Search

Opioid use disorder is common in incarcerated persons, and concern about the diversion of buprenorphine is a barrier to treatment. We conducted a retrospective chart review of incarcerated persons in the New Jersey Department of Corrections who received charges for misuse of medication, including buprenorphine, hypothesizing that the prescription of buprenorphine monoproduct, multiple tabs or films of buprenorphine, or higher doses of buprenorphine would be associated with more diversion incidents. Within the dosing range of 2 to 12 mg, there were more incidents of diversion of buprenorphine monoproduct (24.3%) compared with buprenorphine-naloxone (10.7%, p = .004). More incidents of diversion were seen when multiple films or tabs of buprenorphine product were prescribed (21.7%, comparison 12.7%, p = .01). This observation held when considering multiple buprenorphine-naloxone films, but not multiple buprenorphine tablets. No statistically significant association was found for institutional diversion charges related to higher doses of buprenorphine products. These results suggest that, within the dosing range of buprenorphine used in the New Jersey Department of Corrections, misuse charges were not associated with higher doses although were associated with prescribing buprenorphine monoproduct and multiple films of buprenorphine-naloxone., (© 2024 American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.)

Importance: Previous studies on the comparative effectiveness between buprenorphine and methadone provided limited evidence on differences in treatment effects across key subgroups and were drawn from populations who use primarily heroin or prescription opioids, although fentanyl use is increasing across North America., Objective: To assess the risk of treatment discontinuation and mortality among individuals receiving buprenorphine/naloxone vs methadone for the treatment of opioid use disorder., Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based retrospective cohort study using linked health administrative databases in British Columbia, Canada. The study included treatment recipients between January 1, 2010, and March 17, 2020, who were 18 years or older and not incarcerated, pregnant, or receiving palliative cancer care at initiation., Exposures: Receipt of buprenorphine/naloxone or methadone among incident (first-time) users and prevalent new users (including first and subsequent treatment attempts)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% compatibility (confidence) intervals were estimated for treatment discontinuation (lasting ≥5 days for methadone and ≥6 days for buprenorphine/naloxone) and all-cause mortality within 24 months using discrete-time survival models for comparisons of medications as assigned at initiation regardless of treatment adherence ("initiator") and received according to dosing guidelines (approximating per-protocol analysis)., Results: A total of 30 891 incident users (39% receiving buprenorphine/naloxone; 66% male; median age, 33 [25th-75th, 26-43] years) were included in the initiator analysis and 25 614 in the per-protocol analysis. Incident users of buprenorphine/naloxone had a higher risk of treatment discontinuation compared with methadone in initiator analyses (88.8% vs 81.5% discontinued at 24 months; adjusted HR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.53-1.63]), with limited change in estimates when evaluated at optimal dose in per-protocol analysis (42.1% vs 30.7%; adjusted HR, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.58-1.76]). Per-protocol analyses of mortality while receiving treatment exhibited ambiguous results among incident users (0.08% vs 0.13% mortality at 24 months; adjusted HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.24-1.35]) and among prevalent users (0.08% vs 0.09%; adjusted HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.54-1.73]). Results were consistent after the introduction of fentanyl and across patient subgroups and sensitivity analyses., Conclusions and Relevance: Receipt of methadone was associated with a lower risk of treatment discontinuation compared with buprenorphine/naloxone. The risk of mortality while receiving treatment was similar for buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone, although the CI estimate for the hazard ratio was wide.

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the management of opioid use disorder (OUD) on an outpatient basis with buprenorphine or buprenorphine/naloxone (or methadone, which is limited to federally certified opioid treatment programs). Primary care practices are well poised to provide comprehensive care for patients with OUD, including provision of MOUD. The aim of this study was to assess provider and staff OUD attitudes and role perceptions before and after implementation of a MOUD clinical service line. A survey was distributed to evaluate attitudes and perceptions of patients with OUD and provision of MOUD among providers and staff in an academic family medicine clinic. Surveys were distributed in December 2020 (73% response rate), prior to a substance use disorder educational training and MOUD service line implementation, which provided patients with OUD both primary care services and management with buprenorphine/naloxone. A follow-up survey was distributed in February 2022 (69% response rate).Training and implementation of the MOUD service line demonstrated improvements in the domains of motivation (+0.63), attitudes (+0.32), satisfaction (+0.38), role support (+0.48), role adequacy (+0.39), and safety (+0.79) among surveyed participants. The change in satisfaction and safety domains was statistically significant (P < .05). There was no change in the role legitimacy domain.Implementation of a primary care-based MOUD service line positively affected provider and staff motivation, attitudes, satisfaction, sense of safety, role support, and adequacy when working with patients with OUD. This highlights the benefits of MOUD-specific clinical support to optimize care delivery within primary care., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a significant public health issue as the number of opioid-related overdose deaths continues to reach new highs each year. Buprenorphine/Naloxone is a medication that has been shown to be highly effective for the treatment of OUD. However, the clinical management of patients on this medication is challenging as many patients discontinue treatment prematurely. We conducted a qualitative study focusing on experienced prescribers of buprenorphine to learn about what they believe are key challenges in prescribing this medication to patients with OUD and related strategies for improving treatment outcomes., Methods: We conducted two rounds of interviews with 12 prescribers who were either trained as a primary care physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. These prescribers were recruited from an academically-based treatment program, a community health center, and a commercial substance use disorder treatment facility. Interview data were coded and analyzed in accordance with a grounded theory approach., Results: Key findings and related recommendations emerged for patient monitoring, integration of behavioral health with prescribing, patient volume requirements, and use of telehealth., Conclusion: The interviews generated a number of recommendations for improving patient outcomes from buprenorphine treatment. Some of these recommendations can be implemented quite readily whereas others entail more substantial resources and time commitments., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Approval was secured from a Northeastern University Institutional Review Board (IRB 19-05-06) and consent was obtained from all study participants. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: As fentanyl has become more readily available, opioid-related morbidity and mortality in the United States has increased dramatically. Preliminary studies suggest that high-affinity, partial mu-opioid receptor agonists such as the combination product buprenorphine-naloxone may reduce mortality from overdose and promote remission. With the escalating prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD), it is essential to evaluate the effectiveness of opioid agonists like buprenorphine-naloxone. This study examines mortality and remission rates for OUD patients prescribed buprenorphine-naloxone to determine the efficacy of this treatment toward these outcomes., Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis using the US Collaborative Network database in TriNetX, examining de-identified medical records from nearly 92 million patients across 56 healthcare organizations. The study spanned the years from January 1, 2017-May 13, 2022. Cohort 1 included OUD patients who began buprenorphine-naloxone treatment within one-year post-diagnosis, while Cohort 2, the control group, consisted of OUD patients who were not administered buprenorphine. The study measured mortality and remission rates within a year of the index event, incorporating propensity score matching for age, gender, and race/ethnicity., Results: Prior to propensity matching, we identified a total of 221,967 patients with OUD. Following exclusions, 61,656 patients treated with buprenorphine-naloxone showed 34% fewer deaths within one year of diagnosis compared to 159,061 patients who did not receive buprenorphine (2.6% vs 4.0%; relative risk [RR] 0.661; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.627-0.698; P  < 0.001). The remission rate was approximately 1.9 times higher in the buprenorphine-naloxone group compared to the control group (18.8% vs 10.1%; RR 1.862; 95% CI 1.812-1.914; P  < 0.001). After propensity matching, the effect on mortality decreased but remained statistically significant (2.6% vs 3.0%; RR 0.868; 95% CI 0.813-0.927; P  < 0.001) and the remission rate remained consistent (18.8% vs 10.4%; RR 1.812; 95% CI 1.750-1.876; P  < 0.001). Number needed to treat for benefit was 249 for death and 12 for remission., Conclusion: Buprenorphine-naloxone was associated with significantly reduced mortality and increased remission rates for patients with opioid use disorder and should be used as a primary treatment. The recognition and implementation of treatment options like buprenorphine-naloxone is vital in alleviating the impact of OUD., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: By the WestJEM article submission agreement, all authors are required to disclose all affiliations, funding sources and financial or management relationships that could be perceived as potential sources of bias. This research was supported by the Institute for Translational Sciences at The University of Texas Medical Branch, supported in part by a Clinical and Translational Science Award (UL1 TR001439) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. There are no other conflicts of interest or sources of funding to declare.

Aim: To compare opioid use disorder (OUD) patients who continue to use opioids and are in remission with buprenorphine-naloxone (B/N) in terms of some parameters and to evaluate the relationship between B/N dose and these parameters., Method: We included 141 OUD patients in remission with B/N maintenance treatment for at least 6 months, 141 who still used opioids, and 141 healthy volunteers. Substance Craving Scale (SCS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX), and Short Form 36 (SF-36) were administered., Results: PSQI scores and ASEX scores were higher in those who continued to use opiates than in OUD in remission, and in OUD in remission compared to controls. OUD patients with current opioid use also had lower SF-36 scores compared to both patients in remission and healthy controls. SCS, PSQI, ASEX, and SF-36 scores were similar when the three groups were examined based on the dosage of B/N (below 8, 8-15, and 16 mg/day and above) use in OUD in remission., Conclusions: Quality of life, craving, sleep and sexual functions improved significantly with B/N; however, these effects are not dependent on B/N dosage., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: There has been a significant increase in methamphetamine/amphetamine use in North America, particularly among people who use opioids. Despite its association with several negative health consequences, the population of people who use methamphetamine/amphetamine with opioids is not well characterised. The aim of this study was to investigate correlates of methamphetamine/amphetamine use among adults with prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD) starting methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone as part of a pragmatic randomised treatment trial in Canada., Methods: Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to determine factors associated with baseline methamphetamine/amphetamine use (measured by urine drug test [UDT]) among participants of a pan-Canadian pragmatic trial conducted between 2017 and 2020 comparing supervised methadone versus flexible take-home dosing buprenorphine/naloxone models of care in people with POUD (e.g., licit or illicit, including fentanyl, prescribed or not)., Results: The sample included 269 participants, of which 142 (52.8%) had positive baseline methamphetamine/amphetamine UDT. In the multivariable model, positive fentanyl UDT (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 13.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.45, 28.30), non-fatal overdose in the last 6 months (AOR 2.26, CI 1.01, 5.17) and a lifetime history of opioid agonist therapy exposure prior to study entry (AOR 2.30, CI 1.09, 4.87) remained positively associated with baseline methamphetamine/amphetamine use., Discussion and Conclusions: In this sample of people with POUD, methamphetamine/amphetamine use was associated with markers of complex and severe OUD, including overdose risk. This suggests the need for targeted interventions to optimise treatment outcomes and prevent future overdoses in this population., Clinical Trial Registration: Available at: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03033732., (© 2024 The Authors. Drug and Alcohol Review published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs.)

Objective: To examine the quarterly incidence and prevalence of medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD) from 2015 to 2021., Methods: A retrospective population-wide observational study in Manitoba, Canada, was conducted using administrative claims data from the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy to examine the incidence and prevalence of OUD (methadone, buprenorphine-naloxone, buprenorphine) or AUD medications (naltrexone, acamprosate, disulfiram) per 10,000 individuals in each quarter between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2021., Results: There were 1179 and 451 individuals who received at least one prescription for OUD and AUD, respectively, in the first quarter of 2020. The prevalence of OUD medications more than doubled from 6.3 to 14.3 per 10,000 from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2021. Likewise, AUD medication prevalence increased almost 10-fold from 0.68 to 6.5 per 10,000 from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2021, primarily due to naltrexone. The incidence of AUD prescription use increased 8.6-fold from 0.29 to 2.51 per 10,000 during the study period. In contrast, the incidence of opioid agonist therapy declined from 2.1 per 10,000 in the first quarter of 2015 to 0.53 per 10,000 the first quarter of 2016, primarily due to methadone. Whereas methadone incidence declined, buprenorphine-naloxone incidence increased almost 15-fold during the study period., Conclusion: An increase in both AUD medication prevalence and incidence in addition to an increase in buprenorphine-naloxone incidence was observed. These findings reflect an increase in the uptake of medications for treating AUD and OUD following changes to improve coverage and access to these medications., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background and Objectives: Although concurrent stimulant use is common among people with opioid use disorder (OUD), there is little evidence on its impacts on opioid agonist therapy (OAT) outcomes. This study sought to determine the impact of baseline methamphetamine/amphetamine use on discontinuation of OAT among individuals with prescription-type OUD (POUD) initiating methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone as part of a pragmatic randomized trial in Canada., Methods: Secondary analysis of a pan-Canadian pragmatic trial conducted between 2017 and 2020 comparing supervised methadone versus flexible take-home dosing buprenorphine/naloxone models of care. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the effect of baseline methamphetamine/amphetamine use (measured by urine drug test [UDT]) on two discontinuation outcomes (i.e., assigned OAT discontinuation, any OAT discontinuation)., Results: Two hundred nine (n = 209) participants initiated OAT, of which 96 (45.9%) had positive baseline methamphetamine/amphetamine UDT. Baseline methamphetamine/amphetamine use was associated with shorter median times in assigned OAT (21 vs. 168 days, hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.60-3.76) and any OAT (25 days vs. 168 days, aHR = 2.06, CI = 1.32-3.24). No interaction between methamphetamine/amphetamine and assigned OAT was observed for either outcome (p > .05)., Conclusion and Scientific Significance: This study offers novel insights on the impact of methamphetamine/amphetamine use on OAT outcomes among people with POUD. Methamphetamine/amphetamine use was common and was associated with increased risk of OAT discontinuation. Supplementary interventions, including treatment for stimulant use, are needed to improve retention in OAT and optimize treatment outcomes in this population., (© 2024 The Author(s). The American Journal on Addictions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP).)

Background: Buprenorphine initiation in opioid-tolerant patients usually requires decreasing the total opioid intake per day due to its potential for precipitating withdrawal. However, this strategy may not be tolerated in patients who require higher amounts of opioids, such as those with cancer pain. Case Presentation: We utilized a buprenorphine microdosing strategy for a postoperative cancer patient who was previously taking buprenorphine-naloxone for chronic noncancer pain, then initiated on methadone for uncontrolled cancer-related pain. He had a planned cancer resection in the hospital. He subsequently underwent a successful transition from methadone to buprenorphine-naloxone through microdosing in one week with close monitoring in the inpatient setting. Conclusions: Using a microdosing strategy to transition from methadone to buprenorphine-naloxone in a span of days was achieved in this case report. More research regarding the feasibility and tolerability of microinductions is needed, especially in the setting of chronic pain or cancer-related pain.

Objectives: To describe the use of buprenorphine/naloxone micro-inductions in hospitalized patients and characterize the success rate of these inductions., Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of hospitalized patients receiving a buprenorphine/naloxone micro-induction for opioid use disorder in a tertiary care hospital from Jan 2020-Dec 2020. The primary outcome was a description of the micro-induction prescribing patterns used. The secondary outcomes were a description of the demographic characteristics of patients, the estimated frequency of withdrawal symptoms experienced by patients undergoing a micro-induction, and the overall success rate of the micro-inductions defined as retention on buprenorphine/naloxone therapy with no precipitated withdrawal experienced., Results: Thirty-three patients were included in the analysis. Three main micro-induction regimens were identified, including rapid micro-inductions (8 patients), 0.5 mg SL BID initiations (6 patients), and 0.5 mg SL daily initiations (19 patients). Twenty-four patients (73%) met the criteria for a successful micro-induction, defined as being retained in buprenorphine/naloxone therapy with no precipitated withdrawal experienced. The most common reason for micro-induction failure was patient request to discontinue buprenorphine/naloxone therapy due to perceived adverse effects or personal preference., Conclusion: Buprenorphine/naloxone micro-induction in hospitalized patients resulted in a majority of patients being successfully initiated on buprenorphine/naloxone therapy without requiring opioid abstinence prior to induction. Dosing regimens were variable, and the ideal regimen remains unclear.

Background and Aims: Opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid dependence lead to significant morbidity and mortality, yet treatment retention, crucial for the effectiveness of medications like buprenorphine-naloxone, remains unpredictable. Our objective was to determine the predictability of 6-month retention in buprenorphine-naloxone treatment using electronic health record (EHR) data from diverse clinical settings and to identify key predictors., Design: This retrospective observational study developed and validated machine learning-based clinical risk prediction models using EHR data., Setting and Cases: Data were sourced from Stanford University's healthcare system and Holmusk's NeuroBlu database, reflecting a wide range of healthcare settings. The study analyzed 1800 Stanford and 7957 NeuroBlu treatment encounters from 2008 to 2023 and from 2003 to 2023, respectively., Measurements: Predict continuous prescription of buprenorphine-naloxone for at least 6 months, without a gap of more than 30 days. The performance of machine learning prediction models was assessed by area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC-AUC) analysis as well as precision, recall and calibration. To further validate our approach's clinical applicability, we conducted two secondary analyses: a time-to-event analysis on a single site to estimate the duration of buprenorphine-naloxone treatment continuity evaluated by the C-index and a comparative evaluation against predictions made by three human clinical experts., Findings: Attrition rates at 6 months were 58% (NeuroBlu) and 61% (Stanford). Prediction models trained and internally validated on NeuroBlu data achieved ROC-AUCs up to 75.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 73.6-78.0). Addiction medicine specialists' predictions show a ROC-AUC of 67.8 (95% CI = 50.4-85.2). Time-to-event analysis on Stanford data indicated a median treatment retention time of 65 days, with random survival forest model achieving an average C-index of 65.9. The top predictor of treatment retention identified included the diagnosis of opioid dependence., Conclusions: US patients with opioid use disorder or opioid dependence treated with buprenorphine-naloxone prescriptions appear to have a high (∼60%) treatment attrition by 6 months. Machine learning models trained on diverse electronic health record datasets appear to be able to predict treatment continuity with accuracy comparable to that of clinical experts., (© 2024 The Author(s). Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Background and Aims: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is treatable with buprenorphine/naloxone (buprenorphine), but many patients discontinue treatment prematurely. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of patient- and prescriber-level characteristics relative to several patient outcomes following the initiation of buprenorphine treatment for OUD., Design: This was a retrospective observational investigation. We used the Public Health Data Warehouse from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health to construct a sample of patients who initiated buprenorphine treatment between 2015 and 2019. We attributed each patient to a prescriber based on information from prescription claims. We used multilevel models to assess the influence of patient- and prescriber-level characteristics on each outcome., Setting: Massachusetts, USA., Participants: The study cohort comprised 37 955 unique patients and 2146 prescribers. Among patients, 64.6% were male, 52.6% were under the age of 35 and 82.2% were White, non-Hispanic. For insurance coverage, 72.1% had Medicaid., Measurements: The outcome measures were poor medication continuity, treatment discontinuation and opioid overdose, all assessed within a 12-month follow-up period that began with a focal prescription for buprenorphine. Each patient had a single follow-up period. Poor medication continuity was defined as medication gaps totaling more than 7 days during the initial 180 days of buprenorphine treatment and treatment discontinuation was defined as having a medication gap for 2 consecutive months within the 12-month follow-up period., Findings: The patient-level rates for poor medication continuity, treatment discontinuation and opioid overdose were 59.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 59.2-60.2], 57.4% (95% CI = 56.9-57.9) and 10.3% (95% CI = 10.0-10.6), respectively, with 1.1% (95% CI = 1.0-1.2) experiencing a fatal opioid overdose. At the patient level, after adjustment for covariates, adverse outcomes were associated with race/ethnicity as both Black, non-Hispanic and Hispanic patients had worse outcomes than did White, non-Hispanic patients (Black, non-Hispanic -- poor continuity: 1.50, 95% CI = 1.34-1.68; discontinuation: 1.44, 95% CI = 1.30-1.60; Hispanic -- poor continuity: 1.21, 95% CI = 1.12-1.31; discontinuation: 1.38, 95% CI = 1.28-1.48). Patients with insurance coverage through Medicaid also had worse outcomes than those with commercial insurance (poor continuity: 1.18, 95% CI = 1.11-1.26; discontinuation: 1.09, 95% CI = 1.03-1.16; overdose: 1.98, 95% CI = 1.75-2.23). Pre-treatment mental health conditions and other types of chronic illness were also associated with worse outcomes (History of mental health conditions -- poor continuity: 1.11, 95% CI = 1.06-1.17; discontinuation: 1.05, CI = 1.01-1.10; overdose: 1.47, 95% CI = 1.36-1.60; Chronic health conditions -- poor continuity: 1.15, 95% CI = 1.05-1.27; discontinuation: 1.15, 95% CI = 1.05-1.26; overdose: 1.83, 95% CI = 1.60-2.10; History of substance use disorder other than for opioids -- poor continuity: 1.54, 95% CI = 1.46-1.62; discontinuation: 1.54, 95% CI = 1.47-1.62; overdose: 1.93, 95% CI = 1.80-2.07). At the prescriber level, after adjustments for covariates, adverse outcomes were associated with clinical training, as primary care physicians had higher rates of adverse outcomes than psychiatrists (poor continuity: 1.12, 95% CI = 1.02-1.23; discontinuation: 1.04, 95% CI = 1.01-1.09). A larger prescriber panel size, based on number of patients being prescribed buprenorphine, was also associated with higher rates of adverse outcomes (poor continuity: 1.36, 95% CI = 1.27-1.46; discontinuation: 1.21, 95% CI = 1.14-1.28; overdose: 1.10, 95% CI = 1.01-1.19). Between 9% and 15% of the variation among patients for the outcomes was accounted for at the prescriber level., Conclusions: Patient- and prescriber-level characteristics appear to be associated with patient outcomes following buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder. In particular, patients' race/ethnicity and insurance coverage appear to be associated with substantial disparities in outcomes, and prescriber characteristics appear to be most closely associated with medication continuity during early treatment., (© 2024 The Author(s). Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Objective: A trial comparing extended-release naltrexone and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone demonstrated higher relapse rates in individuals randomized to extended-release naltrexone. The effectiveness of treatment might vary based on patient characteristics. We hypothesized that causal machine learning would identify individualized treatment effects for each medication., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial that compared the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine-naloxone for preventing relapse of opioid misuse. Three machine learning models were derived using all trial participants with 50% randomly selected for training (n = 285) and the remaining 50% for validation. Individualized treatment effect was measured by the Qini value and c-for-benefit, with the absence of relapse denoting treatment success. Patients were grouped into quartiles by predicted individualized treatment effect to examine differences in characteristics and the observed treatment effects., Results: The best-performing model had a Qini value of 4.45 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-7.83) and a c-for-benefit of 0.63 (95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.68). The quartile most likely to benefit from buprenorphine-naloxone had a 35% absolute benefit from this treatment, and at study entry, they had a high median opioid withdrawal score ( P < 0.001), used cocaine on more days over the prior 30 days than other quartiles ( P < 0.001), and had highest proportions with alcohol and cocaine use disorder ( P ≤ 0.02). Quartile 4 individuals were predicted to be most likely to benefit from extended-release naltrexone, with the greatest proportion having heroin drug preference ( P = 0.02) and all experiencing homelessness ( P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Causal machine learning identified differing individualized treatment effects between medications based on characteristics associated with preventing relapse., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Introduction: There is uncertainty about whether criminal legal involvement (CLI) impacts the effectiveness of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). We aimed to determine whether CLI modifies the association between buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) vs. extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and MOUD treatment outcomes., Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of X:BOT, a 24-week multi-center randomized controlled trial comparing treatment outcomes between BUP-NX (n = 287) and XR-NTX (n = 283) in the general population. We used baseline Additional Severity-Index Lite responses to identify patients with recent CLI (n = 342), defined as active CLI and/or CLI in the past 30 days, and lifetime incarceration (n = 328). We explored recent CLI and lifetime incarceration as potential effect modifiers of BUP-NX vs. XR-NTX effectiveness on relapse, induction, and overdose. We conducted both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses for each outcome., Results: In intention-to-treat analyses, recent CLI modified the effect of BUP-NX vs. XR-NTX on odds of successful induction (p = 0.03) and hazard of overdose (p = 0.04), but it did not modify the effect on hazard of relapse (p = 0.23). All participants experienced lower odds of successful induction with XR-NTX compared to BUP-NX, but the relative likelihood of successful induction with BUP-NX was lower than XR-NTX among individuals with recent CLI (OR: 0.25, 95 % CI: 0.13-0.47, p < 0.001) compared to those without recent CLI (OR: 0.04, 95 % CI: 0.01-0.19, p < 0.001). Participants with recent CLI experienced similar hazard of overdose with XR-NTX and BUP-NX (HR: 1.12, 95 % CI: 0.42-3.01, p = 0.82), whereas those without recent CLI experienced greater hazard of overdose with XR-NTX compared to BUP-NX (HR: 12.60, 95 % CI: 1.62-98.03, p = 0.02). In per-protocol analyses, recent CLI did not modify the effect of MOUD on hazard of overdose (p = 0.10) or relapse (p = 0.41). Lifetime incarceration did not modify any outcome., Conclusions: Compared to individuals without recent CLI, individuals with recent CLI experienced decreased relative effectiveness of BUP-NX compared to XR-NTX for induction and overdose outcomes. This highlights the importance of considering the impact of recent CLI on opioid use disorder treatment outcomes. Future research should explore the mechanisms through which recent CLI modifies MOUD effectiveness and aim to improve MOUD effectiveness for individuals with recent CLI., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no declared conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aim: In British Columbia, Canada, clinical guidelines for the treatment of opioid use disorders (OUD) were updated in 2017, during a period in which the potency and composition of the illicit drug supply changed rapidly. We aimed to describe changes in opioid agonist treatment (OAT) prescribing practices at the population level in a setting in which fentanyl and its analogs have become the primary illicit opioid of use., Design, Setting and Participants: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using three linked health administrative databases in British Columbia (BC), Canada. All individuals with at least one OAT dispensation in BC between 1 January 2014 and 31 August 2021 took part., Measurements: To assess changes in OAT prescribing practices over time, we calculated initiation doses, dose titration intervals, maintenance doses and take-home dosing intervals stratified by medication [methadone, buprenorphine-naloxone and slow-release oral morphine (SROM)] according to recommended guidelines., Findings: A total of 265 410 OAT episodes (57.5% on methadone, 34.5% on buprenorphine-naloxone and 8.0% on SROM) were initiated during the study period. Compared with the guideline recommendation, observed initiation doses were higher among all medications from 2014 (2017 for SROM) to 2021 (buprenorphine-naloxone: 14-29%; methadone: 53-66%; SROM: 26-55%). Titration intervals were shorter for all medications, consistent with guidelines for buprenorphine-naloxone (26-49%), but shorter than recommended for methadone or SROM (28-51% and 12-41%, respectively). Higher maintenance dosing was observed for methadone (68-78%) and SROM (3-21%). Take-home allowances extending beyond the recommended guideline length increased across medications (buprenorphine-naloxone: 18-35%; methadone: 50-64%; SROM: 34-39%). Changes in prescribing patterns were similar for first-time OAT initiators., Conclusion: In British Columbia, Canada, from 2014 to 2021, prescribers of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) appeared to initiate both new and experienced OAT clients at higher doses than guideline recommendations, titrate them more rapidly and maintain clients at higher doses. Take-home dose allowances also gradually increased., (© 2024 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Background: Opioid overdose continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Buprenorphine is an important treatment for patients with opioid-use disorder (OUD) and initiation in the emergency department (ED) has been shown to improve outcomes for these patients., Purpose/hypothesis: Our objective was to assess the impact of a three-pronged education package on the knowledge and attitudes of emergency physicians towards using buprenorphine for treatment of OUD. Procedures/data/observations: We developed a three-pronged educational package including back- ground rationale for OUD treatment with buprenorphine, an evidence-based ED buprenorphine induction pathway and electronic medical record tools. This package was deployed to providers in an urban academic ED. A voluntary confidential pre-post survey was administered. Using a 6-point Likert Scale, participants were asked about their understanding, experience, and confidence with prescribing., Conclusions/applications: A one-hour, three-pronged educational package changed the attitudes of emergency physicians towards buprenorphine treatment and demonstrated an increase in willingness and confidence to prescribe it for patients with OUD. Our findings suggest that healthcare entities that wish to boost buprenorphine prescribing can impact willingness and confidence to prescribe with a short education package.

We aimed to examine whether treatment retention, abstinence, and adherence to buprenorphine-naloxone (BNX) differ among individuals with opioid dependence (OD) across three common categories of opioids- heroin, opium, and low-potency pharmaceutical. In a retrospective cohort study, we analyzed outpatient treatment records from March 2020 through February 2022. Opioid category was determined by lifetime and current opioid use. We defined treatment retention as weeks of uninterrupted clinic attendance. Abstinence and BNX adherence were calculated by weeks of extra-medical opioid-negative and buprenorphine-positive urine screening from treatment initiation. Four-hundred-thirteen patients were eligible; 406 (98.3%) were included in the final analysis. Two-hundred-ninety (71.4%) patients were dependent on heroin; 66 (16.3%) were natural opioid dependent, and 50 (12.3%) were dependent on low-potency pharmaceutical opioids. BNX effectiveness in treatment retention, abstinence, and adherence did not differ in patients dependent on heroin, natural, and low-potency pharmaceutical opioids. Patients on ≥8 mg daily BNX had better retention and adherence than those on <8 mg daily. Patients from lower socioeconomic status (SES) had higher odds of retention, abstinence, and adherence than those from upper/middle SES. Treatment outcomes on BNX did not differ across opioid categories. However, BNX should be dosed adequately.

Introduction: People who use drugs are disproportionally affected by sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBIs). While the benefits of methadone in reducing injecting-risk behaviours are well documented, less is known on its impacts on sexual-related risks, as well as its comparative effectiveness to buprenorphine/naloxone, particularly in the context of highly potent opioids. The aim of this study was to estimate the relative effects of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone on injecting and STBBI risks among people with prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD)., Methods: Secondary analysis of a pan-Canadian pragmatic 24-week randomized clinical trial comparing methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone models of care among 272 people with POUD (including licit or illicit opioid analgesics, fentanyl). The Risk Behaviour Survey was used to collect injecting and sexual risks at baseline, and weeks 12 and 24., Results: In total, 210 participants initiated treatment (103 buprenorphine/naloxone and 107 methadone). At baseline, 113/205 (55.1%) participants reported recently injecting drugs, 37/209 (17.7%) unsafe injection practices and 67/162 (41.4%) high-risk sex. Both methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone were associated with reductions in the prevalence of injection drug use and high-risk sex at weeks 12 and 24 with no interactions between treatment arm and time., Conclusion: Methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone were similarly effective in reducing injecting and sexual risk behaviours among people with POUD., Clinical Trials Registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03033732., (© 2024 The Authors. HIV Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British HIV Association.)

Background: Naltrexone is a medication used to treat both opioid and alcohol use disorder with limited experience in pregnant individuals, particularly in comparison to more commonly utilized treatments such as buprenorphine-naloxone. The long-term outcomes of infants exposed to naltrexone has not been previously examined., Aims: To compare the neurobehavioral outcomes of naltrexone versus buprenorphine-naloxone exposed infants., Study Design: Multi-centered prospective cohort study., Subjects: Pregnant people on prescribed buprenorphine-naloxone or naltrexone were enrolled during pregnancy and the dyad followed until 12 months after delivery., Outcome Measures: Infants were evaluated at 4-6 weeks corrected gestational age (CGA) using the NICU Neonatal Neurobehavioral Scale (NNNS) and at the 12-month CGA visit using the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition (ASQ-3)., Results: There were 7 dyads in the naltrexone group and 34 in the buprenorphine-naloxone group. On the NNNS, infants exposed to naltrexone had higher median scores for arousal and excitability, and lower median scores for attention and regulation at 4-6 weeks CGA compared to the buprenorphine-naloxone group. None of the infants in the naltrexone group were monitored for NOWS and had shorter length of hospital stay compared with the buprenorphine-naloxone group. Although no statistically significant differences were observed, more infants in the buprenorphine-naloxone group were identified as at risk for development delays in the communication, problem solving, and personal social domains of the ASQ-3 at 12 months CGA. Results should be interpreted with caution given this study's small sample size and lack of a prospective comparison cohort., Conclusions: In this small cohort, there are differences noted in infant neurobehavior by NNNS at 4-6 weeks of age when comparing the buprenorphine-naloxone and naltrexone groups. At 12 months, ASQ-3 scores were similar but with percentage differences in potential development delay risk observed between the two groups. Larger cohort studies are needed to determine the long-term child outcomes after naltrexone exposure in pregnancy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: To evaluate the impact of depressive symptom severity on opioid use and treatment retention in individuals with prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD)., Method: We analyzed data from a multi-centric, pragmatic, open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing buprenorphine/naloxone to methadone models of care in 272 individuals with POUD. Opioid use was self-reported every two weeks for 24 weeks using the Timeline Followback. Depressive symptom severity was self-reported with the Beck Depression Inventory at baseline, week 12 and week 24., Results: Baseline depressive symptom severity was not associated with opioid use nor treatment retention. At week 12, moderate depressive symptoms were associated with greater opioid use while mild to severe depressive symptoms were associated with lowered treatment retention. At week 24, moderate depressive symptoms were associated with greater opioid use., Conclusions: Ongoing depressive symptoms lead to poorer outcomes in POUD. Clinicians are encouraged to use integrative approaches to optimize treatment outcomes. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03033732) on January 27 th , 2017, prior to participants enrollment.

Objectives: To describe practice patterns surrounding the use of medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) in critically ill patients., Design: Retrospective, multicenter, observational study using the Premier AI Healthcare Database., Setting: The study was conducted in U.S. ICUs., Patients: Adult (≥ 18 yr old) patients with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) admitted to an ICU between 2016 and 2020., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Of 108,189 ICU patients (658 hospitals) with a history of OUD, 20,508 patients (19.0%) received MOUD. Of patients receiving MOUD, 13,745 (67.0%) received methadone, 2,950 (14.4%) received buprenorphine, and 4,227 (20.6%) received buprenorphine/naloxone. MOUD use occurred in 37.9% of patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation. The median day of MOUD initiation was hospital day 2 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-3) and the median duration of MOUD use was 4 days (IQR 2-8). MOUD use per hospital was highly variable (median 16.0%; IQR 10-24; range, 0-70.0%); admitting hospital explained 8.9% of variation in MOUD use. A primary admitting diagnosis of unintentional poisoning (aOR 0.41; 95% CI, 0.38-0.45), presence of an additional substance use disorder (aOR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68), and factors indicating greater severity of illness were associated with reduced odds of receiving MOUD in the ICU., Conclusions: In a large multicenter, retrospective study, there was large variation in the use of MOUD among ICU patients with a history of OUD. These results inform future studies seeking to optimize the approach to MOUD use during critical illness., (Copyright © 2024 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Background and Aims: People who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk for adverse outcomes across multiple dimensions. While evidence-based interventions are available, services are often fragmented and difficult to access. We measured the effectiveness of an integrated care van (ICV) that offered services for PWID., Design, Setting and Participants: This was a cluster-randomized trial, which took place in Baltimore, MD, USA. Prior to randomization, we used a research van to recruit PWID cohorts from 12 Baltimore neighborhoods (sites), currently served by the city's mobile needle exchange program., Intervention and Comparator: We randomized sites to receive weekly visits from the ICV (n = 6) or to usual services (n = 6) for 14 months. The ICV offered case management; buprenorphine/naloxone; screening for HIV, hepatitis C virus and sexually transmitted infections; HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis; and wound care., Measurements: The primary outcome was a composite harm mitigation score that captured access to evidence-based services, risk behaviors and adverse health events (range = 0-15, with higher numbers indicating worse status). We evaluated effectiveness by comparing changes in the composite score at 7 months versus baseline in the two study arms., Findings: We enrolled 720 cohort participants across the study sites (60 per site) between June 2018 and August 2019: 38.3% women, 72.6% black and 85.1% urine drug test positive for fentanyl. Over a median of 10.4 months, the ICV provided services to 734 unique clients (who may or may not have been cohort participants) across the six intervention sites, including HIV/hepatitis C virus testing in 577 (78.6%) and buprenorphine/naloxone initiation in 540 (74%). However, only 52 (7.2%) of cohort participants received services on the ICV. The average composite score decreased at 7 months relative to baseline, with no significant difference in the change between ICV and usual services (difference in differences: -0.31; 95% confidence interval: -0.70, 0.08; P = 0.13)., Conclusions: This cluster-randomized trial in Baltimore, MD, USA, found no evidence that weekly neighborhood visits from a mobile health van providing injection-drug-focused services improved access to services and outcomes among people who injected drugs in the neighborhood, relative to usual services. The van successfully served large numbers of clients but unexpectedly low use of the van by cohort participants limited the ability to detect meaningful differences., (© 2024 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

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., (© 2024 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Background: The relationship between opioid craving and opioid use is unclear. We sought to determine to what extent craving mediated the relationship between opioid agonist therapy and changes in opioid use., Methods: Data came from a pragmatic, 24-week, pan-Canadian, multi-centric, open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing flexible buprenorphine/naloxone take-home doses to standard supervised methadone models of care for the treatment of prescription-type opioid use disorder. Participants were randomly allocated to buprenorphine/naloxone or methadone models of care. 270 people with prescription-type opioid use disorder were included in analyses. There were 93 women (34.4%) and 2 transgender (0.7%) participants. Most participants were white (67.4%), 45.9% reported unstable living conditions, and 44.8% had psychiatric comorbidities. Generalized linear mixed models followed by mediation analysis estimated the direct effect of treatment group on Timeline Followback-reported next-week opioid use and the indirect effect through past 24-hour opioid craving measured using the Brief Substance Craving Scale at week 2, 6, 10, 14, 18 and 22., Results: Upon mediation analysis, the average direct effect of treatment on opioid use was 0.465 (95 % CI = 0.183 to 0.751, p < 0.001). The average causal mediated effect was 0.144 (95 % CI = 0.021 to 0.110; p < 0.001). Craving accounted for 23.6 % of the effect of treatment on opioid use (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Past 24-hour craving was associated with increased next-week opioid use; however, craving only partially mediated the effect of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone on next-week opioid use. Research is needed to develop a comprehensive understanding of factors mediating opioid use during opioid agonist therapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Buprenorphine is an effective and safe treatment for opioid use disorder, but the requirement for moderate opioid withdrawal symptoms to emerge prior to initiation is a significant treatment barrier., Case Presentation: We report on two cases of hospitalized patients with severe, active opioid use disorder, in which we initiated treatment with transdermal buprenorphine over 48 h, followed by the administration of a single dose of sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone and then extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine. The patients did not experience precipitated withdrawal and only had mild withdrawal symptoms., Conclusions: This provides preliminary evidence for a rapid induction strategy that may improve tolerability, caregiver burden, and treatment retention as compared to previous induction strategies., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Fentanyl has exacerbated the opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid overdose epidemic. Data on the effectiveness of medications for OUD among patients using fentanyl are limited., Objective: To assess the effectiveness of sublingual or extended-release injection formulations of buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD among patients with and without fentanyl use., Design, Setting, and Participants: Post hoc analysis of a 24-week, randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted at 35 outpatient sites in the US from December 2015 to November 2016 of sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone vs extended-release subcutaneous injection buprenorphine (CAM2038) for patients with OUD subgrouped by presence vs absence of fentanyl or norfentanyl in urine at baseline. Study visits with urine testing occurred weekly for 12 weeks, then 6 times between weeks 13 and 24. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis from March 2022 to August 2023., Intervention: Weekly and monthly subcutaneous buprenorphine vs daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone., Main Outcomes and Measures: Retention in treatment, percentage of urine samples negative for any opioids (missing values imputed as positive), percentage of urine samples negative for fentanyl or norfentanyl (missing values not imputed), and scores on opiate withdrawal scales and visual analog craving scales., Results: Of 428 participants, 123 (subcutaneous buprenorphine, n = 64; sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone, n = 59; mean [SD] age, 39.1 [10.8] years; 75 men [61.0%]) had evidence of baseline fentanyl use and 305 (subcutaneous buprenorphine, n = 149; buprenorphine-naloxone, n = 156; mean [SD] age, 38.1 [11.1] years; 188 men [61.6%]) did not have evidence of baseline fentanyl use. Study completion was similar between the fentanyl-positive (60.2% [74 of 123]) and fentanyl-negative (56.7% [173 of 305]) subgroups. The mean percentage of urine samples negative for any opioid were 28.5% among those receiving subcutaneous buprenorphine and 18.8% among those receiving buprenorphine-naloxone in the fentanyl-positive subgroup (difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, -3.0% to 22.3%) and 36.7% among those receiving subcutaneous buprenorphine and 30.6% among those receiving buprenorphine-naloxone in the fentanyl-negative subgroup (difference, 6.1%; 95% CI, -1.9% to 14.1%), with significant main associations of baseline fentanyl status and treatment group. In the fentanyl-positive subgroup, the mean percentage of urine samples negative for fentanyl during the study was 74.6% among those receiving subcutaneous buprenorphine vs 61.9% among those receiving sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (difference, 12.7%; 95% CI, 9.6%-15.9%). Opioid withdrawal and craving scores decreased rapidly after treatment initiation across all groups., Conclusions and Relevance: In this post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial of sublingual vs extended-release injection buprenorphine for OUD, buprenorphine appeared to be effective among patients with baseline fentanyl use. Patients with fentanyl use had fewer opioid-negative urine samples during the trial compared with the fentanyl-negative subgroup. These findings suggest that the subcutaneous buprenorphine formulation may be more effective at reducing fentanyl use., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02651584.

Objective: To get information on subcutaneous extended-release buprenorphine as opioid maintenance treatment during pregnancy, we compared it to orally administered buprenorphine and buprenorphine-naloxone treatments. We hypothesized that maternal and neonatal outcomes do not differ between the treatment groups. Study design In this population-based cohort study, 60 pregnant individuals receiving non-changed opioid maintenance treatment for opioid use disorder with a buprenorphine product from the time before conception to the time after delivery and their newborns were included. They were divided into three groups based on the pharmacotherapy with subcutaneous extended-release buprenorphine, sublingual buprenorphine, or buprenorphine-naloxone. Statistical analyses were conducted using Fischer's exact tests, ANOVA tests, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. All the statistical tests were two-tailed., Results: The frequency of pregnancy or delivery complications did not significantly differ between the group receiving extended-release buprenorphine and the other groups. During pregnancy, 38 % of the women used illicit drugs concomitantly, with equal frequency in the extended-release buprenorphine group and the other groups. Of the neonates, 93 % were born full-term and 90 % got at least eight Apgar points in one minute age, without significant differences between the groups (p = 0.57). The need for pharmacotherapy for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome was the lowest in the extended-release buprenorphine group (25 %) and highest in the sublingual buprenorphine group (67 %). Still, the difference between the treatment groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.17). Among all neonates, the breastfed infants were less likely to receive pharmacotherapy for withdrawal symptoms than the formula-fed ones (p = 0.048)., Conclusions: Extended-release buprenorphine with steady drug concentration seems to be a promising pharmacotherapy option during pregnancy for mothers. Maternal health during pregnancy may contribute to the well-being of newborns. Larger trials are urgently needed to confirm these results.., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Identifying effective opioid treatment options during pregnancy is a high priority due to the growing prevalence of opioid use disorder across North America. We assessed the temporal impact of three population-level interventions on the use of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada., Design: This was a population-based time-series analysis to identify trends in the monthly prevalence of pregnant people dispensed methadone and buprenorphine. The impact of adding buprenorphine/naloxone to the public drug formulary, the release of pregnancy-specific guidance and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic were assessed., Setting and Participants: The study was conducted in Ontario, Canada between 1 July 2013 and 31 March 2022, comprising people who delivered a live or stillbirth in any Ontario hospital during the study period., Measurements: We identified any prescription for methadone or buprenorphine dispensed between the estimated conception date and delivery date and calculated the monthly prevalence of OAT-exposed pregnancies among all pregnant people in Ontario., Findings: Overall, rates of OAT during pregnancy have declined since mid-2018. Methadone-exposed pregnancies decreased from 0.46% of all pregnancies in Ontario in 2015 to a low of 0.16% in 2022. In the primary analysis, none of the interventions had a statistically significant impact on overall OAT rates; however, in the stratified analyses, there was a small increase in buprenorphine after the formulary change [0.006%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.0032-0.0081, P < 0.0001] and a decrease in buprenorphine after the release of the 2017 guidelines (-0.005%, 95% CI = -0.0080 to -0.0020, P = 0.001) and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (-0.003%, 95% CI = -0.0054 to -0.0006, P = 0.015)., Conclusion: Despite changes in guidance and funding, opioid agonist treatment during pregnancy has been declining in Ontario, Canada since 2018., (© 2024 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Introduction: Studies show that medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduce illicit opioid use, emergency healthcare services, opioid-related overdose, and death. However, few studies have investigated the long-term cost-effectiveness of MOUD in office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) and opioid treatment program (OTP) settings. We aimed to estimate the cost, utility, quality-adjusted life years gained (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of three MOUD compared to each other and counseling without medication from a US healthcare sector perspective., Methods: Our study developed a Markov model to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of counseling and three MOUD in the OBOT and OTP settings: sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (BUPNX), buprenorphine extended-release (XR-BUP) injection, and oral methadone. The model included five health states representing combinations of receiving or off treatment while either using or not actively using illicit opioids, and death. The cycle length was one month; the time-horizon was ten years. The study obtained model inputs from systematic reviews of published literature and public data. A 3 % annual discount rate was applied to cost and utility calculation. The primary outcomes included total costs, life-years (LYs), QALYs, and ICERs. We also conducted a scenario analysis using a hypothetical OBOT outpatient setting with methadone., Results: In the base-case OBOT setting, the total costs and QALYs, respectively, were counseling $22,848, 5.60; BUPNX $29,875, 5.82; and XR-BUP $63,936, 5.87. ICERs were $32,345/QALY (BUPNX vs. counseling) and $625,858/QALY (XR-BUP vs BUPNX). In the OTP setting, the total costs of counseling, methadone, BUPNX, and XR-BUP were $20,124, $27,000, $33,500, and $75,272, respectively. QALYs of methadone were 5.86. QALYs of counseling, BUPNX, and XR-BUP remained the same as in the OBOT setting. Incremental ICERs were $26,714/QALY (methadone vs counseling) and $3,337,623/QALY (XR-BUP vs methadone). BUPNX was dominated by methadone. In the scenario analysis, BUPNX was also dominated by methadone., Conclusions: Outpatient MOUD resulted in important gains in quality of life and life expectancy. In both OBOT and OTP settings, XR-BUP was not cost-effective. BUPNX was cost-effective in the OBOT setting, while it was dominated by methadone in the OTP setting. The cost-effectiveness of BUPNX and XR-BUP could be enhanced if the costs of these medications were reduced., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest DRT is the Senior Scientific Advisor for Monument Analytics, a consultant for Astra Zeneca, and has received research funding from AbbVie, Inc. and Takeda awarded to the University of Illinois at Chicago for work unrelated to this study. SAC is a post-doctoral fellow at Takeda and the University of Illinois at Chicago. CHY is an employee of AbbVie, Inc. and may own stocks/shares of the company. All other authors have no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is currently a clinical dilemma in treating acute pain in patients receiving long-term buprenorphine products., Methods: This is a retrospective cohort review involving patients receiving long-term buprenorphine therapy who either underwent a surgical procedure or presented to an emergency department (ED) for acute pain between January 1, 2012 and January 1, 2022. Patients were excluded if opioids were prescribed 30 days before the index date. Chart reviews were conducted to characterize buprenorphine treatment strategies and the addition of new pain medications. Chart review revealed (1) incidence of opioid use disorder (OUD) relapse, (2) hospital re-presentation for pain or OUD, (3) fatal and non-fatal overdose, and (4) all-cause mortality and suicidality. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze results., Results: A total of 70 of 259 screened patients met inclusion criteria. The mean (±SD) age was 50.3 ± 13 years, 92.9% male, 64.3% White, and 78.6% had an OUD diagnosis. While 84.3% presented to the ED, 15.7% underwent surgical procedures. For the primary endpoint, the total daily dose of buprenorphine or buprenorphine/naloxone from index date to discharge was continued in 90.0%, increased in 2.9%, decreased in 1.4%, and discontinued in 5.7% of cases. At discharge, 46.2% were prescribed an additional pain medication. A total of 7.1% re-presented for pain or OUD relapse, 15.7% experienced an OUD relapse, 1.4% experienced new-onset suicidality, and 1.4% experience all-cause mortality within 90 days of the index date. No fatal or non-fatal opioid overdoses were observed., Conclusion: The most commonly observed practice was continuing buprenorphine doses in patients with acute or postsurgical pain, which was effective and safe. Although further data is necessary to fully elucidate these findings, the data herein may suggest that clinicians can safely continue buprenorphine doses in the acute pain setting in patients receiving these products chronically., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors declare no relevant conflicts of interest or financial relationships., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Objectives: There is limited evidence on how opioid agonist treatment (OAT) may affect psychoactive non-opioid substance use in prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD) and whether this effect might explain OAT outcomes. We aimed to assess the effect of methadone on non-opioid substance use compared to buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX), to explore whether non-opioid substance use is associated with opioid use and retention in treatment, and to test non-opioid use as a moderator of associations between methadone with retention in OAT and opioid use compared to BUP/NX., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from the OPTIMA trial, an open-label, pragmatic, parallel, two-arm, pan-Canadian, multicentre, randomized-controlled trial to compare standard methadone model of care and flexible take-home dosing BUP/NX for POUD treatment. We studied the effect of methadone and BUP/NX on non-opioid substance use evaluated by urine drug screen (UDS) and by classes of non-opioid substances (i.e., tetrahydrocannabinol [THC], benzodiazepines, stimulants) (weeks 2-24) using adjusted generalized estimation equation (GEE). We studied the association between non-opioid substance-positive UDS and opioid-positive UDS and retention in treatment, using adjusted GEE and logistic regressions., Results: Overall, methadone was not associated with non-opioid substance-positive UDS compared to BUP/NX (OR: 0.78; 95%CI, 0.41 to 1.48). When non-opioid substances were studied separately, methadone was associated with lower odds of benzodiazepine-positive UDS (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.98) and THC-positive UDS (OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.77), but not with different odds of stimulant-positive UDS (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.16) compared to BUP/NX. Substance-positive UDS, overall and separate classes, were not associated with opioid-positive UDS or retention in treatment., Conclusion: Methadone did not show a significant effect on overall non-opioid substance use in POUD compared to BUP/NX treatment but was associated with lower odds of benzodiazepine and THC use in particular. Non-opioid substance use did not predict OAT outcomes. Further research is needed to ascertain whether specific patterns of polysubstance use (quantity and frequency) may affect treatment outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: DJ-A receives study material from Cardiol Therapeutics and Exka for trials funded by public funding bodies. BLF has obtained funding from Pfizer Inc. (GRAND Awards, including salary support) for investigator-initiated projects. He has obtained funding from Indivior for a clinical trial sponsored by Indivior. He has in-kind donations of cannabis products from Aurora Cannabis Enterprises Inc. and study medication donations from Pfizer Inc. (varenicline for smoking cessation) and Bioprojet Pharma. He was also provided a coil for a Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) study from Brainsway. He has obtained industry funding from Canopy Growth Corporation (through research grants handled by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and the University of Toronto), Bioprojet Pharma, Alcohol Countermeasure Systems (ACS), Alkermes and Universal Ibogaine. He has received in-kind donations of nabiximols from GW Pharmaceuticals for past studies funded by CIHR and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). He has participated in a session of a National Advisory Board Meeting (Emerging Trends BUP-XR) for Indivior Canada and has been consultant for Shinogi. MES has received partial support from Indivior's Investigator Initiated Study programme for work outside this study. SM has participated in a session of a national advisory board meeting for Indivior Canada as well as for Abbvie Canada.The OPTIMA clinical trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov before the enrollment of the first participant (NCT03033732).

Abstract: Foreign-body aspiration in adults is considerably less common than in children. The clinical course can be life-threatening but often presents in a more indolent manner, leading to difficulties with diagnosis. We report the retrieval of a buprenorphine-naloxone wrapper by flexible bronchoscopy in a 44-year-old male patient with COVID-19 who was on mechanical ventilation. Following removal, the patient completed treatment for COVID-19, his respiratory status improved, and he was discharged from the hospital. Flexible bronchoscopy is an effective means of diagnosis and retrieval of foreign bodies in the distal airway., (Copyright © 2023 Copyright: © 2023 Journal of Postgraduate Medicine.)

Background: People who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk for opioid overdose and infectious diseases including HIV. We piloted PARTNER UP, a telemedicine-based program to provide PWID with medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nx) and oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine through two syringe services programs (SSP) in North Carolina. We present overall results from this project, including participant retention rates and self-reported medication adherence., Methods: Study participants met with a provider for an initial in-person visit at the SSP, followed by weekly telemedicine visits in month 1 and then monthly until program end at month 6. Participants were asked to start both MOUD and PrEP at initiation but could choose to discontinue either at any point during the study. Demographics and health history including substance use, sexual behaviors, and prior use of MOUD/PrEP were collected at baseline. Follow-up surveys were conducted at 3- and 6-months to assess attitudes towards MOUD and PrEP, change in opioid use and sexual behaviors, and for self-reported medication adherence. Participant retention was measured by completion of visits; provider notes were used to assess whether the participant reported continuation of medication., Results: Overall, 17 persons were enrolled and started on both bup/nx and PrEP; the majority self-identified as white and male. At 3 months, 13 (76%) remained on study; 10 (77%) reported continuing with both MOUD and PrEP, 2 (15%) with bup/nx only, and 1 (8%) with PrEP only. At 6 months, 12 (71%) remained on study; 8 (67%) reported taking both bup/nx and PrEP, and 4 (33%) bup/nx only. Among survey participants, opioid use and HIV risk behaviors decreased. Nearly all reported taking bup/nx daily; however, self-reported daily adherence to PrEP was lower and declined over time. The most common reason for not continuing PrEP was feeling not at risk for acquiring HIV., Conclusions: Our study results show that MOUD and PrEP can be successfully administered via telemedicine in SSPs. PrEP appears to be a lower priority for participants with decreased continuation and adherence. Low perception of HIV risk was a reason for not continuing PrEP, possibly mitigated by MOUD use. Future studies including helping identify PWID at highest need for PrEP are needed., Trial Registration: Providing Suboxone and PrEP Using Telemedicine, NCT04521920. Registered 18 August 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04521920?term=mehri%20mckellar&rank=2 ., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX) titration parameters (eg, range, duration, and rate) can vary during opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. We describe methadone and BUP/NX titration patterns and their associations with treatment outcomes among individuals with a prescription-type OUD., Methods: We used data from a 24-week open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial, including N = 167 participants aged 18-64 years old with prescription-type OUD who received at least a first dose of treatment. Descriptive analyses of methadone and BUP/NX titration patterns were conducted, that is, range and duration from first to maximum dose, and rate (range/duration ratio). Outcomes included percentage of opioid-positive urine drug screens (UDS) and treatment retention. Adjusted linear and logistic regressions were used to study associations between titration patterns and percentage of opioid-positive UDS and treatment retention., Results: Methadone doses were increased by a mean dose range of 42.4 mg over a mean duration of 42.2 days. BUP/NX doses were increased by a mean dose range of 8.4 mg over a mean duration of 28.7 days. Only methadone dose titration range (odds ratio: 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.05) and duration (odds ratio: 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.05) were associated with higher retention. Only methadone dose titration rate was associated with lower percentage of opioid-positive UDS at weeks 12-24 ( B : -2.77; 95% CI, -4.72 to -0.81)., Conclusions: Specific parameters of methadone titration were associated with treatment outcomes and may help in personalizing treatment schedules. Sustained methadone dose titration, when indicated, may help increase retention, whereas faster dose titration for methadone may help decrease opioid use., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Dr Didier receives study material from Cardiol Therapeutics for a clinical trial funded by the Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services and holds a clinical scientist career award from Fonds de Recherche du Québec (FRQS). Dr M. Eugenia Socias is supported by a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research/St Paul's Foundation Scholar Award. Dr M. Eugenia Socias has received partial support from Indivior's Investigator Initiated Study program for work outside this study. Dr Bernard Le Foll has obtained funding from Pfizer Inc (GRAND Awards, including salary support) for investigator-initiated projects. He has obtained funding from Indivior for a clinical trial sponsored by Indivior. Dr Le Foll has in-kind donations of cannabis products from Aurora Cannabis Enterprises Inc and study medication donations from Pfizer Inc (varenicline for smoking cessation) and Bioprojet Pharma. He was also provided a coil for a transcranial magnetic stimulation study from Brainsway. Dr Le Foll has obtained industry funding from Canopy Growth Corporation (through research grants handled by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and the University of Toronto), Bioprojet Pharma, Alcohol Countermeasure Systems, Alkermes, and Universal Ibogaine. Dr Le Foll has received in-kind donations of nabiximols from GW Pharmaceuticals for past studies funded by CIHR and NIH. Dr Le Foll has participated in a session of a National Advisory Board Meeting (Emerging Trends BUP-XR) for Indivior Canada and has been consultant for Shinogi. Dr Le Foll is supported by CAMH, Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, a clinician-scientist award from the department of Family and Community Medicine of the University of Toronto, and a Chair position in Addiction Psychiatry from the Department of Psychiatry of University of Toronto. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Instrumental variable (IV) analysis provides an alternative set of identification assumptions in the presence of uncontrolled confounding when attempting to estimate causal effects. Our objective was to evaluate the suitability of measures of prescriber preference and calendar time as potential IVs to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone versus methadone for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD)., Methods: Using linked population-level health administrative data, we constructed five IVs: prescribing preference at the individual, facility, and region levels (continuous and categorical variables), calendar time, and a binary prescriber's preference IV in analyzing the treatment assignment-treatment discontinuation association using both incident-user and prevalent-new-user designs. Using published guidelines, we assessed and compared each IV according to the four assumptions for IVs, employing both empirical assessment and content expertise. We evaluated the robustness of results using sensitivity analyses., Results: The study sample included 35,904 incident users (43.3% on buprenorphine/naloxone) initiated on opioid agonist treatment by 1585 prescribers during the study period. While all candidate IVs were strong (A1) according to conventional criteria, by expert opinion, we found no evidence against assumptions of exclusion (A2), independence (A3), monotonicity (A4a), and homogeneity (A4b) for prescribing preference-based IV. Some criteria were violated for the calendar time-based IV. We determined that preference in provider-level prescribing, measured on a continuous scale, was the most suitable IV for comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone for the treatment of OUD., Conclusions: Our results suggest that prescriber's preference measures are suitable IVs in comparative effectiveness studies of treatment for OUD., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone are opioid agonist therapies for opioid use disorder treatment. Genetic factors contribute to individual differences in opioid response; however, little is known regarding genetic associations with clinical outcomes in people receiving opioid agonist therapies. Participants diagnosed with opioid use disorder, principally consisting of prescription opioids (licit or illicit), were randomized to methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone for 24 weeks of daily treatment (NCT03033732). Urine was collected at 12 biweekly study visits and analyzed for non-treatment opioids. Variants in genes involved in methadone metabolism (CYP2B6, CYP2C19, and CYP3A4), buprenorphine metabolism (CYP3A4 and UGT2B7), and μ-opioid receptor function (OPRM1) were genotyped and analyzed for their association with the number of non-treatment opioid-free urine screens. Primary analyses focused on the last 12 weeks (6 study visits, post-titration) of treatment among those reporting White ethnicity. Additional sensitivity and exploratory analyses were performed. Among methadone-treated participants (n = 52), the OPRM1 rs1799971 AA genotype (vs. G-genotypes, i.e., having one or two G alleles) was associated with greater opioid-free urine screens (incidence rate ratio = 5.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.43-11.26, P = 0.000023); longitudinal analyses showed a significant genotype-by-time interaction over the full 24 weeks (12 study visits, β = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.45 to -0.11, P = 0.0015). Exploratory analyses suggest an OPRM1 rs1799971 genotype effect on retention. No evidence of association was found between other genetic variants, including in metabolic variants, and non-treatment opioid-free urine screens in the methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone arms. Those with the OPRM1 rs1799971 G-genotypes may have a poorer response to methadone maintenance treatment, an effect that persisted through 24 weeks of treatment., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background: Prescription-type opioid use disorder (POUD) is often accompanied by comorbid anxiety, yet the impact of anxiety on retention in opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is unclear. Therefore, this study investigated whether baseline anxiety severity affects retention in OAT and whether this effect differs by OAT type (methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) vs. buprenorphine/naloxone (BNX))., Methods: This secondary analysis used data from a pan-Canadian randomized trial comparing flexible take-home dosing BNX and standard supervised MMT for 24 weeks. The study included 268 adults with POUD. Baseline anxiety was assessed using the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), with BAI ≥ 16 indicating moderate-to-severe anxiety. The primary outcomes were retention in assigned and any OAT at week 24. In addition, the impact of anxiety severity on retention was examined, and assigned OAT was considered an effect modifier., Results: Of the participants, 176 (65%) reported moderate-to-severe baseline anxiety. In adjusted analyses, there was no significant difference in retention between those with BAI ≥ 16 and those with BAI < 16 assigned (29% vs. 28%; odds ratio (OR) = 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.94-4.40; P  = 0.07) or any OAT (35% vs. 34%; OR = 1.57, 95% CI = 0.77-3.21; P  = 0.21). In addition, there was no significant effect modification by OAT type for retention in assigned ( P  = 0.41) or any OAT ( P  = 0.71). In adjusted analyses, greater retention in treatment was associated with BNX (vs. MMT), male gender identity (vs. female, transgender, or other), enrolment in the Quebec study site (vs. other sites), and absence of a positive urine drug screen for stimulants at baseline., Conclusions: Baseline anxiety severity did not significantly impact retention in OAT for adults with POUD, and there was no significant effect modification by OAT type. However, the overall retention rates were low, highlighting the need to develop new strategies to minimize the risk of attrition from treatment., Clinical Trial Registration: This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03033732)., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr. Bahji receives a small honorarium for teaching undergraduate and postgraduate medical trainees in the Cumming School of Medicine at the University of Calgary. In addition, Dr. Bahji is an unpaid member of the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments editorial committee, the International Society of Addiction Journal Editors, the Canadian Society of Addiction Medicine policy committee, and the Addiction Psychiatry section of the Canadian Psychiatric Association. Dr. Bahji is also an unpaid associate editor of the Canadian Journal of Addiction and a mental health educator for TED-Ed, where he receives a small honorarium for supporting online educational content. Finally, Dr. Bahji does not report royalties, licenses, consulting fees, payment or honoraria for lectures or presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, expert testimony, patents, or participation on other boards. In addition, MES has received partial support from Indivior's Investigator-Initiated Study program for work outside this study. DJA receives investigational products from Cardiol Therapeutics for a clinical trial funded by the Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Objective: To identify individual and site-related factors associated with frequent emergency department (ED) buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP) initiation. BUP initiation, an effective opioid use disorder (OUD) intervention, varies widely across Canadian EDs., Methods: We surveyed emergency physicians in 6 Canadian provinces from 2018 to 2019 using bilingual paper and web-based questionnaires. Survey domains included BUP-related practice, demographics, attitudes toward BUP, and site characteristics. We defined frequent BUP initiation (the primary outcome) as at least once per month, high OUD prevalence as at least one OUD patient per shift, and high OUD resources as at least 3 out of the following 5 resources: BUP initiation pathways, BUP in ED, peer navigators, accessible addiction specialists, and accessible follow-up clinics. We excluded responses from sites with <50% participation (to minimize non-responder bias) and those missing the primary outcome. We used univariate analysis to identify associations between frequent BUP initiation and factors of interest, stratifying by OUD prevalence., Results: We excluded 3 responses for missing BUP initiation frequency and 9 for low response rate at one ED. Of the remaining 649 respondents from 34 EDs, 374 (58%) practiced in metropolitan areas, 384 (59%) reported high OUD prevalence, 312 (48%) had high OUD resources, and 161 (25%) initiated BUP frequently. Age, gender, board certification and years in practice were not associated with frequent BUP initiation. Site-specific factors were associated with frequent BUP initiation (high OUD resources [OR 6.91], high OUD prevalence [OR 4.45], and metropolitan location [OR 2.39],) as were individual attitudinal factors (willingness, confidence, and responsibility to initiate BUP.) Similar associations persisted in the high OUD prevalence subgroup., Conclusions: Individual attitudinal and site-specific factors were associated with frequent BUP initiation. Training to increase physician confidence and increasing OUD resources could increase BUP initiation and benefit ED patients with OUD., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 MacKinnon et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Buprenorphine is a gold-standard treatment for opioid use disorders, but most people with these disorders do not access it. Barriers to treatment access may be diminished by low-threshold mobile treatment programs but concern regarding their impact on local public safety challenges their adoption., Methods: This quasi-experimental study uses difference-in-differences analyses to measure the impact of four mobile buprenorphine clinics in Pittsburgh on neighborhood arrest rates. The study period spans 2018 to 2022, with a pre-intervention period of 11 to 12 quarters and a post-intervention period of 7 to 8 quarters (dependent on neighborhood). A treatment group of 84 census block groups in the areas surrounding clinics during the time period after their establishment were compared to a control group of city census blocks not within one mile of a clinic plus treated block groups in the two years prior to clinic establishment. Outcome variables include drug, non-drug, and total arrests, measured quarterly per 100 in population., Results: Compared to block groups further than 1 mile from a clinic, arrests fell by 34.13 % (b = -0.358, 95 % CI = -0.557, -0.158), drug arrests by 33.85 % (b = -0.087, 95 % CI = -0.151, -0.023), and non-drug related arrests by 22.29 % (b = -0.179, 95 % CI = -0.302, -0.057). Drug arrests declined significantly on days when the clinics were not present (b = -0.015, 95 % CI = -0.025, -0.006), with no significant change on clinic operational days (b = -0.002, 95 % CI = -0.016, -0.013). Total arrests declined significantly on days when clinics were and were not present (b = -0.045, 95 % CI = -0.078, -0.012; and b = -0.052, CI = -0.082, -0.023, respectively)., Conclusions: Mobile clinics providing medication for opioid use disorders were associated with reduced neighborhood arrest rates. Expansion of mobile services could promote health equity and public safety., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: One author is the executive director of the nonprofit organization that operates the evaluated program. His contribution involved composing sections of the manuscript detailing the operation of the intervention, and reviewing the manuscript for accuracy and clarity. We know of no other potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Buprenorphine is a medication that is used to treat opioid use disorder by reducing withdrawal symptoms and cravings for opioids. Patients with poor adherence are at higher risk of relapse and overdose. Providers often test adherence through urine testing but are not aware of simulated adherence, where patients may directly add buprenorphine to the urine samples. As of now, there exists no literature on the simulated adherence practices for patients who stayed in the treatment for more than three months., Methods: This study is a cross-sectional analysis of simulated adherence through urine toxicology results of 3950 patients undergoing buprenorphine/naloxone treatment. Simulated adherence was measured by the ratio of norbuprenorphine and buprenorphine <0.02 in the urine sample. Descriptive statistics as well as multivariate analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between patient information and outcomes., Results: Out of 3950 patients, 411 (10.4%) had a history of one or more simulated adherence. On average, patients with multiple simulated adherences had 48.1% of their tests simulated, while on the contrary, patients with a single occurrence of simulated adherence had 17.6% of their tests simulated. Weekly testing and visit number of over 15 were associated with a higher likelihood of simulated adherence., Conclusion: The study demonstrates that simulated adherence is a recurring phenomenon among buprenorphine/naloxone treatment patients regardless of the duration in the treatment. Utilization of quantitative urine toxicology to identify simulated adherence will enable healthcare providers to formulate a more precise and effective treatment plan tailored to support individual patient needs.

Background: Uptake and retention for opioid agonist treatment (OAT) remains low. Novel extended-release formulations may improve OAT accessibility by reducing the frequency of healthcare visits. Our aim was to examine uptake, characteristics, treatment patterns and retention of individuals initiating extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine (BUP-ER), a monthly injectable OAT., Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study among adults aged 18+ initiated on BUP-ER between February 3, 2020 and March 31, 2022 in Ontario, Canada. Using administrative health data, we defined continuous BUP-ER use based on repeat injections within a 56-day period and used Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate time on treatment. Among new BUP-ER recipients, we described individual and prescriber characteristics, healthcare utilization and treatment patterns., Results: 2366 individuals initiated BUP-ER. The median time to BUP-ER discontinuation was 183 days (interquartile range: 66-428 days) and 52.0% of individuals were co-prescribed buprenorphine/naloxone at least once throughout the period of BUP-ER receipt. Among individuals who initiated on a dose of 300mg BUP-ER and had three or more injections, 18.8% continued to receive only 300mg doses (N=276 of 1470). Furthermore, 28.6% of those whose dose was reduced to 100mg (N=341 of 1194) had a subsequent dose increase to 300mg., Conclusions: On average, people initiating BUP-ER discontinue within the first 6 months of treatment. While BUP-ER is likely providing an important OAT option, the high occurrence of discontinuation, supplementation with buprenorphine/naloxone, and frequent dose increases suggest inadequacy of current dosing recommendations among a proportion of individuals., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Sex differences may exist in opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. This study examined the treatment effects of buprenorphine / naloxone (BUP/NX) and methadone (MET) on the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score in individuals with OUD and tested whether the associations differ by sex., Method: We performed a secondary analysis of the data from the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) protocol-0027. A total of 1269 participants (861 males and 408 females) being aged 18 or older with OUD were randomly assigned to receive BUP/NX ( n  = 740) or MET ( n  = 529). The paired t test was initially used to compare the COWS scores between pre-dose and post-dose for BUP/NX and MET treatments, separately. The linear mixed model was used to examine the changes in COWS score adjusted for baseline demographic, substance use, and mental health disorders. The interaction of sex and treatment was detected and stratified analysis by sex was conducted., Results: The paired t test showed that both BUP/NX and MET treatments significantly reduced the COWS scores ( p values <0.0001). BUP/NX revealed higher COWS scores than MET ( p  = 0.0008) and females demonstrated significantly higher COWS scores than males ( p  = 0.0169). Stratified by sex, BUP/NX compared with MET revealed higher COWS scores only in males ( p  = 0.0043), whereas baseline amphetamines use disorder and major depressive disorder were significantly associated with COWS scores in females ( p  = 0.0158 and 0.0422, respectively)., Conclusions: Both BUP/NX and MET are effective in decreasing opioid withdrawal symptoms via COWS scores, however, treatment plans for OUD by clinical providers should consider sex differences.

Introduction: In clinical practice, sublingual (SL) buprenorphine-naloxone is prescribed as once daily or split daily dosing for the management of opioid use disorder (OUD). Evidence is lacking that assesses how split daily buprenorphine-naloxone affects OUD outcomes. This study aims to evaluate how the dosing frequency of SL buprenorphine-naloxone impacts therapy effectiveness when treating patients with OUD., Methods: This retrospective analysis included adult outpatients prescribed treatment with SL buprenorphine-naloxone for OUD between July 1, 2016, and March 1, 2020. The study excluded patients with sickle cell disease, recent methadone treatment, or pregnancy. We characterized study groups by dosing frequency, either once daily or split dosing. The study compared retention in treatment, medication adherence, adherence to treatment program, and hospital encounters between groups., Results: The study screened eight-hundred and seven patients, and included 250 patients newly prescribed SL buprenorphine-naloxone. Fifty-seven patients (22.8 %) were prescribed once daily dosing and 193 patients (77.2 %) were prescribed split daily dosing. The study found no significant differences noted in 12-month rates of treatment retention (52.6 % vs. 45.6 %, p = .35). These outcomes remained similar when assessed at three and six months. Within a year of buprenorphine-naloxone initiation, the study found no differences in the percentage of patients with hospitalizations (26.3 % vs. 38.3 %, p = .10), median number of hospitalizations (2 vs. 2), or proportion of days covered by a prescription ≥80 % (93.3 % vs. 92.0 %, p = .82)., Conclusions: In this study, patients receiving once daily buprenorphine-naloxone had similar treatment outcomes to patients receiving split dosing. Further controlled studies are necessary to evaluate which patients are more likely to benefit from split dosing., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: First study to assess any compensatory increase in use of non-opioid illicit substances and alcohol in opioid dependent patients randomized to treatment with extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or buprenorphine-naloxone (BP-NLX) and in longer term treatment with extended-release naltrexone., Method: A multicenter, outpatient, open-label randomized clinical trial where patients received intramuscular extended-release naltrexone hydrochloride, 380 mg/month, or daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone 8-24/2-6 mg for 12 weeks, and an option to continue with extended-release naltrexone for an additional 36 week follow-up. The study was conducted at five urban addiction clinics and detoxification units in Norway between November 2012, and July 2016., Results: Among the 143 patients, 106 men and 37 women, there were no significant differences between those randomized to XR-NTX or BP-NLX in the risk of first relapse to alcohol (HR 1.31; 0.68-2.53), amphetamines (HR 0.88; 0.43-1.80), benzodiazepines (HR 1.24; 0.74-2.09) or cannabis (HR 1.55; 0.83-2.89). Also in the 36-week (12-48 weeks) follow-up period we found no significant differences between patients continuing with XR-NTX compared to those switching to XR-NTX after the randomized period in risk of first relapse to any non-opioid substance. In both study periods, the mean time in the study were longer among those relapsing to non-opioid addictive substances than those who did not. There was no significant association between first relapse to illicit opioids and first relapse to non-opioid addictive substances., Conclusion: There was no increase in the risk of relapse to non-opioid addictive substances neither in short term nor longer-term treatment with extended-release naltrexone. Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01717963., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Kratom has been used for different reasons such as pain, opioid withdrawal, and relaxation. Kratom can cause dependence and overdose, and it's classified under 'drugs of concern' by the US Drug Enforcement Administration. Despite these concerns, kratom is legal in most of the United States and many countries around the world with easy accessibility. Literature searches reveal recommendations to use buprenorphine (or buprenorphine-naloxone), which are medications to treat opioid use disorder, in order to treat patients with kratom use disorder; however, there are no formal guidelines available. Buprenorphine (or buprenorphine-naloxone) induction is recommended to be conducted under observation (i.e. in the clinic) in the United States, but COVID-19 has resulted in shifts toward telehealth., Objectives: Describe case series of successful management of kratom use disorder using telehealth followed by unobserved buprenorphine-naloxone home induction and highlight implications for future management, including maintenance dosage and induction method., Methods: We present 2 very similar kratom use disorder patients who reported taking 35 g of kratom per day who underwent unobserved buprenorphine-naloxone home induction., Results: Both were seen via telehealth initially. They reported no adverse effects before, during, or after the unobserved home induction on buprenorphine-naloxone but stabilized on significantly different dosages., Conclusion: Telehealth followed by unobserved buprenorphine-naloxone induction at home may be an alternative to traditional buprenorphine-naloxone induction where treatment accessibility is limited. In addition to daily doses of kratom use, other factors, such as duration of kratom use and individual psychological factors may determine the most comfortable dose of buprenorphine-naloxone., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

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., (© 2023 The American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP).)

Introduction: Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examine "objective" indicators of safety and efficacy of investigational drugs, participants may not perceive study medications as neutral entities. Some medications are imbued with social and cultural meaning, such as stigmatized medications for opioid use disorders. Such perceptions surrounding substance use treatments can extend to the research context and shape RCT participants' experiences with and adherence to study medications., Methods: Considering these complexities in substance use research, we conducted a nested qualitative study within a multi-site, pragmatic RCT in Canada testing two treatments (methadone versus buprenorphine/naloxone) for opioid use disorder. Between 2017 and 2020, we conducted 115 interviews with 75 RCT participants across five trial sites in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec., Results: Using an abductive coding approach, we characterized participants by their previous experience with medication for opioid use disorder and by their exposure to drug culture and drug scenes. Across these experience types, we identified systematic differences around participants' perceptions of the study medications, sources of information and expertise, and medication stigma., Conclusion: Our findings illustrate the critical importance of social context in shaping medication beliefs and study experiences among people who use drugs, with implications for the conduct of future RCTs in substance use., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)