ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine (SL-BUP) are both approved for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment in any medical setting. We aimed to compare the real-world effectiveness of XR-NTX and SL-BUP. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was an observational active comparator, new user cohort study of Medicaid claims records for patients in New Jersey and California, USA, 2016-19. PARTICIPANTS/CASES: The participants were adult Medicaid patients aged 18-64 years who initiated XR-NTX or SL-BUP for maintenance treatment of OUD and did not use medications for OUD in the 90 days before initiation. Our cohort included 1755 XR-NTX and 9886 SL-BUP patients. MEASUREMENTS: We examined two outcomes up to 180 days after medication initiation: (1) composite of medication discontinuation and death and (2) composite of overdose and death. FINDINGS: In adjusted analyses, treatment with XR-NTX was more likely to result in discontinuation or death by the end of follow-up than treatment with SL-BUP: cumulative risk 75.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 73.9%, 77.9%] versus 62.2% (95% CI = 61.2%, 63.2%), respectively (risk difference = 13.7 percentage points, 95% CI = 11.4, 16.0). There was minimal difference in the cumulative risk of overdose or death by the end of follow-up: XR-NTX 3.9% (95% CI = 3.0%, 4.8%) versus SL-BUP 3.3% (95% CI = 2.9%, 3.7%); risk difference = 0.5 percentage points, 95% CI = -0.4, 1.5. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid patients in California and New Jersey, USA, receiving treatment for opioid use disorder stayed in treatment longer on sublingual buprenorphine than on extended-release naltrexone, but the risk of overdose was similar. Most patients in this study discontinued medication within 6 months, regardless of which medication was initiated.
ABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Delayed-Action Preparations , Fentanyl , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Fentanyl/administration & dosage , Fentanyl/therapeutic use , Male , Female , Administration, Sublingual , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Buprenorphine/administration & dosage , Middle Aged , Injections, Subcutaneous , Narcotic Antagonists/administration & dosage , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Opiate Substitution Treatment/methods , Buprenorphine, Naloxone Drug Combination/administration & dosage , Buprenorphine, Naloxone Drug Combination/therapeutic use , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: High levels of missing outcome data for biologically confirmed substance use (BCSU) threaten the validity of substance use disorder (SUD) clinical trials. Underlying attributes of clinical trials could explain BCSU missingness and identify targets for improved trial design. METHODS: We reviewed 21 clinical trials funded by the NIDA National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) and published from 2005 to 2018 that examined pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions for SUD. We used configurational analysis-a Boolean algebra approach that identifies an attribute or combination of attributes predictive of an outcome-to identify trial design features and participant characteristics associated with high levels of BCSU missingness. Associations were identified by configuration complexity, consistency, coverage, and robustness. We limited results using a consistency threshold of 0.75 and summarized model fit using the product of consistency and coverage. RESULTS: For trial design features, the final solution consisted of two pathways: psychosocial treatment as a trial intervention OR larger trial arm size (complexity=2, consistency=0.79, coverage=0.93, robustness score=0.71). For participant characteristics, the final solution consisted of two pathways: interventions targeting individuals with poly- or nonspecific substance use OR younger age (complexity=2, consistency=0.75, coverage=0.86, robustness score=1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial treatments, larger trial arm size, interventions targeting individuals with poly- or nonspecific substance use, and younger age among trial participants were predictive of missing BCSU data in SUD clinical trials. Interventions to mitigate missing data that focus on these attributes may reduce threats to validity and improve utility of SUD clinical trials.
Subject(s)
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , Substance-Related Disorders/therapy , Substance Abuse Detection/methods , Research Design , Male , FemaleABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The opioid intervention court (OIC) is an innovative, pre-plea treatment court to facilitate rapid linkage to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) for people at risk of overdose. This study compares participants in OIC and participants with opioid use problems in a traditional drug treatment court model on (i) initiation for any substance use (SU) treatment, (ii) initiation of MOUD, (iii) number of days to MOUD initiation, and (iv) retention in the OIC program/retention on MOUD. METHODS: We used administrative court records from n = 389 OIC and n = 229 drug court participants in 2 counties in New York State. Differences in outcomes by court were assessed using logistic, multinomial, or linear regressions. RESULTS: After adjusting for current charge severity, gender, race/ethnicity, age, and county, OIC participants were no more likely to initiate any SU treatment but were significantly more likely to initiate MOUD (81.2% OIC vs 45.9% drug court, P < 0.001) and were more quickly linked to any SU treatment (hazard ratio = 1.68, 95% confidence interval = 1.35-2.08) and MOUD (hazard ratio = 4.25, 95% confidence interval = 3.23-5.58) after starting the court. Retention in court/MOUD was higher among drug court participants and may speak to the immediate sanctions (eg, jail) for noncompliance with drug court directives as compared with opioid court, which does not carry such immediate sanctions for noncompliance. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses suggest that the new OIC model can more rapidly link participants to treatment, including MOUD, as compared with traditional drug court model, and may demonstrate improved ability to immediately stabilize and reduce overdose risk in court participants.
ABSTRACT
Importance: Injectable extended-release (XR)-naltrexone is an effective treatment option for opioid use disorder (OUD), but the need to withdraw patients from opioid treatment prior to initiation is a barrier to implementation. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the standard procedure (SP) with the rapid procedure (RP) for XR-naltrexone initiation. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Surmounting Withdrawal to Initiate Fast Treatment with Naltrexone study was an optimized stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial conducted at 6 community-based inpatient addiction treatment units. Units using the SP were randomly assigned at 14-week intervals to implement the RP. Participants admitted with OUD received the procedure the unit was delivering at the time of their admission. Participant recruitment took place between March 16, 2021, and July 18, 2022. The last visit was September 21, 2022. Interventions: Standard procedure, based on the XR-naltrexone package insert (approximately 5-day buprenorphine taper followed by a 7- to 10-day opioid-free period and RP, defined as 1 day of buprenorphine at minimum necessary dose, 1 opioid-free day, and ascending low doses of oral naltrexone and adjunctive medications (eg, clonidine, clonazepam, antiemetics) for opioid withdrawal. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of XR-naltrexone injection prior to inpatient discharge (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included opioid withdrawal scores and targeted safety events and serious adverse events. All analyses were intention-to-treat. Results: A total of 415 participants with OUD were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 33.6 [8.48] years; 205 [49.4%] identified sex as male); 54 [13.0%] individuals identified as Black, 91 [21.9%] as Hispanic, 290 [69.9%] as White, and 22 [5.3%] as multiracial. Rates of successful initiation of XR-naltrexone among the RP group (141 of 225 [62.7%]) were noninferior to those of the SP group (68 of 190 [35.8%]) (odds ratio [OR], 3.60; 95% CI, 2.12-6.10). Withdrawal did not differ significantly between conditions (proportion of days with a moderate or greater maximum Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale score (>12) for RP vs SP: OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.62-2.50). Targeted safety events (RP: 12 [5.3%]; SP: 4 [2.1%]) and serious adverse events (RP: 15 [6.7%]; SP: 3 [1.6%]) were infrequent but occurred more often with RP than SP. Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, the RP of XR-naltrexone initiation was noninferior to the standard approach and saved time, although it required more intensive medical management and safety monitoring. The results of this trial suggest that rapid initiation could make XR-naltrexone a more viable treatment for patients with OUD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04762537.
Subject(s)
Delayed-Action Preparations , Naltrexone , Narcotic Antagonists , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Naltrexone/therapeutic use , Naltrexone/administration & dosage , Male , Female , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Adult , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Narcotic Antagonists/administration & dosage , Delayed-Action Preparations/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , Substance Withdrawal Syndrome/drug therapy , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The authors examined the prevalence and correlates of co-occurring opioid use disorder and opioid overdose among individuals receiving psychiatric services. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of adults with continuous enrollment in New York State Medicaid who received at least one psychiatric service in 2020 (N=523,885). Logistic regression models were used to examine the correlates of both opioid use disorder and overdose. RESULTS: In the study sample, the prevalence rate of opioid use disorder was 8.1%; within this group, 7.7% experienced an opioid overdose in the study year. Opioid use disorder rates were lower among younger (18-24 years; 2.0%) and older (≥65 years; 3.1%) adults and higher among men (11.1%) and among those residing in rural areas (9.9%). Compared with Whites (9.4%), opioid use disorder rates were lower for Asian Americans (2.0%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=0.22) and Blacks (6.8%, AOR=0.76) and higher for American Indians (13.2%, AOR=1.43) and Hispanics (9.6%, AOR=1.29). Individuals with any substance use (24.9%, AOR=5.20), posttraumatic stress (15.7%, AOR=2.34), bipolar (14.9%, AOR=2.29), or anxiety (11.3%, AOR=2.18) disorders were more likely to have co-occurring opioid use disorder; those with conduct (4.5%, AOR=0.51), adjustment (7.4%, AOR=0.88), or schizophrenia spectrum (7.4%, AOR=0.87) disorders were less likely to have opioid use disorder. Those with suicidality (23.9%, AOR=3.83) or economic instability (23.7%, AOR=3.35) had higher odds of having opioid use disorder. Overdose odds were higher among individuals with suicidality (34.0%, AOR=6.82) and economic instability (16.0%, AOR=2.57). CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the importance of providing opioid use disorder screening and treatment for patients receiving psychiatric services.
ABSTRACT
Contingency Management (CM) is a psychological treatment that aims to change behavior with financial incentives. In substance use disorders (SUDs), deployment of CM has been enriched by longstanding discussions around the cost-effectiveness of prized-based and voucher-based approaches. In prize-based CM, participants earn draws to win prizes, including small incentives to reduce costs, and the number of draws escalates depending on the duration of maintenance of abstinence. In voucher-based CM, participants receive a predetermined voucher amount based on specific substance test results. While both types have enhanced treatment outcomes, there is room for improvement in their cost-effectiveness: the voucher-based system requires enduring financial investment; the prize-based system might sacrifice efficacy. Previous work in computational psychiatry of SUDs typically employs frameworks wherein participants make decisions to maximize their expected compensation. In contrast, we developed new frameworks that clinical decision-makers choose actions, CM structures, to reinforce the substance abstinence behavior of participants. We consider the choice of the voucher or prize to be a sequential decision, where there are two pivotal parameters: the prize probability for each draw and the escalation rule determining the number of draws. Recent advancements in Reinforcement Learning, more specifically, in off-policy evaluation, afforded techniques to estimate outcomes for different CM decision scenarios from observed clinical trial data. We searched CM schemas that maximized treatment outcomes with budget constraints. Using this framework, we analyzed data from the Clinical Trials Network to construct unbiased estimators on the effects of new CM schemas. Our results indicated that the optimal CM schema would be to strengthen reinforcement rapidly in the middle of the treatment course. Our estimated optimal CM policy improved treatment outcomes by 32% while maintaining costs. Our methods and results have broad applications in future clinical trial planning and translational investigations on the neurobiological basis of SUDs.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine, and extended-release naltrexone, are effective in decreasing opioid use, morbidity and mortality. The available evidence suggests that these medications should be used for long term treatment; however, patients often ask how long they need to be on medication, and whether it would be safe to discontinue. There are sparse data to guide us. The CTN-0100 trial will address this gap in our knowledge by studying participants who have decided to discontinue buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone for OUD. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The trial is a multicenter, randomized, non-blinded study. Participants are stable adult volunteers, on sublingual buprenorphine, extended-release buprenorphine, or extended-release naltrexone, expressing an interest in discontinuing medication. Participants on buprenorphine must be stable for at least 1 year and participants on extended-release naltrexone must be stable for at least 6 months. Participants are engaged in the study for up to 96 weeks, including a flexible taper period, and are then transitioned to follow-up within the trial. All participants are randomly assigned to the study Medical Management (MM) or to MM plus Connections (CHESS health) digital smartphone application aimed at recovery and abstinence (MMD). Sublingual Buprenorphine participants are also randomized (2 × 2 design) to a taper using either sublingual or extended-release buprenorphine. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: It is hoped that this trial will provide a rich source of data on management of patients discontinuing medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) to inform future research and practice. The trial will shed light on which strategies are most likely to lead to long-term success (absence of relapse), and what participant characteristics distinguish those who can safely discontinue MOUD from those who remain at risk of relapse should they discontinue. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT04464980.
Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Delayed-Action Preparations , Naltrexone , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Buprenorphine/administration & dosage , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Naltrexone/administration & dosage , Naltrexone/therapeutic use , Adult , Administration, Sublingual , Male , Narcotic Antagonists/administration & dosage , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Female , Opiate Substitution Treatment/methods , Research Design , Withholding Treatment , Middle AgedABSTRACT
Aims: To compare the real-world effectiveness of extended release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine (SL-BUP) for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Design: An observational active comparator, new user cohort study. Setting: Medicaid claims records for patients in New Jersey and California, 2016-2019. Participants/Cases: Adult Medicaid patients aged 18-64 years who initiated XR-NTX or SL-BUP for maintenance treatment of OUD and did not use medications for OUD in the 90-days before initiation. Comparators: New initiation with XR-NTX versus SL-BUP for the treatment of OUD. Measurements: We examined two outcomes up to 180 days after medication initiation, 1) composite of medication discontinuation and death, and 2) composite of overdose and death. Findings: Our cohort included 1,755 XR-NTX and 9,886 SL-BUP patients. In adjusted analyses, treatment with XR-NTX was more likely to result in discontinuation or death by the end of follow-up than treatment with SL-BUP: cumulative risk 76% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75%, 78%) versus 62% (95% CI 61%, 63%), respectively (risk difference 14 percentage points, 95% CI 13, 16). There was minimal difference in the cumulative risk of overdose or death by the end of follow-up: XR-NTX 3.8% (95% CI 2.9%, 4.7%) versus SL-BUP 3.3% (95% 2.9%, 3.7%); risk difference 0.5 percentage points, 95%CI -0.5, 1.5. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Longer medication retention is important because risks of negative outcomes are elevated after discontinuation. Our results support selection of SL-BUP over XR-NTX. However, most patients discontinued medication by 6 months indicating that more effective tools are needed to improve medication retention, particularly after initiation with XR-NTX, and to identify which patients do best on which medication.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Extended-release naltrexone (NTX) is an opioid antagonist approved for relapse prevention after medical withdrawal. Its therapeutic effect is dependent on the NTX plasma level, and as it decreases, patients may lack protection against relapse and overdose. Therefore, identifying the minimally effective NTX level needed to block opioid-induced subjective effects has important clinical implications. METHODS: This secondary, individual-level analysis of data collected in a human laboratory study was conducted to evaluate the relationship between NTX levels and subjective effects of an intravenously administered 25-mg challenge dose of heroin in non-treatment-seeking participants with opioid use disorder (N = 12). Subjective ratings of drug liking using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) and NTX levels were measured across 6 weeks after participants received a single injection of either extended-release NTX 192 mg (N = 6) or 384 mg (N = 6). Cubic spline mixed-effects models were used to provide 95% prediction intervals for individual changes in liking scores as a function of NTX levels. RESULTS: Naltrexone levels above 2 ng/mL blocked nearly all VAS ratings of drug liking after intravenous heroin administration. Participants with NTX levels ≥ 2 ng/mL had minimal (≤20 mm) changes from placebo in VAS ratings of drug liking based on 95% prediction intervals. In contrast, NTX levels < 2 ng/mL were associated with greater variability in individual-level subjective responses. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, a plasma level range of 1 to 2 ng/mL is considered to be therapeutic in providing heroin blockade. The current findings suggest that a higher level (>2 ng/mL) may be needed to produce a consistent blockade.
Subject(s)
Naltrexone , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Naltrexone/therapeutic use , Heroin , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Injections , Delayed-Action Preparations/therapeutic use , Injections, IntramuscularABSTRACT
Background: Approximately 1800 opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the US dispense methadone to upwards of 400,000 patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) annually, operating under longstanding highly restrictive guidelines. OTPs were granted novel flexibilities beginning March 15, 2020, allowing for reduced visit frequency and extended take-home doses to minimize COVID exposure with great variation across states and sites. We sought to use electronic health records to compare retention in treatment, opioid use, and adverse events among patients newly entering methadone maintenance in the post-reform period in comparison with year-ago, unexposed, controls. Methods: Retrospective observational cohort study across 9 OTPs, geographically dispersed, in the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network. Newly enrolled patients between April 15 and October 14, 2020 (post-COVID, reform period) v. March 15-September 14, 2019 (pre-COVID, control period) were assessed. The primary outcome was 6-month retention. Secondary outcomes were opioid use and adverse events including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and overdose. Findings: 821 individuals were newly admitted in the post-COVID and year-ago control periods, average age of 38.3 (SD 11.1), 58.9% male. The only difference across pre- and post-reform groups was the prevalence of psychostimulant use disorder (25.7% vs 32.9%, p = 0.02). Retention was non-inferior (60.0% vs 60.1%) as were hazards of adverse events in the aggregate (X2 (1) = 0.55, p = 0.46) in the post-COVID period. However, rates of month-level opioid use were higher among post-COVID intakes compared to pre-COVID controls (64.8% vs 51.1%, p < 0.001). Moderator analyses accounting for stimulant use and site-level variation in take-home schedules did not change findings. Interpretation: Policies allowing for extended take-home schedules were not associated with worse retention or adverse events despite slightly elevated rates of measured opioid use while in care. Relaxed guidelines were not associated with measurable increased harms and findings could inform future studies with prospective trials. Funding: USDHHSNIDACTNUG1DA013035-15.