Faculty Bibliography

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Emergency departments (EDs) are increasingly initiating treatment for patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD) and linking them to ongoing addiction care. To our knowledge, patient perspectives related to their ED visit have not been characterized and may influence their access to and interest in OUD treatment. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To assess the experiences and perspectives regarding ED-initiated health care and OUD treatment among US patients with untreated OUD seen in the ED. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:This qualitative study, conducted as part of 2 studies (Project ED Health and ED-CONNECT), included individuals with untreated OUD who were recruited during an ED visit in EDs at 4 urban academic centers, 1 public safety net hospital, and 1 rural critical access hospital in 5 disparate US regions. Focus groups were conducted between June 2018 and January 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Data collection and thematic analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) implementation science framework with evidence (perspectives on ED care), context (ED), and facilitation (what is needed to promote change) elements. Results/UNASSIGNED:A total of 31 individuals (mean [SD] age, 43.4 [11.0] years) participated in 6 focus groups. Twenty participants (64.5%) identified as male and most 13 (41.9%) as White; 17 (54.8%) reported being unemployed. Themes related to evidence included patients' experience of stigma and perceived minimization of their pain and medical problems by ED staff. Themes about context included the ED not being seen as a source of OUD treatment initiation and patient readiness to initiate treatment being multifaceted, time sensitive, and related to internal and external patient factors. Themes related to facilitation of improved care of patients with OUD seen in the ED included a need for on-demand treatment and ED staff training. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:In this qualitative study, patients with OUD reported feeling stigmatized and minimized when accessing care in the ED and identified several opportunities to improve care. The findings suggest that strategies to address stigma, acknowledge and treat pain, and provide ED staff training should be implemented to improve ED care for patients with OUD and enhance access to life-saving treatment.

How does craving bias decisions to pursue drugs over other valuable, and healthier, alternatives in addiction? To address this question, we measured the in-the-moment economic decisions of people with opioid use disorder as they experienced craving, shortly after receiving their scheduled opioid maintenance medication and ~24 h later. We found that higher cravers had higher drug-related valuation, and that moments of higher craving within-person also led to higher drug-related valuation. When experiencing increased opioid craving, participants were willing to pay more for personalized consumer items and foods more closely related to their drug use, but not for alternative "nondrug-related" but equally desirable options. This selective increase in value with craving was greater when the drug-related options were offered in higher quantities and was separable from the effects of other fluctuating psychological states like negative mood. These findings suggest that craving narrows and focuses economic motivation toward the object of craving by selectively and multiplicatively amplifying perceived value along a "drug relatedness" dimension.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Dynamic, adaptive pharmacologic treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) has been previously recommended over static dosing to prevent relapse, and is aligned with personalized medicine. However, there has been no quantitative evidence demonstrating its advantage. Our objective was to estimate the extent to which a hypothetical intervention that increased buprenorphine dose in response to opioid use would affect risk of relapse over 24 weeks of follow-up. DESIGN/METHODS:A secondary analysis of the buprenorphine arm of an open-label randomized controlled 24-week comparative effectiveness trial, 2014-17. SETTING/METHODS:Eight community addiction treatment programs in the United States. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:English-speaking adults with DSM-5 OUD, recruited during inpatient admission (n = 270). Participants were mainly white (65%) and male (72%). INTERVENTION(S)/METHODS:Participants were treated with daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), with dose based on clinical indication, determined by the provider. We examined a hypothetical intervention of increasing dose in response to opioid use. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Outcome was relapse to regular opioid use during the 24 weeks of outpatient treatment, assessed in a survival framework. We estimated the relapse-free survival curves of participants under a hypothetical (i.e. counterfactual) intervention in which their BUP-NX dosage would be increased following their own subject-specific opioid use during the first 12 weeks of treatment versus a hypothetical intervention in which dose would remain constant. FINDINGS/RESULTS:We estimated that increasing BUP-NX dose in response to recent opioid use would lower risk of relapse by 19.17 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI) = -32.17, -6.18) (additive risk)] and 32% (0.68, 95% CI = 0.49, 0.86) (relative risk). The number-needed-to-treat with this intervention to prevent a single relapse is 6. CONCLUSIONS:In people with opioid use disorder, a hypothetical intervention that increases sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone dose in response to opioid use during the first 12 weeks of treatment appears to reduce risk of relapse over 24 weeks, compared with holding the dose constant after week 2.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment outcomes are poorer for young adults than older adults. Developmental differences are broadly implicated, but particular vulnerability factor interactions are poorly understood. This study sought to identify moderators of OUD relapse between age groups. METHODS:This secondary analysis compared young adults (18-25) to older adults (26+) from a comparative effectiveness trial ("XBOT") that randomized (N = 570) participants to extended-release naltrexone or sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone. We explored the relationship between 25 prespecified patient baseline characteristics and relapse to regular opioid use by age group and treatment condition, using logistic regression. RESULTS:Young adults (n = 111) had higher rates of 24-week relapse than older adults (n = 459) (70.3% vs 58.8%) and differed on a number of specific characteristics, including more smokers, more intravenous opioid use, and more cannabis use. No significant moderators predicted relapse, in either three-way or two-way interactions. CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE:No baseline factors were identified as moderating the relationship between age group and opioid relapse, nor any interactions between baseline characteristics, age group, and treatment condition to predict opioid relapse. Poorer treatment outcomes for young adults are likely associated with multiple developmental vulnerabilities rather than any single predominant factor. Although not reaching significance, several characteristics (using heroin, smoking tobacco, high levels of depression/anxiety, or treatment because of family/friends) showed higher odds ratio point estimates for relapse in young adults than older adults. This is the first study to explore moderators of worse OUD treatment outcomes in young adults, highlighting the need to identify predictor variables that could inform treatment enhancements. (Am J Addict 2021;00:1-12).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:A recent study found that homeless individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) had a lower risk of relapse on extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) versus buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), whereas non-homeless individuals had a lower risk of relapse on BUP-NX. This secondary study examined differences in mediation pathways to medication effect between homeless and non-homeless participants. DESIGN:Secondary analysis of an open-label randomized controlled, 24-week comparative effectiveness trial, 2014-17. SETTING:Eight community addiction treatment programs in the United States. PARTICIPANTS:English-speaking adults with DSM-5 OUD, recruited during inpatient admission (n = 570). INTERVENTION(S):Randomization to monthly injection of XR-NTX or daily sublingual BUP-NX. MEASUREMENTS(S):Mediation analysis estimated the direct effect of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX on relapse and indirect effect through mediators of medication adherence, use of illicit opioids, depressive symptoms and pain, separately by homeless status. FINDINGS:For the homeless subgroup, the protective indirect path contributed a 3.4 percentage point reduced risk of relapse [95% confidence interval (CI) = -12.0, 5.3] comparing XR-NTX to BUP-NX (explaining 21% of the total effect). For the non-homeless subgroup, the indirect path contributed a 9.4 percentage point increased risk of relapse (95% CI = 3.1, 15.7) comparing XR-NTX to BUP-NX (explaining 57% of the total effect). CONCLUSIONS:A novel approach to mediation analysis shows that much of the difference in medication effectiveness (extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine-naloxone) on opioid relapse among non-homeless adults with opioid use disorder appears to be explained by mediators of adherence, illicit opioid use, depressive symptoms and pain.

OBJECTIVE:Sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone and extended-release injection naltrexone are effective treatments, with distinct mechanisms, for opioid use disorder. The authors examined whether patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with better response to one medication or the other. METHODS:In a multisite 24-week randomized comparative-effectiveness trial of assignment to buprenorphine-naloxone (N=287) compared with extended-release naltrexone (N=283) comprising inpatients planning to initiate medication treatment for opioid use disorder, 50 demographic and clinical characteristics were examined as moderators of the effect of medication assignment on relapse to regular opioid use and failure to initiate medication. Moderator-by-medication interactions were estimated using logistic regression with correction for multiple testing. RESULTS:In the intent-to-treat sample, patients who reported being homeless had a lower relapse rate if they were assigned to receive extended-release naltrexone (51.6%) compared with buprenorphine-naloxone (70.4%) (odds ratio=0.45, 95% CI=0.22, 0.90); patients who were not homeless had a higher relapse rate if they were assigned to extended-release naltrexone (70.9%) compared with buprenorphine-naloxone (53.1%) (odds ratio=2.15, 95% CI=1.44, 3.21). In the subsample of patients who initiated medication, the interaction was not significant, with a similar pattern of lower relapse with extended-release naltrexone (41.4%) compared with buprenorphine (68.6%) among homeless patients (odds ratio=0.32, 95% CI=0.15, 0.68) but less difference among those not homeless (extended-release naltrexone, 57.2%; buprenorphine, 52.0%; odds ratio=1.24, 95% CI=0.80, 1.90). For failure to initiate medication, moderators were stated preference for medication (failure was less likely if the patient was assigned to the medication preferred), parole and probation status (fewer failures with extended-release naltrexone for those on parole or probation), and presence of pain and timing of randomization (more failure with extended-release naltrexone for patients endorsing moderate to severe pain and randomized early while still undergoing medically managed withdrawal). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with opioid use disorder admitted to inpatient treatment, homelessness, parole and probation status, medication preference, and factors likely to influence tolerability of medication initiation may be important in matching patients to buprenorphine or extended-release naltrexone.

Chronic pain is highly prevalent among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, little is known about how pharmacological treatments for OUD, for example, extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), affect pain. To begin addressing this question, we performed a secondary analysis of pain data on a large prospective 24-week, open-label, randomized-controlled comparative effectiveness trial of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX (X:BOT trial). Participants' pain status was measured by the EuroQol (EQ-5D). Based on their responses to the pain question at baseline, participants were dichotomized into "Pain" versus "No Pain" categories. Participant's pain status was evaluated every 4 weeks. A mixed effects longitudinal logistic regression model was fitted to examine the differential effect of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX on pain, modelling pain at all available follow-up assessments, adjusted for age, sex, and baseline pain. A total of 474 individuals who were successfully inducted onto their assigned medications were included in this analysis. Among participants endorsing pain at baseline, substantial reductions in pain were observed over the course of the study in both treatment groups. Howecver reduction in pain was slightly greater in the group treated with XR-NTX than the one treated with BUP-NX (OR = 1.60 [95% CI: 1.07-2.40], P = 0.023). Future research using instruments and design specifically focused on pain could extend the present observations and evaluate their clinical significance.

BACKGROUND:Relapse rates during opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment remain unacceptably high. It is possible that optimally matching patients with medication type would reduce risk of relapse. Our objective was to learn a rule by which to assign type of medication for OUD to reduce risk of relapse, and to estimate the extent to which risk of relapse would be reduced if such a rule were used. METHODS:This was a secondary analysis of an open-label randomized controlled, 24-week comparative effectiveness trial of injection extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), delivered approximately every 28 days, or daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) for treating OUD, 2014-2017 (N = 570). Outcome was a binary indicator of relapse to regular opioid use during the 24 weeks of outpatient treatment. RESULTS:We found that applying an estimated individualized treatment rule-i.e., a rule that assigns patients with OUD to either XR-NTX or BUP-NX based on their individual characteristics in such a way that risk of relapse is minimized-would reduce risk of relapse by 24 weeks by 12% compared to randomly assigned treatment. CONCLUSIONS:The number-needed-to-treat with the estimated treatment rule to prevent a single relapse is 14. A simpler, alternative estimated rule in which homeless participants would be treated with XR-NTX and stably housed participants would be treated with BUP-NX performed similarly. These results provide an estimate of the amount by which a relatively simple change in clinical practice could be expected to improve prevention of OUD relapse.

BACKGROUND:The randomized X:BOT trial showed that following induction, sublingual agonist (buprenorphine-naloxone, BUP-NX) or antagonist injection (extended release naltrexone, XR-NTX) produced similar benefits for reducing opioid relapse in injection users with opioid use disorder. Given that XR-NTX reduces drinking in alcohol use disorder (AUD), we completed a secondary analysis of the X:BOT sample of patients successfully inducted onto treatment to determine if XR-NTX (n=204) was superior to BUP-NX (n=270) to reduce drinking or heavy drinking in patients with opioid use disorder. METHODS:Timeline follow-back recorded standard drink units consumed. Mixed-models regression examined monthly frequencies of any drinking or heavy drinking over 6 months of treatment and proportional hazard survival examined time to first drink. RESULTS:Both treatment groups reduced drinking from baseline to post-treatment (small to medium effect), but no differences between groups were detected. However, only 29% (n=136) of the sample had AUD and 19% (n=26/136) of those were abstinent before treatment. Analysis of a subsample enriched for possible drinking included n=136 with an AUD diagnosis plus n=43 who did not have AUD, but reported at least one day of heavy drinking prior to study. Even so, this subsample still reported only 32% of days of any drinking with a median of only 13% of days designated as "heavy". Within this subsample, the BUP-NX group reported greater mean drinks per drinking day than did the XR-NTX group at baseline (p=0.03); however, there were no other significant group differences in drinking observed before, during, or at the end of treatment. CONCLUSIONS:An overall improvement in drinking occurred for treatment of OUD using both agonist and antagonist approaches indicating that the hypothesis that XR-NTX would be superior to BUP-NX was not supported. The study is limited by low levels of comorbid AUD or heavy drinking observed in X:BOT trial participants seeking treatment for opioid use disorder.

Opioid use disorder continues to be a significant problem in the United States and worldwide. Three medications-methadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release injectable naltrexone,- are efficacious for treating opioid use disorder (OUD). However, the utility of these medications is limited, in part due to poor rates of retention in treatment. In addition, minimum recovery milestones and other factors that influence when and whether individuals can safely discontinue medications are unknown. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study "Optimizing Retention, Duration, and Discontinuation Strategies for Opioid Use Disorder Pharmacotherapy" (RDD; CTN-0100) will be among the largest clinical trials on treatment of OUD yet conducted, consisting of two phases, the Retention phase, and the Duration-Discontinuation phase. The Retention phase, open to patients initiating treatment, will test different doses and formulations of buprenorphine (standard dose sublingual, high dose sublingual, or extended-release injection), and a digital therapeutic app delivering contingency management and cognitive behavioral counseling on the primary outcome of retention in treatment. The Discontinuation phase, open to patients in stable remission from OUD and choosing to discontinue medication (including participants from the Retention phase or from the population of patients treated at the clinical site, referred by an outside prescriber or self-referred) will study different tapering strategies for buprenorphine (sublingual taper vs taper with injection buprenorphine), and a digital therapeutic app which provides resources to promote recovery, on the primary outcome of relapse-free discontinuation of medication. This paper describes how the RDD trial derives from two decades of research in the CTN. Initial trials (CTN-0001; CTN-0002; CTN-0003) focused on opioid detoxification, showing buprenorphine-naloxone was effective for detoxification, but that acute detoxification did not appear to be an effective treatment strategy. Trials on comparative effectiveness of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (CTN-0027; CTN-0030; and CTN-0051) highlighted the problem of dropout from treatment and few trials defined retention on MOUD as the primary outcome. Long-term follow-up studies on those patient samples demonstrated the importance of long-term continuation of medication for many patients to sustain remission. Overall, these trials highlight the potential of a stable research infrastructure such as CTN to advance treatment effectiveness through a programmatic succession of large clinical trials.