Buprenorphine Use: The International Experience

Prevalence of stimulant use and the role of opioid agonist treatment among people who inject drugs in France: Results from the COSINUS cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The co-use of stimulants and opioids, including opioid agonist treatment (OAT), is very prevalent worldwide. A large body of data exists on the association between stimulant use and its health complications, and on OAT effectiveness among people with opioid use disorder. However, few data exist on stimulant-opioid co-use among people receiving OAT. Using data from the COSINUS cohort study, we investigated the association between the type of OAT and problematic stimulant use among persons who inject drugs (PWID).

METHODS

COSINUS is a 12-month French cohort study of 665 PWID. Data were collected in face-to-face interviews at enrolment, at 6 and 12 months. We defined problematic stimulant use as daily use of and/or injecting stimulants. We used Bayesian model averaging (BMA) to identify factors associated with problematic stimulant use.

RESULTS

At baseline, 76% (n = 505) of the participants reported problematic stimulant use. The optimal model from the BMA estimation showed that, after adjusting on social precarity and daily injection, participants on prescribed morphine sulfate as an OAT (compared with methadone) and those who use daily unprescribed buprenorphine were less likely to report problematic stimulant use.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Our work highlights the high prevalence of problematic stimulant use among PWID in France but also the potential association between the type of OAT taken and stimulant use, by suggesting a protective effect of morphine sulfate on stimulant use. Since it has a higher intrinsic activity than other opioids, PWID on this OAT may be less interested in stimulants. Our findings warrant further investigation in clinical studies.

Establishing a research agenda for the study and assessment of opioid withdrawal

The opioid crisis is an international public health concern. Treatments for opioid use disorder centre largely on the management of opioid withdrawal, an aversive collection of signs and symptoms that contribute to opioid use disorder. Whereas in the past 50 years more than 90 medications have been developed for depression, only five medications have been developed for opioid use disorder during this period. We posit that underinvestment has occurred in part due to an underdeveloped understanding of opioid withdrawal syndrome. This Personal View summarises substantial gaps in our understanding of opioid withdrawal that are likely to continue to limit major advancements in its treatment. There is no firm consensus in the field as to how withdrawal should be precisely defined; 10-550 symptoms of withdrawal can be measured on 18 scales. The imprecise understanding of withdrawal is likely to result in overestimating or underestimating the severity of an individual's withdrawal syndrome or potential therapeutic effects of different candidate medications. The severity of the opioid crisis is not remitting, and an international research agenda for the study and assessment of opioid withdrawal is necessary to support transformational changes in withdrawal management and treatment of opioid use disorder. Nine actionable targets are delineated here: develop a consensus definition of opioid withdrawal; understand withdrawal symptomatology after exposure to different opioids (particularly fentanyl); understand precipitated opioid withdrawal; understand how co-exposure of other drugs (eg, xylazine and stimulants) influences withdrawal expression; examine individual variation in withdrawal phenotypes; precisely characterise the protracted withdrawal syndrome; identify biomarkers of opioid withdrawal severity; identify predictors of opioid withdrawal severity; and understand which symptoms are most closely associated with treatment attrition or relapse. The US Food and Drug Administration recently established a formal indication for opioid withdrawal that has invigorated interest in drug development for opioid withdrawal management. Action is now needed to support these interests and help industry identify new classes of medications so that real change can be achieved for people with opioid use disorder.

Stability and Degradation of Opioids in River Water

As the level of consumption of opioids continues to rise globally, there is increasing concern over the potential impacts of continuous opioid discharges into aquatic ecosystems. Opioids are psychoactive compounds that are not completely removed during wastewater treatment, and little is known about their stability and fate in the environment. In the present study, we evaluated the stability of four highly used opioids, buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, and tramadol, in river water via batch degradation experiments. The opioids were spiked at environmentally relevant concentrations into 150 mL of river microcosms designed to distinguish among hydrolysis, abiotic degradation, biodegradation, and sorption. All opioids exhibited relatively high stability in river water, with removal rates of only 15% (tramadol) to 26% (buprenorphine) after 6 days. Biodegradation was the most important attenuation pathway for all four opioids, with first-order biodegradation constants ranging from 0.011 d-1 (tramadol) to 0.018 d-1(buprenorphine). Overall, degradation rates were 1-4 orders of magnitude lower compared to the reported rates for wastewater systems. These results offer insights into the stability of opioids in freshwater systems and raise questions about the potential effects of their pseudopresence in surface waters on aquatic organisms.

Differences in buprenorphine prescribing readiness among primary care professionals with and without X-waiver training in the US

BACKGROUND

Medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) are effective at preventing overdose and infectious disease but are vastly under-prescribed in the US. For decades, prescribers faced additional training and regulation to prescribe buprenorphine which stigmatized the medication and lessened support for a harm reduction approach to treating opioid use disorder. The Drug Enforcement Administration removed the X-waiver requirement for prescribing buprenorphine in late 2022, which removed stigma and lessened important barriers to prescribing but also left training at the discretion of individual organizations. Our study aimed to assess differences in knowledge, confidence, and stigma regarding buprenorphine between those who went through the X-waiver training and those who did not, among practicing primary care providers (PCPs).

METHODS

We assessed buprenorphine prescribing readiness among primary care aligned outpatient providers in Ohio, USA. Using survey data, we conducted bivariate and regression analyses predicting primary prescribing outcomes. Primary outcomes measured knowledge of and confidence in buprenorphine, as well as perceived adequacy of one's training. Secondary outcomes were attitudes toward patients with OUD, including bias toward OUD patients, stress when working with them, and empathy toward them. Participants (n = 403) included physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants practicing in primary care aligned disciplines.

RESULTS

Survey data showed that PCPs who received X-waiver training were more likely to understand and have confidence in the mechanism of buprenorphine, and consider their training on treating OUD to be adequate. PCPs with an X-waiver showed more empathy, less negative bias, and experienced less stress when working with patients with OUD.

CONCLUSION

Removing restrictive policies for prescribing buprenorphine is an important step to expanding access and reducing the stigma associated with opioid use disorder treatment. Yet, our findings suggest that the training received alongside regulation may be important for improving prescribing confidence and reducing stigma. Strategies to increase buprenorphine prescribing are unlikely to be effective without also expanding access to prescribing support for primary care providers across the career course.

Harm reduction: a public health approach to prison drug use

PURPOSE

As prison drug use continues to be a concern worldwide, harm reduction practices serve as an alternative approach to traditional abstinence-only or punishment-oriented methods to address substance use behind bars. The purpose of this study is to present a summary of research surrounding prison-based harm reduction programs.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

This narrative review of the international literature summarizes the harms associated with prison drug use followed by an overview of the literature surrounding three prison-based harm reduction practices: opioid agonist therapy, syringe exchange programs and naloxone distribution.

FINDINGS

A collection of international research has found that these three harm reduction programs are safe and feasible to implement in carceral settings. Additionally, these services can effectively reduce some of the harms associated with prison drug use (e.g. risky injection practices, needle sharing, fatal overdoses, etc.). However, these practices are underused in correctional settings in comparison to their use in the community.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

Various policy recommendations are made based on the available literature, including addressing ethical concerns surrounding prison populations' rights to the same standard of health care and services available in the community. By taking a public health approach to prison drug use, harm reduction practices can provide a marginalized, high-risk population of incarcerated individuals with life-saving services rather than punitive, punishment-oriented measures.

Are North Carolina clinicians delivering opioid use disorder treatment to Medicaid beneficiaries?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Medicaid is a public health insurance program in the United States that serves low-income individuals. Medicaid beneficiaries have elevated risk of opioid use disorder (OUD), yet face barriers to receiving medications for OUD (MOUD). To inform efforts to increase MOUD receipt among Medicaid beneficiaries, this study: (1) estimated Medicaid participation prevalence among clinicians authorized to prescribe buprenorphine and (2) estimated the association between clinician characteristics and OUD care delivery to Medicaid beneficiaries.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective study of North Carolina, USA licensed physicians, physician assistants and nurse practitioners. Licensure data from 2018 were merged with 2019 US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) data to identify clinicians who received the DEA waiver required to prescribe buprenorphine (n = 1714). Medicaid claims data were used to characterize clinician engagement in OUD care delivery.

MEASUREMENTS

Outcomes were indicators of any Medicaid professional claims and any Medicaid prescription claims for buprenorphine and/or naltrexone. Predictors included clinician characteristics (e.g. gender and race) and characteristics of clinicians' practice location (e.g. area opioid overdose death rate).

FINDINGS

Most waivered clinicians delivered services to Medicaid beneficiaries, ranging from 67.0% of behavioral health clinicians to 82.9% of specialist physicians. Among waivered clinicians with Medicaid professional claims, prevalence of prescribing buprenorphine to Medicaid beneficiaries ranged from 30.3% among specialist physicians to 51.6% among behavioral health clinicians. The probability of prescribing MOUD to Medicaid beneficiaries was higher among waivered clinicians identifying as male compared with female (8.5 percentage points, P = 0.004) or black compared with white (9.9 percentage points, P = 0.007), older clinicians (0.5 percentage point increase per year, P < 0.001) and clinicians in counties with a higher opioid overdose death rate (5.0 percentage point increase per additional death per 10 000 residents, P = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Among clinicians in North Carolina, USA who are authorized to prescribe buprenorphine, 67-83% (depending on type of specialist) deliver services to Medicaid beneficiaries, but only 30-52% of those prescribe medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) to Medicaid beneficiaries. Engagement in OUD care delivery to Medicaid beneficiaries varies by clinician demographic and area characteristics.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of changes in quality of life following initiation of buprenorphine for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

People with opioid use disorder (OUD) experience lower quality of life (QoL) than the general population, but buprenorphine treatment for OUD could help improve QoL of individuals with OUD. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of buprenorphine on QoL among people with OUD.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched through August 2020. We included English-language studies with pre- and post- QoL assessments internationally. Standardized mean differences were calculated for five domains of QoL measures using a random effects model for correlated effect sizes with robust variance estimation. Meta-regression was used to assess variation in effect sizes based on QoL domain, treatment, and patient factors.

RESULTS

Twenty-one peer-reviewed studies from twelve countries were included. Only three studies included a no-treatment control group and five studies assigned groups using randomization. Improvements between baseline and follow-up were observed across all five domains of QoL measures (overall, physical, psychological, social, and environmental). The certainty of evidence was low for all domains of QoL, and very low for environmental QoL. We did not observe differences in the effect of buprenorphine on QoL by QoL domain, duration, dose, participant characteristics, or adjunctive counseling services.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine treatment likely improves overall, physical, psychological, and social QoL, and may improve environmental QoL, for individuals with OUD. Findings are limited by study quality, including lack of control groups and incomplete reporting. Future studies with more rigorous methods and comprehensive reporting are needed.

Patients on Buprenorphine Formulations Undergoing Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the pharmacology of buprenorphine, the evolution of buprenorphine dosing recommendations, and the current literature regarding its recommendations for the perioperative period.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is a consensus that for all surgeries, buprenorphine should be continued throughout the perioperative period. If the surgery is a minimal to mild pain surgery, no dose adjustment is needed. There is no clear consensus regarding moderate to severe pain. With all surgeries, multimodal analgesia should be utilized, with regional anesthesia when possible. Patients taking buprenorphine should continue their buprenorphine perioperatively; whether to decrease or maintain dosing is up for debate. Multimodal analgesia should also be used throughout the perioperative period, and communication between the patient and all provider teams is of the utmost importance to provide adequate analgesia during the perioperative period, as well as to arrange safe analgesia upon discharge.

Treatment approaches and outcome trajectories for youth with high-risk opioid use: A narrative review

AIM

First use of opioids often happens in adolescence and an increasing number of opioid overdoses are being reported among youth. The purpose of this narrative review was to present the treatment approaches for youth with high-risk opioid use, determine whether the literature supports the use of opioid agonist treatment among youth and identify evidence for better treatment outcomes in the younger population.

METHODS

A search of the literature on PubMed using MeSH terms specific to youth, opioid use and treatment approaches generated 1436 references. Following a screening process, 137 papers were found to be relevant to the treatment of high-risk opioid use among youth. After full-text review, 19 eligible studies were included: four randomized controlled trials, nine observational studies and six reviews.

RESULTS

Research for the different treatment options among youth is limited. The available evidence shows better outcomes in terms of retention in care and cost-effectiveness for opioid agonist treatment than abstinence-based comparisons. Integrating psychosocial interventions into the continuum of care for youth can be an effective way of addressing comorbid psychiatric conditions and emotional drivers of substance use, leading to improved treatment trajectories.

CONCLUSIONS

From the limited findings, there is no evidence to deny youth with high-risk opioid use the same treatment options available to adults. A combination of pharmacological and youth-specific psychosocial interventions is required to maximize retention and survival. There is an urgent need for more research to inform clinical strategies toward appropriate treatment goals for such vulnerable individuals.

Health professionals' attitudes toward medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Research has shown that medications, especially opioid agonist treatments, are an effective way to treat opioid use disorder (OUD); however, negative attitudes held by health professionals contribute to their underutilization. Methods: A 23-year review of studies that examined health professionals' attitudes toward medications for OUD (MOUD) was conducted to describe the current state of knowledge and to inform future research and interventions. Results: Studies examined attitudes toward the use of methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone among various types of health professionals: prescribers, non-prescribing clinicians, pharmacists, and administrators. The characteristics and findings of the included studies were reviewed and synthesized. Findings indicate that attitudes toward MOUD affect access and utilization by influencing prescribing practices, referrals, and adoption within programs. Exposure, knowledge, and treatment orientation were found to be important factors related to attitudes toward MOUD across multiple studies of various types of health professionals. Conclusions: To increase access and utilization, continued efforts are needed to increase positive attitudes toward MOUD among various types of health professionals. Findings indicate that interventions should seek to increase knowledge about MOUD and foster interprofessional communication related to MOUD, especially between prescribers and behavioral health providers.

Factors influencing engagement and utilisation of opium tincture-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder: A qualitative study in Tehran, Iran

INTRODUCTION

In response to a high burden of opioid use disorder (OUD), Iran established a network of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) centres beginning in 2002. To increase treatment diversity, particularly for patients who use opium as their drug of choice, opium tincture (OT)-assisted treatment was introduced to the network. This study aimed to explore factors influencing OT-assisted treatment selection for OUD in Tehran, Iran.

METHODS

We conducted 54 in-depth interviews with patients with OUD (n = 33), family members of patients (n = 9) and drug treatment providers (n = 12). Participants were recruited from 12 drug treatment centres across Tehran, between September and November 2019. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded in OpenCode 4.02 software and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Study participants more commonly reported individual-level factors as facilitators (e.g. to reduce harms associated with illicit opioid use, achieve recovery through a gradual dose reduction regimen combined with Congress 60 recovery program) and structural level factors (e.g. low adoption by OAT system and lack of familiarity of treatment providers) as barriers for utilisation of OT-assisted treatment regimens. OT was perceived to produce lower levels of physiological dependence than methadone, but the requirement for twice supervised dosing was restrictive. Low familial and community acceptance were also seen as barriers to access.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This research identified a range of perceived benefits for OT-assisted treatment ranging from harm reduction to an intermediate step to achieve recovery. However, several structural-, individual-, familial- and community-level barriers impede its availability and acceptability.

A comparison of methods for measuring spatial access to health care

OBJECTIVE

To compare measures of spatial access to care commonly used by policy makers and researchers with the more comprehensive enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method.

STUDY SETTING

Fourteen southwestern Pennsylvania counties.

STUDY DESIGN

We estimated spatial access to buprenorphine-waivered prescribers using three commonly used measures-Euclidean travel distance to the closest prescriber, travel time to the closest provider, and provider-to-population ratios-and the E2SFCA. Unlike other measures, the E2SFCA captures provider capacity, potential patient volume, and travel time to prescribers.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We measured provider capacity as the number of buprenorphine prescribers listed at a given address in the Drug Enforcement Agency's 2020 Controlled Substances Act Registrants Database, and we measured potential patient volume as the number of nonelderly adults in a given census tract as reported by the 2018 American Community Survey. We estimated travel times between potential patients and prescribers with Bing Maps and Mapbox application programming interfaces. We then calculated each spatial access measure using the R programming language. We used each measure of spatial access to identify census tracts in the lowest quintile of spatial access to prescribers.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The Euclidean distance, travel time, and provider-to-population ratio measures identified 48.3%, 47.2%, and 69.9% of the census tracts that the E2SFCA measure identified as being in the lowest quintile of spatial access to care, meaning that these measures misclassify 30%-52% of study area census tracts as having sufficient spatial access to buprenorphine prescribers.

CONCLUSIONS

Measures of spatial access commonly used by policy makers do not sufficiently accurately identify geographic areas with relatively low access to prescribers of buprenorphine. Using the E2SFCA in addition to the commonly used measures would allow policy makers to precisely target interventions to increase spatial access to opioid use disorder treatment and other types of health care services.

Medication for Adolescents and Young Adults With Opioid Use Disorder

Opioid-related morbidity and mortality have risen in many settings globally. It is critical that practitioners who work with adolescents and young adults (AYAs) provide timely, evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Such treatment should include medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine, naltrexone, and methadone. Medication treatment is associated with reduced mortality, fewer relapses to opioid use, and enhanced recovery and retention in addiction care, among other positive health outcomes. Unfortunately, the vast majority of AYAs with OUD do not receive medication. The Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine recommends that AYAs be offered MOUD as a critical component of an integrated treatment approach. Barriers to receipt of medications are widespread; many are common to high-, middle-, and low-income countries alike, whereas others differ. Such barriers should be minimized to ensure equitable access to youth-friendly, affirming, and confidential addiction treatment that includes MOUD. Robust education on OUD and medication treatment should be provided to all practitioners who work with AYAs. Strategies to reduce stigma surrounding medication-and stigma experienced by individuals with substance use disorders more generally-should be widely implemented. A broad research agenda is proposed with the goal of expanding the evidence base for the use and delivery of MOUD for AYAs.

Individual and structural correlates of willingness for intravenous buprenorphine treatment among people who inject sublingual buprenorphine in France

BACKGROUND

Some people do not benefit from oral administration of opioid agonist treatment, and an intravenous (IV) formulation may be more suitable. Our objective was to evaluate the willingness of people who regularly inject sublingual buprenorphine to receive IV buprenorphine as a prescribed treatment, and to examine related correlates.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of data from the cross-sectional study PrebupIV, conducted in France in 2015 among 557 people who inject opioids. The study comprised questionnaires completed either face to face or online and community-based workshops. We only included participants who reported buprenorphine as their main injected drug (n = 209). Willingness to receive IV buprenorphine treatment was measured on a scale from 0 to 10. Ordinal logistic regression identified correlates of willingness. Artworks and testimonies from participants in the workshops were also used to illustrate correlates of willingness.

RESULTS

Among the 209 participants, the mean score (SD) for willingness to receive IV buprenorphine was 8.0 (2.8). Multivariate analysis showed that participants who reported using non-prescribed buprenorphine (AOR = 4.82, p = 0.019), a higher daily dosage of buprenorphine (AOR (for 1 mg) = 1.05, p = 0.043), and a higher number of complications due to injection (AOR = 2.28, p = 0.037), were more willing to receive IV buprenorphine treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Willingness to initiate IV buprenorphine treatment was high among people who regularly inject sublingual buprenorphine. A prescribed IV formulation could attract and retain more people into care and reduce harms associated with the injection of buprenorphine tablets.

Impact of Fentanyl Use on Buprenorphine Treatment Retention and Opioid Abstinence

OBJECTIVES

There has been a rapid increase in the presence of illicitly manufactured fentanyl in the heroin drug supply. Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for heroin and prescription opioid use disorder; however, little is known about treatment outcomes among people using fentanyl. We compared 6-month treatment retention and opioid abstinence among people initiating buprenorphine treatment who had toxicology positive for heroin compared to fentanyl at baseline.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of 251 adult patients initiating office-based buprenorphine treatment who had available toxicology testing across an academic health system between August 2016 and July 2017. Exposure was assessed at baseline before initiating buprenorphine and was categorized as negative toxicology (n = 184) versus fentanyl positive toxicology (n = 48) versus heroin positive toxicology (n = 19).

RESULTS

Six-month treatment retention rates were not different between the fentanyl positive and heroin positive groups [38% (n = 18) vs 47% (n = 9); P = 0.58], or between the fentanyl positive and the negative toxicology group [38% (n = 18) vs 51% (n = 93); P = 0.14]. Opioid abstinence at 6 months among those who had testing did not differ between the fentanyl positive and the heroin positive group [55% (n = 6) vs 60% (n = 6); P = 0.99]. The fentanyl positive group had a lower abstinence rate at 6 months compared to those with negative toxicology at baseline [55% (n = 6) vs 93% (n = 63); P = 0.004]. Mean initial buprenophine dosage did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine treatment retention and abstinence among those retained in treatment is not worse between people using fentanyl compared to heroin at treatment initiation. Both groups have lower abstinence rates at 6 months compared to individuals with negative toxicology at baseline. These findings suggest that people exposed to fentanyl still benefit from buprenorphine treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of Direct Antiviral Agents for Hepatitis C Virus Infection and a Combined Intervention of Syringe Access and Medication-assisted Therapy for Opioid Use Disorders in an Injection Drug Use Population

BACKGROUND

There are too many plausible permutations and scale-up scenarios of combination hepatitis C virus (HCV) interventions for exhaustive testing in experimental trials. Therefore, we used a computer simulation to project the health and economic impacts of alternative combination intervention scenarios for people who inject drugs (PWID), focusing on direct antiviral agents (DAA) and medication-assisted treatment combined with syringe access programs (MAT+).

METHODS

We performed an allocative efficiency study, using a mathematical model to simulate the progression of HCV in PWID and its related consequences. We combined 2 previously validated simulations to estimate the cost-effectiveness of intervention strategies that included a range of coverage levels. Analyses were performed from a health-sector and societal perspective, with a 15-year time horizon and a discount rate of 3%.

RESULTS

From a health-sector perspective (excluding criminal justice system-related costs), 4 potential strategies fell on the cost-efficiency frontier. At 20% coverage, DAAs had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27 251/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Combinations of DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 20%, 40%, and 80% coverage had ICERs of $165 985/QALY, $325 860/QALY, and $399 189/QALY, respectively. When analyzed from a societal perspective (including criminal justice system-related costs), DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 80% was the most effective intervention and was cost saving. While DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 80% was more expensive (eg, less cost saving) than MAT+ at 80% alone without DAA, it offered a favorable value compared to MAT+ at 80% alone ($23 932/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

When considering health-sector costs alone, DAA alone was the most cost-effective intervention. However, with criminal justice system-related costs, DAA and MAT+ implemented together became the most cost-effective intervention.

Unintentional drug overdose: Is more frequent use of non-prescribed buprenorphine associated with lower risk of overdose?

BACKGROUND

Unintentional drug overdoses have reached epidemic levels in the U.S. This study tests the hypothesis that people who have used non-prescribed buprenorphine more frequently in the past six months were less likely to experience a drug overdose during that same time period.

METHODS

Participants age 18 years or older with opioid use disorder who reported use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the last six months were recruited from the Dayton, Ohio, area using a combination of targeted and modified respondent-driven sampling. Participants completed a structured interview, including six-month timeline follow-back, after informed consent. Logistic regression was used to test the association between (log-transformed) frequency of non-prescribed buprenorphine use and overdose in the previous six months, adjusted for confounding due to sex, homelessness, incarceration, substance use treatment, previous overdose, heroin/fentanyl injection, psychiatric comorbidity, and (log-transformed) frequencies of other (non-opioid) drug use.

RESULTS

Almost 89% of 356 participants were white, 50.3% were male, and 78.1% had high school or greater education. Over 27% (n = 98) reported experiencing an overdose in the past six months. After adjusting for confounding, greater frequency of non-prescribed buprenorphine use was significantly associated with lower risk of overdose (AOR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.66, 0.98; p = .0286). Experiencing an overdose more than six months ago (AOR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.24, 3.97); injection as the most common route of administration of heroin/fentanyl (AOR = 2.49, 95% CI = 1.36, 4.71); and frequency of methamphetamine use (AOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.02, 1.27) were strongly associated with increased risk of recent overdose in multivariable analysis.

DISCUSSION

The findings support our hypothesis that higher frequency of non-prescribed buprenorphine use is associated with lower risk of drug overdose, a potential harm reduction consequence of diversion. Improving the availability of buprenorphine though standard substance use disorder treatment, primary care, and other innovative methods is urgently needed.

Depression and Outcomes of Methadone and Buprenorphine Treatment Among People with Opioid Use Disorders: A Literature Review

Objective: Depression is the most common psychiatric comorbidity among people with opioid use disorders (OUDs). However, whether and how comorbid depression is associated with the outcomes of opioid agonist therapy (OAT) remains poorly understood. The objective of this review was to identify and describe the association between depression and main outcomes (opioid use and treatment retention) of methadone and buprenorphine treatment among people with OUDs. Methods: A literature review was conducted by searching five electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews [EBMR], and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL] Complete) from January 1970 to April 2019. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts of the identified records by using pre-established eligibility criteria. Next, full texts were reviewed and studies that met inclusion criteria were selected. Finally, a descriptive synthesis of extracted data was performed. Results: In total, 12,296 records were identified and 18 studies that met inclusion criteria were retained. Of these, six studies reported reduced opioid use and seven reported increased opioid use during methadone or buprenorphine treatment. In addition, three studies reported an increased retention rate and four documented a decreased retention rate during methadone or buprenorphine treatment. The remaining studies did not find any significant association between depression and opioid use or treatment retention. Overall, the evidence did not demonstrate a consistent association between depression and outcomes of methadone or buprenorphine treatment. Conclusions: Although the inconsistent nature of the current evidence prohibited us from drawing definitive conclusions, we posit that the presence of depression among OUDs patients may not always predict negative outcomes related to retention and drug use during the course of OAT. Particularly, the hypothesis that adequate treatment of depression can improve treatment retention is promising and is in line with the call for increased efforts to provide integrated care for comorbid mental health disorders and addiction. Future studies with rigorous methodology are essential to better characterize the complex interplay between depression, OAT, and OUDs.

Acute Care, Prescription Opioid Use, and Overdose Following Discontinuation of Long-Term Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Although buprenorphine treatment reduces risk of overdose and death in opioid use disorder, most patients discontinue treatment within a few weeks or months. Adverse health outcomes following buprenorphine discontinuation were compared among patients who were successfully retained beyond 6 months of continuous treatment, a minimum treatment duration recently endorsed by the National Quality Forum.

METHODS

A retrospective longitudinal cohort analysis was performed using the MarketScan multistate Medicaid claims database (2013-2017), covering 12 million beneficiaries annually. The sample included adults (18-64 years of age) who received buprenorphine continuously for ≥180 days by cohorts retained for 6-9 months, 9-12 months, 12-15 months, and 15-18 months. For outcome assessment in the postdiscontinuation period, patients had to be continuously enrolled in Medicaid for 6 months after buprenorphine discontinuation. Primary adverse outcomes included all-cause emergency department visits, all-cause inpatient hospitalizations, opioid prescriptions, and drug overdose (opioid or non-opioid).

RESULTS

Adverse events were common across all cohorts, and almost half of patients (42.1%-49.9%) were seen in the emergency department at least once. Compared with patients retained on buprenorphine for 6-9 months (N=4,126), those retained for 15-18 months (N=931) had significantly lower odds of emergency department visits (odds ratio=0.75, 95% CI=0.65-0.86), inpatient hospitalizations (odds ratio=0.79, 95% CI=0.64-0.99), and filling opioid prescriptions (odds ratio=0.67, 95% CI=0.56-0.80) in the 6 months following discontinuation. Approximately 5% of patients across all cohorts experienced one or more medically treated overdoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of acute care service use and overdose were high following buprenorphine discontinuation irrespective of treatment duration. Superior outcomes became significant with treatment duration beyond 15 months, although rates of the primary adverse outcomes remained high.

Development of vaccines to treat opioid use disorders and reduce incidence of overdose

Vaccines offer a promising therapeutic strategy to treat substance use disorders (SUD). Vaccines have shown extensive preclinical proof of selectivity, safety, and efficacy against opioids, nicotine, cocaine, methamphetamine, and designer drugs. Despite clinical evaluation of vaccines targeting nicotine and cocaine showing proof of concept for this approach, no vaccine for SUD has yet reached the market. This review first discusses how vaccines for treatment of opioid use disorders (OUD) and reduction of opioid-induced fatal overdoses fit within the current medication assisted treatment (MAT) portfolio, and then summarizes ongoing efforts toward translation of vaccines targeting heroin, oxycodone, fentanyl, and other opioids. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'New Vistas in Opioid Pharmacology'.

Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: An Overview

Opioid use disorder affects over 26 million individuals worldwide. There are currently three World Health Organization-recommended and US Food and Drug Administration-approved medication treatments for opioid use disorder: the full opioid agonist methadone, the opioid partial agonist buprenorphine, and the opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone. We provide a review of the use of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder and discuss the barriers, challenges, risks, and efficacy of buprenorphine treatment vs. other treatments. Although evidence from numerous studies has shown buprenorphine to be effective for the treatment of opioid use disorder, a majority of patients with opioid use disorder do not receive buprenorphine, or any other medical treatment. We review the different formulations of buprenorphine, including newer long-acting injectable formulations that may decrease the risk of diversion and improve adherence.

Impact of drug consumption rooms on risk practices and access to care in people who inject drugs in France: the COSINUS prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

The high prevalence of hepatitis C and the persistence of HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) risk practices in people who inject drugs (PWID) in France underlines the need for innovative prevention interventions. The main objective of this article is to describe the design of the COSINUS cohort study and outline the issues it will explore to evaluate the impact of drug consumption rooms (DCR) on PWID outcomes. Secondary objectives are to assess how DCR (a) influence other drug-related practices, such as the transition from intravenous to less risky modes of use, (b) reduce drug use frequency/quantity, (c) increase access to treatment for addiction and comorbidities (infectious, psychiatric and other), (d) improve social conditions and (e) reduce levels of violence experienced and drug-related offences. COSINUS will also give us the opportunity to investigate the impact of other harm reduction tools in France and their combined effect with DCR on reducing HIV-HCV risk practices. Furthermore, we will be better able to identify PWID needs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Enrollment in this prospective multi-site cohort study started in June 2016. Overall, 680 PWID in four different cities (Bordeaux, Marseilles, Paris and Strasbourg) will be enrolled and followed up for 12 months through face-to-face structured interviews administered by trained staff to all eligible participants at baseline (M0), 3 month (M3), 6 month (M6) and 12 month (M12) follow-up visits. These interviews gather data on socio-demographic characteristics, past and current drug and alcohol consumption, drug-use related practices, access to care and social services, experience of violence (as victims), offences, other psychosocial issues and perception and needs about harm reduction interventions and services. Longitudinal data analysis will use a mixed logistic model to assess the impact of individual and structural factors, including DCR attendance and exposure to other harm reduction services, on the main outcome (HIV-HCV risk practices).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of the French Institute of Medical Research and Health (opinion number: 14-166). The findings of this cohort study will help to assess the impact of DCR on HIV-HCV risk practices and other psycho-social outcomes and trajectories. Moreover, they will enable health authorities to shape health and harm reduction policies according to PWID needs. Finally, they will also help to improve current harm reduction and therapeutic interventions and to create novel ones.

Associations between implementation of Project Lazarus and opioid analgesic dispensing and buprenorphine utilization in North Carolina, 2009-2014

Background

Project Lazarus (PL) is a seven-strategy, community-coalition-based intervention designed to reduce opioid overdose and dependence. The seven strategies include: community education, provider education, hospital emergency department policy change, diversion control, support programs for patients with pain, naloxone policies, and addiction treatment expansion. PL was originally developed in Wilkes County, NC. It was made available to all counties in North Carolina starting in March 2013 with funding of up to $34,400 per county per year. We examined the association between PL implementation and 1) overall dispensing rate of opioid analgesics, and 2) utilization of buprenorphine. Buprenorphine is often used in connection with medication assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid dependence.

Methods

Observational interrupted time series analysis of 100 counties over 2009–2014 (n = 7200 county-months) in North Carolina. The intervention period was March 2013–December 2014. 74 of 100 counties implemented the intervention. Exposure data sources comprised process surveys, training records, Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) data, and methadone treatment program quality data. Outcomes were PDMP-derived counts of opioid prescriptions and buprenorphine patients. Incidence Rate Ratios were estimated with adjusted GEE Poisson regression models of all seven PL strategies.

Results

In adjusted models, diversion control efforts were positively associated with increased dispensing of opioid analgesics (IRR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.09). None of the other PL strategies were associated with reduced prescribing of opioid analgesics. Support programs for patients with pain were associated with a non-significant decrease in buprenorphine utilization (IRR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.85, 1.02), but addiction treatment expansion efforts were associated with no change in buprenorphine utilization (IRR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.06).

Conclusions

Implementation of PL strategies did not appreciably reduce opioid dispensing and did not increase buprenorphine utilization. These results are consistent with previous findings of limited impact of PL strategies on overdose morbidity and mortality. Future studies should analyze the uptake of MAT using a more expansive view of institutional barriers, treating community coalition activity around MAT as an effect modifier.

Personal viewpoint on opioid agonist therapy and transplantation

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is an increasing public health problem. Transplant centers worldwide are being confronted with increasing numbers of patients with opioid use disorder and end stage organ disease. Opioid agonist therapy (OAT; ie, methadone, buprenorphine, and buprenorphine/naloxone) is a scientifically proven, effective, physician-prescribed treatment for OUD. Although data in transplant populations remain limited, studies suggest that OAT does not appear to negatively affect graft or patient survival. Policies that require discontinuation of OAT for purposes of listing or transplantation contradict the evidence base for efficacy of OAT. Additional prospective outcomes studies on OAT and transplantation are needed. In the meantime, centers should not be asking patients to come off these effective treatments.

Profile, risk practices and needs of people who inject morphine sulfate: Results from the ANRS-AERLI study

AIMS

In France, a non-negligible proportion of opioid-dependent individuals inject morphine sulfate. Although it has not yet been officially approved as an opioid substitution treatment (OST), some physicians can prescribe its use for people in methadone or buprenorphine treatment failure. Longitudinal data from the ANRS-AERLI study, which evaluated an educational intervention for safer injection called AERLI, provided us the opportunity to better characterize the profile, risk practices and needs of people who inject morphine sulfate (MSI), through comparison with other injectors, and to identify correlates of HIV/HCV risk practices in this group.

METHODS

The national multisite ANRS-AERLI study assessed the impact of AERLI offered in volunteer harm reduction (HR) centers ("with intervention") (n = 113) through comparison with standard HR centers ("without intervention") (n = 127). All participants were scheduled to be followed up for 12 months and have 3 telephone interviews: at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. We compared MSI (n = 79) with other opioid injectors (n = 161) and then used a mixed logistic model to identify factors associated with HIV/HCV risk practices among MSI.

FINDINGS

Of the 240 eligible participants, 79 were regular MSI. They were less likely to use cocaine, crack or buprenorphine and to receive OST than other participants. Conversely, MSI were more likely to inject drugs more than three times a day and to report HIV/HCV risk practices. Among MSI, multivariate analysis showed that those receiving morphine sulfate as an OST were less likely to report such practices than other participants (aOR [95%CI] = 0.11 [0.02-0.61]).

CONCLUSION

Our results show that while MSI use fewer stimulants, they have more HIV/HCV risk practices than other injectors. However, when MSI are prescribed morphine sulfate as a treatment, these practices tend to decrease. Our findings suggest the importance of increasing access to morphine sulfate as a new OST in France.

Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative Improves Care of Neonatal Narcotic Abstinence Syndrome

OBJECTIVES

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) after an infant's in-utero exposure to opioids has increased dramatically in incidence. No treatment standards exist, leading to substantial variations in practice, degree of opioid exposure, and hospital length of stay.

METHODS

The Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative conducted an extensive multi-modal quality improvement initiative with the goal to (1) standardize identification, nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment in level-2 and 3 NICUs in Ohio, (2) reduce the use of and length of treatment with opioids, and (3) reduce hospital length of stay in pharmacologically treated newborns with NAS.

RESULTS

Fifty-two of 54 (96%) Ohio NICUs participated in the collaborative. Compliance with the nonpharmacologic bundle improved from 37% to 59%, and the pharmacologic bundle improved from 59% to 68%. Forty-eight percent of the 3266 opioid-exposed infants received pharmacologic treatment of symptoms of NAS, and this rate did not change significantly across the time period. Regardless of the opioid used to pharmacologically treat infants with NAS, the length of treatment decreased from 13.4 to 12.0 days, and length of stay decreased from 18.3 to 17 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized approaches to the identification and nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic care were associated with a reduced length of opioid exposure and hospital stay in a large statewide collaborative. Other states and institutions treating opioid-exposed infants may benefit from the adoption of these practices.

Physician prescribing of opioid agonist treatments in provincial correctional facilities in Ontario, Canada: A survey

Background

Substance use and substance use disorders are common in people who experience detention or incarceration in Canada, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT) may reduce the harms associated with substance use disorders. We aimed to define current physician practice in provincial correctional facilities in Ontario with respect to prescribing OAT and to identify potential barriers and facilitators to prescribing OAT.

Methods

We invited all physicians practicing in the 26 provincial correctional facilities for adults in Ontario to participate in an online survey.

Results

Twenty-seven physicians participated, with representation from most correctional facilities in Ontario. Of participating physicians, 52% reported prescribing methadone and 48% reported prescribing buprenorphine/naloxone to patients in provincial correctional facilities. Nineteen percent of participants reported initiating methadone treatment and 11% reported initiating buprenorphine/naloxone for patients in custody. Participants identified multiple barriers to initiating OAT in provincial correctional facilities including concerns about medication diversion and safety, concerns about initiating treatment in patients who are not currently using opioids, lack of linkage with community-based providers and the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services policy. Identified facilitators to initiating OAT were support from institutional health care staff and administrative staff, adequate resources for program delivery and access to linkage with community-based OAT providers.

Conclusions

This study identifies opportunities to improve OAT programs and to improve access to OAT for persons in provincial correctional facilities in Ontario.

Willingness to receive intravenous buprenorphine treatment in opioid-dependent people refractory to oral opioid maintenance treatment: results from a community-based survey in France

Background

Injectable opioids are an interesting option for people who inject drugs (PWID) that do not respond to oral Opioid Maintenance Treatment (OMT). To date, intravenous (IV) buprenorphine - a safer drug than full-opioid agonists in terms of overdose risk - has never been tested in a clinical trial on opioid dependence. We designed a survey to better understand the profile of PWID eligible for IV buprenorphine, and their willingness to receive it.

Methods

This cross-sectional community-based national survey was conducted through face-to-face interviews (in low-threshold and addiction care services) and online questionnaires (on https://psychoactif.org and other websites). Among the 557 participants, we selected those who were eligible for IV buprenorphine treatment (history of oral OMT, regular opioid injection) (n = 371). We used regression models to study factors associated with willingness to receive IV buprenorphine treatment among those with data on willingness (n = 353). In those who were willing (n = 294), we subsequently studied their willingness to receive daily supervised IV buprenorphine treatment.

Results

Among the selected 353 participants, 59% mainly injected buprenorphine, 15% heroin, 16% morphine sulfate and 10% other opioids. Eighty-three percent of the sample reported willingness to receive IV buprenorphine treatment. Factors associated with willingness were: more than 5 injection-related complications, regular buprenorphine injection, no lifetime overdose, and completion of the questionnaire online. Factors associated with unwillingness to receive daily supervised treatment were younger age (OR[IC95%]=1.04[1.01; 1.07]) and stable housing (OR[IC95%]=0.61[0.37;1.01]) while regular heroin injectors were more willing to receive daily supervision (OR[IC95%]=2.94 [1.42; 6.10]).

Conclusions

PWID were very willing to receive intravenous buprenorphine as a treatment, especially those with multiple injection-related complications. In addition, our findings show that IV buprenorphine may be less acceptable to PWID who inject morphine sulfate. Young PWID and those with stable housing were unwilling to receive IV buprenorphine if daily supervision were required. This preliminary study provides useful information for the development of a clinical trial on IV buprenorphine treatment.

Abuse liability of intravenous buprenorphine vs. buprenorphine/naloxone: Importance of absolute naloxone amount

BACKGROUND

This study sought to determine the relative importance of a range of Bup/Nx doses compared to Bup alone in producing subjective and reinforcing effects.

METHODS

Heroin-using volunteers (n=13) were transitioned onto daily oral hydromorphone (40mg). Laboratory sessions assessed the reinforcing and subjective effects of intravenous (IV) doses of Bup (1.51, 2.16, 6.15, and 8.64mg) and Bup/Nx (1.51/0.44, 2.16/0.61, 6.15/1.71, and 8.64/2.44mg). Placebo (Pbo), heroin (25mg) and Nx (0.3mg) were tested as neutral, positive, and negative controls, respectively.

RESULTS

IV Bup alone was self-administered substantially less than IV heroin, though the two largest doses of Bup produced positive subjective effects, drug "Liking" (0-100mm), which were comparable to heroin (mean difference: Heroin vs Bup 6.15mg: -3.4mm, Heroin vs Bup 8.64mg: -11.3mm). All indicators of abuse potential seen with IV Bup alone were substantially decreased with the addition of Nx. All Bup/Nx combinations produced ratings of aversive effects, "Bad", which were comparable to, or greater than IV, Nx. On three of the four measures of aversive effects, the largest difference is seen with the 8.64 vs 8.64/2.44 condition.

CONCLUSIONS

This study further demonstrates the ability of the Bup/Nx combination to deter IV use. Although none of the Bup/Nx combinations showed indications of abuse potential, formulations with larger absolute Nx, may be less abusable as they precipitate a greater degree of withdrawal.

Patterns of physician prescribing for opioid maintenance treatment in Ontario, Canada in 2014

BACKGROUND

Despite concerns surrounding high patient volumes in methadone clinics, little is known about the practice patterns of opioid maintenance therapy (OMT) providers in Ontario. We examined the distribution of these services and how physician characteristics differ based on prescribing volume.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study among prescribers of methadone or buprenorphine to Ontario public drug beneficiaries in 2014 by stratifying physicians into low- (lower 50%), moderate- (51-89%) and high-volume (top 10%) prescribers. We summarized the distribution of OMT prescription days dispensed and urine drug screens (UDS) ordered using Lorenz curves and examined physician characteristics using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

We identified 893 OMT prescribers in 2014. Physicians were mostly male (67.5%; N=603), and middle-aged (median was 50). High-volume methadone providers (N=57) prescribed approximately 56% (N=4,115,322) of the total days of methadone (Gini coefficient=0.76, 95% CI 0.74-0.79) while high-volume buprenorphine providers (N=64) prescribed 61% (N=589,463) of the total days of buprenorphine (Gini coefficient=0.78, 95% CI 0.75-0.80). On average, each high-volume methadone prescriber treated 435 OMT patients and billed 43 UDS per patient, while each high-volume buprenorphine prescriber treated 64 OMT patients and billed 22 UDS per patient. Daily OMT patient volume was on average 74 for high-volume methadone prescribers and 6 for high-volume buprenorphine prescribers.

CONCLUSIONS

OMT services are highly concentrated among a small portion of OMT providers who carry high daily patient volumes. Future research should examine the quality of primary care received by their patients to better elucidate the possible consequences of this highly unequal distribution of services.

Opiate Drugs with Abuse Liability Hijack the Endogenous Opioid System to Disrupt Neuronal and Glial Maturation in the Central Nervous System

The endogenous opioid system, comprised of multiple opioid neuropeptide and receptor gene families, is highly expressed by developing neural cells and can significantly influence neuronal and glial maturation. In many central nervous system (CNS) regions, the expression of opioid peptides and receptors occurs only transiently during development, effectively disappearing with subsequent maturation only to reemerge under pathologic conditions, such as with inflammation or injury. Opiate drugs with abuse liability act to modify growth and development by mimicking the actions of endogenous opioids. Although typically mediated by μ-opioid receptors, opiate drugs can also act through δ- and κ-opioid receptors to modulate growth in a cell-type, region-specific, and developmentally regulated manner. Opioids act as biological response modifiers and their actions are highly contextual, plastic, modifiable, and influenced by other physiological processes or pathophysiological conditions, such as neuro-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. To date, most studies have considered the acute effects of opiates on cellular maturation. For example, activating opioid receptors typically results in acute growth inhibition in both neurons and glia. However, with sustained opioid exposure, compensatory factors become operative, a concept that has been largely overlooked during CNS maturation. Accordingly, this article surveys prior studies on the effects of opiates on CNS maturation, and also suggests new directions for future research in this area. Identifying the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the adaptive responses to chronic opiate exposure (e.g., tolerance) during maturation is crucial toward understanding the consequences of perinatal opiate exposure on the CNS.

Non-Prescribed Buprenorphine in New York City: Motivations for Use, Practices of Diversion, and Experiences of Stigma

Non-medical use of opioid analgesics (OAs) has increased in the United States over the past decade. Concurrently, access to opioid agonist therapies (OATs) such as buprenorphine has expanded. However, there has been little in-depth qualitative exploration into circumstances surrounding buprenorphine diversion and non-prescribed use. This study reports on qualitative data from in-depth interviews conducted with persons in New York City reporting non-medical OA use in the past 12 months. Participants (n=42) were aged between 18 and 49 years. The majority were male (n=29) and non-Hispanic White (n=35). All participants self-reported physical opioid dependence. Motivations for non-prescribed buprenorphine use included the abatement of withdrawal symptoms or a self-initiated detoxification or treatment plan. Few participants reported buprenorphine use for euphoric effect, and no participants reported using buprenorphine as a primary drug. Buprenorphine diversion primarily occurred as a means of supporting ongoing illicit drug use, and no participants reported selling buprenorphine as a primary source of income. Participants reported misinformation around some key areas of buprenorphine induction and use, as well as stigma within peer networks and from drug treatment providers. As access to buprenorphine treatment continues to expand in the United States, enhancing patient education is a critical step toward minimizing diversion and incidental harms from non-prescribed use.

Addiction Treatment Within U.S. Correctional Facilities: Bridging the Gap Between Current Practice and Evidence-Based Care

The United States leads the world in creating prisoners. This epidemic of incarceration is largely due to the "War on Drugs," which has resulted in criminalization of the disease of addiction. Half of prisoners have an active substance use disorder yet a minority receives formal treatment. Opioid agonist maintenance is among the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder. Maintenance treatment reduces illicit opioid use, crime, recidivism, and cost, yet few correctional facilities provide this lifesaving treatment. Increased access to opioid agonist maintenance as well as reexamination of drug policy is necessary to address this costly and morbid incarceration epidemic.

HIV infection among persons who inject drugs: ending old epidemics and addressing new outbreaks

AIDS among persons who inject drugs, first identified in December 1981, has become a global epidemic. Injecting drug use has been reported in 148 countries and HIV infection has been seen among persons who inject drugs in 61 countries. Many locations have experienced outbreaks of HIV infection among persons who inject drugs, under specific conditions that promote very rapid spread of the virus. In response to these HIV outbreaks, specific interventions for persons who inject drugs include needle/syringe exchange programs, medicated-assisted treatment (with methadone or buprenorphine) and antiretroviral therapy. Through a 'combined prevention' approach, these interventions significantly reduced new HIV infections among persons who inject drugs in several locations including New York City, Vancouver and France. The efforts effectively ended the HIV epidemic among persons who inject drugs in those locations. This review examines possible processes through which combined prevention programs may lead to ending HIV epidemics. However, notable outbreaks of HIV among persons who inject drugs have recently occurred in several countries, including in Athens, Greece; Tel-Aviv, Israel; Dublin, Ireland; as well as in Scott County, Indiana, USA. This review also considers different factors that may have led to these outbreaks. We conclude with addressing the remaining challenges for reducing HIV infection among persons who inject drugs.

The Supply of Physicians Waivered to Prescribe Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorders in the United States: A State-Level Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approval of buprenorphine in 2002 expanded options for treating opioid use disorder (OUD). Physicians who intend to treat OUD patients with buprenorphine must seek a waiver to prescribe it, which may contribute to state-by-state variation in the supply of waivered physicians.

METHOD

This study integrates data extracted from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency's database of waivered physicians with state-level indicators of the macro environment, health-related resources, and treatment demand.

RESULTS

In December 2013, the average state had 8.0 waivered physicians per 100,000 residents (SD = 5.2). Large regional differences between states in the Northeast relative to states in the Midwest, South, and West were observed. The percentage of residents covered by Medicaid as well as the population-adjusted availability of opioid treatment programs and substance use disorder treatment facilities were positively associated with buprenorphine physician supply. Buprenorphine physician supply was positively correlated with states' rates of overdose deaths, suggesting that physicians may seek the waiver in response to the magnitude of the opioid problem in their state.

CONCLUSIONS

States with greater health-related resources, particularly in terms of the supply of opioid treatment programs and substance use disorder treatment programs, had more waivered physicians in 2013. The finding regarding Medicaid coverage suggests that states implementing Medicaid expansion under health reform may experience additional growth in buprenorphine physician supply. However, large regional disparities in the supply of waivered physicians may impede access to care for many Americans with OUD.

States' implementation of the Affordable Care Act and the supply of physicians waivered to prescribe buprenorphine for opioid dependence

BACKGROUND

Although the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is anticipated to affect substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, its impact on the supply of physicians waivered to treat opioid dependence with buprenorphine has not been considered. This study examined whether states more supportive of ACA, meaning those that had opted to expand Medicaid and establish a state-based health insurance exchange, experienced greater growth in physician supply than less supportive states.

METHODS

Buprenorphine physician supply, including total physician supply, supply of 30-patient physicians, and supply of 100-patient physicians per 100,000 state residents, was measured from June 2013 to May 2015. State characteristics were drawn from multiple secondary sources, with states categorized as ACA-supportive, ACA-hybrid (where states either expanded Medicaid or established a state-based exchange), or ACA-resistant (where states took neither action). Mixed effects regression was used to estimate state-level growth curves to test whether rates of growth varied by states' approaches to implementing ACA.

RESULTS

The supply of waivered physicians grew significantly over the two-year period. Rates of growth were significantly lower in ACA-hybrid and ACA-resistant states relative to growth in ACA-supportive states. Average buprenorphine physician supply at baseline varied by region, the percentage of residents covered by Medicaid, and the supply of specialty SUD treatment programs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found a positive impact of the ACA on growth in the supply of buprenorphine-waivered physicians in US states. Future research should address whether the ACA affects the number of patients receiving buprenorphine, Medicaid spending, and the quality of treatment services delivered.

Opiate addiction therapies and HIV-1 Tat: interactive effects on glial [Ca²⁺]i, oxyradical and neuroinflammatory chemokine production and correlative neurotoxicity

Few preclinical studies have compared the relative therapeutic efficacy of medications used to treat opiate addiction in relation to neuroAIDS. Here we compare the ability of methadone and buprenorphine, and the prototypic opiate morphine, to potentiate the neurotoxic and proinflammatory ([Ca²⁺]i, ROS, H2O2, chemokines) effects of HIV-1 Tat in neuronal and/or mixed-glial co-cultures. Repeated observations of neurons during 48 h exposure to combinations of Tat, equimolar concentrations (500 nM) of morphine, methadone, or buprenorphine exacerbated neurotoxicity significantly above levels seen with Tat alone. Buprenorphine alone displayed marked neurotoxicity at 500 nM, prompting additional studies of its neurotoxic effects at 5 nM and 50 nM concentrations ± Tat. In combination with Tat, buprenorphine displayed paradoxical, concentration-dependent, neurotoxic and neuroprotective actions. Buprenorphine neurotoxicity coincided with marked elevations in [Ca²⁺]i, but not increases in glial ROS or chemokine release. Tat by itself elevated the production of CCL5/RANTES, CCL4/MIP-1β, and CCL2/MCP-1. Methadone and buprenorphine alone had no effect, but methadone interacted with Tat to further increase production of CCL5/RANTES. In combination with Tat, all drugs significantly increased glial [Ca²⁺]i, but ROS was only significantly increased by co-exposure with morphine. Taken together, the increases in glial [Ca²⁺]i, ROS, and neuroinflammatory chemokines were not especially accurate predictors of neurotoxicity. Despite similarities, opiates displayed differences in their neurotoxic and neuroinflammatory interactions with Tat. Buprenorphine, in particular, was partially neuroprotective at a low concentration, which may result from its unique pharmacological profile at multiple opioid receptors. Overall, the results reveal differences among addiction medications that may impact neuroAIDS.

Implementation of a Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome Weaning Protocol: A Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the generalizability of stringent protocol-driven weaning in improving total duration of opioid treatment and length of inpatient hospital stay after treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 981 infants who completed pharmacologic treatment of NAS with methadone or morphine from January 2012 through August 2014. Before July 2013, 3 of 6 neonatology provider groups (representing Ohio's 6 children's hospitals) directed NAS nursery care by using group-specific treatment protocols containing explicit weaning guidelines. In July 2013, a standardized weaning protocol was adopted by all 6 groups. Statistical analysis was performed to identify effects of adoption of the multicenter weaning protocol on total duration of opioid treatment and length of hospital stay at the protocol-adopting sites and at the sites with preexisting protocol-driven weaning.

RESULTS

After adoption of the multicenter protocol, infants treated by the 3 groups previously without stringent weaning guidelines experienced shorter duration of opioid treatment (23.0 vs 34.0 days, P < .001) and length of inpatient hospital stay (23.7 vs 31.6 days, P < .001). Protocol-adopting sites also experienced a lower rate of adjunctive drug therapy (5% vs 21%, P = .004). Outcomes were sustained by the 3 groups who initially had specific weaning guidelines after multicenter adoption (duration of treatment = 17.0 days and length of hospital stay = 23.3 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of a stringent weaning protocol resulted in improved NAS outcomes, demonstrating generalizability of the protocol-driven weaning approach. Opportunity remains for additional protocol refinement.

National and State Treatment Need and Capacity for Opioid Agonist Medication-Assisted Treatment

OBJECTIVES

We estimated national and state trends in opioid agonist medication-assisted treatment (OA-MAT) need and capacity to identify gaps and inform policy decisions.

METHODS

We generated national and state rates of past-year opioid abuse or dependence, maximum potential buprenorphine treatment capacity, number of patients receiving methadone from opioid treatment programs (OTPs), and the percentage of OTPs operating at 80% capacity or more using Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration data.

RESULTS

Nationally, in 2012, the rate of opioid abuse or dependence was 891.8 per 100 000 people aged 12 years or older compared with national rates of maximum potential buprenorphine treatment capacity and patients receiving methadone in OTPs of, respectively, 420.3 and 119.9. Among states and the District of Columbia, 96% had opioid abuse or dependence rates higher than their buprenorphine treatment capacity rates; 37% had a gap of at least 5 per 1000 people. Thirty-eight states (77.6%) reported at least 75% of their OTPs were operating at 80% capacity or more.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant gaps between treatment need and capacity exist at the state and national levels. Strategies to increase the number of OA-MAT providers are needed.

Abuse potential of intranasal buprenorphine versus buprenorphine/naloxone in buprenorphine-maintained heroin users

In spite of the clinical utility of buprenorphine, parenteral abuse of this medication has been reported in several laboratory investigations and in the real world. Studies have demonstrated lower abuse liability of the buprenorphine/naloxone combination relative to buprenorphine alone. However, clinical research has not yet examined the utility of the combined formulation to deter intranasal use in a buprenorphine-maintained population. Heroin-using volunteers (n = 12) lived in the hospital for 8-9 weeks and were maintained on each of three sublingual buprenorphine doses (2, 8, 24 mg). Under each maintenance dose, participants completed laboratory sessions during which the reinforcing and subjective effects of intranasal doses of buprenorphine (8, 16 mg), buprenorphine/naloxone (8/2, 8/8, 8/16, 16/4 mg) and controls (placebo, heroin 100 mg, naloxone 4 mg) were assessed. Intranasal buprenorphine alone typically produced increases in positive subjective effects and the 8 mg dose was self-administered above the level of placebo. The addition of naloxone dose dependently reduced positive subjective effects and increased aversive effects. No buprenorphine/naloxone combination dose was self-administered significantly more than placebo. These data suggest that within a buprenorphine-dependent population, intranasal buprenorphine/naloxone has reduced abuse potential in comparison to buprenorphine alone. These data strongly argue in favor of buprenorphine/naloxone rather than buprenorphine alone as the more reasonable option for managing the risk of buprenorphine misuse.

Treatment readiness, attitudes toward, and experiences with methadone and buprenorphine maintenance therapy among people who inject drugs in Malaysia

BACKGROUND

Little is known about attitudes toward and experiences with opioid maintenance therapy (OMT) among people who inject drugs in Malaysia, a country where people who inject drugs comprise 1.3% of the adult population.

METHODS

In 2010, 460 people who inject drugs in Greater Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia were surveyed to evaluate attitudes toward and experiences with OMT and treatment readiness. Attitudes towards OMT with both methadone and buprenorphine were assessed using an opinions scale. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess correlates of treatment readiness, measured with the 19-item Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES).

RESULTS

All 460 participants used opioids and nearly all (99.1%) met criteria for opioid dependence. Few had had previous experience with methadone (9.3%) or buprenorphine (12.6%) maintenance therapy, yet many had used methadone (55.2%) or buprenorphine (51.7%) outside of treatment settings. Fifteen percent had injected buprenorphine in the past month, and of the few that were currently receiving buprenorphine maintenance therapy, almost all were injecting it. The majority of subjects exhibited a moderate level of treatment readiness and a preference for methadone over buprenorphine. Those with low treatment readiness scores were more likely to have previous experience with compulsory drug detention centers (p<0.01), needle/syringe exchange programs (p<0.005), or be of Indian ethnicity (p<0.001). Past use of methadone (p<0.01), older age (p<0.001), higher stress symptom severity (p<0.001), and sharing of needles or syringes (p<0.05) were associated with higher treatment readiness scores.

CONCLUSION

There are suboptimal levels of OMT experience among people who inject drugs that may be improved by addressing factors that influence patient attitudes. Those individuals with moderate treatment readiness may be targeted by brief motivational and cognitive interventions in primary care, prisons or OMT clinics aimed at improving entry into and retention in treatment.

A review of buprenorphine diversion and misuse: the current evidence base and experiences from around the world

Outpatient opioid addiction treatment with sublingual buprenorphine pharmacotherapy has rapidly expanded in the United States and abroad, and, with this increase in medication availability, there have been increasing concerns about its diversion, misuse, and related harms. This narrative review defines the behaviors of diversion and misuse, examines how the pharmacology of buprenorphine alone and in combination with naloxone influence its abuse liability, and describes the epidemiological data on buprenorphine diversion and intravenous misuse, risk factors for its intravenous misuse, and the unintended consequences of misuse and diversion. Physician practices to prevent, screen for, and therapeutically respond to these behaviors, which are a form of medication nonadherence, are discussed, and gaps in knowledge are identified. Outpatient opioid addiction treatment with sublingual buprenorphine pharmacotherapy experiences from other countries that have varied health care systems, public policies, and access to addiction treatment are shared to make clear that diversion and misuse occur across the world in various contexts, for many different reasons, and are not limited to buprenorphine. Comparisons are made with other opioids with known abuse liability and medications with no known abuse. The objective was to facilitate understanding of diversion and misuse so that all factors influencing their expression (patient and provider characteristics and public policy) can be appreciated within a framework that also recognizes the benefits of addiction treatment. With this comprehensive perspective, further careful work can help determine how to minimize these behaviors without eroding the current benefits realized through improved addiction treatment access and expansion.