Long-term safety of a weekly and monthly subcutaneous buprenorphine depot (CAM2038) in the treatment of adult out-patients with opioid use disorder

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

An Australian retrospective observational cohort comparison of the use of long-acting injectable buprenorphine products

INTRODUCTION

In early 2019, Australia became the first jurisdiction to have two brands of long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAI-B) products available. Previously published studies have mostly followed pre-planned dosing schedules and seldom compared use of both products. This study presents a retrospective analysis of the "real-world" dosing requirements of patients on LAI-B.

METHOD

Five clinics provided data for patients commenced on LAI-B between 1 February 2019 and 30 June 2021 for buprenorphine doses and intervals between dosing. The study recorded basic demographic data including age, gender, and previous dose of transmucosal buprenorphine. The Local Institutional Ethics Committee provided approval.

RESULTS

Over 3600 individual doses (59 % Buvidal® & 41 % Sublocade®) were administered to 340 individual patients (median age 40 years, 63 % male), with the longest duration in treatment of 856 days. Median estimated duration of a treatment episode was 16.5 months (95%CI: 14.3-19.1). Approximately 94 % transferred from transmucosal buprenorphine (median daily dose 16 mg, range 2-32 mg). Most common LAI-B doses were Sublocade® 100 mg (22.4 %) and Buvidal® Monthly 128 mg (21.5 %); Buvidal® Weekly 24 mg (0.8 %) was least used. 13 % transitioned between LAI-B products. Weekly dose intervals were a median 7 days and monthly doses were given a median of 28 days apart. Overall, 36 % discontinued LAI-B before the census date.

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Most patients who started LAI-B remained in treatment, with similar rates in both products. A small, but appreciable number of people switched brands, suggesting that it remains important to have treatment options available.

Provider Perceptions toward Extended-Release Buprenorphine for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVES

The persistence of the opioid crisis and the proliferation of synthetic fentanyl have heightened the demand for the implementation of novel delivery mechanisms of pharmacotherapy for the treatment of opioid use disorder, including injectable extended-release buprenorphine (buprenorphine-ER). The purpose of this study was to understand provider-level barriers to prescribing buprenorphine in order to facilitate targeted strategies to improve implementation for patients who would benefit from this novel formulation.

METHODS

Using an interview template adapted from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted structured focus group interviews with 20 providers in an outpatient addiction clinic across 4 sessions to assess providers' perceptions of buprenorphine-ER. Ninety-four unique comments were identified and deductively coded using standardized CFIR constructs.

RESULTS

Providers expressed mixed receptivity and confidence in using buprenorphine-ER. Although providers could identify a number of theoretical advantages to the injectable formulation over sublingual buprenorphine, many expressed reservations about using it due to inexperience, negative patient experiences, uncertainties about patient candidacy, cost, and logistical constraints.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider concerns about buprenorphine-ER may limit utilization. Some concerns may be mitigated through improved education, research, and logistical support. Given the putative benefits of buprenorphine-ER, future research should target barriers to implementation, in part based on hypotheses generated by these findings.

Direct induction onto high-dose long-acting injectable buprenorphine: A case series

INTRODUCTION

This case series reports on five patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) who were commenced directly onto high-dose long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB).

METHOD

A retrospective audit and manual review of the electronic medical record at cohealth Innerspace was conducted for patients who had been directly inducted onto high-dose LAIB.

RESULTS

Five cases were identified on retrospective manual file review. All patients identified were males aged between 33 and 60 years old and were treated with either high-dose Buvidal Weekly and Monthly preparations. No immediate significant adverse effects were noticed and 4 out of 5 remain engaged with treatment.

CONCLUSION

This case series shows it is possible to directly induct patients with OUD onto high-dose LAIB preparations without significant side effects or harm to the patient and could be considered a viable option in the treatment of patients with OUD.

Predictive factors for acceptance of a long-acting opiate substitution treatment studied through social representations and internalized stigma

OBJECTIVES

Opioid use disorder is a public health problem worldwide with a treatment gap partially due to sociocultural representation and stigma. Taking the opportunity of an authorization to a subcutaneous (SC) injectable solution of buprenorphine, the first and only injectable treatment for opioid dependence available in France, we investigate potential obstacles to its implementation in France.

METHODS

This study aimed to define the factors predicting the acceptance of a new SC form of opiate substitution treatment (OST) by comparing the social representations using an adapted version of the Explanatory Model Interview Catalogue (EMIC) and the internalized stigma of intravenous drug injection using the Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness Inventory (ISMI) between participants receiving OST likely to accept the SC form or not. We also observed whether the fear of an opiate withdrawal syndrome could influence this choice.

RESULTS

Fifty OST patients were included, 54% of them accepted a new SC form of OST. Perceived causes of drug injection measured with EMIC were significantly lower among participants who would not accept the new SC form. No significant difference was found regarding the total score of the adapted ISMI or its items. The fear of opiate withdrawal syndrome did not seem to be statistically related to acceptance of a long-acting SC OST in either group. The most discriminating combination of factors in predicting patient acceptance of such treatment was related to the perceived causes of drug injection associated with a severe Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th version (DSM-5) diagnosis, and a lower alcohol consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed significant differences in social representations but not in internalized stigma between the two groups. Moreover, the predictive factors linked to the acceptance of a new SC form of OST suggest a multifactorial combination of elements that will have to be tested in a larger and prospective study delivering long-acting high-dose buprenorphine.

96-week retention in treatment with extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine depot injections among people with opioid dependence: Extended follow-up after a single-arm trial

BACKGROUND

The most recent formulation of buprenorphine treatment is extended-release depot injections (BUP-XR) that are administered subcutaneously by health care professionals. This study aimed to observe treatment outcomes of BUP-XR delivered in standard practice during a 96-week follow-up period in a community setting.

METHODS

This study is an extension of the CoLAB study, a prospective single-arm, multicentre, open label trial (N=100, 7 sites in Australia) among people with opioid dependence who received monthly injections of BUP-XR to evaluate the retention in treatment. Participants were followed for 96 weeks, comprising 48 weeks of the CoLAB study followed by a 48-week extension.

RESULTS

Of 100 participants at baseline, 47 were retained on BUP-XR at 96 weeks. The median time retained on monthly depot was 90 weeks. Heroin use (adjusted OR=0.19, P=0.012) in the month prior to baseline was associated with lower odds of retention on BUP-XR. Older age at first opioid use (adjusted OR= 1.08, P=0.009) and longer duration in OAT at baseline (adjusted OR= 1.12, P=0.001) were associated with increased retention. Prevalence of past four-weeks opioid use was estimated at 4% at 96 weeks of treatment (prevalence 0.04, 95%CI: 0.00-0.11) compared to 15% at baseline. Quality of life and medication treatment satisfaction improved over time for those retained in treatment.

CONCLUSION

This is one of the few studies to describe long term (96 week) retention in treatment with BUP-XR in a community setting. It displayed retention rates with 47% of participants completing 96 weeks of treatment with BUP-XR. Patient reported outcomes suggest improvements in client wellbeing.

FUNDING

Indivior.

Patients' perspectives on buprenorphine subcutaneous implant: a case series

BACKGROUND

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

CASE PRESENTATION

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The FASTER-BUP Study, Extended-Release Injectable Buprenorphine for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder Among Individuals at High Risk of Overdose: Protocol for an Observational Prospective Study

North America is facing an unprecedented public health emergency of opioid-related morbidity and mortality. The mortality benefits of oral medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD), such as methadone or buprenorphine, are well documented. However, barriers to access and long-term engagement have prevented maximizing their benefits. Long-acting injectable buprenorphine formulations were developed to address some of the challenges associated with oral MOUD. The "Pilot study to assess the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of extended-release injectable buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder among individuals at high risk of overdose" (FASTER-BUP) was developed to explore this treatment option in populations at high risk of overdose in a real-world Canadian setting. FASTER-BUP is a 24-week observational prospective study evaluating the feasibility and clinical utility of extended-release injectable buprenorphine (XR-BUP) for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) among 40 adults at high risk of overdose (ie, lifetime history of overdose or a positive urine drug test (UDT) for fentanyl within 30 days prior to screening) in Vancouver, BC. The primary outcome is retention in treatment and secondary outcomes include: use of unregulated opioids, safety, overdose events, treatment satisfaction, changes in drug-related problems, changes in quality of life, opioid cravings, health service utilization, and criminal activity. FASTER-BUP is the first study to explore XR-BUP among individuals at high risk of overdose in a real-world Canadian setting. This commentary provides a brief narrative about the study thus far and presents insights on key adaptations to the study protocol, including those adopted to mitigate recruitment challenges.

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

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

Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine from a harm reduction perspective in patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities: a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine may increase access to opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for patients with opioid use disorder in different treatment phases. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of depot buprenorphine among Swedish patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities.

METHOD

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with OAT patients with experience of depot buprenorphine. Recruitment took place at two OAT clinics with a harm reduction focus, specializing in the treatment of patients with ongoing substance use and multiple comorbidities. Nineteen participants were included, 12 men and seven women, with a mean age of 41 years (range 24-56 years), and a mean of 21 years (5-35 years) of experience with illicit substance use. All participants had ongoing substance use and psychiatric comorbidities such as ADHD, anxiety, mood, psychotic and eating disorders. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was conducted both manually and using qualitative data analysis software.

RESULTS

Participants reported social benefits and positive changes in self-perception and identity. In particular, depot buprenorphine contributed to a realization that it was possible to make life changes and engage in activities not related to substance use. Another positive aspect that emerged from the interviews was a noticeable relief from perceived pressure to divert OAT medication, while some expressed the lack of income from diverted oral/sublingual OAT medication as a negative, but still acceptable, consequence of the depot buprenorphine. Many participants considered that the information provided prior to starting depot buprenorphine was insufficient. Also, not all patients found depot buprenorphine suitable, and those who experienced coercion exhibited particularly negative attitudes towards the medication.

CONCLUSIONS

OAT patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities reported clear benefits of depot buprenorphine, including changes in self-perception which has been theorized to play an important role in recovery. Clinicians should consider the specific information needs of this population and the extensive diversion of traditional OAT medications in this population to improve the treatment experience and outcomes. Overall, depot buprenorphine is a valuable treatment option for a population in need of harm reduction and may also contribute to psychological changes that may facilitate recovery in those with the greatest need.

The impact of changes in opioid dependency treatment upon COVID-19 transmission in Sydney, Australia: a retrospective longitudinal observational study

BACKGROUND

In April 2020, in response to the COVID-19 public health emergency, South Eastern Sydney Local Health District (SESLHD) Drug and Alcohol services modified their delivery of opioid dependency treatment (ODT) to reduce spread of COVID-19 and maintain continuity of care by increasing use of takeaway doses (TADs), transferring clients to local community pharmacies for dosing and encouraging the use of long-acting depot buprenorphine (LADB) which enabled once a month dosing.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective longitudinal case-control study conducted from August 1st, to November 30th, 2021. Eligible clients were those admitted for treatment with SESLHD ODT Services prior to August 1st,2021 and who remained in treatment beyond November 30th, 2021. COVID-19 diagnoses were determined by a COVID-19 PCR and extracted from the electronic Medical Records (eMR) Discern Reporting Portal. Demographic, clinical and dosing related data were collected from eMR and the Australian Immunisation Register (AIR).

RESULTS

Clients attending SESLHD ODT services had significantly greater odds of acquiring COVID-19 than the NSW adult population at large (OR: 13.63, 95%CI: 9.64,18.88). Additionally, amongst SESLHD ODT clients, being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander origin was associated with greater odds of acquiring COVID-19 (OR = 2.18, CI: 1.05,4.53); whilst being employed (OR = 0.06, CI:0.01,0.46), receiving doses at pharmacy (OR = 0.43, CI: 0.21,0.89), and being vaccinated (OR = 0.12, CI: 0.06,0.26) were associated with lower odds. Every additional day of attendance required for dosing was associated with a 5% increase in odds of acquiring COVID-19 (OR = 1.05, CI: 1.02,1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Clients attending SESLHD ODT services are significantly more likely to acquire COVID-19 than the NSW population at large. Promoting vaccination uptake, transferring clients to pharmacy, and reducing the frequency of dosing (by use of takeaway doses or long-acting depot buprenorphine) are all potential methods to reduce this risk.

Trends in use of medicines for opioid agonist treatment in Australia, 2013-2022

BACKGROUND

There are limited longitudinal data on national patterns of opioid agonist treatment (OAT). This study describes 10-year trends in the sales of OAT medicines in Australia.

METHODS

A descriptive and time-series analysis of methadone, sublingual (SL) buprenorphine (+/-naloxone), and long-acting injectable (LAI) buprenorphine sold in Australia between 2013 and 2022 was performed. Total units sold were converted into an estimate of the number of clients that could be treated over a 28-day period with that amount of medicine ('client-months').

RESULTS

Between January 2013 and December 2022, the estimated number of client-months on: any OAT increased by 50 % to 53,501, methadone decreased (-8.5%), SL buprenorphine increased (+78%), and LAI buprenorphine increased substantially after September 2019. In January 2013, 78 % of OAT client-months received methadone. By December 2022, 48 % received methadone, 26 % SL buprenorphine, and 26 % LAI buprenorphine. Between 2013 to 2022, OAT client-months per capita were highest in the state of New South Wales. Over the study period, greater increases in OAT were observed in very remote areas (88%) compared to major cities (53%). The number of client-months in non-community pharmacy settings remained stable from 2013 to 2019/20, before increasing markedly. The introduction of LAI buprenorphine was associated with an immediate, sustained increase of 1,636 OAT client-months, and further increases of 190 OAT client-months each month.

CONCLUSION

Patterns of OAT have shifted over the last 10-years with buprenorphine (SL/LAI) now the most common OAT used in Australia. The introduction of LAI buprenorphine has expanded OAT access, particularly in non-community pharmacy settings, and in remote areas.

What to Expect With Pregnant or Postpartum Prescribing of Extended-Release Buprenorphine (CAM2038)

Weekly and monthly CAM2038 (Brixadi®) extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine (XR bup) has been available in Europe and Australia for several years and was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in May 2023. Little is known about the clinical experience of patients and providers using this new medication during prenatal care. Two cases of pregnant persons with opioid use disorder receiving weekly XR bup in an ongoing randomized multi-site outpatient clinical trial are presented along with a brief review of the pharmacology and literature on XR bup formulations. The cases in pregnancy illustrate how treatment with the weekly formulation is initiated including how to make dose adjustments, which may be necessary given the longer half-life; it takes 1 month to achieve steady state. Injection site pain with medication administration was time limited and managed readily. Other injection site reactions experienced included subcutaneous erythema and induration that was delayed in onset and typically mild, resolving with minimal intervention. Delivery management and breastfeeding recommendations while on weekly XR bup were not different compared to sublingual buprenorphine (SL bup). Weekly XR bup is a new treatment for opioid use disorder that may be used in the obstetric population. Obstetric and addiction medicine clinicians should be aware of this new formulation as its use is expected to increase.

Early emergency department experience with 7-day extended-release injectable buprenorphine for opioid use disorder

As the opioid overdose epidemic escalates, there is an urgent need for treatment innovations to address both patient and clinician barriers when initiating buprenorphine in the emergency department (ED). These include insurance status, logistical challenges such as the ability to fill a prescription and transportation, concerns regarding diversion, and availability of urgent referral sites. Extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) preparations such as a new 7-day injectable could potentially solve some of these issues. We describe the pharmacokinetics of a new 7-day XR-BUP formulation and the feasibility of its use in the ED setting. We report our early experiences with this medication (investigational drug CAM2038), in the context of an ongoing clinical trial entitled Emergency Department-Initiated BUP VAlidaTION (ED INNOVATION), to inform emergency clinicians as they consider incorporating this medication into their practice. The medication was approved by the European Medicines Agency in 2018 and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2023 for those 18 years or older for the treatment of moderate to severe opioid use disorder (OUD). We report our experience with approximately 800 ED patients with OUD who received the 7-day XR-BUP preparation in the ED between June 2020 and July 2023.

18-Month efficacy and safety analysis of monthly subcutaneous buprenorphine injection for opioid use disorder: Integrated analysis of phase 3 studies

BACKGROUND

Few studies investigate the natural history of patients on long-term treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). We evaluated the long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability experience of monthly extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR) in participants seeking treatment for OUD, via integrated analysis of phase 3 studies.

METHODS

Study 1 was a 24-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of participants receiving monthly injections of BUP-XR (300 mg × 2, 100 mg × 4 [n = 203] or 300 mg × 6 [n = 201]) or placebo (n = 100). Study 2 was a 48-week, open-label trial enrolling 257 participants who completed study 1 and 412 de novo participants, to receive 6 and 12 BUP-XR injections, respectively. Study 3 was a 24-week, open-label extension enrolling 208 participants who completed study 2 for 6 additional injections. We assessed opioid abstinence as the proportion of urine opioid negative participants by visit and the percentage of each participant's negative opioid assessments during the first 6 months.

RESULTS

In total, 916 participants were treated with BUP-XR or placebo. By the end of 18 months, 92.7 % of the de novo cohort and 81.8 % of the study 1 cohort were urine negative for opioids. Among early nonresponders (percentage of abstinence ≤20 %), 73.1 % were urine negative after 18 months. The longer treatment period was well tolerated, with no new safety concerns, and a low incidence of opioid withdrawal signs and symptoms, and hepatic disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Extending BUP-XR treatment beyond 6 months sustained improvement in opioid abstinence and was well tolerated, supporting clinical benefit up to 18 months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02357901 (study 1); NCT02510014 (study 2); NCT02896296 (study 3).

Integrating long-acting injectable treatment to improve medication adherence among persons living with HIV and opioid use disorder: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Oral antiretroviral therapy (ART) has been effective at reducing mortality rates of people with HIV. However, despite its effectiveness, people who use drugs face barriers to maintaining ART adherence. Receipt of opioid agonist treatment, in the context of HIV care, is associated with medication adherence and decreased HIV viral loads. Recent pharmacological advancements have led to the development of novel long-acting, injectable, medications for both HIV (cabotegravir co-administered with rilpivirine) and OUD (extended-release buprenorphine). These therapies have the potential to dramatically improve adherence by eliminating the need for daily pill-taking. Despite the extensive evidence base supporting long-acting injectable medications for both HIV and OUD, and clinical guidelines supporting integrated care provision, currently little is known about how these medications may be optimally delivered to this population. This paper presents the study design for the development of a clinical protocol to guide the delivery of combined treatment for HIV and OUD using long-acting injectable medications.

METHODS

The study aims are to: (1) develop a clinical protocol to guide the delivery of combined LAI for HIV and OUD by conducting in-depth interviews with prospective patients, clinical content experts, and other key stakeholders; and (2) conduct This single group, open pilot trial protocol to assess feasibility, acceptability, and safety among patients diagnosed with HIV and OUD. Throughout all phases of the study, information on patient-, provider-, and organizational-level variables will be collected to inform future implementation.

DISCUSSION

Findings from this study will inform the development of a future study to conduct a fully-powered Hybrid Type 1 Effectiveness-Implementation design.

Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis Supports Initiation Treatment and Bridging from Sublingual Buprenorphine to Subcutaneous Administration of a Buprenorphine Depot (CAM2038) in the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In treating opioid use disorder (OUD), subcutaneous (SC) extended-release buprenorphine (BPN) depots, e.g., CAM2038, have been shown to provide smaller and less frequent fluctuations in BPN plasma concentrations and pharmacodynamic responses, improve outcomes, reduce treatment burden, and lower risks of misuse and diversion compared to daily sublingual (SL) BPN. This analysis characterized the pharmacokinetics (PK) of BPN following intravenous and SL administration, and administration of SC CAM2038 weekly and monthly.

METHODS

Pharmacokinetic data from two Phase 1 and two Phase 2 trials in healthy participants and participants with OUD, respectively, were used to develop a population PK model using non-linear mixed effects modelling. The analysis included data from 252 participants and 10,658 BPN observations.

RESULTS

The disposition of BPN was best described by a three-compartment model with first-order elimination, and absorption of SL BPN and SC CAM2038 weekly and monthly by dual parallel absorption pathways. Model diagnostics indicated good predictive performance of BPN concentrations. Buprenorphine plasma concentration-time profiles were simulated for treatment initiation, switching from SL BPN to CAM2038 weekly and monthly, and tapering after interrupting treatment with CAM2038. Simulations predicted CAM2038 weekly and monthly doses that provided BPN plasma maximum concentration (Cmax) and trough concentration (Ctrough) values at steady state within those observed following SL BPN administration.

CONCLUSIONS

This population PK model supports the use of CAM2038 doses as individualized treatment for OUD across different treatment stages, including initiation, switching from SL BPN according to established dose conversion schedules, and tapering.

TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

ISRCTN41550730 (05/19/2014), ISRCTN24987553 (07/29/2014), NCT02611752 (11/23/2015), NCT02710526 (03/16/2016).

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Buprenorphine versus methadone for the treatment of opioid dependence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and observational studies

BACKGROUND

Opioid dependence is associated with substantial health and social burdens, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is highly effective in improving multiple outcomes for people who receive this treatment. Methadone and buprenorphine are common medications provided as OAT. We aimed to examine buprenorphine compared with methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence across a wide range of primary and secondary outcomes.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with GATHER and PRISMA guidelines. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO from database inception to Aug 1, 2022; clinical trial registries and previous relevant Cochrane reviews were also reviewed. We included all RCTs and observational studies of adults (aged ≥18 years) with opioid dependence comparing treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. Primary outcomes were retention in treatment at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, treatment adherence (measured through doses taken as prescribed, dosing visits attended, and biological measures), or extra-medical opioid use (measured by urinalysis and self-report). Secondary outcomes were use of benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, amphetamines, and alcohol; withdrawal; craving; criminal activity and engagement with the criminal justice system; overdose; mental and physical health; sleep; pain; global functioning; suicidality and self-harm; and adverse events. Single-arm cohort studies and RCTs that collected data on buprenorphine retention alone were also reviewed. Data on study, participant, and treatment characteristics were extracted. Study authors were contacted to obtain additional data when required. Comparative estimates were pooled with use of random-effects meta-analyses. The proportion of individuals retained in treatment across multiple timepoints was pooled for each drug. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020205109).

FINDINGS

We identified 32 eligible RCTs (N=5808 participants) and 69 observational studies (N=323 340) comparing buprenorphine and methadone, in addition to 51 RCTs (N=11 644) and 124 observational studies (N=700 035) that reported on treatment retention with buprenorphine. Overall, 61 studies were done in western Europe, 162 in North America, 14 in north Africa and the Middle East, 20 in Australasia, five in southeast Asia, seven in south Asia, two in eastern Europe, three in central Europe, one in east Asia, and one in central Asia. 1 040 827 participants were included in these primary studies; however, gender was only reported for 572 111 participants, of whom 377 991 (66·1%) were male and 194 120 (33·9%) were female. Mean age was 37·1 years (SD 6·0). At timepoints beyond 1 month, retention was better for methadone than for buprenorphine: for example, at 6 months, the pooled effect favoured methadone in RCTs (risk ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·67-0·85]; I·=74·2%; 16 studies, N=3151) and in observational studies (0·77 [0·68-0·86]; I·=98·5%; 21 studies, N=155 111). Retention was generally higher in RCTs than observational studies. There was no evidence suggesting that adherence to treatment differed with buprenorphine compared with methadone. There was some evidence that extra-medical opioid use was lower in those receiving buprenorphine in RCTs that measured this outcome by urinalysis and reported proportion of positive urine samples (over various time frames; standardised mean difference -0·20 [-0·29 to -0·11]; I·=0·0%; three studies, N=841), but no differences were found when using other measures. Some statistically significant differences were found between buprenorphine and methadone among secondary outcomes. There was evidence of reduced cocaine use, cravings, anxiety, and cardiac dysfunction, as well as increased treatment satisfaction among people receiving buprenorphine compared with methadone; and evidence of reduced hospitalisation and alcohol use in people receiving methadone. These differences in secondary outcomes were based on small numbers of studies (maximum five), and were often not consistent across study types or different measures of the same constructs (eg, cocaine use).

INTERPRETATION

Evidence from trials and observational studies suggest that treatment retention is better for methadone than for sublingual buprenorphine. Comparative evidence on other outcomes examined showed few statistically significant differences and was generally based on small numbers of studies. These findings highlight the imperative for interventions to improve retention, consideration of client-centred factors (such as client preference) when selecting between methadone and buprenorphine, and harmonisation of data collection and reporting to strengthen future syntheses.

FUNDING

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Buprenorphine Treatment For Opioid Use Disorder: Comparison Of Insurance Restrictions, 2017-21

Buprenorphine is a treatment medication that decreases mortality risks among people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Despite its efficacy, buprenorphine is underused in the US. Insurance restrictions are commonly cited as barriers to buprenorphine prescribing. Using Medicaid, Medicare Advantage, and commercial insurance formulary files, we examined insurance-imposed utilization restrictions for buprenorphine for OUD for each year from 2017 to 2021 by insurance type. Almost all plans covered immediate-release buprenorphine in 2021, with a general trend of decreasing prior authorization requirements and quantity limits since 2017. In contrast, two payers had relatively low coverage of extended-release buprenorphine, with only 46 percent of commercial plans and only 19 percent of Medicare Advantage plans covering this formulation. Even though most Medicaid plans covered extended-release buprenorphine in 2021, 37 percent required prior authorization. Policy makers and researchers concerned with buprenorphine insurance barriers should shift their attention to extended-release buprenorphine. State lawmakers could help address these barriers by mandating that insurers include extended-release buprenorphine on their preferred drug lists.

Outpatient substance abuse treatment completion rates for racial-ethnic minorities during the Great Recession

There has been minimal research linking the effects on racial-ethnic minorities' health outcomes, particularly research focused on racial-ethnic minorities seeking outpatient substance abuse treatment in the United States. The Great Recession from December 2007 to June 2009 in the United States provides the backdrop against the completion of substance abuse treatments among racial-ethnic minorities that may be associated with the impacts on users' social realities. We utilized data from the 2006-2011 Treatment Episode Datasets-Discharge (TEDS-D) dataset which collects data on outpatient substance abuse treatment institutions throughout the United States. The substance abuse treatment completion rates were higher prior to the Great Recession and lower following the Great Recession. Hispanics were more likely than non-Hispanic whites to complete substance abuse treatment, while other minority groups such as Non-Hispanic Blacks, were less likely to do so. Clients in the Northeast and West regions were more likely to successfully complete substance abuse treatment than those in the South. These findings have implications for impacting outpatient substance abuse treatment completion rates following the Great Recession to reduce racial-ethnic disparities which were impacted by region. Even amid an economic recession, treatment for substance abuse should continue to be a top concern.

Health and correctional staff acceptability of depot buprenorphine in NSW prisons

BACKGROUND

Provision of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) in custodial settings is resource-intensive and may be associated with diversion, non-medical use, and violence. A clinical trial of a new OAT, depot buprenorphine (the UNLOC-T study), provided the opportunity to obtain health and correctional staff perspectives regarding this treatment prior to widespread roll-out.

METHODS

Sixteen focus groups with 52 participants were conducted, including 44 health staff (nurses, nurse practitioners, doctors, and operational staff) and eight correctional staff.

RESULTS

Key challenges to providing OAT identified as potentially being addressed by depot buprenorphine included 1) patient access, 2) OAT program capacity, 3) treatment administration procedures, 4) medication diversion and other safety issues and, 5) impact on other service delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of depot buprenorphine into correctional settings was considered to have the potential to increase safety for patients, improve staff / patient relations and advance patient health outcomes via expanded treatment coverage and efficiencies gained through enhanced health service delivery. Support was almost universal from both correctional and health staff participating in this study. These findings build on emerging research regarding the positive impact of more flexible OAT programs and could be used to engage support for the implementation of depot buprenorphine from staff in other secure settings.

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

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

Perioperative Management of Extended-release Buprenorphine

Perioperative management of buprenorphine is increasingly characterized by continuation of buprenorphine throughout the perioperative period while coadministering full agonist opioids for analgesia. Although this "simultaneous strategy" is commonly used for the shorter-acting sublingual buprenorphine formulations, there is little to guide management of the extended-release formulations of buprenorphine. Here we report the perioperative experience of an individual maintained on extended-release buprenorphine who successfully underwent major surgeries utilizing a strategy of performing the surgeries at the time of the next scheduled dose.

Depot buprenorphine as an opioid agonist therapy in New South Wales correctional centres: a costing model

Background

In 2019 daily liquid methadone and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone were primary opioid agonist treatments for correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia. However, both had significant potential for diversion to other patients, and their daily administration was resource intensive. An alternative treatment in the form of subcutaneous depot buprenorphine became a viable option following a safety trial in 2020 – the UNLOC-T study. Depot preparation demonstrated advantages over current treatments as more difficult to divert and requiring fewer administrations. This paper reports the results of economic modelling of staffing costs in medication administration comparing depot buprenorphine, methadone, and sublingual buprenorphine provision in UNLOC-T trial facilities.

Methods

The costing study adopted a micro-costing approach involving the synthesis of cost data from the UNLOC-T clinical trial as well as data collected from Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network records. Labour and materials data were collected during site observations and interviews. Costs were calculated from two payer perspectives: a) the New South Wales (state) government which funds custodial and health services; and b) the Australian Commonwealth government, which pays for medications. The analysis compared the monthly-per-patient cost for each of the three medications in trial-site facilities during July 2019. This was followed by simulation of depot buprenorphine implementation across the study population. Costs associated with medical assessment and reviews were excluded.

Results

The monthly-per-patient New South Wales government service costs of depot buprenorphine, methadone and sublingual buprenorphine were: $151, $379 and $1,529 respectively while Commonwealth government medication costs were $434, $80 and $525. The implementation simulation found that service costs of depot buprenorphine declined as patients transitioned from weekly to monthly administration. Costs of treatment using the other medications increased as patient numbers decreased alongside fixed costs. At 12 months, monthly-per-patient service costs for depot buprenorphine, methadone and sublingual buprenorphine—which would be completely phased out by month 13—were $92, $530 and $2,162 respectively.

Conclusions

Depot buprenorphine was consistently the least costly of the treatment options. Future modelling could allow for dynamic patient populations and downstream impacts for participants and the state health system.

Trial registration

ACTRN12618000942257. Registered 4 June 2018.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08687-8.

Long-acting injectable buprenorphine - 'best practice' opioid agonist therapy for Australian prisoners

OBJECTIVE

To consider opioid agonist therapy in prisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the substantial risks of substance misuse by prisoners, long-acting injectable buprenorphine should be adopted as 'best practice' treatment in Australian prison populations.

Can a new formulation of opiate agonist treatment alter stigma?: Place, time and things in the experience of extended-release buprenorphine depot

INTRODUCTION

Stigma has corrosive effects on all aspects of care and can undermine individual and population health outcomes. Addiction-related stigma has implications for opiate agonist treatment (OAT) and the people who receive, provide and fund it. It is important to understand how stigma is made in OAT and the political purposes that it serves, in order to change the relations of stigma and avoid the reproduction of stigma in the delivery of new treatment formulations, such as extended release buprenorphine (BUP-XR).

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted at two time points with participants in a prospective single-arm, multicentre, open-label trial of monthly BUP-XR. Thirty-six participants (25 men, 11 women) were interviewed, and of these 32 participated in a second interview to explore their experience of transition from other treatment to BUP-XR.

RESULTS

Participants were highly aware of the of the social and material effects of stigma through the negative stereotypes attached to OAT and those who receive it. Participants narrated examples of how stigma governed as a biopower in the relations and practices of OAT provision at numerous levels: structural (such as in public discourse about OAT and the people who receive it, in media, in perceptions about the decisions of investment in medical technologies); organisational (policies about legitimate access to OAT); interpersonal (with health workers) and individual (self-identities). BUP-XR allowed greater freedom and normalcy for clients. The experience of BUP-XR drew attention to the stigmatising potential of time, place and things associated with other OAT requiring daily (or frequent) dosing, accentuating how stigma comes to be materialised as a relational effect of everyday practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving BUP-XR allowed participants to avoid some of the everyday biopolitical powers of other forms of OAT and to reshape self-identities. The altering of relations between time, place and things associated with other forms of OAT allowed participants to feel as though they "pass as normal" . However, the negative public discourse and stigma of OAT is a potential threat to BUP-XR to realise its potential for individual and population benefits.

Sustained drug delivery strategies for treatment of common substance use disorders: Promises and challenges

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are a leading cause of death and other ill health effects in the United States and other countries in the world. Several approaches ranging from detoxification, behavioral therapy, and the use of antagonists or drugs with counter effects are currently being applied for its management. Amongst these, drug therapy is the mainstay for some drug abuse incidences, as is in place specifically for opioid abuse or alcohol dependence. The severity of the havocs observed with the SUDs has triggered constant interest in the discovery and development of novel medications as well as suitable or most appropriate methods for the delivery of these agents. The chronic need of such drugs in users warrants the need for their prolonged or sustained systemic availability. Further, the need to improve patient tolerance to medication, limit invasive drug use and overall treatment outcome are pertinent considerations for embracing sustained release designs for medications used in managing SUDs. This review aims to provide an overview on up-to-date advances made with regards to sustained delivery systems for the drugs for treatment of different types of SUDs such as opioid, alcohol, tobacco, cocaine, and cannabis use disorders. The clinical relevance, promises and the limitations of deployed sustained release approaches along with future opportunities are discussed.

Sex specific effects of buprenorphine on behavior, astrocytic opioid receptor expression and neuroinflammation after pediatric traumatic brain injury in mice

Children who suffered traumatic brain injury (TBI) often experience acute and chronic pain, which is linked to a poor quality of life. Buprenorphine (BPN) is commonly used to treat moderate to severe persistent pain in children, however, the efficacy and safety profile of BPN in the pediatric population is still inconclusive. This study investigated the sex-specific effects of BPN on body weight, motor coordination and strength, expression of opioid receptors in the white matter astrocytes, and neuroinflammation in a mouse impact acceleration model of pediatric TBI. Male and female littermates were randomized on postnatal day 20-21(P20-21) into Sham, TBI + saline and TBI + BPN groups. Mice in the TBI + saline and TBI + BPN groups underwent TBI, while the Sham group underwent anesthesia without injury. BPN (0.075 mg/kg) was administered to the TBI + BPN mice at 30 min after injury, and then every 6-12 h for 2 days. Mice in the TBI + saline group received the same amount of saline injections. The impact of BPN on body weight, motor function, opioid receptor expression, and neuroinflammation was evaluated at 1-day (d), 3-d and 7-d post-injury. We found that 1) TBI induced significant weight loss in both males and females. BPN treatment improved weight loss at 3-d post-injury in females. 2) TBI significantly impaired motor coordination and strength. BPN improved motor coordination and strength in both males and females at 1-d and 3-d post-injury. 3) TBI significantly decreased exploration activity at 1-d post-injury in males, and at 7-d post-injury in females, while BPN improved the exploration activity in females. 4) TBI significantly increased mRNA expression of mu-opioid receptors (MOR) at 7-d post-injury in males, but decreased mRNA expression of MOR at 1-d post-injury in females. BPN normalized MOR mRNA expression at 1-d post-injury in females. 5) MOR expression in astrocytes at corpus callosum significantly increased at 7-d post-injury in male TBI group, but significantly decreased at 1-d post-injury in female TBI group. BPN normalized MOR expression in both males and females. 6) TBI significantly increased the mRNA expression of TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6 and iNOS. BPN decreased mRNA expression of iNOS, and increased mRNA expression of TGF-β1. In conclusion, this study elucidates the sex specific effects of BPN during the acute phase after pediatric TBI, which provides the rationale to assess potential effects of BPN on chronic pathological progressions after pediatric TBI in both males and females.

Clinical Case Conference: Strategies for Transferring From Methadone to Buprenorphine

The mainstay of treatment for opioid use disorder are medications, methadone (a full opioid agonist), or buprenorphine (a partial opioid agonist), in conjunction with psychosocial interventions. Both treatments are effective but safety, efficacy, and patient preference can lead to a decision to change from one treatment to the other. Transfer from buprenorphine to methadone is not clinically challenging; however, changing from methadone to buprenorphine is more complex. Published reports describe varied approaches to manage this transfer to both minimize patient symptoms associated with withdrawal from methadone and reduce risk of precipitating withdrawal symptoms with introduction of the partial agonist buprenorphine [Lintzeris et al. J Addict Med. 2020; in press]. There is no single approach for methadone to buprenorphine that is superior to others and no approach that is suitable for all case presentations. This case conference describes three different approaches to achieve a successful methadone to buprenorphine transfer and provides commentary on how the case may be managed based on published transfer "strategies."

Treatment of opioid dependence with depot buprenorphine (CAM2038) in custodial settings

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Opioid agonist treatment is effective but resource intensive to administer safely in custodial settings, leading to significant under-treatment of opioid dependence in these settings world-wide. This study assessed the safety of subcutaneous slow-release depot buprenorphine in custody.

DESIGN

Open-label, non-randomized trial.

SETTING

Correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-seven men and women, aged ≥ 18 years of various security classifications with a diagnosis of moderate to severe DSM-5 opioid use disorder currently serving a custodial sentence of ≥ 6 months were recruited between November 2018 and July 2019. Patients not in opioid agonist treatment at recruitment commenced depot buprenorphine; patients already stable on oral methadone treatment were recruited to the comparison arm.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Depot buprenorphine (CAM2038 weekly for 4 weeks then monthly) and daily oral methadone.

MEASUREMENTS

Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring and physical examinations at every visit. Participants were administered a survey assessing self-reported diversion and substance use at baseline and weeks 4 and 16.

FINDINGS

Retention in depot buprenorphine treatment was 92.3%. Ninety-four per cent of patients reported at least one adverse event, typically mild and transient. No diversion was identified. The prevalence of self-reported non-prescribed opioid use among depot buprenorphine patients decreased significantly between baseline (97%) and week 16 (12%, odds ratio = 0.0035, 95% confidence interval = 0.0007-0.018, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This first study of depot buprenorphine in custodial settings showed treatment retention and outcomes comparable to those observed in community settings and for other opioid agonist treatment used in custodial settings, without increased risk of diversion.

Rationale, design and methods of VA-BRAVE: a randomized comparative effectiveness trial of two formulations of buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder in veterans

Background

To address the US opioid epidemic, there is an urgent clinical need to provide persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) with effective medication treatments for OUD (MOUD). Formulations of sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (SL-BUP/NLX) are considered the standard of care for OUD including within the Veterans Healthcare Administration (VHA). However, poor retention on MOUD undermines its effectiveness. Long-acting injectable monthly buprenorphine (INJ-BUP) (e.g., Sublocade®) has the potential to improve retention and therefore reduce opioid use and overdose. Designing and conducting studies for OUD pose unique challenges. The strategies and solutions to some of these considerations in designing Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) 2014, Buprenorphine for Treating Opioid Use Disorder in Veterans (VA-BRAVE), a randomized, 20-site, clinical effectiveness trial comparing INJ-BUP to SL-BUP/NLX conducted within the VHA may provide valuable guidance for others confronted with similar investigation challenges.

Methods

This 52-week, parallel group, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluates the comparative effectiveness of two current FDA-approved formulations of buprenorphine: (1) daily SL-BUP/NLX vs. (2) monthly (28-day) INJ-BUP for Veterans with moderate to severe OUD (n = 952). The primary outcomes are (1) retention in MOUD and (2) opioid abstinence. Secondary outcomes include measures of other drug use, psychiatric symptoms, medical outcomes including prevalence rates of HIV, hepatitis B and C as well as social outcomes (housing instability, criminal justice involvement), service utilization and cost-effectiveness. Special considerations in conducting a comparative effectiveness trial with this population and during COVID-19 pandemic were also included.

Discussion

The evaluation of the extended-release formulation of buprenorphine compared to the standard sublingual formulation in real-world VHA settings is of paramount importance in addressing the opioid epidemic. The extent to which this new treatment facilitates retention, decreases opioid use, and prevents severe sequelae of OUD has not been studied in any long-term trial to date. Positive findings in this trial could lead to widespread adoption of MOUD, and, if proven superior INJ-BUP, by clinicians throughout the VHA and beyond. This treatment has the potential to reduce opioid use among Veterans, improve medical, psychological, and social outcomes, and save lives at justifiable cost.

Trial registration Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04375033

Perception of a New Prolonged-Release Buprenorphine Formulation in Patients with Opioid Use Disorder: The PREDEPO Study

AIM

The aim of the study was to assess the acceptance of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) to switching their opioid dependence treatment (ODT) for a prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) injection according to their prior ODT (buprenorphine/naloxone [B/N] or methadone).

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective/cross-sectional, multicentre study of adult patients diagnosed with OUD on ODT. Data collected from diaries were analysed to know their interest and opinion on PRB. Questions with fixed response options were included, and several Likert scales were used.

RESULTS

A total of 98 patients were enrolled (B/N: 50.0%, methadone: 50.0%). The mean age was 46.9 ± 8.43 years and 79.6% were males. PRB was similarly perceived by both groups in most variables analysed, receiving a mean score of 7.2/10 (B/N: 7.4, methadone: 7.0; p = 0.520), and approximately 65% of patients said they were willing to switch to PRB (B/N: 63.3%, methadone: 65.3%; p = 0.833). Of these, a higher percentage in the B/N group considered that switching would be easy/very easy (B/N: 90.3%, methadone: 46.9%; p < 0.001) and that they would start PRB when available (B/N: 64.5%, methadone: 34.3%; p = 0.005). More than 90% would prefer the monthly injection (B/N: 93.6%, methadone: 100%; p = 0.514). One-third of patients in both groups were unsure/would not switch their ODT to PRB (B/N: 36.7%, methadone: 34.7%; p = 0.833). The main reason was administration by injection.

CONCLUSION

Two-thirds of patients would switch their treatment for PRB, and most patients on B/N considered that switching would be easy. PRB could be a suitable alternative for OUD management.

Prolonged-Release Buprenorphine Therapy in Opioid Use Disorder Can Address Stigma and Improve Patient Quality of Life

Treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) including opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is effective. Medication with the oral administration of methadone and buprenorphine has well-known limitations (establishing consistent optimal dosing levels, misuse, diversion, and accidental exposure). Treatment may require attendance at treatment services for collection and consumption of medication; this is associated with stigma and discrimination. Novel therapeutic options include approved, injectable, prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) products providing consistently optimal drug levels and less frequent dosing. This work assesses the lived experience of persons currently engaged in OUD therapy to define the potential value of novel therapeutic options in order to inform treatment decisions.

One hundred and twenty-two people engaged with treatment services participated in this assessment. Seventy-two percent of participants believed that novel therapeutic options would improve quality of life and 67% stated it would reduce stigma and discrimination. Participants were neither concerned about the efficacy of (net score negative 30%), or lack of control over (net score negative 36%) treatment, nor about reduced contact with treatment services (net score negative 11%). Results from this assessment indicate that the provision of choice including novel therapeutic options is likely to improve quality of life and reduce the stigma of persons with OUD.

Outcomes of a single-arm implementation trial of extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine depot injections in people with opioid dependence

BACKGROUND

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is an effective intervention for opioid dependence. Extended-release buprenorphine injections (BUP-XR) may have additional potential benefits over sublingual buprenorphine. This single-arm trial evaluated outcomes among people receiving 48 weeks of BUP-XR in diverse community healthcare settings in Australia, permitting examination of outcomes when BUP-XR is delivered in standard practice.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from a network of specialist public drug treatment services, primary care and some private practices in three states. Following a minimum 7 days on 8-32 mg of sublingual buprenorphine (±naloxone), participants received monthly subcutaneous BUP-XR injections administered by a healthcare practitioner and completed monthly research interviews. The primary endpoint was retention in treatment at 48 weeks.

FINDINGS

Participants (n = 100) were 28% women, mean age 44 years with a long history of OAT (median 5.8 years); heroin was the most common opioid of concern (58%). Treatment retention at 24 and 48 weeks was 86% and 75%, respectively. Participants with past-month injecting drug use (OR 0.23; 95%CI: 0.09-0.61) or heroin use (OR 0.23; 95%CI: 0.08-0.65) at baseline had lower odds of being retained in treatment to 48 weeks. Reductions in multiple forms of extra-medical drug use were observed. Improvements in quality of life, participation in employment, and treatment satisfaction measures were also observed.

INTERPRETATION

This real-world implementation study of BUP-XR demonstrated high retention and treatment satisfaction. This study provides important additional data on the uptake and experience of clients, with relevance for policy makers, health service planners, administrators, and practitioners.

FUNDING

Indivior.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03809143.

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

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

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).

Spatially and time-resolved SAXS for monitoring dynamic structural transitions during in situ generation of non-lamellar liquid crystalline phases in biologically relevant media

Formation of high viscous inverse lyotropic liquid crystalline phases in situ upon exposure of low viscous drug-loaded lipid preformulations to synovial fluid provides a promising approach for design of depot formulations for intra-articular drug delivery. Rational formulation design relies on a fundamental understanding of the synovial fluid-mediated dynamic structural transitions occurring at the administration site. At conditions mimicking the in vivo situation, we investigated in real-time such transitions at multiple positions by synchrotron small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) combined with an injection-cell. An injectable diclofenac-loaded quaternary preformulation consisting of 72/8/10/10% (w/w) glycerol monooleate/1,2-dioleoyl-glycero-3-phospho-rac-(1-glycerol)/ethanol/water was injected into hyaluronic acid solution or synovial fluid. A fast generation of a coherent drug depot of inverse bicontinuous Im3m and Pn3m cubic phases was observed. Through construction of 2D spatial maps from measurements performed 60 min after injection of the preformulation, it was possible to differentiate liquid crystalline rich- and excess hyaluronic acid solution- or synovial fluid-rich regimes. Synchrotron SAXS findings confirmed that the exposure of the preformulation to the media leads to alterations in structural features in position- and time-dependent manners. Effects of biologically relevant medium composition on the structural features, and implications for development of formulations with sustained drug release properties are highlighted.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Treatment of Opioid Dependence With Weekly and Monthly Subcutaneous Depot vs Daily Sublingual Buprenorphine: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Patient-reported outcomes in the treatment of opioid dependence may differ between subcutaneously administered depot buprenorphine and daily sublingual buprenorphine.

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient satisfaction between depot buprenorphine and sublingual buprenorphine in adult outpatients with opioid dependence.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted among adult patients with opioid dependence at 6 outpatient clinical sites in Australia from October 2018 to September 2019. Data analysis was conducted from October 2019 to May 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized to receive treatment with weekly or monthly depot buprenorphine or daily sublingual buprenorphine over 24 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was the difference in global treatment satisfaction, assessed by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) version 1.4 (range, 0-100; higher score indicates greater satisfaction) at week 24. Secondary end points included other patient-reported outcomes, including quality of life, treatment burden, and health-related outcomes, as well as measures of opioid use, retention in treatment, and safety.

RESULTS

A total of 119 participants (70 [58.8%] men; mean [SD] age, 44.4 [10.5] years) were enrolled, randomized to, and received either depot buprenorphine (60 participants [50.4%]) or sublingual buprenorphine (59 participants [49.6%]). From the initial sample of 120, a participant (0.8%) in the sublingual buprenorphine group withdrew consent and did not receive study treatment. All participants were receiving sublingual buprenorphine when enrolled. The mean TSQM global satisfaction score was significantly higher for the depot group compared with the sublingual group at week 24 (mean [SE] score, 82.5 [2.3] vs 74.3 [2.3]; difference, 8.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 14.6; P = .01). Improved outcomes were also observed for several secondary end points after treatment with depot buprenorphine (eg, mean [SE] treatment burden assessed by the Treatment Burden Questionnaire global score, on which lower scores indicate lower burden: 13.2 [2.6] vs 28.6 [2.5]; difference, -15.4; 95% CI, -22.6 to -8.2; P < .001). Thirty-nine participants (65.0%) in the depot buprenorphine group experienced 117 adverse drug reactions, mainly injection site reactions of mild intensity following subcutaneous administration, and 12 participants (20.3%) in the sublingual buprenorphine group experienced 21 adverse drug reactions. No participants withdrew from the trial medication or the trial due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, participants receiving depot buprenorphine reported improved treatment satisfaction compared with those receiving sublingual buprenorphine. The results highlight the application of patient-reported outcomes as alternative end points to traditional markers of substance use in addiction treatment outcome studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

anzctr.org.au Identifier: ANZCTR12618001759280.

Increased Treatment Engagement and Adherence: Flexible Management with Prolonged-Release Buprenorphine in Treatment of Opioid Dependence

Opioid dependence (OD) is effectively treated with well-evidenced regimens including psychosocial and opioid agonist pharmacotherapy. Many do not engage with treatment services; reasons include the burden of mandatory supervision and stigma. Injectable prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) offers choice and flexibility in treatment. Experience reported here demonstrates the potential for PRB to enable wider engagement with treatment services. Treatment was successful in patients unable to attend daily observed therapy due to work commitments, unable to use services for fear of stigma, or having not achieved goals on previous attempts with conventional approaches. PRB therapy was clinically successful without withdrawal signs or evidence of use of other drugs. Patient-reported outcomes were positive including maintained ability to work, manageable detoxification experience, and stigma-free treatment. This work provides evidence of PRB benefit in expanding treatment engagement.

Increasing access to medications for opioid use disorder: Policy analysis and proposals

Opioid overdose continues to be the leading cause of accidental death in the United States, and the prevalence of OUD continues to increase. Increased access to health insurance-specifically in regard to state-funded Medicaid programs-as well as robust formularies and limited prior authorization have been demonstrated to be effective both in treating patients with OUD, as well as producing cost savings for government and commercial payors.

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

PURPOSE

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Modulating target engagement of small molecules via drug delivery: approaches and applications in drug discovery and development

Drug-delivery technologies for modified drug release have been in existence for decades, but their utilization has been largely limited to post-launch efforts improving therapeutic outcomes. Recently, they have gained renewed importance because the pharmaceutical industry is steadily shifting to a more integrated discovery-development approach. In discovery, modulating target engagement via drug-delivery technologies can enable crucial pharmacological studies for building well-defined criteria for molecular design. In development, earlier implementation of delivery technologies can enhance the value of drug products through reduced dosing frequency and improved tolerability and/or safety profile, thereby leading to better adherence and therapeutic effectiveness.