Effect of Buprenorphine Implants on Illicit Opioid Use Among Abstinent Adults With Opioid Dependence Treated With Sublingual Buprenorphine: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Evaluating preferences for medication formulation and treatment model among people who use opioids non-medically: A web-based cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Over the past decade, treatment for opioid use disorder has expanded to include long-acting injectable and implantable formulations of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and integrated treatment models systematically addressing both behavioral and physical health. Patient preference for these treatment options has been underexplored. Gathering data on OUD treatment preferences is critical to guide the development of patient-centered treatment for OUD. This cross-sectional study assessed preferences for long-acting MOUD and integrated treatment using an online survey.

METHODS

An online Qualtrics survey assessed preferences for MOUD formulation and integrated treatment models. The study recruited participants (n = 851) in October and November 2019 through advertisements or posts on Facebook, Google AdWords, Reddit, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Eligible participants scored a two or higher on the opioid pain reliever or heroin scales of the Tobacco, Alcohol Prescription Medication and other Substance Use (TAPS) Tool. Structured survey items obtained patient preference for MOUD formulation and treatment model. Using stated preference methods, the study assessed preference via comparison of preferred options for MOUD and treatment model.

RESULTS

In the past year, 824 (96.8 %) participants reported non-prescribed use of opioid pain relievers (mean TAPS score = 2.72, SD = 0.46) and 552 (64.9 %) reported heroin or fentanyl use (mean TAPS score = 2.73, SD = 0.51). Seventy-four percent of participants (n = 631) reported currently or previously receiving OUD treatment, with 407 (48.4 %) receiving MOUD. When asked about preferences for type of MOUD formulation, 452 (53.1 %) preferred a daily oral formulation, 115 (13.5 %) preferred an implant, 114 (13.4 %) preferred a monthly injection and 95 (11.2 %) preferred a weekly injection. Approximately 8.8 % (n = 75) would not consider MOUD regardless of formulation. The majority of participants (65.2 %, n = 555) preferred receiving treatment in a specialized substance use treatment program distinct from their medical care, compared with receiving care in an integrated model (n = 296, 34.8 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Though most participants expressed willingness to try long-acting MOUD formulations, the majority preferred short-acting formulations. Likewise, the majority preferred non-integrated treatment in specialty substance use settings. Reasons for these preferences provide insight on developing effective educational tools for patients and suggesting targets for intervention to develop a more acceptable treatment system.

Empirically contrasting urine drug screening-based opioid use disorder treatment outcome definitions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A lack of consensus on the optimal outcome measures to assess opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment efficacy and their precise definition and computation has hampered the pooling of research data for evidence synthesis and meta-analyses. This study aimed to empirically contrast multiple clinical trial definitions of treatment success by applying them to the same dataset.

METHODS

Data analysis used a suite of functions, developed as a software package for the R language, to operationalize 61 treatment outcome definitions based on urine drug screening (UDS) results. Outcome definitions were derived from clinical trials that are among the most influential in the OUD treatment field. Outcome functions were applied to a harmonized dataset from three large-scale National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) studies, which tested various medication for OUD (MOUD) options (n = 2492). Hierarchical clustering was employed to empirically contrast outcome definitions.

RESULTS

The optimal number of clusters identified was three. Cluster 1, comprising eight definitions focused on detecting opioid-positive UDS, did not include missing UDS in outcome calculations, potentially resulting in inflated rates of treatment success. Cluster 2, with the highest variability, included 10 definitions characterized by strict criteria for treatment success, relying heavily on UDS results from either a brief period or a single study visit. The 43 definitions in Cluster 3 represented a diverse range of outcomes, conceptualized as measuring abstinence, use reduction and relapse. These definitions potentially offer more balanced measures of treatment success or failure, as they avoid the extreme methodologies characteristic of Clusters 1 and 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trials using urine drug screening (UDS) for objective substance use assessment in outcome definitions should consider (1) incorporating missing UDS data in outcome computation and (2) avoiding over-reliance on UDS data confined to a short time frame or the occurrence of a single positive urine test following a period of abstinence.

Rapid induction of transdermal buprenorphine to subcutaneous extended-release buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder

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.

Patients' perspectives on buprenorphine subcutaneous implant: a case series

BACKGROUND

Considering the enormous burden represented by the opioid use disorder (OUD), it is important to always consider, when implementing opioid agonist therapy (OAT), the potential impact on patient's adherence, quality of life, and detoxification. Thus, the purpose of the study is to evaluate how the introduction of a novel OAT approach influences these key factors in the management of OUD.

CASE PRESENTATION

This article marks the pioneering use of OAT through buprenorphine implant in Europe and delves into the experience of six patients diagnosed with OUD at a relatively young age. The patients, comprising both males and a female, are of Caucasian Italian and African Italian ancestry (case 4) and exhibit an age range from 23 to 63, with an average drug abuse history of 19 ± 12 years. All patients were on stable traditional OAT before transitioning to buprenorphine implants. Despite the heterogeneity in social and educational backgrounds, health status, and drug abuse initiation histories, the case series reveals consistent positive treatment outcomes such as detoxification, absence of withdrawal symptoms and of side effects. Notably, all patients reported experiencing a newfound sense of freedom and improved quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

These results emphasise the promising impact of OAT via buprenorphine implants in enhancing the well-being and quality of life in the context of OUD.

Tinkering with care: Implementing extended-release buprenorphine depot treatment for opioid dependence

We examine how extended-release buprenorphine depot (BUP-XR) is put to use and made to work in implementation practices, attending to how care practices are challenged and adapted as a long-acting technology is introduced into service in opioid agonist treatment (OAT) in Australia. Our approach is informed by ideas in science and technology studies (STS) emphasising the irreducible entanglement of care practices and technology, and in particular the concept of 'tinkering' as a practice of adaptation. To make our analysis, we draw on qualitative interview accounts (n = 19) of service providers involved in BUP-XR implementation across five sites. Our analysis considers the disruptive novelty of BUP-XR. Tinkering to make a novel technology work in practice slows down the expectation of implementation in relation to transformative innovation, despite the promise of dramatic or rapid change. Tinkering allowed for more open relations, for new care practices that departed from the routine and familiar, opening potential for how BUP-XR could be put to use and made to work in its new situation, and as its situation evolved along-with its implementation. Flexibility and openness of altering relations was, however, at times, held in tension with inflexibility and closure. This analysis identifies a concern for what is made present and what is made absent in the altered care network affected by BUP-XR, with the multiple effects of supervised daily dosing practices thrown into relief as they become absented. Tinkering to implement BUP-XR locally connects with a broader assemblage of trial and movement in the constitution of treatment. The introduction of long-acting technologies prompts new questions about embedded implementation practices, including supervised dosing, urinalysis, the time and place of psychosocial support, and how other social aspects of care might be recalibrated in drug treatment.

An Analysis of Benzodiazepine Prescribing to Primary Care Patients in a Large Healthcare System from 2019-2020

We sought to quantify benzodiazepine prescribing by primary care providers from 2019 to 2020 and identify correlates of prescribing. We hypothesized prescribing would increase post-COVID-19 lockdown. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with primary care visits in 2019 or 2020 in a large Ohio healthcare system. Demographics, diagnosis codes, and receipt of benzodiazepine prescriptions were collected. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined factors associated with benzodiazepine prescription receipt during the whole study period and post-lockdown. 455,537 adult patients had 1,643,473 visits. Benzodiazepines were prescribed in 3.2% (53,049/1,643,473) of visits. Effect sizes for positive associations with benzodiazepine prescription were largest for anxiety disorders. For negative associations, they were largest for Black patients and patients with cocaine use disorder. Benzodiazepine prescribing was positively associated with multiple groups having contraindications, though effect sizes were small. Contrary to our hypothesis, odds of receiving a prescription were 8.8% lower post-lockdown. Benzodiazepine prescribing rates in our system compared favorably to national rates. Year over year odds of receiving a prescription were slightly lower post-lockdown. Racial disparities were present and deserve further study. Strategies to reduce benzodiazepine prescribing to patients with anxiety may yield the largest reductions for benzodiazepine prescribing in primary care settings.

Dental Disorders Reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System in Association with Buprenorphine: An Analysis by Ingredient Composition and Route of Administration

BACKGROUND

Prior research has suggested buprenorphine-containing medications may be associated with an increased risk of dental disorders. However, published data describing adverse dental reactions in buprenorphine users by active ingredient composition and route of administration are limited.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of formulation on spontaneous reporting of dental disorders among patients treated with buprenorphine.

METHODS

Adverse event reports submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) between 2015 and 2022 were analyzed. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to measure disproportionality of dental disorder reporting as classified by 39 Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms.

RESULTS

Compared to pooled reports for all other drugs across FAERS, both buprenorphine monotherapy (ROR 3.09; 95% CI 2.61-3.66) and combination buprenorphine/naloxone (ROR 14.61; 95% CI 13.34-16.01) were associated with positive disproportionality signals. Signals of disproportionate dental disorder reporting were also detected for buprenorphine medicines administered by sublingual (ROR 20.03; 95% CI 18.04-22.24), buccal (ROR 4.46; 95% CI 3.00-6.61) and oral (ROR 7.17; 95% CI 5.03-10.22) routes, but not for other modalities. In considering active ingredient and route together, sublingual buprenorphine monotherapies (ROR 23.55; 95% CI 17.84-31.11) and sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (ROR 19.47; 95% CI 17.39-21.80) were each associated with disproportionate reporting of dental disorders.

CONCLUSION

Subject to the limitations of spontaneous adverse event data, this study identified significantly disproportionate reporting of dental disorders to FAERS among patients treated with buprenorphine- containing medications, including formulations administered by sublingual, buccal and oral routes. These findings are consistent with prior data and suggest that regular oral care and proper dental hygiene be emphasized for patients undergoing therapy with orally dissolving buprenorphine.

Buprenorphine for Chronic Pain Management: a Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to educate healthcare professionals regarding buprenorphine for the use of opioid use disorder (OUD) as well as for chronic pain management. This review provides physicians and practitioners with updated information regarding the distinct characteristics and intricacies of prescribing buprenorphine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Buprenorphine is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for acute pain, chronic pain, opioid use disorder (OUD), and opioid dependence. When compared to most other opioids, buprenorphine offers superior patient tolerability, an excellent half-life, and minimal respiratory depression. Buprenorphine does have notable side effects as well as pharmacokinetic properties that require special attention, especially if patients require future surgical interventions. Many physicians are not trained to initiate or manage patients on buprenorphine. However, buprenorphine offers a potentially safer alternative for medication management for patients who require chronic opioid therapy for pain or have OUD. This review provides updated information on buprenorphine for both chronic pain and OUD.

The experience of buprenorphine implant in patients with opioid use disorder: a series of narrative interviews

Background

This study used narrative medicine (NM) to assess the point of view of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) and the impact that addiction and a new treatment approach via buprenorphine implant had on their daily lives as compared with previous oral Opioid Agonist Therapy (OAT).

Methods

Five patients with OUD undergoing treatment with a buprenorphine subcutaneous implant participated voluntarily and provided their anonymity by self-describing, in response to questions prompted by the clinician, their experience with this innovative therapy. The narratives were analyzed according to standard NM methodology. Citations of patients' positive or negative experiences with traditional OAT and buprenorphine implant were classified according to five categories-patient's determination toward complete opioid abstinence, emotional impact, impact on life, smoothness of therapy, and therapy dependency-and quantified to obtain a picture of the overall therapy experience.

Results

The analysis revealed the extent of the burden not only of addiction but also of the traditional OAT on patients' life, including relationships with family, job management, and free time. Conversely, the therapy with buprenorphine implant revealed a significant improvement in the quality of life of the patients, who also largely reported a positive emotional outcome during this therapy, as well as a solid determination to achieve complete recovery.

Conclusions

This study illustrates the complex problems of living with OUD and provides insights into the added value of an innovative buprenorphine implant therapy that, due to its administration route and prolonged duration, allows patients to take an additional step toward total opioid abstinence and complete recovery of daily life.

Long-Acting Buprenorphine Formulations as a New Strategy for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

Long-acting buprenorphine formulations have been recently marketed for the Opioid Agonist Treatment (OAT) of opioid use disorder (OUD) associated with medical, social, and psychological support. Their duration of action ranges from one week up to 6 months. The non-medical use of opioids is increasing with a parallel rise in lethal overdoses. Methadone and buprenorphine are the standard treatment for opioid dependence. Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) is widely recognized as one of the most effective ways of reducing the risks of overdose, crime, and transmission of HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) in people who use opioids; however, its effectiveness has been hindered by low rates of uptake and retention in treatment. Furthermore, both methadone and buprenorphine are widely diverted and misused. Thus, a crucial aspect of treating OUD is facilitating patients' access to treatment while minimizing substance-related harm and improving quality of life. The newly developed long-acting buprenorphine formulations represent a significant change in the paradigm of OUD treatment, allowing an approach individualized to patients' needs. Strengths of this individualized approach are improved adherence (lack of peaks and troughs in blood concentrations) and a reduced stigma since the patient doesn't need to attend their clinic daily or nearly daily, thus facilitating social and occupational integrations as the quality of life. However, less frequent attendance at the clinic should not affect the patient-physician relationship. Therefore, teleconsulting or digital therapeutic services should be developed in parallel. In addition, diversion and intravenous misuse of buprenorphine are unlikely due to the characteristics of these formulations. These features make this approach of interest for treating OUD in particular settings, such as subjects staying or when released from prison or those receiving long-term residential treatment for OUD in the therapeutic communities. The long-lasting formulations of buprenorphine can positively impact the OUD treatment and suggest future medical and logistic developments to maximize their personalized management and impact.

Evaluating the feasibility of prolonged-release buprenorphine formulations as an alternative to daily opioid agonist therapy regardless of prior treatment adherence: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Effective opioid agonist therapy (OAT) depends on good patient adherence. However, the daily, supervised administration of standard OAT represents a significant burden to patients and often drives poor adherence. Prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) formulations may mitigate some of this burden, enabling clinic visits to be substantially reduced. For treatment guidelines to be effective, the likely benefit of a transition to PRB therapy in different patient populations must be established.

METHODS

The aim was to determine the feasibility of assessing PRB as an alternative to daily OAT in two groups: those currently adhering well to daily OAT (group 1, N = 5) and those not currently showing adherence or a positive response to daily OAT (group 2, N = 10). This open-label, prospective, non-controlled pilot study was conducted at the Kaleidoscope Drug Project in South Wales, UK. Participants were assessed for history, drug use, psychosocial assessment scores, and clinical severity at baseline and after 6 months of treatment. Primary outcomes were the feasibility of assessing PRB as an alternative to daily OAT and the acceptability of PRB therapy in each group. Secondary outcomes were treatment response, on-top drug use, psychosocial measures, and assessment of clinical severity.

RESULTS

Participants from both groups demonstrated high levels of participation with assessment protocols at both baseline and 6-month follow-up, indicating study feasibility. PRB treatment was acceptable to the majority of participants, with all of group 1 and 70% of group 2 adhering to PRB therapy for the duration of the study and opting to persist with PRB therapy over other OAT options after study completion. All participants who remained on treatment demonstrated marked improvements in psychosocial and clinical severity assessment scores, with some returning to employment or education. On-top drug use remained absent in group 1 and was reduced in group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation of transition of participants from daily OAT to PRB therapy was shown to be feasible, acceptable, and effective across both groups. A larger randomised controlled trial is warranted, particularly to assess PRB therapy in participants with a history of poor treatment engagement, as the need for therapy is greater in this group and their management is associated with higher costs of care.

Optimizing buprenorphine training during undergraduate medical education: Medical student feedback and attitudes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Strong evidence supports efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), but stringent prescribing policies impair access. Many physicians report discomfort prescribing MOUD due to inadequate knowledge. Most medical students believe MOUD training should occur during undergraduate medical education (UME). As legislation surrounding buprenorphine prescribing shifts, it is timely to consider how best to incorporate MOUD training into UME.

METHODS

At the start of 3rd year, all students (n = 290) received a survey regarding experiences working with people with OUDs, and beliefs and knowledge regarding harm reduction and treatment. During orientation, students completed an 8-h online MOUD training. Afterwards, students completed another survey, including questions about training perceptions.

RESULTS

One-third of students (32.8%) completed MOUD training and both surveys. Before training, 60.0% had not heard of the waiver, but 82.1% endorsed interest in prescribing buprenorphine. Despite mixed feelings about training content and delivery, 79.1% believed future classes should receive it. Most thought it should be integrated longitudinally throughout the curriculum rather than as separate online training.

CONCLUSION AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Medical students want more MOUD education throughout their training; however, the 8-h online training may be less-than-optimal. As this training is no longer required to prescribe buprenorphine, there is an opportunity to modify the content presented. There is an urgent need for physicians with the knowledge and willingness to treat patients with OUD. Introducing integrated training about MOUD should help future physicians feel confident in their knowledge to treat patients and comfortable applying for the waiver.

Brain circuits for maternal sensitivity and pain involving anterior cingulate cortex among mothers receiving buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder

Opioid-induced deficits in maternal behaviors are well-characterized in rodent models. Amid the current epidemic of opioid use disorder (OUD), prevalence among pregnant women has risen sharply. Yet, the roles of buprenorphine replacement treatment for OUD (BT/OUD) in the brain functions of postpartum mothers are unclear. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we have developed an evolutionarily conserved maternal behavior neurocircuit (MBN) model to study human maternal care versus defensive/aggressive behaviors critical to mother-child bonding. The anterior cingulate gyrus (ACC) is not only involved in the MBN for mother-child bonding and attachment, but also part of an opioid sensitive "pain-matrix". The literature suggests that prescription opioids produce physical and emotional "analgesic" effects by disrupting specific resting-state functional connectivity (rs-FC) of ACC to regions related to MBN. Thus, in this longitudinal study, we report findings of overlapping MBN and pain matrix circuits, for mothers with chronic exposure of BT/OUD. A total of 32 mothers were studied with 6 min rs-FC at 1 month (T1) and 4 months postpartum (T2), including seven on BT/OUD and 25 non-BT/OUD mothers as a comparison group. We analyzed rs-FC between the insula, putamen, and the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (DACC) and rostral ACC (RACC), as the regions of interest that mediate opioid analgesia. BT/OUD mothers, as compared to non-BT/OUD mothers, showed less left insula-RACC rs-FC but greater right putamen-DACC rs-FC at T1, with these between-group differences diminished at T2. Some of these rs-FC results were correlated with the scores of postpartum parental bonding questionnaire. We found time-by-treatment interaction effects on DACC and RACC-dependent rs-FC, potentially identifying brain mechanisms for beneficial effects of BT, normalizing dysfunction of maternal brain and behavior over the first four months postpartum. This study complements recent studies to ascertain how BT/OUD affects maternal behaviors, mother-child bonding, and intersubjectivity and reveals potential MBN/pain-matrix targets for novel interventions.

Prediction of subcutaneous drug absorption - characterization of subcutaneous interstitial fluids as a basis for developing biorelevant in vitro models

Unlike orally administered drugs, the absorption profile of subcutaneously injectable drugs in humans is difficult to predict from preclinical studies. Since the subcutaneous interstitial fluid (ISF) is the first fluid interacting with the administered formulation before the respective drug is absorbed, it could critically affect bioavailability. The aim of the present study was to gain a better understanding of the similarities and differences of ISF of different species. For this purpose, ISF was isolated from subcutaneous tissues of five preclinical animal species, i.e., mice, rats, minipig, landrace pig, non-human primates, and humans, using a centrifugation method, and characterized with respect to its major constituents and physicochemical properties. The results show trends between animal species, with ISF from non-human primates differing significantly from that of the other preclinical species for most parameters analyzed and showing similarities to ISF of human origin. Although from a statistical point of view it will be necessary to further increase the existing data sets, the presented data provide valuable information for the development of biorelevant in vitro models to predict the in vivo performance of subcutaneously administered formulations, as they provide fundamental information for the design of biorelevant ISF media for both preclinical species and humans.

In-vitro and in-vivo evaluation of sustained-release buprenorphine using in-situ forming lipid-liquid crystal gels

AIMS

Sustained-release systems reduce the incidence of drug side effects and the need for frequent drug consumption, thus increasing patient compliance with treatment. In this study, we aimed to produce sustained-release buprenorphine (BP) using lipid-liquid crystal gels.

MAIN METHODS

The three experimental groups in this study included: group I: lipid-liquid crystal formulation 5 (F5) containing BP, group II: BP-free F5, group III: BP solution in NMP, and group IV: control (no treatment). The formulations were injected subcutaneously into the rabbits' back neck.

KEY FINDINGS

The results showed that the time required to reach the drug's maximum concentration (T_max) was longer in group I than in group III. The maximum BP concentration (C_max) and the constants of the drug removal rate and drug absorption rate (K_a) were significantly higher in group III compared to group I. The half-life (t_1/2) of the drug in blood circulation was significantly longer in group I than in group III. Histopathological analysis revealed no histological abnormalities in the skin and heart in group I (BP-containing F5); however, mild hyperemia was observed in interstitial vessels in group III (BP-containing NMP). The kidney and liver tissues showed normal structure in the control group, as well as groups I and II. However, in the group receiving BP-containing NMP, significant congestion, tissue damage, necrosis, and fibrosis were observed in the kidney and liver.

SIGNIFICANCE

The results showed that the lipid-liquid crystal system can be used to design slow-release platforms for BP, minimizing the side effects associated with the use of its conventional forms.

History of the discovery, development, and FDA-approval of buprenorphine medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder

Buprenorphine-based medications were first approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2002 for the treatment of opioid dependence, or opioid use disorder (OUD) as the condition is presently known. This regulatory milestone was the outcome of 36 years of research and development, which also led to the development and approval of several other new buprenorphine-based medications. In this short review, we first describe the discovery and early development stages of buprenorphine. Second, we review key steps that led to the development of buprenorphine as a drug product. Third, we explain the regulatory approval of several buprenorphine-based medications for the treatment of OUD. We also discuss these developments in the context of the evolution of regulations and policies that have progressively improved OUD treatment availability and efficacy, although challenges remain in removing system-level, provider-level, and local-level barriers to quality treatment, to integrating OUD treatment into routine care and other settings, to reducing disparities in access to treatment, and to optimizing person-centered outcomes.

A novel long-acting formulation of oral buprenorphine/naloxone produces prolonged decreases in fentanyl self-administration by rhesus monkeys

BACKGROUND

Due to the poor oral bioavailability of buprenorphine, an oral formulation has not been thought possible. Lyndra Therapeutics is developing a once-weekly long-acting oral product containing buprenorphine. We evaluated the efficacy of this formulation in reducing intravenous (i.v.) fentanyl self-administration by three male and three female rhesus monkeys.

METHODS

Buprenorphine HCl and naloxone HCl were co-formulated using an 11:1 ratio of buprenorphine:naloxone in a controlled-release gastric residence formulation administered in an oral capsule (LYN-013). Naloxone was included to determine the feasibility of combining naloxone with buprenorphine in the formulation as an abuse deterrent. Complete fentanyl dose-response functions were determined during each session. The efficacy of single doses of 56/5, 112/10 and 168/15 mg buprenorphine/naloxone in reducing fentanyl self-administration was examined over 13 days.

RESULTS

LYN-013 significantly decreased the rate of responding for fentanyl for 3 days and significantly reduced total intake of fentanyl for 8 days. Time to maximal buprenorphine levels (Tmax) ranged between 56 and 68 h for all 3 doses. The maximal buprenorphine level (Cmax) following 168 mg was 2.3 ng/ml which was significantly greater that those observed for 56 mg (1.22 ng/ml) and 112 mg (1.35 ng/ml). Finally, the area-under-curves (AUCtau) were buprenorphine dose-dependently increased from 88 to 127-265 h*ng/ml. There were no signs of non-specific changes in behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

A once-weekly oral buprenorphine/naloxone formulation produced sustained suppression of fentanyl self-administration in monkeys suggesting that oral delivery of buprenorphine with this formulation could provide a new opportunity to treat opioid use disorders (OUD).

Buprenorphine and its formulations: a comprehensive review

Buprenorphine, a novel long-acting analgesic, was developed with the intention of two purposes: analgesia and opioid use disorder. Regarding its pharmacodynamics, it is a partial agonist at mu receptors, an inverse agonist at kappa receptors, and an antagonist at delta receptors. For the purpose of analgesia, three formulations of buprenorphine were developed: IV/IM injectable formulation (Buprenex®), transdermal patch formulation (Butrans®), and buccal film formulation (Belbuca®). Related to opioid dependence, the formulations developed were subcutaneous extended release (Sublocade®), subdermal implant (Probuphine®), and sublingual tablets (Subutex®). Lastly, in order to avoid misuse of buprenorphine for opioid dependence, two combination formulations paired with naloxone were developed: film formulation (Suboxone®) and tablet formulation (Zubsolv®). In this review, we present details of each formulation along with their similarities and differences between each other and clinical considerations.

Reduced Child-Oriented Face Mirroring Brain Responses in Mothers With Opioid Use Disorder: An Exploratory Study

While the prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD) among pregnant women has multiplied in the United States in the last decade, buprenorphine treatment (BT) for peripartum women with OUD has been administered to reduce risks of repeated cycles of craving and withdrawal. However, the maternal behavior and bonding in mothers with OUD may be altered as the underlying maternal behavior neurocircuit (MBN) is opioid sensitive. In the regulation of rodent maternal behaviors such as licking and grooming, a series of opioid-sensitive brain regions are functionally connected, including the ventral pallidum (VP). In humans, these brain regions, interact with the supplementary motor area (SMA) to regulate maternal behaviors and are functionally dysregulated by opioids. It is unclear how these brain regions respond to the emotions of their child for mothers receiving BT. In this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) pilot study in 22 mothers within the first postpartum year, including six mothers receiving BT and 16 non-OUD mothers as a comparison group (CG), we devised a child face mirroring task in fMRI settings to assess maternal responses to pictures of facial expressions of own child and an unknown child in an empathic mirroring condition (Join) and a non-mirroring observation condition (Observe). In each condition, faces of neutral, ambiguous, distressed, and joyful expressions of each child were repeatedly displayed in a random order. The response of SMA during empathic mirroring (Join) vs. non-mirroring (Observe) of own child was reduced among BT/OUD vs. CG. Within MBN, the left VP, critical for parental sensitivity, had a similar deficit. This study outlines potential mechanisms for investigating the risks of deficits in the neural responses to actual maternal sensitivity and parenting behavior in mothers with OUD, and potential targets for interventions that reduce stress and augment maternal behavior and child outcome.

Perioperative Opioids, the Opioid Crisis, and the Anesthesiologist

This review summarizes current evidence related to perioperative opioid prescription fulfillment and use and discusses the role of personalized anesthesia care in mitigating opioid-related harms without compromising analgesia.

Transition From Full Mu Opioid Agonists to Buprenorphine in Opioid Dependent Patients-A Critical Review

Methadone, a full opioid agonist at the mu-, kappa-, and delta-receptor, and buprenorphine, a partial agonist at the mu receptor, are first-line medications in opioid maintenance treatment. Transition from methadone to buprenorphine may precipitate withdrawal, and no accepted algorithm for this procedure has been developed. Current treatment strategies recommend transfer from methadone to buprenorphine predominantly in patients at low doses of methadone (30-40 mg/day). There are some reports indicating that transition from higher doses of methadone may be possible. A number of dosing strategies have been proposed to soften withdrawal symptoms and facilitate transfer including use of other opioids or medications and especially microdosing techniques for buprenorphine. The case series and studies available thus far are reviewed.

Diversity inclusion in United States opioid pharmacological treatment trials: A systematic review

Pharmacological treatments for opioid use disorders (OUDs) may have mixed efficacy across diverse groups, i.e., sex/gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES). The present systematic review aims to examine how diverse groups have been included in U.S. randomized clinical trials examining pharmacological treatments (i.e., methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone) for OUDs. PubMed was systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The initial search yielded 567 articles. After exclusion of ineligible articles, 50 remained for the present review. Of the included articles, 14.0% (n = 7) reported both full (i.e., accounting for all participants) sex/gender and race/ethnicity information; only two of those articles also included information about any SES indicators. Moreover, only 22.0% (n = 11) reported full sex/gender information, and 42.0% (n = 21) reported full racial/ethnic information. Furthermore, only 10.0% (n = 5) reported that their lack of subgroup analyses or diverse samples was a limitation to their studies. Particularly underrepresented were American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN), Asian, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (NH/OPI), and multiracial individuals. These results also varied by medication type; Black individuals were underrepresented in buprenorphine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but were well represented in RCTs for methadone and/or naltrexone. In conclusion, it is critical that all people receive efficacious pharmacological care for OUDs given the ongoing opioid epidemic. Findings from the present review, however, support that participants from diverse or marginalized backgrounds are underrepresented in treatment trials, despite being at increased risk for disparities related to OUDs. Suggestions for future research are advanced. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Recent advances in the treatment of opioid use disorders–focus on long-acting buprenorphine formulations

Oral methadone or sublingual buprenorphine are first-line medications for pharmacotherapy of opioid use disorders (OUDs). Three long-acting buprenorphine depot or implant formulations are currently available for the treatment of OUDs: (1) CAM 2038 (Buvidal) for subcutaneous weekly and monthly application; (2) RBP-6000 (Sublocade™) as a monthly depot formulation; and (3) A six-month buprenorphine implant [Probuphine™]. The pharmacology, clinical efficacy and prospects of these medications are discussed.

Transition from methadone to subcutaneous buprenorphine depot in patients with opioid use disorder in custodial setting - a case series

BACKGROUND

Methadone, a full opioid agonist, and buprenorphine, a partial agonist at the opioid receptor, are established first-line medications for opioid maintenance therapy. Transition from methadone to sublingual buprenorphine may precipitate withdrawal and is usually performed only in patients on low dose of methadone (<30-40 mg). Transition from methadone to a novel subcutaneous buprenorphine depot (Buvidal) has not been previously described.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that a rapid transition from methadone to buprenorphine depot after a single dose of buprenorphine 4 mg sublingual is safe and well tolerated.

METHODS

Retrospective chart analysis of a case series of seven opioid users under custodial setting (prison) who were switched from methadone to buprenorphine depot (initial dose 16 mg weekly subcutaneously) after an initial test dose of buprenorphine 4 mg sublingual within 48 hours.

RESULTS

Clinical data indicate that a rapid transition from methadone to depot buprenorphine is feasible (six patients within 48 hours, one within 4 days). All patients were successfully switched to buprenorphine depot and the transfer period was completed without dropouts or major medical problems. Further dose adjustments were performed in 4 of 7 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Transition of opioid users from methadone to buprenorphine depot is feasible and safe via 4 mg buprenorphine sublingual. This procedure may facilitate induction of buprenorphine depot formulations in patients treated with methadone.

The impact of current opioid agonist therapy on hepatitis C virus treatment initiation among people who use drugs from in the DAA era: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

Evidence that opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is associated with increased odds of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment initiation among people who use drugs (PWUD) is emerging. The objective of this study was to determine the association between current OAT and HCV treatment initiation among PWUD in a population-level linked administrative dataset.

METHODS

The British Columbia (BC) Hepatitis Testers Cohort was used for this study, which includes all people tested for or diagnosed with HCV in BC, linked to medical visits, hospitalizations, laboratory, prescription drug, and mortality data from 1992 until 2019. PWUD with injecting drug use or opioid use disorder and chronic HCV infection were identified for inclusion in this study. HCV treatment initiation was the main outcome, and subdistribution proportional hazards modeling was used to assess the relationship with current OAT.

RESULTS

13,803 PWUD with chronic HCV were included in this study. Among those currently on OAT at the end of the study period, 47% (2,704/5,770) had started HCV treatment, whereas 22% (1778/8033) of those not currently on OAT has started HCV treatment .. Among PWUD with chronic HCV infection, current OAT was associated with higher likelihood of HCV treatment initiation in time to event analysis (adjusted hazard ratio 1.84 [95%CI, 1.50, 2.26]).

CONCLUSIONS

Current OAT was associated with a higher likelihood of HCV treatment initiation. However, many PWUD with HCV currently receiving OAT have yet to receive HCV treatment. Enhanced integration between substance use care and HCV treatment is needed to improve the overall health of PWUD.

New Approaches in Drug Dependence: Opioids

Purpose of Review

This article aims to provide an overview of standard and adjunctive treatment options in opioid dependence in consideration of therapy-refractory courses. The relevance of oral opioid substitution treatment (OST) and measures of harm reduction as well as heroin-assisted therapies are discussed alongside non-pharmacological approaches.

Recent Findings

Currently, recommendation can be given for OST with methadone, buprenorphine, slow-release oral morphine (SROM), and levomethadone. Heroin-assisted treatment using diamorphine shall be considered as a cost-effective alternative for individuals not responding to the afore-mentioned opioid agonists in order to increase retention and reduce illicit opioid use. The modalities of application and the additional benefits of long-acting formulations of buprenorphine should be sufficiently transferred to clinicians and the eligible patients; simultaneously methods to improve planning of actions and self- management need to be refined. Regarding common primary outcomes in research on opioid treatment, evidence of the effectiveness of adjunctive psychological interventions is scarce.

Summary

Maintaining a harm reduction approach in the treatment of opioid addiction, a larger range of formulations is available for the prescribers. Embedding the pharmacological, ideally individualized treatment into a holistic, structure-giving concept also requires a reduction of fragmentation of ancillary services available, drug policies, and treatment philosophies on a global scale.

Real-world outcomes with extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) in a low threshold bridge clinic: A retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

In clinical trial settings, extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) is noninferior to sublingual buprenorphine and may offer some advantages. However, real-world experiences of XR-BUP are limited and outcomes are unknown for low-threshold clinics with high-risk populations. Practical guidance is lacking on overcoming treatment challenges, such as inability for some to stabilize on sublingual (SL) BUP for seven days prior to XR-BUP and ongoing craving/withdrawal symptoms during treatment.

METHODS

Retrospective case series of a convenience sample of 40 serial adults with opioid use disorder (OUD) treated with XR-BUP from Massachusetts General Hospital bridge clinic from February 1, 2019, to July 31, 2019.

RESULTS

Patients were mostly male (67.5%), non-Hispanic white (97.5%), unstably housed (77.5%), and average age of 32.1 years old. The average SL BUP dose prior to XR-BUP was 18.6 mg (standard deviation [SD] = 5; range 8-32) for an average treatment duration of 105 days (SD = 191; range 1-810). Ten (25%) patients received SL BUP for fewer than the seven recommended days (mean = 3.7, SD = 1.4, range = 1-6). Standard induction dosing was administered to 30%, empiric high-dose XR-BUP (300 mg monthly) was administered to 25%, and 55% were treated with supplemental SL BUP ranging from 4 to24mg, daily or as needed, for varying time periods. At the end of data collection, 65% remained on XR-BUP, 30% discontinued XR-BUP, and one patient was lost to follow-up. Acute care utilization rates were similar between patients who continued XR-BUP versus discontinued at 18.5% and 16.6%, respectively (χ² = 0.02, p-value = 0.89). Toxicology was negative for other opioids in 65% of patients throughout treatment. There were no reports of overdose, withdrawal after use of opioids, or precipitated withdrawal after subsequent XR-BUP. Patients' most cited reason for discontinuing XR-BUP was a preference for SL BUP.

CONCLUSION

This real-world evaluation of XR-BUP in a low-threshold clinic found that treatment was feasible, well tolerated, and outcomes were good, with most individuals choosing to continue treatment and a majority with no evidence of ongoing opioid use or precipitated withdrawal.

Drug eluting implants in pharmaceutical development and clinical practice

Introduction: Drug eluting implants offer patient convenience and improved compliance through less frequent dosing, eliminating repeated, painful injections and providing localized, site specific delivery with applications in contraception, ophthalmology, and oncology.Areas covered: This review provides an overview of available implant products, design approaches, biodegradable and non-biodegradable polymeric materials, and fabrication techniques with a focus on commercial applications and industrial drug product development. Developing trends in the field, including expanded availability of suitable excipients, development of novel materials, scaled down manufacturing process, and a wider understanding of the implant development process are discussed and point to opportunities for differentiated drug eluting implant products.Expert opinion: In the future, long-acting implants will be important clinical tools for prophylaxis and treatment of global health challenges, especially for infectious diseases, to reduce the cost and difficulty of treating chronic indications, and to prolong local delivery in difficult to administer parts of the body. These products will help improve patient safety, adherence, and comfort.

Factors of Interest in Extended-Release Buprenorphine: Comparisons Between Incarcerated and Non-Incarcerated Patients with Opioid Use Disorder

PURPOSE

Extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) covers a range of formulations of buprenorphine-based treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) that release the medication over a period of one week, one month, or six months. OUD is particularly prevalent among incarcerated populations, and previous findings have shown that incarcerated subjects were not less interested in XR-BUP than non-incarcerated subjects. However, no study has ever investigated whether the factors of interest in XR-BUP were similar in incarcerated and non-incarcerated populations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We carried out post-hoc analyses using data from the "AMBRE" survey, which was conducted among 366 individuals with OUD, that were recruited in 68 French addiction settings, including six prison medical centers. The reasons for interest in XR-BUP were compared between incarcerated and non-incarcerated interviewees, using logistic regressions models, which provided raw and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Adjustment variables were gender, age category, level of education, and type of current medication for OUD, respectively.

RESULTS

Data from 317 participants (ie, 221 non-incarcerated, and 96 incarcerated individuals) were included in the analyses. Adjusted comparisons found that "no longer taking a daily treatment" (aOR= 2.91; 95% CI= 1.21-6.98) and "having a more discreet medication" (aOR= 1.76; 95% CI= 1.01-3.10) were reasons that appealed more to incarcerated participants than to non-incarcerated ones. On the other hand, the potential reduction of withdrawal symptoms (aOR= 0.54; 95% CI= 0.29-0.99) or the risk of misuse (aOR= 0.56; 95% CI= 0.34-0.94) associated with XR-BUP treatment were considered more important by non-incarcerated individuals than by incarcerated ones.

CONCLUSION

Incarcerated interviewees were interested in XR-BUP for different reasons than those outside prison. In particular, incarcerated patients were more interested in practicability and discretion features, and less in improving recovery or reducing misuse than non-incarcerated patients.

The changing opioid crisis: development, challenges and opportunities

The current opioid epidemic is one of the most severe public health crisis in US history. Responding to it has been difficult due to its rapidly changing nature and the severity of its associated outcomes. This review examines the origin and evolution of the crisis, the pharmacological properties of opioids, the neurobiology of opioid use and opioid use disorder (OUD), medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and existing and promising approaches to prevention. The results of the review indicate that the opioid epidemic is a complex, evolving phenomenon that involves neurobiological vulnerabilities and social determinants of health. Successfully addressing the epidemic will require advances in basic science, development of more acceptable and effective treatments, and implementation of public health approaches, including prevention. The advances achieved in addressing the current crisis should also serve to advance the science and treatment of other substance use disorders.

Retention Strategies for Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Adults: A Rapid Evidence Review

OBJECTIVES

Although medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) save lives, treatment retention remains challenging. Identification of interventions to improve MOUD retention is of interest to policymakers and researchers. On behalf of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, we conducted a rapid evidence review on interventions to improve MOUD retention.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library from February 2009 through August 2019 for systematic reviews and randomized trials of care settings, services, logistical support, contingency management, health information technology (IT), extended-release (XR) formulations, and psychosocial interventions that assessed retention at least 3 months.

RESULTS

Two systematic reviews and 39 primary studies were included; most did not focus on retention as the primary outcome. Initiating MOUD in soon-to-be-released incarcerated people improved retention following release. Contingency management may improve retention using antagonist but not agonist MOUD. Retention with interventions integrating medical, psychiatric, social services, or IT did not differ from in-person treatment-as-usual approaches. Retention was comparable with XR- compared to daily buprenorphine formulations and conflicting with XR-naltrexone monthly injection compared to daily buprenorphine. Most psychosocial interventions did not improve retention.

DISCUSSION

Consistent but sparse evidence supports criminal justice prerelease MOUD initiation, and contingency management interventions for antagonist MOUD. Integrating MOUD with medical, psychiatric, social services, delivering through IT, or administering via XR-MOUD formulations did not worsen retention. Fewer than half of the studies we identified focused on retention as a primary outcome. Studies used different measures of retention, making it difficult to compare effectiveness. Additional inquiry into the causes of low retention would inform future interventions.Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42019134739.

Systematic benefit-risk assessment for buprenorphine implant: a semiquantitative method to support risk management

BACKGROUND

Prior to approval in the European Union, a systematic benefit-risk assessment was required to compare buprenorphine implant to sublingual buprenorphine as part of the license application to the European Medicines Agency.

OBJECTIVE

The Benefit-Risk Action Team framework was used to describe the overall benefit-risk of buprenorphine implant in comparison to sublingual buprenorphine.

STUDY SELECTION/METHODS

A value tree of key benefits and risks related to the implant formulation of buprenorphine was constructed. Risk differences (RD) or reporting ORs (ROR) and corresponding 95% CIs were calculated for each outcome, along with the number needed to treat and number needed to harm. Swing weighting was assigned to outcomes and the weighted net clinical benefit (wNCB) was calculated.

FINDINGS

Key benefits assessed: reduced risk of illicit opioid use (RD=0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.17), reduced risk of misuse and diversion (ROR=0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.94), improved compliance and convenience (RD=0.20) and quality of life measures (RD=0.03). Key risks assessed: clinically significant implant breakage (RD=0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.01), migration/missing implant (RD=0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.02), infection at insertion/removal site (RD=0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.12) and implant-related allergic reaction (RD=0.07, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.11). The wNCB for buprenorphine implant was 4.96, which suggests a favourable benefit-risk profile.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit-risk profile of buprenorphine implant is considered favourable in comparison to sublingual buprenorphine, based on this semiquantitative analysis using available data. Further data from real-world use on benefits and risks should be used for ongoing monitoring of the benefit-risk profile of buprenorphine implants in the postmarketing setting.

Novel Long-Acting Buprenorphine Medications for Opioid Dependence: Current Update

Opioid maintenance treatment with oral methadone or sublingual buprenorphine is the first-line treatment in opioid dependence. Three novel long-acting buprenorphine formulations have been approved or will be available soon: for subcutaneous weekly and monthly application, the depot formulations CAM 2038 (Buvidal^®), the monthly depot formulation RBP-6000 (Sublocade™), and a 6-month buprenorphine implant (Probuphine™). Clinical data available so far on the efficacy of these 3 medications are given, and possible clinical implications are discussed.

Perceptions of extended-release buprenorphine injections for opioid use disorder among people who regularly use opioids in Australia

AIMS

To examine perceptions of extended-release (XR) buprenorphine injections among people who regularly use opioids in Australia.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey prior to implementation. XR-buprenorphine was registered in Australia in November 2018.

SETTING

Sydney, Melbourne and Hobart. Participants A total of 402 people who regularly use opioids interviewed December 2017 to March 2018.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcome concerned the proportion of participants who believed XR-buprenorphine would be a good treatment option for them, preferred weekly versus monthly injections and perceived advantages/disadvantages of XR-buprenorphine. Independent variables concerned the demographic characteristics and features of current opioid agonist treatment (OAT; medication-type, dose, prescriber/dosing setting, unsupervised doses, out-of-pocket expenses and travel distance).

FINDINGS

Sixty-eight per cent [95% confidence interval (CI) = 63-73%] believed XR-buprenorphine was a good treatment option for them. They were more likely to report being younger [26-35 versus > 55 years; odds ratio (OR) = 3.16, 95% CI = 1.12-8.89; P = 0.029], being female (OR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.04-2.69; P = 0.034), < 10 years school education (OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.12-3.12; P = 0.016) and past-month heroin (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.15-2.85; P = 0.006) and methamphetamine use (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.20-3.01; P = 0.006). Fifty-four per cent reported no preference for weekly versus monthly injections, 7% preferred weekly and 39% preferred monthly. Among OAT recipients (n = 255), believing XR-buprenorphine was a good treatment option was associated with shorter treatment episodes (1-2 versus ≥ 2 years; OR = 3.93, 95% CI = 1.26-12.22; P = 0.018), fewer unsupervised doses (≤ 8 doses past-month versus no take-aways; OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.27-0.93; P = 0.028) and longer travel distance (≥ 5 versus < 5 km; OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.20-3.65; P = 0.009). Sixty-nine per cent reported 'no problems or concerns' with potential differences in availability, flexibility and location of XR-buprenorphine.

CONCLUSIONS

Among regular opioid users in Australia, perceptions of extended-release buprenorphine as a good treatment option are associated with being female, recent illicit drug use and factors relating to the (in)convenience of current opioid agonist treatment.

New directions in the treatment of opioid withdrawal

The treatment of opioid withdrawal is an important area of clinical concern when treating patients with chronic, non-cancer pain, patients with active opioid use disorder, and patients receiving medication for opioid use disorder. Current standards of care for medically supervised withdrawal include treatment with μ-opioid receptor agonists, (eg, methadone), partial agonists (eg, buprenorphine), and α2-adrenergic receptor agonists (eg, clonidine and lofexidine). Newer agents likewise exploit these pharmacological mechanisms, including tramadol (μ-opioid receptor agonism) and tizanidine (α2 agonism). Areas for future research include managing withdrawal in the context of stabilising patients with opioid use disorder to extended-release naltrexone, transitioning patients with opioid use disorder from methadone to buprenorphine, and tapering opioids in patients with chronic, non-cancer pain.

[Prolonged-release buprenorphine formulations: Perspectives for clinical practice]

Buprenorphine and methadone are the two main opioids agonist treatments approved for opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine is a partial agonist of the mu-opioid receptors, which has been merely available through sublingual form until now. In practice, the use of buprenorphine is smoother than that of methadone, and it induces reduced risks of overdose. However, sublingual buprenorphine also exposes to risks (e.g., withdrawal, misuse) and constraints (e.g., daily intake). Three new galenic formulations of prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) are being commercialized and should allow some improvements in patients' comfort and safety. This narrative review aims to describe the main technical features and efficacy and safety data of these PRBs, as well as patients' and professionals' expectancies and concerns, using data of the scientific literature and the regulatory texts. PRBs consist of one subcutaneous implant and two subcutaneous injection depots. Sixmo®/Probuphine® is a six-month-long implant which needs to be surgically placed and removed and is approved for subjects previously treated with a maximum daily dose of 8mg of sublingual buprenorphine, and can be used only for two successive periods of six months before the subject needs to be switched back to sublingual form. Sublocade® is a one-month-long depot formulation that is indicated in switch from sublingual buprenorphine, and which proposes only two dose schemes, i.e., 100 and 300mg monthly. Buvidal®/Brixadi® is a one-week- or one-month-long depot formulation with multiple dosages, which can be used in initiation or in switched from sublingual formulations. While opioid users report some concerns with a risk of coercive use of long-acting forms of buprenorphine, both users and professionals deem that these new specialties could be particularly appreciated in stabilized patients bothered with the daily intake of the treatments, or specific situations at risk of treatment dropout (e.g., following hospital discharge or prison release).

Prolonged-release buprenorphine formulations: Perspectives for clinical practice

Buprenorphine and methadone are the two main opioid agonist treatments approved for opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine is a partial agonist of the mu opioid receptors, which has been merely available through sublingual form until now. In practice, the use of buprenorphine is smoother than that of methadone, and it induces reduced risks of overdose. However, sublingual buprenorphine also exposes to risks (e.g., withdrawal, misuse) and constraints (e.g., daily intake). Three new galenic formulations of prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) are being commercialized and should allow some improvements in patients' comfort and safety. This narrative review aims to describe the main technical features and efficacy and safety data of these PRBs, as well as patients' and professionals' expectancies and concerns, using data of the scientific literature and the regulatory texts. PRBs consist of one subcutaneous implant and two subcutaneous injection depots. Sixmo®/Probuphine® is a six-month-long implant which needs to be surgically placed and removed and is approved for subjects previously treated with a maximum daily dose of 8mg of sublingual buprenorphine, and can be used only for two successive periods of six months before the subject needs to be switched back to sublingual form. Sublocade® is a one-month-long depot formulation that is indicated in switch from sublingual buprenorphine, and which proposes only two dose schemes, i.e., 100 and 300mg monthly. Buvidal®/Brixadi® is a one-week- or one-month-long depot formulation with multiple dosages, which can be used in initiation or in switched from sublingual formulations. While opioid users report some concerns with a risk of coercive use of long-acting forms of buprenorphine, both users and professionals deem that these new specialties could be particularly appreciated in stabilized patients bothered with the daily intake of the treatments, or specific situations at risk of treatment dropout (e.g., following hospital discharge or prison release).

A Literature Review Examining Primary Outcomes of Medication Treatment Studies for Opioid Use Disorder: What Outcome Should Be Used to Measure Opioid Treatment Success?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduce opioid use and overdose; however, MOUD clinical trials have used varying primary outcomes to document treatment success. We conducted a literature review to assess and critically examine the methodologies used in MOUD treatment studies.

METHODS

Published studies in English that examined MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, or extended-release naltrexone) were included (N = 20). The methods and frequencies of measuring primary opioid outcomes, including urine drug tests (UDTs) and self-report of opioid use were compared among studies.

RESULTS

A total of 20 studies fit the inclusion criteria. Each study assessed opioid use; only 12 had opioid use as a primary outcome. Other primary outcomes included retention in treatment (N = 6), and two had other primary outcomes (death and opioid withdrawal symptoms). Opioid use was assessed through both self-report and UDTs in 15 studies. Two studies did not use UDTs. Differences were found in the methods used for how opioid use, retention in treatment, self-report of opioid use, and UDTs were measured.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The different primary outcomes used and operational definitions in each study make comparisons between studies difficult. The use of both self-report and UDTs for opioid use has several advantages, and if possible, researchers should use both measures.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This is the first review critically examining outcome measures from MOUD treatment studies. Creating a standard for opioid treatment outcomes in MOUD studies will allow for generalizable results that can inform both researchers and clinicians to better care for those with OUD. (Am J Addict 2020;00:00-00).

Buprenorphine Pharmacology Review: Update on Transmucosal and Long-acting Formulations

: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder. As a high-affinity, partial agonist for the mu-opioid receptor, buprenorphine suppresses opioid withdrawal and craving, reduces illicit opioid use, and blocks exogenous opioid effects including respiratory depression. Other pharmacologic benefits of buprenorphine are its superior safety profile compared with full opioid agonists and its long half-life that allows daily or less-than-daily dosing. New and innovative buprenorphine formulations, with pharmacokinetic profiles that differ from the original tablet formulation, continue to be developed. These include higher bioavailability transmucosal tablets and films and also 6-month implantable and monthly injectable products. This growing array of available formulations allows more choices for patients and increased opportunity for clinicians to individualize treatment; thus, it is important for buprenorphine prescribers to understand these differences.

Substance Use Disorder Assessment, Diagnosis, and Management for Patients Hospitalized With Severe Infections Due to Injection Drug Use

OBJECTIVES

Persons with injection drug use (IDU) have high healthcare utilization. Consequently, healthcare providers have opportunities to identify and treat underlying substance use disorders (SUD) that drive these hospitalizations. The study purpose was to characterize current SUD evaluation and treatment practices by primary and consulting services during hospitalization for severe infections related to IDU.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective chart review of inpatient admissions to an academic medical center. The 2 inclusion criteria were documentation of IDU in clinical notes and the presence of an infection likely related to IDU. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 108 inpatient admissions met inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The most common infections related to IDU were endocarditis (n = 65, 60.2%) and osteomyelitis (n = 27, 25.0%). The primary team explicitly documented substance use in the H&P and progress notes in 103 (95.4%) hospitalizations and in 84 (77.8%) at discharge. Opioid use disorder was coded by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision in 62 (57.4%). The most frequent intervention was screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment in 99 (91.7%) episodes. The vast majority of patients did not have specific plans or recommendations for SUD treatment upon discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Though more than half of the patients in this study had opioid use disorder, pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder was typically not provided, and screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) was the most common intervention. There are significant gaps in the clinical assessment, diagnosis, and management of SUD in persons hospitalized with life-threatening complications of IDU, leaving many opportunities to improve care for this complex patient population.

Differences in Availability and Use of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Residential Treatment Settings in the United States

IMPORTANCE

While many individuals with opioid use disorder seek treatment at residential facilities to initiate long-term recovery, the availability and use of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) in these facilities is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To examine differences in MOUD availability and use in residential facilities as a function of Medicaid policy, facility-level factors associated with MOUD availability, and admissions-level factors associated with MOUD use.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used deidentified facility-level and admissions-level data from 2863 residential treatment facilities and 232 414 admissions in the United States in 2017. Facility-level data were extracted from the 2017 National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services, and admissions-level data were extracted from the 2017 Treatment Episode Data Set-Admissions. Statistical analyses were conducted from June to November 2019.

EXPOSURES

Admissions for opioid use disorder at residential treatment facilities in the United States that identified opioids as the patient's primary drug of choice.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Availability and use of 3 MOUDs (ie, extended-release naltrexone, buprenorphine, and methadone).

RESULTS

Of 232 414 admissions, 205 612 (88.5%) contained complete demographic data (166 213 [80.8%] aged 25-54 years; 136 854 [66.6%] men; 151 867 [73.9%] white). Among all admissions, MOUDs were used in only 34 058 of 192 336 (17.7%) in states that expanded Medicaid and 775 of 40 078 (1.9%) in states that did not expand Medicaid (P < .001). A relatively low percentage of the 2863 residential treatment facilities in this study offered extended-release naltrexone (854 [29.8%]), buprenorphine (953 [33.3%]), or methadone (60 [2.1%]). Compared with residential facilities that offered at least 1 MOUD, those that offered no MOUDs had lower odds of also offering psychiatric medications (odds ratio [OR], 0.06; 95% CI, 0.05-0.08; Wald χ21 = 542.09; P < .001), being licensed by a state or hospital authority (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27-0.57; Wald χ21 = 24.28; P < .001), or being accredited by a health organization (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.23-0.33; Wald χ21 = 180.91; P < .001). Residential facilities that did not offer any MOUDs had higher odds of accepting cash-only payments than those that offered at least 1 MOUD (OR, 4.80; 95% CI, 3.47-6.64; Wald χ21 = 89.65; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional study of residential addiction treatment facilities in the United States, MOUD availability and use were sparse. Public health and policy efforts to improve access to and use of MOUDs in residential treatment facilities could improve treatment outcomes for individuals with opioid use disorder who are initiating recovery.

Pharmacokinetics of Sublingual Buprenorphine Tablets Following Single and Multiple Doses in Chinese Participants With and Without Opioid Use Disorder

Background

Two phase I studies assessed the pharmacokinetics of buprenorphine, its metabolite norbuprenorphine, and naloxone following administration of buprenorphine/naloxone sublingual tablets in Chinese participants.

Methods

In the first phase I, open-label, single ascending-dose (SAD) study, 82 opioid-naïve volunteers received a single buprenorphine/naloxone dose ranging from 2 mg/0.5 mg to 24 mg/6 mg while under naltrexone block. In a second phase I, open-label, multiple ascending-dose (MAD) study, 27 patients with opioid dependence in withdrawal received buprenorphine/naloxone doses of either 16 mg/4 mg or 24 mg/6 mg for 9 consecutive days. Serial blood samples were collected after a single dose (SAD study) and at steady-state (MAD study). Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis. Safety assessments included adverse events monitoring and laboratory tests.

Results

The pharmacokinetic profiles of buprenorphine and naloxone were consistent between single- and multiple-dose studies. Peak plasma concentrations (C_max) were reached early for buprenorphine (0.75–1.0 h) and naloxone (0.5 h), supporting rapid absorption. In the SAD study, increases in plasma exposures to buprenorphine and naloxone were less than dose proportional, in line with previous observations in Western populations. Buprenorphine-to-naloxone ratios for C_max and area under the curve (AUC) were constant over the dose range investigated and also consistent with Western populations data. Steady state was reached within 7 days of daily dosing, with slight accumulation over repeated doses. No serious adverse events were observed.

Conclusions

The present data suggest that buprenorphine/naloxone pharmacokinetic profiles in Chinese participants are consistent, overall, with those in Western populations, supporting no differences in dosing.

Clinical Trial Registration

The protocols were registered on the official website of the China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA): http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/; Registration numbers CTR20132963 (RB-CN-10-0012), CTR20140153 (RB-CN-10-0015).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40268-019-0277-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Perceptions and preferences for long-acting injectable and implantable medications in comparison to short-acting medications for opioid use disorders

Aim

Treatment for opioid use disorders has recently evolved to include long-acting injectable and implantable formulations of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Incorporating patient preferences into treatment for substance use disorders is associated with increased motivation and treatment satisfaction. This study sought to assess treatment preferences for long-acting injectable and implantable MOUD as compared to short-acting formulations among individuals with OUD.

Methods

We conducted qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with forty adults recruited from across the United States through Craigslist advertisements and flyers posted in treatment programs. Eligible participants scored a two or greater on the heroin or opioid pain reliever sections of the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medications, and Other Substances (TAPS) Tool, indicative of a past-year OUD. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed.

Results

Twenty-four participants (60%) currently or previously had been prescribed MOUD. Sixteen participants (40%) expressed general opposition to MOUD, citing concerns that MOUD is purely financial gain for pharmaceutical companies and/or a "band aid" solution replacing one drug with another, rather than a path to abstinence. Some participants expressed personal preference for long-acting injectable (n = 16/40: 40%) and implantable formulations (n = 12/40: 30%) over short-acting formulations. About half of the participants were not willing to use injectables (n = 19/40: 48%) or implantables (n = 22/40: 55%), preferring short-acting formulations. Mixed evaluations of long- and short-acting MOUD focused on considerations of medication-related beliefs (privacy, concern over an embedded foreign body), the medication-related burden (convenience, provision of structure and support, medication administration, potential side effects), and medication-taking practices (potential for non-prescribed use, control over dosage, and duration of treatment).

Conclusions

Though many participants personally prefer short-acting to long-acting MOUD, some were open to including long-acting formulations in the range of options for those with OUD. Participants felt long-acting formulations may reduce medication-related burden and the risk of diversion. Conversely, participants expressed concern about invasive administration and loss of control over their treatment. Results suggest support for expanded access to a variety of formulations of MOUD. The use of shared decision making may also help patients select the formulation best aligned with their experiences, values, and treatment goals.

Opioid use disorder

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a chronic relapsing disorder that, whilst initially driven by activation of brain reward neurocircuits, increasingly engages anti-reward neurocircuits that drive adverse emotional states and relapse. However, successful recovery is possible with appropriate treatment, although with a persisting propensity to relapse. The individual and public health burdens of OUD are immense; 26.8 million people were estimated to be living with OUD globally in 2016, with >100,000 opioid overdose deaths annually, including >47,000 in the USA in 2017. Well-conducted trials have demonstrated that long-term opioid agonist therapy with methadone and buprenorphine have great efficacy for OUD treatment and can save lives. New forms of the opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone are also being studied. Some frequently used approaches have less scientifically robust evidence but are nevertheless considered important, including community preventive strategies, harm reduction interventions to reduce adverse sequelae from ongoing use and mutual aid groups. Other commonly used approaches, such as detoxification alone, lack scientific evidence. Delivery of effective prevention and treatment responses is often complicated by coexisting comorbidities and inadequate support, as well as by conflicting public and political opinions. Science has a crucial role to play in informing public attitudes and developing fuller evidence to understand OUD and its associated harms, as well as in obtaining the evidence today that will improve the prevention and treatment interventions of tomorrow.

Medications for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder among Persons Living with HIV

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent HIV outbreaks have occurred as a result of the current US opioid epidemic. Providing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with methadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release naltrexone is essential to achieving optimal HIV treatment outcomes including viral suppression and retention in treatment. This review describes the pharmacology of MOUD with specific attention to interactions with antiretroviral therapy, and to the effect of MOUD on HIV treatment outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Methadone and buprenorphine both improve HIV viral suppression, adherence to antiretroviral therapy, and overall mortality for persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). Extended-release naltrexone has been most extensively studied in persons with HIV leaving incarcerated settings, and improves HIV viral suppression in that context. Strategies that integrate MOUD and HIV treatment are crucial to optimize viral suppression. The differing pharmacokinetic and delivery characteristics of these MOUD offer diverse options. Given the chronic and relapsing nature of both HIV and OUD, long-term approaches are required.

Initiation of injectable opioid agonist treatment in hospital: A case report

Uncontrolled opioid withdrawal and pain often drive inpatients with opioid use disorder to leave hospital against medical advice, resulting in suboptimal medical and addiction treatment. When oral opioid agonist treatments such as methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone fail for management of craving and withdrawal, injectable opioid agonist treatment may serve to retain patients in care and link them to addiction services. We describe the case of a 47-year-old man with a severe, active opioid use disorder and daily use of illicitly manufactured fentanyl, who was re-admitted to hospital for post-operative management after leaving against medical advice due to uncontrolled opioid withdrawal. Intravenous hydromorphone was used to retain him in care, allowing for completion of his antibiotics and enrolment in ongoing community injectable opioid agonist treatment.