Abstinence at intake for marijuana dependence treatment predicts response

Exploring the mediating role of baseline urinalysis results on demographic characteristics and stimulant use disorder treatment outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Baseline stimulant urinalysis (UA) is one of the most reliable predictors of stimulant use disorder treatment outcomes. Yet we know little about the role of baseline stimulant UA mediating the effects of different baseline characteristics on treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore the potential mediating role of baseline stimulant UA results on the relationship between baseline characteristics and total number of stimulant negative UAs submitted during treatment.

METHODS

The study team conducted analyses on data from a multisite randomized clinical trial of contingency management (CM) targeting stimulant use among individuals enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment programs (n = 394). Baseline characteristics included trial arm, education, race, sex, age, and Addiction Severity Index (ASI) composite measures. Baseline stimulant UA was the mediator and total number of stimulant negative UAs provided during treatment was the primary outcome variable.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of sex (OR = 1.85), ASI drug (OR = 0.01) and psychiatric (OR = 6.20) composites were directly associated with the baseline stimulant UA result (p < 0.05 for all). Baseline stimulant UA result (B = -8.24), trial arm (B = -2.55), ASI drug composite (B = -8.38) and education (B = -1.95) were directly associated with the total number of negative UAs submitted (p < 0.05 for all). The evaluation of indirect effects of baseline characteristics on the primary outcome through baseline stimulant UA revealed significant mediated effects for the ASI drug composite (B = -5.50) and age (B = -0.05; p < 0.05 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline stimulant UA is a strong predictor of stimulant use treatment outcomes and mediates the association of some baseline characteristics and a stimulant use treatment outcome.

Current advances in research in treatment and recovery: Nicotine addiction

The health harms of combusted tobacco use are undeniable. With market and regulatory pressures to reduce the harms of nicotine delivery by combustion, the tobacco product landscape has diversified to include smokeless, heated, and electronic nicotine vaping products. Products of tobacco combustion are the main cause of smoking-induced disease, and nicotine addiction sustains tobacco use. An understanding of the biology and clinical features of nicotine addiction and the conditioning of behavior that occurs via stimuli paired with frequent nicotine dosing, as with a smoked cigarette, is important for informing pharmacologic and behavioral treatment targets. We review current advances in research on nicotine addiction treatment and recovery, with a focus on conventional combustible cigarette use. Our review covers evidence-based methods to treat smoking in adults and policy approaches to prevent nicotine product initiation in youth. In closing, we discuss emerging areas of evidence and consider new directions for advancing the field.

"Hey, I Got to Smoke Some Weed": Favorable Perceptions of Marijuana Use Among Non-College-Educated Young Adult Cigarette Smokers

Introduction: As marijuana legalization progresses in the U.S., this study investigated the perceptions of marijuana use among non-college-educated young adult smokers. Methods: Twelve focus groups were conducted to explore themes related to marijuana and marijuana use among a racially and ethnically diverse sample of 75 young adult smokers (ages 18-29 years) with <4-year college education and <$90,000 annual household income living in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. Thematic content analysis was employed to analyze the transcripts. Data collection and analysis took place in 2017 and 2018, respectively. Results: Many participants reported smoking cigarettes to boost and maintain the psychoactive effect ("high") of smoking marijuana; some smoked marijuana to substitute frequent cigarette smoking. Participants generally stated that they believed marijuana smoking was healthier and less addictive than cigarette smoking; many preferred smoking marijuana over cigarettes. Participants also mentioned that cigarette smoking was stigmatized and not socially acceptable but marijuana smoking was "trendy" and "cool." Some reported that they smoked marijuana to cut down on cigarettes, although most were unsuccessful. Racial and ethnic differences in marijuana use were also identified. Discussion: Non-college-educated young adult smokers expressed largely favorable views towards smoking marijuana. Such positive views may lead to prolonged and escalated use of cigarettes and marijuana, resulting in exacerbated adverse health consequence of smoking both products as well as worsened outcomes of cigarette smoking cessation. Evidence-based messages are greatly needed to communicate the harm and risks of marijuana use and marijuana and tobacco co-use among this group.

Continuous Abstinence During Early Alcohol Treatment is Significantly Associated with Positive Treatment Outcomes, Independent of Duration of Abstinence

AIMS

Neither the predictive value of early continuous abstinence in alcohol use disorder (AUD) or the point at which this effect may emerge has been evaluated. This analysis of the Combined Pharmacotherapies and Behavioral Interventions (COMBINE) clinical trial evaluated whether abstinence early in treatment was a predictor of longer term abstinence.

METHODS

Participants who stated a goal of total abstinence (N = 954) were dichotomized into Early Abstainer vs. Nonabstainers and were compared on a variety of drinking outcome measures that are frequently used in clinical trial evaluations of alcohol treatment strategies, as a function of duration of early continuous abstinence.

RESULTS

Significant differences existed for every outcome. Early Abstinence was significantly associated with fewer drinks per drinking day, number of drinking and number of heavy drinking days, and longer time to first drinking and first heavy drinking day. Effects were evident within the first week. The magnitude of all effects increased as the duration of early abstinence (1-4 weeks) increased, though the size of increase varied across the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide evidence that drinking at the beginning of alcohol treatment is significantly and robustly associated with drinking throughout and at the end of a clinical trial treatment for AUD. Early drinking may be a useful early index to identify whether patients are responding positively to a treatment strategy, and provides a useful method for tailoring treatment to patients that is consistent with a personalized medicine approach.

Waiting Time as a Barrier to Treatment Entry: Perceptions of Substance Users

Many substance users report that they experience multiple barriers that produce significant challenges to linking with treatment services. Being on a waiting list is frequently mentioned as a barrier, leading some people to give up on treatment and to continue using, while prompting others to view sobriety during the waiting period as proof they do not need treatment. This ethnographic study examines the views that 52 substance users have of the waiting time before treatment and the strategies they created to overcome it. Understanding how substance users react to waiting time itself and in relation to other barriers can lead to services that are effective in encouraging treatment linkage.

Psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use disorder is the most commonly reported illegal substance use disorder in the general population; although demand for assistance from health services is increasing internationally, only a minority of those with the disorder seek professional assistance. Treatment studies have been published, but pressure to establish public policy requires an updated systematic review of cannabis-specific treatments for adults.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder (compared with inactive control and/or alternative treatment) delivered to adults in an out-patient or community setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cumulaive Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and reference lists of articles. Searched literature included all articles published before July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled studies examining a psychosocial intervention for cannabis use disorder (without pharmacological intervention) in comparison with a minimal or inactive treatment control or alternative combinations of psychosocial interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 randomised controlled trials involving 4045 participants. A total of 15 studies took place in the United States, two in Australia, two in Germany and one each in Switzerland, Canada, Brazil and Ireland. Investigators delivered treatments over approximately seven sessions (range, one to 14) for approximately 12 weeks (range, one to 56).Overall, risk of bias across studies was moderate, that is, no trial was at high risk of selection bias, attrition bias or reporting bias. Further, trials included a large total number of participants, and each trial ensured the fidelity of treatments provided. In contrast, because of the nature of the interventions provided, participant blinding was not possible, and reports of researcher blinding often were unclear or were not provided. Half of the reviewed studies included collateral verification or urinalysis to confirm self report data, leading to concern about performance and detection bias. Finally, concerns of other bias were based on relatively consistent lack of assessment of non-cannabis substance use or use of additional treatments before or during the trial period.A subset of studies provided sufficient detail for comparison of effects of any intervention versus inactive control on primary outcomes of interest at early follow-up (median, four months). Results showed moderate-quality evidence that approximately seven out of 10 intervention participants completed treatment as intended (effect size (ES) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.78, 11 studies, 1424 participants), and that those receiving psychosocial intervention used cannabis on fewer days compared with those given inactive control (mean difference (MD) 5.67, 95% CI 3.08 to 8.26, six studies, 1144 participants). In addition, low-quality evidence revealed that those receiving intervention were more likely to report point-prevalence abstinence (risk ratio (RR) 2.55, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.83, six studies, 1166 participants) and reported fewer symptoms of dependence (standardised mean difference (SMD) 4.15, 95% CI 1.67 to 6.63, four studies, 889 participants) and cannabis-related problems compared with those given inactive control (SMD 3.34, 95% CI 1.26 to 5.42, six studies, 2202 participants). Finally, very low-quality evidence indicated that those receiving intervention reported using fewer joints per day compared with those given inactive control (SMD 3.55, 95% CI 2.51 to 4.59, eight studies, 1600 participants). Notably, subgroup analyses found that interventions of more than four sessions delivered over longer than one month (high intensity) produced consistently improved outcomes (particularly in terms of cannabis use frequency and severity of dependence) in the short term as compared with low-intensity interventions.The most consistent evidence supports the use of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), motivational enhancement therapy (MET) and particularly their combination for assisting with reduction of cannabis use frequency at early follow-up (MET: MD 4.45, 95% CI 1.90 to 7.00, four studies, 612 participants; CBT: MD 10.94, 95% CI 7.44 to 14.44, one study, 134 participants; MET + CBT: MD 7.38, 95% CI 3.18 to 11.57, three studies, 398 participants) and severity of dependence (MET: SMD 4.07, 95% CI 1.97 to 6.17, two studies, 316 participants; MET + CBT: SMD 7.89, 95% CI 0.93 to 14.85, three studies, 573 participants), although no particular intervention was consistently effective at nine-month follow-up or later. In addition, data from five out of six studies supported the utility of adding voucher-based incentives for cannabis-negative urines to enhance treatment effect on cannabis use frequency. A single study found contrasting results throughout a 12-month follow-up period, as post-treatment outcomes related to overall reduction in cannabis use frequency favoured CBT alone without the addition of abstinence-based or treatment adherence-based contingency management. In contrast, evidence of drug counselling, social support, relapse prevention and mindfulness meditation was weak because identified studies were few, information on treatment outcomes insufficient and rates of treatment adherence low. In line with treatments for other substance use, abstinence rates were relatively low overall, with approximately one-quarter of participants abstinent at final follow-up. Finally, three studies found that intervention was comparable with treatment as usual among participants in psychiatric clinics and reported no between-group differences in any of the included outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Included studies were heterogeneous in many aspects, and important questions regarding the most effective duration, intensity and type of intervention were raised and partially resolved. Generalisability of findings was unclear, most notably because of the limited number of localities and homogeneous samples of treatment seekers. The rate of abstinence was low and unstable although comparable with treatments for other substance use. Psychosocial intervention was shown, in comparison with minimal treatment controls, to reduce frequency of use and severity of dependence in a fairly durable manner, at least in the short term. Among the included intervention types, an intensive intervention provided over more than four sessions based on the combination of MET and CBT with abstinence-based incentives was most consistently supported for treatment of cannabis use disorder.

Cannabis Withdrawal, Posttreatment Abstinence, and Days to First Cannabis Use Among Emerging Adults in Substance Use Treatment: A Prospective Study

Very little prospective research investigates how cannabis withdrawal is associated with treatment outcomes, and this work has not used the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5) thresholds for cannabis withdrawal. The sample included 110 emerging adults entering outpatient substance use treatment who were heavy cannabis users with no other drug use and limited alcohol use. We used survival analyses to predict days to first use of cannabis and logistic regression to predict whether participants were abstinent and living in the community at 3 months. Those meeting criteria for cannabis withdrawal were more likely to return to use sooner than those not meeting criteria for cannabis withdrawal. However, the presence of cannabis withdrawal was not a significant predictor of 3-month abstinence. Emerging adults with DSM-5 cannabis withdrawal may have difficulty initiating abstinence in the days following their intake assessment, implying the need for strategies to mitigate their more rapid return to cannabis use.

Initiation of abstinence in adolescents treated for marijuana use disorders

This study assessed the time to initiation of marijuana abstinence in an adolescent treatment-seeking sample, and identified variables that were predictive of abstinence. Adolescents (N=69), ages 14 to 18 were randomly assigned to one of two 14-week behavioral treatments. Abstinence was measured with twice-weekly urine toxicology plus teen and parent reports. Discrete-time survival and hazard functions were conducted. The majority of adolescents achieved at least 1 week of abstinence, and 51% achieved 6 weeks of abstinence. Initiation of abstinence occurred by the sixth treatment week for 94% of teens with any abstinence suggesting that alternative, clinical approaches should be considered for those not responding by week 6. Teens with a drug negative urinalysis at intake, and teens that had two parents participating in treatment were more likely to achieve at least 6 weeks of abstinence. These findings, if replicated, can be used to inform clinical and research strategies that might lead to enhanced treatment efficacy and cost effectiveness for substance abuse treatment programming.

The co-occurring use and misuse of cannabis and tobacco: a review

AIMS

  Cannabis and tobacco use and misuse frequently co-occur. This review examines the epidemiological evidence supporting the life-time co-occurrence of cannabis and tobacco use and outlines the mechanisms that link these drugs to each other. Mechanisms include (i) shared genetic factors; (ii) shared environmental influences, including (iii) route of administration (via smoking), (iv) co-administration and (v) models of co-use. We also discuss respiratory harms associated with co-use of cannabis and tobacco, overlapping withdrawal syndromes and outline treatment implications for co-occurring use.

METHODS

  Selective review of published studies.

RESULTS

  Both cannabis and tobacco use and misuse are influenced by genetic factors, and a proportion of these genetic factors influence both cannabis and tobacco use and misuse. Environmental factors such as availability play an important role, with economic models suggesting a complementary relationship where increases in price of one drug decrease the use of the other. Route of administration and smoking cues may contribute to their sustained use. Similar withdrawal syndromes, with many symptoms in common, may have important treatment implications. Emerging evidence suggests that dual abstinence may predict better cessation outcomes, yet empirically researched treatments tailored for co-occurring use are lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

  There is accumulating evidence that some mechanisms linking cannabis and tobacco use are distinct from those contributing to co-occurring use of drugs in general. There is an urgent need for research to identify the underlying mechanisms and harness their potential etiological implications to tailor treatment options for this serious public health challenge.

Contingency management in community programs treating adolescent substance abuse: a feasibility study

PROBLEM

Adolescent substance abuse remains a public health problem, and more effective treatment approaches are needed.

PURPOSE

The study aims to determine the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of implementing a cost-effective contingency management (CM) intervention in community substance abuse treatment for adolescents with marijuana use disorders.

METHODS

Thirty-one adolescents with primary marijuana use disorder enrolled in a community treatment were randomized into either a prize-based CM intervention contingent when submitting negative urine drug screens (UDS) or a noncontingent control group.

FINDINGS

There were no significant group differences in percent negative UDS, sustained negative UDS, or retention in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

CM was difficult to integrate into community treatment programs and did not seem to be an effective adjunct to standard community substance abuse treatment for adolescents with marijuana use disorders. Modifying the CM procedure for adolescents, changing staff attitudes toward CM, and/or combining CM with other evidence-based psychosocial treatment may improve outcomes.

Validity of Timeline Follow-Back for self-reported use of cannabis and other illicit substances--systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB) is a widely used, calendar-based measure of self-reported use of (among other things) illicit substances. We examined agreement between TLFB and biological measures for illicit substances.

METHODS

PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched in December 2010. 16,633 papers screened to identify those that measured illicit substance use by both TLFB and biological measures. We extracted data on agreement between TLFB and biological measures, sample size, study type, inclusion criteria of participants, and length of recall of TLFB.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine papers were included, almost exclusively in substance-use-disorder populations. Some studies reported several overall agreement rates, e.g. over time. Lowest and highest weighted average agreement rates were: for cannabis, 87.3% (95% confidence interval 86.9% to 87.7%) and 90.9% (90.5% to 91.4%); for cocaine, 79.3% (79.1% to 79.6%) and 84.1% (83.9% to 84.2%); for opiates 94.0% (93.5% to 94.5%) for both weighted averages; and for studies not distinguishing between substances, 88.5% (88.4 to 88.7%) and 91.0% (90.7% to 91.2%). Higher agreement was found in populations without psychiatric comorbidity, and lower agreement in randomized controlled trials. Publication bias or selective outcome reporting bias was not detected.

CONCLUSIONS

TLFB validly detects use of illicit substances in populations with substance use disorders. Using TLFB may limit the need for biological samples, making information on illicit substance use easier and less costly to obtain and analyze.

Patient satisfaction and sustained outcomes of drug abuse treatment

The authors investigated the relationship between patients' self-rated satisfaction with treatment services during and shortly after treatment with their drug use outcomes at one year follow-up, using a US national panel survey of patients in 62 methadone, outpatient, short-term residential, and long-term residential programs. A favorable evaluation of treatment near the time of discharge had a significant positive relationship with drug use improvement outcomes approximately one year later, independent of the separately measured effects of treatment duration, counseling intensity, patient adherence to treatment protocols, pre-treatment drug use patterns, and other characteristics of patients and treatment programs.

Randomized trial of prize-based reinforcement density for simultaneous abstinence from cocaine and heroin

To examine the effect of reinforcer density in prize-based abstinence reinforcement, heroin/cocaine users (N = 116) in methadone maintenance (100 mg/day) were randomly assigned to a noncontingent control group (NonC) or to 1 of 3 groups that earned prize draws for abstinence: manual drawing with standard prize density (MS) or computerized drawing with standard (CS) or high (CH) density. Probabilities (prizes/draw) were standard (50%) and high (78%); prize density was double blind. Mean prize values were CH, $286; CS, $167; MS, $139; and NonC, $171. Outcomes were % opioid/cocaine-negative urines during the 12-week intervention and then 8 weeks postintervention as well as diagnosis of dependence up to 6 months poststudy. CH had significantly more negative specimens than did NonC during intervention and had more than all groups during postintervention treatment: Mean % negative (95% confidence interval) during postintervention treatment adjusted for baseline drug use and dropout were CH, 55% (14%-90%); CS, 7% (1%-27%); MS, 4% (1%-12%); and NonC, 3% (1%-10%). Current cocaine dependence diagnoses after treatment were significantly lower in contingent compared with noncontingent groups. Computerized drawing with higher-density prizes enhanced reduction of cocaine use; abstinence reinforcement had long-term therapeutic benefits.

The use of contingency management and motivational/skills-building therapy to treat young adults with marijuana dependence

Marijuana-dependent young adults (N = 136), all referred by the criminal justice system, were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment conditions: a motivational/skills-building intervention (motivational enhancement therapy/cognitive-behavioral therapy; MET/CBT) plus incentives contingent on session attendance or submission of marijuana-free urine specimens (contingency management; CM), MET/CBT without CM, individual drug counseling (DC) plus CM, and DC without CM. There was a significant main effect of CM on treatment retention and marijuana-free urine specimens. Moreover, the combination of MET/CBT plus CM was significantly more effective than MET/CBT without CM or DC plus CM, which were in turn more effective than DC without CM for treatment attendance and percentage of marijuana-free urine specimens. Participants assigned to MET/CBT continued to reduce the frequency of their marijuana use through a 6-month follow-up.

Completing substance abuse treatment in child welfare: the role of co-occurring problems and primary drug of choice

A significant number of substance-abusing parents in the child welfare system do not complete substance abuse treatments. Consequently, their children experience longer stays in substitute care settings, and the risk of the termination of parental rights is increased. This study identifies and determines the specific factors that explain the completion of substance abuse treatment for substance-abusing caregivers in child welfare. The sample includes 871 caregivers enrolled in the Illinois Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse waiver demonstration. Approximately 22% of these caregivers successfully completed all required levels of substance abuse treatment. The multivariate models indicate that age, employment status, and legal involvement were significantly associated with the likelihood of completing substance abuse treatment. Heroin users were significantly less likely to complete treatment as compared with alcohol, cocaine, and marijuana users. The findings are discussed in terms of policy and practice implications for public child welfare systems.

Medications development: Successes and challenges

The National Institute on Drug Abuse has funded a medications program that has concentrated on the development of medications for opiate and cocaine dependence. Levomethadyl acetate (LAAM) and buprenorphine and buprenorphine/naloxone sublingual tablets were developed in conjunction with pharmaceutical partners and approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The remaining challenges for medications development for opiate dependence involves Phase IV studies in special populations, for example, pregnant opiate-dependent patients, and to translate neuroscience-based findings into treatments. Several marketed medications have shown initial efficacy to reduce cocaine use in well-controlled clinical trials. Disulfiram has been shown to reduce cocaine use in several clinical trials, while baclofen, modafinil, naltrexone, ondansetron, tiagabine, and topiramate have shown preliminary efficacy in initial clinical studies. Confirmatory studies of many of these medications is underway. More recently, the NIDA medications program has evaluated medications for their ability to reduce methamphetamine use. To date, no medications tested have shown efficacy to reduce methamphetamine use. Both marketed medications and investigational agents will be tested. Finally, NIDA has begun to test medications for efficacy to reduce cannabis use. Initial studies are underway. Both agonist and antagonist approaches will be evaluated. Additionally, medications will be tested in cannabis-dependent patients for the management of insomnia, withdrawal, and concurrent depression.