Treatment Persistence Among Insured Patients Newly Starting Buprenorphine/Naloxone for Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Persistence with medication-assisted therapy among patients with opioid use disorder has been associated with reduced likelihood of illicit opioid use. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe treatment persistence and identify factors associated with 1-year persistence among insured patients newly initiating buprenorphine-containing pharmacotherapy. METHODS: The retrospective observational cohort included employer-sponsored and managed Medicaid patients newly started on buprenorphine-containing therapy between June 30, 2010, and January 1, 2015. Persistence was measured as both a continuous and dichotomous variable (proportion of patients persistent for 1 year). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with 1-year persistence. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients met inclusion criteria. The median [range] number of treatment episodes was 1 [1-4]. Mean number of days on therapy during the first episode was 206 (SD = 152) days, with 40.4% (n = 122) of patients persisting for 1 year. Presence of concomitant fills of prescription opioid analgesics (odds ratio [OR] = 0.25; 95% CI = 0.12-0.51), being in care of an addiction specialist (OR = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.21-0.76), and Medicaid insurance coverage (OR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.13-0.84) were significantly and negatively associated with 1-year persistence. There was also a strong inverse relationship between persistence and inpatient hospitalization (OR = 0.30; 95% CI = 0.12-0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Several health care delivery and use variables were significantly associated with nonpersistence. Concomitant use of prescription opioids is the most easily modifiable risk factor that health care providers and policy makers may act on to improve treatment continuation.

Successful treatment of chronic hepatitis C with triple therapy in an opioid agonist treatment program.

BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs (PWID) constitute 10 million people globally with hepatitis C virus, including many opioid agonist treatment patients. Little data exist describing clinical outcomes for patients receiving HCV treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) in opioid agonist treatment settings. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, we describe clinical outcomes for 50 genotype-1 patients receiving HCV treatment with triple therapy: telaprevir (n=42) or boceprevir (n=8) in combination with pegylated interferon and ribavirin on-site in an opioid agonist treatment program. RESULTS: Overall, 70% achieved an end of treatment response (ETR) and 62% achieved a sustained virological response (SVR). These treatment outcomes are nearly equivalent to previously published HCV outcomes shown in registration trials, despite high percentages of recent drug use prior to treatment (52%), ongoing drug use during treatment (45%) and psychiatric comorbidity (86%). Only 12% (n=6) discontinued antiviral treatment early for non-virological reasons. Four patients received a blood transfusion, and one discontinued telaprevir due to severe rash. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that on-site HCV treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents is effective in opioid agonist treatment patients including patients who are actively using drugs. Future interferon-free regimens will likely be even more effective. Opioid agonist treatment programs represent an opportunity to safely and effectively treat chronic hepatitis C, and PWID should have unrestricted access to DAAs.

Reducing barriers to hepatitis C treatment among drug users: an integrated hepatitis C peer education and support program.

This report describes an innovative HCV Peer Educator Program that facilitates education, support, and engagement in HCV treatment among patients in an opioid treatment program. Integrating peer educators in a collaborative manner with close supervision holds promise as a model to reduce barriers to HCV treatment among drug users.

Buprenorphine treatment outcomes among opioid-dependent cocaine users and non-users.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: National treatment guidelines state that polysubstance users, including cocaine users, may not be appropriate candidates for office-based buprenorphine treatment. However, data to support this recommendation are sparse and conflicting, and the implications of this recommendation may include limiting the usefulness of buprenorphine treatment, as cocaine use is common among opioid-dependent individuals seeking buprenorphine treatment. We compared buprenorphine treatment outcomes (6-month treatment retention and self-reported opioid use over 6 months) in opioid-dependent cocaine users versus non-users who initiated buprenorphine treatment at an urban community health center. METHODS: We followed 87 participants over 6 months, collecting interview and medical record data. We used logistic regression models to test whether baseline cocaine use was associated with treatment retention and mixed effects nonlinear models to test whether baseline cocaine use was associated with self-reported opioid use. RESULTS: At baseline, 39.1% reported cocaine use. In all participants, self-reported opioid use decreased from 89.7% to 27.4% over 6 months, and 6-month treatment retention was 54.5%. We found no significant difference in 6-month treatment retention (AOR = 1.56, 95% CI: .58-4.17, p = .38) or self-reported opioid use (AOR = .89, 95% CI: .26-3.07, p = .85) between cocaine users and non-users. CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: This study demonstrates that buprenorphine treatment retention is not worse in cocaine users than non-users, with clinically meaningful improvements in self-reported opioid use. These findings suggest that opioid-dependent cocaine users attain considerable benefits from office-based buprenorphine treatment and argue for the inclusion of these patients in office-based buprenorphine treatment programs.

Meaning and methadone: patient perceptions of methadone dose and a model to promote adherence to maintenance treatment.

OBJECTIVES: Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) effectively reduces illicit opioid use and its negative consequences when patients participate in and adhere to treatment. Patients' participation and adherence may relate to their perceptions about methadone doses and dose adjustments and the meanings that patients associate with treatment. This study assessed patient perceptions about methadone dosing and the meanings associated with methadone treatment to better support patient adherence to and success in MMT. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 19 patients in an urban MMT program. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed through an iterative process. RESULTS: Participants' expressed perceptions about methadone doses related to ideas of "comfort" and "function," suggesting a model for determining dose appropriateness and "ideal" methadone dose based on various factors both intrinsic and extrinsic to MMT. Intrinsic factors included those exerting downward pressure on "ideal" methadone dose such as lack of control in treatment, disdain for getting "high," concerns about methadone dependence, and desire to avoid adverse effects; those exerting upward pressure such as concern about withdrawal; and those exerting mixed pressures such as methadone formulations. Extrinsic factors included those exerting downward pressure such as shame about and stigma around MMT; those exerting upward pressure such as medical conditions and medication interactions; and those exerting mixed pressures such as family and peer relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Participants held perceptions about methadone dosing that included considerations beyond typical medical parameters used by physicians and other MMT providers to determine appropriate methadone doses. The model that emerged from our data could help inform MMT providers to support greater patient comfort with methadone doses and dose changes, as well as adherence to and success in MMT.

Prior buprenorphine experience is associated with office-based buprenorphine treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: As buprenorphine treatment and illicit buprenorphine use increase, many patients seeking buprenorphine treatment will have had prior experience with buprenorphine. Little evidence is available to guide optimal treatment strategies for patients with prior buprenorphine experience. We examined whether prior buprenorphine experience was associated with treatment retention and opioid use. We also explored whether type of prior buprenorphine use (prescribed or illicit use) was associated with these treatment outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed interview and medical record data from a longitudinal cohort study of 87 individuals who initiated office-based buprenorphine treatment. We examined associations between prior buprenorphine experience and 6-month treatment retention using logistic regression models, and prior buprenorphine experience and any self-reported opioid use at 1, 3, and 6 months using nonlinear mixed models. RESULTS: Most (57.4%) participants reported prior buprenorphine experience; of these, 40% used prescribed buprenorphine and 60% illicit buprenorphine only. Compared with buprenorphine-naïve participants, those with prior buprenorphine experience had better treatment retention (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.05-6.70). Similar associations that did not reach significance were found when exploring prescribed and illicit buprenorphine use. There was no difference in opioid use when comparing participants with prior buprenorphine experience with those who were buprenorphine-naive (AOR = 1.33, 95% CI = 0.38-4.65). Although not significant, qualitatively different results were found when exploring opioid use by type of prior buprenorphine use (prescribed buprenorphine vs buprenorphine-naïve, AOR = 2.20, 95% CI = 0.58-8.26; illicit buprenorphine vs buprenorphine-naïve, AOR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.07-3.46). CONCLUSIONS: Prior buprenorphine experience was common and associated with better retention. Understanding how prior buprenorphine experience affects treatment outcomes has important clinical and public health implications.

Concurrent group treatment for hepatitis C: implementation and outcomes in a methadone maintenance treatment program.

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is highly prevalent among current and former drug users. However, the minority of patients enrolled in drug treatment programs have initiated HCV treatment. New models are needed to overcome barriers to care. In this retrospective study, we describe the implementation and outcomes of 42 patients treated in a concurrent group treatment (CGT) program. Patients participated in weekly provider-led group treatment sessions which included review of side effects; discussion of adherence and side effect management; administration of interferon injections; brief physical examination; and ended with brief meditation. Of the first 27 patients who initiated CGT, 42% achieved a sustained viral response. In addition, 87% (13/15) of genotype-1 infected patients treated with direct acting antiviral agent achieved an undetectable viral load at 24 weeks. The CGT model may be effective in overcoming barriers to treatment and improving adherence and outcomes among patients enrolled in drug treatment programs.

A comparison of buprenorphine induction strategies: patient-centered home-based inductions versus standard-of-care office-based inductions.

Although novel buprenorphine induction strategies are emerging, they have been inadequately studied. To examine our newly developed patient-centered home-based inductions, we conducted a subgroup analysis of 79 opioid-dependent individuals who had buprenorphine inductions at an urban community health center. Participants chose their induction strategy. Standard-of-care office-based inductions were physician driven, with multiple assessments, and observed, and the patient-centered home-based inductions emphasized patient self-management and included a "kit" for induction at home. We conducted interviews and extracted medical records. Using mixed nonlinear models, we examined associations between induction strategy and opioid use and any drug use. Compared with those with standard-of-care office-based inductions, participants with patient-centered home-based inductions had no significant differences in opioid use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.13-2.97) but greater reductions in any drug use (AOR = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.01-0.37). Taking into account the limitations of our observational cohort study design, we conclude that participants with patient-centered home-based inductions had similar reductions in opioid use and greater reductions in any drug use than those with standard-of-care office-based inductions. It is essential that new induction strategies be based on existing models or theories and be well studied.

HIV provider endorsement of primary care buprenorphine treatment: a vignette study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Opioid dependence is common among HIV-infected persons in the United States. Factors associated with HIV care providers recommending buprenorphine for opioid dependence are poorly defined. Using vignettes, we sought to identify HIV provider characteristics associated with endorsing buprenorphine treatment in primary care. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional survey of HIV providers, including 497 physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants attending HIV educational conferences in 2006. Anonymous questionnaires distributed to conference attendees contained one of two vignettes depicting opioid-dependent patients. Respondents recommended type of substance abuse treatment for the vignette patient. Using logistic regression, we tested patient and provider factors associated with HIV provider endorsement of buprenorphine in primary care. RESULTS: Sixteen percent of providers endorsed buprenorphine treatment in primary care for vignette patients. Family physicians and general internists (AOR=2.8, CI=1.1-7.1), African American providers (AOR=3.0, CI=1.3-6.8), and those with previous buprenorphine prescribing experience (AOR=4.6, CI=1.2-17.9) were more likely to endorse buprenorphine treatment in primary care. CONCLUSIONS: HIV providers infrequently endorsed buprenorphine treatment in primary care for vignette patients. Generalist and African American providers and those with previous buprenorphine prescribing experience are more likely to endorse buprenorphine treatment in primary care. Targeting generalist and minority providers may be one strategy to promote effective integration of HIV care and opioid addiction treatment.

Self-management of injection-related wounds among injecting drug users.

Injection-related wounds are an important complication of injection drug use. This study describes behaviors related to self-management of injection-related wounds and identifies factors associated with behaviors that may increase the potential for harm. We conducted interviews with 101 injecting drug users in Washington, DC. A total of 82 (81.2%) injecting drug users reported ever having an injection-related wound, and of these 93.9% reported self-management of their wounds. The most commonly reported behaviors were cleaning and applying ointment to wounds; however, several participants engaged in behaviors determined to be more potentially harmful, including acquiring antibiotics without prescriptions and manipulating their wounds. In multivariate analysis, injecting drug users who had ever injected amphetamines were more likely to engage in potentially harmful self-management behaviors (adjusted odds ratio = 4.38; 95% confidence interval = 1.15-16.64). Self-management of injection-related wounds is common and certain behaviors may increase the potential for harm. Further research is needed to best focus efforts to improve wound care for injecting drug users.

Nurse practitioner and physician assistant interest in prescribing buprenorphine.

Office-based buprenorphine places health care providers in a unique position to combine HIV and drug treatment in the primary care setting. However, federal legislation restricts nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) from prescribing buprenorphine, which may limit its potential for uptake and inhibit the role of these nonphysician providers in delivering drug addiction treatment to patients with HIV. This study aimed to examine the level of interest in prescribing buprenorphine among nonphysician providers. We anonymously surveyed providers attending HIV educational conferences in six large U.S. cities about their interest in prescribing buprenorphine. Overall, 48.6% (n = 92) of nonphysician providers were interested in prescribing buprenorphine. Compared to infectious disease specialists, nonphysician providers (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22-6.83) and generalist physicians (AOR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.09-3.84) were significantly more likely to be interested in prescribing buprenorphine. NPs and PAs are interested in prescribing buprenorphine. To improve uptake of buprenorphine in HIV settings, the implications of permitting nonphysician providers to prescribe buprenorphine should be further explored.

Barriers to obtaining waivers to prescribe buprenorphine for opioid addiction treatment among HIV physicians.

BACKGROUND: Illicit drug use is common among HIV-infected individuals. Buprenorphine enables physicians to simultaneously treat HIV and opioid dependence, offering opportunities to improve health outcomes. Despite this, few physicians prescribe buprenorphine. OBJECTIVE: To examine barriers to obtaining waivers to prescribe buprenorphine. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study. PARTICIPANTS: 375 physicians attending HIV educational conferences in six cities in 2006. APPROACH: Anonymous questionnaires were distributed and analyzed to test whether confidence addressing drug problems and perceived barriers to prescribing buprenorphine were associated with having a buprenorphine waiver, using chi-square, t tests, and logistic regression. RESULTS: 25.1% of HIV physicians had waivers to prescribe buprenorphine. In bivariate analyses, physicians with waivers versus those without waivers were less likely to be male (51.1 vs 63.7%, p < .05), more likely to be in New York (51.1 vs 29.5%, p < .01), less likely to be infectious disease specialists (25.5 vs 41.6%, p < .05), and more likely to be general internists (43.6 vs 33.5%, p < .05). Adjusting for physician characteristics, confidence addressing drug problems (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.05, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.08-3.88) and concern about lack of access to addiction experts (AOR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.32-0.97) were significantly associated with having a buprenorphine waiver. CONCLUSIONS: Among HIV physicians attending educational conferences, confidence addressing drug problems was positively associated with having a buprenorphine waiver, and concern about lack of access to addiction experts was negatively associated with it. HIV physicians are uniquely positioned to provide opioid addiction treatment in the HIV primary care setting. Understanding and remediating barriers HIV physicians face may lead to new opportunities to improve outcomes for opioid-dependent HIV-infected patients.

Effect of androgens and glucocorticoids on microbial growth and antimicrobial susceptibility.

The effects of androgens, testosterone and dihydrotestosterone (DHT), of an environmental anti-androgen, 2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl)-1,1-dichloroethylene (DDE), and of glucocorticoids, hydrocortisone and dexamethasone, on growth kinetics and antibiotic susceptibility of E. faecalis, E. coli, P. aeurginosa, and S. aureus were measured. For P. aeurginosa, the presence of either DHT or DDE caused at least a fourfold shift in the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of cefepime and tobramycin. DHT and DDE also affected the response of E. faecalis to meropenem and norfloxacin, resulting in a shift from sensitive to intermediate resistance (four-fold increase in MIC). Hydrocortisone (2 microM) induced an increase in the sensitivity of S. aureus to erythromycin, as compared to hormone-free control (from 0.5 to 0.06 microg/mL). The susceptibility pattern of E. coli was unaffected by the hormones tested. These changes in susceptibility to antibiotics were unrelated to alterations in growth kinetics. For all organisms tested, the alterations in MICs occurred only in the presence of hormone, indicative of changes in the phenotype of these stable quality control strains.