Slow-release naltrexone implant versus oral naltrexone for improving treatment outcomes in people with HIV who are addicted to opioids: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial

Opioids and Immunosuppression: Clinical Evidence, Mechanisms of Action, and Potential Therapies

Background

In addition to the more well-known adverse effects of opioids, such as constipation, mounting evidence supports underlying immunosuppressive effects as well.

Methods

In this study, we provide a narrative review of preclinical and clinical evidence of opioid suppression of the immune system as well as possible considerations for therapies.

Results

In vitro and animal studies have shown clear effects of opioids on inflammatory cytokine expression, immune cell activity, and pathogen susceptibility. Observational data in humans have so far supported preclinical findings, with multiple reports of increased rates of infections in various settings of opioid use. However, the extent to which this risk is due to the impact of opioids on the immune system compared with other risk factors associated with opioid use remains uncertain. Considering the data showing immunosuppression and increased risk of infection with opioid use, measures are needed to mitigate this risk in patients who require ongoing treatment with opioids. In preclinical studies, administration of opioid receptor antagonists blocked the immunomodulatory effects of opioids.

Conclusions

As selective antagonists of peripheral opioid receptors, peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor (MOR) antagonists may be able to protect against immune impairment while still allowing for opioid analgesia. Future research is warranted to further investigate the relationship between opioids and infection risk as well as the potential application of peripherally acting MOR antagonists to counteract these risks.

Rapid access to antiretroviral therapy, receipt of naltrexone, and strengths-based case management versus standard of care for HIV viral load suppression in people with HIV who inject drugs in Russia (LINC-II): an open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) coverage in Russia is low for people with HIV who inject drugs. HIV and addiction treatment in Russia are not well integrated. We aimed to evaluate an intervention to link people with HIV in addiction treatment to HIV care to achieve HIV viral load suppression.

METHODS

LINC-II was a two-arm, open-label, randomised controlled trial at the City Addiction Hospital, Saint Petersburg, Russia. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had a positive HIV status, were not currently on ART, were admitted to a narcology hospital, and had a current diagnosis of opioid use disorder. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a multicomponent intervention (ie, rapid access to ART, naltrexone for opioid use disorder, and strengths-based case management) or standard of care. Blocked randomisation was stratified by history of ART use. The primary outcome was undetectable HIV viral load at 12 months, defined as less than 40 copies per mL. The trial was conducted and analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03290391.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 19, 2018, and Dec 25, 2020, 953 individuals were screened for eligibility, 225 of whom were randomly assigned to the intervention (n=111) or standard of care (n=114). 136 (60%) participants were male and 89 (40%) were female. Participants in the intervention group had higher odds of HIV viral load suppression at 12 months compared with participants in the standard-of-care group (52 [47%] vs 26 [23%]; adjusted odds ratio 3·0 [95% CI 1·4-6·4]; p=0·0039). 21 adverse events (18 in the intervention group and three in the standard-of-care group)and 14 deaths (four in the intervention group and ten in the standard-of-care group) were reported in the study.

INTERPRETATION

Given the effectiveness of the LINC-II intervention, scaling up this model could be one strategy to advance the UNAIDS goal of ending the HIV epidemic.

FUNDING

National Institute on Drug Abuse and Providence/Boston Center for AIDS Research.

HIV clinic-based extended-release naltrexone versus treatment as usual for people with HIV and opioid use disorder: a non-blinded, randomized non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Opioid agonist medications for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) can improve human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) outcomes and reduce opioid use. We tested whether outpatient antagonist treatment with naltrexone could achieve similar results.

DESIGN

Open-label, non-inferiority randomized trial.

SETTING

Six US HIV primary care clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 114 participants with untreated HIV and OUD (62% male; 56% black, 12% Hispanic; positive for fentanyl (62%), other opioids (47%) and cocaine (60%) at baseline). Enrollment halted early due to slow recruitment.

INTERVENTION

HIV clinic-based extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; n = 55) versus treatment as usual (TAU) with buprenorphine or methadone (TAU; n = 59).

MEASUREMENTS

Treatment group differences were compared for the primary outcome of viral suppression (HIV RNA ≤ 200 copies/ml) at 24 weeks and secondary outcomes included past 30-day use of opioids at 24 weeks.

FINDINGS

Fewer XR-NTX participants initiated medication compared with TAU participants (47 versus 73%). The primary outcome of viral suppression was comparable for XR-NTX (52.7%) and TAU (49.2%) [risk ratio (RR) = 1.064; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.748, 1.514] at 24 weeks. Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated, as the lower confidence limit of the RR did not exceed the pre-specified margin of 0.75 in intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The main secondary outcome of past 30-day opioid use was comparable for XR-NTX versus TAU (11.7 versus 14.8 days; mean difference = -3.1; 95% CI = -8.7, 1.1) in ITT analysis. Among those initiating medication, XR-NTX resulted in fewer days of opioid use compared with TAU in the past 30 days (6.0 versus 13.6, mean difference = -7.6; 95% CI = -13.8, -0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

A randomized controlled trial found supportive, but not conclusive, evidence that human immunodeficiency virus clinic-based extended-release naltrexone is not inferior to treatment as usual for facilitating human immunodeficiency virus viral suppression. Participants who initiated extended-release naltrexone used fewer opioids than those who received treatment as usual.

Goofballing of Opioid and Methamphetamine: The Science Behind the Deadly Cocktail

Globally, millions of people suffer from various substance use disorders (SUD), including mono-and polydrug use of opioids and methamphetamine. Brain regions such as the cingulate cortex, infralimbic cortex, dorsal striatum, nucleus accumbens, basolateral and central amygdala have been shown to play important roles in addiction-related behavioral changes. Clinical and pre-clinical studies have characterized these brain regions and their corresponding neurochemical changes in numerous phases of drug dependence such as acute drug use, intoxication, craving, withdrawal, and relapse. At present, many studies have reported the individual effects of opioids and methamphetamine. However, little is known about their combined effects. Co-use of these drugs produces effects greater than either drug alone, where one decreases the side effects of the other, and the combination produces a prolonged intoxication period or a more desirable intoxication effect. An increasing number of studies have associated polydrug abuse with poorer treatment outcomes, drug-related deaths, and more severe psychopathologies. To date, the pharmacological treatment efficacy for polydrug abuse is vague, and still at the experimental stage. This present review discusses the human and animal behavioral, neuroanatomical, and neurochemical changes underlying both morphine and methamphetamine dependence separately, as well as its combination. This narrative review also delineates the recent advances in the pharmacotherapy of mono- and poly drug-use of opioids and methamphetamine at clinical and preclinical stages.

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.

The Effect of Buprenorphine on Human Immunodeficiency Virus Viral Suppression

BACKGROUND

Opioid use is prevalent among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH) and adversely affects HIV outcomes. We assessed the effect of buprenorphine (BUP) initiation on subsequent HIV viral loads.

METHODS

We identified PLWH from the Johns Hopkins HIV Clinical Cohort who initiated BUP between 2002 and 2017. Poisson regression with robust variance was used to estimate the prevalence of viral suppression (<200 copies/mL) before and after BUP initiation. We matched individuals who initiated BUP with controls based on viral load measurement dates and used prior event rate ratio (PERR) methods to estimate the effect of BUP initiation on viral suppression. PERR methods account for unmeasured confounders.

RESULTS

We identified 279 PLWH who initiated BUP. After BUP initiation, PLWH were more likely to be virally suppressed (prevalence ratio [PR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.37). After matching PLWH who initiated BUP to controls and accounting for measured and unmeasured confounders, BUP initiation increased viral suppression for both those on antiretroviral therapy (ART) at baseline (PERR PR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.00-1.18) and those not on ART at baseline (PR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.10-1.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the initiation of BUP results in an increase in the probability of being virally suppressed after accounting for both measured and unmeasured confounders. Persons with opioid use disorder should initiate BUP to not only treat substance use but also to increase viral suppression allowing for treatment as prevention.

Management of Sedation and Analgesia in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Long-Acting Naltrexone Therapy for Opioid Use Disorder

The explosion of the opioid epidemic in the United States and across the world has been met with advances in pharmacologic therapy for the treatment of opioid use disorder. Long-acting naltrexone is a promising strategy, but its use has important implications for critical care, as it may interfere with or complicate sedation and analgesia. Currently, there are two available formulations of long-acting naltrexone, which are distinguished by different administration routes and distinct pharmacokinetics. The use of long-acting naltrexone may be identified through a variety of strategies (such as physical examination, laboratory testing, and medical record review), and is key to the safe provision of sedation and analgesia during critical illness. Perioperative experience caring for patients receiving long-acting naltrexone informs management in the intensive care unit. Important lessons include the use of multimodal analgesia strategies and anticipating patients' demonstrating variable sensitivity to opioids. For the critically ill patient, however, there are important distinctions to emphasize, including changes in drug metabolism and medication interactions. By compiling and incorporating the currently available literature, we provide critical care physicians with recommendations for the sedation and analgesia for critically ill patients receiving long-acting naltrexone therapy.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2019

This paper is the forty-second consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2019 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonists 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).

Gender difference in all-cause mortality of people living with HIV in Iran: findings from a 20-year cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Gender differences in the efficacy of treatment and the mortality of HIV-infected patients have not yet been fully elucidated. For the first time, we used data from a 20-year cohort of people living with HIV (PLWH) in four provinces (Fars, Bushehr, Bandar Abbas, and Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad) in the southern part of Iran to assess the gender difference in all-cause mortality in PLWH in Iran.

METHODS

We analysed data for 1216 patients aged ≥ 15 years who were diagnosed with HIV/AIDS between 1997 and 2017. Three hundred and fourteen (25.8%) were women.

RESULTS

The death rate from all causes among women was 13.7% vs. 43.8% among men (P < 0.001). All-cause mortality was significantly associated with gender [the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for men compared with women was 3.20], not being on antiretroviral therapy (ART) compared with being on ART at the last visit (aHR 5.42), older age (aHR 1.03), delayed HIV diagnosis compared with early diagnosis (aHR 1.72), history of incarceration (aHR 1.57), higher log CD4 count at diagnosis (aHR 0.54), and prophylaxis for Pneumocystis pneumonia (aHR 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this 20-year cohort study suggest that gender is an important predictor of survival among HIV-infected patients. Improving early HIV diagnosis and early ART initiation in men, as well as increased access to hepatitis C virus treatment are needed to increase the survival rate of HIV-infected patients in Iran.

Receipt of opioid agonist treatment halves the risk of HIV-1 RNA viral load rebound through improved ART adherence for HIV-infected women who use illicit drugs

BACKGROUND

Women living with HIV who use illicit drugs may be particularly vulnerable to HIV-1 RNA viral load (VL) rebound.

METHODS

We used longitudinal data from 2006 to 2017 to evaluate the impact of sociodemographic, behavioral, social-structural, and clinical factors on the hazard of viral rebound for women enrolled in the ACCESS study, a prospective cohort with systematic VL monitoring. Women were included if they achieved VL suppression (<50 copies/mL) following antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation and had more than one study interview. Sociodemographic as well as substance use, social-structural, addiction treatment, and HIV clinical factors were evaluated as predictors of viral rebound (VL > 1000 copies/mL). Cox regressions using a recurrent events framework, time-varying covariates, robust standard errors, and a frailty component were used.

RESULTS

Of the 185 women included, 62 (34%) experienced at least one viral rebound event over an 11-year period, accumulating a total of 87 viral rebound events. In adjusted analysis, stimulant use more than doubled the hazard of viral rebound (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]: 2.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-5.14) while the only factor protective against viral rebound was receipt of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) in the past six months (AHR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.26-0.81). After adjusting for ART adherence in the past six months, the effect of OAT was attenuated (AHR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.32-1.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve access to and retention within OAT programs and decrease stimulant use may improve rates of viral suppression for HIV-positive women who use illicit drugs.