Explore the vast range of titles available.

RationaleMany people being treated for opioid use disorder continue to use drugs during treatment. This use occurs in patterns that rarely conform to well-defined cycles of abstinence and relapse. Systematic identification and evaluation of these patterns could enhance analysis of clinical trials and provide insight into drug use.ObjectivesTo evaluate such an approach, we analyzed patterns of opioid and cocaine use from three randomized clinical trials of contingency management in methadone-treated participants.MethodsSequences of drug test results were analyzed with unsupervised machine-learning techniques, including hierarchical clustering of categorical results (i.e., whether any samples were positive during each week) and K-means longitudinal clustering of quantitative results (i.e., the proportion positive each week). The sensitivity of cluster membership as an experimental outcome was assessed based on the effects of contingency management. External validation of clusters was based on drug craving and other symptoms of substance use disorder.ResultsIn each clinical trial, we identified four clusters of use patterns, which can be described as opioid use, cocaine use, dual use (opioid and cocaine), and partial/complete abstinence. Different clustering techniques produced substantially similar classifications of individual participants, with strong above-chance agreement. Contingency management increased membership in clusters with lower levels of drug use and fewer symptoms of substance use disorder.ConclusionsCluster analysis provides person-level output that is more interpretable and actionable than traditional outcome measures, providing a concrete answer to the question of what clinicians can tell patients about the success rates of new treatments.

Background The concomitant presence of major depressive disorder (MDD) and opioid use disorder (OUD) poses a formidable clinical challenge, warranting effective interventions that address both psychiatric and addictive components. Aims This study sought to compare the efficacy of adjunctive ketamine and buprenorphine in mitigating anxiety symptom severity and craving intensity in individuals with co-occurring MDD and OUD. Methods A randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted, involving individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for both MDD and OUD. Participants were randomly assigned to receive adjunctive ketamine or buprenorphine, in conjunction with standard psychiatric and addiction treatments. Anxiety symptom severity and craving intensity were assessed using Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), and the Opioid Craving Scale after 2 h, 24 h, and 7 days. Results The findings revealed distinct treatment trajectories, with ketamine demonstrating rapid and substantial reduction in anxiety symptom severity within hours of administration, accompanied by a pronounced decline in opioid craving intensity. In contrast, buprenorphine was associated with a more gradual but sustained improvement in anxiety symptoms over several days, paralleled by a modest initial reduction in opioid craving, followed by persistent attenuation. Conclusions In conclusion, this randomized clinical trial provides evidence supporting the efficacy of adjunctive Ketamine and Buprenorphine in reducing anxiety symptoms and craving intensity in patients with co-occurring MDD and OUD. Trial registration IRCT20211214053411N1.

BackgroundIdentifying effective strategies to improve access to medication treatments for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is imperative. Within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), provision of MOUD varies significantly, requiring development and testing of implementation strategies that target facilities with low provision of MOUD.ObjectiveDetermine the effectiveness of external facilitation in increasing the provision of MOUD among VHA facilities with low baseline provision of MOUD compared to matched controls.DesignPre-post, block randomized study designed to compare facility-level outcomes in a stratified sample of eligible facilities. Four blocks (two intervention facilities in each) were defined by median splits of both the ratio of patients with OUD receiving MOUD and number of patients with OUD not currently receiving MOUD (i.e., number of actionable patients). Intervention facilities participated in a 12-month implementation intervention.ParticipantsVHA facilities in the lowest quartile of MOUD provision (35 facilities), eight of which were randomly assigned to participate in the intervention (two per block) with twenty-seven serving as matched controls by block.InterventionExternal facilitation included assessment of local barriers/facilitators, formation of a local implementation team, a site visit for action planning and training/education, cross-facility quarterly calls, monthly coaching calls, and consultation.Main MeasuresPre- to post-change in the facility-level ratio of patients with an OUD diagnosis receiving MOUD compared to control facilities.Key ResultsIntervention facilities significantly increased the ratio of patients with OUD receiving MOUD from an average of 18% at baseline to 30% 1 year later, with an absolute difference of 12% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.6%, 17.0%). The difference in differences between intervention and control facilities was 3.0% (95% CI: − 0.2%. 6.7%). The impact of the intervention varied by block, with smaller, less complex facilities more likely to outperform matched controls.ConclusionsIntensive external facilitation improved the adoption of MOUD in most low-performing facilities and may enhance adoption beyond other interventions less tailored to individual facility contexts.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a chronic, relapsing condition with severe negative health consequences. Previous studies have reported that 5-year opioid abstinence is a good predictor of reduced likelihoods of relapse, but factors that shape long-term opioid abstinence are poorly understood. The present study is based on data from a prospective study of 699 adults with OUD who had been randomized to either methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone and who were followed for at least 5 years. During the 5 years prior to the participants’ last follow-up interview, 232 (33.2%) had achieved 5-year abstinence from heroin. Of those 232, 145 (20.7% of the total) had remained abstinent from both heroin and other opioids (e.g., hydrocodone, oxycodone, other opioid analgesics, excluding methadone or buprenorphine). Compared to non-abstinent individuals, those in both categories of opioid abstinence had lower problem severity in health and social functioning at the final follow-up. Logistic regression results indicated that cocaine users and injection drug users were less likely to achieve 5-year heroin abstinence, whereas Hispanics (vs. whites) and those treated in clinics on the West Coast (vs. East) were less likely to achieve 5-year abstinence from heroin and other opioids. For both abstinence category groups, abstinence was positively associated with older age at first opioid use, lower impulsivity, longer duration of treatment for OUD, and greater social support. Reducing cocaine use and injection drug use and increasing social support and retention in treatment may help maintain long-term abstinence from opioids among individuals treated with agonist pharmacotherapy.

RationaleMinocycline, a tetracycline antibiotic, inhibits activation of microglia. In preclinical studies, minocycline prevented development of opioid tolerance and opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH). The goal of this study was to determine if minocycline changes pain threshold and tolerance in individuals with opioid use disorder who are maintained on agonist treatment.MethodsIn this double-blind, randomized human laboratory study, 20 participants were randomized to either minocycline (200 mg/day) or placebo treatment for 15 days. The study had three test sessions (days 1, 8, and 15 of treatment) and one follow-up visit 1 week after the end of treatment. In each test session, participants were assessed on several subjective and cognitive measures, followed by assessment of pain sensitivity using the Cold Pressor Test (CPT). Daily surveys and cognitive measures using Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) were also collected four times a day on days 8 through 14 of treatment, and proinflammatory serum cytokines were assessed before and on the last day of treatment.ResultsMinocycline treatment did not change pain threshold or tolerance on the CPT. Similarly, minocycline did not change severity of pain, opioid craving, withdrawal, or serum cytokines. Minocycline treatment increased accuracy on a Go/No-Go task.ConclusionsWhile these findings do not support minocycline’s effects on OIH, minocycline may have a potential use as a cognitive enhancer for individuals with opioid use disorder, a finding that warrants further systematic studies.

Background and ObjectivesIn the United States, use of oral opioid analgesics has been associated with increasing rates of addiction, abuse, and diversion. However, little is known about the recent national use of non-illicit prescription opioid analgesics (those prescribed in a physician-patient relationship), the primary source of these drugs for the general US population. Our primary objective was to examine trends in the use of prescription opioid analgesics in the United States and to identify defining characteristics of patient users of prescribed opioids from 2000 to 2010.MethodsWe used the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to examine trends in prescription oral opioid analgesic use from 2000 to 2010. We used survey design methods to make national estimates of adults (18 years and older) who reported receiving an opioid analgesic prescription (referred to as opioid users) and used logistic regression to examine predictors of opioid analgesic use. Our primary outcome measures were national estimates of total users of prescription opioid analgesics and total number of prescriptions. Our secondary outcome was that of observing changes in the disability and health of the users.ResultsThe estimated total number of opioid analgesic prescriptions in the United States increased by 104%, from 43.8 million in 2000 to 89.2 million in 2010. In 2000, an estimated 7.4% (95% confidence interval, 6.9–7.9) of adult Americans were prescription opioid users compared with 11.8% (95% confidence interval, 11.2–12.4) in 2010. On the basis of estimates adjusted for changes in the general population, each year was associated with a 6% increase in the likelihood of receiving an opioid prescription from 2000 to 2010. Despite the apparent increase in use, there were no demonstrable improvements in the age- or sex-adjusted disability and health status measures of opioid users.ConclusionsThe use of prescription opioid analgesics among adult Americans has increased in recent years, and this increase does not seem to be associated with improvements in disability and health status among users. On a public health level, these data suggest that there may be an opportunity to reduce the prescribing of opioid analgesics without worsening of population health metrics.

Background Persons with opioid use disorders who inject drugs (PWID) in the United States (US) face multiple and intertwining health risks. These include interference with consistent access, linkage, and retention to health care including medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), HIV prevention using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Most services, when available, including those that address substance misuse, HIV prevention, and STIs, are often provided in multiple locations that may be difficult to access, which further challenges sustained health for PWID. HPTN 094 (INTEGRA) is a study designed to test the efficacy of an integrated, “whole-person” strategy that provides integrated HIV prevention including antiretroviral therapy (ART), PrEP, MOUD, and STI testing and treatment from a mobile health delivery unit (“mobile unit”) with peer navigation compared to peer navigation alone to access these services at brick and mortar locations. Methods HPTN 094 (INTEGRA) is a two-arm, randomized controlled trial in 5 US cities where approximately 400 PWID without HIV are assigned either to an experimental condition that delivers 26 weeks of “one-stop” integrated health services combined with peer navigation and delivered in a mobile unit or to an active control condition using peer navigation only for 26 weeks to the same set of services delivered in community settings. The primary outcomes include being alive and retained in MOUD and PrEP at 26 weeks post-randomization. Secondary outcomes measure the durability of intervention effects at 52 weeks following randomization. Discussion This trial responds to a need for evidence on using a “whole-person” strategy for delivering integrated HIV prevention and substance use treatment, while testing the use of a mobile unit that meets out-of-treatment PWID wherever they might be and links them to care systems and/or harm reduction services. Findings will be important in guiding policy for engaging PWID in HIV prevention or care, substance use treatment, and STI testing and treatment by addressing the intertwined epidemics of addiction and HIV among those who have many physical and geographic barriers to access care. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04804072 . Registered on 18 March 2021.

Background Buprenorphine is usually administered to treat opioid use disorder and pain syndromes. This research presents the first study regarding the effectiveness of different singly administered high doses of buprenorphine (a partial opioid agonist (of μ-opioid receptors), a potent opioid antagonist (of κ-receptors) and a partial agonist of nociception receptors) in reducing suicidal ideation in acutely depressed people with co-morbid opiate dependence. It follows small studies that suggest that ultra-low-dose buprenorphine may be useful in reducing suicidal ideation. The goal of this study was to describe the outcome of different doses of buprenorphine on suicidal opioid-dependent patients over a 3-day interval, by conducting a randomized clinical trial. Methods Fifty-one suicidal male inpatients who fulfilled the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria for both opioid dependence and major depressive disorder were randomized to three groups ( n = 17 per group) to receive a single, sublingual dose of buprenorphine (32 mg, 64 mg, or 96 mg). Out of 51 participants, there were 47 patients; 16 (34.04%) received 32 mg, 17 (36.17%) received 64 mg, and 14 (29.78%) received 96 mg of sublingual buprenorphine. They were evaluated by using psychometric assessment of the Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation (BSSI) and interviews based on DSM-5 criteria. A placebo group was not included because of the high probability of severe withdrawal without active pharmacological treatment. The study was conducted with appropriate precautions and monitoring of respiratory and cardiovascular measures. The medication was administered while the patients were in moderate opiate withdrawal, as indicated by the presence of four to five withdrawal symptoms. A structured clinical interview was conducted, and urine toxicology testing was performed. Results Patients completed the 3-day trial course. The outcomes illustrated a significant reduction in BSSI scores within each of the three groups, p  < 0.01., but no difference in results between the groups, p  = 0.408. Conclusions The results suggest that a single high dose of buprenorphine could rapidly treat suicidal ideations. A single high dose of buprenorphine may be a main-mechanism medication that gives a rapid treatment for suicidal opioid-dependent patients. Placebo-controlled trials are required to measure the safety and the physiological and psychological effects of this medication.

Background Opioid-related fatalities are a leading cause of death in Ohio and nationally, with an increasing number of overdoses attributable to fentanyl. Rapid fentanyl test strips can identify fentanyl and some fentanyl analogs in urine samples and are increasingly being used to check illicit drugs for fentanyl before they are used. Fentanyl test strips are a promising harm reduction strategy; however, little is known about the real-world acceptability and impact of fentanyl test strip use. This study investigates fentanyl test strip distribution and education as a harm reduction strategy to prevent overdoses among people who use drugs. Methods The research team will recruit 2400 individuals ≥ 18 years with self-reported use of illicit drugs or drugs purchased on the street within the past 6 months. Recruitment will occur at opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution programs in 16 urban and 12 rural Ohio counties. Participating sites will be randomized at the county level to the intervention or non-intervention study arm. A brief fentanyl test strip educational intervention and fentanyl test strips will be provided to participants recruited from sites in the intervention arm. These participants will be eligible to receive additional fentanyl test strips for 2 years post-enrollment. Participants recruited from sites in the non-intervention arm will not receive fentanyl test strip education or fentanyl test strips. All participants will be followed for 2 years post-enrollment using biweekly, quarterly, and 6-month surveys. Primary outcomes include (1) identification of perceived barriers and facilitating factors associated with incorporating fentanyl test strip education and distribution into opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution programs; (2) differences in knowledge and self-efficacy regarding how to test drugs for fentanyl and strategies for reducing overdose risk between the intervention and non-intervention groups; and (3) differences in non-fatal and fatal overdose rates between the intervention and non-intervention groups. Discussion Findings from this cluster randomized controlled trial will contribute valuable information about the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of integrating fentanyl test strip drug checking in rural and urban communities in Ohio and help guide future overdose prevention interventions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05463341. Registered on July 19, 2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05463341

Background Buprenorphine-naloxone is a medication shown to improve outcomes for individuals seeking treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD); however, outcomes are limited by low medication adherence rates. This is especially true during the early stages of treatment. Methods The present study proposes to utilize a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial design to compare two psychological interventions targeting buprenorphine-naloxone adherence: (1) contingency management (CM) and (2) brief motivational interviewing plus substance-free activities session plus mindfulness (BSM). Participants will be N  = 280 adults who present to a university-based addictions clinic seeking treatment for OUD. Participants will be randomized to condition to receive 4 sessions of their assigned intervention (CM or BSM). Participants who are adherent, defined as attending physician appointments and having buprenorphine present in urine toxicology, will enter maintenance intervention for an additional 6 months. Those who are not adherent will be re-randomized to receive either the other intervention or both interventions. Follow-up will occur at 8 months post-randomization. Conclusions This novel design will examine the benefit of sequential treatment decisions following non-adherence. The primary outcome of this study is buprenorphine-naloxone medication adherence, as assessed by physician visit attendance and presence of buprenorphine in urine. Results will elicit the relative efficacy of CM and BSM compared to one another and whether keeping the initial treatment approach when adding the alternative approach for initially non-adherent individuals is beneficial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04080180