Use Disorders Prevalence Study (IASP-2) on 402 adults in SUD treatment from Puerto Rico, Hungary, and Australia using diagnostic interviews for ADHD, antisocial (ASP) and borderline (BPD) personality disorders, and the self-report Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence (FTND). We compared SUD patients with and without ADHD on nicotine addiction severity. We tested direct and indirect pathways from ADHD to nicotine addiction and mediation through ASP and BPD. RESULTS: Overall, 81.4% of SUD patients reported current cigarette smoking. SUD patients with ADHD had higher FTND scores and smoked more cigarettes than those without ADHD, with an earlier onset and more years of smoking. ASP mediated the effect of ADHD on all aspects of nicotine addiction severity, whereas BPD did so only on some aspects of nicotine addiction severity. CONCLUSIONS: SUD patients with comorbid ADHD show more severe nicotine addiction than those without, which is largely explained by comorbid impulsive personality disorders. In SUD patients, it is important to screen for adult ADHD and other psychiatric disorders, especially those with impulse control deficits such as ASP and BPD.

New directions in the treatment of opioid withdrawal.

The treatment of opioid withdrawal is an important area of clinical concern when treating patients with chronic, non-cancer pain, patients with active opioid use disorder, and patients receiving medication for opioid use disorder. Current standards of care for medically supervised withdrawal include treatment with µ-opioid receptor agonists, (eg, methadone), partial agonists (eg, buprenorphine), and α2-adrenergic receptor agonists (eg, clonidine and lofexidine). Newer agents likewise exploit these pharmacological mechanisms, including tramadol (µ-opioid receptor agonism) and tizanidine (α2 agonism). Areas for future research include managing withdrawal in the context of stabilising patients with opioid use disorder to extended-release naltrexone, transitioning patients with opioid use disorder from methadone to buprenorphine, and tapering opioids in patients with chronic, non-cancer pain.

Case Series: Rapid Induction Onto Long Acting Buprenorphine Injection for High Potency Synthetic Opioid Users.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Highly potent synthetic opioids (HPSO) are increasingly responsible for opioid overdose deaths in the United States. METHODS: In an open-label, uncontrolled trial to test the feasibility of extended-release buprenorphine (BXR) injection treatment of heroin-using individuals with opioid use disorder testing positive for HPSO, participants were enrolled and began an induction with sublingual BXR (n = 5). During the induction, ancillary medications (clonidine, clonazepam, zolpidem, and prochlorperazine) were provided for breakthrough opioid withdrawal symptoms. RESULTS: Two participants received the BXR injection on the second day of the induction and three participants on the third day. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: All five participants were retained at least 1-month postinduction. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: It may be feasible to provide BXR treatment to HPSO-positive heroin users rapidly to achieve clinical stabilization. (Am J Addict 2020;00:00-00).

A week-long outpatient induction onto XR-naltrexone in patients with opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Extended-release (XR) naltrexone can prevent relapse to opioid use disorder following detoxification. However, one of the barriers to initiating XR-naltrexone is the recommendation for a 7-10-day period of abstinence from opioids prior to the first dose. OBJECTIVES: The current study evaluated the feasibility of an XR-naltrexone induction protocol that can be implemented over 1 week in the outpatient clinic. METHODS: Participants (N = 44) were seen in the clinic daily. On Day 1, after abstaining from opioids for at least 12 h, they received buprenorphine 6-8 mg. Adjunctive medications (clonidine, clonazepam, zolpidem, trazodone, and prochlorperazine) were dispensed on Days 2-5, while ascending oral doses of naltrexone were given on Days 3-5 starting with 1 mg dose. An injection of XR-naltrexone was given on Day 5, 1 h after receiving and tolerating naltrexone 24 mg. RESULTS: Of the 44 participants (38 males), 35 (80%) were heroin users and 9 (20%) used prescription opioids. A total of 26 participants (59%) completed the induction and received their first injection of XR-naltrexone. XR-naltrexone was initiated in 54% (19/35) of heroin users and 78% (7/9) of prescription opioid users. CONCLUSION: The results support the feasibility of a week-long outpatient induction onto XR-naltrexone with ascending doses of naltrexone and standing doses of adjunctive medications. By circumventing the need for a protracted period of abstinence and mitigating the severity of withdrawal symptoms experienced during naltrexone titration, this strategy has the potential to increase patient acceptability and access to relapse prevention treatment with XR-naltrexone.

International Consensus Statement on Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment of Substance Use Disorder Patients with Comorbid Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Adult attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often co-occurs with substance use disorders (SUD) and is associated with early onset and more severe development of SUD and with reduced treatment effectiveness. Screening tools allow for a good recognition of possible ADHD in adults with SUD and should be used routinely, followed by an ADHD diagnostic process initiated as soon as possible. Simultaneous and integrated treatment of ADHD and SUD, using a combination of pharmaco- and psychotherapy, is recommended. Long-acting methylphenidate, extended-release amphetamines, and atomoxetine with up-titration to higher dosages may be considered in patients unresponsive to standard doses. This paper includes evidence- and consensus-based recommendations developed to provide guidance in the screening, diagnosis and treatment of patients with ADHD-SUD comorbidity.

Abstinence and reduced frequency of use are associated with improvements in quality of life among treatment-seekers with cannabis use disorder.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Many patients with cannabis use disorder (CUD) do not achieve or do not have abstinence as a goal of treatment, rather they reduce their use. Assessing outcome measures as they relate to functioning and reductions in cannabis use is an important area of study. Quality of life (QoL) shows promise as one such measure. Past studies have demonstrated gender differences in QoL and CUD. We aim to assess (1) the relationship between cannabis use and QoL and (2) gender effects in an outpatient medication treatment study for CUD. METHODS: Data from an 11-weeks, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of lofexidine and dronabinol for CUD (n = 62) was analyzed. Pearson's correlations between baseline QoL as measured with the Quality of Life, Enjoyment, and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (QLES-Q-SF) and cannabis use assessed with modified timeline follow-back (TLFB) were examined. Multiple linear regression models of cannabis use on end of study QLES-Q-SF were analyzed, while adjusting for baseline QLES-Q-SF, study arm, and gender. Moderation effects with gender were also tested. RESULTS: No significant association between baseline cannabis use and QoL was found. End of study abstinence (F1,47 = 8.34, p = .006) and reduced proportion of using days (F1,47 = 9.48, p = .004) were each significantly associated with end of study QoL. Reduction in grams (F1,27 = 0.25, p = .62) was not associated with QoL at end of study. Gender was not a significant moderator. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Abstinence and lower frequency of use are associated with higher QoL, regardless of gender. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first time QoL has been demonstrated to change over the course of CUD medication treatment. QoL is an important outcome in CUD treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01020019. (Am J Addict 2018;27:101-107).

Exploring longitudinal course and treatment-baseline severity interactions in secondary outcomes of smoking cessation treatment in individuals with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

BACKGROUND: A double blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial (NCT00253747) evaluating osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) for smoking-cessation revealed a significant interaction effect in which participants with higher baseline ADHD severity had better abstinence outcomes with OROS-MPH while participants with lower baseline ADHD severity had worse outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This current report examines secondary outcomes that might bear on the mechanism for this differential treatment effect. METHODS: Longitudinal analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of OROS-MPH on three secondary outcomes (ADHD symptom severity, nicotine craving, and withdrawal) in the total sample (N = 255, 56% Male), and in the high (N = 134) and low (N = 121) baseline ADHD severity groups. RESULTS: OROS-MPH significantly improved ADHD symptoms and nicotine withdrawal symptoms in the total sample, and exploratory analyses showed that in both higher and lower baseline severity groups, OROS-MPH statistically significantly improved these two outcomes. No effect on craving overall was detected, though exploratory analyses showed statistically significantly decreased craving in the high ADHD severity participants on OROS-MPH. No treatment by ADHD baseline severity interaction was detected for the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Methylphenidate improved secondary outcomes during smoking cessation independent of baseline ADHD severity, with no evident treatment-baseline severity interaction. Our results suggest divergent responses to smoking cessation treatment in the higher and lower severity groups cannot be explained by concordant divergence in craving, withdrawal and ADHD symptom severity, and alternative hypotheses may need to be identified.