Extended-release naltrexone for youth with opioid use disorder

Exploration of Effective Substance Use Relapse Prevention Programmes for the Youth: An Integrative Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Youth substance use has been associated with recurrent episodes of substance misuse. A large body of research has shown that relapsing into substance use is still a significant obstacle that prevents people who use substances and want to stop from recovering and abstaining. The objective of this evaluation was to locate, compile and summarise the results of all pertinent research on youth substance use relapse prevention programmes.

METHOD

An integrative literature review (ILR) was conducted, guided by Whittemore and Knafl (Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2005, 52, 546), following a step-by-step guide for conducting an ILR. The PRISMA guidelines were used in the selection process.

RESULTS

Twenty-three papers met the eligibility criteria, and three were added from grey literature. Three themes identified in the studies included in the review: Continuing care, technology-mediated recovery management interventions and relapse prevention through developmentally engaging activities.

DISCUSSION

The review identified that a successful substance use relapse prevention programme for the youth requires continued care following discharge from hospital treatment. The care encompasses posttreatment check-ups, assessments and linkages to treatment in which a suspected/potential relapse is referred back to treatment to prevent its severity or occurrence.

Sustained-release naltrexone for opioid dependence

BACKGROUND

Opioid dependence is a severe and often lifelong disorder with a high risk of overdose and premature death, as well as severe psychosocial difficulties. Sustained-release naltrexone is a treatment option that works by blocking the euphoric and overdose effects of opioids. When injected intramuscularly, naltrexone provides blockade for one month, while the blocking effects with implants can last for up to six months.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of sustained-release naltrexone for the treatment of opioid dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the following databases from 2007 up to 20 December 2023: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Specialised Register of Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Science, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We manually searched the reference lists of identified studies, published reviews and relevant websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing the effects of injectable or implantable naltrexone with other treatment, no treatment or placebo in adults with opioid dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Primary outcomes were illicit opioid use, retention in treatment, treatment acceptability and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were opioid craving, recreational use of substances other than opioids, mental health, quality of life and criminal activity. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 1). We combined the results of individual trials through meta-analysis where possible using a random-effects model. Two review authors independently assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 22 studies (3416 participants) that met our inclusion criteria. Three studies compared sustained-release naltrexone with opioid agonist treatment, five with oral naltrexone, six with placebo, nine with treatment as usual and one with psychosocial intervention. Sustained-release naltrexone compared with opioid agonist treatment We found moderate-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone probably increases in-treatment illicit opioid use slightly (risk ratio (RR) 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.31; 1 study, 570 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sustained-release naltrexone on retention in treatment (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.76; 3 studies, 773 participants) and treatment acceptability (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.16; 3 studies, 773 participants). There was low-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone may increase serious adverse events slightly in comparison with opioid agonist treatment for serious adverse events (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.11; 2 studies, 713 participants). Sustained-release naltrexone compared with oral naltrexone treatment We found low-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone may reduce in-treatment illicit opioid use (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.93; 1 study, 69 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sustained-release naltrexone on retention in treatment (RR 2.40, 95% CI 1.64 to 3.52; 3 studies, 464 participants) and on serious adverse events (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.46 to 3.36; 2 studies, 260 participants). There was low-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone may result in little to no difference in treatment acceptability in comparison with oral naltrexone treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.01; 3 studies, 474 participants). Sustained-release naltrexone compared with placebo We found low-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone may result in little to no difference in in-treatment illicit opioid use (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03; 3 studies, 443 participants), treatment acceptability (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02; 1 study, 204 participants) and serious adverse events (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.23; 3 studies, 443 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sustained-release naltrexone on retention in treatment in comparison with placebo (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.60; 4 studies, 594 participants). Sustained-release naltrexone compared with treatment as usual We found high-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone reduces in-treatment illicit opioid use (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.90; 4 studies, 479 participants). There was low-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone may result in little or no difference in retention in treatment (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.82; 3 studies, 126 participants) and that it may result in a slight reduction in treatment acceptability (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.90; 8 studies, 1094 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence that sustained-release naltrexone probably reduces serious adverse events in comparison with treatment as usual (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.95; 6 studies, 1009 participants). Our primary outcome measures were not reported for sustained-release naltrexone compared with psychosocial treatments. Amongst the most common methodological weaknesses were the risk of performance bias and imprecision due to few studies and small sample size for many outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sustained-release naltrexone may slightly increase illicit opioid use and serious adverse events compared to opioid agonists, with uncertain effects on retention and acceptability. It may reduce illicit opioid use compared to oral naltrexone but has uncertain effects on other outcomes. Compared to placebo, it may have little to no impact on key outcomes. Compared to treatment as usual, it reduces illicit opioid use and may reduce serious adverse events but has little effect on retention and slightly reduces acceptability. Significant gaps remain in the evidence on sustained-release naltrexone for opioid dependence. Future research should include comparisons with psychosocial treatments, larger and higher-quality studies, and analyses of differences between formulations and comparator treatments. Improved study designs are needed to reduce bias, and more inclusive research should address under-represented populations and synthetic opioid users. The lack of long-term outcome data limits understanding of sustained effects, highlighting the need for extended follow-up and exploration of diverse treatment settings and populations.

Opioid use and abuse in adolescents and young adults; dealing with science, laws and ethics: Charming the COBRAS

The subject of substance use disorders in the pediatric population remains a disturbing conundrum for clinicians, researchers and society in general. Many of our youth are at risk of being damaged and even killed by drug addictions that result from the collision of rapidly developing as well as vulnerable central nervous systems encountering the current global drug addiction crisis. A major motif of this chemical calamity is opioid use disorder in adolescents and young adults that was stimulated by the 19th century identification of such highly addictive drugs as morphine, heroin and a non-opiate, cocaine. This analysis focuses on the pervasive presence of opioid drugs such as heroin and fentanyl that has become a major tragedy in the 21st century arising from an overall substance use and misuse phenomenon rampant in global society. Themes covered in this article include the history of addictive drugs in humans, diagnostic terms in use, the role of neurobiology in drug addiction, and current psychopharmacologic approaches to opioid overdose as well as addiction. Our youth are continuously confronted by dangers of high-risk behaviors including death and injury from opioid use disorders due to their central nervous system neuroplasticity as well as the widespread availability of these harmful chemicals. Healthcare professionals should actively assist our youth who unknowingly and even innocently encounter this deadly menace in the 21st century.

A scoping review of interventions for engaging adolescents and young adults in opioid use disorder treatment across the care cascade

Background: A high number of adolescents and young adults engage in opioid misuse and/or meet criteria for opioid use disorder (OUD). Youth also experience worse treatment outcomes when compared to adult counterparts.Objectives: This scoping review aimed to identify and summarize existing interventions designed to increase engagement of youth across the OUD care cascade, as well as describe clinical and research implications.Methods: Peer-reviewed literature was searched using PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. Studies were eligible if they presented outcomes of an intervention focused on engaging adolescents and young adults (ages 12-25 years) in the OUD care cascade and were published in English.Results: Nine articles met inclusion criteria that described interventions for adolescents and young adults across engagement, initiation, and retention in the OUD care cascade. Several strategies were used in interventions, including behavioral health and integrated health services, contingency management, meaningful family involvement, assertive outreach, and provider trainings/consultation. Only one intervention has been tested with a randomized control trial.Conclusions: Due to small sample sizes and lack of control groups, findings from existing intervention studies do not indicate which strategies are most effective. Further research is urgently needed to develop and evaluate effective interventions for youth with OUD. Providers working with youth should implement services to meet youth's individual needs. Providers should consider utilizing integrated services and referrals to behavioral health, involving family in treatment, and use of contingency management and assertive outreach. Continuing education for providers on OUD treatment and developmental concerns is also crucially needed.

An Assertive Community Intervention to Engage Youth with Opioid Use Disorder and Their Families

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the most effective treatment for OUD. Many patients struggle with adherence, but young adults face unique developmental barriers and experience higher relapse rates. The Youth Opioid Recovery Support (YORS) intervention is a developmentally informed behavioral approach to increase medication adherence through assertive outreach, family involvement, low-barrier access to extended-release MOUD, and contingency management. Early studies have shown promising results, and a randomized controlled trial is underway. Here we describe the implementation of YORS using case examples, offer guidance on adapting YORS to real-world clinical settings, and explore future directions for research and practice.

Comparing outcomes of extended-release naltrexone in adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use among youth is a public health concern in the United States, with >3300 overdose deaths occurring nationally each year. Unfortunately, youth in the United States are still prescribed medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) at a lower rate than their adult counterparts.

METHODS

From 10/2013 to 01/2018, adolescents (ages 15-17; n = 25) and young adults (ages 18-21; n = 263) with moderate to severe OUD enrolled in the parent trial of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; n = 82) versus treatment-as-usual (TAU; either buprenorphine maintenance [n = 94] or counseling without buprenorphine maintenance [n = 112]). The study assessed opioid use outcomes for adolescents vs. young adults using timeline follow-back self-report procedures at baseline and 3-/6-month follow-up assessments. Mixed-effects longitudinal and clustered panel regression models compared treatment effects over time of XR-NTX and TAU on opioid use outcomes in this secondary analysis.

RESULTS

Though adolescent participants reported significantly less opioid use at baseline relative to their young adult counterparts (p < 0.05), the two age groups reported similar rates of opioid use throughout the intervention period. Additionally, both adolescents and young adults receiving XR-NTX evidenced lower rates of opioid use than those receiving TAU at all time points, and adolescents on XR-NTX were the only group who reduced their opioid use at all time points. Mixed-effects models indicated adolescents receiving XR-NTX demonstrated a 48 % lower rate of opioid use days [Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) = 0.52; p = 0.020], while young adults receiving XR-NTX reported an estimated 26 % lower rate (IRR = 0.74; p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that adolescents respond favorably to XR-NTX relative to TAU for treatment of OUD, demonstrating similar outcomes to young adults.

Patient and provider medication preferences affect treatment outcomes among adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic in the United States has not spared youth or young adults, as evidenced by a six-fold increase in opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnoses in the last two decades. Given this dramatic rise, a call for greater uptake and accessibility of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) among youth and young adults has ensued, resulting in an increasing number of MOUD treatment pathways for this vulnerable population.

METHODS

This secondary data analysis seeks to characterize patient and provider preferences for MOUD treatment pathways, and test for associations between baseline MOUD treatment preferences and opioid use and treatment adherence outcomes. Participants included 288 youth and young adults (age 15-21 years), recruited from a residential treatment program in Maryland. The study assessed patient preferences at baseline (n = 253) and provider preferences at patient treatment discharge (n = 224). Mixed-effects negative binomial regression models were conducted for opioid use outcomes, and logistic regressions were conducted for treatment adherence outcomes.

RESULTS

Results indicate that congruence of treatment with patients' (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR] = 0.65) and providers' (IRR = 0.66) preferences was significantly associated with reduced self-reported days of opioid use in the past 90 days, but only for patients receiving extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). Results also indicated that patients were less likely to switch medication treatment pathways (e.g., from XR-NTX to buprenorphine, or vice versa) during follow-up if they received their preferred treatment at baseline, a finding which held true for both XR-NTX (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.32) and buprenorphine (OR = 0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of MOUD congruent with patient and provider preferences was associated with reduced opioid use and greater treatment adherence in this sample of youth and young adults with OUD.

Barriers and Best Practices on the Management of Opioid Use Disorder

Opioids refer to chemicals that agonize opioid receptors in the body resulting in analgesia and sometimes, euphoria. Opiates include morphine and codeine; semi-synthetic opioids include heroin, hydrocodone, oxycodone, and buprenorphine; and fully synthetic opioids include tramadol, fentanyl and methadone. In 2021, an estimated 5.6 million individuals met criteria for opioid use disorder. This article provides an overview of the pharmacology of heroin and non-prescription fentanyl (NPF) and its synthetic analogues, and summarizes the literature related to the management of opioid use disorder, overdose, and withdrawal. This is followed by a description of barriers to treatment and best practices for management with a discussion on recent updates and their potential impact on this patient population. This is followed by a description of barriers to treatment and best practices for management with a discussion on recent updates and their potential impact on this patient population.

Health care use and cost of treatment for adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined the cost of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with counseling for the adolescent and young adult population. This study calculated the health care utilization and cost of MOUD treatment, other substance use disorder treatment, and general health care for adolescents and young adults receiving treatment for opioid use disorder.

METHODS

The study randomized youth ages 15 to 21 (N = 288) equally into the two study conditions: extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or treatment as usual (TAU). While participants committed to treatment based on randomization the study observed considerable nonadherence to both randomized conditions. Instead of using the randomly assigned study conditions, we present descriptive costs by the type of MOUD treatment received: XR-NTX only, buprenorphine only, any other combination of MOUD treatments, and no MOUD. Health care use was aggregated over the 6-month period for each participant, and we calculated average/participant utilization for each treatment group. To determine participant costs, we multiplied the unit costs of health care services obtained from the literature by the reported amount of health care utilization for each participant. We then calculated the mean, standard error, median and IQR for MOUD costs, other substance use disorder treatment costs and general healthcare cost from the health care sector perspective.

RESULTS

On average, participants in the XR-NTX only group received 2.6 doses of XR-NTX (equivalent to approximately 78 days of treatment). The buprenorphine only group had an average of 97 days of buprenorphine treatment. The XR-NTX only group had higher/patient costs compared to participants in the buprenorphine only group ($10,491 vs. $8765) and higher XR-NTX utilization would further increase costs. Participants in the any other MOUD combination group had the highest total costs ($14,627) while participants in the no MOUD group at the lowest ($3453).

DISCUSSION

Our cost analysis calculates the real-world cost of MOUD treatment and, while not generalizable, provides policy makers an estimate of costs for adolescents and young adults. We found that participants in the XR-NTX only group received fewer days of medication compared to the buprenorphine only group, but their medication costs were higher due to the cost of XR-NTX injections. While the buprenorphine only group had the highest number of days of medication utilization of all the groups, the average number of days of medication utilization was considerably shorter than the six-month treatment period.

Implementation of Substance Use Services to Justice-Involved Youth: Examining Barriers, Facilitators, and Best Practices

Justice-involved youth are known to be at elevated risk of substance use disorder (SUD). This review examines literature published over a 10-year period and summarizes evidence-based practices for screening, treatment, and linkage to care for justice-involved youth as well as barriers and facilitators that may arise during implementation. Strategies to incorporate a health equity lens and trauma-informed approaches are discussed. Despite high prevalence of substance use and research showing that treatment reduces recidivism, few juvenile justice systems universally screen and treat youth with SUD. There is limited developmentally appropriate guidance available for those seeking to better address substance use in juvenile justice settings. This review highlights gaps in the literature, which must be addressed to increase access to treatment and improve outcomes for this vulnerable youth population.

Relationship-Oriented Recovery System for Youth (RORSY): Clinical Protocol for Transition-Age Youth with Opioid Use Disorders

This article introduces the Relationship-Oriented Recovery System for Youth (RORSY) protocol, which is designed to increase uptake of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) and related services among adolescents and young adults. Youth exhibit alarmingly poor rates of MOUD initiation and adherence, OUD services involvement and long-term recovery success. RORSY attends to three developmentally unique recovery needs of this age group: assess and bolster youth recovery capital, prioritize involvement of concerned significant others, and use digital direct-to-consumer recovery supports. RORSY contains five evidence-informed intervention modules that can be flexibly tailored to meet the individual and relationship needs of a given youth: Relational Orientation, Youth Recovery Management Planning, Relational Recovery Management Planning, Relationship Skills Building, and Digital Recovery Support Planning. The article concludes with practice and policy recommendations for making relationship-building a top clinical priority for addressing youth OUD.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2021

This paper is the forty-fourth consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2021 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonizts and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (1), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (2) and humans (3), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (4), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (5), stress and social status (6), learning and memory (7), eating and drinking (8), drug abuse and alcohol (9), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (10), mental illness and mood (11), seizures and neurologic disorders (12), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (13), general activity and locomotion (14), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (15), cardiovascular responses (16), respiration and thermoregulation (17), and immunological responses (18).

The impact of nursing on health outcomes of people receiving medication for opioid use disorder: An integrative review

INTRODUCTION

This integrative review aimed to understand the impact of nursing on the health outcomes of people with opioid use disorder (OUD).

METHODS

Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) integrative review methodology guided the review process. The authors searched PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and OVID databases for peer-reviewed, English language articles describing nursing care for people receiving medications for OUD. The literature search followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 773 articles were identified through the database searches after duplicates were removed; 15 articles met inclusion criteria and were included in the final review from the United States, Canada, Ireland, England, and the Netherlands. Two themes emerged: (1) The effect of nurse-led care on patient outcomes and (2) Nursing roles and the environment of care. Studies emphasized the aspects of nursing care that promote patient-centeredness and patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

The importance of the registered nurse in providing quality care for people receiving medications for OUD is clear from the literature reviewed. The studies in the review highlighted important aspects of the registered nurses' role in affecting outcomes for people receiving medications for OUD including communication and care coordination.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This review highlights the need for role delineation and further development of nurse-sensitive indicators in the OUD treatment setting.

Attitudes and beliefs among Georgia addiction treatment staff about medication for opioid use disorder in adolescents, young adults, and adults: a multi-mixed methods study

Background: Adverse consequences, including non-fatal overdose and death, are prevalent in adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder (OUD). Barriers toward medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) have been identified in adult populations but are poorly understood in youth.Objective: This exploratory multi-mixed methods study examines beliefs and attitudes of addiction treatment program staff about the use of MOUD in youth.Methods: A 40-item survey was distributed electronically to 299 addiction treatment programs in Georgia from May 2020 to January 2021. Participant (N = 215; 74% female) attitudes regarding the use of MOUD in three age groups (adolescents (aged 16-17), young adults (aged 18-25), and adults (aged 26+) on a 6-point Likert scale were compared using paired samples t-tests. A series of one-way ANOVA analyses examined differences in attitudes and beliefs across participant characteristics. Verbatim responses to qualitative survey questions were analyzed using a coding reliability approach to thematic analysis.Results: Participants were less likely to support MOUD in adolescents (M = 3.68, SD 1.5) compared with young (M = 4.38, SD 1.36, t = 8.19, p < .001, d = .51) and older adults (M = 4.64, SD 1.3, t = 9.83, p < .001 d = .74). Participants endorsed higher response rates for the use of both naltrexone and buprenorphine over methadone in young adults. A total of 1,412 text responses were reviewed. Participants highlighted barriers to acceptance and use of MOUD in adolescents including safety concerns and impact on brain development.Conclusions: The results support a comprehensive approach to reducing the barriers to using medications to treat OUDs in adolescent populations. Formal and focused continuing education to correct attitudes and beliefs about MOUD treatment for adolescents is necessary.

Use of Contrave, Naltrexone with Bupropion, Bupropion, or Naltrexone and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Systematic Literature Review

Naltrexone/Bupropion extended release (ER; Contrave) is an extended-release, fixed-dose combination medication of naltrexone (8 mg) and bupropion (90 mg) for patients with obesity or overweight with at least one weight-related comorbidity. Obese and overweight patients with or without comorbidities are at increased cardiovascular (CV) risk. Due to the increased CV risk profile in this patient population, this systematic literature review was conducted to assess human studies reporting major adverse CV events (MACE) and other CV events. A priori eligibility criteria included clinical studies (randomized and observational) published from January 1, 2012, to September 30, 2021, with data comparing users of naltrexone/bupropion ER, naltrexone with bupropion, bupropion without naltrexone, or naltrexone without bupropion versus comparator groups (placebo or other treatments), and with sufficient information to determine the frequency of MACE or other CV adverse events by treatment group. Among 2539 English-language articles identified, 70 articles met the eligibility criteria: seven studies of naltrexone/bupropion ER or naltrexone with bupropion, 32 studies of bupropion, and 31 studies of naltrexone. No studies reported an increased risk of MACE among users of naltrexone/bupropion ER, naltrexone with bupropion, or bupropion or naltrexone individually compared with nonusers. One-half of the available studies (n = 35) reported no (zero) CV events and the other half (n = 35) reported that a non-zero frequency of CV events occurred. Four studies reported data on MACE, including three studies of bupropion and one study of naltrexone/bupropion ER. For composite MACE and its components, the difference in proportions between naltrexone/bupropion ER-, bupropion-, or naltrexone-treated patients compared with active comparators or placebo-treated patients did not exceed 2.5%. In conclusion, the available human evidence does not indicate an increased risk of CV events or MACE following use of naltrexone/bupropion ER, naltrexone with bupropion, or the individual components.

Drug and sexual HIV-risk behaviors among adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

Opioid use disorder (OUD) among adolescents and young adults (youth) is associated with drug use and sexual HIV-related risk behaviors and opioid overdose. This mixed methods analysis assesses risk behaviors among a sample of 15-21-year-olds (N = 288) who were being treated for OUD in a residential drug treatment program in Baltimore, Maryland. Participants were enrolled in a parent study in which they received either extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or Treatment as Usual (TAU), consisting of outpatient counseling with or without buprenorphine, prior to discharge. At baseline, participants were administered the HIV-Risk Assessment Battery (RAB), and clinical intake records were reviewed to determine participants' history of sexual, physical, or other abuse, as well as parental and partner substance use. A sub-sample of study participants completed semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 35) at baseline, three-, and six-month follow-up periods. This analysis identified gender (e.g., female IRR = 1.63, CI 1.10-2.42, p = .014), the experience of dependence (e.g., previous detoxification IRR = 1.08, CI 1.01-1.15, p = .033) and withdrawal (e.g., severe withdrawal symptoms IRR = 1.41, CI 1.08-1.84, p = .012), and the role of relationships (e.g., using with partner IRR = 2.45, CI 1.15-5.22, p = .021) as influencing high-risk substance use behaviors. Similarly, high-risk sex was influenced by gender (e.g., female IRR = 1.43, CI 1.28-1.59, p < .001), and the role of relationships (e.g., using with partner IRR = 0.78, CI 0.62-0.98, p = .036). These are key targets for future prevention, treatment, and intervention.