Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION:Recent findings support the provision of meditation-based interventions (MBIs) in primary care. However, the acceptability of MBI among patients prescribed medications for opioid use disorder (eg, buprenorphine) in primary care remains unclear. This study assessed experiences and preferences for adopting MBI among patients prescribed buprenorphine in office-based opioid treatment (OBOT). METHODS:This 23-item, semistructured cross-sectional survey was administered by study staff to patients enrolled in OBOT (N = 72) and consisted of demographic and clinical characteristics, perceptions, experiences with MBI, and preferred strategies to access MBI to support their treatment on buprenorphine. RESULTS:Most participants reported practicing at least 1 category of MBI (90.3%) on at least a daily (39.6%) or weekly (41.7%) basis including (1) spiritual meditation (eg, centering prayer; 67.7%); (2) nonmantra meditation (eg, comfortable posture; 61.3%); (3) mindfulness meditation (eg, mindfulness-based stress reduction; 54.8%); and (4) mantra meditation (eg, transcendental meditation; 29.0%). Interest in MBI was motivated by improving one's general health and well-being (73.4%), treatment outcomes with medications for OUD (eg, buprenorphine; 60.9%), and relationships with others (60.9%). Perceived clinical benefits of MBI included reduced anxiety or depression symptoms (70.3%), pain (62.5%), illicit substance or alcohol use (60.9%), cravings for illicit substances (57.8%), and opioid-related withdrawal symptoms (51.6%). CONCLUSIONS:Findings from this study indicate high acceptability for adopting MBI among patients prescribed buprenorphine in OBOT. Further research is needed to assess the efficacy of MBI to improve clinical outcomes among patients initiating buprenorphine in OBOT.

BACKGROUND:Pragmatic innovations are needed to optimize clinical outcomes among people who use opioids initiating buprenorphine. This pilot randomized controlled trial assessed the feasibility of integrating text messaging in a low threshold telebuprenorphine bridge program for people who use opioids during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:Eligible adult patients with opioid use disorder inducted on buprenorphine (N = 128) in the NYC Health+Hospitals Virtual Buprenorphine Clinic between May and November 2020 were randomized to an automated texting intervention based on the medical management model versus treatment as usual. A participant feedback survey was administered at 8 weeks (n = 18). Primary outcomes consisted of acceptability (eg, study enrollment, engagement with the intervention) and feasibility (eg, lack of phone number and/or mobile phone ownership) of integrating texting in clinical care. A secondary outcome included retention in treatment at week 8 (ie, active buprenorphine prescription within the prior 7 days). RESULTS:Nearly all eligible patients consented to enroll in the study (90.8%) and few were excluded because of lack of mobile phone ownership (n = 27, 14.6%). Requests to discontinue receipt of texts (n = 6, 9.4%) was attributed to excessive message frequency, perceived lack of relevancy, and reduced interest in the intervention. Respondents completing the follow-up feedback survey were generally satisfied with the frequency of software-generated messages (14/18, 77.8%) and half shared text content with peers (9/18, 50%). There were no perceived issues with privacy, intrusiveness, or ease of use. Retention did not differ between participants randomized to the texting (M = 5.23 weeks, SD = 3.41) and treatment as usual groups (M = 4.98 weeks, SD = 3.34) at week 8 ( P = 0.676). CONCLUSIONS:This pilot randomized controlled trial confirms high acceptability and feasibility of integrating an automated texting tool in a telebuprenorphine bridge program. Future studies should assess whether text messaging may be efficacious when combined with staff contact and content addressing social determinants of health.

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

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

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

BACKGROUND:At the start of 2020, the kidney waiting list consisted of 2526 candidates with a calculated panel reactive antibody (CPRA) of 99.9% or greater, a cohort demonstrated in published research to have meaningfully lower than average access to transplantation even under the revised kidney allocation system (KAS). METHODS:This was a retrospective analysis of US kidney registrations using data from the OPTN [Reference (https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/data/about-data/)]. The period-prevalent study cohort consisted of US kidney-alone registrations who waited at least 1 day between April 1, 2016, when HLA DQ-Alpha and DP-Beta unacceptable antigen data became available in OPTN data collection, to December 31, 2019. Poisson rate regression was used to model deceased donor kidney transplant rates per active year waiting and using an offset term to account for differential at-risk periods. Median time to transplant was estimated for each IRR group using the Kaplan-Meier method. Sensitivity analyses were included to address geographic variation in supply-to-demand ratios and differences in dialysis time or waiting time. RESULTS:In this study, we found 1597 additional sensitized (CPRA 50-<99.9%) candidates with meaningfully lower than average access to transplant when simultaneously taking into account CPRA and other factors. In combination with CPRA, candidate blood type, Estimated Post-Transplant Survival Score (EPTS), and presence of other antibody specificities beyond those in the current, 5-locus CPRA were found to influence the likelihood of transplant. CONCLUSION:In total, this suggests approximately 4100 sensitized candidates are on the waiting list who represent a community of disadvantaged patients who may benefit from progressive therapies and interventions to facilitate incompatible transplantation. Though associated with higher risks, such interventions may nevertheless be more attractive than remaining on dialysis with the associated accumulation of mortality risk over time.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Opioid overdose is a leading cause of death during the immediate time after release from jail or prison. Most jails in the United States do not provide methadone and buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and research in estimating its impact in jail settings is limited. We aimed to test the hypothesis that in-jail MOUD is associated with lower overdose mortality risk post-release. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Retrospective, observational cohort study of 15 797 adults with opioid use disorder who were released from New York City jails to the community in 2011-17. They experienced 31 382 incarcerations and were followed up to 1 year. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:The primary outcomes were death caused by accidental drug poisoning and all-cause death. The exposure was receipt of MOUD (17 119 events) versus out-of-treatment (14 263 events) during the last 3 days before community reentry. Covariates included demographic, clinical, behavioral, housing, healthcare utilization, and legal characteristics variables. We performed multivariable, mixed-effect Cox regression analysis to test association between in-jail MOUD and deaths. FINDINGS/RESULTS:A majority were male (82%) and their average age was 42 years. Receiving MOUD was associated with misdemeanor charges, being female, injection drug use, and homelessness. During 1 year post-release, 111 overdose deaths occurred, and crude death rates were 0.49 and 0.83 per 100 person-years for in-jail MOUD and out-of-treatment groups, respectively. Accounting for confounding and random effects, in-jail MOUD was associated with lower overdose mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.08-0.46), and all-cause mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.11-0.42) for the first month post-release. CONCLUSIONS:Methadone and buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder during incarceration was associated with an 80% reduction in overdose mortality risk for the first month post-release.

While the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare delivery everywhere, persons with carceral system involvement and opioid use disorder (OUD) were disproportionately impacted and vulnerable to severe COVID-associated illness. Carceral settings and community treatment programs (CTPs) rapidly developed protocols to sustain healthcare delivery while reducing risk of COVID-19 transmission. This survey study assessed changes to OUD treatment, telemedicine use, and re-entry support services among carceral and CTPs participating in the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)-funded study, Long-Acting Buprenorphine vs. Naltrexone Opioid Treatments in Criminal Justice System-Involved Adults (EXIT-CJS) study. In December 2020, carceral sites (n = 6; median pre-COVID 2020 monthly census = 3468 people) and CTPs (n = 7; median pre-COVID 2020 monthly census = 550 patients) participating in EXIT-CJS completed a cross-sectional web-based survey. The survey assessed changes pre- (January-March 2020) and post- (April-September 2020) COVID-19 in OUD treatment, telemedicine use, re-entry supports and referral practices. Compared to January-March 2020, half of carceral sites (n = 3) increased the total number of persons initiating medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) from April-September 2020, while a third (n = 2) decreased the number of persons initiated. Most CTPs (n = 4) reported a decrease in the number of new admissions from April-September 2020, with two programs stopping or pausing MOUD programs due to COVID-19. All carceral sites with pre-COVID telemedicine use (n = 5) increased or maintained telemedicine use, and all CTPs providing MOUD (n = 6) increased telemedicine use. While expansion of telemedicine services supported MOUD service delivery, the majority of sites experienced challenges providing community support post-release, including referrals to housing, employment, and transportation services. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this small sample of carceral and CTP sites innovated to continue delivery of treatment for OUD. Expansion of telemedicine services was critical to support MOUD service delivery. Despite these innovations, sites experienced challenges providing reintegration supports for persons in the community. Pre-COVID strategies for identifying and engaging individuals while incarcerated may be less effective since the pandemic. In addition to expanding research on the most effective telemedicine practices for carceral settings, research exploring strategies to expand housing and employment support during reintegration are critical.

BACKGROUND:Evidence maps are emerging data visualization of a systematic review. There are no published evidence maps summarizing opioid use disorder (OUD) interventions. AIM/OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to publish an interactive summary of all peer-reviewed interventional and observational trials assessing the treatment of OUD and common clinical outcomes. METHODS:PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Web of Science were queried using multiple OUD-related MESH terms, without date limitations, for English-language publications. Inclusions were human subjects, treatment of OUD, OUD patient or community-level outcomes, and systematic reviews of OUD interventions. Exclusions were laboratory studies, reviews, and case reports. Two reviewers independently scanned abstracts for inclusion before coding eligible full-text articles by pre-specified filters: research design, study population, study setting, intervention, outcomes, sample size, study duration, geographical region, and funding sources. RESULTS:The OUD Evidence Map (https://med.nyu.edu/research/lee-lab/research/opioid-use-disorder-treatment-evidence-map) identified and assessed 12,933 relevant abstracts through 2020. We excluded 9455 abstracts and full text reviewed 2839 manuscripts; 888 were excluded, 1591 were included in the final evidence map. The most studied OUD interventions were methadone (n = 754 studies), buprenorphine (n = 499), and naltrexone (n = 134). The most common outcomes were heroin/opioid use (n = 708), treatment retention (n = 557), and non-opioid drug use (n = 368). Clear gaps included a wider array of opioid agonists for treatment, digital behavioral interventions, studies of OUD treatments in criminal justice settings, and overdose as a clinical outcome. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This OUD Evidence Map highlights the importance of pharmacologic interventions for OUD and reductions in opioid use. Future iterations will update results annually and scan policy-level interventions.