Motivation and context of concurrent stimulant and opioid use among persons who use drugs in the rural United States: a multi-site qualitative inquiry.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, stimulant use has increased among persons who use opioids in the rural U.S., leading to high rates of overdose and death. We sought to understand motivations and contexts for stimulant use among persons who use opioids in a large, geographically diverse sample of persons who use drugs (PWUD) in the rural settings. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured individual interviews with PWUD at 8 U.S. sites spanning 10 states and 65 counties. Content areas included general substance use, injection drug use, changes in drug use, and harm reduction practices. We used an iterative open-coding process to comprehensively itemize and categorize content shared by participants related to concurrent use. RESULTS: We interviewed 349 PWUD (64% male, mean age 36). Of those discussing current use of stimulants in the context of opioid use (n = 137, 39%), the stimulant most used was methamphetamine (78%) followed by cocaine/crack (26%). Motivations for co-use included: 1) change in drug markets and cost considerations; 2) recreational goals, e.g., seeking stronger effects after heightened opioid tolerance; 3) practical goals, such as a desire to balance or alleviate the effects of the other drug, including the use of stimulants to avoid/reverse opioid overdose, and/or control symptoms of opioid withdrawal; and 4) functional goals, such as being simultaneously energized and pain-free in order to remain productive for employment. CONCLUSION: In a rural U.S. cohort of PWUD, use of both stimulants and opioids was highly prevalent. Reasons for dual use found in the rural context compared to urban studies included changes in drug availability, functional/productivity goals, and the use of methamphetamine to offset opioid overdose. Education efforts and harm reduction services and treatment, such as access to naloxone, fentanyl test strips, and accessible drug treatment for combined opioid and stimulant use, are urgently needed in the rural U.S. to reduce overdose and other adverse outcomes.

Pilot study of a community pharmacist led program to treat hepatitis C virus among people who inject drugs.

Background: People who inject drugs (PWID) are a key population for treatment with direct-acting antiviral medications (DAAs) to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV). We developed a Pharmacist, Physician, and Patient Navigator Collaborative Care Model (PPP-CCM) for delivery of HCV treatment; this study describes clinical outcomes related to HCV treatment (initial evaluation, treatment initiation, completion, and cure), as well as patient satisfaction. Methods: We conducted a single-arm prospective pilot study of adult PWID living with HCV. Participants completed baseline and six-month follow-up surveys, and treatment and outcomes were abstracted from electronic health records. Primary outcome was linkage to pharmacist for HCV evaluation; secondary outcomes included DAA initiation, completion, and cure, as well as patient-reported satisfaction. Results: Of the 40 PWID enrolled, mean age was 43.6 years, 12 (30 %) were female, 20 (50 %) were non-white, and 15 (38 %) were unhoused. Thirty-eight (95 %) were successfully linked to the pharmacist for initial evaluation. Of those, 21/38 (55 %) initiated DAAs, and 16/21 (76 %) completed treatment. Among those completing treatment who had viral load data to document whether they achieved "sustained virologic response", i.e. cure, 10/11 (91 %) were found to be cured. There was high satisfaction with 100 % responding "agree or strongly agree" that they had a positive experience with the pharmacist. Conclusion: Nearly all participants in this pilot were successfully linked to the pharmacist for evaluation, and more than half were started on DAAs; results provide preliminary evidence of feasibility of pharmacist-led models of HCV treatment for PWID. Clinicaltrialsgov registration number: NCT04698629.

Estimating the impact of stimulant use on initiation of buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone in two clinical trials and real-world populations.

BACKGROUND: Co-use of stimulants and opioids is rapidly increasing. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have established the efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), but stimulant use may decrease the likelihood of initiating MOUD treatment. Furthermore, trial participants may not represent "real-world" populations who would benefit from treatment. METHODS: We conducted a two-stage analysis. First, associations between stimulant use (time-varying urine drug screens for cocaine, methamphetamine, or amphetamines) and initiation of buprenorphine or extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) were estimated across two RCTs (CTN-0051 X:BOT and CTN-0067 CHOICES) using adjusted Cox regression models. Second, results were generalized to three target populations who would benefit from MOUD: Housed adults identifying the need for OUD treatment, as characterized by the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH); adults entering OUD treatment, as characterized by Treatment Episodes Dataset (TEDS); and adults living in rural regions of the U.S. with high rates of injection drug use, as characterized by the Rural Opioids Initiative (ROI). Generalizability analyses adjusted for differences in demographic characteristics, substance use, housing status, and depression between RCT and target populations using inverse probability of selection weighting. RESULTS: Analyses included 673 clinical trial participants, 139 NSDUH respondents (weighted to represent 661,650 people), 71,751 TEDS treatment episodes, and 1,933 ROI participants. The majority were aged 30-49 years, male, and non-Hispanic White. In RCTs, stimulant use reduced the likelihood of MOUD initiation by 32% (adjusted HR [aHR] = 0.68, 95% CI 0.49-0.94, p = 0.019). Stimulant use associations were slightly attenuated and non-significant among housed adults needing treatment (25% reduction, aHR = 0.75, 0.48-1.18, p = 0.215) and adults entering OUD treatment (28% reduction, aHR = 0.72, 0.51-1.01, p = 0.061). The association was more pronounced, but still non-significant among rural people injecting drugs (39% reduction, aHR = 0.61, 0.35-1.06, p = 0.081). Stimulant use had a larger negative impact on XR-NTX initiation compared to buprenorphine, especially in the rural population (76% reduction, aHR = 0.24, 0.08-0.69, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Stimulant use is a barrier to buprenorphine or XR-NTX initiation in clinical trials and real-world populations that would benefit from OUD treatment. Interventions to address stimulant use among patients with OUD are urgently needed, especially among rural people injecting drugs, who already suffer from limited access to MOUD.

The Global Task Force for Chronic Pain in People with HIV (PWH): Developing a research agenda in an emerging field.

Chronic pain is a common comorbidity in people with HIV (PWH), with prevalence estimates of 25-85%. Research in this area is growing, but significant gaps remain. A Global Task Force of HIV experts was organized to brainstorm a scientific agenda and identify measurement domains critical to advancing research in this field. Experts were identified through literature searches and snowball sampling. Two online questionnaires were developed by Task Force members. Questionnaire 1 asked participants to identify knowledge gaps in the field of HIV and chronic pain and identify measurement domains in studies of chronic pain in PWH. Responses were ranked in order of importance in Questionnaire 2, which was followed by a group discussion. 29 experts completed Questionnaire 1, 25 completed Questionnaire 2, and 21 participated in the group. Many important clinical and research priorities emerged, including the need to examine etiologies of chronic pain in PWH. Pain-related measurement domains were discussed, with a primary focus on domains that could be assessed in a standardized manner across various cohorts that include PWH in different countries. We collaboratively identified clinical and research priorities, as well as gaps in standardization of measurement domains, that can be used to move the field forward.

Impact of a jail-based treatment decision-making intervention on post-release initiation of medications for opioid use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is common among people in jail and is effectively treated with medications for OUD (MOUD). People with OUD may have an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of OUD and MOUD, and of how to access care. We evaluated an OUD treatment decision making (TDM) intervention to determine whether the intervention increased MOUD initiation post-release. METHODS: We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study of the TDM intervention on initiation of MOUD, individuals with records data indicating confirmed or suspected OUD incarcerated in four eligible jails were eligible to receive the intervention. Time-to-event analyses of the TDM intervention were conducted using Cox proportional hazard modeling with MOUD as the outcome. RESULTS: Cox proportional hazard modeling, with the intervention modeled as having a time-varying effect due to violation of the proportionality assumption, indicated that those receiving the TDM intervention (n = 568) were significantly more likely to initiate MOUD during the first month after release from jail (adjusted hazard ratio 6.27, 95 % C.I. 4.20-9.37), but not in subsequent months (AHR 1.33 95 % C.I. 0.94-1.89), adjusting for demographics, prior MOUD, or felony or gross misdemeanor arrest in the prior year compared to those not receiving the intervention (n = 3174). CONCLUSION: The TDM intervention was associated with a significantly higher relative hazard of starting MOUD, specifically during the first month after incarceration. However, a minority of all eligible people received any MOUD. Future research should examine ways to increase initiation on MOUD immediately after (or ideally during) incarceration.