Allan Cohen

Bringing Buprenorphine-Naloxone Detoxification to Community Treatment Providers: The NIDA Clinical Trials Network Field Experience

In October 2002, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved buprenorphine-naloxone (Suboxone) sublingual tablets as an opioid dependence treatment available for use outside traditionally licensed opioid treatment programs. The NIDA Center for Clinical Trials Network (CTN) sponsored two clinical trials assessing buprenorphine-naloxone for short-term opioid detoxification. These trials provided an unprecedented field test of its use in twelve diverse community-based treatment programs. Opioid-dependent men and women were randomized to a thirteen-day buprenorphine-naloxone taper regimen for short-term opioid detoxification. The 234 buprenorphine-naloxone patients averaged 37 years old and used mostly intravenous heroin. Direct and rapid induction onto buprenorphine-naloxone was safe and well tolerated. Most patients (83%) received 8 mg buprenorphine-2 mg naloxone on the first day and 90% successfully completed induction and reached a target dose of 16 mg buprenorphine-4 mg naloxone in three days. Medication compliance and treatment engagement was high. An average of 81% of available doses was ingested, and 68% of patients completed the detoxification. Most (80.3%) patients received some ancillary medications with an average of 2.3 withdrawal symptoms treated. The safety profile of buprenorphine-naloxone was excellent. Of eighteen serious adverse events reported, only one was possibly related to buprenorphine-naloxone. All providers successfully integrated buprenorphine-naloxone into their existing treatment milieus. Overall, data from the CTN field experience suggest that buprenorphine-naloxone is practical and safe for use in diverse community treatment settings, including those with minimal experience providing opioid-based pharmacotherapy and/or medical detoxification for opioid dependence.

Treatment Retention among Patients Randomized to Buprenorphine/Naloxone Compared to Methadone in A Multi-site Trial

AIMS To examine patient and medication characteristics associated with retention and continued illicit opioid use in methadone (MET) versus buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP) treatment for opioid dependence. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS This secondary analysis included 1267 opioid-dependent individuals participating in nine opioid treatment programs between 2006 and 2009 and randomized to receive open-label BUP or MET for 24 weeks. MEASUREMENTS The analyses included measures of patient characteristics at baseline (demographics; use of alcohol, cigarettes and illicit drugs; self-rated mental and physical health), medication dose and urine drug screens during treatment, and treatment completion and days in treatment during the 24-week trial. FINDINGS The treatment completion rate was 74% for MET versus 46% for BUP (P < 0.01); the rate among MET participants increased to 80% when the maximum MET dose reached or exceeded 60 mg/day. With BUP, the completion rate increased linearly with higher doses, reaching 60% with doses of 30-32 mg/day. Of those remaining in treatment, positive opioid urine results were significantly lower [odds ratio (OR) = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.52-0.76, P < 0.01] among BUP relative to MET participants during the first 9 weeks of treatment. Higher medication dose was related to lower opiate use, more so among BUP patients. A Cox proportional hazards model revealed factors associated with dropout: (i) BUP [versus MET, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.61, CI = 1.20-2.15], (ii) lower medication dose (<16 mg for BUP, <60 mg for MET; HR = 3.09, CI = 2.19-4.37), (iii) the interaction of dose and treatment condition (those with higher BUP dose were 1.04 times more likely to drop out than those with lower MET dose, and (iv) being younger, Hispanic and using heroin or other substances during treatment. CONCLUSIONS Provision of methadone appears to be associated with better retention in treatment for opioid dependence than buprenorphine, as does use of provision of higher doses of both medications. Provision of buprenorphine is associated with lower continued use of illicit opioids.

Predictors of outcome for short-term medically supervised opioid withdrawal during a randomized, multicenter trial of buprenorphine-naloxone and clonidine in the NIDA clinical trials network drug and alcohol dependence

Few studies in community settings have evaluated predictors, mediators, and moderators of treatment success for medically supervised opioid withdrawal treatment. This report presents new findings about these factors from a study of 344 opioid-dependent men and women prospectively randomized to either buprenorphine-naloxone or clonidine in an open-label 13-day medically supervised withdrawal study. Subjects were either inpatient or outpatient in community treatment settings; however not randomized by treatment setting. Medication type (buprenorphine-naloxone versus clonidine) was the single best predictor of treatment retention and treatment success, regardless of treatment setting. Compared to the outpatient setting, the inpatient setting was associated with higher abstinence rates but similar retention rates when adjusting for medication type. Early opioid withdrawal severity mediated the relationship between medication type and treatment outcome with buprenorphine-naloxone being superior to clonidine at relieving early withdrawal symptoms. Inpatient subjects on clonidine with lower withdrawal scores at baseline did better than those with higher withdrawal scores; inpatient subjects receiving buprenorphine-naloxone did better with higher withdrawal scores at baseline than those with lower withdrawal scores. No relationship was found between treatment outcome and age, gender, race, education, employment, marital status, legal problems, baseline depression, or length/severity of drug use. Tobacco use was associated with worse opioid treatment outcomes. Severe baseline anxiety symptoms doubled treatment success. Medication type (buprenorphine-naloxone) was the most important predictor of positive outcome; however the paper also considers other clinical and policy implications of other results, including that inpatient setting predicted better outcomes and moderated medication outcomes.

From research to the real world: buprenorphine in the decade of the Clinical Trials Network.

The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) established the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) in 1999 to bring researchers and treatment providers together to develop a clinically relevant research agenda. Initial CTN efforts addressed the use of buprenorphine, a mu-opioid partial agonist, as treatment for opioid dependence. Strong evidence of buprenorphines therapeutic efficacy was demonstrated in clinical trials involving several thousand opioid-dependent participants, and in 2002, the Food and Drug Administration approved buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid dependence. With the advent of a sublingual tablet containing both buprenorphine and naloxone to mitigate abuse and diversion (Suboxone), buprenorphine appeared poised to be the first-line treatment for opioid addiction. Notwithstanding its many attributes, certain implementation barriers remained to be addressed in CTN studies, and these efforts have brought a body of knowledge on buprenorphine to frontline clinicians. The purpose of this article is to review CTN-based buprenorphine research and related efforts to overcome challenges to the implementation of buprenorphine therapy in mainstream practice. Furthermore, this article explores current issues and future challenges that may require additional CTN efforts.

Effect of Motivational Interviewing on Reduction of Alcohol Use

BACKGROUND Methadone-maintained (MM) clients who engage in excessive alcohol use are at high risk for HIV and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Nurse-led hepatitis health promotion (HHP) may be one strategy to decrease alcohol use in this population. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of nurse-led HHP, delivered by nurses compared to motivational interviewing (MI), delivered by trained therapists in group sessions or one-on-one on reduction of alcohol use. METHODS A three-arm randomized, controlled trial, conducted with 256 MM adults attending one of five MM outpatient clinics in the Los Angeles area. Within each site, moderate-to-heavy alcohol-using MM participants were randomized into one of three conditions: (1) nurse-led hepatitis health promotion group sessions (n=87); (2) MI delivered in group sessions (MI-group; n=79), or (3) MI delivered one-on-one sessions (MI-single, n=90). RESULTS Self-reported alcohol use was reduced from a median of 90 drinks/month at baseline to 60 drinks/month at 6-month follow-up. A Wilcoxon sign-rank test indicated a significant reduction in alcohol use in the total sample (p<.05). In multiple logistic regression analysis controlling for alcohol consumption at baseline and other covariates, no differences by condition were found. DISCUSSION As compared to two programs delivered by MI specialists, a culturally-sensitive and easy to implement nurse-led HHP program produced similar reductions in alcohol use over 6 months. Employing nurse-led programs may allow cost savings for treatment programs as well as a greater integration of alcohol reduction counseling along with a more comprehensive focus on general health-related issues than previously conducted.

Correlates of Alcohol Use among Methadone-Maintained Adults

This prospective study (n=190) examined correlates of alcohol use from baseline data of a longitudinal trial conducted among moderate and heavy alcohol users receiving methadone maintenance therapy (MMT). The sample included MMT clients who were 18-55 years of age, and were receiving MMT from five large methadone maintenance clinics in the Los Angeles area. Half of the sample was heavy drinkers and nearly half (46%) reported heroin use. Using a structured questionnaire, correlates of heavy alcohol use included White and Hispanic ethnicity, and fair or poor physical health combined with older age (> or =50 years). We also found that MMT clients who were younger than 50 years, regardless of health status, were more likely to be heavy drinkers. Compared with moderate alcohol consumers, a greater number of heavy alcohol users also experienced recent victimization. To optimize MMT, alcohol screening should be part of routine assessment and alcohol treatment should be made available within MMT programs. Moreover, special consideration should be provided to the most vulnerable clients, such as the younger user, those with a long-term and current history of heavy drug use, and those victimized and reporting fair or poor health. In addition, promoting attention to general physical and mental health problems within MMT programs may be beneficial in enhancing health outcomes of this population.

Patient Perspectives on Buprenorphine/Naloxone: A Qualitative Study of Retention During the Starting Treatment with Agonist Replacement Therapies (START) Study

Abstract This study examines the barriers and facilitators of retention among patients receiving buprenorphine/naloxone at eight community-based opioid treatment programs across the United States. Participants (n = 105) were recruited up to three and a half years after having participated in a randomized clinical trial comparing the effect of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone on liver function. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 67 patients provided with buprenorphine/naloxone who had terminated early and 38 patients who had completed at least 24 weeks of the trial. Qualitative data were analyzed using the constant comparison method. Barriers to buprenorphine/naloxone retention that emerged included factors associated with: (1) the design of the clinical trial; (2) negative medication or treatment experience; and (3) personal circumstances. The facilitators comprised: (1) positive experience with the medication; (2) personal determination and commitment to complete; and (3) staff encouragement and support. The themes drawn from interviews highlight the importance of considering patients’ prior experience with buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone, medication preference, personal circumstances, and motivation to abstain from illicit use or misuse of opioids, as these may influence retention. Ongoing education of patients and staff regarding buprenorphine/naloxone, especially in comparison to methadone, and support from staff and peers are essential.

Effectiveness of Intervention on Improvement of Drug Use Among Methadone Maintained Adults

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of three interventions (individual motivational interviewing, group motivational interviewing, or nurse-led hepatitis health promotion) in reducing drug use. A randomized, controlled trial was conducted with 256 methadone maintained moderate-to-heavy alcohol-using adults attending one of five MM outpatient clinics. Drug use in the overall sample was significantly reduced from baseline to 6-month follow-up, as assessed by a 30-day recall (p < 0.0001), with a trend apparent for 6-month recall (p = 0.09). The group and individual programs revealed significant decreases in drug use at the 30-day recall.

Predictors of HAV/HBV Vaccination Completion among Methadone Maintenance Clients

This randomized, controlled study (N = 256) was conducted to compare three interventions designed to promote hepatitis A virus (HAV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination completion among clients undergoing methadone maintenance (MM) treatment. Participants were recruited from five MM treatment sites in Southern California and randomized into three groups: Motivational Interviewing-Single (MI-Single), Motivational Interviewing-Group (MI-Group); and Nurse-Led Hepatitis Health Promotion (HHP). All were offered the three-series HAV/HBV vaccine. A total of 148 participants completed the vaccine. Groups did not differ in rate of vaccination completion (73.6%, HHP group, vs. 65% and 69% for the MI-Single and MI-Group, respectively). The equivalence of findings across groups suggests the value of including nurses with a comprehensive health focus in promoting vaccination completion.

NIDA Clinical Trials Network CTN-0051, Extended-Release Naltrexone vs. Buprenorphine for Opioid Treatment (X:BOT): Study design and rationale.

INTRODUCTION For opioid-dependent patients in the US and elsewhere, detoxification and counseling-only aftercare are treatment mainstays. Long-term abstinence is rarely achieved; many patients relapse and overdose after detoxification. Methadone, buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) and extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) can prevent opioid relapse but are underutilized. This study is intended to develop an evidence-base to help patients and providers make informed choices and to foster wider adoption of relapse-prevention pharmacotherapies. METHODS The National Institute on Drug Abuses Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study CTN-0051, X:BOT, is a comparative effectiveness study of treatment for 24weeks with XR-NTX, an opioid antagonist, versus BUP-NX, a high affinity partial opioid agonist, for opioid dependent patients initiating treatment at 8 short-term residential (detoxification) units and continuing care as outpatients. Up to 600 participants are randomized (1:1) to XR-NTX or BUP-NX. RESULTS The primary outcome is time to opioid relapse (i.e., loss of persistent abstinence) across the 24-week treatment phase. Differences between arms in the distribution of time-to-relapse will be compared (construction of the asymptotic 95% CI for the hazard ratio of the difference between arms). Secondary outcomes include proportions retained in treatment, rates of opioid abstinence, adverse events, cigarette, alcohol, and other drug use, and HIV risk behaviors; opioid cravings, quality of life, cognitive function, genetic moderators, and cost effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS XR-NTX and BUP-NX differ considerably in their characteristics and clinical management; no studies to date have compared XR-NTX with buprenorphine maintenance. Study design choices and compromises inherent to a comparative effectiveness trial of distinct treatment regimens are reviewed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT02032433.