Supply-side response to declining heroin purity: fentanyl overdose episode in New Jersey.

The inelastic price demand observations characteristic of illegal drug markets have led to the conclusion that the burden of a negative supply shock would be completely reflected to consumers. This paper argues that the increasing availability of prescription opioids may threaten heroin sellers' profit margin and force them to find alternative methods to compensate buyers in the event of a supply shock. We investigate the 2006 fentanyl overdose episode in New Jersey and argue that the introduction of non-pharmaceutical fentanyl, its spatial distribution, and the timing of overdose deaths may have been related to trends in heroin purity. Using medical examiner data, as well as data from the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control on retail sales of prescription opioids in a negative binomial specification, we show that month-to-month fluctuations in heroin purity have a significant effect on fentanyl-related overdoses, particularly in those areas where prescription opioids are highly available.

Co-located Heroin Assisted Treatment within primary care: A preliminary analysis of the implications for healthcare access, cost, and treatment delivery in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The UK is experiencing its highest rate of drug related deaths in 25 years. Poor and inconsistent access to healthcare negatively impacts health outcomes for people who use drugs. Innovation in models of care which promote access and availability of physical treatment is fundamental. Heroin Assisted Treatment (HAT) is a treatment modality targeted at the most marginalised people who use drugs, at high risk of mortality and morbidity. The first service-provider initiated HAT service in the UK ran between October 2019 and November 2022 in Middlesbrough, England. The service was co-located within a specialist primary care facility offering acute healthcare treatment alongside injectable diamorphine. METHODS: Analysis of anonymised health records for healthcare costs (not including drug treatment) took place using descriptive statistics prior and during engagement with HAT, at both three (n=15) and six (n=12) months. Primary outcome measures were incidents of wound care, skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs), overdose (OD) events, unplanned overnight stays in hospital, treatment engagement (general and within hospital care settings) and ambulance incidents. Secondary outcome measures were costs associated with these events. RESULTS: A shift in healthcare access for participants during HAT engagement was observed. HAT service attendance appeared to support health promoting preventative care, and reduce reactive reliance on emergency healthcare systems. At three and six months, engagement for preventative wound care and treatment for SSTIs increased at the practice. Unplanned emergency healthcare interactions for ODs, overnight hospital stays, serious SSTIs, and ambulance incidents reduced, and there was an increase in treatment engagement (i.e. a reduction in appointments which were not engaged with). There was a decrease in treatment engagement in hospital settings. Changes in healthcare utilisation during HAT translated to a reduction in healthcare costs of 58% within six months compared to the same timeframe from the period directly prior to commencing HAT. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study highlights the potential for innovative harm reduction interventions such as HAT, co-located with primary care services, to improve healthcare access and engagement for a high-risk population. Increased uptake of primary healthcare services translated to reductions in emergency healthcare use and associated costs. Although costs of HAT provision are substantial, the notable cost-savings in health care should be an important consideration in service implementation planning.

Injectable heroin - effective treatment for opiate misusers, but is it cost-effective?

Implementation of injectable heroin treatment for patients with chronic heroin dependence unresponsive to oral methadone maintenance treatment has stagnated, even though the evidence for its effectiveness in this population continues to accrue. This is due to a range of political and environmental factors, not least of which is the cost of the treatment. The article by Byford et al in this issue of the Journal goes some way to increasing the evidence base for the cost-effectiveness of injectable heroin treatment compared with other treatment options. Questions still remain though about the funding implications for government departments, commissioners and providers, given that the sector that is responsible for the majority of the cost, healthcare, is not the same sector that sees the majority of the cost savings, criminal justice.

Cost-effectiveness of injectable opioid treatment v. oral methadone for chronic heroin addiction.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of the effectiveness of injectable opioid treatment compared with oral methadone for chronic heroin addiction, the additional cost of injectable treatment is considerable, and cost-effectiveness uncertain. AIMS: To compare the cost-effectiveness of supervised injectable heroin and injectable methadone with optimised oral methadone for chronic refractory heroin addiction. METHOD: Multisite, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Outcomes were assessed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Economic perspective included health, social services and criminal justice resources. RESULTS: Intervention costs over 26 weeks were significantly higher for injectable heroin (mean £8995 v. £4674 injectable methadone and £2596 oral methadone; P<0.0001). Costs overall were highest for oral methadone (mean £15 805 v. £13 410 injectable methadone and £10 945 injectable heroin; P = n.s.) due to higher costs of criminal activity. In cost-effectiveness analysis, oral methadone was dominated by injectable heroin and injectable methadone (more expensive and less effective). At willingness to pay of £30 000 per QALY, there is a higher probability of injectable methadone being more cost-effective (80%) than injectable heroin. CONCLUSIONS: Injectable opioid treatments are more cost-effective than optimised oral methadone for chronic refractory heroin addiction. The choice between supervised injectable heroin and injectable methadone is less clear. There is currently evidence to suggest superior effectiveness of injectable heroin but at a cost that policy makers may find unacceptable. Future research should consider the use of decision analytic techniques to model expected costs and benefits of the treatments over the longer term.

Cost-effectiveness of diacetylmorphine versus methadone for chronic opioid dependence refractory to treatment.

BACKGROUND: Although diacetylmorphine has been proven to be more effective than methadone maintenance treatment for opioid dependence, its direct costs are higher. We compared the cost-effectiveness of diacetylmorphine and methadone maintenance treatment for chronic opioid dependence refractory to treatment. METHODS: We constructed a semi-Markov cohort model using data from the North American Opiate Medication Initiative trial, supplemented with administrative data for the province of British Columbia and other published data, to capture the chronic, recurrent nature of opioid dependence. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios to compare diacetylmorphine and methadone over 1-, 5-, 10-year and lifetime horizons. RESULTS: Diacetylmorphine was found to be a dominant strategy over methadone maintenance treatment in each of the time horizons. Over a lifetime horizon, our model showed that people receiving methadone gained 7.46 discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) on average (95% credibility interval [CI] 6.91-8.01) and generated a societal cost of $1.14 million (95% CI $736,800-$1.78 million). Those who received diacetylmorphine gained 7.92 discounted QALYs on average (95% CI 7.32-8.53) and generated a societal cost of $1.10 million (95% CI $724,100-$1.71 million). Cost savings in the diacetylmorphine cohort were realized primarily because of reductions in the costs related to criminal activity. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of diacetylmorphine being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $0 per QALY gained was 76%; the probability was 95% at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. Results were confirmed over a range of sensitivity analyses. INTERPRETATION: Using mathematical modelling to extrapolate results from the North American Opiate Medication Initiative, we found that diacetylmorphine may be more effective and less costly than methadone among people with chronic opioid dependence refractory to treatment.

Heroin hustles: Drugs and the laboring poor in South Africa.

This article sets out a political economic framework to understand South Africa's dramatic upsurge in heroin use in the 2000s. Drawing on interviews with users and their families, it shows how the opioid gained influence among men in their twenties living in apartheid-engineered townships marked by chronic unemployment. Giving particular attention to histories of work, it documents the ways that men hustle to generate an income to buy heroin, showing their relationship to families who support them and community members who may employ them. The article challenges the view that heroin users' income comes primarily from criminal activities, an assumption that feeds into punitive approaches to drugs. Instead, it insists that heroin hustlers must be seen as part of a large group of "laboring poor" who undertake low-paid work that does not enable desirable futures. As such, the article develops a framework that can contribute to understanding the political economy of heroin use in high-unemployment regions of the Global South.

Incidence and treatment costs of severe bacterial infections among people who inject heroin: A cohort study in South London, England.

BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs often get bacterial infections. Few longitudinal studies have reported the incidence and treatment costs of these infections. METHODS: For a cohort of 2335 people who inject heroin entering treatment for drug dependence between 2006 and 2017 in London, England, we reported the rates of hospitalisation or death with primary causes of cutaneous abscess, cellulitis, phlebitis, septicaemia, osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, endocarditis, or necrotising fasciitis. We compared these rates to the general population. We also used NHS reference costs to calculate the cost of admissions. RESULTS: During a median of 8.0 years of follow-up, 24 % of patients (570/2335) had a severe bacterial infection, most commonly presenting with cutaneous abscesses or cellulitis. Bacterial infections accounted for 13 % of all hospital admissions. The rate was 73 per 1000 person-years (95 % CI 69-77); 50 times the general population, and the rate remained high throughout follow-up. The rate of severe bacterial infections for women was 1.50 (95 % CI 1.32-1.69) times the rate for men. The mean cost per admission was £4980, and we estimate that the annual cost of hospital treatment for people who inject heroin in London is £4.5 million. CONCLUSIONS: People who inject heroin have extreme and long-term risk of severe bacterial infections.

Prescription of heroin for the management of heroin dependence: current status.

The prescription of heroin (diamorphine) for the management of heroin dependence is a controversial treatment approach that was limited to Britain until the 1990s. Since then a number of countries have embarked upon clinical trials of this approach, and it is currently licensed and available in several European countries. To date, six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with over 1600 patients and several cohort studies have examined injected (or inhaled) heroin treatment. This article reviews relevant clinical pharmacology, how heroin treatment programmes are delivered, and the evidence regarding safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness from RCTs. Heroin is usually prescribed in intravenous dosages of 300-500 mg/day, divided in two or three doses. Uncommon but serious side effects include seizures and respiratory depression immediately following injection. Despite methodological shortcomings, RCTs generally indicate that heroin treatment results in a comparable retention, improved general health and psychosocial functioning, and less self-reported illicit heroin use than oral methadone treatment. Cost-effectiveness studies indicate heroin treatment to be more expensive to deliver but to result in savings in the criminal justice sector. There has been debate regarding how heroin treatment should be positioned within the range of treatment approaches for this condition. There is increasing consensus that, in countries that have robust and accessible treatment systems for heroin users, heroin treatment is suited to a minority of heroin users as a second-line treatment for those individuals who do not respond to methadone or buprenorphine treatment delivered under optimal conditions.

Researching a local heroin market as a complex adaptive system.

This project applies agent-based modeling (ABM) techniques to better understand the operation, organization, and structure of a local heroin market. The simulation detailed was developed using data from an 18-month ethnographic case study. The original research, collected in Denver, CO during the 1990s, represents the historic account of users and dealers who operated in the Larimer area heroin market. Working together, the authors studied the behaviors of customers, private dealers, street-sellers, brokers, and the police, reflecting the core elements pertaining to how the market operated. After evaluating the logical consistency between the data and agent behaviors, simulations scaled-up interactions to observe their aggregated outcomes. While the concept and findings from this study remain experimental, these methods represent a novel way in which to understand illicit drug markets and the dynamic adaptations and outcomes they generate. Extensions of this research perspective, as well as its strengths and limitations, are discussed.

Illicit fentanyls in the opioid street market: desired or imposed?

BACKGROUND: Illicitly manufactured fentanyl and its analogues are appearing in countries throughout the world, often disguised as heroin or counterfeit prescription pills, with resulting high overdose mortality. Possible explanations for this phenomenon include reduced costs and risks to heroin suppliers, heroin shortages, user preferences for a strong, fast-acting opioid and the emergence of Dark Web cryptomarkets. This paper addresses these potential causes and asks three questions: (1) can users identify fentanyl; (2) do users desire fentanyl; and (3) if users want fentanyl, can they express this demand in a way that influences the supply? ARGUMENT/ANALYSIS: Existing evidence, while limited, suggests that some users can identify fentanyl, although not reliably, and some desire it, but because fentanyl is frequently marketed deceptively as other drugs, users lack information and choice to express demand effectively. Even when aware of fentanyl's presence, drug users may lack fentanyl-free alternatives. Cryptomarkets, while difficult to quantify, appear to offer buyers greater information and competition than offline markets. However, access barriers and patterns of fentanyl-related health consequences make cryptomarkets unlikely sources of user influence on the fentanyl supply. Market condition data indicate heroin supply shocks and shortages prior to the introduction of fentanyl in the United States and parts of Europe, but the much lower production cost of fentanyl compared with heroin may be a more significant factor CONCLUSION: Current evidence points to a supply-led addition of fentanyl to the drug market in response to heroin supply shocks and shortages, changing prescription opioid availability and/or reduced costs and risks to suppliers. Current drug users in affected regions of the United States, Canada and Europe appear largely to lack both concrete knowledge of fentanyl's presence in the drugs they buy and access to fentanyl-free alternatives.

Drug affordability-potential tool for comparing illicit drug markets.

BACKGROUND: The importance of illicit drug price data and making appropriate adjustments for purity has been repeatedly highlighted for understanding illicit drug markets. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) has been collecting retail price data for a number of drug types alongside drug-specific purity information for over 15 years. While these data are useful for a number of monitoring and analytical purposes, they are not without their limitations and there are circumstances where additional adjustment needs to be considered. This paper reviews some conceptual issues and measurement challenges relevant to the interpretation of price data. It also highlights the issues with between-country comparisons of drug prices and introduces the concept of affordability of drugs, going beyond purity-adjustment to account for varying national economies. METHODS: Based on a 2015 European data set of price and purity data across the heroin and cocaine retail markets, the paper demonstrates a new model for drug market comparative analysis; calculation of drug affordability is achieved by applying to purity-adjusted prices 2015 Price Level Indices (PLI, Eurostat). RESULTS: Available data allowed retail heroin and cocaine market comparison for 27 European countries. The lowest and highest unadjusted prices per gram were observed for heroin: in Estonia, Belgium, Greece and Bulgaria (lowest) and Finland, Ireland, Sweden and Latvia (highest); for cocaine: the Netherlands, Belgium and the United Kingdom (lowest) and Turkey, Finland, Estonia and Romania (highest). The affordability per gram of heroin and cocaine when taking into account adjustment for both purity and economy demonstrates different patterns. CONCLUSION: It is argued that purity-adjusted price alone provides an incomplete comparison of retail price across countries. The proposed new method takes account of the differing economic conditions within European countries, thus providing a more sophisticated tool for cross-national comparisons of retail drug markets in Europe. Future work will need to examine other potential uses of the drug affordability tool. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this measure reflect primarily the limitations of the constituent data; in addition to issues inherent in collecting accurate data on illicit markets, analysis that relies on data collected from multiple countries is susceptible to discrepancies in data collection practices from country to country.

Cost-effectiveness of hydromorphone for severe opioid use disorder: findings from the SALOME randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous research has found diacetylmorphine, delivered under supervision, to be cost-effective in the treatment of severe opioid use disorder, but diacetylmorphine is not available in many settings. The Study to Assess Long-term Opioid Maintenance Effectiveness (SALOME) randomized controlled trial provided evidence that injectable hydromorphone is non-inferior to diacetylmorphine. The current study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of hydromorphone directly with diacetylmorphine and indirectly with methadone maintenance treatment. DESIGN: A within-trial analysis was conducted using the patient level data from the 6-month, double-blind, non-inferiority SALOME trial. A life-time analysis extrapolated costs and outcomes using a decision analytical cohort model. The model incorporated data from a previous trial to include an indirect comparison to methadone maintenance. SETTING: A supervised clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 202 long-term street opioid injectors who had at least two attempts at treatment, including one with methadone (or other substitution), were randomized to hydromorphone (n = 100) or diacetylmorphine (n = 102). MEASUREMENTS: We measured the utilization of drugs, visits to health professionals, hospitalizations, criminal activity, mortality and quality of life. This enabled us to estimate incremental costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost-effectiveness ratios from a societal perspective. Sensitivity analyses considered different sources of evidence, assumptions and perspectives. FINDINGS: The within-trial analysis found hydromorphone provided similar QALYs to diacetylmorphine [0.377, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.361-0.393 versus 0.375, 95% CI = 0.357-0.391], but accumulated marginally greater costs [$49 830 ($28 401-73 637) versus $34 320 ($21 780-55 998)]. The life-time analysis suggested that both diacetylmorphine and hydromorphone provide more benefits than methadone [8.4 (7.4-9.5) and 8.3 (7.2-9.5) versus 7.4 (6.5-8.3) QALYs] at lower cost [$1.01 million ($0.6-1.59 million) and $1.02 million ($0.72-1.51 million) versus $1.15 million ($0.71-1.84 million)]. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe opioid use disorder enrolled into the SALOME trial, injectable hydromorphone provided similar outcomes to injectable diacetylmorphine. Modelling outcomes during a patient's life-time suggested that injectable hydromorphone might provide greater benefit than methadone alone and may be cost-saving, with drug costs being offset by costs saved from reduced involvement in criminal activity.

Silicon to syringe: Cryptomarkets and disruptive innovation in opioid supply chains.

Cryptomarkets offer insight into the evolving interplay between online black markets and cartel-based distribution. The types and forms of heroin, fentanyl, and prescription drugs show wide diversification. In this commentary we describe changes in the conceptualizations, technologies and structures of drug supply chains in the 21st Century, with special attention to the role of cryptomarkets as tools, contexts, and drivers of innovation in public health research.

The effects of cocaine and heroin price on drug-related emergency department visits.

This paper estimates the empirical relationship between cocaine and heroin prices and drug-related hospital ED admissions for 21 U.S. cities. These outcomes bypass some of the problems with self-reports and directly measure a component of healthcare costs associated with heavy drug usage. The price elasticity of the probability of a cocaine and heroin episode is estimated at -0.27 and -0.10, respectively. A 10% increase in prices can prevent 10,723 cocaine and heroin-related ED visits, with cost savings between 21 million dollars and 47 million dollars. These low magnitudes of the drug outcome-price response have implications for the cost-effectiveness of enforcement-driven price increases.