Opioid use disorder (OUD) and treatment for opioid problems among OUD symptom subtypes in individuals misusing opioids.

Background: In 2021, approximately 60 million individuals worldwide and 9 million individuals in the United States (US) reported opioid misuse. In the US, 2.5 million have OUD, of which only about a third receive any substance abuse treatment. OUD is often regarded as a monolithic disorder but different opioid problem subtypes may exist beyond DSM-IV/5 criteria. Understanding the characteristics of these subtypes could be useful for informing treatment and intervention strategies. Methods: Latent class analysis was used to identify OUD symptom subtypes among persons in the US who reported misusing prescription opioids or heroin in the 2015-2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (n=10,928). Regression analyses were utilized to determine associations between class membership and treatment receipt, as well as demographic characteristics and other comorbid conditions. Results: Five classes were identified with unique OUD symptom patterns: Class 1: Asymptomatic (71.6%), Class 2: Tolerance/Time (14.5%), Class 3: Loss of Control/Pharmacological (LOC/Pharmacol) (5.7%), Class 4: Social Impairment (2.6%), and Class 5: Pervasive (5.6%). Nearly all persons in the LOC/Pharmacol, Social Impairment, and Pervasive classes met criteria for OUD (98-100%); however, they differed in receipt of past-year treatment for substance use (28%, 28%, 49%, respectively). Age, race, education, insurance status, and criminal activity were also associated with treatment receipt. Conclusions: There were considerable differences in OUD symptom patterns and substance use treatment among individuals who misused opioids. The findings indicate a substantial unmet need for OUD treatment and point to patterns of heterogeneity within OUD that can inform development of treatment programs.

Struggling With Recovery From Opioids: Who Is at Risk During COVID-19?

OBJECTIVES: Individuals in recovery from opioid use disorder (OUD) are vulnerable to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent findings suggest increased relapse risk and overdose linked to COVID-19-related stressors. We aimed to identify individual-level factors associated with COVID-19-related impacts on recovery. METHODS: This observational study (NCT04577144) enrolled 216 participants who previously partook in long-acting buprenorphine subcutaneous injection clinical trials (2015-2017) for OUD. Participants indicated how COVID-19 affected their recovery from substance use. A machine learning approach Classification and Regression Tree analysis examined the association of 28 variables with the impact of COVID-19 on recovery, including demographics, substance use, and psychosocial factors. Ten-fold cross-validation was used to minimize overfitting. RESULTS: Twenty-six percent of the sample reported that COVID-19 had made recovery somewhat or much harder. Past-month opioid use was higher among those who reported that recovery was harder compared with those who did not (51% vs 24%, respectively; P < 0.001). The final classification tree (overall accuracy, 80%) identified the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) as the strongest independent risk factor associated with reporting COVID-19 impact. Individuals with a BDI-II score ≥10 had 6.45 times greater odds of negative impact (95% confidence interval, 3.29-13.30) relative to those who scored <10. Among individuals with higher BDI-II scores, less progress in managing substance use and treatment of OUD within the past 2 to 3 years were also associated with negative impacts. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the importance of monitoring depressive symptoms and perceived progress in managing substance use among those in recovery from OUD, particularly during large-magnitude crises.

Oral buprenorphine utilization, concomitant benzodiazepines and opioid analgesics, and payment source: Trends from 2015 to 2019.

INTRODUCTION: This study describes utilization patterns of oral buprenorphine products indicated for the treatment of opioid use disorder with a focus on patterns consistent with prescribing guidelines and the safe use conditions during induction and maintenance treatment outlined by the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program, including trends over time. METHODS: Using an anonymized longitudinal patient-level dataset that captures information on medical and pharmacy claims in the United States (October 1, 2014 through March 31, 2020), buprenorphine prescriptions, days' supply, and daily dose were described overall and stratified by induction (month 1) vs. maintenance (month 2-6) treatment, along with duration of concomitant benzodiazepines or opioid analgesics. RESULTS: Overall, there were 1.5 million buprenorphine treatment episodes initiated between January 1, 2015 to September 30, 2019 (2015: 258,899; 2019: 351,378). Treatment episodes included an average of 6.8 buprenorphine prescriptions (standard deviation [SD] = 6.7), 16.8 days' supply per prescription (SD = 10.5), 94.2 total days' supply per treatment episode (SD = 71.4), and a mean daily dose of 13.6 mg (SD = 6.3), with the number of prescriptions and total days' supply per treatment episode declining over the study period. There was a lower mean number of days' supply per prescription in the first month of treatment compared to months 2-6 (month 1: 15.8 [SD = 11.0]; month 2-6: 19.0 [SD = 10.1]) and daily dose per prescription (month 1: 13.3 mg [SD = 6.4]; months 2-6: 14.3 mg [SD = 6.2]), and a higher mean number of prescriptions per month (month 1: 2.5 per month [SD = 1.7]; months 2-6: 1.8 per month [SD = 1.2]). From 2015 to 2019, there appeared to be a shift in payer mix, with increases in Medicaid/Medicare and declines in cash and commercial insurance. Concomitant benzodiazepine and opioid analgesic use declined over time; in 2019, 16.6 % and 14.3 % of treatment episodes had any concomitant benzodiazepine or opioid analgesic, respectively, and <5 % had chronic (>90 overlapping days) concomitant use (3.0 % and 0.4 %, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The number of oral buprenorphine treatment episodes increased over the study period, and prescribing was generally consistent with the REMS and other treatment guidelines. There was a decline in concomitant buprenorphine and benzodiazepine or opioid analgesics, and chronic concomitant use was rare.

Long-term recovery from opioid use disorder: recovery subgroups, transition states and their association with substance use, treatment and quality of life.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Limited information exists regarding individual subgroups of recovery from opioid use disorder (OUD) following treatment and how these subgroups may relate to recovery trajectories. We used multi-dimensional criteria to identify OUD recovery subgroups and longitudinal transitions across subgroups. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In a national longitudinal observational study in the United States, individuals who previously participated in a clinical trial for subcutaneous buprenorphine injections for treatment of OUD were enrolled and followed for an average of 4.2 years after participation in the clinical trial. MEASUREMENTS: We identified recovery subgroups based on psychosocial outcomes including depression, opioid withdrawal and pain. We compared opioid use, treatment utilization and quality of life among these subgroups. FINDINGS: Three dimensions of the recovery process were identified: depression, opioid withdrawal and pain. Using these three dimensions, participants were classified into four recovery subgroups: high-functioning (minimal depression, mild withdrawal and no/mild pain), pain/physical health (minimal depression, mild withdrawal and moderate pain), depression (moderate depression, mild withdrawal and mild/moderate pain) and low-functioning (moderate/severe withdrawal, moderate depression and moderate/severe pain). Significant differences among subgroups were observed for DSM-5 criteria (P < 0.001) and remission status (P < 0.001), as well as with opioid use (P < 0.001), treatment utilization (P < 0.001) and quality of life domains (physical health, psychological, environment and social relationships; Ps < 0.001, Cohen's fs ≥ 0.62). Recovery subgroup assignments were dynamic, with individuals transitioning across subgroups during the observational period. Moreover, the initial recovery subgroup assignment was minimally predictive of long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There appear to be four distinct subgroups among individuals in recovery from OUD. Recovery subgroup assignments are dynamic and predictive of contemporaneous, but not long-term, substance use, substance use treatment utilization or quality of life outcomes.

Continued Posttrial Benefits of Buprenorphine Extended Release: RECOVER Study Findings.

BACKGROUND: This analysis describes participants' opioid use disorder (OUD) outcomes for 18 months after discontinuing extended-release buprenorphine injection (BUP-XR, SUBLOCADE). METHODS: The RECOVER (Remission From Chronic Opioid Use: Studying Environmental and Socioeconomic Factors on Recovery) study recruited participants from BUP-XR clinical trials (NCT02357901, NCT025100142, and NCT02896296) to assess whether there were sustained benefits after leaving the trial. Abstinence from opioids and from all illicit substances (excluding medical cannabis), health-related quality of life, depression, and employment were measured after BUP-XR discontinuation and change in outcomes assessed at 6, 12, and 18 months. Results were analyzed within the full cohort and by duration of BUP-XR treatment (0-2 months, 3-5 months, 6-11 months, 12 months, or 13-18 months) with and without inverse probability weights adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Of 533 participants, 529 were assessed over the 18-month study period. Further posttrial pharmacotherapy was reported by 33% of participants. At RECOVER baseline, longer BUP-XR was associated with higher abstinence (0-2 months BUP-XR [n = 116]: 38.8%; 3-5 months BUP-XR [n = 61]: 41.0%; 6-11 months BUP-XR [n = 86]: 68.6%; 12 months BUP-XR [n = 135]: 71.9%; 18 months BUP-XR [n = 131]: 88.2%) and greater 12-Item Short Form Health Survey mental component scores. Over 60% of participants had stable or improved outcomes at 6, 12, and 18 months assessments. Overall 47% of participants self-reported sustained opioid abstinence for the full 18-month follow-up, with greater sustained abstinence associated with longer BUP-XR treatment duration. A sensitivity analysis, removing patients receiving medications for OUD, yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Participants from BUP-XR clinical trials who continued into RECOVER maintained or improved on numerous outcomes over 18 months, demonstrating the long-term positive impact of OUD pharmacotherapy.

Assessing Motivations for Nonprescribed Buprenorphine Use Among Rural Appalachian Substance Users.

OBJECTIVE: Buprenorphine (Suboxone) is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, there have been widespread reports of diversion and misuse. This study examined motivations for nonprescribed buprenorphine use among rural residents. METHODS: Eligible participants (N = 200) were at least 18 years old, had used any illegal or prescription drugs to get high, and had ever used nonprescribed buprenorphine. A questionnaire administered by a trained interviewer assessed demographic characteristics, substance use, and motivations for use. RESULTS: Primary motivations for first nonprescribed buprenorphine use included avoiding withdrawal and getting high, while at most recent nonprescribed use, motivations shifted toward maintaining abstinence from other drugs. In adjusted logistic regression analyses, past month use of stimulants decreased odds of nonprescribed buprenorphine use for the purposes of self-treatment by 68% (adjusted odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.61), whereas history of treatment for OUD more than doubled odds of use for self-treatment (adjusted odds ratio, 2.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-6.63). CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that many individuals used buprenorphine without a prescription, motivated largely by behaviors consistent with self-treatment, and diversion of buprenorphine may be driven by these motivations more than desire to get high. While many participants attempted to access treatment, many were still using nonprescribed buprenorphine for self-treatment, and many were dissatisfied with care they had received as part of a treatment program. Thus, increasing quantity of providers may not be adequate to address the opioid epidemic, but particular attention should be paid to providing care targeted to the needs of those with OUD in rural areas.

Recovery from opioid use disorder: A 4-year post-clinical trial outcomes study.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) seriously impacts public health in the United States. However, few investigations of long-term outcomes following treatment with medication for OUD exist. Additionally, these studies have prioritized opioid use and treatment utilization outcomes, and a gap in knowledge regarding long-term, multidimensional trajectories of OUD recovery exists. This study investigated a diverse array of outcomes for individuals with OUD at an average of 4.2 years post clinical trial participation. METHODS: Individuals who previously participated in long-acting buprenorphine subcutaneous injection clinical trials (NCT023579011; NCT025100142; NCT02896296) and enrolled in The Remission from Chronic Opioid Use-Studying Environmental and SocioEconomic Factors on Recovery (RECOVER; NCT03604861) Study participated in a follow up assessment (n = 216). Substance use, psychosocial, opioid dependence, and delay discounting outcomes were assessed. Regression analyses were conducted to determine significant associations between psychosocial/opioid dependence variables and both recent opioid use and delay discounting. RESULTS: The majority of participants reported abstinence from opioids since the last RECOVER study assessment (mean 2.26 years; 55%) and in the past 30 days (69%). Participants reported low levels of depression and psychological distress. Positive associations between depression and opioid craving with past 30-day opioid misuse and delay discounting, and negative associations between quality of life and treatment effectiveness with these outcomes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study examined longer term OUD recovery outcomes. Participants reported high levels of abstinence from opioids and psychosocial functioning. These encouraging results highlight the multidimensional nature of recovery from OUD, and further support the effectiveness of buprenorphine as an OUD treatment.

Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the criminal justice system: Perspectives of individuals recently released from incarceration.

Buprenorphine, an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), remains underutilized in many U.S. jails and prisons. However, use of non-prescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The current study examined non-prescribed buprenorphine use experiences in correctional and community contexts. The study conducted face-to-face interviews with 300 adults with OUD/opioid misuse and recent incarceration, recruited in Baltimore, MD, and New York, NY (n = 150 each). Illicit/non-prescribed opioid use during incarceration was reported by 63% of participants; 39% reported non-prescribed buprenorphine. Non-prescribed buprenorphine was considered the most widely available opioid in jails/prisons in both states (81% reported "very" or "somewhat" easy to get). The average price of non-prescribed buprenorphine in jail/prison was ~10× higher than in the community (p < 0.001). Participants were more likely to endorse getting high/mood alteration as reasons for using non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration, but tended to ascribe therapeutic motives to use in the community (e.g., self-treatment; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that different individual-level characteristics were associated with history of non-prescribed buprenorphine use during incarceration and in the community. Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration was associated with younger age (p = 0.006) and longer incarceration history (p < 0.001), while use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the community was associated with MD recruitment site (p = 0.001), not being married (p < 0.001), prior buprenorphine treatment experience (p < 0.001), and housing situation (p = 0.01). These findings suggest that different dynamics and demand characteristics underlie the use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in community and incarceration contexts, with implications for efforts to expand OUD treatment in correctional settings.

Exploring nonprescribed use of buprenorphine in the criminal justice system through qualitative interviews among individuals recently released from incarceration.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine treatment remains unavailable in many jails and prisons, but use of nonprescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The purpose of this analysis is to explore the experiences and motivations behind the use of diverted buprenorphine among recently incarcerated individuals. METHODS: Adults with opioid misuse who were recently released from jail or prison (n= 26; 58% male) completed semi-structured qualitative interviews as part of a study focused on buprenorphine diversion in the criminal justice system. Qualitative interviews explored participants' incarceration experiences and opioid use background, knowledge of buprenorphine and other substance use in jails/prisons, personal use of buprenorphine while incarcerated, reasons for using buprenorphine while incarcerated, and knowledge of how buprenorphine is brought into and acquired in jails/prisons. The study recorded and transcribed interviews, and analyzed the narratives for content related to these predetermined thematic areas. RESULTS: Key themes emerging from the interviews surrounding buprenorphine diversion during incarceration included: 1) the perceived high prevalence of diverted buprenorphine in jail/prison settings, 2) how the perception of prevalence is related to buprenorphine sublingual film formulation, 3) adaptive routes of administration related to the high cost of diverted buprenorphine, and 4) reasons individuals who are incarcerated use diverted buprenorphine (to achieve euphoric effects and cope with confinement, in contrast to using for self-treatment/withdrawal management as is done in the community). CONCLUSION: Participants reported widespread availability of diverted buprenorphine in criminal justice facilities, and characterized reasons for its use specific to these contexts. More research is needed to determine the impact of expanding buprenorphine treatment in jails and prisons on inmates' use of diverted buprenorphine, and future research should explore these intersections as treatment initiation opportunities.

Recovery From Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) After Monthly Long-acting Buprenorphine Treatment: 12-Month Longitudinal Outcomes From RECOVER, an Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: While evidence has mounted regarding the short-term effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder (OUD), little is known about longer-term psychosocial, economic, and health outcomes. We report herein 12-month outcomes for an observational study enrolling participants who had previously taken part in a long-acting buprenorphine subcutaneous injection (BUP-XR) trial for moderate to severe OUD. METHODS: The RECOVER (Remission from Chronic Opioid Use: Studying Environmental and SocioEconomic Factors on Recovery; NCT03604861) study enrolled participants from 35 US community-based sites. Self-reported sustained opioid abstinence over 12 months and self-reported past-week abstinence at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month visits were assessed. Multiple regression models assessed the association of BUP-XR duration with abstinence, controlling for potential confounders. Withdrawal, pain, health-related quality of life, depression, and employment at RECOVER baseline and 12-month visits were also compared to values collected before treatment in the BUP-XR trial. RESULTS: Of 533 RECOVER participants, 425 completed the 12-month visit (average age 42 years; 66% male); 50.8% self-reported sustained 12-month and 68.0% past-week opioid abstinence. In multiple regressions, participants receiving 12-month versus ≤2-month BUP-XR treatment duration had significantly higher likelihood of sustained opioid abstinence (75.3% vs 24.1%; P = 0.001), with similar results for past-week self-reported abstinence over time. During RECOVER, participants had fewer withdrawal symptoms, lower pain, positive health-related quality of life, minimal depression, and higher employment versus pre-trial visit. CONCLUSIONS: RECOVER participants reported positive outcomes over the 12-month observational period, including high opioid abstinence and stable or improved humanistic outcomes. These findings provide insights into the long-term impact of pharmacotherapy in OUD recovery.

Buprenorphine in the United States: Motives for abuse, misuse, and diversion.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and its consequences are a major public health concern. The partial agonist buprenorphine is a safe and effective treatment for OUD, but concerns about abuse, misuse, and diversion of buprenorphine have been raised. This narrative review examined the rates and motives for use of illicit buprenorphine in the United States. Findings from the 17 included studies suggest the majority of study participants using illicit buprenorphine do so for reasons related to misuse (to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms or achieve or maintain abstinence from other opioids). A smaller percentage of study respondents reported using buprenorphine for reasons related to abuse (to get high). There appears to be a gap between need for buprenorphine and access to adequate treatment. Attenuation of policy-related barriers and adoption of appropriate buprenorphine use by the treatment community are critical tools in the continued effort to reduce the burdens associated with OUD.

Understanding the use of diverted buprenorphine.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is approved in many countries for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), but problems with diversion and abuse exist. There is a need to understand how and why patients use diverted buprenorphine, and whether barriers to access contribute to illicit use. METHODS: Adults >18 years with DSM-IV criteria for substance use disorder and primarily using an opioid completed the online Survey of Key Informants' Patients (SKIP) between August and September 2016. The survey included closed- and open-ended questions regarding reasons for buprenorphine use with and without a prescription, sources of buprenorphine, route of administration, and barriers to treatment. RESULTS: Of 303 respondents, 175 (58%) reported a history of diverted buprenorphine use, 65 (37%) of whom reported never receiving a prescription. The most common reasons for illicit buprenorphine use were consistent with therapeutic use: to prevent withdrawal (79%), maintain abstinence (67%), or self-wean off drugs (53%). Approximately one-half (52%) reported using buprenorphine to get high or alter mood, but few (4%) indicated that it was their drug of choice. Among respondents who had used diverted buprenorphine, 33% reported that they had issues finding a doctor or obtaining buprenorphine on their own. Most (81%) of these participants indicated they would prefer using prescribed buprenorphine, if available. CONCLUSIONS: Although 58% of survey respondents reported a history of using diverted buprenorphine, the most frequently cited reasons for non-prescription use were consistent with therapeutic use. Diversion was partially driven by barriers to access, and an unmet need for OUD treatment persists.

Assessing the accuracy of opioid overdose and poisoning codes in diagnostic information from electronic health records, claims data, and death records.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess positive predictive value (PPV), relative to medical chart review, of International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 diagnostic codes for identifying opioid overdoses and poisonings. METHODS: Data were obtained from Kaiser Permanente Northwest and Northern California. Diagnostic data from electronic health records, submitted claims, and state death records from Oregon, Washington, and California were linked. Individual opioid-related poisoning codes (e.g., 965.xx and X42), and adverse effects of opioids codes (e.g., E935.xx) combined with diagnoses possibly indicative of overdoses (e.g., respiratory depression), were evaluated by comparison with chart audits. RESULTS: Opioid adverse effects codes had low PPV to detect overdoses (13.4%) as assessed in 127 charts and were not pursued. Instead, opioid poisoning codes were assessed in 2100 individuals who had those codes present in electronic health records in the period between the years 2008 and 2012. Of these, 10/2100 had no available information and 241/2100 were excluded potentially as anesthesia-related. Among the 1849 remaining individuals with opioid poisoning codes, 1495 events were accurately identified as opioid overdoses; 69 were miscodes or misidentified, and 285 were opioid adverse effects, not overdoses. Thus, PPV was 81%. Opioid adverse effects or overdoses were accurately identified in 1780 of 1849 events (96.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid poisoning codes have a predictive value of 81% to identify opioid overdoses, suggesting ICD opioid poisoning codes can be used to monitor overdose rates and evaluate interventions to reduce overdose. Further research to assess sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value are ongoing. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Understanding opioid overdose characteristics involving prescription and illicit opioids: A mixed methods analysis.

BACKGROUND: Opioid abuse and misuse are significant public health issues. The CDC estimated 72% of pharmaceutical-related overdose deaths in the US in 2012 involved opioids. While studies of opioid overdoses have identified sociodemographic characteristics, agents used, administration routes, and medication sources associated with overdoses, we know less about the context and life circumstances of the people who experience these events. METHODS: We analyzed interviews (n=87) with survivors of opioid overdoses or family members of decedents. Individuals experiencing overdoses were members of a large integrated health system. Using ICD codes for opioid overdoses and poisonings, we identified participants from five purposefully derived pools of health-plan members who had: 1) prescriptions for OxyContin(®) or single-ingredient sustained-release oxycodone, 2) oxycodone single-ingredient immediate release, 3) other long-acting opioids, 4) other short-acting opioids, or 5) no active opioid prescriptions. RESULTS: Individuals who experienced opioid overdoses abused and misused multiple medications/drugs; experienced dose-related miscommunications or medication-taking errors; had mental health and/or substance use conditions; reported chronic pain; or had unstable resources or family/social support. Many had combinations of these risks. Most events involved polysubstance use, often including benzodiazepines. Accidental overdoses were commonly the result of abuse or misuse, some in response to inadequately treated chronic pain or, less commonly, medication-related mistakes. Suicide attempts were frequently triggered by consecutive negative life events. CONCLUSIONS: To identify people at greater risk of opioid overdose, efforts should focus on screening for prescribed and illicit polysubstance use, impaired cognition, and changes in life circumstances, psychosocial risks/supports, and pain control.

Decreased diversion by doctor-shopping for a reformulated extended release oxycodone product (OxyContin).

BACKGROUND: Doctor-shopping (obtaining prescriptions from multiple prescribers/pharmacies) for opioid analgesics produces a supply for diversion and abuse, and represents a major public health issue. METHODS: An open cohort study assessed changes in doctor-shopping in the U.S. for a brand extended release (ER) oxycodone product (OxyContin) and comparator opioids before (July, 2009 to June, 2010) versus after (January, 2011 to June, 2013) introduction of reformulated brand ER oxycodone with abuse-deterrent properties, using IMS LRx longitudinal data covering >150 million patients and 65% of retail U.S. prescriptions. RESULTS: After its reformulation, the rate of doctor-shopping decreased 50% (for 2+ prescribers/3+ pharmacies) for brand ER oxycodone, but not for comparators. The largest decreases in rates occurred among young adults (73%), those paying with cash (61%) and those receiving the highest available dose (62%), with a 90% decrease when stratifying by all three characteristics. The magnitude of doctor-shopping reductions increased with increasing number of prescribers/pharmacies (e.g., 75% reduction for ≥2 prescribers/≥4 pharmacies). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of doctor-shopping for brand ER oxycodone decreased substantially after its reformulation, which did not occur for other prescription opioids. The largest reductions in doctor-shopping occurred with characteristics associated with higher abuse risk such as youth, cash payment and high dose, and with more specific thresholds of doctor-shopping. A higher prescriber and/or pharmacy threshold also increased the magnitude of the decrease, suggesting that it better captured the effect of the reformulation on actual doctor-shoppers.

Protocol: changes in rates of opioid overdose and poisoning events in an integrated health system following the introduction of a formulation of OxyContin® with abuse-deterrent properties.

BACKGROUND: Addiction, overdoses and deaths resulting from prescription opioids have increased dramatically over the last decade. In response, several manufacturers have developed formulations of opioids with abuse-deterrent properties. For many of these products, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognized the formulation with labeling claims and mandated post-marketing studies to assess the abuse-deterrent effects. In response, we assess differences in rates of opioid-related overdoses and poisonings prior to and following the introduction of a formulation of OxyContin® with abuse-deterrent properties. METHODS/DESIGN: To assess effects of this formulation, electronic medical record (EMR) data from Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW) and Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) are linked to state death data and compared to chart audits. Overdose and poisoning events will be categorized by intentionality and number of agents involved, including illicit drugs and alcohol. Using 6-month intervals over a 10-year period, trends will be compared in rates of opioid-related overdoses and poisoning events associated with OxyContin® to rates of events associated with other oxycodone and opioid formulations. Qualitative interviews with patients and relatives of deceased patients will be conducted to capture circumstances surrounding events. DISCUSSION: This study assesses and tracks changes in opioid-related overdoses and poisoning events prior to and following the introduction of OxyContin® with abuse-deterrent properties. Public health significance is high because these medications are designed to reduce abuse-related behaviors that lead to important adverse outcomes, including overdoses and deaths.

A retrospective cohort study of long-term immediate-release hydrocodone/acetaminophen use and acetaminophen dosing above the Food and Drug Administration recommended maximum daily limit among commercially insured individuals in the United States (2008-2013).

UNLABELLED: Immediate-release (IR) hydrocodone/acetaminophen is the most prescribed opioid in the United States; however, patterns of use, including long-term treatment and dose, are not well described. Duration of use, including the percentage of patients on long-term treatment (>90 days of continuous use), was assessed for patients newly prescribed IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen compared to other opioid analgesics in a national commercial insurance database (January 2008-September 2013). Though only a small percentage of IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen patients continued treatment long-term (1.7%), the number was large (104,839) and was nearly 5 times the number receiving extended-release (ER) morphine (n = 22,338) and nearly 4 times the number receiving ER oxycodone (n = 26,946) long-term. Using a less conservative allowable gap in treatment increased the number of patients meeting the criteria for long-term use (approximately 160,000 for IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen vs <30,000 for ER morphine and ER oxycodone). Most patients meeting these criteria received IR hydrocodone doses between >20 and ≤60 mg/d (n = 56,220, 53.6%) in month 4; 5.5% (n = 5,743) received doses >60 mg/d. Moreover, approximately 15% of IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen patients (n > 900,000) were prescribed total daily acetaminophen doses exceeding 4 g (the limit recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration) at their initial IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen prescription or any time during therapy. PERSPECTIVE: Although most patients were prescribed IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen for acute pain, the number of patients prescribed long-term therapy exceeds the number of patients prescribed ER opioids. It is important to consider the benefits and risks inherent with long-term opioid therapy, whether with IR or ER opioids, to ensure safe use of these products.

Reductions in reported deaths following the introduction of extended-release oxycodone (OxyContin) with an abuse-deterrent formulation.

PURPOSE: Abuse of opioid analgesics for their psychoactive effects is associated with a large number of fatalities. The effect of making opioid tablets harder to crush/dissolve on opioid-related fatalities has not been assessed. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of introducing extended-release oxycodone (ERO [OxyContin(®) ]) tablets containing physicochemical barriers to crushing/dissolving (reformulated ERO) on deaths reported to the manufacturer. METHODS: All spontaneous adverse event reports of death in the US reported to the manufacturer between 3Q2009 and 3Q2013 involving ERO were used. The mean numbers of deaths/quarter in the 3 years after reformulated ERO introduction were compared with the year before. Changes in the slope of trends in deaths were assessed using spline regression. Comparison groups consisted of non-fatal reports involving ERO and fatality reports involving ER morphine. RESULTS: Reports of death decreased 82% (95% CI: -89, -73) from the year before to the third year after (131 to 23 deaths per year) reformulation; overdose death reports decreased 87% (95% CI: -93, -78) and overdose deaths with mention of abuse-related behavior decreased 86% (95% CI:-92, -75). In contrast, non-fatal ERO reports did not decrease post-reformulation, and reported ER morphine fatalities remained unchanged. The ratio of ERO fatalities to all oxycodone fatalities decreased from 21% to 8% in the year pre-reformulation to the second year post-reformulation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings, when considered in the context of previously published studies using other surveillance systems, suggest that the abuse-deterrent characteristics of reformulated ERO have decreased the fatalities associated with its misuse/abuse. © 2014 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Monitoring of internet forums to evaluate reactions to the introduction of reformulated OxyContin to deter abuse.

BACKGROUND: Reformulating opioid analgesics to deter abuse is one approach toward improving their benefit-risk balance. To assess sentiment and attempts to defeat these products among difficult-to-reach populations of prescription drug abusers, evaluation of posts on Internet forums regarding reformulated products may be useful. A reformulated version of OxyContin (extended-release oxycodone) with physicochemical properties to deter abuse presented an opportunity to evaluate posts about the reformulation in online discussions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to use messages on Internet forums to evaluate reactions to the introduction of reformulated OxyContin and to identify methods aimed to defeat the abuse-deterrent properties of the product. METHODS: Posts collected from 7 forums between January 1, 2008 and September 30, 2013 were evaluated before and after the introduction of reformulated OxyContin on August 9, 2010. A quantitative evaluation of discussion levels across the study period and a qualitative coding of post content for OxyContin and 2 comparators for the 26 month period before and after OxyContin reformulation were conducted. Product endorsement was estimated for each product before and after reformulation as the ratio of endorsing-to-discouraging posts (ERo). Post-to-preintroduction period changes in ERos (ie, ratio of ERos) for each product were also calculated. Additionally, post content related to recipes for defeating reformulated OxyContin were evaluated from August 9, 2010 through September 2013. RESULTS: Over the study period, 45,936 posts related to OxyContin, 18,685 to Vicodin (hydrocodone), and 23,863 to Dilaudid (hydromorphone) were identified. The proportion of OxyContin-related posts fluctuated between 6.35 and 8.25 posts per 1000 posts before the reformulation, increased to 10.76 in Q3 2010 when reformulated OxyContin was introduced, and decreased from 9.14 in Q4 2010 to 3.46 in Q3 2013 in the period following the reformulation. The sentiment profile for OxyContin changed following reformulation; the post-to-preintroduction change in the ERo indicated reformulated OxyContin was discouraged significantly more than the original formulation (ratio of ERos=0.43, P<.001). A total of 37 recipes for circumventing the abuse-deterrent characteristics of reformulated OxyContin were observed; 32 were deemed feasible (ie, able to abuse). The frequency of posts reporting abuse of reformulated OxyContin via these recipes was low and decreased over time. Among the 5677 posts mentioning reformulated OxyContin, 825 posts discussed recipes and 498 reported abuse of reformulated OxyContin by such recipes (41 reported injecting and 128 reported snorting). CONCLUSIONS: After introduction of physicochemical properties to deter abuse, changes in discussion of OxyContin on forums occurred reflected by a reduction in discussion levels and endorsing content. Despite discussion of recipes, there is a relatively small proportion of reported abuse of reformulated OxyContin via recipes, particularly by injecting or snorting routes. Analysis of Internet discussion is a valuable tool for monitoring the impact of abuse-deterrent formulations.