Predictors of engagement in screening for a hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment trial in a rural Appalachian community.

An HCV treatment trial was initiated in September 2019 to address the opioid/hepatitis C virus (HCV) syndemic in rural Kentucky. The focus of the current analysis is on participation in diagnostic screening for the trial. Initial eligibility (≥18 years of age, county resident) was established by phone followed by in-person HCV viremia testing. 900 rural residents met the inclusion criteria and comprised the analytic sample. Generalized linear models were specified to estimate the relative risk of non-attendance at the in-person visit determining HCV eligibility. Approximately one-quarter (22.1%) of scheduled participants were no-shows. People who inject drugs were no more likely than people not injecting drugs to be a no-show; however, participants ≤35 years of age were significantly less likely to attend. While the median time between phone screening and scheduled in-person screening was only 2 days, each additional day increased the odds of no-show by 3% (95% confidence interval: 2%-3%). Finally, unknown HCV status predicted no-show even after adjustment for age, gender, days between screenings and injection status. We found that drug injection did not predict no-show, further justifying expanded access to HCV treatment among people who inject drugs. Those 35 years and younger were more likely to no-show, suggesting that younger individuals may require targeted strategies for increasing testing and treatment uptake. Finally, streamlining the treatment cascade may also improve outcomes, as participants in the current study were more likely to attend if there were fewer days between phone screening and scheduled in-person screening.

Facilitating factors and barriers for use of medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) among justice-involved individuals in rural Appalachia.

The purpose of this qualitative study is to assess facilitating factors and barriers for medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) initiation among justice-involved individuals in one rural Appalachian community, as well as how those factors may differ across the three types of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved medications. Qualitative interviews were conducted with rural justice-involved individuals (N = 10) with a history of opioid use in the target community. Overall, participants demonstrated knowledge of the different types of MOUD and their pharmacological properties, but limited overall health literacy around opioid use disorder and MOUD treatment. Treatment access was hampered by transportation, time burdens, and costs. Findings call for research into improving health literacy education, training, and resources to decrease stigma and increase access to MOUD, particularly in light of the ongoing opioid crisis. State policies also need to increase access to all FDA medications among justice-involved individuals, as well as supporting a care continuum from facility entry, release, and community re-entry.

Psychometric evaluation of two indices assessing stigma toward opioid misuse and treatment among health care providers.

Background: Stigma is described as highly relevant to the treatment context for opioid use disorder (OUD) partly because it is known to influence clinicians' treatment decisions and care provision. However, appropriate measures are needed to test the salience of stigmatizing views held by clinicians directly.Objective: This study assessed dimensionality, reliability, and validity evidence for two measures - of public stigma toward opioid misuse and clinician stigma associated with medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), respectively.Methods: Psychometric tests were conducted based on survey data collected from a sample of 144 clinicians participating in a buprenorphine waiver training program (30% female).Results: Factor analysis indicated that the indices of stigma associated with opioid misuse and MOUD stigma are best represented as separate measures. Spearman-Brown Prophesy estimates (opioid misuse stigma = .88; MOUD stigma = .93) and Cronbach's alpha coefficients (opioid misuse stigma = .93; MOUD stigma = .91) supported the reliability of both measures. Construct validity evidence was additionally found in correlation tests based on provider background characteristics, and discriminant validity evidence is supported by the between-factor correlation coefficient (r = .44, p = .04) for the opioid misuse stigma and MOUD stigma indices.Conclusions: Both indices examined in this report are psychometrically acceptable measures for assessing general bias among health care providers toward persons who misuse opioids and toward those seeking MOUD treatment. Further consideration of these forms of bias are recommended in future research to improve clinical practice and increase the implementation of MOUD treatment.

Long-acting buprenorphine injectables: Opportunity to improve opioid use disorder treatment among rural populations.

The opioid epidemic continues with escalating overdose deaths further exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic, despite having efficacious medication treatments for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Most persons with OUD remain undiagnosed, without ever receiving MOUD, and even among those who initiate MOUD, retention is infrequently longer than 6 months (Williams et al., 2019). Treatment access remains particularly problematic in rural areas that often have few providers and limited resources (Ghertner, 2019). There are two new injectable long-acting buprenorphine (LAB) formulations recently approved in the United States and abroad (Lofwall et al., 2018; Walsh et al., 2017; Haight et al., 2019). They hold promise to improve treatment access and retention by decreasing risks of nonadherence, diversion and misuse and may be particularly attractive during a pandemic in order to minimize provider and pharmacy contacts (Roberts et al., 2020) and help improve access to care in rural areas. There are several ongoing evaluations of LAB injectables in large multi-site randomized clinical trials sponsored by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and Veterans Administration Office of Research and Development in settings with special populations that exist in both urban and rural settings. Understanding the potential clinical benefits of LAB injectables along the care continuum, particularly for rural areas is essential to successful implementation in the complex healthcare system.

Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy Plus Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder and Severe Injection-related Infections.

In a pilot randomized trial in persons with opioid use disorder hospitalized with injection-related infections, an innovative care model combining outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy with buprenorphine treatment had similar clinical and drug use outcomes to usual care (inpatient intravenous antibiotic completion) and shortened hospital length of stay by 23.5 days. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03048643.

Longitudinal trends in nonmedical prescription opioid use in a cohort of rural Appalachian people who use drugs.

Rural Appalachia remains an epicenter of the prescription opioid epidemic. In 2008, a cohort study was undertaken to examine longitudinal trends in nonmedical prescription opioid use (NMPOU). Eight waves of data (2008-2020) from the Social Networks among Appalachian People (SNAP) cohort were utilized for the current analysis. Only those who reported recent (past 6-month) NMPOU at baseline are included (n = 498, 99%). Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to model factors associated with NMPOU over time. Recent NMPOU declined significantly over the past decade (p < .001). However, 54.1% of participants still engaged in NMPOU at their most recent follow-up. Receipt of benefits for a physical or mental disability (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.11, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.98, 4.90) and self-described poor health status (aOR: 3.67, 95% CI: 1.61, 8.37) were both associated with NMPOU. All treatment modalities (methadone maintenance, residential, outpatient counseling) tested in the model, with the notable exception of detoxification, were associated with significantly lower odds of NMPOU. Although significant declines in prescription opioid misuse were observed in the cohort, more than half of all participants were engaged in NMPOU more than a decade after entering the study. Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment (excluding detoxification) was shown associated with reduced odds of continued NMPOU; therefore, increasing access to evidence-based treatments should be a priority in rural areas affected by the ongoing opioid epidemic.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the kappa opioid receptor antagonist, CERC-501, in a human laboratory model of smoking behavior.

Preclinical data indicate that selective kappa opioid receptor antagonists reduce nicotine self-administration and withdrawal symptoms. The aim of the current study was to determine whether treatment with CERC-501, an orally available, potent, and selective kappa opioid receptor antagonist, could alleviate nicotine withdrawal and craving and mitigate mood alterations associated with nicotine withdrawal in humans. Healthy, adult cigarette smokers were enrolled into this randomized, multisite, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Participants completed two 8-day treatment phases during which they received either CERC-501 (15 mg, p.o., once daily) or placebo. On the seventh day of each dosing phase, participants were admitted as inpatients for an 18-hour cigarette abstinence period followed by experimental testing. The primary outcome measures were (a) performance on the McKee Smoking Lapse test (ie, latency to smoke in exchange for money) and (b) number of cigarettes self-administered during a 60-minute ad lib smoking period. Other outcomes included measures of craving, mood, anxiety, nicotine withdrawal, and subjective effects of cigarette smoking. A total of 71 participants who smoked an average of approximately 23 cigarettes per day were enrolled, and 56 subjects completed the study. CERC-501 was well tolerated, but it did not significantly alter the latency to start smoking (CERC-501: 16.5 min vs placebo: 17.7 min) or the number of cigarettes smoked (CERC-501: 3.3 cigarettes vs placebo: 3.1 cigarettes). Compared with placebo, CERC-501 also did not affect cigarette craving, mood, anxiety, nicotine withdrawal, or subjective effects of smoking. These findings do not support a role for CERC-501 in the treatment of nicotine use disorder.

Adoption of the 275-patient buprenorphine treatment waiver for treating opioid use disorder: A state-level longitudinal analysis.

Background: Increasing access to buprenorphine treatment is a critical tool for addressing the opioid epidemic in the United States. In 2016, a federal policy change allowed physicians who meet specific requirements to treat up to 275 concurrent buprenorphine patients. This study examines state-level measures of buprenorphine treatment supply over 21 months since this policy change and estimates associations between the supply of 275-patient waivers and state characteristics. Methods: Monthly state-level measures of the number of physicians holding the 275-patient waiver per 100,000 residents were constructed from September 2016 to May 2018 using the Drug Enforcement Agency's Controlled Substance Act database. State characteristics were obtained from publicly available sources. Mixed-effects regression models were estimated to examine change over time. Results: During the 21-month period, the number of physicians waivered to treat 275 patients increased from 153 to 4009 physicians. The mean supply of 275-patient physicians per 100,000 state residents significantly increased from 0.07 (SD = 0.21) in September 2016 to 1.43 (SD = 1.08) in May 2018 (t = -9.84, df = 50, P < .001). The final mixed-effects regression model indicated that Census division and the preexisting supply of 100-patient waivered physicians were correlated with the rate of growth in 275-patient waivers over the study period. Conclusions: Although uptake of the 275-patient waiver has exceeded initial projections, growth is uneven across the United States. Unequal patterns of growth pose a challenge to efforts to increase treatment availability as a means of addressing the opioid epidemic.

Integrated outpatient treatment of opioid use disorder and injection-related infections: A description of a new care model.

Persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) hospitalized with severe, injection-related infections (SIRI) are frequently hospitalized for the duration of IV antibiotic treatment due to concerns regarding their eligibility for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT), which is the standard of care for prolonged IV antibiotic courses for patients without drug use. As part of a pilot study, a novel, integrated care model was developed where patients with OUD and SIRI receive addiction consultation and buprenorphine induction while hospitalized, followed by ongoing management in an outpatient clinic that combines office-based opioid treatment with buprenorphine pharmacotherapy and counseling services with OPAT. Through three illustrative case vignettes the outpatient model is described along with challenges, lessons learned and future directions.

Treating Opioid Use Disorder in Patients Who Are Incarcerated: Quandaries of a Hospitalist.

This Viewpoint discusses the importance of ensuring that life-saving medication for opioid use disorder is available to hospitalized persons who are incarcerated.

A Pharmacokinetic Study Examining Acetazolamide as a Novel Adherence Marker for Clinical Trials.

RATIONALE: Accurate assessment of medication adherence is critical for determination of medication efficacy in clinical trials, but most current methods have significant limitations. This study tests a subtherapeutic (microdose) of acetazolamide as a medication ingestion marker because acetazolamide is rapidly absorbed and excreted without metabolism in urine and can be noninvasively sampled. METHODS: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, residential study, 10 volunteers received 15 mg oral acetazolamide for 4 consecutive days. Acetazolamide pharmacokinetics were assessed on day 3, and its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with a model medication (30 mg oxycodone) were examined on day 4. The rate of acetazolamide elimination into urine was followed for several days after dosing cessation. RESULTS: Erythrocyte sequestration (half-life = 50.2 ± 18.5 h, mean ± SD, n = 6), resulted in the acetazolamide microdose exhibiting a substantially longer plasma half-life (24.5 ± 5.6 hours, n = 10) than previously reported for therapeutic doses (3-6 hours). After cessation of dosing, the rate of urinary elimination decreased significantly (F3,23 = 247: P < 0.05, n = 6) in a predictable manner with low intersubject variability and a half-life of 16.1 ± 3.8 h (n = 10). For each of 4 consecutive mornings after dosing cessation, the rates of urinary acetazolamide elimination remained quantifiable.There was no overall effect of acetazolamide on the pharmacodynamics, Cmax, Tmax, or elimination half-life of the model medication tested. Acetazolamide may have modestly increased overall oxycodone exposure (20%, P < 0.05) compared with one of the 2 days when oxycodone was given alone, but there were no observed effects of acetazolamide on oxycodone pharmacodynamic responses. CONCLUSIONS: Coformulation of a once-daily trial medication with an acetazolamide microdose may allow estimation of the last time of medication consumption for up to 96 hours postdose. Inclusion of acetazolamide may therefore provide an inexpensive new method to improve estimates of medication adherence in clinical trials.

Pharmacodynamic effects of oral oxymorphone: abuse liability, analgesic profile and direct physiologic effects in humans.

Oxymorphone is a semisynthetic µ-opioid agonist, marketed as a prescription analgesic purported to be twice as potent as oxycodone for pain relief. Oral formulations of oxymorphone were reintroduced in the United States in 2006 and reports of abuse ensued; however, there are limited data available on its pharmacodynamic effects. The current study aimed to examine the direct physiologic effects, relative abuse liability, analgesic profile and overall pharmacodynamic potency of oxymorphone in comparison with identical doses of oxycodone. Healthy, non-dependent opioid abusers (n = 9) were enrolled in this within-subject, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-week inpatient study. Seven experimental sessions (6.5 hours) were conducted, during which an oral dose of immediate-release formulations of oxymorphone (10, 20 and 40 mg), oxycodone (10, 20 and 40 mg) or placebo was administered. An array of physiologic, abuse liability and experimental pain measures was collected. At identical doses, oxymorphone produced approximately twofold less potent effects on miosis, compared with oxycodone. Oxymorphone also produced lesser magnitude effects on measures of respiratory depression, two experimental pain models and observer-rated agonist effects. However, 40 mg of oxymorphone was similar to 40 mg of oxycodone on several abuse-related subjective ratings. Formal relative potency analyses were largely invalid because of the substantially greater effects of oxycodone. Overall, oxymorphone is less potent on most pharmacodynamic measures, although at higher doses, its abuse liability is similar to oxycodone. These data suggest that the published clinical equianalgesic estimates may not be consistent with the observed direct physiologic effects of opioids, results of experimental pain models or abuse liability measures, as assessed in the human laboratory.

Effect of Buprenorphine Implants on Illicit Opioid Use Among Abstinent Adults With Opioid Dependence Treated With Sublingual Buprenorphine: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The effectiveness of buprenorphine treatment of opioid dependence is limited by suboptimal medication adherence, abuse, and diversion. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether 6-month buprenorphine implants are noninferior to daily sublingual buprenorphine as maintenance treatment for opioid-dependent patients with stable abstinence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Outpatient, randomized, active-controlled, 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy study conducted at 21 US sites from June 26, 2014, through May 18, 2015. Outpatients were prescribed daily sublingual buprenorphine for 6 months or more, were abstinent while taking 8 mg/d or less of sublingual buprenorphine for 90 days or longer, and were determined to be clinically stable by their physician. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive sublingual buprenorphine plus 4 placebo implants or sublingual placebo plus four 80-mg buprenorphine hydrochloride implants (expected efficacy, 24 weeks). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary end point was between-group difference in proportion of responders (≥4 of 6 months without opioid-positive urine test result [monthly and 4 times randomly] and self-report). The noninferiority established for the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval was greater than -0.20 (P < .025). Secondary end points included cumulative percentage of negative opioid urine results, abstinence, and time to first illicit opioid use. Safety was assessed by adverse event reporting. RESULTS: Of 177 participants (mean age, 39 years; 40.9% female), 90 were randomized to sublingual buprenorphine with placebo implants and 87 to buprenorphine implants with sublingual placebo; 165 of 177 (93.2%) completed the trial. Eighty-one of 84 (96.4%) receiving buprenorphine implants and 78 of 89 (87.6%) receiving sublingual buprenorphine were responders, an 8.8% difference (1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.009 to ∞; P < .001 for noninferiority). Over 6 months, 72 of 84 (85.7%) receiving buprenorphine implants and 64 of 89 (71.9%) receiving sublingual buprenorphine maintained opioid abstinence (hazard ratio, 13.8; 95% CI, 0.018-0.258; P = .03). Non-implant-related and implant-related adverse events occurred in 48.3% and 23% of the buprenorphine implant group and in 52.8% and 13.5% of participants in the sublingual buprenorphine group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among adults with opioid dependence maintaining abstinence with a stable dose of sublingual buprenorphine, the use of buprenorphine implants compared with continued sublingual buprenorphine did not result in an inferior likelihood of remaining a responder. However, the study population had an exceptionally high response rate in the control group, and further studies are needed in broader populations to assess the efficacy in other settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02180659.

Extended-release Buprenorphine Administered at Discharge in Hospitalized Persons With Opioid Use Disorder: A Case Series.

INTRODUCTION: Monthly subcutaneous injectable buprenorphine (XR-Bup) is an option for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) that addresses some sublingual buprenorphine adherence barriers and is infrequently offered to hospitalized patients with OUD. METHODS: A retrospective case series was performed for patients receiving XR-Bup upon discharge from 1 academic medical center. Demographic information, diagnoses, follow-up, and documented factors informing the selection of XR-Bup were extracted from the electronic health record. RESULTS: In 1 year, 37 hospitalized patients with OUD received XR-Bup at discharge. The average age was 37.6 years, and patients were primarily Medicaid insured with an injection-related infection. The most common documented factors informing the selection of XR-Bup were as follows: previous sublingual buprenorphine adherence barriers, concurrent stimulant use disorder, and patient preference. Sixty-four percent of patients scheduled for follow-up attended appointments, and 55% received a second dose of XR-Bup. CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous injectable buprenorphine is an option for OUD treatment among hospitalized patients providing 30 or more days of buprenorphine coverage in the postdischarge period.

Pain Management in Patients With Opioid Use Disorder on Extended-release Buprenorphine: A Case Report.

ABSTRACT: Persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) are receiving extended-release buprenorphine (ER-buprenorphine) for treatment of OUD. There are no clinical guidelines for management of patients with OUD on ER-buprenorphine experiencing acute or chronic pain. This case report describes 3 patient-involved, multidisciplinary approaches for pain management in various clinical scenarios, including a scheduled knee replacement, emergent surgery for an ischemic limb, and management of chronic pain from metastatic malignancy. These cases illustrate that adequate analgesia for patients who have received ER-buprenorphine is possible, and approaches can be individualized, with shared decision making between providers and patients addressing all barriers to optimize treatment outcomes. Options for acute pain management that can be considered include supplemental sublingual buprenorphine, nonopioid adjuncts, and short courses of full opioid agonists. Potential barriers that impact OUD and acute/chronic pain are provider bias, limited access to palliative care clinicians with addiction medicine training, and payor restrictions to adding sublingual buprenorphine for patients that are on ER-buprenorphine. Additional training for clinicians and other members of the health care team is recommended to improve patient-involved care of persons with OUD experiencing pain.

Get It in Writing: How to Make Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Available During Incarceration.

In a case example from the Kentucky HEALing Communities Study, extensive resources were deployed to address structural barriers and facilitate the provision of medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) in an urban county jail. However, implementation was unsuccessful, and this case example emphasizes the importance of including evidence-based medication for OUD (MOUD) treatment in the scope of work of jails' contracted medical providers. The privatization of correctional health care services allows local governments with opioid abatement funds to incorporate requirements into medical provider contracts to screen all people entering jails for OUD and to offer MOUD at intake, throughout incarceration, and upon release to everyone for whom it is clinically indicated. We provide sample contractual language that can be added to requests for medical provider proposals to help drive the private correctional health care market toward integrating MOUD treatment into their standard of care. This approach also could expedite efforts to scale up broad MOUD access across U.S. jails through sharing of workflows and best practices among the small group of national correctional health care companies contracted with jails in states with broad mandates, such as Massachusetts. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04111939.

Extended-Release Injection vs Sublingual Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder With Fentanyl Use: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Fentanyl has exacerbated the opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid overdose epidemic. Data on the effectiveness of medications for OUD among patients using fentanyl are limited. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of sublingual or extended-release injection formulations of buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD among patients with and without fentanyl use. Design, Setting, and Participants: Post hoc analysis of a 24-week, randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted at 35 outpatient sites in the US from December 2015 to November 2016 of sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone vs extended-release subcutaneous injection buprenorphine (CAM2038) for patients with OUD subgrouped by presence vs absence of fentanyl or norfentanyl in urine at baseline. Study visits with urine testing occurred weekly for 12 weeks, then 6 times between weeks 13 and 24. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis from March 2022 to August 2023. Intervention: Weekly and monthly subcutaneous buprenorphine vs daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone. Main Outcomes and Measures: Retention in treatment, percentage of urine samples negative for any opioids (missing values imputed as positive), percentage of urine samples negative for fentanyl or norfentanyl (missing values not imputed), and scores on opiate withdrawal scales and visual analog craving scales. Results: Of 428 participants, 123 (subcutaneous buprenorphine, n = 64; sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone, n = 59; mean [SD] age, 39.1 [10.8] years; 75 men [61.0%]) had evidence of baseline fentanyl use and 305 (subcutaneous buprenorphine, n = 149; buprenorphine-naloxone, n = 156; mean [SD] age, 38.1 [11.1] years; 188 men [61.6%]) did not have evidence of baseline fentanyl use. Study completion was similar between the fentanyl-positive (60.2% [74 of 123]) and fentanyl-negative (56.7% [173 of 305]) subgroups. The mean percentage of urine samples negative for any opioid were 28.5% among those receiving subcutaneous buprenorphine and 18.8% among those receiving buprenorphine-naloxone in the fentanyl-positive subgroup (difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, -3.0% to 22.3%) and 36.7% among those receiving subcutaneous buprenorphine and 30.6% among those receiving buprenorphine-naloxone in the fentanyl-negative subgroup (difference, 6.1%; 95% CI, -1.9% to 14.1%), with significant main associations of baseline fentanyl status and treatment group. In the fentanyl-positive subgroup, the mean percentage of urine samples negative for fentanyl during the study was 74.6% among those receiving subcutaneous buprenorphine vs 61.9% among those receiving sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (difference, 12.7%; 95% CI, 9.6%-15.9%). Opioid withdrawal and craving scores decreased rapidly after treatment initiation across all groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial of sublingual vs extended-release injection buprenorphine for OUD, buprenorphine appeared to be effective among patients with baseline fentanyl use. Patients with fentanyl use had fewer opioid-negative urine samples during the trial compared with the fentanyl-negative subgroup. These findings suggest that the subcutaneous buprenorphine formulation may be more effective at reducing fentanyl use. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02651584.