Leslie Amass

Buprenorphine: how to use it right

The unique pharmacology of buprenorphine at the mu-opioid receptor (i.e. high affinity, low intrinsic activity and slow dissociation) results in buprenorphine having: (1) a good safety profile, (2) low physical dependence, and (3) flexibility in dose scheduling. Early studies assessed the effectiveness of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid dependence using a sublingual solution formulation. More recently, a combination tablet (buprenorphine/naloxone in a 4:1 ratio) has been assessed with the goal of decreasing diversion and abuse. Controlled studies with buprenorphine solution, buprenorphine mono-tablet, and buprenorphine/naloxone combination tablet have uniformly demonstrated the effectiveness of buprenorphine for opioid dependence treatment and the combination tablet appears to decrease (but not eliminate) abuse potential. There is general agreement across studies regarding buprenorphine induction and maintenance dose schedules. The clinical effects of buprenorphine and buprenorphine/naloxone are similar and most patients can be treated initially with and maintained on a daily buprenorphine/naloxone dose of 4:1-24:6 mg. Dosing is possible on a less-than-daily schedule; however, multiples of the daily-dose should be administered to cover the increased interval between doses. If buprenorphine withdrawal is indicated, gradual dose reduction is recommended over a rapid dose reduction or abrupt cessation. Both tablet formulations are approved by the US FDA for opioid dependence treatment as Schedule III narcotics and are, therefore, available for use in office-based practice. The buprenorphine plus naloxone combination product should provide additional safeguards for use in office-based practice by decreasing risk of diversion, and office-based treatment should expand the availability of services to opioid dependent patients.

Effects of adding behavioral treatment to opioid detoxification with buprenorphine

This trial assessed whether behavioral treatment improves outcome during a 26-week outpatient opioid detoxification. Thirty-nine opioid-dependent adults were assigned randomly to a buprenorphine dose-taper combined with either behavioral or standard treatment. Behavioral treatment included (a) a voucher incentive program for providing opioid-free urine samples and engaging in verifiable therapeutic activities and (b) the community reinforcement approach, a multicomponent behavioral treatment. Standard treatment included lifestyle counseling. Fifty-three percent of the patients receiving behavioral treatment completed treatment, versus 20% receiving standard treatment. The percentage of patients achieving 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks of continuous opioid abstinence were 68, 47, 26, and 11 for the behavioral group and 55, 15, 5, and 0 for the standard group, respectively. Behavioral treatment improved outcomes during outpatient detoxification.

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.

Efficacy of daily and alternate-day dosing regimens with the combination buprenorphine–naloxone tablet

This study evaluated the efficacy of a combination tablet formulation of buprenorphine containing 8 mg of buprenorphine and 2 mg of naloxone for every other day treatment and whether increasing the daily maintenance dose was essential for maintaining an efficacious alternate-day treatment. Twenty-six opioid-dependent outpatients completing a 16-day baseline entered a double-blind, placebo-controlled, triple crossover trial. Twenty-one days of daily combination tablet administration were compared to two different 21-day periods of alternate-day buprenorphine administration where subjects received either 8 or 16 mg of the combination tablet every other day with placebo on the interposed day. Fifty-four percent (14/26) of subjects completed the study, but only two subjects dropped out during the 16-mg alternate-day condition. Rates of medication compliance, illicit opioid use and subject- and observer-rated measures of opioid effects did not distinguish daily from alternate-day treatments in subjects completing the study. However, pupillary diameter was significantly increased during 8-mg alternate-day compared to the 8-mg daily or 16-mg alternate-day treatment. These data replicate earlier findings describing the acceptability of alternate-day buprenorphine treatment using multiples of the daily maintenance dose and extend these findings by establishing the clinical efficacy of daily and alternate-day dosing regimens with the combination buprenorphine naloxone tablet. This study also suggests slightly improved outcomes during alternate-day treatment using multiples of the daily dose.

Buprenorphine use : The international experience

The confluence of the heroin injection epidemic and the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection epidemic has increased the call for expanded access to effective treatments for both conditions. Buprenorphine and methadone are now listed on the World Health Organizations Model Essential Drugs List. In France, which has the most extensive experience, buprenorphine has been associated with a dramatic decrease in deaths due to overdose, and buprenorphine diversion appears to be associated with inadequate dosage, social vulnerability, and prescriptions from multiple providers. Other treatment models (in the United States, Australia, Germany, and Italy) and buprenorphine use in specific populations are also reviewed in the present article. In countries experiencing a dual epidemic of heroin use and HIV infection, such as former states of the Soviet Union and other eastern European and Asian countries, access to buprenorphine and methadone may be one potential tool for reducing the spread of HIV infection among injection drug users and for better engaging them in medical care.

Buprenorphine dosing every 1, 2, or 3 days in opioid-dependent patients.

Abstract Rationale: Administration of double the maintenance dose of buprenorphine has been shown to permit every-other-day dosing. Whether longer periods between dosing can be achieved is unknown. Objectives: To examine whether triple the maintenance dose can be administered every 72 h without opioid withdrawal or intoxication. Methods: Sixteen opioid-dependent outpatients each received three conditions (1) the maintenance dose of buprenorphine every 24 h, (2) double the maintenance dose every 48 h, and (3) triple the maintenance dose every 72 h under double-blind placebo-controlled conditions. Each conditions was imposed in a random sequence for 21–22 days. Self report and observer measures were taken at 24-h intervals. Results: No significant differences were observed on measures of opioid agonist and withdrawal effects between the dosing conditions. However, averaging effects across conditions may obscure important within-condition effects. When conditions were analyzed by individual days within a condition, several significant effects were observed. For example, 24 h after administration of triple the maintenance dose, significant effects were observed in eight opioid agonist measures. Also, 72 h after administration of triple the maintenance dose, significant effects were observed on four measures of withdrawal. Neither adverse medical reactions nor excessive opioid intoxication were observed. Conclusions: These results suggest that buprenorphine may be administered safely every 72 h by tripling the maintenance dose, with only minimal withdrawal complaints. Importantly, this 72-h dosing may permit patients to attend clinic thrice weekly without the use of take-home doses.

Behavioral and Emotional Problems Among Children of Cocaine‐ and Opiate‐Dependent Parents

OBJECTIVE To test associations between parental drug abuse and childrens problems, children of cocaine- and opiate-dependent parents were compared with demographically matched referred and nonreferred children. METHOD Cocaine- and opiate-dependent parents in treatment completed the Child Behavior Checklist for 410 children (218 boys, 192 girls) from ages 2 through 18 years (mean = 7.9 years). Children of drug abusers (CDAs) were demographically matched to referred (RCs) and nonreferred children (NRCs). RESULTS RCs scored lower than CDAs and NRCs on most competence scales, and higher than CDAs and NRCs on all problem scales. CDAs scored lower than NRCs on most competence scales, and higher than NRCs on Withdrawn, Thought Problems, Delinquent Behavior, Aggressive Behavior, Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems. Group status also predicted clinical range scores on most competence and all problem scales. CONCLUSIONS CDAs showed more internalizing and externalizing psychopathology relative to matched NRCs, but they showed significantly less psychopathology than shown by matched RCs. CDAs are an important group to target for preventive interventions.

Alternate-day dosing during buprenorphine treatment of opioid dependence

Thirteen opioid-dependent outpatients participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Twenty-one days of daily sublingual buprenorphine administration were compared to 21-days of alternate-day buprenorphine administration where patients received twice their daily maintenance dose every other day with placebo on the interposed day. Observer- and subject-rated measures of opioid agonist and withdrawal effects, pupillary diameter, and dose identifications were collected daily. Ten subjects (77%) completed the study (n = 6, 4 mg/70 kg; n = 4, 8 mg/70 kg); 8 subjects (62%) participated in a second crossover. Sixteen of seventeen measures of opioid agonist and withdrawal effects obtained during alternate-day administration did not differ significantly from those obtained during daily dosing in the ten subjects completing the study. The only significant difference observed was in subject-rated agonist effects, which were significantly lower during alternate-day than daily administration. No differences were observed between treatments on any measure for the eight subjects completing a second crossover. These data suggest that buprenorphine can be administered safely every 48 hours by doubling the maintenance dose. This alternate-day schedule permits patients to attend the clinic less frequently without the risk of diversion associated with take-home doses, may be cost-effective for programs, and may be useful in settings in which travel to the clinic is a barrier to treatment.

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.

Contingency management among homeless, out-of-treatment men who have sex with men

Homeless men who have sex with men are a particularly vulnerable population with high rates of substance dependence, psychiatric disorders, and HIV prevalence. Most need strong incentives to engage with community-based prevention and treatment programs. Contingency management (CM) was implemented in a community HIV prevention setting and targeted reduced substance use and increased health-promoting behaviors over a 24-week intervention period. Participants in the CM condition achieved greater reductions in stimulant and alcohol use (χ(2) = 27.36, p < .01) and, in particular, methamphetamine use (χ(2) = 21.78, p < .01) and greater increases in health-promoting behaviors (χ(2) = 37.83, p < .01) during the intervention period than those in the control group. Reductions in substance use were maintained to 9- and 12-month follow-up evaluations. Findings indicate the utility of CM for this high-risk population and the feasibility of implementing the intervention in a community-based HIV prevention program.