Randomized trial of buprenorphine for treatment of concurrent opiate and cocaine dependence

Cebranopadol, a novel long-acting opioid agonist with low abuse liability, to treat opioid use disorder: Preclinical evidence of efficacy

Maintenance therapy with buprenorphine and methadone is the gold standard pharmacological treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Despite these compounds demonstrating substantial efficacy, a significant number of patients do not show optimal therapeutic responses. The abuse liability of these medications is also a concern. Here we used rats to explore the therapeutic potential of the new long-acting pan-opioid agonist Cebranopadol in OUD. We tested the effect of cebranopadol on heroin self-administration and yohimbine-induced reinstatement of heroin seeking. In addition, we evaluated the abuse liability potential of cebranopadol in comparison to that of heroin under fixed ratio 1 (FR1) and progressive ratio (PR) operant self-administration contingencies. Oral administration of cebranopadol (0, 25, 50 μg/kg) significantly attenuated drug self-administration independent of heroin dose (1, 7, 20, 60μg/inf). Cebranopadol also reduced the break point for heroin (20 μg/inf). Finally, pretreatment with cebranopadol significantly attenuated yohimbine-induced reinstatement of drug seeking. In abuse liability experiments under FR1 contingency, rats maintained responding for heroin (1, 7, 20, 60μg/inf) to a larger extent than cebranopadol (0.03, 0.1, 0.3, 1.0, 6.0μg/inf). Under PR contingency, heroin maintained responding at high levels at all except the lowest dose, while the break point (BP) for cebranopadol did not differ from that of saline. Together, these data indicate that cebranopadol is highly efficacious in attenuating opioid self-administration and stress-induced reinstatement, while having limited abuse liability properties. Overall, the data suggest clinical potential of this compound for OUD treatment.

IUPHAR Review: New strategies for medications to treat substance use disorders

Substance use disorders (SUDs) and drug overdose are a public health emergency and safe and effective treatments are urgently needed. Developing new medications to treat them is expensive, time-consuming, and the probability of a compound progressing to clinical trials and obtaining FDA-approval is low. The small number of FDA-approved medications for SUDs reflects the low interest of pharmaceutical companies to invest in this area due to market forces, characteristics of the population (e.g., stigma, and socio-economic and legal disadvantages), and the high bar regulatory agencies set for new medication approval. In consequence, most research on medications is funded by government agencies, such as the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Multiple scientific opportunities are emerging that can accelerate the discovery and development of new medications for SUDs. These include fast and efficient tools to screen new molecules, discover new medication targets, use of big data to explore large clinical data sets and artificial intelligence (AI) applications to make predictions, and precision medicine tools to individualize and optimize treatments. This review provides a general description of these new research strategies for the development of medications to treat SUDs with emphasis on the gaps and scientific opportunities. It includes a brief overview of the rising public health toll of SUDs; the justification, challenges, and opportunities to develop new medications; and a discussion of medications and treatment endpoints that are being evaluated with support from NIDA.

Trends in buprenorphine dosage and days supplied for new treatment episodes for opioid use disorder, 2010-2019

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine reduces risk of opioid overdose mortality. However, its benefits are limited by low retention, particularly in early treatment. Optimizing initial dosage may impact retention. However, little is known about the prescription characteristics of new buprenorphine treatment episodes.

METHODS

In a US sample of commercial and employer-sponsored pharmacy claims, we identified new buprenorphine treatment episodes (days 1-30) from individuals ≥16 years following 90 days without buprenorphine from 2010 to 2019. Outcomes included first prescription average days supplied, first prescription average daily dosage, and average dosage on days 2, 8, 15 and 30.

RESULTS

We identified 117,793 new episodes among 96,451 unique individuals. Episodes per 10,000 person-years decreased slightly over time. Stratifying by age, sex and region demonstrated decreasing episodes among individuals ≤34 years and increasing episodes among individuals ≥35 years. From 2010-2019, first prescription average days supplied and daily dosage decreased from 17.1 to 15.3 days and 13.6mg to 11.6mg, respectively. Simultaneously, the proportion of episodes without possession and with dosages <16mg increased across all days and years. By day 30, episodes without buprenorphine possession grew from 27.9% to 30.8% and episodes involving dosages of <16mg grew from 26.4% to 33.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that buprenorphine dosage and days supplied for new treatment episodes decreased from 2010 to 2019 while buprenorphine possession worsened. Further investigation examining the relationship between buprenorphine dosage and retention in the early treatment period is needed.

Polysubstance Use in Adults With Opioid Use Disorder Receiving Buprenorphine Maintenance

INTRODUCTION

Studying polysubstance use is a public health recommendation. In the United Arab Emirates, more than 80% of adults with opioid use disorder (OUD) use 2 or more nonopioid substances. This secondary analysis contrasts the characteristics of polysubstance users (OUD + ≥1 nonopioid) with OUD, explores the correlates and predictors of nonfatal overdose, and examines the impact of polysubstance use on OUD treatment outcomes using buprenorphine (BUP).

METHODS

This analysis uses data from a 16-week outpatient randomized controlled trial of 141 adults with OUD allocated to BUP + incentivized adherence and abstinence monitoring (n = 70) and BUP in usual care (control, n = 71). Outcomes were nonfatal overdose events over the preceding 12 months, positive drug screens, and treatment retention. Participant characteristics were contrasted, and bivariate statistical tests were conducted for simple associations followed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

Polysubstance use was reported by 117 participants (82.9%), the majority of whom used pregabalin 72.1% (n = 75). Compared with OUD, polysubstance users observed higher arrests (median, 1.0 [interquartile range, 0.0-3.0] vs 0.5 [interquartile range, 0.0-2.0]; P = 0.04]) and nonfatal overdose events (n = 33 [31.8%] vs 2 [10.8%], P = 0.003). Carisoprodol and injecting drug use independently predicted nonfatal overdose (adjusted odds ratio, 4.519 [95% confidence interval, 1.81-11.22] and 2.74 [95% confidence interval, 1.15-6.51], respectively). No significant difference was observed in opioid use and retention in treatment outcomes between groups.

CONCLUSION

Carisoprodol and injecting drug use increase the likelihood of nonfatal overdose in adults with OUD. Polysubstance use does not impact response to BUP treatment compared with OUD.

Pharmacological Treatments for Cocaine Craving: What Is the Way Forward? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving efficacy of pharmacotherapies tested for cocaine use disorder, in the context of randomized-controlled clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

we assessed the databases of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO, without date restrictions up to August 2022, to identify relevant studies.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS

we included double-blinded randomized-controlled trials investigating pharmacotherapies for cocaine craving and/or cocaine use disorder whose outcomes included cocaine craving.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Two authors screened studies' titles and abstracts for inclusion, and both read all the included studies. We systematically gathered information on the following aspects of each study: title; author(s); year of publication; sample size; mean age; sample characteristics; study set-ting; whether participants were treatment-seeking; study design; craving measures; study interventions; drop-out rates; and other relevant outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, we appraised 130 clinical trials, including 8137 participants. We further considered the drugs from the studies that scored equal to or greater than six points in the quality assessment. There was a correlation between craving and cocaine use outcomes (self-reports, timeline follow-back or urinary benzoylecgonine) in the vast majority of studies. In the short-term treatment, acute phenylalanine-tyrosine depletion, clonidine, fenfluramine, meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (m-CPP) and mecamylamine presented promising effects. In the long term, amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone presented promising anti-craving effects. Unfortunately, the highly tested medications were not successful in most of the trials, as follows: propranolol in the short term; amantadine, aripiprazole, bromocriptine, citicoline, ketamine, modafinil, olanzapine, topiramate in the long term. The remaining 52 medications had no positive anti-craving outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

Our review was limited by high heterogeneity of craving assessments across the studies and by a great range of pharmacotherapies. Further, the majority of the studies considered abstinence and retention in treatment as the main outcomes, whereas craving was a secondary outcome and some of the studies evaluated patients with cocaine use disorder with comorbidities such as opioid or alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity. Lastly, most of the studies also included non-pharmacological treatments, such as counseling or psychotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a direct association between craving and cocaine use, underscoring craving as an important treatment target for promoting abstinence among persons with cocaine use disorder. Clonidine, fenfluramine and m-CPP showed to be promising medications for cocaine craving in the short-term treatment, and amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone in the long-term treatment.

Evaluation of the Impact of HIV Serostatus on the Hepatitis C Virus Care Cascade and Injection Drug Use Among Persons Initiating Medication Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

Background

Persons who inject drugs are at increased risk for acquiring hepatitis C virus (HCV). Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are associated with reduced injection drug use (IDU) frequency among persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, whether HCV treatment uptake or changes in IDU frequency differ by HIV serostatus among persons receiving MOUD is incompletely understood.

Methods

A secondary analysis was performed of data collected from 2 prospective cohort studies of participants with (PWH) or without HIV with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-diagnosed OUD who were initiated on methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone.

Results

Of 129 participants, 78 (60.5%) were HCV antibody positive. PWH underwent increased HCV viral load testing (76.7% vs 43.3%; P = .028), but HCV treatment rates did not differ (17.6% vs 10.0%; P = .45) by HIV status. Participants without HIV reported a greater reduction in mean opioid IDU at 90 days (10.7 vs 2.0 fewer days out of 30; P < .001), but there were no group differences at 90 days. Stimulant use did not differ between groups. Urine opioid positivity declined from baseline to 90 days among the entire cohort (61.4% to 38.0%; P < .001) but did not differ by HIV serostatus.

Conclusions

PWH who received MOUD underwent higher rates of follow-up HCV testing, but HCV treatment rates did not significantly differ by HIV serostatus. Participants without HIV on MOUD reported a greater reduction in opioid IDU. Improved integration of concomitant OUD with HCV and HIV screening, linkage to care, and treatment are needed for persons without HIV.

Opioid agonist treatment for people who are dependent on pharmaceutical opioids

BACKGROUND

There are ongoing concerns regarding pharmaceutical opioid-related harms, including overdose and dependence, with an associated increase in treatment demand. People dependent on pharmaceutical opioids appear to differ in important ways from people who use heroin, yet most opioid agonist treatment research has been conducted in people who use heroin.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of maintenance opioid agonist pharmacotherapy for the treatment of pharmaceutical opioid dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to January 2022: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, four other databases, and two trial registers. We checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs with adults and adolescents examining maintenance opioid agonist treatments that made the following two comparisons. 1. Full opioid agonists (methadone, morphine, oxycodone, levo-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM), or codeine) versus different full opioid agonists or partial opioid agonists (buprenorphine) for maintenance treatment. 2. Full or partial opioid agonist maintenance versus non-opioid agonist treatments (detoxification, opioid antagonist, or psychological treatment without opioid agonist treatment).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight RCTs that met inclusion criteria (709 participants). We found four studies that compared methadone and buprenorphine maintenance treatment, and four studies that compared buprenorphine maintenance to either buprenorphine taper (in addition to psychological treatment) or a non-opioid maintenance treatment comparison. We found low-certainty evidence from three studies of a difference between methadone and buprenorphine in favour of methadone on self-reported opioid use at end of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.86; 165 participants), and low-certainty evidence from four studies finding a difference in favour of methadone for retention in treatment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43; 379 participants). We found low-certainty evidence from three studies showing no difference between methadone and buprenorphine on substance use measured with urine drug screens at end of treatment (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.17; 206 participants), and moderate-certainty evidence from one study of no difference in days of self-reported opioid use (mean difference 1.41 days, 95% CI 3.37 lower to 0.55 days higher; 129 participants). There was low-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference between methadone and buprenorphine on adverse events (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.93; 206 participants). We found low-certainty evidence from four studies favouring maintenance buprenorphine treatment over non-opioid treatments in terms of fewer opioid positive urine drug tests at end of treatment (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.84; 270 participants), and very low-certainty evidence from four studies finding no difference on self-reported opioid use in the past 30 days at end of treatment (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.01; 276 participants). There was low-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference in the number of days of unsanctioned opioid use (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.09; 205 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence from four studies favouring buprenorphine maintenance over non-opioid treatments on retention in treatment (RR 3.02, 95% CI 1.73 to 5.27; 333 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference in adverse effects between buprenorphine maintenance and non-opioid treatments (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.48; 252 participants). The main weaknesses in the quality of the data was the use of open-label study designs, and difference in follow-up rates between treatment arms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is  very low- to moderate-certainty evidence supporting the use of maintenance agonist pharmacotherapy for pharmaceutical opioid dependence. Methadone or buprenorphine did not differ on some outcomes, although on the outcomes of retention and self-reported substance use some results favoured methadone. Maintenance treatment with buprenorphine appears more effective than non-opioid treatments. Due to the overall very low- to moderate-certainty evidence and small sample sizes, there is the possibility that the further research may change these findings.

Buprenorphine reduces methamphetamine intake and drug seeking behavior via activating nociceptin/orphanin FQ peptide receptor in rats

Buprenorphine, which has been approved for the treatment of opioid dependence, reduces cocaine consumption by co-activating μ-opioid receptors and nociceptin/orphanin FQ peptide (NOP) receptors. However, the role of buprenorphine in methamphetamine (METH) reinforcement and drug-seeking behavior remains unclear. This study investigated the effects of buprenorphine on METH self-administration and reinstatement of METH-seeking behavior in rats. We found that buprenorphine pretreatment had an inhibitory effect on METH self-administration behavior, and that buprenorphine at a dose of 0.3 mg/kg could inhibit motivation to respond for METH. Pretreatment with the NOP receptor antagonist thienorphine (0.5 mg/kg) or SB-612111 (1 mg/kg) could reverse the inhibitory effect of buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg) on the METH self-administration. Moreover, treatment with buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg and 0.3 mg/kg) significantly reduced the drug-seeking behavior induced by context or by METH priming but failed to reduce the drug-seeking behavior induced by conditional cues. Additionally, the NOP receptor antagonist SB-612111 reversed the inhibitory action of buprenorphine on the drug-seeking behavior induced by METH priming. The results demonstrated that buprenorphine reduced either METH intake or the drug-seeking behavior by activating NOP receptors, providing empirical evidence for the clinical use of buprenorphine in the treatment of METH relapse and addiction.

Role of Nociceptin/Orphanin FQ-NOP Receptor System in the Regulation of Stress-Related Disorders

Nociceptin/orphanin FQ (N/OFQ) is a 17-residue neuropeptide that binds the nociceptin opioid-like receptor (NOP). N/OFQ exhibits nucleotidic and aminoacidics sequence homology with the precursors of other opioid neuropeptides but it does not activate either MOP, KOP or DOP receptors. Furthermore, opioid neuropeptides do not activate the NOP receptor. Generally, activation of N/OFQ system exerts anti-opioids effects, for instance toward opioid-induced reward and analgesia. The NOP receptor is widely expressed throughout the brain, whereas N/OFQ localization is confined to brain nuclei that are involved in stress response such as amygdala, BNST and hypothalamus. Decades of studies have delineated the biological role of this system demonstrating its involvement in significant physiological processes such as pain, learning and memory, anxiety, depression, feeding, drug and alcohol dependence. This review discusses the role of this peptidergic system in the modulation of stress and stress-associated psychiatric disorders in particular drug addiction, mood, anxiety and food-related associated-disorders. Emerging preclinical evidence suggests that both NOP agonists and antagonists may represent a effective therapeutic approaches for substances use disorder. Moreover, the current literature suggests that NOP antagonists can be useful to treat depression and feeding-related diseases, such as obesity and binge eating behavior, whereas the activation of NOP receptor by agonists could be a promising tool for anxiety.

The Buprenorphine Analogue BU10119 Attenuates Drug-Primed and Stress-Induced Cocaine Reinstatement in Mice

There are no Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for cocaine use disorder, including relapse. The μ-opioid receptor (MOPr) partial agonist buprenorphine alone or in combination with naltrexone has been shown to reduce cocaine-positive urine tests and cocaine seeking in rodents. However, there are concerns over the abuse liability of buprenorphine. Buprenorphine's partial agonist and antagonist activity at the nociception receptor (NOPr) and κ-opioid receptor (KOPr), respectively, may contribute to its ability to inhibit cocaine seeking. Thus, we hypothesized that a buprenorphine derivative that exhibits antagonist activity at MOPr and KOPr with enhanced agonist activity at the NOPr could provide a more effective treatment. Here we compare the pharmacology of buprenorphine and two analogs, BU10119 and BU12004, in assays for antinociception and for cocaine- and stress-primed reinstatement in the conditioned place preference paradigm. In vitro and in vivo assays showed that BU10119 acts as an antagonist at MOPr, KOPr, and δ-opioid receptor (DOPr) and a partial agonist at NOPr, whereas BU12004 showed MOPr partial agonist activity and DOPr, KOPr, and NOPr antagonism. BU10119 and buprenorphine but not BU12004 lessened cocaine-primed reinstatement. In contrast, BU10119, BU12004, and buprenorphine blocked stress-primed reinstatement. The selective NOPr agonist SCH221510 but not naloxone decreased cocaine-primed reinstatement. Together, these findings are consistent with the concept that NOPr agonism contributes to the ability of BU10119 and buprenorphine to attenuate reinstatement of cocaine-conditioned place preference in mice. The findings support the development of buprenorphine analogs lacking MOPr agonism with increased NOPr agonism for relapse prevention to cocaine addiction. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: There are no Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for cocaine use disorder. Buprenorphine has shown promise as a treatment for cocaine relapse prevention; however, there are concerns over the abuse liability of buprenorphine. Here we show a buprenorphine analogue, BU10119, which lacks μ-opioid receptor agonism and inhibits cocaine-primed and stress-primed reinstatement in a conditioned place-preference paradigm. The results suggest the development of BU10119 for the management of relapse to cocaine seeking.

Beyond abstinence and relapse II: momentary relationships between stress, craving, and lapse within clusters of patients with similar patterns of drug use

RATIONALE

Given that many patients being treated for opioid-use disorder continue to use drugs, identifying clusters of patients who share similar patterns of use might provide insight into the disorder, the processes that affect it, and ways that treatment can be personalized.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

We applied hierarchical clustering to identify patterns of opioid and cocaine use in 309 participants being treated with methadone or buprenorphine (in a buprenorphine-naloxone formulation) for up to 16 weeks. A smartphone app was used to assess stress and craving at three random times per day over the course of the study.

RESULTS

Five basic patterns of use were identified: frequent opioid use, frequent cocaine use, frequent dual use (opioids and cocaine), sporadic use, and infrequent use. These patterns were differentially associated with medication (methadone vs. buprenorphine), race, age, drug-use history, drug-related problems prior to the study, stress-coping strategies, specific triggers of use events, and levels of cue exposure, craving, and negative mood. Craving tended to increase before use in all except those who used sporadically. Craving was sharply higher during the 90 min following moderate-to-severe stress in those with frequent use, but only moderately higher in those with infrequent or sporadic use.

CONCLUSIONS

People who share similar patterns of drug-use during treatment also tend to share similarities with respect to psychological processes that surround instances of use, such as stress-induced craving. Cluster analysis combined with smartphone-based experience sampling provides an effective strategy for studying how drug use is related to personal and environmental factors.

Comparison of Treatments for Cocaine Use Disorder Among Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

In the US and the United Kingdom, cocaine use is the second leading cause of illicit drug overdose death. Psychosocial treatments for cocaine use disorder are limited, and no pharmacotherapy is approved for use in the US or Europe.

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatments for active cocaine use among adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for clinical trials published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

This meta-analysis was registered on Covidence.org (study 8731) on December 31, 2015. Clinical trials were included if they (1) had the term cocaine in the article title; (2) were published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017; (3) were written in English; (4) enrolled outpatients 18 years or older with active cocaine use at baseline; and (5) reported treatment group size, treatment duration, retention rates, and urinalysis results for the presence of cocaine metabolites. A study was excluded if (1) more than 25% of participants were not active cocaine users or more than 80% of participants had negative test results for the presence of cocaine metabolites at baseline and (2) it reported only pooled urinalysis results indicating the presence of multiple substances and did not report the specific proportion of positive test results for cocaine metabolites. Multiple reviewers reached criteria consensus. Of 831 records screened, 157 studies (18.9%) met selection criteria and were included in the analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Search results were imported from PubMed XML into Covidence.org then Microsoft Excel. Data extraction was completed in 2 iterations to ensure fidelity. Analyses included a multilevel random-effects model, a multilevel mixed-effects meta-regression model, and sensitivity analyses. Treatments were clustered into 11 categories (psychotherapy, contingency management programs, placebo, opioids, psychostimulants, anticonvulsants, dopamine agonists, antidepressants, antipsychotics, miscellaneous medications, and other therapies). Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations. The significance threshold for all analyses was P = .05. Data were analyzed using the metafor and mice packages in R software, version 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Data were analyzed from January 1, 2018, to February 28, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the intention-to-treat logarithm of the odds ratio (OR) of having a negative urinalysis result for the presence of cocaine metabolites at the end of each treatment period compared with baseline. The hypothesis, which was formulated after data collection, was that no treatment category would have a significant association with objective reductions in cocaine use.

RESULTS

A total of 157 studies comprising 402 treatment groups and 15 842 participants were included. Excluding other therapies, the largest treatment groups across all studies were psychotherapy (mean [SD] number of participants, 40.04 [36.88]) and contingency management programs (mean [SD] number of participants, 37.51 [25.51]). Only contingency management programs were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of having a negative test result for the presence of cocaine (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.62-2.80), and this association remained significant in all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis, contingency management programs were associated with reductions in cocaine use among adults. Research efforts and policies that align with this treatment modality may benefit those who actively use cocaine and attenuate societal burdens.

Evaluating differences in opioid and stimulant use-associated infectious disease hospitalizations in Florida, 2016-2017

Background

The opioid epidemic has led to increases in injection drug use (IDU)-associated infectious diseases; however, little is known about how more recent increases in stimulant use have affected the incidence and outcomes of hospitalizations for infections among people who inject drugs (PWID).

Methods

All hospitalizations of PWID for IDU-associated infections in Florida were identified using administrative diagnostic codes and were grouped by substance used (opioids, stimulants, or both) and site of infection. We evaluated the association between substance used and the outcomes: patient-directed discharge (PDD, or “against medical advice”) and in-hospital mortality.

Results

There were 22 856 hospitalizations for infections among PWID. Opioid use was present in 73%, any stimulants in 43%, and stimulants-only in 27%. Skin and soft tissue infection was present in 50%, sepsis/bacteremia in 52%, osteomyelitis in 10%, and endocarditis in 10%. PWID using opioids/stimulants were youngest, most uninsured, and had the highest rates of endocarditis (16%) and hepatitis C (44%). Additionally, 25% of patients with opioid/stimulant use had PDD versus 12% for those using opioids-only. In adjusted models, opioid/stimulant use was associated with PDD compared to opioid-only use (aRR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17–1.40). Younger age and endocarditis were also associated with PDD. Compared to opioid-only use, stimulant-only use had higher risk of in-hospital mortality (aRR 1.26, 95% CI 1.03–1.46).

Conclusions

While opioid use contributed to most IDU-associated infections, many hospitalizations also involved stimulants. Increasing access to harm reduction interventions could help prevent these infections, while further research on the acute management of stimulant use disorder-associated infections is needed.

Effect of lowering initiation thresholds in a primary care-based buprenorphine treatment program

BACKGROUND

Office-based buprenorphine treatment is effective for opioid use disorder. Scant research has examined programmatic factors impacting successful initiation of treatment. To increase initiation of eligible patients, our buprenorphine program implemented changes to lower treatment thresholds. Most notable among these was elimination of a requirement that patients demonstrate abstinence from stimulants prior to initiating buprenorphine.

METHODS

This observational, retrospective study included patients screened for primary care-based buprenorphine treatment under high- and low-threshold conditions from 2015 to 2017. Background characteristics and treatment data were extracted from the electronic medical record and clinical registry. Chi-squared tests were used to compare proportions of patients initiated within 90 days of screening and retained to 60 days after initiation, under both conditions. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to compare relative odds of buprenorphine initiation after adjustment for several covariates. All analyses were stratified by recent stimulant use.

RESULTS

The sample of 168 patients included 96 in the high-threshold group and 72 in the low-threshold group. Among patients with recent stimulant use, low-threshold conditions were associated with a higher proportion of patients initiated (69% versus 35%, p = 0.002) and higher relative odds of initiation (aOR = 7.01, 95% CI = 2.26-21.80) but also with a lower proportion of patients retained (63% versus 100%, p = 0.004). Among patients without recent stimulant use, low-threshold conditions did not change these measures by a statistically significant margin.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower-threshold policies may increase buprenorphine treatment initiation for patients with co-occurring stimulant use. However, patients using stimulants may require additional supports to remain engaged.

Suboxone Treatment and Recovery Trial (STAR-T): Study Protocol for a Randomised Controlled Trial of Opioid Medication Assisted Treatment with Adjunctive Medication Management Using Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Contingency Management

Introduction

Opioid assisted treatment (OAT) with buprenorphine (BUP) is front-line medical maintenance intervention for illicit and prescription opioid use disorder (OUD). In many clinics, opioid medication is dispensed for several days for self-administration. This provides flexibility to the patient but may compromise the effectiveness of OAT because of nonadherence or medication diversion. OAT can be delivered as an entirely supervised intervention, but many patients discontinue treatment under this arrangement and dispensing costs may be prohibitive. An alternative is to enable patients to receive take-home doses contingent on OAT adherence guided by a medication management framework using Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) alongside negative urine drug screens (UDS) to provide evidence of abstinence. TDM is recommended to monitor adherence with BUP but it has not been applied in OAT programs and evaluation research to date.

Methods

The Suboxone Treatment and Recovery Trial (STAR-T) is a single site, 16-week, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. The aim of the study is to determine the effectiveness of a medication management framework including TDM and UDS to enable patients enrolled on outpatient OAT (with buprenorphine/naloxone [sublingual film formulation; BUP/NX-F; Suboxone™]) to receive stepped take-home doses. Following stabilisation during inpatient care, adult participants with illicit or prescription OUD were allocated (1:1) to receive (1) BUP/NX-F plus medication management for take-home doses based on TDM, UDS, and contingency management protocol (the experimental group) or (2) BUP/NX-F plus UDS only (treatment-as-usual, the control group). The primary outcome is the mean percentage of negative UDS over 16 weeks. The secondary outcome is treatment retention defined as completion of 16 weeks of OAT without interruption. There will be an exploratory analysis of the association between participant characteristics, clinical data, and outcomes.

Conclusions

Providing BUP/NX-F take-home doses contingent on adherence and opioid abstinence may enable OAT to be delivered flexibly and effectively.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN41645723 is retrospectively registered on 15/11/2015.

NOP-Related Mechanisms in Substance Use Disorders

Nociceptin/orphanin FQ (N/OFQ) is a 17 amino acid peptide that was deorphanized in 1995 and has been widely studied since. The role of the N/OFQ system in drug abuse has attracted researchers' attention since its initial discovery. The first two scientific papers describing the effect of intracranial injection of N/OFQ appeared 20 years ago and reported efficacy of the peptide in attenuating alcohol intake, whereas heroin self-administration was insensitive. Since then more than 100 scientific articles investigating the role of the N/OFQ and N/OFQ receptor (NOP) system in drug abuse have been published. The present article provides an historical overview of the advances in the field with focus on three major elements. First, the most robust data supportive of the efficacy of NOP agonists in treating drug abuse come from studies in the field of alcohol research, followed by psychostimulant and opioid research. In contrast, activation of NOP appears to facilitate nicotine consumption. Second, emerging data challenge the assumption that activation of NOP is the most appropriate strategy to attenuate consumption of substances of abuse. This assumption is based first on the observation that animals carrying an overexpression of NOP system components are more prone to consume substances of abuse, whereas NOP knockout rats are less motivated to self-administer heroin, alcohol, and cocaine. Third, administration of NOP antagonists also reduces alcohol consumption. In addition, NOP blockade reduces nicotine self-administration. Hypothetical mechanisms explaining this apparent paradox are discussed. Finally, we focus on the possibility that co-activation of NOP and mu opioid (MOP) receptors is an alternative strategy, readily testable in the clinic, to reduce the consumption of psychostimulants, opiates, and, possibly, alcohol.

Pharmacotherapy for amphetamine dependence: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Demand for treatment for amphetamine use is increasing internationally. Establishing effective pharmacotherapy provides broader treatment options for people who are dependent on amphetamine and may encourage engagement in evidence-based behavioral treatment. This study aimed to identify medicines that have potential in improving treatment outcomes for people who are dependent on amphetamines.

METHODS

Medline, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from 1997 to 2012 and again from 2013 to 2016. Studies on medications for amphetamine/methamphetamine dependence treatment were selected and assessed by two independent researchers. A meta-narrative review approach was used to synthesize results.

RESULTS

A total of 49 studies investigating 20 potential pharmacotherapies were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 35 studies related to 33 level II quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Five medications were subject to multiple RCTs. Four of these medicines demonstrated some limited evidence of benefit for reducing amphetamine use: methylphenidate (as reported in three studies), bupropion (in three studies), modafinil (two studies), and naltrexone (one study). Four RCTs of dexamphetamine suggest its benefit on secondary outcomes such as treatment retention, but not for reducing amphetamine use. Six other medicines indicate the potential for efficacy, but the number of studies is too small to draw conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

No medicine has as yet demonstrated sufficient, consistent evidence of effectiveness to support its use in routine treatment. High study drop-out and poor medication adherence limits the strength of evidence and raises important clinical questions about how to improve treatment engagement and outcomes.

Development and validation of the scale to assess satisfaction with medications for addiction treatment - Buprenorphine-naloxone for heroin addiction (SASMAT-BUNHER)

BACKGROUND

Until now, no specific tool has been available to measure heroin-dependent patient satisfaction with buprenorphine-naloxone as a medication. The purpose of the present study was to develop the Scale to Assess Satisfaction with Medications for Addiction Treatment-Buprenorphine-Naloxone for Heroin addiction (SASMAT-BUNHER) and to examine its validity and reliability.

METHODS

The SASMAT-BUNHER was developed from a pool of 44 self-administered items grouped into nine theoretical domains, as follows: Overall Satisfaction, Pharmacotherapy, Initiation, Anti-Addictive Effect on Heroin, Mental State, Physical State, Personal Functioning, Acceptability, and Anti-Addictive Effect on Secondary Substances. The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication 1.4 version (TSQM 1.4) was used for convergent validation. Participants were 316 heroin-dependent patients in maintenance treatment with buprenorphine-naloxone sublingual tablets at 16 different treatment centres.

RESULTS

Principal component analysis of the SASMAT-BUNHER revealed a 5-factor structure that accounted for 65.1% of total variance. Based on similarities between empirically-obtained factors and theoretical domains, Factors 1 through 5 were named 'Mental and Physical State' (10 items), 'Anti-Addictive Effect on Other Substances' (5 items), 'Anti-Addictive Effect on Heroin' (4 items), 'Personal Functioning' (3 items), and 'Acceptability' (4 items). All factors showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficients: 0.744-0.925) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.704-0.895). Correlation between SASMAT-BUNHER and TSQM 1.4 total scores was moderate (Pearson r = 0.552). Moreover, SASMAT-BUNHER total scores of patients reporting absence of buprenorphine-naloxone side effects were higher than those of their counterparts.

CONCLUSION

These results support the validity and reliability of the SASMAT-BUNHER.

Characteristics and experiences of buprenorphine-naloxone use among polysubstance users

BACKGROUND

With a rise in overdoses and medical emergencies related to opioids, buprenorphine-naloxone (bup-nx) is seen as a preferred treatment for opioid dependence. However, the research examining experiences with bup-nx among polysubstance users who may or may not be opioid dependent has been limited.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to examine use, characteristics of users, and experiences of bup-nx use among polysubstance users entering drug-free recovery programs.

METHODS

This study examined secondary data on 896 opioid or opiate user individuals (53.4% male) collected by drug-free, self-help-based residential recovery centers during intake.

RESULTS

One-quarter of users said bup-nx helped them with their substance use while 75% of bup-nx users reported that bup-nx either had no effect or a negative effect on their drug problems. Of the very few (4%-7%) obtaining bup-nx solely through a prescription, over 90% reported relief from withdrawal. However, over 80% of those who obtained bup-nx through illicit means reported using bup-nx until their preferred drug could be obtained and used it for its euphoriant effect. Three groups of opioid users were created including one group with no bup-nx use, one with lifetime but not recent bup-nx use, and one with recent (past 6 month) use. There were differences in substance use patterns and characteristics of bup-nx experiences between the different groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that the views of bup-nx by individuals in drug-free recovery centers are varied, with many seeing bup-nx as not unlike other opioids while others report bup-nx as self-medication.

Intercorrelation of Alcohol and Other Drug Use Disorders among a National Sample of Drivers

This study examined the relationship between alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, and painkiller use disorders in a sample of drivers. We studied nighttime drivers aged 16 to 87 (n = 4,277) from the 2007 National Roadside Survey who reported substance use behaviors and provided breath tests for alcohol. Logistic regression analyses assessed the relationships between (1) substance (i.e., alcohol/marijuana/cocaine/pain killer) use disorders; (2) demographic characteristics; and (3) BAC levels. Overall, 13.2% of participants met criteria for marijuana use disorder, 7% met criteria for cocaine use disorder, and 15.4% met criteria for extra-medicinal painkiller use disorder. When self-report data were analyzed, three reciprocal associations emerged: (1) marijuana use disorders and alcohol use disorders were correlated; (2) marijuana use disorders and cocaine use disorders were correlated; and (3) cocaine use disorders and painkiller use disorders were correlated. BAC data revealed that marijuana and cocaine use disorders were both associated with positive BAC levels, but only cocaine use disorders were associated with BAC levels over the legal limit. Results suggest significant poly-substance use disorders in a sample of nighttime drivers, with variations by demographic characteristics. The individual and public health consequences of multiple substance use disorders among drivers are significant.

Buprenorphine requires concomitant activation of NOP and MOP receptors to reduce cocaine consumption

Buprenorphine's clinical use is approved for the treatment of heroin addiction; however, evidence supporting its efficacy in cocaine abuse also exists. While for heroin it has been demonstrated that the effect of buprenorphine is mediated by its ability to activate μ-opioid peptide receptor (MOP) receptors, the mechanism through which it attenuates cocaine intake remains elusive. We explored this mechanism using operant models where rodents were trained to chronically self-administer cocaine for 2 hours daily. Buprenorphine (0.3, 1.0 and 3.0 mg/kg) given intraperitoneally 90 minutes before access to cocaine significantly and dose dependently reduced its intake. Pre-treatment with naltrexone or with the selective nociceptin/orphanin FQ peptide (NOP) antagonist SB-612111 did not prevent buprenorphine-induced reduction of cocaine intake. However, when naltrexone and SB-612111 were combined, the effect of buprenorphine on cocaine was completely prevented. To confirm that co-activation of MOP and NOP receptors is the underlying mechanism through which buprenorphine reduces cocaine intake, three compounds, namely, AT-034, AT-201 and AT-202, with a range of affinity and intrinsic activity profiles for MOP and NOP receptors, but weak ability for kappa-opioid peptide receptor (KOP) transmission, were tested. Consistent with our hypothesis based on buprenorphine's effects, results demonstrated that AT-034 and AT-201, which co-activate MOP and NOP receptors, reduced cocaine self-administration like buprenorphine. AT-202, which selectively stimulates NOP receptors, was not effective. Together, these data demonstrate that for buprenorphine, co-activation of MOP and NOP receptors is essential to reduce cocaine consumption. These results open new vistas on the treatment of cocaine addiction by developing compounds with mixed MOP/NOP agonist properties.

Cebranopadol Blocks the Escalation of Cocaine Intake and Conditioned Reinstatement of Cocaine Seeking in Rats

Cebranopadol is a novel agonist of nociceptin/orphanin FQ peptide (NOP) and opioid receptors with analgesic properties that is being evaluated in clinical Phase 2 and Phase 3 trials for the treatment of chronic and acute pain. Recent evidence indicates that the combination of opioid and NOP receptor agonism may be a new treatment strategy for cocaine addiction. We sought to extend these findings by examining the effects of cebranopadol on cocaine self-administration (0.5 mg/kg/infusion) and cocaine conditioned reinstatement in rats with extended access to cocaine. Oral administration of cebranopadol (0, 25, and 50 μg/kg) reversed the escalation of cocaine self-administration in rats that were given extended (6 hour) access to cocaine, whereas it did not affect the self-administration of sweetened condensed milk (SCM). Cebranopadol induced conditioned place preference but did not affect locomotor activity during the conditioning sessions. Finally, cebranopadol blocked the conditioned reinstatement of cocaine seeking. These results show that oral cebranopadol treatment prevented addiction-like behaviors (i.e., the escalation of intake and reinstatement), suggesting that it may be a novel strategy for the treatment of cocaine use disorder. However, the conditioned place preference that was observed after cebranopadol administration suggests that this compound may have some intrinsic rewarding effects.

Evaluation of the "Pipeline" for Development of Medications for Cocaine Use Disorder: A Review of Translational Preclinical, Human Laboratory, and Clinical Trial Research

Cocaine use disorder is a persistent public health problem for which no widely effective medications exist. Self-administration procedures, which have shown good predictive validity in estimating the abuse potential of drugs, have been used in rodent, nonhuman primate, and human laboratory studies to screen putative medications. This review assessed the effectiveness of the medications development process regarding pharmacotherapies for cocaine use disorder. The primary objective was to determine whether data from animal and human laboratory self-administration studies predicted the results of clinical trials. In addition, the concordance between laboratory studies in animals and humans was assessed. More than 100 blinded, randomized, fully placebo-controlled studies of putative medications for cocaine use disorder were identified. Of the 64 drugs tested in these trials, only 10 had been examined in both human and well-controlled animal laboratory studies. Within all three stages, few studies had been conducted for each drug and when multiple studies had been conducted conclusions were sometimes contradictory. Overall, however, there was good concordance between animal and human laboratory results when the former assessed chronic drug treatment. Although only seven of the ten reviewed drugs showed fully concordant results across all three types of studies reviewed, the analysis revealed several subject-related, procedural, and environmental factors that differ between the laboratory and clinical trial settings that help explain the disagreement for other drugs. The review closes with several recommendations to enhance translation and communication across stages of the medications development process that will ultimately speed the progress toward effective pharmacotherapeutic strategies for cocaine use disorder.

Probuphine® (buprenorphine implant): a promising candidate in opioid dependence

Opioid dependence leads to physical dependence and addiction which finally results in profound medical, psychological and social dysfunction. One of the useful medications for opioid dependence is buprenorphine, the partial opioid agonist, which is used alone or in combination with naloxone. However, buprenorphine is the victim of its own success due to its illicit use and accidental poisoning in children. Also, buprenorphine typically requires daily self-administration and its effectiveness heavily depends on patient adherence. So, poor treatment adherence results in ineffective treatment manifesting as craving and withdrawal symptoms. Short-term use of buprenorphine in opioid dependence is also often followed by relapse. Buprenorphine when used sublingually often results in inadequate or fluctuating blood concentrations and poorer treatment retention compared with methadone. All of these led to the development of Probuphine®, a polymeric matrix composed of ethylene vinyl acetate and buprenorphine in the form of implants, that are implanted subdermally in office practice and deliver the active drug over 6 months. Buprenorphine release from such implant is fairly consistent, avoiding plasma peaks and troughs, and the implant is also reported to be safe. In this review article, we have highlighted these aspects of treatment of opioid addiction, stressing on the pharmacology of buprenorphine and Probuphine®, and relevant clinical trials addressing the efficacy and safety of Probuphine®. This sustained-release implantable formulation of buprenorphine has the potential to be a suitable alternative to daily or alternate day sublingual buprenorphine which can thereby eliminate the need for daily supervision, minimizing fluctuations in plasma concentrations, and allowing these patients to reduce clinic or pharmacy visits.

Cebranopadol, a Mixed Opioid Agonist, Reduces Cocaine Self-administration through Nociceptin Opioid and Mu Opioid Receptors

Cocaine addiction is a widespread psychiatric condition still waiting for approved efficacious medications. Previous studies suggested that simultaneous activation of nociceptin opioid (NOP) and mu opioid (MOP) receptors could be a successful strategy to treat cocaine addiction, but the paucity of molecules co-activating both receptors with comparable potency has hampered this line of research. Cebranopadol is a non-selective opioid agonist that at nanomolar concentration activates both NOP and MOP receptors and that recently reached phase-III clinical trials for cancer pain treatment. Here, we tested the effect of cebranopadol on cocaine self-administration (SA) in the rat. We found that under a fixed-ratio-5 schedule of reinforcement, cebranopadol (25 and 50 µg/kg) decreased cocaine but not saccharin SA, indicating a specific inhibition of psychostimulant consumption. In addition, cebranopadol (50 µg/kg) decreased the motivation for cocaine as detected by reduction of the break point measured in a progressive-ratio paradigm. Next, we found that cebranopadol retains its effect on cocaine consumption throughout a 7-day chronic treatment, suggesting a lack of tolerance development toward its effect. Finally, we found that only simultaneous blockade of NOP and MOP receptors by concomitant administration of the NOP antagonist SB-612111 (30 mg/kg) and naltrexone (2.5 mg/kg) reversed cebranopadol-induced decrease of cocaine SA, demonstrating that cebranopadol activates both NOP and classical opioid receptors to exert its effect. Our data, together with the fairly advanced clinical development of cebranopadol and its good tolerability profile in humans, indicate that cebranopadol is an appealing candidate for cocaine addiction treatment.

Kappa-Opioid Antagonists for Psychiatric Disorders: From Bench to Clinical Trials

Kappa-opioid receptor (KOR) antagonists are currently being considered for the treatment of a variety of neuropsychiatric conditions, including depressive, anxiety, and substance abuse disorders. A general ability to mitigate the effects of stress, which can trigger or exacerbate these conditions, may explain their putative efficacy across such a broad array of conditions. The discovery of their potentially therapeutic effects evolved from preclinical research designed to characterize the molecular mechanisms by which experience causes neuroadaptations in the nucleus accumbens (NAc), a key element of brain reward circuitry. This research established that exposure to drugs of abuse or stress increases the activity of the transcription factor CREB (cAMP response element binding protein) in the NAc, which leads to elevated expression of the opioid peptide dynorphin that in turn causes core signs of depressive- and anxiety-related disorders. Disruption of KORs-the endogenous receptors for dynorphin-produces antidepressant- and anxiolytic-like actions in screening procedures that identify standard drugs of these classes, and reduces stress effects in tests used to study addiction and stress-related disorders. Although interest in this target is high, prototypical KOR antagonists have extraordinarily persistent pharmacodynamic effects that complicate clinical trials. The development of shorter acting KOR antagonists together with more rapid designs for clinical trials may soon provide insight on whether these drugs are efficacious as would be predicted by preclinical work. If successful, KOR antagonists would represent a unique example in psychiatry where the therapeutic mechanism of a drug class is understood before it is shown to be efficacious in humans.

Buprenorphine + naloxone plus naltrexone for the treatment of cocaine dependence: the Cocaine Use Reduction with Buprenorphine (CURB) study

AIMS

To examine the safety and effectiveness of buprenorphine + naloxone sublingual tablets (BUP, as Suboxone(®) ) provided after administration of extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX, as Vivitrol(®) ) to reduce cocaine use in participants who met DSM-IV criteria for cocaine dependence and past or current opioid dependence or abuse.

METHODS

This multi-centered, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted under the auspices of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network, randomly assigned 302 participants at sites in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Ohio, New York and Washington DC, USA to one of three conditions provided with XR-NTX: 4 mg/day BUP (BUP4, n = 100), 16 mg/day BUP (BUP16, n = 100, or no buprenorphine (placebo; PLB, n = 102). Participants received pharmacotherapy for 8 weeks, with three clinic visits per week. Cognitive behavioral therapy was provided weekly. Follow-up assessments occurred at 1 and 3 months post-intervention. The planned primary outcome was urine drug screen (UDS)-corrected, self-reported cocaine use during the last 4 weeks of treatment. Planned secondary analyses assessed cocaine use by UDS, medication adherence, retention and adverse events.

RESULTS

No group differences were found between groups for the primary outcome (BUP4 versus PLB, P = 0.262; BUP16 versus PLB, P = 0.185). Longitudinal analysis of UDS data during the evaluation period using generalized linear mixed equations found a statistically significant difference between BUP16 and PLB [P = 0.022, odds ratio (OR) = 1.71] but not for BUP4 (P = 0.105, OR = 1.05). No secondary outcome differences across groups were found for adherence, retention or adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine + naloxone, used in combination with naltrexone, may be associated with reductions in cocaine use among people who meet DSM-IV criteria for cocaine dependence and past or current opioid dependence or abuse.

Opioid agonist treatment for pharmaceutical opioid dependent people

BACKGROUND

There are increasing concerns regarding pharmaceutical opioid harms including overdose and dependence, with an associated increase in treatment demand. People dependent on pharmaceutical opioids appear to differ in important ways from people who use heroin, yet most opioid agonist treatment research has been conducted in people who use heroin.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of maintenance agonist pharmacotherapy for the treatment of pharmaceutical opioid dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

The search included the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group's Specialised Register of Trials; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2015, Issue 5); PubMed (January 1966 to May 2015); EMBASE (Ovid) (January 1974 to May 2015); CINAHL (EBSCOhost) (1982 to May 2015); ISI Web of Science (to May 2014); and PsycINFO (Ovid) (1806 to May 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials examining maintenance opioid agonist treatments that made the following two comparisons:1. full opioid agonists (methadone, morphine, oxycodone, levo-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM), or codeine) versus different full opioid agonists or partial opioid agonists (buprenorphine) for maintenance treatment and2. full or partial opioid agonist maintenance versus placebo, detoxification only, or psychological treatment (without opioid agonist treatment).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six randomised controlled trials that met inclusion criteria (607 participants).We found moderate quality evidence from two studies of no difference between methadone and buprenorphine in self reported opioid use (risk ratio (RR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 1.63) or opioid positive urine drug tests (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.18). There was low quality evidence from three studies of no difference in retention between buprenorphine and methadone maintenance treatment (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.22). There was moderate quality evidence from two studies of no difference between methadone and buprenorphine on adverse events (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.91).We found low quality evidence from three studies favouring maintenance buprenorphine treatment over detoxification or psychological treatment in terms of fewer opioid positive urine drug tests (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91) and self reported opioid use in the past 30 days (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.93). There was no difference on days of unsanctioned opioid use (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.31, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.04). There was moderate quality evidence favouring buprenorphine maintenance over detoxification or psychological treatment on retention in treatment (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.47). There was moderate quality evidence favouring buprenorphine maintenance over detoxification or psychological treatment on adverse events (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.57).The main weaknesses in the quality of the data was the use of open-label study designs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was low to moderate quality evidence supporting the use of maintenance agonist pharmacotherapy for pharmaceutical opioid dependence. Methadone or buprenorphine appeared equally effective. Maintenance treatment with buprenorphine appeared more effective than detoxification or psychological treatments.Due to the overall low to moderate quality of the evidence and small sample sizes, there is the possibility that the further research may change these findings.

The opioid receptors as targets for drug abuse medication

The endogenous opioid system is largely expressed in the brain, and both endogenous opioid peptides and receptors are present in areas associated with reward and motivation. It is well known that this endogenous system plays a key role in many aspects of addictive behaviours. The present review summarizes the modifications of the opioid system induced by chronic treatment with drugs of abuse reported in preclinical and clinical studies, as well as the action of opioid antagonists and agonists on the reinforcing effects of drugs of abuse, with therapeutic perspectives. We have focused on the effects of chronic psychostimulants, alcohol and nicotine exposure. Taken together, the changes in both opioid peptides and opioid receptors in different brain structures following acute or chronic exposure to these drugs of abuse clearly identify the opioid system as a potential target for the development of effective pharmacotherapy for the treatment of addiction and the prevention of relapse.

BU08073 a buprenorphine analogue with partial agonist activity at μ-receptors in vitro but long-lasting opioid antagonist activity in vivo in mice

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Buprenorphine is a potent analgesic with high affinity at μ, δ and κ and moderate affinity at nociceptin opioid (NOP) receptors. Nevertheless, NOP receptor activation modulates the in vivo activity of buprenorphine. Structure activity studies were conducted to design buprenorphine analogues with high affinity at each of these receptors and to characterize them in in vitro and in vivo assays.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Compounds were tested for binding affinity and functional activity using [(35) S]GTPγS binding at each receptor and a whole-cell fluorescent assay at μ receptors. BU08073 was evaluated for antinociceptive agonist and antagonist activity and for its effects on anxiety in mice.

KEY RESULTS

BU08073 bound with high affinity to all opioid receptors. It had virtually no efficacy at δ, κ and NOP receptors, whereas at μ receptors, BU08073 has similar efficacy as buprenorphine in both functional assays. Alone, BU08073 has anxiogenic activity and produces very little antinociception. However, BU08073 blocks morphine and U50,488-mediated antinociception. This blockade was not evident at 1 h post-treatment, but is present at 6 h and remains for up to 3-6 days.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

These studies provide structural requirements for synthesis of 'universal' opioid ligands. BU08073 had high affinity for all the opioid receptors, with moderate efficacy at μ receptors and reduced efficacy at NOP receptors, a profile suggesting potential analgesic activity. However, in vivo, BU08073 had long-lasting antagonist activity, indicating that its pharmacokinetics determined both the time course of its effects and what receptor-mediated effects were observed.

LINKED ARTICLES

This article is part of a themed section on Opioids: New Pathways to Functional Selectivity. To view the other articles in this section visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bph.2015.172.issue-2.

The biology of Nociceptin/Orphanin FQ (N/OFQ) related to obesity, stress, anxiety, mood, and drug dependence

Nociceptin/Orphanin FQ (N/OFQ) is a 17 amino acid peptide that was deorphanized in 1995. The generation of specific agonists, antagonists and receptor deficient mice and rats has enabled progress in elucidating the biological functions of N/OFQ. Additionally, radio-imaging technologies have been advanced for investigation of this system in animals and humans. Together with traditional neurobehavioral techniques, these tools have been utilized to identify the biological significance of the N/OFQ system and its interacting partners. The present review focuses on the role of N/OFQ in the regulation of feeding, body weight homeostasis, stress, the stress-related psychiatric disorders of depression and anxiety, and in drug and alcohol dependence. Critical evaluation of the current scientific preclinical literature suggests that small molecule modulators of nociceptin opioid peptide receptors (NOP) might be useful in the treatment of diseases related to these biological functions. In particular, the literature data suggest that antagonism of NOP receptors will produce anti-obesity and antidepressant activities in humans. However, there are also contradictory data discussed. The current literature on the role of N/OFQ in anxiety and addiction, on the other hand points primarily to a role of agonist modulation being potentially therapeutic. Some drug-like molecules that function either as agonists or antagonists of NOP receptors have been optimized for human clinical study to test some of these hypotheses. The discovery of PET ligands for NOP receptors, combined with the pharmacological tools and burgeoning preclinical data set discussed here bodes well for a rapid advancement of clinical understanding and potential therapeutic benefit.

Buprenorphine maintenance versus placebo or methadone maintenance for opioid dependence

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine maintenance treatment has been evaluated in randomised controlled trials against placebo medication, and separately as an alternative to methadone for management of opioid dependence.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate buprenorphine maintenance compared to placebo and to methadone maintenance in the management of opioid dependence, including its ability to retain people in treatment, suppress illicit drug use, reduce criminal activity, and mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to January 2013: Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Review Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, PsycLIT, CORK, Alcohol and Drug Council of Australia, Australian Drug Foundation, Centre for Education and Information on Drugs and Alcohol, Library of Congress, reference lists of identified studies and reviews. We sought published/unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of buprenorphine maintenance treatment versus placebo or methadone in management of opioid-dependent persons.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane Collaboration methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We include 31 trials (5430 participants), the quality of evidence varied from high to moderate quality.There is high quality of evidence that buprenorphine was superior to placebo medication in retention of participants in treatment at all doses examined. Specifically, buprenorphine retained participants better than placebo: at low doses (2 - 6 mg), 5 studies, 1131 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.88; at medium doses (7 - 15 mg), 4 studies, 887 participants, RR 1.74; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.87; and at high doses (≥ 16 mg), 5 studies, 1001 participants, RR 1.82; 95% CI 1.15 to 2.90. However, there is moderate quality of evidence that only high-dose buprenorphine (≥ 16 mg) was more effective than placebo in suppressing illicit opioid use measured by urinanalysis in the trials, 3 studies, 729 participants, standardised mean difference (SMD) -1.17; 95% CI -1.85 to -0.49, Notably, low-dose, (2 studies, 487 participants, SMD 0.10; 95% CI -0.80 to 1.01), and medium-dose, (2 studies, 463 participants, SMD -0.08; 95% CI -0.78 to 0.62) buprenorphine did not suppress illicit opioid use measured by urinanalysis better than placebo.There is high quality of evidence that buprenorphine in flexible doses adjusted to participant need,was less effective than methadone in retaining participants, 5 studies, 788 participants, RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95. For those retained in treatment, no difference was observed in suppression of opioid use as measured by urinalysis, 8 studies, 1027 participants, SMD -0.11; 95% CI -0.23 to 0.02 or self report, 4 studies, 501 participants, SMD -0.11; 95% CI -0.28 to 0.07, with moderate quality of evidence.Consistent with the results in the flexible-dose studies, in low fixed-dose studies, methadone (≤ 40 mg) was more likely to retain participants than low-dose buprenorphine (2 - 6 mg), (3 studies, 253 participants, RR 0.67; 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.87). However, we found contrary results at medium dose and high dose: there was no difference between medium-dose buprenorphine (7 - 15 mg) and medium-dose methadone (40 - 85 mg) in retention, (7 studies, 780 participants, RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.10) or in suppression of illicit opioid use as measured by urines, (4 studies, 476 participants, SMD 0.25; 95% CI -0.08 to 0.58) or self report of illicit opioid use, (2 studies, 174 participants, SMD -0.82; 95% CI -1.83 to 0.19). Similarly, there was no difference between high-dose buprenorphine (≥ 16 mg) and high-dose methadone (≥ 85 mg) in retention (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.20 to 3.16) or suppression of self-reported heroin use (SMD -0.73; 95% CI -1.08 to -0.37) (1 study, 134 participants).Few studies reported adverse events ; two studies compared adverse events statistically, finding no difference between methadone and buprenorphine, except for a single result indicating more sedation among those using methadone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine is an effective medication in the maintenance treatment of heroin dependence, retaining people in treatment at any dose above 2 mg, and suppressing illicit opioid use (at doses 16 mg or greater) based on placebo-controlled trials.However, compared to methadone, buprenorphine retains fewer people when doses are flexibly delivered and at low fixed doses. If fixed medium or high doses are used, buprenorphine and methadone appear no different in effectiveness (retention in treatment and suppression of illicit opioid use); however, fixed doses are rarely used in clinical practice so the flexible dose results are more relevant to patient care. Methadone is superior to buprenorphine in retaining people in treatment, and methadone equally suppresses illicit opioid use.

Mixed κ/μ partial opioid agonists as potential treatments for cocaine dependence

Cocaine use activates the dopamine reward pathway, leading to the reinforcing effects of dopamine. There is no FDA-approved medication for treating cocaine dependence. Opioid agonists and antagonists have been approved for treating opioid and alcohol dependence. Agonists that activate the μ opioid receptor increase dopamine levels in the nucleus accumbens, while μ receptor antagonists decrease dopamine levels by blocking the effects of endogenous opioid peptides. Activation of the κ opioid receptor decreases dopamine levels and leads to dysphoria. In contrast, inhibition of the κ opioid receptor decreases dopamine levels in the nucleus accumbens. Antagonists acting at the κ receptor reduce stress-mediated behaviors and anxiety. Mixed partial μ/κ agonists have the potential of striking a balance between dopamine levels and attenuating relapse to cocaine. The pharmacological properties of mixed μ/κ opioid receptor agonists will be discussed and results from clinical and preclinical studies will be presented. Results from studies with some of the classical benzomorphans and morphinans will be presented as they lay the foundation for structure-activity relationships. Recent results with other partial opioid agonists, including buprenorphine derivatives and the mixed μ/κ peptide CJ-15,208, will be discussed. The behavioral effects of the mixed μ/κ MCL-741, an aminothiazolomorphinan, in attenuating cocaine-induced locomotor activity will be presented. While not a mixed μ/κ opioid, results obtained with GSK1521498, a μ receptor inverse agonist, will be discussed. Preclinical strategies and successes will lay the groundwork for the further development of mixed μ/κ opioid receptor agonists to treat cocaine dependence.

Buprenorphine implants for treatment of opioid dependence: randomized comparison to placebo and sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone

AIMS

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of buprenorphine implants (BI) versus placebo implants (PI) for the treatment of opioid dependence. A secondary aim compared BI to open-label sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone tablets (BNX).

DESIGN

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Subjects received either four buprenorphine implants (80 mg/implant) (n = 114), four placebo implants (n = 54) or open-label BNX (12-16 mg/day) (n = 119).

SETTING

Twenty addiction treatment centers.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult out-patients (ages 18-65) with DSM-IV-TR opioid dependence.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary efficacy end-point was the percentage of urine samples negative for opioids collected from weeks 1 to 24, examined as a cumulative distribution function (CDF).

FINDINGS

The BI CDF was significantly different from placebo (P < 0.0001). Mean [95% confidence interval (CI)] proportions of urines negative for opioids were: BI = 31.2% (25.3, 37.1) and PI = 13.4% (8.3, 18.6). BI subjects had a higher study completion rate relative to placebo (64 versus 26%, P < 0.0001), lower clinician-rated (P < 0.0001) and patient-rated (P < 0.0001) withdrawal, lower patient-ratings of craving (P < 0.0001) and better subjects' (P = 0.031) and clinicians' (P = 0.022) global ratings of improvement. BI also resulted in significantly lower cocaine use (P = 0.0016). Minor implant-site reactions were comparable in the buprenorphine [27.2% (31 of 114)] and placebo groups [25.9% (14 of 54)]. BI were non-inferior to BNX on percentage of urines negative for opioids [mean (95% CI) = 33.5 (27.3, 39.6); 95% CI for the difference of proportions = (-10.7, 6.2)].

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, buprenorphine implants result in significantly less frequent opioid use and are non-inferior to sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone tablets.

Pharmacological Profiles of Oligomerized μ-Opioid Receptors

Opioids are widely prescribed pain relievers with multiple side effects and potential complications. They produce analgesia via G-protein-protein coupled receptors: μ-, δ-, κ-opioid and opioid receptor-like 1 receptors. Bivalent ligands targeted to the oligomerized opioid receptors might be the key to developing analgesics without undesired side effects and obtaining effective treatment for opioid addicts. In this review we will update the biological effects of μ-opioids on homo- or hetero-oligomerized μ-opioid receptor and discuss potential mechanisms through which bivalent ligands exert beneficial effects, including adenylate cyclase regulation and receptor-mediated signaling pathways.

Buprenorphine-naloxone Treatment for Pre-release Opioid-dependent Inmates in Puerto Rico

The following study, conducted in Puerto Rico, examined the feasibility of providing daily buprenorphine-naloxone (bup-nx) in prison and on release to 45 male inmates with histories of heroin addiction. Participants were assessed at study entry and at 1 month after release (N = 42; 93.3% follow-up rate). Treatment completers compared with noncompleters had significantly greater reductions in self-reported heroin use, cocaine use, and crime and were less likely to be opioid-positive according to urine drug testing. Despite study limitations, the short-term outcomes of this study suggest that bup-nx may contribute to reductions in readdiction to heroin and in criminal activities among re-entering male prisoners.

Buprenorphine treatment outcomes among opioid-dependent cocaine users and non-users

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

National treatment guidelines state that polysubstance users, including cocaine users, may not be appropriate candidates for office-based buprenorphine treatment. However, data to support this recommendation are sparse and conflicting, and the implications of this recommendation may include limiting the usefulness of buprenorphine treatment, as cocaine use is common among opioid-dependent individuals seeking buprenorphine treatment. We compared buprenorphine treatment outcomes (6-month treatment retention and self-reported opioid use over 6 months) in opioid-dependent cocaine users versus non-users who initiated buprenorphine treatment at an urban community health center.

METHODS

We followed 87 participants over 6 months, collecting interview and medical record data. We used logistic regression models to test whether baseline cocaine use was associated with treatment retention and mixed effects nonlinear models to test whether baseline cocaine use was associated with self-reported opioid use.

RESULTS

At baseline, 39.1% reported cocaine use. In all participants, self-reported opioid use decreased from 89.7% to 27.4% over 6 months, and 6-month treatment retention was 54.5%. We found no significant difference in 6-month treatment retention (AOR = 1.56, 95% CI: .58-4.17, p = .38) or self-reported opioid use (AOR = .89, 95% CI: .26-3.07, p = .85) between cocaine users and non-users.

CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This study demonstrates that buprenorphine treatment retention is not worse in cocaine users than non-users, with clinically meaningful improvements in self-reported opioid use. These findings suggest that opioid-dependent cocaine users attain considerable benefits from office-based buprenorphine treatment and argue for the inclusion of these patients in office-based buprenorphine treatment programs.

Retention in methadone and buprenorphine treatment among African Americans

Methadone has been the most commonly used pharmacotherapy for the treatment of opioid dependence in U.S. public sector treatment, but availability of buprenorphine as an alternative medication continues to increase. Drawing data from two community-based clinical trials that were conducted nearly contemporaneously, this study examined retention in methadone versus buprenorphine treatment over 6 months among urban African Americans receiving treatment in one of four publicly-funded programs (N=478; 178 methadone; 300 buprenorphine). Adjusting for confounds related to medication selection, survival analysis revealed that buprenorphine patients are at substantially higher risk of dropout compared to methadone patients (HR=2.43; p<.001). Buprenorphine's retention disadvantage appears to be concentrated in the earlier phases of treatment (approximately the first 50 days), after which risk of subsequent dropout becomes similar for the two medications. These findings confirm a retention disparity between methadone and buprenorphine in this population, and suggest potential avenues for future research to enhance retention in buprenorphine treatment.

A randomized trial of cognitive behavioral therapy in primary care-based buprenorphine

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of cognitive behavioral therapy on outcomes in primary care, office-based buprenorphine/naloxone treatment of opioid dependence.

METHODS

We conducted a 24-week randomized clinical trial in 141 opioid-dependent patients in a primary care clinic. Patients were randomized to physician management or physician management plus cognitive behavioral therapy. Physician management was brief, manual guided, and medically focused; cognitive behavioral therapy was manual guided and provided for the first 12 weeks of treatment. The primary outcome measures were self-reported frequency of illicit opioid use and the maximum number of consecutive weeks of abstinence from illicit opioids, as documented by urine toxicology and self-report.

RESULTS

The 2 treatments had similar effectiveness with respect to reduction in the mean self-reported frequency of opioid use, from 5.3 days per week (95% confidence interval, 5.1-5.5) at baseline to 0.4 (95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.6) for the second half of maintenance (P<.001 for the comparisons of induction and maintenance with baseline), with no differences between the 2 groups (P=.96) or between the treatments over time (P=.44). For the maximum consecutive weeks of opioid abstinence there was a significant main effect of time (P<.001), but the interaction (P=.11) and main effect of group (P=.84) were not significant. No differences were observed on the basis of treatment assignment with respect to cocaine use or study completion.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients receiving buprenorphine/naloxone in primary care for opioid dependence, the effectiveness of physician management did not differ significantly from that of physician management plus cognitive behavioral therapy.

A combination of buprenorphine and naltrexone blocks compulsive cocaine intake in rodents without producing dependence

Buprenorphine, a synthetic opioid that acts at both μ and κ opioid receptors, can decrease cocaine use in individuals with opioid addiction. However, the potent agonist action of buprenorphine at μ opioid receptors raises its potential for creating opioid dependence in non-opioid-dependent cocaine abusers. Here, we tested the hypothesis that a combination of buprenorphine and naltrexone (a potent μ opioid antagonist with weaker δ and κ antagonist properties) could block compulsive cocaine self-administration without producing opioid dependence. The effects of buprenorphine and various doses of naltrexone on cocaine self-administration were assessed in rats that self-administered cocaine under conditions of either short access (noncompulsive cocaine seeking) or extended access (compulsive cocaine seeking). Buprenorphine alone reproducibly decreased cocaine self-administration. Although this buprenorphine-alone effect was blocked in a dose-dependent manner by naltrexone in both the short-access and the extended-access groups, the combination of the lowest dose of naltrexone with buprenorphine blocked cocaine self-administration in the extended-access group but not in the short-access group. Rats given this low dose of naltrexone with buprenorphine did not exhibit the physical opioid withdrawal syndrome seen in rats treated with buprenorphine alone, and naltrexone at this dose did not block κ agonist-induced analgesia. The results suggest that the combination of buprenorphine and naltrexone at an appropriate dosage decreases compulsive cocaine self-administration with minimal liability to produce opioid dependence and may be useful as a treatment for cocaine addiction.

Cocaine use reduction with buprenorphine (CURB): rationale, design, and methodology

BACKGROUND

Effective medications to treat cocaine dependence have not been identified. Recent pharmacotherapy trials demonstrate the potential efficacy of buprenorphine (BUP) (alone or with naltrexone) for reducing cocaine use. The National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) launched the Cocaine Use Reduction with Buprenorphine (CURB) investigation to examine the safety and efficacy of sublingual BUP (as Suboxone®) in the presence of extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX, as Vivitrol®) for the treatment of cocaine dependence. This paper describes the design and rationale for this study.

METHODS

This multi-site, double-blind, placebo-controlled study will randomize 300 participants across 11 sites. Participants must meet the DSM-IV criteria for cocaine dependence and past or current opioid dependence or abuse. Participants are inducted onto XR-NTX after self-reporting at least 7 days of abstinence from opioids and tolerating a naloxone challenge followed by oral naltrexone and are then randomly assigned to one of three medication conditions (4 mg BUP, 16 mg BUP, or placebo) for 8 weeks. Participants receive a second injection of XR-NTX 4 weeks after the initial injection, and follow-up visits are scheduled at 1 and 3 months post-treatment. Participants receive weekly cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Recruitment commenced in September, 2011. Enrollment, active medication, and follow-up phases are ongoing, and recruitment is exceeding targeted enrollment rates.

CONCLUSIONS

This research using 2 medications will demonstrate whether BUP, administered in the presence of XR-NTX, reduces cocaine use in adults with cocaine dependence and opioid use disorders and will demonstrate if XR-NTX prevents development of physiologic dependence on BUP.

Opiate addiction and cocaine addiction: underlying molecular neurobiology and genetics

Addictive diseases, including addiction to heroin, prescription opioids, or cocaine, pose massive personal and public health costs. Addictions are chronic relapsing diseases of the brain caused by drug-induced direct effects and persisting neuroadaptations at the epigenetic, mRNA, neuropeptide, neurotransmitter, or protein levels. These neuroadaptations, which can be specific to drug type, and their resultant behaviors are modified by various internal and external environmental factors, including stress responsivity, addict mindset, and social setting. Specific gene variants, including variants encoding pharmacological target proteins or genes mediating neuroadaptations, also modify vulnerability at particular stages of addiction. Greater understanding of these interacting factors through laboratory-based and translational studies have the potential to optimize early interventions for the therapy of chronic addictive diseases and to reduce the burden of relapse. Here, we review the molecular neurobiology and genetics of opiate addiction, including heroin and prescription opioids, and cocaine addiction.

Effect of buprenorphine dose on treatment outcome

The goal of this meta-analysis is to provide evidence based information about proper dosing for buprenorphine maintenance treatment to improve treatment outcome. To be selected for the review and inclusion in the meta-analysis, articles had to be randomized, controlled, or double-blind clinical trials, with buprenorphine as the study drug; the length of buprenorphine maintenance treatment had to be 3 weeks or longer; doses of buprenorphine had to be clearly stated; outcome measures had to include retention rates in buprenorphine treatment; outcome measures had to include illicit opioid use based on analytical determination of drugs of abuse in urine samples as outcome variables; and outcome measures had to include illicit cocaine use based on analytical determination of drugs of abuse in urine samples as outcome variables. Twenty-nine articles were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. The authors present the results of 21 articles that met inclusion criteria. The higher buprenorphine dose (16-32 mg per day) predicted better retention in treatment compared with the lower dose (less than 16 mg per day) (P = .009, R(2) adjusted = 0.40), and the positive urine drug screens for opiates predicted dropping out of treatment (P = .019, R(2) Adjusted = 0.40). Retention in treatment predicted less illicit opioid use (P = .033, R(2) Adjusted = 0.36), and the positive urine drug screens for cocaine predicted more illicit opioid use (P = .021, R(2) Adjusted = 0.36). Strong evidence exists based on 21 randomized clinical trials that the higher buprenorphine dose may improve retention in buprenorphine maintenance treatment.

Medication-assisted treatment research with criminal justice populations: challenges of implementation

Creating, implementing and evaluating substance abuse interventions, especially medication-assisted treatments, for prisoners, parolees, and probationers with histories of heroin addiction is an especially challenging endeavor because of the difficulty in coordinating and achieving cooperation among diverse criminal justice, substance abuse treatment, research, and social service agencies, each with its own priorities and agenda. In addition, there are special rules that must be followed when conducting research with criminal justice-involved populations, particularly prisoners. The following case studies will explore the authors' experience of over 10 years conducting pharmacotherapy research using methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone with criminal justice populations. The major obstacles and how they were overcome are presented. Finally, recommendations are provided with regard to implementing and conducting research with criminal justice populations.

Opiate versus psychostimulant addiction: the differences do matter

The publication of the psychomotor stimulant theory of addiction in 1987 and the finding that addictive drugs increase dopamine concentrations in the rat mesolimbic system in 1988 have led to a predominance of psychobiological theories that consider addiction to opiates and addiction to psychostimulants as essentially identical phenomena. Indeed, current theories of addiction - hedonic allostasis, incentive sensitization, aberrant learning and frontostriatal dysfunction - all argue for a unitary account of drug addiction. This view is challenged by behavioural, cognitive and neurobiological findings in laboratory animals and humans. Here, we argue that opiate addiction and psychostimulant addiction are behaviourally and neurobiologically distinct and that the differences have important implications for addiction treatment, addiction theories and future research.