Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder in Community-Based Settings: Outcome Related to Intensity of Services and Urine Drug Test Results.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Variables contributing to the outcome of buprenorphine treatment for opiate use disorder have been studied, including patient characteristics and the treatment approach applied. It is also valuable to study the types of clinical facilities that can affect outcome. METHODS: We evaluated patients (N = 20 993) in 573 facilities where buprenorphine was prescribed. Urine drug test results were analyzed for those (N = 13 281) who had buprenorphine prescribed at least twice in the period January 2015 through June 2017. Facilities were divided into three categories: medication management (MM) only, limited psychosocial (LP) therapy, and recovery-oriented (with more extensive counseling and a 12-step orientation) (RO). RESULTS: Urine drug tests negative for other opioids at the time of the second buprenorphine prescription were 34% for MM, 56% for LP, and 62% for RO (P < .001). A comparison was made between the most recent and the established patients at the facilities. The decrement in urinalyses positive for other opioids in this latter comparison was 3% for MM, 7% for LP, and 23% for RO (P < .001). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: In a large sample of community settings, buprenorphine patients' urinalyses positive for opioids can vary considerably across treatment facilities, and more intensive recovery orientation may yield a better outcome in terms of secondary opioid use. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: The majority of buprenorphine patients are treated in community facilities. It is important that research be done by facility type in such settings in order to plan for optimal treatment. (© 2020 The Authors. The American Journal on Addictions published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.;00:00-00).

A Systematic, Intensive Statistical Investigation of Data from the Comprehensive Analysis of Reported Drugs (CARD) for Compliance and Illicit Opioid Abstinence in Substance Addiction Treatment with Buprenorphine/naloxone.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine and naloxone (bup/nal), a combination partial mu receptor agonist and low-dose delta mu antagonist, is presently recommended and used to treat opioid-use disorder. However, a literature review revealed a paucity of research involving data from urine drug tests that looked at compliance and abstinence in one sample. METHOD: Statistical analysis of data from the Comprehensive Analysis of Reported Drugs (CARD) was used to assess compliance and abstinence during treatment in a large cohort of bup/nal patients attending chemical-dependency programs from eastern USA in 2010 and 2011. RESULTS: Part 1: Bup/nal was present in 93.4% of first (n = 1,282; p <.0001) and 92.4% of last (n = 1,268; p <.0001) urine samples. Concomitantly, unreported illicit drugs were present in 47.7% (n = 655, p =.0261) of samples. Patients who were compliant to the bup/nal prescription were more likely than noncompliant patients to be abstinent during treatment (p =.0012; odds ratio = 1.69 with 95% confidence interval (1.210, 2.354). Part 2: An analysis of all samples collected in 2011 revealed a significant improvement in both compliance (p < 2.2 × 10-16) and abstinence (p < 2.2 × 10-16) during treatment. Conclusion/Importance: While significant use of illicit opioids during treatment with bup/nal is present, improvements in abstinence and high compliance during maintenance-assisted therapy programs may ameliorate fears of diversion in comprehensive programs. Expanded clinical datasets, the treatment modality, location, and year of sampling are important covariates, for further studies. The potential for long-term antireward effects from bup/nal use requires consideration in future investigations.

Quantitative testing of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine to identify urine sample spiking during office-based opioid treatment.

BACKGROUND: Patients may spike urine samples with buprenorphine during office-based opioid treatment to simulate adherence to prescribed buprenorphine, potentially to conceal diversion of medications. However, routine immunoassay screens do not detect instances of spiking, as these would simply result in a positive result. The aim of this study was to report on the experience of using quantitative urine testing for buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine to facilitate the identification of urine spiking. METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of 168 consecutive patients enrolled in outpatient buprenorphine treatment at an urban academic medical setting between May 2013 and August 2014. All urine samples submitted were subjected to quantitative urine toxicology testing for buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine. Norbuprenorphine-to-buprenorphine ratio of less than 0.02 were further examined for possible spiking. Demographic and clinical variables were also extracted from medical records. Clinical and demographic variables of those who did and did not spike their urines were compared. Statistically significant variables from the univariate testing were entered as predictors of spiking in a regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients were included, submitting a total of 2275 urine samples. Patients provided on average 13.6 (SD = 9.9) samples, and were in treatment for an average 153.1 days (SD = 142.2). In total, 8 samples (0.35%) from 8 patients (4.8%) were deemed to be spiked. All of the samples suspected of spiking contained buprenorphine levels greater than 2000 ng/mL, with a mean norbuprenorphine level of 11.9 ng/mL. Spiked samples were submitted by 6 patients (75.0%) during the intensive outpatient (IOP) phase of treatment, 2 patients (25.0%) during the weekly phase, and none from the monthly phase. Regression analysis indicated that history of intravenous drug use and submission of cocaine-positive urine samples at baseline were significant predictors of urine spiking. CONCLUSIONS: Even though only a small number of patients were identified to have spiked their urine samples, quantitative testing may help identify urine spiking during office-based opioid treatment with buprenorphine.

Describing prescription opioid adherence among individuals with chronic pain using urine drug testing.

Adherence monitoring for prescription opioid use is a clinical imperative for individuals prescribed opioids for chronic pain. Urine drug testing (UDT) provides objective evidence for prescription opioid adherence, as recommended by national guidelines to be part of adherence monitoring. The aim of this study was to describe prescription opioid adherence using UDT results in chronic pain patients and to examine the association between demographic characteristics and adherence to their prescribed opiate regimens. We used a retrospective chart review of 120 consecutive patients at an urban pain management clinic. Data collected included UDT results, pain level, and demographic characteristics. Descriptive and correlational statistics were used for data analysis. About 54% of the individuals appeared nonadherent to their prescribed opiate regimen as defined by absence or inappropriate level of prescribed controlled medication, presence of additional nonprescribed controlled substance(s), presence of illicit substance(s), or presence of adulterant in the urine sample. Of the participants, 23% had absence of one or more of their prescribed controlled medications and 12.5% had presence of one or more other opioids. Marijuana was the main illicit substance used (24.2%), followed by cocaine (11.7%). Patients' age, pain level, sex, ethnicity, and injury compensation were not associated with UDT results. UDT results could be useful to educate and guide patients on the proper use of controlled medications. Results from UDT are highly contextual and easily misinterpreted, requiring comparison with a variety of clinical indicators over time before deciding if there is adherence to a prescribed opiate regimen for individuals with chronic pain.

Preliminary buprenorphine sublingual tablet pharmacokinetic data in plasma, oral fluid, and sweat during treatment of opioid-dependent pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is currently under investigation as a pharmacotherapy to treat pregnant women for opioid dependence. This research evaluates buprenorphine (BUP), norbuprenophine (NBUP), buprenorphine-glucuronide (BUP-Gluc), and norbuprenorphine-glucuronide (NBUP-Gluc) pharmacokinetics after high-dose (14-20 mg) BUP sublingual tablet administration in three opioid-dependent pregnant women. METHODS: Oral fluid and sweat specimens were collected in addition to plasma specimens for 24 hours during gestation weeks 28 or 29 and 34, and 2 months after delivery. Time to maximum concentration was not affected by pregnancy; however, BUP and NBUP maximum concentration and area under the curve at 0 to 24 hours tended to be lower during pregnancy compared with postpartum levels. RESULTS: Statistically significant but weak positive correlations were found for BUP plasma and OF concentrations and BUP/NBUP ratios in plasma and oral fluid. Statistically significant negative correlations were observed for times of specimen collection and BUP and NBUP oral fluid/plasma ratios. BUP-Gluc and NBUP-Gluc were detected in only 5% of oral fluid specimens. In sweat, BUP and NBUP were detected in only four of 25 (12 or 24 hours) specimens in low concentrations (less than 2.4 ng/patch). CONCLUSION: These preliminary data describe BUP and metabolite pharmacokinetics in pregnant women and suggest that, like methadone, upward dose adjustments may be needed with advancing gestation.

Naltrexone and Its Noroxymorphone Minor Metabolite - A Case Report.

As part of substance use maintenance programs, individuals are monitored for sobriety through urine drug screens. A positive screen, and its confirmation and interpretation, can have devastating consequences, sometimes even leading to termination from the program and relapse. Naltrexone metabolism involves several steps and metabolites - one minor metabolite with very little mention in medical literature being noroxymorphone. This is also the final intermediate in the metabolic pathway of oxycodone; hence, detection is naturally presumed by clinicians to be attributed to oxycodone use. Through this case report, we alert clinicians that, depending on individual pharmacogenomics, it is possible to obtain a positive confirmation of this component alone (without any oxycodone pathway intermediates) with naltrexone administration.

Use of urinary naloxone levels in a single provider practice: a case study.

BACKGROUND: Urine drug monitoring for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) such as buprenorphine can help to support treatment adherence. The practice of introducing unconsumed medication directly into urine (known as "spiking" samples) has been increasingly recognized as a potential means to simulate treatment adherence. In the laboratory, examination of the ratios of buprenorphine and its metabolite, norbuprenorphine, has been identified as a mechanism to identify "spiked" samples. Urine levels of naloxone may also be a novel marker in cases where the combination buprenorphine-naloxone product has been administered. This case study, which encompasses one provider's practice spanning two sites, represents a preliminary report on the utility of using urinary naloxone as an indicator of "spiked" urine toxicology samples. Though only a case study, this represents the largest published evaluation of patients' naloxone levels to date. CASE PRESENTATION: Over a 3-month period across two practice sites, we identified 1,223 patient samples with recorded naloxone levels, spanning a range of 0 to 12,161 ng/ml. The average naloxone level was 633.65 ng/ml with the majority (54%) of samples < 300 ng/ml. 8.0% of samples demonstrated extreme values of naloxone (> 2000 ng/ml). One practice site, which had increased evidence of specimen tampering at collections, had a greater percent of extreme naloxone levels (>  2000 ng/ml) at 9.3% and higher average naloxone level (686.8 ng/ml), in contrast to a second site (570.9 ng/ml; 6.4% at > 2000 ng/ml) that did not have known reports of specimen tampering. CONCLUSIONS: We postulate that naloxone may serve as an additional flag to identify patient "spiking" of urine samples with use of the combination product of buprenorphine-naloxone.

Urinary excretion of buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine-glucuronide, and norbuprenorphine-glucuronide in pregnant women receiving buprenorphine maintenance treatment.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine (BUP) is under investigation as a medication therapy for opioid-dependent pregnant women. We investigated BUP and metabolite disposition in urine from women maintained on BUP during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy and postpartum. METHODS: We measured BUP, norbuprenorphine (NBUP), buprenorphine glucuronide (BUP-Gluc), and NBUP-Gluc concentrations in 515 urine specimens collected thrice weekly from 9 women during pregnancy and postpartum. Specimens were analyzed using a fully validated liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry method with limits of quantification of 5 microg/L for BUP and BUP-Gluc and 25 microg/L for NBUP and its conjugated metabolite. We examined ratios of metabolites across trimesters and postpartum to identify possible changes in metabolism during pregnancy. RESULTS: NBUP-Gluc was the primary metabolite identified in urine and exceeded BUP-Gluc concentrations in 99% of specimens. Whereas BUP-Gluc was identified in more specimens than NBUP, NBUP exceeded BUP-Gluc concentrations in 77.9% of specimens that contained both analytes. Among all participants, the mean BUP-Gluc:NBUP-Gluc ratio was significantly higher in the second trimester compared to the third trimester, and there were significant intrasubject differences between trimesters in 71% of participants. In 3 women, the percent daily dose excreted was higher during pregnancy than postpregnancy, consistent with other data indicating increased renal elimination of drugs during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: These data are the first to evaluate urinary disposition of BUP and metabolites in a cohort of pregnant women. Variable BUP excretion during pregnancy may indicate metabolic changes requiring dose adjustment during later stages of gestation.

Urine is superior to oral fluid for detecting buprenorphine compliance in patients undergoing treatment for opioid addiction.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine (BUP) is commonly used in opioid agonist medication-assisted treatment (OA-MAT). Oral fluid (OF) is an attractive option for compliance monitoring during OA-MAT as collections are observed and evidence suggests that OF is less likely to be adulterated than urine (UR). However, the clinical and analytical performance of each matrix for monitoring BUP compliance has not been well studied. METHODS: We collected 260 paired OF and UR specimens. Concentrations of buprenorphine (BUP) and norbuprenorphine (NBUP) were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) in each matrix. The glucuronide metabolites and naloxone concentrations were also measured in UR by LC-MS/MS. Medications were reviewed and UR creatinine concentrations were determined. RESULTS: 147/260 specimens (57%) were positive for BUP and/or metabolites in one or both matrices. BUP and/or metabolites were more likely to be detected in UR (p < 0.001). 1 OF specimen and 12 UR specimens were considered adulterated/substituted. The majority of patients prescribed BUP were positive for BUP in UR (97%) as opposed to OF (78%). The detection of undisclosed use approximately doubled in UR. CONCLUSIONS: UR is the preferred matrix for detecting both buprenorphine compliance and undisclosed use. Clinicians should consider the ease of collection, risk of adulteration and detection of illicit drug use when deciding on an appropriate matrix. If OF testing is clinically necessary, UR should be measured in conjunction with OF at least periodically to avoid false negative BUP results.

Disposition of naltrexone after intravenous bolus administration in Wistar rats, low-alcohol-drinking rats and high-alcohol-drinking rats.

Reports have shown that interspecies differences in the metabolism and pharmacokinetics of naltrexone are a rule rather than exception. However, there is paucity of information on the disposition of naltrexone in selectively bred rat lines that reliably exhibit high and low voluntary alcohol consumption, and are often used to study alcohol-drinking behavior. We have characterized the pharmacokinetic profiles of naltrexone in selectively bred rat lines: high-alcohol-drinking (HAD-1) and low-alcohol-drinking (LAD-1) rats as well as the native Wistar strain. This study was carried out to establish a baseline pharmacokinetic profile of naltrexone in these rats prior to evaluating its pharmacokinetic profile in polymeric controlled-release formulations in our laboratory. The hypothesis is that alcohol-preferring and non-alcohol-preferring lines of rats should differ in the disposition of intravenously administered naltrexone. Naltrexone administration and blood collection were via the jugular vein. In a parallel experiment, naltrexone was administered via the jugular vein, but urine was collected using the Nalgene metabolic cage system. Data were analyzed by a noncompartmental approach. Results show a high clearance that is close to or higher than hepatic blood flow in all groups (Wistar > LAD-1 > HAD-1, but with a statistically significant difference only between Wistar and HAD-1). Volume of distribution (approximately 2.5-3 l/kg) and the half-life (approximately 1 h) were similar. Urinary elimination of naltrexone was small, but also showed differences between the rats: HAD-1 > LAD-1 > Wistar, but with a statistically significant difference only between HAD-1 and Wistar rats. This study has therefore established the baseline disposition characteristics of naltrexone in these strains of rats.

Development and validation of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay for the simultaneous quantification of buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, and metabolites in human urine.

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the simultaneous quantification of buprenorphine (BUP), norbuprenorphine (NBUP), buprenorphine glucuronide (BUP-Gluc), and norbuprenorphine glucuronide (NBUP-Gluc) in human urine was developed and fully validated. Extensive endogenous and exogenous interferences were evaluated and limits of quantification were identified empirically. Analytical ranges were 5-1,000 ng/mL for BUP and BUP-Gluc and 25-1,000 ng/mL for NBUP and NBUP-Gluc. Intra-assay and interassay imprecision were less than 17% and recovery was 93-116%. Analytes were stable at room temperature, at 4 degrees C, and for three freeze-thaw cycles. This accurate and precise assay has sufficient sensitivity and specificity for urine analysis of specimens collected from individuals treated with BUP for opioid dependence.

Comparison of nonhydrolysis and hydrolysis methods for the determination of buprenorphine metabolites in urine by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.

A highly sensitive and selective method for the direct determination of buprenorphine (BUP), norbuprenorphine (NBUB), buprenorphine-3-glucuronide, and norbuprenorphine-3-glucuronide in urine was developed and validated. Analytes of interest were extracted by solid-phase extraction on Bond Elut C18, followed by liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry analysis using a Synergy Polar RP column. Gradient elution was based on a mobile phase consisting of 10 mM ammonium formate adjusted to pH 3 and acetonitrile. Acceptance criteria for linearity, precision, and recovery were achieved for all analytes. Intraday and interday precisions were better than 12% and 14%, respectively. Calibration curves were linear for BUP and its metabolites over the concentration range of 5-250 ng/mL, and correlation coefficients (R(2)) were better than 0.999. Limits of detection and lower limits of quantification were 0.2-0.4 and 0.7-1.2 ng/mL, respectively. Recoveries were in the range of 76-96%. No interference was detected with other common drugs. The described method was compared with an in-house hydrolysis method using 21 real urine case samples. BUP and NBUP were detected using both methods, with higher concentrations obtained using the direct method. Both methods were linear with correlation coefficients of 0.994 and 0.986 for total BUP and total NBUP, respectively. The comparison between the direct detection of BUP and its metabolites with the analysis of total BUP and total NBUP using the hydrolysis method is reported for the first time in this work.

Urinary buprenorphine concentrations in patients treated with suboxone as determined by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry and CEDIA immunoassay.

We report on the utility of urine total buprenorphine, total norbuprenorphine, and creatinine concentrations in patients treated with Suboxone (a formulation containing buprenorphine and naloxone), used increasingly for the maintenance or detoxification of patients dependent on opiates such as heroin or oxycodone. Patients received 8-24 mg/day buprenorphine. Two-hundred sixteen urine samples from 70 patients were analyzed for both total buprenorphine and total norbuprenorphine by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS). Buprenorphine concentrations in all 176 samples judged to be unadulterated averaged 164 ng/mL, with a standard deviation (SD) of 198 ng/mL. Nine samples (4.2%) had metabolite-parent drug ratios < 0.02, and 33 (15.3%) had no detectable buprenorphine. The metabolite/parent drug ratio in 166 samples had a range of 0.07-23.0 (mean = 4.52; SD = 3.97). Fifteen of 96 available urine samples (16.7%) had creatinine less than 20 mg/dL. We also found sample adulteration in 7 (7.3%) available samples. Using a 5 ng/mL urine buprenorphine cutoff, the sensitivity and specificity of the Microgenics homogeneous enzyme immunoassay versus LC-MS-MS were 100% and 87.5%, respectively. The 5 ng/mL cutoff Microgenics CEDIA buprenorphine assay results agreed analytically with LC-MS-MS in 97.9% of samples.

[Determination of buprenorphine in urine]. / Bestemmelse av buprenorfinkonsentrasjon i urin.

Buprenorphine is one of the drugs used for treatment of opioid-dependent patients enrolled in rehabilitation programs in Norway. Buprenorphine is metabolized in the liver by cytochrome P450 to the active metabolite norbuprenorphine, and further to buprenorphine-glucuronide and norbuprenorphine-glucuronide. The Division of Forensic Toxicology and Drug Abuse at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health has during the past 5 years received an increasing number of urine samples for buprenorphine analysis. All urine samples with question of buprenorphine have since August 2005 been analysed with a new method, which analyses the glucuronides of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine in urine. This method is fast and simple and saves time and resources in our routine laboratory.

Determination of naloxegol in human biological matrices.

AIM: Naloxegol is an oral peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation. Sensitive, robust, bioanalytical methods were required to quantitate naloxegol in human biological matrices as part of the clinical development program. METHODOLOGY/RESULTS: Analytical plasma samples were prepared using Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) coupled with concentration. The method's linearity was established at 0.1-50 ng/ml with up to 100-fold dilution. Urine samples were analyzed directly postdilution; dialysate samples were extracted by supported liquid extraction. Sensitive liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assays were developed and validated, and demonstrated acceptable precision, accuracy and selectivity for naloxegol in the appropriate matrices. CONCLUSION: Methods for quantifying naloxegol in human biological matrices have been successfully validated.

Quantitative LC-MS determination of strychnine in urine after ingestion of a Strychnos nux-vomica preparation and its consequences in doping control.

A simple, fast and sensitive method for the quantitative determination of strychnine residues in urine has been developed and validated. The method consists of a liquid-liquid extraction step with ethyl acetate at pH 9.2, followed by LC-MS/MS in positive atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI)-mode. The method is linear in the range of 1-100 ng/mL and allows for the determination of strychnine at sub-toxicological concentrations. The accuracy of the method ranged from 1.3% to 4.4%. The method was used to determine the excretion profile of strychnine after the ingestion of an over-the-counter herbal preparation of Strychnos nux-vomica. Each volunteer ingested a dose equivalent to 380 micro g of strychnine. This dose is lower than the prescription dose but results in the detection of strychnine for over 24-h post administration. Maximum detected urinary concentrations ranged from 22.6 to 176 ng/mL. The results of this study show that the use of this type of preparation by athletes can lead to a positive doping case.

Quantitation of Buprenorphine, Norbuprenorphine, Buprenorphine Glucuronide, Norbuprenorphine Glucuronide, and Naloxone in Urine by LC-MS/MS.

Buprenorphine is an opioid drug that has been used to treat opioid dependence on an outpatient basis, and is also prescribed for managing moderate to severe pain. Some formulations of buprenorphine also contain naloxone to discourage misuse. The major metabolite of buprenorphine is norbuprenorphine. Both compounds are pharmacologically active and both are extensively metabolized to their glucuronide conjugates, which are also active metabolites. Direct quantitation of the glucuronide conjugates in conjunction with free buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, and naloxone in urine can distinguish compliance with prescribed therapy from specimen adulteration intended to mimic compliance with prescribed buprenorphine. This chapter quantitates buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, their glucuronide conjugates and naloxone directly in urine by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Urine is pretreated with formic acid and undergoes solid phase extraction (SPE) prior to analysis by LC-MS/MS.