Opioid Overdose Deaths with Buprenorphine Detected in Postmortem Toxicology: a Retrospective Analysis

Randomised clinical trial of a 16 mg vs 24 mg maintenance daily dose of buprenorphine to increase retention in treatment among people with an opioid use disorder in Rhode Island: study protocol paper

INTRODUCTION

Buprenorphine is a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, provider observations and preliminary research suggest that the current standard maintenance dose may be insufficient for suppressing withdrawal and preventing cravings among people who use or have used fentanyl. Buprenorphine dosing guidelines were based on studies among people who use heroin and have not been formally re-evaluated since fentanyl became predominant in the unregulated drug supply. We aim to compare the effectiveness of a high (24 mg) vs standard (16 mg) maintenance daily dose of buprenorphine for improving retention in treatment, decreasing the use of non-prescribed opioids, preventing cravings and reducing opioid overdose risk in patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Adults who are initiating or continuing buprenorphine for moderate to severe OUD and have a recent history of fentanyl use (n=250) will be recruited at four outpatient substance use treatment clinics in Rhode Island. Patients continuing buprenorphine must be on doses of 16 mg or less and have ongoing fentanyl use to be eligible. Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either a high (24 mg) or standard (16 mg) maintenance daily dose, each with usual care, and followed for 12 months to evaluate outcomes. Providers will determine the buprenorphine initiation strategy, with the requirement that participants reach the study maintenance dose within 7 days of randomisation. Providers may adjust the maintenance dose, if clinically needed, for participant safety. The primary study outcome is retention in buprenorphine treatment at 6 months postrandomisation, measured using clinical and statewide administrative data. Other outcomes include non-prescribed opioid use and opioid cravings (secondary), as well as non-fatal or fatal opioid overdose (exploratory).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol was approved by the Brown Institutional Review Board (STUDY00000075). Results will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06316830.

Buprenorphine deaths confirmed by toxicology reveal a low proportion of opioid agonist treatment before death in Finland

We studied opioid agonist treatment (OAT) status before buprenorphine-related death in Finland, where buprenorphine is the principal OAT medicine and also the most misused opioid, through a retrospective population-based study using medico-legal cause-of-death investigation and OAT patient records. The study included all death cases (N = 570) between 2018 and 2020 with a buprenorphine or norbuprenorphine finding in post-mortem toxicology and with known drug misuse history or concomitant findings of illicit drugs. Of the deceased, 10% had received OAT in the year before death. Less than 1% of individuals < 25 years had received OAT, whereas the proportion in individuals ≥ 25 years was 13% (p < 0.001). There were significantly more females and more fatal poisonings (p < 0.001) among those < 25 years than among those ≥ 25 years. OAT medication at the time of death was sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone in 74% and subcutaneous buprenorphine in 23%. Except for significantly fewer benzodiazepine findings among those receiving OAT, minimal differences were found in terms of age, gender, cause and manner of death, or concomitant substance use between the deceased in and outside of OAT. Concomitant misuse of benzodiazepines, psychostimulants, alcohol, and gabapentinoids was frequent both in and outside of OAT and likely contributed to the death. These results suggest that access to OAT especially for young people and treatment of multiple addictions should be improved. Comprehensive information from medico-legal cause-of-death investigation as a starting point, combined with subsequent ante-mortem patient records, proved to be a successful approach to shed light on the Finnish scene of buprenorphine mortality.

Behavioural patterns and dangers: a mixed-methods exploration of simultaneous polysubstance use and intervention strategies among Swiss adolescents

BACKGROUND

Recent trends in Switzerland indicate a concerning rise in simultaneous polysubstance use among adolescents, a practice marked by the concurrent or sequential consumption of multiple psychoactive substances, notably alcohol and cannabis, alongside prescription medications (e.g. benzodiazepines) and illicit drugs, resulting in dozens of fatal outcomes. However, data on simultaneous polysubstance use and evidence-based approaches to effective prevention is lacking.

AIMS OF THE STUDY

The study aimed to explore and gain insights into use patterns, use settings, use motives, harm-reduction strategies, concerns associated with substance use, and support and counselling services from the point of view of adolescents practicing simultaneous polysubstance use in Switzerland.

METHODS

An exploratory study was conducted via an online survey (n = 116) and two focus group discussions with affected Swiss adolescents aged 14 to 20. A mixed-methods approach was applied to gain insights and better understand the phenomenon of simultaneous polysubstance use among Swiss adolescents. Quantitative survey data obtained between November 2021 and March 2023 by means of convenience sampling - organised by distributing flyers (in three national languages) among several project partners, on the internet, over social media and by word of mouth - was analysed descriptively, whereas qualitative survey data and focus group data were thematically explored. A concurrent nested design was employed, utilising quantitative findings as a core foundation for addressing research questions, while qualitative findings were instrumental in validating and providing contextual depth to the results.

RESULTS

Our findings reveal a preference of the sample for combining alcohol with cannabis and/or other substances (e.g. benzodiazepines or hard drugs) in social settings, driven by diverse motives, including enhancement of experiences and partly maladaptive coping mechanisms leading to self-medication. Despite some awareness of the potential harms, there is a significant reliance on peer-shared strategies for harm reduction, highlighting a gap in formal support and counselling services, some of which are perceived by adolescents as lacking empathy and relevance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study underscores the urgency of developing targeted, youth-centred interventions that resonate with the lived realities of adolescents, aiming not only to reduce substance use but also to address the broader psychosocial factors contributing to simultaneous polysubstance use. By shedding light on the complex dynamics of adolescent polysubstance use, our research contributes to the ongoing dialogue on effective prevention strategies, advocating for a holistic approach encompassing education, policy reform and community support to tackle this multifaceted public health challenge.

Composition of buprenorphine prescribing networks in Medicaid and association with quality of care

INTRODUCTION

Despite Medicaid's outsized role in delivering and financing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), little is known about the extent to which buprenorphine prescriber networks vary across Medicaid health plans, and whether network characteristics affect quality of treatment received. In this observational cross-sectional study, we used 2018-2019 Medicaid claims in Oregon to assess network variation in the numbers and types of buprenorphine prescribers, as well as the association of prescriber and network characteristics with quality of care.

METHODS

We describe prescribers (MD/DOs and advanced practice providers) of OUD-approved buprenorphine formulations to patients with an OUD diagnosis, across networks. For each patient who initiated buprenorphine treatment during 2018, we assigned a "usual prescriber" and assessed four measures of quality in the 180d following initiation: 1) continuous receipt of buprenorphine; 2) receipt of any behavioral health counseling services; 3) receipt of any urine drug screen; and 4) receipt of any prescription for a benzodiazepine. We used multivariable linear regressions to examine the association of prescriber and network characteristics with quality of buprenorphine care following initiation.

RESULTS

We identified 645 providers who prescribed buprenorphine to 20,739 eligible Medicaid enrollees with an OUD diagnosis. The composition of buprenorphine prescriber networks varied in terms of licensing type, specialty, and panel size, with the majority of prescribers providing buprenorphine to small panels of patients. In the 180 days following initiation, a third of patients were maintained on buprenorphine; 69.9 % received behavioral health counseling; 88.4 % had a urine drug screen; and 11.3 % received a benzodiazepine prescription. In regression analyses, while no single network characteristic was associated with higher quality across all examined measures, each one unit increase in prescriber-to-enrollee ratio was associated with a 1.18 p.p. increase in the probability of continuous buprenorphine maintenance during the 180 days following initiation (95 % confidence interval = [0.21, 2.15], p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Medicaid plans may be able to leverage their networks to provide higher quality care. Our findings, which should be interpreted as descriptive only, suggest that higher prescriber-to-enrollee ratio is associated with increased buprenorphine maintenance. Future research should focus on isolating the causal relationships between MOUD prescribing network design and patient outcomes.

Buprenorphine for Pain: A Narrative Review and Practical Applications

Chronic noncancer pain affects about 20% of US adults and can significantly affect function and quality of life. Current guidelines recommend multimodal pain control. Despite risks associated with long-term opioid therapy, opioids are commonly prescribed. Buprenorphine is a partial opioid agonist with an improved safety profile compared to full agonists. Some formulations are approved for chronic pain and others for opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine is an option for patients who use chronic daily opioids for pain. This review summarizes the literature on buprenorphine's efficacy and safety for chronic pain and provides recommendations to generalists on initiation, titration, and monitoring of buprenorphine-based pain treatment. We also discuss a communication approach when considering buprenorphine for pain.

A Systematic Review of State Office-Based Buprenorphine Treatment Laws Effective During 2022: Counseling, Dosage, and Visit Frequency Requirements

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is among the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder. Even though the federal government recently eliminated the waiver requirement and patient limits applicable to office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT), among other settings, some states may still have policies imposing requirements on OBBT providers not required by federal law.

METHODS

We collected statutes and regulations from 50 US states and the District of Columbia (ie, 51 jurisdictions) between August 11 and November 30, 2022 using the Nexis Uni legal database and search terms related to OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or frequency of visits. We then used template analysis, a mixed deductive-inductive qualitative method, to analyze legal content.

RESULTS

Ten jurisdictions (20%) in 2022 had an OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or visit frequency requirement. Four jurisdictions had at least one law in each OBBT policy category examined. One-fifth of jurisdictions have OBBT policies not required under federal law. Five of these jurisdictions are among those with the highest overdose death rates per capita, according to publicly available data from 2021. Some OBBT requirements could potentially limit clinician interest in offering buprenorphine treatment or result in inadequate care (eg, if dosage limitations are too low.).

CONCLUSIONS

Even though a federal waiver is no longer required for OBBT, our results suggests that at least some jurisdictions have other OBBT requirements, such as counseling, dosage, and/or frequency requirements. Given the severity of the ongoing opioid overdose crisis, policymakers should carefully consider the extent to which OBBT requirements are evidence based.

Quantifying a potential protective effect of buprenorphine on fatality risk during acute fentanyl exposures

INTRODUCTION

Buprenorphine is an important therapy for opioid use disorder and may also reduce the risk of fatal overdoses in fentanyl exposures. However, the role of buprenorphine in reducing this risk has not been quantified. This cross-sectional study examined the association between buprenorphine presence, decedent characteristics, and other factors with the predicted fentanyl concentrations in overdose deaths.

METHODS

The study identified unintentional fentanyl overdose decedents (n = 3036) from the West Virginia Forensic Drug Database, 2011 through mid-2020. The main outcome was fentanyl concentrations in overdose deaths in the presence and absence of buprenorphine. A multiple linear regression model examined the association of fentanyl concentrations with buprenorphine presence based on the concentrations of the parent drug buprenorphine (B) and its metabolite norbuprenorphine (N), adjusting for demographics, toxicological characteristics (presence of multiple opioids, benzodiazepines, stimulants, marijuana, and alcohol), and comorbidities. We used a B/N concentration ratio < 1 as an indirect indicator of longer-term buprenorphine exposure prior to drug overdose death.

RESULTS

The median fentanyl concentration was 65 % higher when buprenorphine was present (N = 168) vs. absent (N = 2868) (0.028 vs. 0.017 μg/mL, p < 0.001). In the multivariable model, statistically significant associations occurred between buprenorphine presence and increased fentanyl concentrations (+28.7 %) with a B/N ratio < 1. Obesity, male sex, alcohol presence, and comorbid cardiovascular diseases were statistically significantly associated with lower (-11.3 % to -20.7 %) fentanyl concentrations, whereas marijuana presence and a history of substance use disorder were associated with statistically significant higher fentanyl concentrations (+8.8 % to +31.3 %).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that sustained or longer-term buprenorphine intake might exert some protective effect on fatalities resulting from fentanyl exposure as documented by the association of higher fentanyl blood concentrations with buprenorphine presence among fatal drug overdoses. As fentanyl availability and overdose rates increase nationally, buprenorphine is a vital tool for effective opioid use disorder treatment that might also reduce the risk of fatality in an acute fentanyl exposure.

A Guide to Expanding the Use of Buprenorphine Beyond Standard Initiations for Opioid Use Disorder

Buprenorphine has become an important medication in the context of the ongoing opioid epidemic. However, complex pharmacologic properties and varying government regulations create barriers to its use. This narrative review is intended to facilitate buprenorphine use-including non-traditional initiation methods-by providers ranging from primary care providers to addiction specialists. This article briefly discusses the opioid epidemic and the diagnosis and treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). We then describe the basic and complex pharmacologic properties of buprenorphine, linking these properties to their clinical implications. We guide readers through the process of initiating buprenorphine in patients using full agonist opioids. As there is no single recommended approach for buprenorphine initiation, we discuss the details, advantages, and disadvantages of the standard, low-dose, bridging-strategy, and naloxone-facilitated initiation techniques. We consider the pharmacology of, and evidence base for, buprenorphine in the treatment of pain, in both OUD and non-OUD patients. Throughout, we address the use of buprenorphine in children and adolescent patients, and we finish with considerations related to the settings of pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Postmortem toxicology findings from the Camden Opioid Research Initiative

The United States continues to be impacted by decades of an opioid misuse epidemic, worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic and by the growing prevalence of highly potent synthetic opioids (HPSO) such as fentanyl. In instances of a toxicity event, first-response administration of reversal medications such as naloxone can be insufficient to fully counteract the effects of HPSO, particularly when there is co-occurring substance use. In an effort to characterize and study this multi-faceted problem, the Camden Opioid Research Initiative (CORI) has been formed. The CORI study has collected and analyzed post-mortem toxicology data from 42 cases of decedents who expired from opioid-related toxicity in the South New Jersey region to characterize substance use profiles. Co-occurring substance use, whether by intent or through possible contamination of the illicit opioid supply, is pervasive among deaths due to opioid toxicity, and evidence of medication-assisted treatment is scarce. Nearly all (98%) of the toxicology cases show the presence of the HPSO, fentanyl, and very few (7%) results detected evidence of medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder, such as buprenorphine or methadone, at the time of death. The opioid toxicity reversal drug, naloxone, was detected in 19% of cases, but 100% of cases expressed one or more stimulants, and sedatives including xylazine were detected in 48% of cases. These results showing complex substance use profiles indicate that efforts at mitigating the opioid misuse epidemic must address the complications presented by co-occurring stimulant and other substance use, and reduce barriers to and stigmas of seeking effective medication-assisted treatments.

An Examination of the Complex Pharmacological Properties of the Non-Selective Opioid Modulator Buprenorphine

The goal of this review is to provide a recent examination of the pharmacodynamics as well as pharmacokinetics, misuse potential, toxicology, and prenatal consequences of buprenorphine. Buprenorphine is currently a Schedule III opioid in the US used for opioid-use disorder (OUD) and as an analgesic. Buprenorphine has high affinity for the mu-opioid receptor (MOR), delta (DOR), and kappa (KOR) and intermediate affinity for the nociceptin (NOR). Buprenorphine's active metabolite, norbuprenorphine, crosses the blood-brain barrier, is a potent metabolite that attenuates the analgesic effects of buprenorphine due to binding to NOR, and is responsible for the respiratory depressant effects. The area under the concentration curves are very similar for buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine, which indicates that it is important to consider this metabolite. Crowding sourcing has identified a buprenorphine street value (USD 3.95/mg), indicating some non-medical use. There have also been eleven-thousand reports involving buprenorphine and minors (age < 19) at US poison control centers. Prenatal exposure to clinically relevant dosages in rats produces reductions in myelin and increases in depression-like behavior. In conclusion, the pharmacology of this OUD pharmacotherapy including the consequences of prenatal buprenorphine exposure in humans and experimental animals should continue to be carefully evaluated.

Buprenorphine involvement in opioid overdose deaths: A retrospective analysis of postmortem toxicology in Marion County, Indiana, 2015-2021

Background

Amidst an unprecedented overdose epidemic, the opioid partial agonist buprenorphine is a medication for opioid use disorder associated with reductions in overdose. Despite its efficacy, buprenorphine prescribing remains closely regulated, owing to concerns about misuse, and its possible role in overdoses.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the Marion County, Indiana coroner's postmortem toxicology data for unintentional opioid-involved overdose deaths from 2015 through 2021. The county was chosen as a novel setting whose corner provided comprehensive overdose data. It contains Indianapolis, a large city in the US Midwest The 2,369 opioid-involved overdoses were analyzed for the presence of buprenorphine and its metabolite, as wel as potent substances associated with illicit drug use and overdose.

Results

Of the 2,369 postmortem toxicology records analyzed, 55 (2.3%) indicated presence of buprenorphine. Of buprenorphine-involved cases, 51 (92.7%) involved other potent substances such as fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, methadone, and amphetamines; 4 (7.3%) were attributed to buprenorphine and liver failure, diabetic ketoacidosis, or relatively less potent substances. Fentanyl was present in 28 cases (50.9%), benzodiazepines were present in 24 (43.6%). Black opioid decedents were considerably less likely to have buprenorphine in their toxicology than White decedents.

Conclusions

Buprenorphine was rarely detected in the postmortem toxicology of unintentional opioid overdoses in a major US city in the Midwest. In nearly all cases it was accompanied by other potent substances that more frequently cause fatal overdoses on their own. This study confirms findings from other geographic settings that the overdose mortality risks associated with buprenorphine are low.

Characterization of Unintentional Deaths Among Buprenorphine Users

OBJECTIVE

Medications used to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) reduce drug overdose risk. Buprenorphine is often the preferred treatment for OUD because of its high safety profile. Given expanding buprenorphine use, this study sought to examine buprenorphine-involved deaths (BIDs) and compare them with other drug-related deaths.

METHOD

West Virginia drug-related deaths from 2005 to early 2020 were identified. Study data included decedent demographics, toxicology, autopsy findings, and medical and prescription histories. Characteristics of BIDs compared with other drug-related deaths were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 11,764 drug-related deaths, only 564 (4.8%) involved buprenorphine. Buprenorphine alone was present in 32 deaths, of which 20 were considered the direct cause of death (0.2% of all drug-related deaths). Significantly more BIDs involved five or more drugs (23%) compared with other opioid deaths (14.9%). Co-intoxicants found most frequently in BIDs were benzodiazepines (47.3%), methamphetamine (27.1%), and fentanyl (22.9%). Cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities were identified in 43% and 21% of BIDs, respectively. Of the 564 BIDs, a current buprenorphine prescription was present in 132 deaths (23.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing buprenorphine use, BIDs comprised less than 5% of overall West Virginia drug-related deaths. Seldom was it the only drug found, and most decedents did not have current prescriptions for buprenorphine. Although buprenorphine is effective, with a wide safety margin, clinicians and patients should be aware that buprenorphine can be involved in overdose deaths, especially when buprenorphine is taken in combination with drugs such as benzodiazepines, methamphetamine, or fentanyl, and in persons with underlying cardiovascular or pulmonary comorbidities.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Buprenorphine

Pain management in palliative care (PC) is becoming more complex as patients survive longer with life-limiting illnesses and population-wide trends involving opioid misuse become more common in serious illness. Buprenorphine, a generally safe partial mu-opioid receptor agonist, has been shown to be effective for both pain management and opioid use disorder. It is critical that PC clinicians become comfortable with indications for its use, strategies for initiation while understanding risks and benefits. This article, written by a team of PC and addiction-trained specialists, including physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers, and a pharmacist, offers 10 tips to demystify buprenorphine use in serious illness.

CommunityStat: A Public Health Intervention to Reduce Opioid Overdose Deaths in Burlington, Vermont, 2017-2020

From 2017 to early 2020, the US city of Burlington, Vermont led a county-wide effort to reduce opioid overdose deaths by concentrating on the widespread, low-barrier distribution of medications for opioid use disorder. As a small city without a public health staff, the initiative was led out of the police department-with an understanding that it would not be enforcement-oriented-and centered on a local adaptation of CompStat, a management and accountability program developed by the New York City Police Department that has been cited as both yielding improvements in public safety and overemphasizing counterproductive police performance metrics if not carefully directed. The initiative was instrumental to the implementation of several novel interventions: low-threshold buprenorphine prescribing at the city's syringe service program, induction into buprenorphine-based treatment at the local hospital emergency department, elimination of the regional waiting list for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and the de-facto decriminalization of diverted buprenorphine by the chief of police and county prosecutor. An effort by local legislators resulted in a state law requiring all inmates with opioid use disorder be provided with MOUD as well. By the end of 2018, these interventions were collectively associated with a 50% (17 vs. 34) reduction in the county's fatal overdose deaths, while deaths increased 20% in the remainder of Vermont. The reduction was sustained through the end of 2019. This article describes the effort undertaken by officials in Burlington to implement these interventions. It provides an example that other municipalities can use to take an evidence-based approach to reducing opioid deaths, provided stakeholders assent to sustained collaboration in the furtherance of a commitment to save lives. In doing so, it highlights that police-led public health interventions are the exception, and addressing the overdose crisis will require reform that shifts away from criminalization as a community's default framework for substance use.

Buprenorphine management in the perioperative period: educational review and recommendations from a multisociety expert panel

BACKGROUND

The past two decades have witnessed an epidemic of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the USA, resulting in catastrophic loss of life secondary to opioid overdoses. Medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is effective, yet barriers to care continue to result in a large proportion of untreated individuals. Optimal analgesia can be obtained in patients with MOUD within the perioperative period. Anesthesiologists and pain physicians can recommend and consider initiating MOUD in patients with suspected OUD at the point of care; this can serve as a bridge to comprehensive treatment and ultimately save lives.

METHODS

The Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, American Society of Anesthesiologists, American Academy of Pain Medicine, American Society of Addiction Medicine and American Society of Health System Pharmacists approved the creation of a Multisociety Working Group on Opioid Use Disorder, representing the fields of pain medicine, addiction, and pharmacy health sciences. An extensive literature search was performed by members of the working group. Multiple study types were included and reviewed for quality. A modified Delphi process was used to assess the literature and expert opinion for each topic, with 100% consensus being achieved on the statements and each recommendation. The consensus statements were then graded by the committee members using the United States Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence guidelines. In addition to the consensus recommendations, a narrative overview of buprenorphine, including pharmacology and legal statutes, was performed.

RESULTS

Two core topics were identified for the development of recommendations with >75% consensus as the goal for consensus; however, the working group achieved 100% consensus on both topics. Specific topics included (1) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the management of patients receiving buprenorphine for MOUD in the perioperative setting and (2) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the initiation of buprenorphine in patients with suspected OUD in the perioperative setting.

CONCLUSIONS

To decrease the risk of OUD recurrence, buprenorphine should not be routinely discontinued in the perioperative setting. Buprenorphine can be initiated in untreated patients with OUD and acute pain in the perioperative setting to decrease the risk of opioid recurrence and death from overdose.

Alternative use of buprenorphine among people who use opioids in three U.S. Cities

Background: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder, yet some persons are concerned with its "alternative use" (i.e., any use unintended by the prescriber). There is limited evidence on the factors associated with alternative use of buprenorphine (AUB); in this study, we examined correlates of recent (past 6 months) AUB. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze survey data from a multi-site, cross-sectional study of people who use drugs (PWUD) (N = 334) in Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; and Providence, Rhode Island. Results: One-fifth (20%) of the sample reported recent AUB. In adjusted analyses, significant negative correlates of AUB were female gender (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.48, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.24-0.95), recent emergency room visit (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.89), and recent injection drug use (aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.88). Significant positive correlates were alternative use of other prescription opioids (aOR 8.32, 95% CI 4.22-16.38), three or more overdoses in the past year (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 1.53-9.17), recent buprenorphine use as prescribed (aOR 2.50, 95% CI 1.12-5.55), and recent residential rehabilitation treatment (aOR 3.71, 95% CI 1.50-9.16). Conclusions: Structural and behavioral correlates of AUB may help identify PWUD at high risk of overdose with unmet treatment needs.

Buprenorphine-Related Deaths in North Carolina from 2010-2018

Buprenorphine is a commonly prescribed medication for the treatment of opioid-use disorder. As prescriptions increase in North Carolina, buprenorphine is more frequently encountered statewide in routine postmortem casework. Between 2010 and 2018, there were 131 select cases investigated by the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner where buprenorphine was detected in peripheral blood and considered a primary cause of death, with no other opioids present and no other non-opioid substances found in the lethal range. The decedents ranged in age from 14 to 64 years, with 67% male. The mean/median peripheral blood concentrations were 4.1/2.1 ng/mL for buprenorphine and 7.8/3.4 ng/mL for the metabolite, norbuprenorphine. These postmortem blood concentrations overlap antemortem therapeutic concentrations in plasma reported in the literature for opioid-dependent subjects receiving sublingual maintenance therapy. The pathologist considered scene findings, prescription history, autopsy findings, toxicological analysis, and decedent behavior prior to death to conclude a drug-related cause of death. Many of the deaths were complicated by the presence of other central nervous system depressants along with contributory underlying cardiovascular and respiratory disease. The three most prevalent additive substances were alprazolam, ethanol, and gabapentin, found in 67, 36, and 32 cases out of 131, respectively. Interpreting buprenorphine involvement in a death is complex, and instances may be under-estimated in epidemiological data because of the lack of a defined toxic or lethal range in postmortem blood along with its good safety profile. As expansion to access of opioid-use disorder treatment becomes a priority, awareness of the challenges of postmortem interpretation is needed as increased use and diversion of buprenorphine are inevitable.

Benefit-Risk Analysis of Buprenorphine for Pain Management

Health care providers in the United States are facing challenges in selecting appropriate medication for patients with acute and chronic pain in the midst of the current opioid crisis and COVID-19 pandemic. When compared with conventional opioids, the partial µ-opioid receptor agonist buprenorphine has unique pharmacologic properties that may be more desirable for pain management. The formulations of buprenorphine approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for pain management include intravenous injection, transdermal patch, and buccal film. A comparison of efficacy and safety data from studies of buprenorphine and conventional opioids suggests that buprenorphine may be a better-tolerated treatment option for many patients that provides similar or superior analgesia. Our benefit-risk assessment in this narrative review suggests that health care providers should consider that buprenorphine may be an appropriate alternative for pain management over other opioids.