Jessica Jenkins

Buprenorphine tapering schedule and illicit opioid use

AIMS To compare the effects of a short or long taper schedule after buprenorphine stabilization on participant outcomes as measured by opioid-free urine tests at the end of each taper period. DESIGN This multi-site study sponsored by Clinical Trials Network (CTN, a branch of the US National Institute on Drug Abuse) was conducted from 2003 to 2005 to compare two taper conditions (7 days and 28 days). Data were collected at weekly clinic visits to the end of the taper periods, and at 1-month and 3-month post-taper follow-up visits. SETTING Eleven out-patient treatment programs in 10 US cities. INTERVENTION Non-blinded dosing with Suboxone during the 1-month stabilization phase included 3 weeks of flexible dosing as determined appropriate by the study physicians. A fixed dose was required for the final week before beginning the taper phase. MEASUREMENTS The percentage of participants in each taper group providing urine samples free of illicit opioids at the end of the taper and at follow-up. FINDINGS At the end of the taper, 44% of the 7-day taper group (n = 255) provided opioid-free urine specimens compared to 30% of the 28-day taper group (n = 261; P = 0.0007). There were no differences at the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (7-day = 18% and 12%; 28-day = 18% and 13%, 1 month and 3 months, respectively). CONCLUSION For individuals terminating buprenorphine pharmacotherapy for opioid dependence, there appears to be no advantage in prolonging the duration of taper.

Comparison of behavioral treatment conditions in buprenorphine maintenance

BACKGROUND AND AIMS The Controlled Substances Act requires physicians in the United States to provide or refer to behavioral treatment when treating opioid-dependent individuals with buprenorphine; however, no research has examined the combination of buprenorphine with different types of behavioral treatments. This randomized controlled trial compared the effectiveness of four behavioral treatment conditions provided with buprenorphine and medical management (MM) for the treatment of opioid dependence. DESIGN After a 2-week buprenorphine induction/stabilization phase, participants were randomized to one of four behavioral treatment conditions provided for 16 weeks: cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT = 53); contingency management (CM = 49); both CBT and CM (CBT + CM = 49); and no additional behavioral treatment (NT = 51). SETTING Study activities occurred at an out-patient clinical research center in Los Angeles, California, USA. PARTICIPANTS Included were 202 male and female opioid-dependent participants. MEASUREMENTS Primary outcome was opioid use, measured as a proportion of opioid-negative urine results over the number of tests possible. Secondary outcomes include retention, withdrawal symptoms, craving, other drug use and adverse events. FINDINGS No group differences in opioid use were found for the behavioral treatment phase (χ2  = 1.25, P = 0.75), for a second medication-only treatment phase, or at weeks 40 and 52 follow-ups. Analyses revealed no differences across groups for any secondary outcome. CONCLUSION There remains no clear evidence that cognitive behavioural therapy and contingency management reduce opiate use when added to buprenorphine and medical management in opiate users seeking treatment.

Sustained‐release methylphenidate in a randomized trial of treatment of methamphetamine use disorder

BACKGROUND AND AIMS No effective pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine (MA) use disorder has yet been found. This study evaluated sustained-release methylphenidate (MPH-SR) compared with placebo (PLA) for treatment of MA use disorder in people also undergoing behavioral support and motivational incentives. DESIGN This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design with MPH-SR or PLA provided for 10 weeks (active phase) followed by 4 weeks of single-blind PLA. Twice-weekly clinic visits, weekly group counseling (CBT) and motivational incentives (MI) for MA-negative urine drug screens (UDS) were included. SETTING Treatment sites were in Los Angeles, California (LA) and Honolulu, Hawaii (HH), USA. PARTICIPANTS A total of 110 MA-dependent (via DSM-IV) participants (LA = 90; HH = 20). MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome measure is self-reported days of MA use during the last 30 days of the active phase. Included in the current analyses are drug use (UDS and self-report), retention, craving, compliance (dosing, CBT, MI), adverse events and treatment satisfaction. FINDINGS No difference was found between treatment groups in self-reported days of MA use during the last 30 days of the active phase (P = 0.22). In planned secondary outcomes analyses, however, the MPH group had fewer self-reported MA use days from baseline through the active phase compared with the PLA group (P = 0.05). The MPH group also had lower craving scores and fewer marijuana-positive UDS than the PLA group in the last 30 days of the active phase. The two groups had similar retention, other drug use, adverse events and treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS Methylphenidate may lead to a reduction in concurrent methamphetamine use when provided as treatment for patients undergoing behavioral support for moderate to severe methamphetamine use disorder, but this requires confirmation.

Comparisons of analgesic potency and side effects of buprenorphine and buprenorphine with ultra-low-dose naloxone.

Objectives:Opioids are the most effective pain medication available, yet concerns about their safety may limit their administration to those in need. In efforts to identify analgesics with lower potential for abuse and dependence, recent evidence suggests that combinations of opioids with ultra-low doses of the opioid antagonist naloxone may enhance the analgesic effect with increased safety. This study investigated the use of buprenorphine (0.3 mg) plus ultra-low-dose naloxone (0.02 mg) (BUP + ULDN) as compared with buprenorphine alone (0.3 mg) (BUP) for the treatment of pain. Methods:In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized cross-over design, 12 study participants with lingering, noncancer pain received each medication intravenously for 5 days of dosing, separated by an intertrial interval of at least 7 days to avoid possible carryover effects. Results:We found no order effects and no differences between medications in pre- to postdose pain ratings, side effects, or adverse events. Conclusions:These findings suggest that BUP + ULDN is not more effective in reducing pain than BUP.

Attitudes towards exercise among substance using older adults living with HIV and chronic pain

ABSTRACT Chronic pain and substance use disorders occur commonly among HIV-infected persons. Recent CDC guidelines recommend non-pharmacologic approaches over opioid medications for the management of chronic pain. This is particularly relevant for persons with substance use disorders. Structured physical activity may be an effective strategy for pain reduction. We developed a combined cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) + exercise intervention to reduce pain, pain-related disability and substance use and improve physical function in older HIV-infected adults with chronic pain and substance use. We employed established CBT protocols for the intervention, and sought feedback from potential end users when developing the exercise component of the intervention. A total of 27 HIV-infected adults ≥ 50 years of age participated in four focus group sessions. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Participant demographics: mean age 54 years; male 81%; Hispanic 48%, Black 33%; treated for substance abuse in the past 52%. Exercise was seen as a desirable activity, but many participants expressed barriers to exercise including fear of pain exacerbation, low physical fitness, and lack of availability of perceived safe spaces for HIV-infected persons. Most participants were receptive to exercise for pain reduction, particularly modalities that provide added psychological benefits of reducing stress and anxiety. Exercise for pain management among older HIV-infected adults with chronic pain and substance use was found to be highly acceptable. However, interventions need to be tailored to the unique needs of this population to address their fears and concerns.

Sustained-release methylphenidate in a randomized trial of treatment of methamphetamine use disorder: Methylphenidate for methamphetamine use

BACKGROUND AND AIMS No effective pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine (MA) use disorder has yet been found. This study evaluated sustained-release methylphenidate (MPH-SR) compared with placebo (PLA) for treatment of MA use disorder in people also undergoing behavioral support and motivational incentives. DESIGN This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design with MPH-SR or PLA provided for 10 weeks (active phase) followed by 4 weeks of single-blind PLA. Twice-weekly clinic visits, weekly group counseling (CBT) and motivational incentives (MI) for MA-negative urine drug screens (UDS) were included. SETTING Treatment sites were in Los Angeles, California (LA) and Honolulu, Hawaii (HH), USA. PARTICIPANTS A total of 110 MA-dependent (via DSM-IV) participants (LA = 90; HH = 20). MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome measure is self-reported days of MA use during the last 30 days of the active phase. Included in the current analyses are drug use (UDS and self-report), retention, craving, compliance (dosing, CBT, MI), adverse events and treatment satisfaction. FINDINGS No difference was found between treatment groups in self-reported days of MA use during the last 30 days of the active phase (P = 0.22). In planned secondary outcomes analyses, however, the MPH group had fewer self-reported MA use days from baseline through the active phase compared with the PLA group (P = 0.05). The MPH group also had lower craving scores and fewer marijuana-positive UDS than the PLA group in the last 30 days of the active phase. The two groups had similar retention, other drug use, adverse events and treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS Methylphenidate may lead to a reduction in concurrent methamphetamine use when provided as treatment for patients undergoing behavioral support for moderate to severe methamphetamine use disorder, but this requires confirmation.

Sustained-Release Methylphenidate in a Randomized Trial of Treatment ofMethamphetamine Use Disorder

BACKGROUND AND AIMS No effective pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine (MA) use disorder has yet been found. This study evaluated sustained-release methylphenidate (MPH-SR) compared with placebo (PLA) for treatment of MA use disorder in people also undergoing behavioral support and motivational incentives. DESIGN This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design with MPH-SR or PLA provided for 10 weeks (active phase) followed by 4 weeks of single-blind PLA. Twice-weekly clinic visits, weekly group counseling (CBT) and motivational incentives (MI) for MA-negative urine drug screens (UDS) were included. SETTING Treatment sites were in Los Angeles, California (LA) and Honolulu, Hawaii (HH), USA. PARTICIPANTS A total of 110 MA-dependent (via DSM-IV) participants (LA = 90; HH = 20). MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome measure is self-reported days of MA use during the last 30 days of the active phase. Included in the current analyses are drug use (UDS and self-report), retention, craving, compliance (dosing, CBT, MI), adverse events and treatment satisfaction. FINDINGS No difference was found between treatment groups in self-reported days of MA use during the last 30 days of the active phase (P = 0.22). In planned secondary outcomes analyses, however, the MPH group had fewer self-reported MA use days from baseline through the active phase compared with the PLA group (P = 0.05). The MPH group also had lower craving scores and fewer marijuana-positive UDS than the PLA group in the last 30 days of the active phase. The two groups had similar retention, other drug use, adverse events and treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS Methylphenidate may lead to a reduction in concurrent methamphetamine use when provided as treatment for patients undergoing behavioral support for moderate to severe methamphetamine use disorder, but this requires confirmation.