Opioid addicts at admission vs. slow-release oral morphine, methadone, and sublingual buprenorphine maintenance treatment participants

Buprenorphine versus methadone for the treatment of opioid dependence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and observational studies

BACKGROUND

Opioid dependence is associated with substantial health and social burdens, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is highly effective in improving multiple outcomes for people who receive this treatment. Methadone and buprenorphine are common medications provided as OAT. We aimed to examine buprenorphine compared with methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence across a wide range of primary and secondary outcomes.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with GATHER and PRISMA guidelines. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO from database inception to Aug 1, 2022; clinical trial registries and previous relevant Cochrane reviews were also reviewed. We included all RCTs and observational studies of adults (aged ≥18 years) with opioid dependence comparing treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. Primary outcomes were retention in treatment at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, treatment adherence (measured through doses taken as prescribed, dosing visits attended, and biological measures), or extra-medical opioid use (measured by urinalysis and self-report). Secondary outcomes were use of benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, amphetamines, and alcohol; withdrawal; craving; criminal activity and engagement with the criminal justice system; overdose; mental and physical health; sleep; pain; global functioning; suicidality and self-harm; and adverse events. Single-arm cohort studies and RCTs that collected data on buprenorphine retention alone were also reviewed. Data on study, participant, and treatment characteristics were extracted. Study authors were contacted to obtain additional data when required. Comparative estimates were pooled with use of random-effects meta-analyses. The proportion of individuals retained in treatment across multiple timepoints was pooled for each drug. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020205109).

FINDINGS

We identified 32 eligible RCTs (N=5808 participants) and 69 observational studies (N=323 340) comparing buprenorphine and methadone, in addition to 51 RCTs (N=11 644) and 124 observational studies (N=700 035) that reported on treatment retention with buprenorphine. Overall, 61 studies were done in western Europe, 162 in North America, 14 in north Africa and the Middle East, 20 in Australasia, five in southeast Asia, seven in south Asia, two in eastern Europe, three in central Europe, one in east Asia, and one in central Asia. 1 040 827 participants were included in these primary studies; however, gender was only reported for 572 111 participants, of whom 377 991 (66·1%) were male and 194 120 (33·9%) were female. Mean age was 37·1 years (SD 6·0). At timepoints beyond 1 month, retention was better for methadone than for buprenorphine: for example, at 6 months, the pooled effect favoured methadone in RCTs (risk ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·67-0·85]; I·=74·2%; 16 studies, N=3151) and in observational studies (0·77 [0·68-0·86]; I·=98·5%; 21 studies, N=155 111). Retention was generally higher in RCTs than observational studies. There was no evidence suggesting that adherence to treatment differed with buprenorphine compared with methadone. There was some evidence that extra-medical opioid use was lower in those receiving buprenorphine in RCTs that measured this outcome by urinalysis and reported proportion of positive urine samples (over various time frames; standardised mean difference -0·20 [-0·29 to -0·11]; I·=0·0%; three studies, N=841), but no differences were found when using other measures. Some statistically significant differences were found between buprenorphine and methadone among secondary outcomes. There was evidence of reduced cocaine use, cravings, anxiety, and cardiac dysfunction, as well as increased treatment satisfaction among people receiving buprenorphine compared with methadone; and evidence of reduced hospitalisation and alcohol use in people receiving methadone. These differences in secondary outcomes were based on small numbers of studies (maximum five), and were often not consistent across study types or different measures of the same constructs (eg, cocaine use).

INTERPRETATION

Evidence from trials and observational studies suggest that treatment retention is better for methadone than for sublingual buprenorphine. Comparative evidence on other outcomes examined showed few statistically significant differences and was generally based on small numbers of studies. These findings highlight the imperative for interventions to improve retention, consideration of client-centred factors (such as client preference) when selecting between methadone and buprenorphine, and harmonisation of data collection and reporting to strengthen future syntheses.

FUNDING

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Opioid use as a proximal risk factor for suicidal behavior in young adults

INTRODUCTION

There is a concomitant rise in suicide rates with the prevalence of opioids involved in overdose deaths, especially among adolescents and young adults. However, there are limited studies on whether opioid use prospectively predicts suicidal behavior in youth.

METHODS

Our sample included 183 psychiatric patients (18-30 years) admitted for a suicide attempt (SA), have current suicidal ideation (SI), and psychiatric controls without ideation or attempt (PC). Suicidal behavior was assessed using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale. We also recruited a healthy control group (HC; n = 40). Patients and controls were followed over a year. ANOVA, regression, and cox regression were used.

RESULTS

Suicide attempt (β = 0.87, CI [0.1-1.6], p = 0.02) and SI [(β = 0.75, CI [0.03-1.5], p = 0.04) were significantly more likely than HCs to have used opioids in the past year at baseline. Opioid use was associated with increased anxiety symptoms (β = 0.75, CI [0.001-1.5], p = 0.05), PTSD symptoms (β = 3.90, CI [1.1-6.7], p = 0.01), and aggression (β = 0.02, CI [0.01-0.04], p = 0.02). Opioid use in the month prior to hospitalization predicted SA at 6 months (OR = 1.87, CI [1.06-3.31], p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid use is a proximal predictor for SA. These findings may help clinicians better identify patients at risk for suicidal behavior, allowing for more personalized treatment approaches.

Effects of opioid rotation to buprenorphine/naloxone on pain, pain thresholds, pain tolerance, and quality of life in patients with chronic pain and opioid use disorder

ABSTRACT

Long-term opioid use in patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) can lead to opioid use disorder (OUD) and has been associated with hyperalgesia and reduced quality of life (QoL). Studies suggest antihyperalgesic properties of buprenorphine, and buprenorphine or naloxone (BuNa) has shown beneficial effects on QoL in patients with OUD without CNCP. This study investigated the added value of BuNa in patients with CNCP with OUD on self-reported pain, pain thresholds, pain tolerance, and QoL. In the current study, 43 outpatients with CNCP and OUD were included for inpatient conversion from full μ-receptor agonist opioids to BuNa. Self-reported pain, pain thresholds, pain tolerance, and QoL were determined at baseline and after 2 months of follow-up, using, respectively, a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS-pain and VAS-QoL), quantitative sensory testing, and EuroQol-5 dimensions. In total, 37 participants completed the protocol, and their data were analyzed. The mean VAS-pain score decreased from 51.3 to 37.2 (27.5%, F = 3.3; P = 0.044), whereas the pressure pain threshold and electric pain threshold or tolerance increased after substitution (F = 7.8; P = 0.005 and F = 44.5; P < 0.001, respectively), as well as QoL (EuroQol-5 dimensions questionnaire: F = 10.4; P = 0.003 and VAS-QoL: F = 4.4; P = 0.043). We found that conversion of full μ-receptor agonists to BuNa, in patients with CNCP with OUD, was accompanied with lower self-reported pain, higher pain thresholds, higher pain tolerance, and improved QoL. Despite several study limitations, these data suggest that BuNa might be of value in patients with CNCP with OUD. Future studies should investigate long-term effects of BuNa in randomized trials.

Retention in the Austrian opioid agonist treatment system: a national prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Retention in care is a prerequisite for successful recovery, especially for a chronic condition like opioid dependence. Though retention varies greatly depending on the different substitution medication and treatment model, treatment retention is used as an indicator of treatment quality and effectiveness of care on a system and individual level. To monitor the overall quality of the Austrian opioid agonist treatment (OAT) system and to monitor patient satisfaction within the system, a new online-based registry called "eSuchmittel" was introduced in Austria at the beginning of 2011. The objective of this study is to analyze retention rates within the Austrian treatment system and to identify patient characteristics associated with retention, using data collected by the substitution registry.

METHODS

The complete Austrian sample of 4778 registered patients starting treatment between 1.1.2011 to 31.12.2012 were included in the prospective cohort study using data from the Austrian substitution registry. For the statistical analysis, multivariate Cox Regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were used to evaluate retention in treatment.

RESULTS

The retention rate of the total cohort after two years was around 61%. Retention rates were significantly lower for men (exp(B) = .806, 95% CI 0.714-0.908) and significantly higher for patients aged 30 and older (exp(B) = 1.155, 95% CI 1.044-1.279), among patients located in Vienna (exp(B) = 1.439, 95% CI 1.273-1.626) and among patients prescribed oral slow-release morphine (SROM) (exp(B) = 2.141, 95% CI 1.885-2.430).

CONCLUSIONS

Average retention in the Austrian system is high in comparison to international retention rates. Nationally, SROM demonstrates higher treatment retention when compared to other available substitution medications. Sociodemographic and regional indicators also contribute to higher retention in care. A systematic monitoring of retention rates within a national registry is an important tool helping to evaluate the quality of care. In this study, the Austrian OAT system proves very high retention in care, an important success criterion.

Comparison of Treatment Options for Refractory Opioid Use Disorder in the United States and Canada: a Narrative Review

Amidst the opioid overdose crisis, there are increased efforts to expand access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Hospitalization for the complications of substance use in the United States (US) provides an opportunity to initiate methadone, buprenorphine, and extended release naltrexone and link high-risk, not otherwise engaged, patients into outpatient care. However, treatment options for patients are quickly exhausted when these medications are not desired, tolerated, or beneficial. As an example, we discuss the case of a man who was hospitalized 27 times over 2 years for complications related to his opioid use disorder (OUD), including recurring methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus vertebral osteomyelitis, increasing antimicrobial resistance, new infections, and multiple overdoses in and out of the hospital. The patient suffered these complications despite efforts to treat his OUD with methadone and buprenorphine while hospitalized, and repeated attempts to link him to outpatient care. We use this case to review evidence-based treatments for refractory OUD, which are not approved in the US, but are available in Canada. If hospitalized in Vancouver, Canada, this patient could have been offered slow-release oral morphine and injectable opioid agonist therapy, as well as access to sterile syringes and injection equipment at an in-hospital supervised injection facility. Each of these approaches is supported by evidence and has been implemented successfully in Canada, yet none are available in the US. In order to combat the multiple harms from opioids, it is critical that we consider every evidence-based tool.

Slow release oral morphine versus methadone for the treatment of opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of slow release oral morphine (SROM) as a treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

Three electronic databases were searched through 1 May 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE. We also searched the following electronic registers for ongoing trials: ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Current Controlled Trials and the EU Clinical Trials Register.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included RCTs of all durations, assessing the effect of SROM on measures of treatment retention, heroin use and craving in adults who met the diagnostic criteria for OUD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using the random-effects model and expressed as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed (χ2 statistic) and quantified (I2 statistic) and a sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assess the impact of particular high-risk trials.

RESULTS

Among 1315 records screened and four studies reviewed, four unique randomised trials met the inclusion criteria (n=471), and compared SROM with methadone. In the meta-analysis, we observed no significant differences between SROM and methadone in improving treatment retention (RR=0.98; 95%CI: 0.94 to 1.02, p=0.34) and heroin use (RR=0.96; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.52, p=0.86). Craving data was not amenable to meta-analysis. Available data implied no differences in adverse events, heroin, cocaine or benzodiazepine use.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of existing randomised trials suggests SROM may be generally equal to methadone in retaining patients in treatment and reducing heroin use while potentially resulting in less craving. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was low-to-moderate.

Effects of medication assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid use disorder on functional outcomes: A systematic review

This systematic review synthesizes evidence on the effects of Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) for opioid use disorder (OUD) on functional outcomes, including cognitive (e.g., memory), physical (e.g., fatigue), occupational (e.g., return to work), social/behavioral (e.g., criminal activity), and neurological (e.g., balance) function. Five databases were searched from inception to July 2017 to identify English-language controlled trials, case control studies, and cohort comparisons of one or more groups; cross-sectional studies were excluded. Two independent reviewers screened identified literature, abstracted study-level information, and assessed the quality of included studies. Meta-analyses used the Hartung-Knapp method for random-effects models. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. A comprehensive search followed by 1411 full text publication screenings yielded 30 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 10 observational studies meeting inclusion criteria. The studies reported highly diverse functional outcome measures. Only one RCT was rated as high quality, but several methodologically sound observational studies were identified. The statistical power to detect differences in functional outcomes was unclear in most studies. When compared with matched "healthy" controls with no history of substance use disorder (SUD), in two studies MAT patients had significantly poorer working memory and cognitive speed. One study found MAT patients scored worse in aggressive responding than did "healthy" controls. A large observational study found that MAT users had twice the odds of involvement in an injurious traffic accident as non-users. When compared with persons with OUD not on MAT, one cohort study found lower fatigue rates among buprenorphine-treated OUD patients. No differences were reported for occupational outcomes and results for criminal activity and other social/behavioral areas were mixed. There were few differences among MAT drug types. A pooled analysis of three RCTs found a significantly lower prevalence of fatigue with buprenorphine compared to methadone, while a meta-analysis of the same RCTs found no statistical difference in insomnia prevalence. Three RCTs that focused on cognitive function compared the effects of buprenorphine to methadone; no statistically significant differences in memory, cognitive speed and flexibility, attention, or vision were reported. The quality of evidence for most functional outcomes was rated low or very low. In sum, weaknesses in the body of evidence prevent strong conclusions about the effects of MAT for opioid use disorder on functional outcomes. Rigorous studies of functional effects would strengthen the body of literature.

Making the Case for 'Power Abuse Disorder' as a Nosologic Entity

The development of societies and cultures arguably is based on the ability of human primates to form hierarchies in which some individuals acquire and wield power, that is, control resources and influence and control the behavior of their conspecifics. In the following, we focus on the type of human primate power wielding that (a) harms and (b) produces excessive negative emotions in (1) the victim(s) of the power wielder and (2) the power wielder her/himself. If such a harmful behavior of the power wielder is not accompanied by an ethically justifiable benefit for the involved human primate groups, it can be considered "power abuse." We propose to term the associated behaviors, cognitions, and emotions of the power wielder as "power abuse disorder" (PAD). This behavior results from what we consider addictive behavior of the power abuse disordered (PADed) power wielder. PAD can be diagnosed on the basis of the World Health Organization's criteria for "dependence syndrome" as listed in the International Classification of Diseases version 10. We will demonstrate that many PADed individuals may very likely carry the Zeitgeist diagnosis "burnout." This article reviews the current understanding of the neural correlates of PAD and suggests future research. Based on the available evidence, PAD seems to be associated with a dysfunction of the mesocorticolimbic dopamine system, rendering PADed individuals vulnerable for psychostimulant abuse/dependence, and suggesting specific pharmacotherapeutic approaches to treat PAD.

Characteristics and quality of life of opioid-dependent pregnant women in Austria

This study investigated pregnant opioid-dependent women undergoing maintenance therapy, applying a multidisciplinary, case-management approach at the Addiction Clinic of the Medical University of Vienna, Austria. It aimed at characterizing the patients' basic demographic and clinical parameters and evaluating their overall quality of life (QoL) prepartum and postpartum. Three hundred ninety women were treated between 1994 and 2009 with buprenorphine (n = 77), methadone (n = 184), or slow-release oral morphine (SROM) (n = 129) on an outpatient basis throughout their pregnancy and postpartum period. All patients were subject to standardized prepartum and postpartum medical and psychiatric assessments, including QoL assessments using a German adaptation of the Lancashire QoL Profile (Berliner Lebensqualitaetsprofil), and regular supervised urine toxicologies. No medication group differences were revealed regarding basic demographic or clinical data. Mean maintenance doses (SD) at time of delivery were as follows: 64 mg (36 mg) methadone, 10 mg (6 mg) buprenorphine, 455 mg (207 mg) SROM. However, buprenorphine-medicated women showed significantly less concomitant benzodiazepine consumption than methadone- or SROM-maintained women (p = 0.005), and significantly less concomitant opioid consumption than methadone-maintained women (p = 0.033) during the last trimester. Overall QoL was good prepartum and postpartum in all measured domains except "finances" and "prospect of staying in the same housing situation," and no differences were observed in QoL among the three medication groups (p = 0.177). QoL improved significantly after delivery in most of the domains (p < 0.001). Although opioid-dependent pregnant women face high-risk pregnancies and show variability in addiction severity, they report good QoL independent of the medication administered. These results show that individually tailored treatment interventions are effective for this patient population and suggest a QoL improvement after delivery.

Maintenance treatment for opioid dependence with slow-release oral morphine: a randomized cross-over, non-inferiority study versus methadone

AIMS

To compare the efficacy of slow-release oral morphine (SROM) and methadone as maintenance medication for opioid dependence in patients previously treated with methadone.

DESIGN

Prospective, multiple-dose, open label, randomized, non-inferiority, cross-over study over two 11-week periods. Methadone treatment was switched to SROM with flexible dosing and vice versa according to period and sequence of treatment.

SETTING

Fourteen out-patient addiction treatment centres in Switzerland and Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with opioid dependence in methadone maintenance programmes (dose ≥50 mg/day) for ≥26 weeks.

MEASUREMENTS

The efficacy end-point was the proportion of heroin-positive urine samples per patient and period of treatment. Each week, two urine samples were collected, randomly selected and analysed for 6-monoacetyl-morphine and 6-acetylcodeine. Non-inferiority was concluded if the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) in the difference of proportions of positive urine samples was below the predefined boundary of 10%.

FINDINGS

One hundred and fifty-seven patients fulfilled criteria to form the per protocol population. The proportion of heroin-positive urine samples under SROM treatment (0.20) was non-inferior to the proportion under methadone treatment (0.15) (least-squares mean difference 0.05; 95% CI = 0.02, 0.08; P > 0.01). The 95% CI fell within the 10% non-inferiority margin, confirming the non-inferiority of SROM to methadone. A dose-dependent effect was shown for SROM (i.e. decreasing proportions of heroin-positive urine samples with increasing SROM doses). Retention in treatment showed no significant differences between treatments (period 1/period 2: SROM: 88.7%/82.1%, methadone: 91.1%/88.0%; period 1: P = 0.50, period 2: P = 0.19). Overall, safety outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Slow-release oral morphine appears to be at least as effective as methadone in treating people with opioid use disorder.

Slow-release oral morphine as maintenance therapy for opioid dependence

BACKGROUND

Opioid substitution treatments are effective in retaining people in treatment and suppressing heroin use. An open question remains whether slow-release oral morphine (SROM) could represent a possible alternative for opioid-dependent people who respond poorly to other available maintenance treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of SROM as an alternative maintenance pharmacotherapy for the treatment of opioid dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group's Register of Trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2013), MEDLINE (January 1966 to April 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2013) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials assessing efficacy of SROM compared with other maintenance treatment or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected articles for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies with 195 participants were included in the review. Two were cross-over trials and one was a parallel group RCT. The retention in treatment appeared superior to 80% in all the three studies (without significant difference with controls). Nevertheless, it has to be underlined that the studies had different durations. One lasted six months, and the other two lasted six and seven weeks. The use of opioids during SROM provision varied from lower to non-statistically or clinically different from comparison interventions, whereas there were no differences as far as the use of other substances was concerned.SROM seemed to be equal to comparison interventions for severity of dependence, or mental health/social functioning, but there was a trend for less severe opiate withdrawal symptoms in comparison with methadone (withdrawal score 2.2 vs. 4.8, P value = 0.06). Morphine was generally well tolerated and was preferred by a proportion of participants (seven of nine people in one study). Morphine appeared to reduce cravings, depressive symptoms (measured using the Beck Depression Inventory; P value < 0.001), physical complaints (measured using the Beschwerde-Liste (BL); P value < 0.001) and anxiety symptoms (P value = 0.008). Quality of life in people treated with SROM resulted in no significant difference or a worst outcome than in those taking methadone and buprenorphine. Other social functioning measures, such as finances, family and overall satisfaction, scored better in people maintained with the comparison substances than in those maintained with SROM. In particular, people taking methadone showed more favourable values for leisure time (5.4 vs. 3.7, P value < 0.001), housing (6.1 vs. 4.7, P value < 0.023), partnerships (5.7 vs. 4.2, P value = 0.034), friend and acquaintances (5.6 vs. 4.4, P value = 0.003), mental health (5.0 vs. 3.4, P value = 0.002) and self esteem (8.2 vs. 5.7, P value = 0.002) compared to people taking SROM; while people taking buprenorphine obtained better scores for physical health.Medical adverse events were consistently higher in people in SROM than in the comparison groups. None of the studies included people with a documented poor response to other maintenance treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The present review did not identify sufficient evidence to assess the effectiveness of SROM for opioid maintenance because only three studies meeting our inclusion criteria have been identified. Two studies suggested a possible reduction of opioid use in people taking SROM. In another study, the use of SROM was associated with fewer depressive symptoms. Retention in treatment was not significantly different among compared interventions while the adverse effects were more frequent with the people given SROM.

Pharmacological therapies for maintenance treatments of opium dependence

BACKGROUND

Pharmacologic therapies for maintenance treatment of heroin dependence have been used and studied widely. Systematic reviews have demonstrated the effectiveness of such therapies. Opium dependence is associated with less problems and impairments and is less likely to be used by injecting, with consequent reductions in risk of overdose and blood-borne diseases. Although it is a common substance use disorder in many countries, a systematic review of the literature is lacking on the maintenance treatment for opium dependence.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of various pharmacological therapies on maintenance of opium dependence (alone or in combination with psychosocial interventions) compared to no intervention, detoxification, different doses of the same intervention, other pharmacologic interventions and any psychosocial interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to February 2012: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, regional databases (IMEMR and ASCI), national databases (Iranmedex and Iranpsych), main electronic sources of ongoing trials and reference lists of all relevant papers. Also, we contacted known investigators from some Asian countries to obtain details about unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing any maintenance pharmacologic intervention versus no intervention, other pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic intervention for opium dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed the risks of biases and extracted data, independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Three RCTs recruiting 870 opium dependents were included. The studies made different comparisons so it was not possible to pool data. Only retention rate was assessed by the studies. Two studies compared different doses of buprenorphine: in one study, 4 mg/day of buprenorphine was compared with doses of 2 mg/day and 1 mg/day and in another study, 8 mg/day of buprenorphine was compared with doses of 3 mg/day and 1 mg/day. Comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between groups; higher doses of buprenorphine increased the probability of retention in treatment. The studies had high risks of biases. In the third study, after a process of detoxification, baclofen (60 mg/day) was compared with placebo for maintenance treatment. The difference in retention rate between groups was high, but it was not statistically significant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is not possible to conclude about the use of any kind of pharmacologic therapies for maintenance treatment of opium dependence.

Agonist treatment in opioid use: advances and controversy

Opioid dependence is a chronic relapsing condition which requires comprehensive care; pharmacological agents form the mainstay of its long term treatment. The two most popular approaches are the harm reduction method using agonists and the complete abstinence method using antagonists. Currently, particularly from the harm minimization perspective and the low feasibility of an abstinence based approach, there is an increasing trend toward agonist treatment. The use of buprenorphine has gained popularity in view of its safety profile and the availability of the buprenorphine-naloxone combination has made it popular as a take-home treatment. This review outlines the pharmacological advances and controversies in this area.

Feasibility of double-blind clinical trials with oral diacetylmorphine: a randomized controlled phase II study in an inpatient setting

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of conducting double-blind controlled randomized clinical trials using twice-a-day immediate-release oral diacetylmorphine (DAM) in heroin-dependent patients, by means of measuring the capacity of oral DAM to block opiate withdrawal and clinicians' ability to distinguish it from morphine and methadone. This was a randomized, phase II, double-blind, multicenter pilot study comparing immediate-release oral DAM, slow-release oral morphine and oral methadone administered twice a day during 10 days. Forty-five heroin-dependent patients were randomly assigned to these three treatment groups in an inpatient regime. Patients were stabilized with a mean of 350 mg (SD = 193) of immediate-release oral DAM, 108 mg (SD = 46.2) of slow-release oral morphine and 40 mg (SD = 17.9) of methadone. No statistically significant differences were found between any studied medication in clinical outcome. Neither patients nor clinicians were able to identify the administered medication. This study shows the feasibility of double-blind clinical trials using b.i.d. immediate-release oral DAM allowing further phase III clinical trials in the process of introducing oral DAM as a medication for heroin-dependent patients not responding to standard maintenance treatments.

Slow-release oral morphine for opioid maintenance treatment: a systematic review

This review article summarizes the results of all available clinical trials considering the use of slow-release oral morphine (SROM) for opioid maintenance treatment (OMT). All studies published up to October 2010 and assessing SROM for OMT in adult patients are included. Three independent reviewers assessed the selected articles using a standardized checklist. Study design, study length and number of subjects included were recorded. Data about retention rate (proportion of participants remaining under maintenance treatment at the end of the study), quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, craving, additional drug consumption, driving capacity and adverse events were collected. We identified 13 articles corresponding to nine clinical trials considering the use of SROM for OMT. Among them, only one was a randomized trial and one was a controlled not randomized trial. All other studies were uncontrolled. Retention rates were good (from 80.6 to 95%) with SROM maintenance, but similar retention rates were obtained with methadone. Most of the studies showed that quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, craving and additional drug consumption improved with SROM. However, there was no comparison with other maintenance drugs. As most of the studies assessing SROM efficacy were uncontrolled, there is no definite evidence that SROM is an effective alternative to methadone for OMT.

Exploratory study on domain-specific determinants of opiate-dependent individuals' quality of life

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Studies on determinants of quality of life (QoL) among opiate-dependent individuals are scarce. Moreover, findings concerning the role of severity of drug use are inconsistent. This exploratory study investigates the association between domain-specific QoL and demographic, social, person, health and drug-related variables, and potential indirect effects of current heroin use on opiate-dependent individuals' QoL.

METHODS

A cohort of opiate-dependent individuals who started outpatient methadone treatment at least 5 years previously (n = 159) were interviewed about their current QoL, psychological distress, satisfaction with methadone treatment and the severity of drug-related problems using the Lancashire Quality of Life Profile, the Brief Symptom Inventory, the Verona Service Satisfaction Scale for Methadone Treatment and the EuropASI.

RESULTS

None of the QoL domains were defined by the same compilation of determinants. No direct effect of current heroin use on QoL was retained, but path analyses demonstrated its indirect effects on the domains of 'living situation', 'finances' and 'leisure and social participation'.

CONCLUSION

These findings illustrate the particularity of each QoL domain and the need for a multidimensional approach to the concept. The relationship between current heroin use and various domains of opiate-dependent individuals' QoL is complex, indirect and mediated by psychosocial and treatment-related variables.

Buprenorphine in maintenance treatment: experience among Italian physicians in drug addiction centers

The aim of this study was to assess the attitudes of Italian physicians regarding buprenorphine and its clinical use approximately 6 years after the medication was introduced into clinical practice. The sample consisted of 305 randomly selected physicians, working in public centers of drug addiction. In Italy buprenorphine seems a valid tool in the field of drug addiction treatment, although it is far from replacing methadone even though it seems to guarantee better compliance. Interviewees follow clinical experience more than international guidelines, with pharmaceutical company representatives as the most cited source for information about the medication. The data also suggests a need for the development of formal guidelines for treatment with buprenorphine in Italy.

Current quality of life and its determinants among opiate-dependent individuals five years after starting methadone treatment

Purpose

This study explores the current QoL of opiate-dependent individuals who started outpatient methadone treatment at least 5 years ago and assesses the influence of demographic, psychosocial, drug and health-related variables on individuals’ QoL.

Methods

Participants (n = 159) were interviewed about their current QoL, psychological distress and severity of drug-related problems, using the Lancashire Quality of Life Profile, the Brief Symptom Inventory and the Addiction Severity Index. Potential determinants of QoL were assessed in a multiple linear regression analysis.

Results

Five years after the start of methadone treatment, opiate-dependent individuals report low QoL scores on various domains. No association was found between drug-related variables and QoL, but a significant negative impact of psychological distress was identified. Severity of psychological distress, taking medication for psychological problems and the inability to change one’s living situation were associated with lower QoL. Having at least one good friend and a structured daily activity had a significant, positive impact on QoL.

Conclusions

Opiate-dependent individuals’ QoL is mainly determined by their psychological well-being and a number of psychosocial variables. These findings highlight the importance of a holistic approach to treatment and support in methadone maintenance treatment, which goes beyond fixing the negative physical consequences of opiate dependence.

Quality of life in patients receiving opioid maintenance therapy. A comparative study of slow-release morphine versus methadone treatment

BACKGROUND/AIMS

In recent years, quality of life (QoL) assessments have proved useful for evaluating and comparing drug treatment programs. To compare QoL of patients maintained on methadone versus slow-release morphine, a prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, cross-over study was conducted.

METHODS

Over two 7-week study phases, participants received either oral slow-release morphine capsules followed by methadone oral solution or vice versa. QoL status was assessed at baseline, week 7, and week 14 using the German version of the Lancashire Quality of Life Profile.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found between methadone and slow-release morphine in any QoL domain. A significant time effect for nearly all QoL domains was observed after 14 weeks of opioid medication, independent of the chosen drug (general well-being, p < 0.001; mental health, p = 0.001; general state of health, p = 0.018; leisure time at home, p = 0.034; leisure time out of the home, p = 0.008). Furthermore, this study revealed that even short-term maintenance yields significantly higher QoL scores in the important domain of general well-being.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that slow-release morphine has effects comparable to methadone on patient-reported QoL data and is thus a promising option for treatment of opioid-dependent subjects.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2006

This paper is the 29th consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, now spanning 30 years of research. It summarizes papers published during 2006 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurological disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); and immunological responses (Section 17).

Substance use and quality of life over 12 months among buprenorphine maintenance-treated and methadone maintenance-treated heroin-addicted patients

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of methadone treatment and buprenorphine treatment on retention in treatment, urine drug testing results, psychiatric status, social adjustment, and quality of life among patients involved in long-term treatment with the cited medications. Two hundred thirteen patients (106 on buprenorphine treatment and 107 on methadone treatment) were enrolled in this open study at the 3rd month of their treatment and followed up until the 12th month; those who left the program before the end of the 3rd month of their treatment were not included in the study sample. The results of this study show statistically significant improvements in opioid use, psychiatric status, and quality of life between the 3rd and 12th months for both medications. This study suggests the long-term efficacy of methadone treatment and buprenorphine treatment on symptoms of opioid addiction and quality of life.

Tratamiento con morfina en la dependencia de opiáceos

Morphine is an opiate drug widely used as an analgesic in multiple medical diseases. Currently, its management in the maintenance treatment of opiate dependent patients is being studied. The most significant studies are described. In these, its usefulness has been assessed in comparison with other treatments, such as methadone, buprenorphine. Morphine has shown efficacy and tolerability. Its management is easy both in patients who consume heroin as well as those who have received other opiate drugs. Thus, it is a drug that may extend the therapeutic armamentarium in patients who begin with treatment with other opiates for the first time or who have previously received them. However, new studies must be conducted to adequately characterize its clinical use.

Innovations in agonist maintenance treatment of opioid-dependent patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of published studies on agonist maintenance treatment options for opioid-dependent patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent publication of controlled trials confirms earlier clinical evidence of the efficacy of diamorphine (heroin) in the treatment of opioid dependence. Findings show not only efficacy with respect to improvement of health, reduction of illicit drug use, reduction of criminality and stabilization of social conditions, but also cost effectiveness in the treatment of chronic treatment-resistant heroin addicts.

SUMMARY

Agonist maintenance treatment has become the first-line treatment for chronic opioid dependence. High-quality studies demonstrate the effectiveness of a growing number of different agonist maintenance treatments for opioid dependence such as methadone and buprenorphine. In addition, there is new evidence for the effectiveness of other agonists, mainly slow-release morphine, intravenous and inhalable diamorphine and possibly oral diamorphine. Maintenance treatment with intravenous or inhalable diamorphine should be implemented into the healthcare system to treat a group of severely dependent treatment-resistant patients. Furthermore, the opioid-dependent patients not under treatment need to be engaged in maintenance treatments through other harm reduction measures. Agonist maintenance treatment is very effective in stabilizing the health condition and social situation, while also reducing harm, thereby increasing life expectancy and quality of life.

Evidenced-based treatment of opioid-dependent patients

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of treatment options for opioid-dependent patients.

METHOD

We screened all published studies on the treatment of opioid dependence, with a special focus on systematic literature reviews, formal metaanalyses, and recent trials.

RESULTS

Both clinical experience and neurobiological evidence indicate that opioid dependence is a chronic relapsing disorder. Treatment objectives depend on the pursued goals: crisis intervention, abstinence-oriented treatment (detoxification and relapse prevention), or agonist maintenance treatment. The high quality of solid evidence in the literature demonstrates that there are numerous effective interventions available for the treatment of opioid dependence. Crisis intervention, frequently necessary owing to the high overdose rate, can be effectively handled with naloxone. Abstinence-oriented interventions are effective for only a few motivated patients with stable living conditions and adequate social support. Agonist maintenance treatment is considered the first line of treatment for opioid dependence. Numerous studies have shown efficacy for methadone and buprenorphine treatment, while maintenance with other agonists is also becoming available to a greater extent. Maintenance treatment with diamorphine should be made available for the small group of treatment-resistant, severely dependent addicts. Other harm-reduction measures can serve to engage individuals with opioid addiction who are not in treatment.

CONCLUSION

Opioid dependence is a chronic relapsing disease that is difficult to cure, but effective treatments are available to stabilize patients and reduce harm, thereby increasing life expectancy and quality of life.