Rapid Initiation of Injection Naltrexone for Opioid Use Disorder: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

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.

Discontinuation of medication treatment for opioid use disorder after a successful course: The discontinuation phase of the CTN-0100 (RDD) trial.

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.

Target trial emulation for comparative effectiveness research with observational data: Promise and challenges for studying medications for opioid use disorder.

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) increase retention in care and decrease mortality during active treatment; however, information about the comparative effectiveness of different forms of MOUD is sparse. Observational comparative effectiveness studies are subject to many types of bias; a robust framework to minimize bias would improve the quality of comparative effectiveness evidence. This paper discusses the use of target trial emulation as a framework to conduct comparative effectiveness studies of MOUD with administrative data. Using examples from our planned research project comparing buprenorphine-naloxone and extended-release naltrexone with respect to the rates of MOUD discontinuation, we provide a primer on the challenges and approaches to employing target trial emulation in the study of MOUD.

Optimizing the use of ketamine to reduce chronic postsurgical pain in women undergoing mastectomy for oncologic indication: study protocol for the KALPAS multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Mastectomies are commonly performed and strongly associated with chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP), more specifically termed postmastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS), with 25-60% of patients reporting pain 3 months after surgery. PMPS interferes with function, recovery, and compliance with adjuvant therapy. Importantly, it is associated with chronic opioid use, as a recent study showed that 1 in 10 patients continue to use opioids at least 3 months after curative surgery. The majority of PMPS patients are women, and, over the past 10 years, women have outpaced men in the rate of growth in opioid dependence. Standard perioperative multimodal analgesia is only modestly effective in prevention of CPSP. Thus, interventions to reduce CPSP and PMPS are urgently needed. Ketamine is well known to improve pain and reduce opioid use in the acute postoperative period. Additionally, ketamine has been shown to control mood in studies of anxiety and depression. By targeting acute pain and improving mood in the perioperative period, ketamine may be able to prevent the development of CPSP. METHODS: Ketamine analgesia for long-lasting pain relief after surgery (KALPAS) is a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to study the effectiveness of ketamine in reducing PMPS. The study compares continuous perioperative ketamine infusion vs single-dose ketamine in the postanesthesia care unit vs placebo for reducing PMPS. Participants are followed for 1 year after surgery. The primary outcome is pain at the surgical site at 3 months after the index surgery as assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory-short form pain severity subscale. DISCUSSION: This project is part of the NIH Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) Initiative, a nationwide effort to address the opioid public health crisis. This study can substantially impact perioperative pain management and can contribute significantly to combatting the opioid epidemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05037123. Registered on September 8, 2021.

Individual-Level Risk Prediction of Return to Use During Opioid Use Disorder Treatment.

Importance: No existing model allows clinicians to predict whether patients might return to opioid use in the early stages of treatment for opioid use disorder. Objective: To develop an individual-level prediction tool for risk of return to use in opioid use disorder. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical model used predictive modeling with individual-level data harmonized in June 1, 2019, to October 1, 2022, from 3 multicenter, pragmatic, randomized clinical trials of at least 12 weeks' duration within the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) performed between 2006 and 2016. The clinical trials covered a variety of treatment settings, including federally licensed treatment sites, physician practices, and inpatient treatment facilities. All 3 trials enrolled adult participants older than 18 years, with broad pragmatic inclusion and few exclusion criteria except for major medical and unstable psychiatric comorbidities. Intervention: All participants received 1 of 3 medications for opioid use disorder: methadone, buprenorphine, or extended-release naltrexone. Main Outcomes and Measures: Predictive models were developed for return to use, which was defined as 4 consecutive weeks of urine drug screen (UDS) results either missing or positive for nonprescribed opioids by week 12 of treatment. Results: The overall sample included 2199 trial participants (mean [SD] age, 35.3 [10.7] years; 728 women [33.1%] and 1471 men [66.9%]). The final model based on 4 predictors at treatment entry (heroin use days, morphine- and cocaine-positive UDS results, and heroin injection in the past 30 days) yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.67 (95% CI, 0.62-0.71). Adding UDS in the first 3 treatment weeks improved model performance (AUROC, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.78-0.85). A simplified score (CTN-0094 OUD Return-to-Use Risk Score) provided good clinical risk stratification wherein patients with weekly opioid-negative UDS results in the 3 weeks after treatment initiation had a 13% risk of return to use compared with 85% for those with 3 weeks of opioid-positive or missing UDS results (AUROC, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.76-0.84). Conclusions and Relevance: The prediction model described in this study may be a universal risk measure for return to opioid use by treatment week 3. Interventions to prevent return to regular use should focus on this critical early treatment period.

Retention and critical outcomes among new methadone maintenance patients following extended take-home reforms: a retrospective observational cohort study.

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.

Secondary Analysis of Agreement Between Negative Timeline Follow Back Report and Negative Urine Toxicology in a Large Trial of Individuals with Opioid Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVES: Timeline follow-back (TLFB) is a self-report measure commonly used as a method of assessing historical drug use in both clinical and research settings. Our study considered rates of agreement between TLFB and an objective biological assay of opioid use. METHODS: We calculated the rates of agreement between negative report of opioid use for the most recent 8 days on TLFB and urine toxicology (UTOX) results in a large multisite opioid use disorder treatment trial. RESULTS: In total, 3986 assessments were provided by trial participants with both UTOX and TLFB during weeks 1 to 12, 2716 during weeks 13 to 24, and 325 at week 28. Rates of disagreement between negative TLFB and positive opioid UTOX were 2.33% of all assessments (21.68% of those with positive UTOX) over weeks 1 to 12, 2.06% of all assessment (25.00% of those with positive UTOX) over weeks 13 to 24, and 9.85% of all assessments (26.02% of those with positive UTOX) at week 28. CONCLUSIONS: Negative TLFB seems to be generally associated with negative results on urine toxicology.

Implementation of substance use screening in rural federally-qualified health center clinics identified high rates of unhealthy alcohol and cannabis use among adult primary care patients.

BACKGROUND: Screening for substance use in rural primary care clinics faces unique challenges due to limited resources, high patient volumes, and multiple demands on providers. To explore the potential for electronic health record (EHR)-integrated screening in this context, we conducted an implementation feasibility study with a rural federally-qualified health center (FQHC) in Maine. This was an ancillary study to a NIDA Clinical Trials Network study of screening in urban primary care clinics (CTN-0062). METHODS: Researchers worked with stakeholders from three FQHC clinics to define and implement their optimal screening approach. Clinics used the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medication, and Other Substance (TAPS) Tool, completed on tablet computers in the waiting room, and results were immediately recorded in the EHR. Adult patients presenting for annual preventive care visits, but not those with other visit types, were eligible for screening. Data were analyzed for the first 12 months following implementation at each clinic to assess screening rates and prevalence of reported unhealthy substance use, and documentation of counseling using an EHR-integrated clinical decision support tool, for patients screening positive for moderate-high risk alcohol or drug use. RESULTS: Screening was completed by 3749 patients, representing 93.4% of those with screening-eligible annual preventive care visits, and 18.5% of adult patients presenting for any type of primary care visit. Screening was self-administered in 92.9% of cases. The prevalence of moderate-high risk substance use detected on screening was 14.6% for tobacco, 30.4% for alcohol, 10.8% for cannabis, 0.3% for illicit drugs, and 0.6% for non-medical use of prescription drugs. Brief substance use counseling was documented for 17.4% of patients with any moderate-high risk alcohol or drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Self-administered EHR-integrated screening was feasible to implement, and detected substantial alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco use in rural FQHC clinics. Counseling was documented for a minority of patients with moderate-high risk use, possibly indicating a need for better support of primary care providers in addressing substance use. There is potential to broaden the reach of screening by offering it at routine medical visits rather than restricting to annual preventive care visits, within these and other rural primary care clinics.

Clinical and psychosocial outcomes by sex among individuals prescribed buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) or extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) for opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Limited research has explored sex differences in opioid use disorder medication (MOUD) treatment outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine MOUD initiation onto buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) versus extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) by sex, and sex differences in clinical and psychosocial outcomes. METHODS: Using data from a 24-week open-label comparative effectiveness trial of BUP-NX or XR-NTX, this study examined MOUD initiation (i.e., receiving a minimum one XR-NTX injection or first BUP-NX dose) and 24-week self-report outcomes. We used regression models to estimate the probability of MOUD initiation failure among the intent-to-treat sample (N = 570), and the main and interaction effects of sex on outcomes of interest among the subsample of participants who successfully initiated MOUD (n = 474). RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat sample, the odds of treatment initiation failure were not significantly different by sex. In the subsample of successful MOUD initiates, the effect of treatment on employment at week 24 was significantly moderated by sex (p = .003); odds of employment were not significantly different among males by MOUD type; females randomized to XR-NTX versus BUP-NX had 4.63 times greater odds of employment (p < .001). Males had significantly lower odds of past 30-day exchanging sex for drugs versus females (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 0.10, p = .004), controlling for treatment and baseline outcomes. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Further research should explore how to integrate employment support into OUD treatment to improve patient outcomes, particularly among women. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: The current study addressed gaps in the literature by examining sex differences in MOUD initiation and diverse treatment outcomes in a large, national sample.

Risks of returning to opioid use at treatment entry and early in opioid use disorder treatment: Role of non-opioid substances.

OBJECTIVE: Patients in treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) often report use of other substances in addition to opioids. Few studies exist that examine the relationship between use at treatment entry and early non-opioid use in opioid treatment outcome. METHODOLOGY: We combined and harmonized three randomized, controlled MOUD clinical trials from the National Institutes of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network (CTN) (N=2197) and investigated the association of non-opioid substance use at treatment entry and during early treatment with a return to opioid use. The trials compared MOUD treatment (buprenorphine, methadone, extended-release naltrexone) in populations with opioid use disorder (OUD). Non-opioid substances were identified through harmonizing self-reported use. The primary outcomes were markers of return to opioid use by 12 weeks. RESULTS: When treatment cohorts were adjusted, no association between self-reported treatment entry use of non-opioid substances and week-12 opioid use was detected. During the first month of treatment, higher use of cocaine (OR 1.41 [1.18-1.69]) and amphetamine (OR 1.70 [1.27-2.26]) was found to be associated with higher likelihood of illicit opioid use by week 12. Exploratory analyses of potential treatment cohort-by-predictor interactions showed that those with heavier cocaine use had a lower rate of returning to opioid use in the extended-release naltrexone group than in the methadone group. CONCLUSION: Substance use other than opioids at treatment entry is not associated with relapse. Use of cocaine or amphetamines during the first few weeks of MOUD treatment may signal a worse outcome, suggesting a need for additional interventions.

Homelessness and Treatment Outcomes Among Black Adults With Opioid Use Disorder: A Secondary Analysis of X:BOT.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with homelessnesss, and explore the relationship between homelessnesss and treatment outcomes among Black individuals. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the subgroup of Black participants (n = 73) enrolled in "X:BOT," a 24-week multisite randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone versus sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (n = 570). Outcomes included medication initiation, return to extramedical use of opioids assessed by both self-report and urine toxicology, and engagement in medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment at 28 weeks postrandomization. Descriptive statistics were performed. RESULTS: Black participants were mostly unmarried and male, and about a third were aged 21-30 years. Among people experiencing homelessnesss, more were uninsured (45.5% [10/22] vs 19.6% [10/51]), unemployed (77.3% [17/22] vs 64.7% [33/51]), and reported alcohol (40.9% [9/22] vs 23.5% [12/51]) and sedative use (54.5% [12/22] vs 17.6% [9/51]) within the previous 30 days. Compared with housed Black individuals, a slightly higher proportion of Black individuals experiencing homelessnesss successfully initiated study medication (81.1% [18/22] vs 72.6% [37/51]); similar proportions returned to opioid use during the trial (68.2% [15/22] vs 68.6% [35/51]) and were engaged in MOUD at 28 weeks after trial entry (72.2% [13/18] vs 69.7% [23/33]) among participants located for follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These descriptive results among Black patients participating in a trial of MOUD suggest that efficacious MOUD is possible despite homelessnesss with additional clinical supports such as those provided by a clinical trial.

Impact of Medication-Based Treatment on Health Care Utilization Among Individuals With Opioid Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the association between medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and health care utilization over time among a sample of treatment-seeking individuals with opioid use disorder. In contrast to previous studies, this study used a novel measure of MOUD adherence, more comprehensive utilization data, and analyses that controlled for detailed individual and social determinants of health. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of a comparative effectiveness trial (N=570) of extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine-naloxone. The outcome of interest was usage of nonstudy acute care, inpatient and outpatient addiction services, and other outpatient services across 36 weeks of assessment. Adherence (percentage of days taking MOUD) was defined as low (<20%), medium (≥20% but <80%), or high (≥80%). A two-part model evaluated the probability of utilizing a resource and the quantity (utilization days) of the resource consumed. A time-varying approach was used to examine the effect of adherence in a given month on utilization in the same month, with analyses controlling for a wide range of person-level characteristics. RESULTS: Participants with high adherence (vs. low) were significantly less likely to use inpatient addiction (p<0.001) and acute care (p<0.001) services and significantly more likely to engage in outpatient addiction (p=0.045) and other outpatient (p=0.042) services. CONCLUSIONS: These findings reinforce the understanding that greater MOUD adherence is associated with reduced usage of high-cost health services and increased usage of outpatient care. The results further suggest the need for enhanced access to MOUD and for interventions that improve adherence.

Implementing Programs to Initiate Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in High-Need, Low-Resource Emergency Departments: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that implementation facilitation would enable us to rapidly and effectively implement emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine programs in rural and urban settings with high-need, limited resources and dissimilar staffing structures. METHODS: This multicenter implementation study employed implementation facilitation using a participatory action research approach to develop, introduce, and refine site-specific clinical protocols for ED-initiated buprenorphine and referral in 3 EDs not previously initiating buprenorphine. We assessed feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness by triangulating mixed-methods formative evaluation data (focus groups/interviews and pre/post surveys involving staff, patients, and stakeholders), patients' medical records, and 30-day outcomes from a purposive sample of 40 buprenorphine-receiving patient-participants who met research eligibility criteria (English-speaking, medically stable, locator information, nonprisoners). We estimated the primary implementation outcome (proportion receiving ED-initiated buprenorphine among candidates) and the main secondary outcome (30-day treatment engagement) using Bayesian methods. RESULTS: Within 3 months of initiating the implementation facilitation activities, each site implemented buprenorphine programs. During the 6-month programmatic evaluation, there were 134 ED-buprenorphine candidates among 2,522 encounters involving opioid use. A total of 52 (41.6%) practitioners initiated buprenorphine administration to 112 (85.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 79.7% to 90.4%) unique patients. Among 40 enrolled patient-participants, 49.0% (35.6% to 62.5%) were engaged in addiction treatment 30 days later (confirmed); 26 (68.4%) reported attending one or more treatment visits; there was a 4-fold decrease in self-reported overdose events (odds ratio [OR] 4.03; 95% CI 1.27 to 12.75). The ED clinician readiness increased by a median of 5.02 (95% CI: 3.56 to 6.47) from 1.92/10 to 6.95/10 (n(pre)=80, n(post)=83). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation facilitation enabled us to effectively implement ED-based buprenorphine programs across heterogeneous ED settings rapidly, which was associated with promising implementation and exploratory patient-level outcomes.

Effectiveness of Conditioned Open-label Placebo With Methadone in Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Methadone treatment is the most effective evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), but challenges related to dosing and premature treatment dropout argue for adjunct interventions to improve outcomes. One potential behavioral intervention with low risk involves harnessing placebo effects. Objective: To determine the effect of a pharmacologically conditioned open-label placebo (C-OLP) on 90-day methadone dose, retention, drug use, withdrawal, craving, quality of life, and sleep. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-arm, open-label, single-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted between December 5, 2017, and August 2, 2019, in an academically affiliated community opioid treatment program. Analyses were conducted between October 1, 2019, and April 30, 2020. A total of 320 newly enrolled adults seeking treatment for moderate to severe OUD were assessed for study eligibility; 131 met eligibility criteria, provided informed consent, and were randomized to either C-OLP or treatment as usual (TAU) in an unequal-block (3:2) manner. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, hospital/program transfers, and court-ordered treatment. Interventions: Participants randomized to C-OLP received pharmacologic conditioning and a placebo pill and methadone, and participants randomized to TAU were given methadone only. Participants met with the study team 5 times: at baseline (treatment intake) and 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks postbaseline. Interactions were balanced between the 2 groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included 90-day methadone dose (primary) and treatment retention, drug use, withdrawal, craving, quality of life, and sleep quality (secondary). Analyses were conducted as intention-to-treat. Results: Of the 131 people enrolled in the study, 54 were randomized to TAU and 77 to C-OLP. Mean (SD) age was 45.9 (11.2) years; most of the participants were Black or African American (83 [63.4%]) and male (84 [64.1%]). No significant group differences were observed in the mean (SD) 90-day methadone dose (83.1 [25.1] mg for group TAU, 79.4 [19.6] mg for group C-OLP; t = 0.621991; P = .43), but the groups differed significantly in their retention rates: 33 (61.1%) for TAU and 60 (77.9%) for C-OLP (χ21 = 4.356; P = .04; number needed to treat for the beneficial outcome of 3-month treatment retention, 6; 95% CI, 4-119). C-OLP participants also reported significantly better sleep quality. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, C-OLP had no effect on the primary outcome of 90-day methadone dose. However, C-OLP participants were significantly more likely to remain in treatment. These findings support the use of C-OLP as a methadone treatment adjunct, but larger trials are needed to further examine the use of C-OLP. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02941809.

Surmounting Withdrawal to Initiate Fast Treatment with Naltrexone (SWIFT): A stepped wedge hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study.

BACKGROUND: Extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX) is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), but initiation remains a barrier to implementation. Standard practice requires a 10- to 15-day inpatient admission prior to XR-NTX initiation and involves a methadone or buprenorphine taper followed by a 7- to 10-day washout, as recommended in the Prescribing Information for XR-NTX. A 5- to 7-day rapid induction approach was developed that utilizes low-dose oral naltrexone and non-opioid medications. METHODS: The CTN-0097 Surmounting Withdrawal to Initiate Fast Treatment with Naltrexone (SWIFT) study was a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial that compared the effectiveness of the standard procedure (SP) to the rapid procedure (RP) for XR-NTX initiation across six community inpatient addiction treatment units, and evaluated the implementation process. Sites were randomized to RP every 14 weeks in an optimized stepped wedge design. Participants (target recruitment = 450) received the procedure (SP or RP) that the site was implementing at time of admission. The hypothesis was RP will be non-inferior to SP on proportion of inpatients who receive XR-NTX, with a shorter admission time for RP. Superiority testing of RP was planned if the null hypothesis of inferiority of RP to SP was rejected. DISCUSSION: If RP for XR-NTX initiation is shown to be effective, the shorter inpatient stay could make XR-NTX more feasible and have an important public health impact expanding access to OUD pharmacotherapy. Further, a better understanding of facilitators and barriers to RP implementation can help with future translatability and uptake to other community programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04762537 Registered February 21, 2021.

Trajectories of depression among patients in treatment for opioid use disorder: A growth mixture model secondary analysis of the XBOT trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To inform clinical practice, we identified subgroups of adults based on levels of depression symptomatology over time during opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. METHODS: Participants were 474 adults in a 24-week treatment trial for OUD. Depression symptoms were measured using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) at nine-time points. This was a secondary analysis of the Clinical Trials Network Extended-Release Naltrexone versus Buprenorphine for Opioid Treatment (XBOT) trial using a growth mixture model. RESULTS: Three distinct depression trajectories were identified: Class 1 High Recurring-10% with high HAM-D with initial partial reductions (of HAM-D across time), Class 2 Persistently High-5% with persistently high HAM-D, and Class 3 Low Declining-85% of the participants, with low HAM-D with early sustained reductions. The majority (low declining) had levels of depression that improved in the first 4 weeks and then stabilized across the treatment period. In contrast, 15% (high recurring and persistently high) had high initial levels that were more variable across time. The persistently high class had higher rates of opioid relapse. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: In this OUD sample, most depressive symptomatology was mild and improved after medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Smaller subgroups had higher depressive symptoms that persisted or recurred after the initiation of MOUD. Depressive symptoms should be followed in patients initiating treatment for OUD, and when persistent, should prompt further evaluation and consideration of antidepressant treatment. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: This study is the first to identify three distinct depression trajectories among a large clinical sample of individuals in MOUD treatment.

Optimally Choosing Medication Type for Patients With Opioid Use Disorder.

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) tend to get assigned to one of 3 medications based on the treatment program to which the patient presents (e.g., opioid treatment programs tend to treat patients with methadone, while office-based practices tend to prescribe buprenorphine). It is possible that optimally matching patients with treatment type would reduce the risk of return to regular opioid use (RROU). We analyzed data from 3 comparative effectiveness trials from the US National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN0027, 2006-2010; CTN0030, 2006-2009; and CTN0051 2014-2017), in which patients with OUD (n = 1,459) were assigned to treatment with either injection extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), or oral methadone. We learned an individualized rule by which to assign medication type such that risk of RROU during 12 weeks of treatment would be minimized, and then estimated the amount by which RROU risk could be reduced if the rule were applied. Applying our estimated treatment rule would reduce risk of RROU compared with treating everyone with methadone (relative risk (RR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.60, 0.97) or treating everyone with XR-NTX (RR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.96). Applying the estimated treatment rule would have resulted in a similar risk of RROU to that of with treating everyone with BUP-NX (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.73, 1.11).

Psilocybin for alcohol use disorder: Rationale and design considerations for a randomized controlled trial.

Several lines of evidence suggest that classic psychedelics (5-HT2A receptor agonists or partial agonists) such as psilocybin might facilitate behavior change in individuals with substance use disorders. We conducted a multi-site, double-blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the effects of psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy in alcohol-dependent volunteers. In addition to a structured 12-week psychotherapy platform, participants (n = 96) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral psilocybin or an active placebo (oral diphenhydramine) in each of two dosing sessions (at weeks 4 and 8). Initial doses were 25 mg/70 kg psilocybin or 50 mg diphenhydramine, which could be increased in the second session depending on initial response. The psychotherapy platform combined evidence-based, manualized therapy for alcohol dependence with a supportive context for the dosing sessions. All participants were followed in the RCT through week 36. At the end of the RCT, participants who still met safety criteria were offered an open-label psilocybin session. Data collected at screening, baseline and throughout the study included: demographics, measures of alcohol use, subjective response to psilocybin and diphenhydramine, and safety measures. The primary outcome was the proportion of heavy drinking days during the 32 weeks after the first dosing session (i.e., between week 4 and week 36). Secondary outcomes included safety, additional measures of drinking (e.g., abstinence, drinking days, etc.), craving, self-efficacy, and acute effects. We will also explore moderators and mediators of the primary outcome. The primary outcomes will be published elsewhere. In this paper, we describe the protocol and rationale for our design decisions.