Factors associated with complicated buprenorphine inductions

Patient experiences of buprenorphine dispensing from a mobile medical unit

BACKGROUND

Overdose deaths continue to rise within the United States, despite effective treatments such as buprenorphine and methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD). Mobile medical units with the ability to dispense buprenorphine have been developed to engage patients and eliminate barriers to accessing OUD treatment. This study reports survey responses of patients of a mobile medical unit dispensing buprenorphine in areas of Chicago, IL with high overdose rates.

METHODS

All patients who were dispensed buprenorphine via the mobile medical unit were invited to participate in a 7-item anonymous survey between May 24, 2023, and August 25, 2023. The survey included 5-point satisfaction scale, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. Outcomes included satisfaction with buprenorphine dispensing from the mobile medical unit, satisfaction with filling buprenorphine at a pharmacy in the past, barriers experienced at pharmacies when filling buprenorphine, and whether the client would have started treatment that day if the mobile medical unit had not been present. Satisfaction scale and multiple-choice question responses were assessed using descriptive statistics. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare median satisfaction levels between receiving buprenorphine from the mobile medical unit versus filling a buprenorphine prescription at a community pharmacy. Open-ended questions were analyzed qualitatively using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

106 unique patients were dispensed buprenorphine from the mobile unit during the study period. Of these patients, 54 (51%) completed the survey. Respondents reported high satisfaction with the buprenorphine dispensing process as a part of a mobile medical unit. Of those who had previously filled buprenorphine at a pharmacy, 83% reported at least one barrier, with delays in prescription dispensing from a community pharmacy, lack of transportation to/from the pharmacy, and opioid withdrawal symptoms being the most common barriers. 87% reported they would not have started buprenorphine that same day if the mobile medical unit had not been present. Nearly half of survey participants reported having taken buprenorphine that was not prescribed to them. Qualitative analysis of open-ended survey responses noted the importance of convenient accessibility, comprehensive care, and a non-judgmental environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobile medical units that dispense buprenorphine are an innovative model to reach patients with OUD who have significant treatment access barriers. This study found that patients who experienced barriers to accessing buprenorphine from a pharmacy were highly satisfied with the mobile medical unit's buprenorphine dispensing process. Programs seeking to develop mobile buprenorphine dispensing programs should consider patient priorities of accessibility, comprehensive care, and welcoming, non-judgmental environments.

Managing Opioid Withdrawal Symptoms During the Fentanyl Crisis: A Review

Illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF) is a significant contributor to the increasing rates of overdose-related deaths. Its high potency and lipophilicity can complicate opioid withdrawal syndromes (OWS) and the subsequent management of opioid use disorder (OUD). This scoping review aimed to collate the current OWS management of study populations seeking treatment for OWS and/or OUD directly from an unregulated opioid supply, such as IMF. Therefore, the focus was on therapeutic interventions published between January 2010 and November 2023, overlapping with the period of increasing IMF exposure. A health science librarian conducted a systematic search on November 13, 2023. A total of 426 studies were screened, and 173 studies were reviewed at the full-text level. Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Buprenorphine and naltrexone were included in most studies with the goal of transitioning to a long-acting injectable version. Various augmenting agents were tested (buspirone, memantine, suvorexant, gabapentin, and pregabalin); however, the liberal use of adjunctive medication and shortened timelines to initiation had the most consistently positive results. Outside of FDA-approved medications for OUD, lofexidine, gabapentin, and suvorexant have limited evidence for augmenting opioid agonist initiation. Trials often have low retention rates, particularly when opioid agonist washout is required. Neurostimulation strategies were promising; however, they were developed and studied early. Precipitated withdrawal is a concern; however, the rates were low and adequately mitigated or managed with low- or high-dose buprenorphine induction. Maintenance treatment continues to be superior to detoxification without continued management. Shorter induction protocols allow patients to initiate evidence-based treatment more quickly, reducing the use of illicit or non-prescribed substances.

Withdrawal during outpatient low dose buprenorphine initiation in people who use fentanyl: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD); however, buprenorphine initiation can be complicated by withdrawal symptoms including precipitated withdrawal. There has been increasing interest in using low dose initiation (LDI) strategies to reduce this withdrawal risk. As there are limited data on withdrawal symptoms during LDI, we characterize withdrawal symptoms in people with daily fentanyl use who underwent initiation using these strategies as outpatients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with OUD using daily fentanyl who were prescribed 7-day or 4-day LDI at 2 substance use disorder treatment clinics in San Francisco. Two addiction medicine experts assessed extracted chart documentation for withdrawal severity and precipitated withdrawal, defined as acute worsening of withdrawal symptoms immediately after taking buprenorphine. A third expert adjudicated disagreements. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

There were 175 initiations in 126 patients. The mean age was 37 (SD 10 years). 71% were men, 26% women, and 2% non-binary. 21% identified as Black, 16% Latine, and 52% white. 60% were unstably housed and 75% had Medicaid insurance. Substance co-use included 74% who used amphetamines, 29% cocaine, 22% benzodiazepines, and 19% alcohol. Follow up was available for 118 (67%) initiations. There was deviation from protocol instructions in 22% of these initiations with follow up. 31% had any withdrawal, including 21% with mild symptoms, 8% moderate and 2% severe. Precipitated withdrawal occurred in 10 cases, or 8% of initiations with follow up. Of these, 7 had deviation from protocol instructions; thus, there were 3 cases with follow up (3%) in which precipitated withdrawal occurred without protocol deviation.

CONCLUSIONS

Withdrawal was relatively common in our cohort but was mostly mild, and precipitated withdrawal was rare. Deviation from instructions, structural barriers, and varying fentanyl use characteristics may contribute to withdrawal. Clinicians should counsel patients who use fentanyl that mild withdrawal symptoms are likely during LDI, and there is still a low risk for precipitated withdrawal. Future studies should compare withdrawal across initiation types, seek ways to support patients in initiating buprenorphine, and qualitatively elicit patients' withdrawal experiences.

Low-dose buprenorphine initiation and treatment continuation among hospitalized patients with opioid dependence: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for both opioid use disorder (OUD) and chronic pain, but buprenorphine's pharmacology complicates treatment initiation for some patients. Low-dose buprenorphine initiation is a novel strategy that may reduce precipitated withdrawal. Few studies describe what patient populations benefit most from low-dose initiations and the clinical parameters that impact treatment continuation. This study aimed to 1) describe experiences with low-dose buprenorphine initiation, including both successes and failures among hospitalized patients in an urban underserved community; 2) identify patient- and treatment-related characteristics associated with unsuccessful initiation and treatment discontinuation; and 3) assess buprenorphine treatment continuation after discharge.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study with opioid-dependent (meaning OUD or receiving long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain) patients who underwent low-dose buprenorphine initiation during hospital admission from October 2021 through April 2022. The primary outcome was successful completion of low-dose initiation. Bivariate analysis identified patient- and treatment-related factors associated with unsuccessful initiation. Secondary outcomes were buprenorphine treatment discontinuation at post-discharge follow-up, 30- and 90-days.

RESULTS

Of 28 patients who underwent low-dose buprenorphine initiation, 68 % successfully completed initiation. Unsuccessful initiation was associated with receipt of methadone during admission and higher morphine milligram equivalents (MME) of supplemental opioids. Of 22 patients with OUD, the percent receiving a buprenorphine prescription at a follow-up visit, 30 days, and 90 days, respectively, was 46 %, 36 %, and 36 %. Of 6 patients with chronic pain, the percent receiving a buprenorphine prescription at a follow-up visit, 30 days, and 90 days, respectively, was 100 %, 100 %, and 83 %.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose buprenorphine initiation can be successful in opioid-dependent hospitalized patients. Patients taking methadone or requiring higher MME of supplemental opioids may have more difficulty with the low-dose buprenorphine initiation approach, but these findings should be replicated in larger studies. This study suggests patient- and treatment-related factors that clinicians could consider when determining the optimal treatment strategy for patients wishing to transition to buprenorphine.

Methadone and neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS): what we think we know, but do not

Since the first use of methadone to treat OUD in pregnancy in the 1970s, there has been a long, controversial, and confusing history of studies, regulatory actions, and practice changes that have clouded an accurate perception of methadone's use in pregnancy. This review will trace this history with a focus on the effect of methadone exposure during pregnancy on neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). A new laboratory measure, the serum methadone/metabolite ratio (MMR), has provided a tool for documenting the profoundly dynamic nature of perinatal metabolism. Continuous induction of metabolic enzymes during pregnancy requires dose adjustments and dose frequency changes. The concept of "fetal methadone dosing" emphasizes that relative stability of methadone levels in the fetus is an important consideration for methadone dosing in pregnancy. Finally, the effects of the societal "war on drugs" on pediatric management of neonatal withdrawal risks will be discussed, as well as the importance of comprehensive services for mother and child including the "rooming-in" approach of neonatal care which has considerably replaced the older NICU care model of maternal/infant separation.

A Guide to Expanding the Use of Buprenorphine Beyond Standard Initiations for Opioid Use Disorder

Buprenorphine has become an important medication in the context of the ongoing opioid epidemic. However, complex pharmacologic properties and varying government regulations create barriers to its use. This narrative review is intended to facilitate buprenorphine use-including non-traditional initiation methods-by providers ranging from primary care providers to addiction specialists. This article briefly discusses the opioid epidemic and the diagnosis and treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). We then describe the basic and complex pharmacologic properties of buprenorphine, linking these properties to their clinical implications. We guide readers through the process of initiating buprenorphine in patients using full agonist opioids. As there is no single recommended approach for buprenorphine initiation, we discuss the details, advantages, and disadvantages of the standard, low-dose, bridging-strategy, and naloxone-facilitated initiation techniques. We consider the pharmacology of, and evidence base for, buprenorphine in the treatment of pain, in both OUD and non-OUD patients. Throughout, we address the use of buprenorphine in children and adolescent patients, and we finish with considerations related to the settings of pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Case Report: Buprenorphine-precipitated fentanyl withdrawal treated with high-dose buprenorphine

Background: Buprenorphine, a partial agonist of the mu-opioid receptor, is an increasingly prescribed medication for maintenance treatment of opioid use disorder. When this medication is taken in the context of active opioid use, precipitated withdrawal can occur, leading to acute onset of opioid withdrawal symptoms. Fentanyl complicates use of buprenorphine, as it slowly releases from body stores and can lead to higher risk of precipitated withdrawal. Objectives: Describe the successful management of buprenorphine precipitated opioid withdrawal from fentanyl with high doses of buprenorphine. We seek to highlight how no adverse effects occurred in this patient and illustrate his stable transition to outpatient treatment. Case report: We present the case of a patient with severe opioid use disorder who presented in moderately severe opioid withdrawal after taking non-prescribed buprenorphine-naloxone which precipitated opioid withdrawal from daily fentanyl use. He was treated with high doses of buprenorphine, 148 mg over the first 48 hours, averaging 63 mg per day over four days. The patient reported rapid improvement in withdrawal symptoms without noted side effects and was able to successfully taper to 16 mg twice daily by discharge. Conclusions: This case demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of buprenorphine at high doses for treatment of precipitated withdrawal. While other options include symptomatic withdrawal management, initiating methadone or less researched options like ketamine, utilizing buprenorphine can preserve or re-establish confidence in this life-saving medication. This case also increases the previously documented upper boundary on buprenorphine dosing for withdrawal and should provide additional confidence in its use.

Implementing buprenorphine prolonged-release injection using a health at the margins approach for transactional sex-workers

Background

Access to prescribed interventions and retention in treatment services are associated with improved health outcomes and reduced premature mortality rates for people living with opioid use disorder (OUD). In Leeds, transactional sex-workers frequently cycled in and out of treatment for OUD such that they never reached a level of engagement that permitted opportunities to meet their healthcare or housing needs. Barriers to accessing care provision include an itinerant lifestyle, difficulties with travel at unpredictable hours, impacting upon adherence to medication regimens including daily supervised consumption.

Objectives

To use a co-produced, "health at the margins" approach, to reach the sex-working population in Leeds, and support informed choices about the potential to receive buprenorphine prolonged-release injection (BPRI) as a treatment option for OUD.

Methods

BPRI was introduced using a theory of change model and improvements in sex-worker care delivery was reviewed. Strategies included buprenorphine micro-induction, shared decision-making, collaborative multi-agency working and supporting a strengths-based and trauma-informed approach.

Results

Benefits of BPRI included removal of the need for daily pharmacy visits, reducing the risk of diversion, improved medication adherence, stability and engagement with treatment and supportive services.

Conclusion

BPRI may offer an additional option for pharmacological interventions for people with OUD where there may be increased barriers to accessing treatment for example due to sex-working. Strategies for effective BPRI include micro-induction, shared decision-making, collaborative multi-agency working and supporting a strengths-based approach.

Buprenorphine/naloxone micro-induction in a tertiary care hospital: a retrospective cohort analysis

OBJECTIVES

To describe the use of buprenorphine/naloxone micro-inductions in hospitalized patients and characterize the success rate of these inductions.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of hospitalized patients receiving a buprenorphine/naloxone micro-induction for opioid use disorder in a tertiary care hospital from Jan 2020-Dec 2020. The primary outcome was a description of the micro-induction prescribing patterns used. The secondary outcomes were a description of the demographic characteristics of patients, the estimated frequency of withdrawal symptoms experienced by patients undergoing a micro-induction, and the overall success rate of the micro-inductions defined as retention on buprenorphine/naloxone therapy with no precipitated withdrawal experienced.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were included in the analysis. Three main micro-induction regimens were identified, including rapid micro-inductions (8 patients), 0.5 mg SL BID initiations (6 patients), and 0.5 mg SL daily initiations (19 patients). Twenty-four patients (73%) met the criteria for a successful micro-induction, defined as being retained in buprenorphine/naloxone therapy with no precipitated withdrawal experienced. The most common reason for micro-induction failure was patient request to discontinue buprenorphine/naloxone therapy due to perceived adverse effects or personal preference.

CONCLUSION

Buprenorphine/naloxone micro-induction in hospitalized patients resulted in a majority of patients being successfully initiated on buprenorphine/naloxone therapy without requiring opioid abstinence prior to induction. Dosing regimens were variable, and the ideal regimen remains unclear.

Low-dose Initiation of Buprenorphine in Hospitalized Patients Using Buccal Buprenorphine: A Case Series

OBJECTIVE

To describe a low-dose buprenorphine initiation strategy with buccal buprenorphine.

METHODS

This is a case series of hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) and/or chronic pain who underwent low-dose buprenorphine initiation with buccal buprenorphine to sublingual buprenorphine. Results are descriptively reported.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent low-dose buprenorphine initiation from January 2020 to July 2021. Twenty-two (49%) patients had OUD only, 5 (11%) patients had chronic pain only, and 18 (40%) patients had both OUD and chronic pain. Thirty-six (80%) patients had documented history of heroin or non-prescribed fentanyl use before admission. Acute pain in 34 (76%) patients was the most commonly documented rationale for low-dose buprenorphine initiation. Methadone was the most common outpatient opioid utilized before admission (53%). The addiction medicine service consulted on 44 (98%) cases and median length of stay was approximately 2 weeks. Thirty-six (80%) patients completed the transition to sublingual buprenorphine with a median completion dose of 16 mg daily. Of the 24 patients (53%) with consistently documented Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale scores, no patients experienced severe opioid withdrawal. Fifteen (62.5%) experienced mild or moderate withdrawal and 9 (37.5%) experienced no withdrawal (Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale score <5) during the entire process. Continuity of postdischarge prescription refills ranged from 0 to 37 weeks and the median number of buprenorphine refills was 7 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose buprenorphine initiation with buccal buprenorphine to sublingual buprenorphine was well tolerated and can be safely and effectively utilized for patients whose clinical scenario precludes traditional buprenorphine initiation strategies.

Low dose IV buprenorphine inductions for patients with opioid use disorder and concurrent pain: a retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

Hospitalizations are a vital opportunity for the initiation of life-saving opioid agonist therapy (OAT) for patients with opioid use disorder. A novel approach to OAT initiation is the use of IV buprenorphine for low dose induction, which allows patients to immediately start buprenorphine at any point in a hospitalization without stopping full agonist opioids or experiencing significant withdrawal.

METHODS

This is a retrospective case series of 33 patients with opioid use disorder concurrently treated with full agonist opioids for pain who voluntarily underwent low dose induction at a tertiary academic medical center. Low dose induction is the process of initiating very low doses of buprenorphine at fixed intervals with gradual dose increases in patients who recently received or are simultaneously treated with full opioid agonists. Our study reports one primary outcome: successful completion of the low dose induction (i.e. transitioned from low dose IV buprenorphine to sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone) and three secondary outcomes: discharge from the hospital with buprenorphine-naloxone prescription, self-reported pain scores, and nursing-assessed clinical opiate withdrawal scale (COWS) scores over a 6-day period, using descriptive statistics. COWS and pain scores were obtained from day 0 (prior to starting the low dose induction) to day 5 to assess the effect on withdrawal symptoms and pain control.

RESULTS

Thirty patients completed the low dose induction (30/33, 90.9%). Thirty patients (30/33, 90.9%) were discharged with a buprenorphine prescription. Pain and COWS scores remained stable over the course of the study period. Mean COWS scores for all patients were 2.6 (SD 2.8) on day 0 and 1.6 (SD 2.6) on day 5. Mean pain scores for all patients were 4.4 (SD 2.1) on day 0 and 3.5 on day 5 (SD 2.1).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that an IV buprenorphine low dose induction protocol was well-tolerated by a group of 33 hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder with co-occurring pain requiring full agonist opioid therapy. COWS and pain scores improved for the majority of patients. This is the first case series to report mean daily COWS and pain scores over an extended period throughout a low dose induction process.

Opioids and Opioid Use Disorder in Pregnancy

Overdose is a leading cause of pregnancy-associated morbidity and mortality in the United States. As such, all obstetric providers have a responsibility to provide evidence-based care for patients with opioid use disorder to mitigate adverse outcomes associated with substance use during pregnancy.

Inpatient Buprenorphine Induction for Opioid Use Disorder in Pregnancy

Objective Buprenorphine is a commonly used medication to manage opioid use disorder, however there is limited data to guide induction protocols specifically during pregnancy. Similar to non-pregnant patients the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) is often used to guide induction and titration of buprenorphine in pregnancy. The objective of this retrospective descriptive study is to assess the inpatient buprenorphine induction patterns, treatment retention, and pregnancy outcomes among obstetric patients with opioid use disorder seeking treatment.  Study design This was a retrospective study of obstetric patients with opioid use disorder admitted for inpatient buprenorphine induction at a large academic center between May 2015 to 2020. A descriptive analysis of the cohort, induction patterns, and dose retention after discharge were evaluated in addition to obstetric and neonatal outcomes. Results Sixty patients were admitted for inpatient buprenorphine induction at a median gestational age of 16.7 weeks. The median COWS score on presentation was 9. The starting dose for half of the patients (30 out of 60 patients) was 8 mg of buprenorphine, while 24 patients were started at 4 mg. The median duration of hospitalization was three days (range 2-12). The median buprenorphine dose upon discharge was 10 mg (range 4-20). Only 13 of the 35 patients (37%) who desired prenatal care at our institution returned to receive routine prenatal care. Of the 12 (20%) patients who delivered at our institution, nine were live births (75%). Among the live births, the median gestational age at delivery was 37.4 weeks, birth weight 3085 grams, and only one (8%) developed neonatal abstinence syndrome. Conclusion When using the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale to guide inpatient buprenorphine titration for pregnant patients with opioid use disorder it takes approximately three days to establish a satisfactory maintenance dose with the median dose at discharge in this population being 10 mg. The majority of patients who followed up after hospital discharge did not need dose adjustments.

METHADONE INITIATION IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT FOR OPIOID USE DISORDER: A CASE SERIES

BACKGROUND

In an era of fentanyl and continually rising rates of opioid overdose deaths, increasing access to evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) should be prioritized. Emergency department (ED) buprenorphine initiation for patients with OUD is considered best-practice. Methadone, though also evidence-based and effective, is under-utilized due to strict federal regulation, significant stigma, and lack of physician training. We describe the novel utilization of CFR Title 21 1306.07 (b), also known as the "72-hour rule," to initiate methadone for OUD in the ED.

CASE SERIES

We describe the cases of 3 patients with a history of OUD who were initiated on methadone for OUD in the ED, linked to an opioid treatment program, and attended an intake appointment. Why Should an Emergency Physician Be Aware of This? The ED can be a crucial point of intervention for vulnerable patients with OUD who may not interact with the health care system in other settings. Methadone and buprenorphine are both first-line options for medication for OUD, and methadone may be preferred in patients who have been unsuccessful with buprenorphine in the past or those at higher risk of treatment dropout. Patients may also prefer methadone to buprenorphine based on previous experience or understanding of the medications. ED physicians may utilize the "72-hour rule" to administer and initiate methadone for up to 3 consecutive days while arranging referral to treatment. EDs can develop methadone initiation and bridge programs utilizing similar strategies to those that have been described in developing buprenorphine programs.

Precipitated opioid withdrawal after buprenorphine administration in patients presenting to the emergency department: A case series

Objectives

Buprenorphine is a highly effective medication for the treatment of opioid use disorder, but it can cause precipitated withdrawal (PW) from opioids. Incidence, risk factors, and best approaches to management of PW are not well understood. Our objective was to describe adverse outcomes after buprenorphine administration among emergency department (ED) patients and assess whether they met the criteria for PW.

Methods

This study is a case series using retrospective chart review in a convenience sample of patients from 3 hospitals in an urban academic health system. This study included patients who were reported by clinicians as potential cases of PW. Relevant clinical data were abstracted from the electronic health record using a structured retrospective chart review instrument.

Results

A total of 13 cases were included and classified into the following 3 categories: (1) PW after buprenorphine administration consistent with guidelines (n = 5), (2) PW after deviating from guidelines (n = 4), and (3) protracted opioid withdrawal with no increase in Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale score (n = 4). A total of 11 patients had urine drug testing positive for fentanyl, and 11 patients received additional doses of buprenorphine for symptom management. Of the patients, 5 had self-directed hospital discharges, and 6 were ultimately discharged with prescriptions for buprenorphine.

Conclusions

Cases of adverse outcomes after buprenorphine administration in the ED and hospital meet criteria for PW, although some cases may have represented protracted opioid withdrawal. Further investigation into the incidence, risk factors, management of PW as well as patient perspectives is needed to expand and sustain the use of buprenorphine in EDs and hospitals.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, pilot clinical trial examining buspirone as an adjunctive medication during buprenorphine-assisted supervised opioid withdrawal

Successful management of opioid withdrawal improves long-term treatment outcomes and reduces opioid use-related morbidity and mortality. Mechanistically supported pharmacotherapeutic approaches are needed to effectively manage acute and protracted opioid withdrawal. Buspirone is a D2 antagonist and 5-HT1a agonist that may decrease opioid withdrawal. Individuals (n = 15) admitted to a residential treatment center for opioid use disorder (OUD) were enrolled into a double-blind randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy and acceptability of buspirone (45 mg/day) as an adjunctive medication to buprenorphine-assisted, supervised opioid withdrawal. Participants completed daily questionnaires which consisted of the Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) and a consensus sleep diary, which assessed total sleep time, time to sleep onset, and sleep quality. Total SOWS scores, individual opioid withdrawal symptoms and sleep outcomes were assessed between treatment groups (Placebo and Buspirone) and over time in a repeated measures linear mixed model. Total SOWS scores significantly decreased across study phases for both groups but decreased to a greater extent among individuals assigned to buspirone during both the first and second week of stable buspirone. Greater decreases in withdrawal were observed during Week 2 of stable buspirone relative to Week 1 of stable buspirone. Participants also reported significant increases in sleep duration and significant decreases in latency to sleep onset. This study provides further support that buspirone can help mitigate opioid withdrawal during a supervised opioid taper. Buspirone may confer unique benefits during protracted withdrawal periods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Open-label, rapid initiation pilot study for extended-release buprenorphine subcutaneous injection

Background: For patients with opioid use disorder, buprenorphine extended-release injection (BUP-XR) achieves sustained therapeutic plasma concentrations, controls craving and withdrawal symptoms, and improves patient outcomes. Given retention challenges during transmucosal buprenorphine (BUP-TM) induction, assessing methods to quickly achieve sustained buprenorphine concentrations is important.Objectives: This open-label, single-group, single-center pilot study (NCT03993392) evaluated safety and tolerability of initiating BUP-XR following a single BUP-TM 4 mg dose.Methods: Eligible participants abstained from short and long-acting opioids for 6 and 24  hours, respectively. If the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) was ≥8, BUP-TM 4 mg was administered. Participants not exhibiting hypersensitivity, precipitated opioid withdrawal (POW), or sedation symptoms within 1 hour received BUP-XR 300 mg (assessed as inpatients for 48 hours and outpatients to Day 29). Endpoints were COWS score increase ≥6, independent adjudication of POW, and opioid use.Results: Twenty-six participants (14 male) received BUP-TM, 24 received BUP-XR, and 20 completed the study. After injection, COWS scores decreased from pre-BUP-TM baseline of 14.6 ± 4.1 to 6.9 ± 4.1 at 6 hours and 4.2 ± 3.2 at 24 hours. Most participants (62.5%) experienced maximum COWS scores pre-BUP-XR; 2 experienced a COWS score increase ≥6, occurring at 1 and 2 hours post-BUP-XR. By adjudication, 2/24 participants experienced POW. Irritability, anxiety, nausea, and pain were the most frequent adverse events (AEs) with no serious AEs.Conclusions: Results support increased flexibility for initiating BUP-XR. Initiating BUP-XR 300 mg following a single BUP-TM 4 mg dose was well tolerated. Although some participants initially experienced withdrawal symptoms after injection, significant symptomatic improvement was observed in all participants within 24 hours.

Developing A Rapid Transfer from Opioid Full Agonist to Buprenorphine: "Ultrarapid Micro-Dosing" Proof of Concept

Buprenorphine/naloxone has been shown to be effective for treating opioid use disorder (OUD). However, the traditional method of induction requires a patient to be in moderate-to-severe withdrawal, which is challenging, time-consuming, and a common reason for leaving against medical advice. Induction strategies that minimize the severity and duration of patient discomfort while enabling patients to reach therapeutic doses during short hospital admissions can mitigate difficulties when inducing a patient on buprenorphine/naloxone. This case-series illustrates two patients with OUD using illicit fentanyl, who were successfully started on buprenorphine/naloxone using 24-hour and 6-hour micro-dosing induction protocol. During induction, the patients were up-titrated to a therapeutic dose through ultrarapid micro-dosing with ongoing use of short-acting opioids. Both patients reached therapeutic doses experiencing minimal levels of withdrawal. This case-series is a proof of concept for the use of a buprenorphine/naloxone ultrarapid micro-induction protocol for inpatients with OUD. By reducing the length of induction and precluding the need for withdrawal, this method offers several advantages over previously published inductions protocols and can improve the accessibility of buprenorphine/naloxone to patients with OUD.

A Plea From People Who Use Drugs to Clinicians: New Ways to Initiate Buprenorphine Are Urgently Needed in the Fentanyl Era

With the worst opioid overdose death crisis in the United States history, urgent new approaches to assist people who use drugs onto medication for opioid use disorder are necessary. In this commentary, addiction medicine clinicians and drug user union representatives align to argue that conventional ways of buprenorphine initiation that require periods of withdrawal must be augmented with additional novel approaches to initiation. In the fentanyl era, members of the New England Users Union and Portland Users Union report encountering precipitated withdrawal, being unable to stop using full agonist opioids for a required period of time, and difficulty initiating this medication that could offer them some stability and life-saving treatment. People who use drugs should be involved at all levels with ongoing research, clinical and policy efforts to improve buprenorphine initiation as their lives and their suffering are at stake.

A case of buprenorphine-precipitated withdrawal managed with high-dose buprenorphine

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine-naloxone has a very high affinity for the mu-receptor and can cause precipitated opioid withdrawal, typically more severe than withdrawal that occurs naturally, when administered while a full mu-opioid receptor agonist remains in a person's system. To avoid precipitated withdrawal, one needs to be in mild to moderate opioid withdrawal at the time of buprenorphine-naloxone induction. Recently, there have been reported cases of precipitated withdrawal occurring in patients taking fentanyl knowingly or unknowingly, despite them being in adequate opioid withdrawal at the time of induction. When this occurs, the current recommendation is to provide 2 mg of buprenorphine-naloxone every 1-2 hours.

OBJECTIVES

Describe a case of successful management of buprenorphine-precipitated withdrawal with escalation of the dose of buprenorphine and highlight implications for future management.

METHODS

We present a case of a patient with a history of opioid use disorder who was in moderate opioid withdrawal at the time of buprenorphine-naloxone induction and experienced precipitated withdrawal after buprenorphine-naloxone administration.

RESULTS

High-dose buprenorphine-naloxone was given to the patient and precipitated withdrawal subsided after receiving a total of 20 mg. On the next day, the patient had no symptoms of opioid withdrawal and is currently maintained on 16 mg/day.

CONCLUSION

With the rising prevalence of fentanyl-laced drugs, increased instances of precipitated withdrawal are likely to be encountered. In cases of precipitated withdrawal, giving a high dose of buprenorphine-naloxone rapidly is safe and will allow rapid reversal of withdrawal symptoms.

Strategies for Transfer From Methadone to Buprenorphine for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorders and Associated Outcomes: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To review the currently available evidence on transfer strategies from methadone to sublingual buprenorphine used in clinical trials and observational studies of medication for opioid use disorder treatment, and to consider whether any strategies yield better clinical outcomes than others.

METHODS

Six medical and public health databases were searched for articles and conference abstracts. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were used to identify unpublished trial results. Records were dually screened, and data were extracted and checked independently. Results were summarized qualitatively and, when possible, analyzed quantitatively.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies described transfer from methadone to buprenorphine. Transfer protocols were extremely varied. Most studies reported successful rates of transfer, even among studies involving transfer from high methadone doses, although lower pretransfer methadone dose was significantly associated with higher rate of successful transfer. Precipitated withdrawal was not reported frequently. A range of innovative approaches to transfer from methadone to buprenorphine remains untested.

CONCLUSIONS

Few studies have used designs that enable comparison of different approaches to transfer patients from methadone to buprenorphine. Most international clinical guidelines provide recommendations consistent with the available evidence. However, clinical guidelines should be perceived as providing "guidance" rather than "protocols," and clinicians and patients need to exercise judgment when attempting transfers.

Safety of induction at standard doses of buprenorphine for inpatients with opioid use disorder

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are commonly admitted to various inpatient services where treatment can be started. The typical initiation of buprenorphine involves delay of treatment until withdrawal symptoms occur, however, those symptoms may interfere with other medical therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of initiation of buprenorphine for inpatients with OUD.

We reviewed the charts of 99 patients for whom the inpatient addiction medicine consult service was contacted over a 15-month period from January 2020 to identify those patients started on buprenorphine. We abstracted data on toxicology results, prior use of buprenorphine, and Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Scale (COWS) and pain scores before and after the administration of buprenorphine.

There was no significant difference in COWS classification post treatment based on ancillary or non use of full agonist therapy. There was no significant change in COWS scores based on prior buprenorphine or methadone use. 5% of patients developed moderate withdrawal (COWS score 12-24) after the initiation of buprenorphine. Twenty of the study patients (20%) developed a 2-point increase in pain scores after the initiation of buprenorphine.

SUMMARY

The initiation of buprenorphine for inpatients rarely results in a significant increase in withdrawal symptoms. A larger percent of patients may have an increase in pain scores which would need to be managed. Further prospective work on this subject is warranted.

"I wanted something that was more flexible": A qualitative study of patient preferences on choosing buprenorphine over methadone in a large, safety-net hospital opioid treatment program

Background: Buprenorphine availability for the treatment of opioid use disorders (OUD) has expanded in the United States. Programs that previously offered only methadone treatment to patients with OUD now offer an equal choice between buprenorphine and methadone at the same location, yet little is known about patient preferences for buprenorphine over methadone in these settings. We sought to understand the decision-making factors and motivations underlying why patients opt for buprenorphine over methadone for the treatment of OUD when both are offered in a safety-net hospital-based opioid treatment program (OTP). Methods: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with patients receiving buprenorphine, in which we asked about substance use and treatment history, reasons for choosing buprenorphine, advantages, and disadvantages of choosing buprenorphine, and what they would like to change in their treatment experience. Results: Participants had varied exposure to buprenorphine prior to their current treatment, ranging from none to years of experience in multiple settings. Increased flexibility with take-home doses was a widespread motivation for choosing buprenorphine over methadone. Participants described decreased sedation and greater effectiveness in preventing opioid use compared to methadone as advantages during their treatment with buprenorphine. Difficulty with the transition to buprenorphine was a noteworthy challenge for many. Conclusions: Overall, patients maintained on buprenorphine at an urban safety-net hospital OTP viewed their treatment favorably compared to methadone. Increased autonomy in light of federal regulation differences and an improved physical profile were significant decision-making factors, although the number of patients choosing buprenorphine at the OTP remained low. Targeted patient education about induction and focus on improving structural barriers such as dosing efficiency may enhance patient experiences.

Challenges with buprenorphine inductions in the context of the fentanyl overdose crisis: A case series

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

North America is currently experiencing an epidemic of opioid overdose deaths, driven by the proliferation of fentanyl in the street drug market. Although buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX) is an evidence-based, first-line opioid agonist for the management of opioid use disorder, a key challenge in its prescribing lies in the fact that it can precipitate opioid withdrawal during its initial induction process. At this time, there is minimal literature on the BUP/NX induction process in individuals who use illicit fentanyl regularly.

DESIGN, METHODS AND RESULTS

A case series from a Vancouver, Canada addiction medicine clinic of three fentanyl-exposed patients who experienced unexpected, precipitated withdrawal when initiating BUP/NX.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

These cases describe incidents of precipitated opioid withdrawal occurring after unusually long periods of fentanyl abstention. Although fentanyl is experienced as a short-acting opioid, the drug persists much longer in the body's peripheral tissues. Here, we highlight the new challenges fentanyl may pose to current BUP/NX induction strategies, and explore the possibility of a long-acting pharmacokinetic effect of fentanyl in the setting of repeated illicit use.

Low Dose Initiation of Buprenorphine: A Narrative Review and Practical Approach

Low dose buprenorphine initiation, is an alternative method of initiating buprenorphine in which the starting dose is very low and gradually increased to therapeutic levels over a period of days. This method takes advantage of slow displacement of the full opioid agonist from mu-opioid receptors, avoiding the need for a person with opioid use disorder to experience opioid withdrawal symptoms before initiating buprenorphine, while also minimizing the risk of precipitated opioid withdrawal. With this initiation method, full opioid agonists can be continued as buprenorphine is initiated, expanding the population to which buprenorphine can be offered. To date, the literature on low dose initiation is primarily case-based but rapidly growing. While evidence emerges, guidance for the use of low dose initiation is clearly desired and urgently needed in the context of an increasingly risky and contaminated opioid drug supply, particularly with high potency synthetic opioids, driving overdose deaths. Despite limited evidence, several principles to guide low dose initiation have been identified including: (1) choosing the appropriate clinical situation, (2) initiating at a low buprenorphine dose, (3) titrating the buprenorphine dose gradually, (4) continuing the full opioid agonist even if it is nonmedical, (5) communicating clearly with frequent monitoring, (6) pausing or delaying buprenorphine dose changes if opioid withdrawal symptoms occur, and (7) prioritizing care coordination. We review a practical approach to low dose initiation in hospital-based and outpatient settings guided by the current evidence.

Initiating buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder without prerequisite withdrawal: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Opioid withdrawal symptoms prior to buprenorphine initiation may be intolerable and as a result, alternative strategies have emerged. We aim to systematically review the efficacy and safety of buprenorphine initiation that aims to omit prerequisite withdrawal.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE and CENTRAL from 1996 through April 10, 2020, augmented with searches in Google Scholar and www.clinicaltrials.gov . A study was included if it was in patients with substance use disorder or chronic pain that were taking a full mu opioid agonist and transitioning to buprenorphine without preceding withdrawal, and reported withdrawal during initiation as an outcome. Two investigators independently screened citations and articles for inclusion, collected data using a standardized data collection tool, and assessed study risk of bias.

RESULTS

We included 15 case reports/series, reporting 24 unique cases, in our qualitative synthesis. No controlled studies were identified. Microdosing and bridging with a buprenorphine patch were the most common strategies reported. Transition to buprenorphine with complete cessation of opioid agonists was achieved in 87.5% (n = 21) of cases. Withdrawal during initiation occurred in 58.3% (n = 14) of cases, two of which were at least moderate in severity.

CONCLUSION

Buprenorphine initiation strategies that omit prerequisite withdrawal have emerged. Low quality evidence from case reports suggests withdrawal during initiation is common but most often mild in severity. There is an unmet need for controlled studies to inform their efficacy and safety compared with traditional strategies, including outcomes during initiation and in the long-term.

Rapid Induction Therapy for Opioid-Use Disorder Using Buprenorphine Transdermal Patch: A Case Series

INTRODUCTION

Opioid dependency is a major epidemiologic problem with profound morbidity and mortality. Despite the availability of effective treatments, there are often overwhelming barriers to those treatments.

CASE PRESENTATIONS

We present a case series involving a novel approach to the induction phase of buprenorphine or buprenorphine-naloxone therapy using transdermal buprenorphine. This approach has been demonstrated in inpatient settings but has not been widely explored in the outpatient setting. We demonstrated that a range of patients, from the highly medically complex to relatively straightforward cases, benefited from this approach.

DISCUSSION

We believe that this approach can be used in a wide range of patients to transition from opioid use to buprenorphine therapy without the patient having to experience withdrawal or wait to start treatment. This should reduce the risk of lack of return for follow-up as well as decrease the dropout rate caused by patients being unable to tolerate withdrawal symptoms.

Rapid buprenorphine microdosing for opioid use disorder in a hospitalized patient receiving very high doses of full agonist opioids for acute pain management: Titration, implementation barriers, and strategies to overcomes

Background: Conventional buprenorphine inductions for OUD are clinically useful but require patients to experience mild to moderate opioid withdrawal symptoms to avoid precipitated withdrawal. This may be intolerable/unreasonable for some, which may have precluded successful buprenorphine treatment in the past. Microdosing buprenorphine, allowing for full agonist opioid overlap, has emerged as a clinically useful strategy for those unable to complete conventional buprenorphine induction. However, many questions remain such as preclusions regarding the amount of full agonist opioid overlap, speed of buprenorphine microdose titration, and overcoming implementation barriers in U.S. hospitals. Case presentation: A female between the ages of 30 and 40 with severe OUD admitted to the hospital for IDU-related osteomyelitis wished to begin buprenorphine for OUD. Her hospitalization was subject to premature discharge at any time due to competing interests of potential foreclosure on her home, so buprenorphine needed to be started rapidly for safety and improved outcomes. Due to her significant acute pain requirements managed with full agonist opioids, it was unreasonable to consider conventional buprenorphine induction. Buprenorphine microdose strategy was employed at more rapid titration and previously described in the literature, starting at 1 mg TDD on day 1, 3 mg TDD on day 2, and 8 mg TDD on day 3 with full agonist opioid overlap starting at 1,944 MME tapered down to 473 MME. The patient prematurely left the hospital, at which time buprenorphine 8 mg TDD was held at this dose for days 3-8 while full agonist opioid was tapered from 473 MME to 117 MME. BUP was then further titrated to 8 mg TID. This patient tolerated buprenorphine microdosing well, without any treatment-emergent opioid symptoms or worsening of baseline symptoms. Discussion: This case demonstrates the success of buprenorphine microdose induction despite very high doses of full agonist opioid overlap and demonstrates the ability to titrate buprenorphine microdoses faster than originally described. Strategies to overcoming implementation barriers are also discussed.

Managing opioid withdrawal precipitated by buprenorphine with buprenorphine

Buprenorphine is a partial opioid agonist commonly used to treat opioid dependence. The pharmacology of buprenorphine increases the risk of a precipitated opioid withdrawal when commencing patients on buprenorphine treatment, particularly when transferring from long acting opioids (e.g. methadone). There is little documented experience regarding the management of precipitated withdrawal. In our case, a patient developed a significant precipitated opioid withdrawal following buprenorphine administration, and was able to be successfully treated in hospital with further buprenorphine. This demonstrates that rapid increases in buprenorphine dose can be used as an effective treatment for buprenorphine-induced precipitated opioid withdrawal. The use of buprenorphine to manage withdrawal then allows the individual to continue on this highly effective treatment.

The Pharmacology of Buprenorphine Microinduction for Opioid Use Disorder

Although expanding the availability of buprenorphine—a first-line pharmacotherapy for opioid-use disorder (OUD)—has increased the capacity of healthcare systems to offer treatment, starting this medication is fraught with significant barriers. Standard induction regimens require persons with OUD to taper and discontinue full opioid agonists and experience opioid withdrawal prior to the first dose of buprenorphine. Further, emerging evidence indicates that precipitated withdrawal during induction may impact long-term treatment outcomes. Microinduction is a novel approach that, by harnessing buprenorphine’s unique pharmacological profile, may allow circumventing the needed for prolonged opioid tapers, and reduce the risk of precipitated withdrawal—holding promise to enhance treatment access. In this review, we examine the pharmacological basis for microinduction and appraise the evidence of this approach to improve clinical outcomes among persons with OUD. First, we highlight the potential dose-dependent effects of buprenorphine on two key neuroadaptations at the mu-opioid receptor (MOR)—resensitization and upregulation. We then focus on how microinduction may reverse these chronic MOR neuroadaptations, allowing the maintenance of an adequate opioid tone, and thereby potentially circumventing opioid withdrawal. Second, we describe the clinical evidence available, derived from observational reports and open-label studies, examining the potential efficacy of microinduction. Despite significant heterogeneity—exemplified by variable buprenorphine formulations, daily doses, and schedules of administration—these data provide preliminary support for the feasibility of microinduction. Finally, we provide new mechanistic, methodological, and clinical insights to guide future translational research, as well as randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials in this compelling agenda of pharmacotherapy development.

Method for Successfully Inducting Individuals Who Use Illicit Fentanyl Onto Buprenorphine/Naloxone

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Individuals exposed to fentanyl are at risk of precipitated withdrawal using typical buprenorphine/naloxone induction procedures.

METHODS

This case series describes buprenorphine/naloxone inductions of four individuals who tested positive for fentanyl.

RESULTS

Buprenorphine-precipitated withdrawal was observed in two individuals who completed a conventional buprenorphine/naloxone induction strategy. Two more individuals completed a revised buprenorphine/naloxone induction strategy that did not precipitate withdrawal.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Using multiple 2 mg doses of buprenorphine/naloxone in patients already in mild/moderate withdrawal improved outcomes.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Persons who use illicit fentanyl might be less likely to experience precipitated withdrawal from this revised buprenorphine/naloxone induction strategy. (Am J Addict 2021;30:83-87).

Case Series: Limited Opioid Withdrawal With Use of Transdermal Buprenorphine to Bridge to Sublingual Buprenorphine in Hospitalized Patients

BACKGROUND

Prerequisite opioid withdrawal symptoms prior to buprenorphine induction are unacceptable to many patients. We assessed whether transdermal buprenorphine minimized withdrawal while bridging to sublingual therapy among hospital inpatients.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of (n = 23) inpatients with opioid use disorder or opioid dependence due to chronic pain.

RESULTS

Of 23 inpatients, 65% transitioned without symptoms, while 35% experienced mild withdrawal. Ninety-six percent completed planned hospitalizations, with 83% engaged in treatment 4 weeks post-discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Bridging to sublingual therapy with transdermal buprenorphine patches was feasible without withdrawal symptoms.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This strategy may facilitate buprenorphine therapy in hospital inpatients. (Am J Addict 2019;00:1-4).

The relationship between pupil diameter and other measures of opioid withdrawal during naloxone precipitated withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Understanding mechanisms of physiological opioid withdrawal symptoms can inform treatment strategies. This secondary analysis evaluated the association between mydriasis (dilated pupils), a commonly-assessed opioid withdrawal metric, with self- and observer-rated opioid withdrawal severity.

METHOD

Ninety-five participants with opioid physical dependence were stabilized with morphine before receiving an injection of the opioid antagonist naloxone to precipitate withdrawal. Pupil diameter, the Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS), and the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) were collected at baseline and in 15-minute intervals for 120 min following naloxone administration. Pearson product-moment correlations and linear regressions characterized the relationships between pupil measurements (baseline and peak naloxone-induced) and self- and observer-rated measures of withdrawal. Repeated-measures ANOVAs tested whether self and observer-rated withdrawal severity corresponded to unique patterns in pupil changes.

RESULTS

Baseline pupil diameter significantly correlated with SOWS and COWS peak scores. Peak naloxone-induced pupil diameter significantly correlated with SOWS scores only. Peak changes in pupil from baseline did not correspond to peak changes in self- and observer-rated withdrawal scales.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that pupil diameter measurements were more closely associated with acute opioid withdrawal severity than changes in pupil diameter. Prospective research examining the mechanisms underlying the relationship between pupil diameter and opioid withdrawal severity are warranted.

Demystifying buprenorphine misuse: Has fear of diversion gotten in the way of addressing the opioid crisis?

Buprenorphine is considered one of the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder and significantly reduces risk of overdose death. However, concerns about its diversion and misuse have often taken center stage in public discourse and in the design of practices and policies regarding its use. This has been to the detriment of many vulnerable patient populations, especially those involved in the criminal justice system. Policies that restrict access to buprenorphine in criminal justice and other settings due to concerns of diversion do not accurately reflect the relative risks and safety profile associated with it, creating unnecessary barriers that drive an illicit market of this much-needed medication. Although proper regulation of all controlled medications should be a priority, in most instances the benefits of buprenorphine highly outweigh its risks. In the midst of a national crisis, efforts should be focused on expanding, and not restricting, access to this lifesaving treatment.

Effect of Buprenorphine Weekly Depot (CAM2038) and Hydromorphone Blockade in Individuals With Opioid Use Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Buprenorphine is an efficacious, widely used treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Daily oral transmucosal formulations can be associated with misuse, diversion, and nonadherence; these limitations may be obviated by a sustained release formulation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the ability of a novel, weekly, subcutaneous buprenorphine depot formulation, CAM2038, to block euphorigenic opioid effects and suppress opioid withdrawal in non-treatment-seeking individuals with OUD.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multisite, double-blind, randomized within-patient study was conducted at 3 controlled inpatient research facilities. It involved 47 adults with DSM-V moderate-to-severe OUD. The study was conducted from October 12, 2015 (first patient enrolled), to April 21, 2016 (last patient visit).

INTERVENTIONS

A total of five 3-day test sessions evaluated the response to hydromorphone (0, 6, and 18 mg intramuscular in random order; 1 dose/session/day). After the first 3-day session (ie, qualification phase), participants were randomized to either CAM2038 weekly at 24 mg (n = 22) or 32 mg (n = 25); the assigned CAM2038 dose was given twice, 1 week apart (day 0 and 7). Four sets of sessions were conducted after randomization (days 1-3, 4-6, 8-10, and 11-13).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was maximum rating on the visual analog scale for drug liking. Secondary end points included other visual analog scale (eg, high and desire to use), opioid withdrawal scales, and physiological and pharmacokinetic outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 46 of 47 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 35.5 [9] years; 76% male [n = 35]) completed the study. Both weekly CAM2038 doses produced immediate and sustained blockade of hydromorphone effects (liking maximum effect, CAM2038, 24 mg: effect size, 0.813; P < .001, and CAM2038, 32 mg: effect size, 0.753; P < .001) and suppression of withdrawal (Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale, CAM2038, 24 mg: effect size, 0.617; P < .001, and CAM2038, 32 mg: effect size, 0.751; P < .001). CAM2038 produces a rapid initial rise of buprenorphine in plasma with maximum concentration around 24 hours, with an apparent half-life of 4 to 5 days and approximately 50% accumulation of trough concentration from first to second dose (trough concentration = 0.822 and 1.23 ng/mL for weeks 1 and 2, respectively, with 24 mg; trough concentration = 0.993 and 1.47 ng/mL for weeks 1 and 2, respectively, with 32 mg).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

CAM2038 weekly, 24 and 32 mg, was safely tolerated and produced immediate and sustained opioid blockade and withdrawal suppression. The results support the use of this depot formulation for treatment initiation and stabilization of patients with OUD, with the further benefit of obviating the risk for misuse and diversion of daily buprenorphine while retaining its therapeutic benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02611752.

Very early disengagement and subsequent re-engagement in primary care Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) with buprenorphine

INTRODUCTION

Patients with opioid use disorder often require multiple treatment attempts before achieving stable recovery. Rates of disengagement from buprenorphine are highest in the first month of treatment and termination of buprenorphine therapy results in return to use rates as high as 90%. To better characterize these at-risk patients, this study aims to describe: 1) the frequency and characteristics of patients with very early disengagement (≤1month) from Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) with buprenorphine and 2) the frequency and characteristics of patients who re-engage in care at this same OBOT clinic within 2years, among the subset of very early disengagers.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of adult patients enrolled in a large urban OBOT program. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample and the proportion of patients with very early (≤1month) disengagement and their re-engagement. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify patient characteristics associated with the outcomes of very early disengagement and re-engagement. Potential predictors included: sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, employment, opioid use history, prior substance use treatments, urine drug testing, and psychiatric diagnoses.

RESULTS

Overall, very early disengagement was unusual, with only 8.4% (104/1234) of patients disengaging within the first month. Among the subset of very early disengagers with 2years of follow-up, the proportion who re-engaged with this OBOT program in the subsequent 2years was 11.9% (10/84). Urine drug test positive for opiates within the first month (AOR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.02-3.93) was associated with increased odds of very early disengagement. Transferring from another buprenorphine prescriber (AOR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.70) was associated with decreased odds of very early disengagement. No characteristics were significantly associated with re-engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Early disengagement is uncommon; however, continued opioid use appeared to be associated with higher odds of treatment disengagement and these patients may warrant additional support. Re-engagement was uncommon, suggesting the need for a more formal explicit system to encourage and facilitate re-engagement among patients who disengage.

Overcoming Barriers to Initiating Medication-assisted Treatment for Heroin Use Disorder in a General Medical Hospital: A Case Report and Narrative Literature Review

Deaths due to heroin overdoses are increasing and are the leading cause of death among intravenous heroin users. Although medication-assisted treatment (MAT) improves morbidity and mortality in patients with opioid use disorders, it is underutilized. Most efforts to expand access to MAT have focused on outpatient settings. Although the inpatient medical setting presents a critical opportunity to initiate treatment, general hospitals are often unfamiliar with MAT, creating a number of barriers to its use. In this report, we describe the case of a woman with heroin use disorder who was initiated on buprenorphine maintenance treatment while hospitalized for cardiac disease related to her intravenous heroin use. Barriers to initiating buprenorphine in this case included patient, practitioner, and organizational factors, and, ultimately, shared misperceptions about the feasibility of administering buprenorphine in a general medical hospital. These barriers were addressed, buprenorphine was initiated, and the patient demonstrated reduced craving, improved postoperative pain control, improved overall well-being, increased engagement in discharge planning, and acceptance of referral for addiction specialty aftercare. Our experience with this patient suggests that it is feasible to initiate buprenorphine in acute medical settings and that such treatment can improve patient outcomes. Our review of the literature reveals emerging evidence supporting the value of this practice.

Public sector low threshold office-based buprenorphine treatment: outcomes at year 7

Background

Buprenorphine maintenance for opioid dependence remains of limited availability among underserved populations, despite increases in US opioid misuse and overdose deaths. Low threshold primary care treatment models including the use of unobserved, “home,” buprenorphine induction may simplify initiation of care and improve access. Unobserved induction and long-term treatment outcomes have not been reported recently among large, naturalistic cohorts treated in low threshold safety net primary care settings.

Methods

This prospective clinical registry cohort design estimated rates of induction-related adverse events, treatment retention, and urine opioid results for opioid dependent adults offered buprenorphine maintenance in a New York City public hospital primary care office-based practice from 2006 to 2013. This clinic relied on typical ambulatory care individual provider-patient visits, prescribed unobserved induction exclusively, saw patients no more than weekly, and did not require additional psychosocial treatment. Unobserved induction consisted of an in-person screening and diagnostic visit followed by a 1-week buprenorphine written prescription, with pamphlet, and telephone support. Primary outcomes analyzed were rates of induction-related adverse events (AE), week 1 drop-out, and long-term treatment retention. Factors associated with treatment retention were examined using a Cox proportional hazard model among inductions and all patients. Secondary outcomes included overall clinic retention, buprenorphine dosages, and urine sample results.

Results

Of the 485 total patients in our registry, 306 were inducted, and 179 were transfers already on buprenorphine. Post-induction (n = 306), week 1 drop-out was 17%. Rates of any induction-related AE were 12%; serious adverse events, 0%; precipitated withdrawal, 3%; prolonged withdrawal, 4%. Treatment retention was a median 38 weeks (range 0–320) for inductions, compared to 110 (0–354) weeks for transfers and 57 for the entire clinic population. Older age, later years of first clinic visit (vs. 2006–2007), and baseline heroin abstinence were associated with increased treatment retention overall.

Conclusions

Unobserved “home” buprenorphine induction in a public sector primary care setting appeared a feasible and safe clinical practice. Post-induction treatment retention of a median 38 weeks was in line with previous naturalistic studies of real-world office-based opioid treatment. Low threshold treatment protocols, as compared to national guidelines, may compliment recently increased prescriber patient limits and expand access to buprenorphine among public sector opioid use disorder patients.

Retention in buprenorphine treatment is associated with improved HCV care outcomes

Persons who inject drugs, most of whom are opioid dependent, comprise the majority of the HCV infected in the United States. As the national opioid epidemic unfolds, increasing numbers of people are entering the medical system to access treatment for opioid use disorder, specifically with buprenorphine. Yet little is known about HCV care in patients accessing buprenorphine-based opioid treatment. We sought to determine the HCV prevalence, cascade of care, and the association between patient characteristics and completion of HCV cascade of care milestones for patients initiating buprenorphine treatment. We reviewed electronic health records of all patients who initiated buprenorphine treatment at a primary-care clinic in the Bronx, NY between January 2009 and January 2014. Of the 390 patients who initiated buprenorphine treatment, 123 were confirmed to have chronic HCV infection. The only patient characteristic associated with achieving HCV care milestones was retention in opioid treatment. Patients retained (vs. not retained) in buprenorphine treatment were more likely to be referred for HCV specialty care (63.1% vs. 34.0%, p<0.01), achieve an HCV-specific evaluation (40.8% vs. 21.3%, p<0.05), be offered HCV treatment (22.4% vs. 8.5%, p<0.05), and initiate HCV treatment (9.2% vs. 6.4%, p=0.6). Given the current opioid epidemic in the US and the growing number of people receiving buprenorphine treatment, there is an unprecedented opportunity to access and treat persons with HCV, reducing HCV transmission, morbidity and mortality. Retention in opioid treatment may improve linkage and retention in HCV care; innovative models of care that integrate opioid drug treatment with HCV treatment are essential.

Factors associated with buprenorphine versus methadone use in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine has recently emerged as a safe and effective treatment option for pregnant women with opioid use disorder (OUD) and is associated with superior neonatal outcomes. This study characterized and compared patient populations who used buprenorphine versus methadone during pregnancy in an academic medical center.

METHODS

Observational retrospective cohort evaluation of 791 pregnant women with OUD on opioid maintenance treatment from 2009 to 2012. Buprenorphine versus methadone use was defined as use after either (a) conversion from illicit opioid use during pregnancy or (b) ongoing prepregnancy use. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify patient characteristics predictive of buprenorphine use.

RESULTS

Among 791 pregnant women, 608 (76.9%) used methadone and 183 (23.1%) used buprenorphine. From 2009 to 2012, buprenorphine use during pregnancy increased from 10.1% to 33.2%. Pregnant women using buprenorphine were significantly more likely to be older, married, employed, have more education, and have a history of prescription opioid use compared with women using methadone. In contrast, pregnant women using methadone were significantly more likely to have hepatitis C virus infection, use cocaine, benzodiazepines, or marijuana, and have a history of heroin and/or intravenous opioid use. In multivariable analysis, pregnant women who were older (odds ratio [OR] = 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02, 1.11), were employed (1.87; 1.20, 2.90), and had a history of opioid maintenance treatment prior to pregnancy (2.68; 1.78, 4.02) were more likely to use buprenorphine during pregnancy. Pregnant women with a history of benzodiazepine use (0.48; 0.30, 0.77), who had children no longer in their legal custody (0.63; 0.40, 0.99), and who had a partner with a substance use history (0.37; 0.22, 0.63) were less likely to use buprenorphine during pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities exist among patients who use buprenorphine versus methadone during pregnancy and indicate the need to improve the availability and accessibility of buprenorphine for many pregnant women.

Text message content preferences to improve buprenorphine maintenance treatment in primary care

Few studies have evaluated text message content preferences to support evidence-based treatment approaches for opioid use disorders, and none in primary care office-based buprenorphine treatment settings. This study assessed the acceptability and preferences for a tailored text message intervention in support of core office-based buprenorphine treatment medical management components (e.g., treatment adherence, encouraging abstinence, 12-step group participation, motivational interviewing, and patient-provider communication as needed). There were 97 patients enrolled in a safety net office-based buprenorphine treatment program who completed a 24-item survey instrument that consisted of multiple-choice responses, 7-point Likert-type scales, binomial "Yes/No" questions, and open-ended responses. The sample was predominately male (81%), had an average age of 46 years, and was diverse (64% ethnic/racial minorities); 56% lacked stable employment. Respondents were interested in receiving text message appointment reminders (90%), information pertaining to their buprenorphine treatment (76%), supportive content (70%), and messages to reduce the risk of relapse (88%). Participants preferred to receive relapse prevention text messages during all phases of treatment: immediately after induction into buprenorphine treatment (81%), a "few months" into treatment (57%), and after discontinuing buprenorphine treatment (72%). Respondents also expressed interest in text message content enhancing self-efficacy, social support, and frequent provider communication to facilitate unobserved "home" induction with buprenorphine. Older participants were significantly less receptive to receiving text message appointment reminders; however, they were as interested in receiving supportive, informational, and relapse prevention components compared to younger respondents. Implications for integrating a text message support system in office-based buprenorphine treatment are discussed.

Treatment outcomes in opioid dependent patients with different buprenorphine/naloxone induction dosing patterns and trajectories

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Induction is a crucial period of opioid addiction treatment. This study aimed to identify buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP) induction patterns and examine their association with outcomes (opioid use, retention, and related adverse events [AEs]).

METHODS

The secondary analysis of a study of opioid-dependent adults seeking treatment in eight treatment settings included 740 participants inducted on BUP with flexible dosing.

RESULTS

Latent class analysis models detected six distinctive induction trajectories: bup1-started and remained on low; bup2-started low, shifted slowly to moderate; bup3-started low, shifted quickly to moderate; bup4-started high, shifted to low; bup5-started and remained on moderate; bup6-started moderate, shifted to high dose (Fig. 1). Baseline characteristics, including Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Scale (COWS), were important predictors of retention. When controlled for the baseline characteristics, bup6 participants were three times less likely to drop out the first 7 days than bup1 participants (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = .28, p = .03). Opioid use and AEs were similar across trajectories. Participants on ≥16 mg BUP compared to those on <16 mg at Day 28 were less likely to drop out (aHR = .013, p = .001) and less likely to have AEs during the first 28 days (aOR = .57, p = .03).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

BUP induction dosing was guided by an objective measure of opioid withdrawal. Participants with higher baseline COWS whose BUP doses were raised more quickly were less likely to drop out in the first 7 days than those whose doses were raised slower.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This study supports the use of an objective measure of opioid withdrawal (COWS) during BUP induction to improve retention early in treatment.

Effects of a higher-bioavailability buprenorphine/naloxone sublingual tablet versus buprenorphine/naloxone film for the treatment of opioid dependence during induction and stabilization: a multicenter, randomized trial

PURPOSE

Sublingual buprenorphine and combination buprenorphine/naloxone (BNX) are effective options for the treatment of opioid dependence. A BNX sublingual tablet approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the induction and maintenance treatment of opioid-dependence in adults was developed as a higher-bioavailability formulation, allowing for a 30% lesser dose of buprenorphine with bioequivalent systemic exposure compared with another BNX sublingual tablet formulation. No data were previously available comparing the higher-bioavailability BNX sublingual tablet to generic buprenorphine or BNX sublingual film; we therefore evaluated treatment retention during induction and stabilization with the higher-bioavailability BNX sublingual tablet versus generic buprenorphine or BNX sublingual film.

METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-group noninferiority trial was conducted at 43 centers in the United States. Eligible patients were adults aged 18 to 65 years who met the criteria for opioid dependence and had at least mild withdrawal symptoms. On days 1 and 2, patients received blinded, fixed-dose induction with the higher-bioavailability BNX sublingual tablet or generic buprenorphine. On days 3 to 14, patients induced with BNX received open-label, titrated doses of the BNX tablet for stabilization; patients induced with buprenorphine received sublingual BNX film. Co-primary end points were treatment retention on days 3 and 15; noninferiority was concluded if the lower limit of the 95% CI of the between-group difference in treatment retention was ≥-10%. Tolerability was assessed throughout the study period.

FINDINGS

A total of 758 opioid-dependent patients were included in the study (BNX sublingual tablet, 383 patients; generic buprenorphine, 375). Day-3 retention rates were 93.9% (309/329) and 92.6% (302/326) with the BNX tablet and buprenorphine, respectively (between-group difference 95% CI, -2.6 to 5.1). Day-15 retention rates were 83.0% (273/329) and 82.5% (269/326) with the BNX tablet and BNX film, respectively (between-group difference 95% CI, -5.3 to 6.3). No unexpected tolerability issues were identified; the safety profile of the BNX sublingual tablet was similar to those of generic buprenorphine and BNX film.

IMPLICATIONS

Based on the findings from this study in patients with opioid dependence, the higher-bioavailability BNX sublingual tablet formulation was noninferior to both generic buprenorphine (induction) and BNX film (stabilization). These findings suggest that BNX sublingual tablets are an efficacious and well-tolerated option for induction and early stabilization treatment of opioid dependence. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01908842.

Unobserved "home" induction onto buprenorphine

BACKGROUND

Unobserved, or "home" buprenorphine induction is common in some clinical practices. Patients take the initial and subsequent doses of buprenorphine after, rather than during, an office visit. This review summarizes the literature on the feasibility and acceptability, safety, effectiveness, and prevalence of unobserved induction.

METHODS

We searched the English language literature for studies describing unobserved buprenorphine induction and associated outcomes. Clinical studies were assessed by strength of design, bias, and internal and external validity. Surveys of provider practices and unobserved induction adoption were reviewed for prevalence data and key findings. We also examined previous review papers and international buprenorphine treatment guidelines.

RESULTS

N = 10 clinical studies describing unobserved induction were identified: 1 randomized controlled trial, 3 prospective cohort studies, and 6 retrospective cohort studies. The evidence supports the feasibility of unobserved induction, particularly in office-based primary care practices. Evidence is weak to moderate in support of no differences in adverse event rates between unobserved and observed inductions. There is insufficient or weak evidence in terms of any or no differences in overall effectiveness (treatment retention, medication adherence, illicit opioid abstinence, other drug use). N = 9 provider surveys assessed unobserved induction: observed induction logistics are seen as barriers to buprenorphine prescribing; unobserved induction appears widespread in specific locations. International guidelines reviewed emphasize clinician or pharmacist observed induction (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Australia); only one (Denmark) explicitly endorses unobserved induction.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence supporting unobserved induction as more, less, or as effective as observed induction. However, the predominantly observational and naturalistic studies of unobserved induction reviewed, all of which have significant sources of bias and limited external validity, document feasibility and low rates of adverse events. Unobserved induction seems to be widely adopted in US and French regional provider surveys. Prescribers, policy makers, and patients should balance the benefits of observed induction such as maximum clinical supervision with the ease-of-use and comparable safety profile of unobserved induction.

Prior Experience with Non-Prescribed Buprenorphine: Role in Treatment Entry and Retention

Buprenorphine availability continues to expand as an effective treatment for opioid dependence, but increases in availability have also been accompanied by increases in non-prescribed use of the medication. Utilizing data from a randomized clinical trial, this mixed-method study examines associations between use of non-prescribed buprenorphine and subsequent treatment entry and retention. Quantitative analyses (N = 300 African American buprenorphine patients) found that patients with prior use of non-prescribed buprenorphine had significantly higher odds of remaining in treatment through 6 months than patients who were naïve to the medication upon treatment entry. Qualitative data, collected from a subsample of participants (n = 20), identified three thematic explanations for this phenomenon: 1) perceived effectiveness of the medication; 2) cost of obtaining prescription buprenorphine compared to purchasing non-prescribed medication; and 3) convenience of obtaining the medication via daily-dosing or by prescription compared to non-prescribed buprenorphine. These findings suggest a dynamic relationship between non-prescribed buprenorphine use and treatment that indicates potential directions for future research into positive and negative consequences of buprenorphine diversion.

Opioid withdrawal, craving, and use during and after outpatient buprenorphine stabilization and taper: a discrete survival and growth mixture model

INTRODUCTION

Most patients relapse to opioids within one month of opioid agonist detoxification, making the antecedents and parallel processes of first use critical for investigation. Craving and withdrawal are often studied in relationship to opioid outcomes, and a novel analytic strategy applied to these two phenomena may indicate targeted intervention strategies.

METHODS

Specifically, this secondary data analysis of the Prescription Opioid Addiction Treatment Study used a discrete-time mixture analysis with time-to-first opioid use (survival) simultaneously predicted by craving and withdrawal growth trajectories. This analysis characterized heterogeneity among prescription opioid-dependent individuals (N=653) into latent classes (i.e., latent class analysis [LCA]) during and after buprenorphine/naloxone stabilization and taper.

RESULTS

A 4-latent class solution was selected for overall model fit and clinical parsimony. In order of shortest to longest time-to-first use, the 4 classes were characterized as 1) high craving and withdrawal, 2) intermediate craving and withdrawal, 3) high initial craving with low craving and withdrawal trajectories and 4) a low initial craving with low craving and withdrawal trajectories. Odds ratio calculations showed statistically significant differences in time-to-first use across classes.

CONCLUSIONS

Generally, participants with lower baseline levels and greater decreases in craving and withdrawal during stabilization combined with slower craving and withdrawal rebound during buprenorphine taper remained opioid-free longer. This exploratory work expanded on the importance of monitoring craving and withdrawal during buprenorphine induction, stabilization, and taper. Future research may allow individually tailored and timely interventions to be developed to extend time-to-first opioid use.