Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:Smoking remains a major public health burden among persons with opioid and/or alcohol use disorder. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A 49-item semi-structured survey was conducted among urban, inpatient detoxification program patients eliciting demographic and clinical characteristics, smoking profile, technology use patterns, and preferences for adopting technology-based smoking cessation interventions. Multivariate logistic regression models further evaluated the association between participant demographic and clinical characteristics and technology preferences. Results/UNASSIGNED:Participants were mostly male (91%), and admitted for detoxification for alcohol (47%), heroin (31%), or both alcohol and heroin (22%). Past 30-day smoking was reported by 78% of the sample. Mobile phone ownership was common (89%); with an average past-year turnover of 3 mobile phones and 3 phone numbers. Computer ownership was low (28%) and one third reported daily internet use (34%). Telephone (41%) and text message-based interventions (40%) were the most popular platforms to facilitate smoking cessation. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Despite concurrent AUD-OUD, most respondents had attempted to quit smoking in the last year and preferred telephone- and text message-based interventions to facilitate smoking cessation. High turnover of mobile phones, phone numbers, and limited access to computers pose barriers to dissemination of technology-based smoking cessation interventions in this vulnerable population.

OBJECTIVES:To estimate the costs of providing extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX) and buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) following inpatient detoxification using data derived from a multisite randomized controlled trial at 8 US community-based treatment programs. STUDY DESIGN:Cost data were collected for 3 intervention phases: program start-up, inpatient detoxification, and up to 24 weeks of medication induction and management visits (post detoxification). Cost analyses were from the healthcare sector perspective (2015 US$); patient costs are also reported. METHODS:We conducted site visits, administered a cost survey to treatment programs, and analyzed study data on medication and services utilization. Nationally representative sources were used to estimate unit costs. Uncertainty was evaluated in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS:Mean start-up costs were $1071 per program for XR-NTX and $828 per program for BUP-NX. Mean costs per participant were $5416 for XR-NTX (57% detoxification, 37% medication, 3% provider, 3% patient) and $4148 for BUP-NX (64% detoxification, 12% medication, 10% provider, 14% patient). Total cost per participant ranged by site from $2979 to $8963 for XR-NTX and from $2521 to $6486 for BUP-NX. CONCLUSIONS:For treatment providers, offering XR-NTX and/or BUP-NX as part of existing detoxification treatment modalities generates modest costs in addition to the costs of detoxification, which vary substantially among the 8 sites. From the patient's perspective, the costs associated with medication management visits may be a barrier for some individuals considering these treatments.

The risk of severe precipitated opioid withdrawal (POW) is amplified when precipitated by a long-acting opioid antagonist. IM extended release naltrexone (XRNTX;Vivitrol®) is an FDA approved therapy to prevent relapse of opioid and alcohol abuse. Two cases of precipitated opioid withdrawal from XRNTX are presented that illustrate different patient reactions to POW. A 56-year-old woman developed a hypertensive emergency and required continuous intravenous vasodilator, clonidine, and intensive care monitoring after re-initiation of XRNTX following opioid relapse. A 25-year-old man developed agitation and altered mental status after receipt of XRNTX at the conclusion of a twelve-day detoxification program during which he continued surreptitious use of heroin. The patient received benzodiazepines and haloperidol without adequate affect, and required intubation with propofol, lorazepam, and dexmedetomidine infusions. Management of POW from XRNTX is a challenge to emergency providers and protocols to guide management do not exist. Recommended therapies include intravenous fluids, anti-emetics, clonidine, or benzodiazepines as well as therapy tailored to the organ system affected. To minimize risk of POW it is important for providers instituting XRNTX to adhere to the manufacturers warnings and clinic protocols including a naloxone challenge and ensure an adequate opioid free period prior to administration of XRNTX.

Individuals must feel free to exert personal control over decisions regarding research participation. We present an examination of participants' perceived personal control over, as well as reported pressures and threats from others, influencing their decision to join a study assessing the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone in preventing opioid dependence relapse. Most participants endorsed a strong sense of control over the decision; few reported pressures or threats. Although few in number, participants' brief narrative descriptions of the pressures and threats are illuminating and provide context for their perceptions of personal control. Based on this work, we propose a useful set of tools to help ascertain participants' sense of personal control in joining research.

BACKGROUND: Extended release naltrexone (XR-NTX) injected intramuscularly monthly has been shown to reduce relapse in persons with opioid use disorder. Baseline factors, including patients' demographics, comorbidities and lifestyle, may help identify patients who will benefit most or least from XR-NTX treatment. METHODS: Potential moderators of XR-NTX's effect were examined in the largest North American randomized open-label effectiveness trial of XR-NTX. Relapse status (Yes/No) at 6-month follow-up was regressed on treatment group (XR-NTX, N=153; or Treatment-as-Usual [TAU], N=155), baseline covariates, and their two-way interaction to identify moderator effects. Baseline covariates included age, gender, summary scores for depression, suicidal thoughts, drug abuse risk, substance use, medical, psychiatric and employment status, socialization, legal and family/social issues, history of abuse and quality of life measures. RESULTS: Alcohol use to intoxication in the 30days before randomization was a significant moderator: during the treatment phase, those who reported being recently intoxicated before randomization to XR-NTX relapsed to opioids at a rate (56%) similar to TAU (58%), while those without alcohol intoxication in the prior 30days had a lower rate of opioid relapse (41% vs. 65%, respectively, P<0.04). CONCLUSIONS: XR-NTX appeared to work equally well across subgroups with diverse demographic, addiction, mental health and environmental characteristics, with the possible exception of working better among those without recent alcohol intoxication. These findings should be reassuring to practitioners increasingly using XR-NTX as medical addiction therapy in diverse and often vulnerable populations.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder is often treated with short term hospitalization and medically supervised withdrawal from opioids followed by counseling alone without medication assisted treatment (MAT). More evidence is needed to confirm the expectation that the rate of relapse would be high after short term inpatient treatment and withdrawal from opioids without follow-up MAT. OBJECTIVE/METHODS: To examine relapse to opioid use disorder in a randomized, multi-site effectiveness trial of extended-release injection naltrexone (XR-NTX) vs community-based treatment as usual (TAU) without medication, as a function of the type of clinical service where treatment was initiated-short-term inpatient (N=59), long-term inpatient (N=48), or outpatient (N=201). Inpatients typically were admitted to treatment actively using opioids and had completed withdrawal from opioids before study entry. Outpatients typically presented already abstinent for varying periods of time. RESULTS: One month after randomization, relapse rates on TAU by setting were: short-term inpatient: 63%; long term inpatient: 14%; outpatient: 28%. On XR-NTX relapse rates after one month were low (<12%) across all three settings. At the end of the 6 month trial, relapse rates on TAU were high across all treatment-initiation settings (short term inpatient 77%; long term inpatient 59%; outpatient 61%), while XR-NTX exerted a modest protective effect against relapse across settings (short term inpatient: 59%; long term inpatient 46%; outpatient 38%). CONCLUSIONS: Short term inpatient treatment is associated with a high rate of relapse among patients with opioid use disorder. These findings support the recommendation that medically supervised withdrawal from opioids should be followed by medication assisted treatment.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorders have reached epidemic proportions, with overdose now the leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Extended release naltrexone (XR-NTX) has emerged as a medication treatment that reduces opioid use and craving. However, the effect of XR-NTX therapy on acute healthcare utilization, including emergency department visits and inpatient hospitalizations, remains uncertain. The objective of the current study is to evaluate hospital-based healthcare resource utilization in adults involved in the criminal justice system with a history of opioid use disorder randomized to XR-NTX therapy compared with treatment as usual (TAU) during a 6-month treatment phase and 12months post-treatment follow up. METHODS: This retrospective exploratory analysis uses data collected in a published randomized trial. Comparisons of the number of emergency department visits and hospital admissions (for drug detox, psychiatric care and other medical reasons) were performed using chi square tests for any admission and negative binomial models for number of admissions. RESULTS: Of the 308 participants randomized, 96% had utilization data (76% complete 6months, 67% complete follow up). No significant differences were seen in overall healthcare utilization (IRR=0.88, 95%CI 0.63-1.23, p=0.45), or substance use-related drug detox hospitalizations (IRR=0.83, 95%CI 0.32-2.16, p=0.71). Despite having more participants report chronic medical problems at baseline (43% vs. 32%, p=0.05), those receiving XR-NTX generally experienced equivalent or lower rates of healthcare utilization compared to TAU. The XR-NTX group had significantly lower medical/surgical related hospital admissions (IRR=0.55, 95%CI 0.30-1.00, p=0.05) during the course of the entire study. CONCLUSIONS: XR-NTX did not significantly increase rates of healthcare utilization compared to TAU. Provider concerns regarding healthcare utilization should not preclude the consideration of XR-NTX as therapy for opioid use disorders.

BACKGROUND: Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), an opioid antagonist, and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), a partial opioid agonist, are pharmacologically and conceptually distinct interventions to prevent opioid relapse. We aimed to estimate the difference in opioid relapse-free survival between XR-NTX and BUP-NX. METHODS: We initiated this 24 week, open-label, randomised controlled, comparative effectiveness trial at eight US community-based inpatient services and followed up participants as outpatients. Participants were 18 years or older, had Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 opioid use disorder, and had used non-prescribed opioids in the past 30 days. We stratified participants by treatment site and opioid use severity and used a web-based permuted block design with random equally weighted block sizes of four and six for randomisation (1:1) to receive XR-NTX or BUP-NX. XR-NTX was monthly intramuscular injections (Vivitrol; Alkermes) and BUP-NX was daily self-administered buprenorphine-naloxone sublingual film (Suboxone; Indivior). The primary outcome was opioid relapse-free survival during 24 weeks of outpatient treatment. Relapse was 4 consecutive weeks of any non-study opioid use by urine toxicology or self-report, or 7 consecutive days of self-reported use. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02032433. FINDINGS: Between Jan 30, 2014, and May 25, 2016, we randomly assigned 570 participants to receive XR-NTX (n=283) or BUP-NX (n=287). The last follow-up visit was Jan 31, 2017. As expected, XR-NTX had a substantial induction hurdle: fewer participants successfully initiated XR-NTX (204 [72%] of 283) than BUP-NX (270 [94%] of 287; p<0.0001). Among all participants who were randomly assigned (intention-to-treat population, n=570) 24 week relapse events were greater for XR-NTX (185 [65%] of 283) than for BUP-NX (163 [57%] of 287; hazard ratio [HR] 1.36, 95% CI 1.10-1.68), most or all of this difference accounted for by early relapse in nearly all (70 [89%] of 79) XR-NTX induction failures. Among participants successfully inducted (per-protocol population, n=474), 24 week relapse events were similar across study groups (p=0.44). Opioid-negative urine samples (p<0.0001) and opioid-abstinent days (p<0.0001) favoured BUP-NX compared with XR-NTX among the intention-to-treat population, but were similar across study groups among the per-protocol population. Self-reported opioid craving was initially less with XR-NTX than with BUP-NX (p=0.0012), then converged by week 24 (p=0.20). With the exception of mild-to-moderate XR-NTX injection site reactions, treatment-emergent adverse events including overdose did not differ between treatment groups. Five fatal overdoses occurred (two in the XR-NTX group and three in the BUP-NX group). INTERPRETATION: In this population it is more difficult to initiate patients to XR-NTX than BUP-NX, and this negatively affected overall relapse. However, once initiated, both medications were equally safe and effective. Future work should focus on facilitating induction to XR-NTX and on improving treatment retention for both medications. FUNDING: NIDA Clinical Trials Network.