Recovery From Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) After Monthly Long-acting Buprenorphine Treatment: 12-Month Longitudinal Outcomes From RECOVER, an Observational Study

Effectiveness of long-acting buprenorphine - A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the evidence of the effectiveness of long-acting injection buprenorphine (LAI-B) in the management of opioid use disorder (OUD).

METHOD

Databases were searched for studies reporting on the effectiveness of LAI-B for the treatment of OUD. Risk of bias was assessed, and a narrative synthesis of data was presented. The study adhered to PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023396033).

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included in the final review: two double-blind randomised control trials, two open-label randomised control trials, two retrospective cohort studies, one non-controlled pilot study, and eleven observational studies. In comparative trials, LAI-B was superior to placebo and superior or non-inferior to treatment as usual. LAI-B was positively associated with improvements in abstinence rates and patient-centred outcomes. There was limited data on the long-term effects of continuous LAI-B prescription.

CONCLUSION

LAI-B is an effective treatment for OUD with advantages over existing forms of treatment. Patients reported high levels of medication satisfaction and there were no significant safety concerns. This review highlights the need for future research on long-term effectiveness outcomes, with participants of more varied demographics and psychiatric comorbidity, which is more reflective of the OUD population seen in community clinical settings.

Provider costs of treating opioid dependence with extended-release buprenorphine in Australia

INTRODUCTION

The costs of providing medication-assisted treatment for opioid dependence can determine its scale of provision. To provide estimates of the costs of extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR), we performed a bottom-up costing analysis of provider operational treatment costs.

METHODS

Data were collected in a single-arm open label trial of BUP-XR injections conducted in specialist public drug treatment services and primary care private practices in three Australian states (the CoLAB study). The unit costs of resources used for each activity were combined with quantities used at each participating facility to arrive at the average annual cost per client.

RESULTS

One hundred participants across the six health facility sites received monthly subcutaneous BUP-XR injections administered by a health-care practitioner. The average cost of providing 1 year of treatment per participant was $6656 ($6026-$8326). Screening cost (initial assessment and medical history) was $282 while monthly follow-up appointments cost $531 per client. The main cost driver was the monthly treatment costs accounting for 79% of the average annual client cost, with medication costs comprising 95% of this cost.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

With medication costs making up the largest proportion of treatment costs, treatment using BUP-XR has the potential to free up other health system resources, for example, staff time. The costs reported in this study can be used in an economic evaluation to estimate the net benefit or cost-effectiveness of BUP-XR especially when compared to other opioid agonist treatments.

Long-Acting Injectable Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder: A Qualitative Analysis of Patients' Interpersonal Relationships during the First Year of Treatment

Introduction: Long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) is a new treatment for opioid use disorder. Drawing upon new materialism and the concept of social capital, this article provides a focused analysis of how LAIB affects, and is affected by, patients' relationships with other people. Methods: Data derive from a longitudinal qualitative study. Twenty-six people (18 males; 8 females) initiating LAIB were recruited from England and Wales (2020/2021) and interviewed up to six times each over a year (125 interviews in total). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. Coded relationship data were summarized in Excel and analyzed via Iterative Categorization. Results: Core significant others who did not use substances offered participants important support with LAIB. Children and grandchildren provided motivation for LAIB, whilst other family relationships could be supportive and unsupportive. Participants wanted to avoid friends, peers and associates who might offer them substances, but valued sharing experiences with others in similar circumstances. Whilst some participants were unconcerned when treatment staff did not contact them, others were angry and upset. Those who did not continue LAIB or were lost from the study were more isolated at recruitment. Meanwhile, participants who remained on LAIB described increased sociability over time. Conclusions: Findings are consistent with ideas relating to new materialism (LAIB is part of an interacting network of material and non-material factors) and social capital (those with supportive relationships benefited more from LAIB). Interpersonal relationships need to be considered as part of routine care and should be reviewed with patients throughout the treatment journey.

Buprenorphine and Opioid Use Disorder Training: Graduate Nursing Curricula Recommendations

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a public health emergency, with a shortage of providers trained to prescribe buprenorphine for OUD treatment. We conducted a systematic review to examine advanced practice RN (APRN) and medical school programs that included OUD content or Drug Addiction Treatment Act waiver training and evaluate the outcomes of those curricular modifications. APRN and medical school programs that provided OUD content or waiver training saw improvements in students' knowledge and self-efficacy for managing buprenorphine treatment and reduced stigma toward individuals with OUD. Students' perceptions of training were largely positive, and the programs' results indicated improved practice outcomes related to the use of buprenorphine. Further inclusion of OUD content and training in APRN curricula will increase the number of capable buprenorphine prescribers, which will increase access to buprenorphine for individuals with OUD. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 62(7), 17-24.].

Single cell transcriptomics reveals distinct transcriptional responses to oxycodone and buprenorphine by iPSC-derived brain organoids from patients with opioid use disorder

The opioid epidemic represents a national crisis. Oxycodone is one of the most prescribed opioid medications in the United States, whereas buprenorphine is currently the most prescribed medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) pharmacotherapy. Given the extensive use of prescription opioids and the global opioid epidemic, it is essential to understand how opioids modulate brain cell type function at the single-cell level. We performed single nucleus RNA-seq (snRNA-seq) using iPSC-derived forebrain organoids from three male OUD subjects in response to oxycodone, buprenorphine, or vehicle for seven days. We utilized the snRNA-seq data to identify differentially expressed genes following drug treatment using the Seurat integrative analysis pipeline. We utilized iPSC-derived forebrain organoids and single-cell sequencing technology as an unbiased tool to study cell-type-specific and drug-specific transcriptional responses. After quality control filtering, we analyzed 25787 cells and identified sixteen clusters using unsupervised clustering analysis. Our results reveal distinct transcriptional responses to oxycodone and buprenorphine by iPSC-derived brain organoids from patients with OUD. Specifically, buprenorphine displayed a significant influence on transcription regulation in glial cells. However, oxycodone induced type I interferon signaling in many cell types, including neural cells in brain organoids. Finally, we demonstrate that oxycodone, but not buprenorphine activated STAT1 and induced the type I interferon signaling in patients with OUD. These data suggest that elevation of STAT1 expression associated with OUD might play a role in transcriptional regulation in response to oxycodone. In summary, our results provide novel mechanistic insight into drug action at single-cell resolution.

Reduced emergency department use among insured individuals receiving extended-release buprenorphine in a health system setting

Introduction

Extended-release buprenorphine (XR-Bup) is associated with reduced opioid use and opioid negative urine drug screens. Little is known about its use in outpatient addiction care provided within health systems.

Methods

Individuals prescribed XR-Bup were identified from electronic health records; chart abstraction was conducted. Primary outcome was all-cause emergency department (ED) use. Secondary outcomes included ED use or inpatient stays for mental health or substance use, ED use for any other cause, discontinuation reasons, and drug substitution. Statistical comparisons used nonparametric tests from related samples (McNemar's test and Wilcoxon matched pair tests) to test outcomes six months prior and 6 months following XR-Bup initiation.

Results

152 individuals had an XR-Bup order, 126 received >1 injection. Among those consistently insured 6 months prior to and following XR-Bup initiation (n=99), the mean number of injections following initiation was 3.95; one-third received 6 doses in the 6 months. The proportion of individuals using ED services for all causes declined (41% prior vs. 28% following XR-Bup initiation, p<.05); similar results were found for secondary ED use outcomes. The proportion of individuals requiring inpatient treatment for mental health or substance use also declined (46% vs. 16%, p<.01). Common reasons for discontinuing XR-Bup included losing insurance (21%) or cost (11%). The most common non-prescribed substances used during treatment were opioids (n=31) and THC (n=20).

Conclusions

In this non-randomized retrospective observational study, use of XR-Bup was associated with reduced ED use 6 months following initiation. XR-Bup may help health systems reduce use of costly ED services.

Long-acting injectable buprenorphine in the real world: case report on dual disorders

OBJECTIVES

Long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) has demonstrated a good profile for opioid use disorder (OUD) management. However, there is scarce information on LAIB in OUD patients with comorbid mental disorders (dual disorder patients).

METHODS

We present a case report on OUD patients with a comorbid mental disorder who have received LAIB for at least 3 months.

RESULTS

Two women and one man with OUD and another comorbid mental disorder were prescribed with LAIB ranging from three to twelve months. Good adherence and opioid abstinence were observed during the follow-up. Psychopathological issues related to comorbid mental disorders were stabilized. A deep discussion on LAIB in this profile of patients is conducted.

CONCLUSIONS

LAIB in OUD patients with comorbid mental disorders may be a safe and well tolerated option, similar to OUD patients without comorbid mental disorders. LAIB's impact on psychopathological issues requires further high-quality research to understand the real impact of LAIB on OUD and comorbid mental disorders.

Extended-release buprenorphine in pregnancy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The relative safety and efficacy of monthly extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) has not been fully evaluated in pregnant persons.

METHODS

Case report of two pregnant individuals receiving XR-BUP while pregnant.

RESULTS

Both patients had positive experiences and healthy infants.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Sparse data regarding the use of XR-BUP in pregnant patients limits shared decision-making. Additional evidence will support the growing population of pregnant patients exposed to XR-BUP.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Positive patient experiences using XR-BUP during pregnancy have been previously unreported. This report will contribute to discussions of risks and benefits for future patients using XR-BUP during pregnancy.

Compared implementation of the long-acting buprenorphine treatment buvidal in four European countries

BACKGROUND

Buvidal is the only depot buprenorphine currently available in Europe. Buvidal offers a new treatment paradigm, which may require some adjustment in the national regulatory frameworks for opioid agonist treatments (OATs), as well as the national care systems.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Data on the national dissemination of Buvidal, types of populations treated, and the national regulatory framework and care organization system through which Buvidal has been implemented were compared between the UK, Finland, Spain, and France, using a qualitative survey.

RESULTS

In 2022, the proportion of people on OAT who received Buvidal was 2.1% in the UK, 60-65% in Finland, 1% in Spain, and 0.3% in France. In both Finland and the UK, the cost of the medication is covered by the national health system, whereas, in Spain and France, Buvidal is accessible only in specialized centers, which must carry its cost. Other national features may explain the gaps in Buvidal use, including the baseline level of OAT coverage, which was high in both France and Spain.

CONCLUSIONS

Important national discrepancies are found regarding Buvidal dissemination among people on OAT.

Efficacy of Integrating the Management of Pain and Addiction via Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) in Individuals With Chronic Pain and Opioid Use Disorder: Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial of a Digital Cognitive Behavioral Treatment

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are maintained on medications for OUD (MOUD; eg, buprenorphine or methadone). Chronic pain is associated with worse retention and higher levels of substance use. Treatment of individuals with chronic pain receiving MOUD can be challenging due to their increased clinical complexity. Given the acute and growing nature of the opioid crisis, MOUD is increasingly offered in a wide range of settings, where high-quality, clinician-delivered, empirically validated behavioral treatment for chronic pain may not be available. Therefore, digital treatments that support patient self-management of chronic pain and OUD have the potential for wider implementation to fill this gap.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of Integrating the Management of Pain and Addiction via Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT), an interactive digital treatment program with asynchronous coach feedback, compared to treatment as usual (TAU) in individuals with chronic pain and OUD receiving MOUD.

METHODS

Adult participants (n=160) receiving MOUD and reporting bothersome or high-impact chronic pain will be recruited from outpatient opioid treatment programs in Connecticut (United States) and randomized 1:1 to either IMPACT+TAU or TAU only. Participants randomized to IMPACT+TAU will complete an interactive digital treatment that includes 9 modules promoting training in pain and addiction coping skills and a progressive walking program. The program is augmented with a weekly personalized voice message from a trained coach based on daily participant-reported pain intensity and interference, craving to use opioids, sleep quality, daily steps, pain self-efficacy, MOUD adherence, and engagement with IMPACT collected through digital surveys. Outcomes will be assessed at 3, 6, and 9 months post randomization. The primary outcome is MOUD retention at 3 months post randomization (ie, post treatment). Secondary outcomes include pain interference, physical functioning, MOUD adherence, substance use, craving, pain intensity, sleep disturbance, pain catastrophizing, and pain self-efficacy. Semistructured qualitative interviews with study participants (n=34) randomized to IMPACT (completers and noncompleters) will be conducted to evaluate the usability and quality of the program and its outcomes.

RESULTS

The study has received institutional review board approval and began recruitment at 1 site in July 2022. Recruitment at a second site started in January 2023, with a third and final site anticipated to begin recruitment in January 2024. Data collection is expected to continue through June 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing efficacy for a digital treatment for addiction and chronic pain that can be integrated into MOUD clinics will provide options for individuals with OUD, which reduce barriers to behavioral treatment. Participant feedback on the intervention will inform updates or modifications to improve engagement and efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05204576; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05204576.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/54342.

Evaluation of an injectable monthly extended-release buprenorphine program in a low-barrier specialty addiction medicine clinic

INTRODUCTION

Monthly injectable extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) can address several systemic and individual barriers to consistent sublingual buprenorphine treatment for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). Real-world evaluations of XR-BUP in the outpatient addiction treatment setting are limited. The purpose of this study was to compare 6-month treatment retention and urine drug tests between patients who initiated XR-BUP compared to those who were prescribed but did not initiate XR-BUP in a low-barrier addiction medicine specialty clinic.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with OUD prescribed XR-BUP between 12/1/2018 and 12/31/2020 in a low-barrier addiction medicine specialty clinic to compare 6-month treatment retention between patients who initiated XR-BUP and those who were prescribed but did not initiate XR-BUP (comparison group). Secondary outcomes included percent of urine toxicology tests negative for non-prescribed opioids. Multivariable logistic regression models evaluated factors associated with 6-month treatment retention and XR-BUP initiation.

RESULTS

Of the 233 patients prescribed XR-BUP, 148 (63.8 %) identified as non-Hispanic white, 218 (93.6 %) were insured by public insurance (Medicare/Medicaid), and nearly two-thirds were prescribed XR-BUP due to unstable OUD. Approximately 50 % of patients initiated XR-BUP treatment (mean number of injections = 3.7). About 60 % of XR-BUP-treated patients received supplemental sublingual buprenorphine and nearly two-thirds received a 300 mg maintenance dose. Six-month treatment retention was greater in the XR-BUP treatment versus comparison group (70.3 % vs. 36.5 %, p < 0.001). The XR-BUP treatment group had a higher percentage of opioid-negative urine toxicology tests versus the comparison group (67.2 % vs. 36.3 %, p < 0.001). Receipt of XR-BUP was an independent predictor of 6-month treatment retention (OR 5.40, 95 % CI 2.18-13.38). Those prescribed XR-BUP due to unstable OUD had lower odds of treatment retention (OR 0.41, 95 % CI 0.24-0.98) after controlling for receipt of XR-BUP and other variables known to impact retention.

CONCLUSIONS

XR-BUP improved 6-month treatment retention and resulted in a greater proportion of opioid-negative urine toxicology tests compared to a comparison group of patients who were prescribed but did not initiate XR-BUP. Patients with unstable OUD had lower odds of XR-BUP initiation, suggesting the need for targeted interventions to increase XR-BUP uptake in this high-risk population.

Superiority and cost-effectiveness of monthly extended-release buprenorphine versus daily standard of care medication: a pragmatic, parallel-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

Background

Daily methadone maintenance or buprenorphine treatment is the standard-of-care (SoC) medication for opioid use disorder (OUD). Subcutaneously injected, extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR) may be more effective-but there has been no superiority evaluation.

Methods

This pragmatic, parallel-group, open-label, multi-centre, effectiveness superiority randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was conducted at five National Health Service community-based treatment clinics in England and Scotland. Participants (adults aged ≥ 18 years; all meeting DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for moderate or severe OUD at admission to their current maintenance treatment episode) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive continued daily SoC (liquid methadone (usual dose range: 60-120 mg) or sublingual/transmucosal buprenorphine (usual dose range: 8-24 mg) for 24 weeks; or monthly BUP-XR (Sublocade;® two injections of 300 mg, then four maintenance injections of 100 mg or 300 mg, with maintenance dose selected by response and preference) for 24 weeks. In the intent-to-treat population (senior statistician blinded to blinded to treatment group allocation), and with a seven-day grace period after randomisation, the primary endpoint was the count of days abstinent from non-medical opioids between days 8-168 (i.e., weeks 2-24; range: 0-161 days). Safety was reported for the intention-to- treat population. Adopting a broad societal perspective inclusive of criminal justice, NHS and personal social service costs, a trial-based cost-utility analysis estimated the Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of BUP-XR versus SoC at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold. The study was registered EudraCT (2018-004460-63) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05164549), and is completed.

Findings

Between Aug 9, 2019 and Nov 2, 2021, 314 participants were randomly allocated to receive SoC (n = 156) or BUP-XR (n = 158). Participants were abstinent from opioids for an adjusted mean of 104.37 days (standard error [SE] 9.89; range: 0-161 days) in the SoC group and an adjusted mean of 123.43 days (SE 4.76; range: 24-161 days) in the BUP-XR group (adjusted incident rate ratio [IRR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.33; p-value 0.004). The incidence of any adverse event was higher in the BUP-XR group than the SoC group (128 [81.0%] of 158 participants versus 67 [42.9%] of 156 participants, respectively-most commonly rapidly-resolving (mild-moderate range) pain from drug administration in the BUP-XR group (121 [26.9%] of 450 adverse events). There were 11 serious adverse events (7.0%) in the 158 participants in the BUP-XR group, and 18 serious adverse events (11.5%) in the 156 participants in the SoC group-none judged to be related to study treatment. The BUP-XR treatment group had a mean incremental cost of £1033 (95% central range [CR] -1189 to 3225) and was associated with a mean incremental QALY of 0.02 (95% CR 0.00-0.05), and an ICER of £47,540 (0.37 probability of being cost-effective at the £30,000/QALY gained willingness-to-pay threshold). However, BUP-XR dominated the SoC among participants who were rated more severe at study baseline, and among participants in maintenance treatment for more that 28 days at study enrolment.

Interpretation

Evaluated against the daily oral SoC, monthly BUP-XR is clinically superior, delivering greater abstinence from opioids, and with a comparable safety profile. BUP-XR was not cost-effective in a base case cost-utility analysis using the societal perspective, but it was more effective and less costly (dominant) among participants with more severe OUD, or those whose current treatment episode was longer than 28 days. Further trials are needed to evaluate if BUP-XR is associated with better clinical and health economic outcomes over the longer term.

Funding

Indivior.

18-Month efficacy and safety analysis of monthly subcutaneous buprenorphine injection for opioid use disorder: Integrated analysis of phase 3 studies

BACKGROUND

Few studies investigate the natural history of patients on long-term treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). We evaluated the long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability experience of monthly extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR) in participants seeking treatment for OUD, via integrated analysis of phase 3 studies.

METHODS

Study 1 was a 24-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of participants receiving monthly injections of BUP-XR (300 mg × 2, 100 mg × 4 [n = 203] or 300 mg × 6 [n = 201]) or placebo (n = 100). Study 2 was a 48-week, open-label trial enrolling 257 participants who completed study 1 and 412 de novo participants, to receive 6 and 12 BUP-XR injections, respectively. Study 3 was a 24-week, open-label extension enrolling 208 participants who completed study 2 for 6 additional injections. We assessed opioid abstinence as the proportion of urine opioid negative participants by visit and the percentage of each participant's negative opioid assessments during the first 6 months.

RESULTS

In total, 916 participants were treated with BUP-XR or placebo. By the end of 18 months, 92.7 % of the de novo cohort and 81.8 % of the study 1 cohort were urine negative for opioids. Among early nonresponders (percentage of abstinence ≤20 %), 73.1 % were urine negative after 18 months. The longer treatment period was well tolerated, with no new safety concerns, and a low incidence of opioid withdrawal signs and symptoms, and hepatic disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Extending BUP-XR treatment beyond 6 months sustained improvement in opioid abstinence and was well tolerated, supporting clinical benefit up to 18 months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02357901 (study 1); NCT02510014 (study 2); NCT02896296 (study 3).

Long-Term Effects of Increasing Buprenorphine Treatment Seeking, Duration, and Capacity on Opioid Overdose Fatalities: A Model-based Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Because buprenorphine treatment of opioid use disorder reduces opioid overdose deaths (OODs), expanding access to care is an important policy and clinical care goal. Policymakers must choose within capacity limitations whether to expand the number of people with opioid use disorder who are treated or extend duration for existing patients. This inherent tradeoff could be made less acute with expanded buprenorphine treatment capacity.

METHODS

To inform such decisions, we used a validated simulation model to project the effects of increasing buprenorphine treatment-seeking, average episode duration, and capacity (patients per provider) on OODs in the United States from 2023 to 2033, varying the start time to assess the effects of implementation delays.

RESULTS

Results show that increasing treatment duration alone could cost lives in the short term by reducing capacity for new admissions yet save more lives in the long term than accomplished by only increasing treatment seeking. Increasing provider capacity had negligible effects. The most effective 2-policy combination was increasing capacity and duration simultaneously, which would reduce OODs up to 18.6% over a decade. By 2033, the greatest reduction in OODs (≥20%) was achieved when capacity was doubled and average duration reached 2 years, but only if the policy changes started in 2023. Delaying even a year diminishes the benefits. Treatment-seeking increases were equally beneficial whether they began in 2023 or 2025 but of only marginal benefit beyond what capacity and duration achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

If policymakers only target 2 policies to reduce OODs, they should be to increase capacity and duration, enacted quickly and aggressively.

Impact Over 3 Years of a Family Medicine-led Addiction Medicine Curriculum for Medical Students

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Innovations in medical school training are essential for family physicians to enter practice confident in addressing the opioid epidemic and substance use disorders. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a distance-learning addiction medicine curriculum led by family medicine physicians for third-year medical students.

METHODS

Our prospective cohort study of third-year medical students compared our educational model to a traditional curriculum. Our distance-learning collaboration employed videoconferencing and community experts to engage students across Minnesota in an addiction medicine curriculum. Students in a family medicine-focused 9-month longitudinal integrated curriculum (LIC) participated in this 16-session curriculum while embedded in a rural or urban underserved community for their core third-year clerkships. We evaluated program effectiveness through a knowledge and attitude self-assessment survey of student participants before and after the program compared to students in a traditional curriculum.

RESULTS

The pre- and postsurvey response rates, respectively, were 22.8% for the control group and 98.4% for the ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) group. Compared to classmates in a traditional curriculum, program participants reported significantly higher self-perceived ability managing addiction concerns upon completing this curriculum (mean score of 3.2 vs 2.2 on a 5-point Likert scale, P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Data from our LIC showed promise that the model can be effective in building confidence in students' abilities to practice addiction medicine. Because of its broad reach and low cost, this form of medical education may be a key model for medical schools to respond to the opioid epidemic and better serve our patients.

Effects of buprenorphine on opioid craving in comparison to other medications for opioid use disorder: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Craving is a distressing symptom of opioid use disorder (OUD) that can be alleviated with medications for OUD (MOUD). Buprenorphine is an effective MOUD that may suppress craving; however, treatment discontinuation and resumed opioid use is common during the early phases of treatment. More information on the craving response through the high-risk period of initiating buprenorphine may provide meaningful information on how to better target craving, which in turn may enhance outcomes. This systematic review investigated buprenorphine doses and formulations on craving during the induction and maintenance phases of treatment, and for context also compared the craving response to other MOUD (i.e., methadone, extended-release naltrexone [XR-NTX]).

METHODS

PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized trials of buprenorphine versus placebo, various buprenorphine formulations/doses, or other MOUD that included a measure of opioid craving.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were selected for inclusion. Buprenorphine and buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NAL) were each associated with lower craving than placebo over time. Craving was greater among those prescribed lower versus higher buprenorphine doses. In comparison to other MOUD, buprenorphine or BUP/NAL was linked to greater craving than methadone in 3 of the 6 studies. BUP/NAL was associated with greater reported craving than XR-NTX.

DISCUSSION

Craving is reduced over time with buprenorphine and BUP/NAL, although other MOUD may provide greater reductions in craving. Although there is currently considerable variability in the measurement of craving, it may be a valuable concept to address with individuals receiving MOUD, especially early in treatment.

History of the discovery, development, and FDA-approval of buprenorphine medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder

Buprenorphine-based medications were first approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2002 for the treatment of opioid dependence, or opioid use disorder (OUD) as the condition is presently known. This regulatory milestone was the outcome of 36 years of research and development, which also led to the development and approval of several other new buprenorphine-based medications. In this short review, we first describe the discovery and early development stages of buprenorphine. Second, we review key steps that led to the development of buprenorphine as a drug product. Third, we explain the regulatory approval of several buprenorphine-based medications for the treatment of OUD. We also discuss these developments in the context of the evolution of regulations and policies that have progressively improved OUD treatment availability and efficacy, although challenges remain in removing system-level, provider-level, and local-level barriers to quality treatment, to integrating OUD treatment into routine care and other settings, to reducing disparities in access to treatment, and to optimizing person-centered outcomes.

Continued Posttrial Benefits of Buprenorphine Extended Release: RECOVER Study Findings

BACKGROUND

This analysis describes participants' opioid use disorder (OUD) outcomes for 18 months after discontinuing extended-release buprenorphine injection (BUP-XR, SUBLOCADE).

METHODS

The RECOVER (Remission From Chronic Opioid Use: Studying Environmental and Socioeconomic Factors on Recovery) study recruited participants from BUP-XR clinical trials (NCT02357901, NCT025100142, and NCT02896296) to assess whether there were sustained benefits after leaving the trial. Abstinence from opioids and from all illicit substances (excluding medical cannabis), health-related quality of life, depression, and employment were measured after BUP-XR discontinuation and change in outcomes assessed at 6, 12, and 18 months. Results were analyzed within the full cohort and by duration of BUP-XR treatment (0-2 months, 3-5 months, 6-11 months, 12 months, or 13-18 months) with and without inverse probability weights adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 533 participants, 529 were assessed over the 18-month study period. Further posttrial pharmacotherapy was reported by 33% of participants. At RECOVER baseline, longer BUP-XR was associated with higher abstinence (0-2 months BUP-XR [n = 116]: 38.8%; 3-5 months BUP-XR [n = 61]: 41.0%; 6-11 months BUP-XR [n = 86]: 68.6%; 12 months BUP-XR [n = 135]: 71.9%; 18 months BUP-XR [n = 131]: 88.2%) and greater 12-Item Short Form Health Survey mental component scores. Over 60% of participants had stable or improved outcomes at 6, 12, and 18 months assessments. Overall 47% of participants self-reported sustained opioid abstinence for the full 18-month follow-up, with greater sustained abstinence associated with longer BUP-XR treatment duration. A sensitivity analysis, removing patients receiving medications for OUD, yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants from BUP-XR clinical trials who continued into RECOVER maintained or improved on numerous outcomes over 18 months, demonstrating the long-term positive impact of OUD pharmacotherapy.

How do patients feel during the first 72 h after initiating long-acting injectable buprenorphine? An embodied qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) is a new treatment for opioid use disorder that is generating positive outcomes. Negative effects are typically mild and transient, but can occasionally be serious, resulting in treatment discontinuation/non-adherence. This paper aims to analyse patients' accounts of how they felt during the first 72 h after initiating LAIB.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted (June 2021-March 2022) with 26 people (18 males and 8 females) who had started LAIB within the previous 72 h. Participants were recruited from treatment services in England and Wales and were interviewed by telephone using a topic guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded. The concepts of embodiment and embodied cognition framed the analyses. Data on participants' substance use, initiation onto LAIB and feelings were tabulated. Next, participants' accounts of how they felt were analysed following the stages of Iterative Categorization.

RESULTS

Participants reported complex combinations of changing negative and positive feelings. Bodily experiences included withdrawal symptoms, poor sleep, injection-site pain/soreness, lethargy and heightened senses inducing nausea ('distressed bodies'), but also enhanced somatic wellbeing, improved sleep, better skin, increased appetite, reduced constipation and heightened senses inducing pleasure ('returning body functions'). Cognitive responses included anxiety, uncertainties and low mood/depression ('the mind in crisis') and improved mood, greater positivity and reduced craving ('feeling psychologically better'). Whereas most negative effects reported are widely recognized, the early benefits of treatment described are less well-documented and may be an overlooked distinctive feature of LAIB.

CONCLUSIONS

During the first 72 h after initiating long-acting injectable buprenorphine, new patients report experiencing a range of interconnected positive and negative short-term effects. Providing new patients with information about the range and nature of these effects can prepare them for what to expect and help them manage feelings and reduce anxiety. In turn, this may increase medication adherence.

Evaluation of real-world outcomes associated with use of a prescription digital therapeutic to treat substance use disorders

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Digital therapeutics can expand the reach and fidelity of behavioral treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs). This analysis evaluated real-world engagement and clinical outcomes in patients diagnosed with SUD who were prescribed reSET®, an FDA-authorized prescription digital therapeutic (PDT).

METHODS

Patients were prescribed a 12-week PDT comprising 61 therapy lessons (31 "core" and 30 "keep learning" lessons) and contingency management rewards (positive reinforcement message or monetary gift cards) based on lesson completion and negative urine drug screens. Engagement (defined as any activity in the PDT), retention (any activity in Weeks 9-12), and substance use data were collected automatically by the PDT and analyzed descriptively. Associations between early lesson completion and end-of-treatment outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Six hundred and fifty-eight patients filled their prescription. Evaluated were 602 patients who were exposed to therapeutic content by completing at least one lesson (median age 37 years, 33% female, 41% male, 26% unreported sex). Median lessons completed was 33 (out of 61 possible), and 52% of patients completed all core modules. Retention in treatment during the last 4 weeks of treatment was 74%, and 62% were abstinent (missing data considered positive). [Correction added on 13 December 2022, after first online publication: In the preceding sentence, the treatment percentage values were revised from 74.6% to 74%.] DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SUD exhibited robust engagement with a PDT, high rates of retention through 12 weeks, and substantial rates of abstinence at end of treatment when the therapeutic was used in a real-world setting. PDT's hold promise as a new way to access effective SUD treatment.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This study is the first to report real-world PDT engagement and clinical outcomes data from a large, geographically diverse population of patients with SUDs.

Patient-centered quality measurement for opioid use disorder: Development of a taxonomy to address gaps in research and practice

Background: Evidence-based treatment is provided infrequently and inconsistently to patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). Treatment guidelines call for high-quality, patient-centered care that meets individual preferences and needs, but it is unclear whether current quality measures address individualized aspects of care and whether measures of patient-centered OUD care are supported by evidence. Methods: We conducted an environmental scan of OUD care quality to (1) evaluate patient-centeredness in current OUD quality measures endorsed by national agencies and in national OUD treatment guidelines; and (2) review literature evidence for patient-centered care in OUD diagnosis and management, including gaps in current guidelines, performance data, and quality measures. We then synthesized these findings to develop a new quality measurement taxonomy that incorporates patient-centered aspects of care and identifies priority areas for future research and quality measure development. Results: Across 31 endorsed OUD quality measures, only two measures of patient experience incorporated patient preferences and needs, while national guidelines emphasized providing patient-centered care. Among 689 articles reviewed, evidence varied for practices of patient-centered care. Many practices were supported by guidelines and substantial evidence, while others lacked evidence despite guideline support. Our synthesis of findings resulted in EQuIITable Care, a taxonomy comprised of six classifications: (1) patient Experience and engagement, (2) Quality of life; (3) Identification of patient risks; (4) Interventions to mitigate patient risks; (5) Treatment; and (6) Care coordination and navigation. Conclusions: Current quality measurement for OUD lacks patient-centeredness. EQuIITable Care for OUD provides a roadmap to develop measures of patient-centered care for OUD.

Buprenorphine exposure levels to optimize treatment outcomes in opioid use disorder

The severity of the ongoing opioid crisis, recently exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizes the importance for individuals suffering from opioid use disorder (OUD) to have access to and receive efficacious, evidence-based treatments. Optimal treatment of OUD should aim at blocking the effects of illicit opioids while controlling opioid craving and withdrawal to facilitate abstinence from opioid use and promote recovery. The present work analyses the relationship between buprenorphine plasma exposure and clinical efficacy in participants with moderate to severe OUD using data from two clinical studies (39 and 504 participants). Leveraging data from placebo-controlled measures assessing opioid blockade, craving, withdrawal and abstinence, we found that buprenorphine plasma concentrations sustained at 2-3 ng/ml (corresponding to ≥70% brain mu-opioid receptor occupancy) optimized treatment outcomes in the majority of participants, while some individuals (e.g., injecting opioid users) needed higher concentrations. Our work also included non-linear mixed effects modeling and survival analysis, which identified a number of demographic, genetic and social factors modulating treatment response and retention. Altogether, these findings provide key information on buprenorphine plasma levels that optimize clinical outcomes and increase the likelihood of individual treatment success. NLM identifiers: NCT02044094, NCT02357901.

Struggling With Recovery From Opioids: Who Is at Risk During COVID-19?

OBJECTIVES

Individuals in recovery from opioid use disorder (OUD) are vulnerable to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent findings suggest increased relapse risk and overdose linked to COVID-19-related stressors. We aimed to identify individual-level factors associated with COVID-19-related impacts on recovery.

METHODS

This observational study (NCT04577144) enrolled 216 participants who previously partook in long-acting buprenorphine subcutaneous injection clinical trials (2015-2017) for OUD. Participants indicated how COVID-19 affected their recovery from substance use. A machine learning approach Classification and Regression Tree analysis examined the association of 28 variables with the impact of COVID-19 on recovery, including demographics, substance use, and psychosocial factors. Tenfold cross-validation was used to minimize overfitting.

RESULTS

Twenty-six percent of the sample reported that COVID-19 had made recovery somewhat or much harder. Past-month opioid use was higher among those who reported that recovery was harder compared with those who did not (51% vs 24%, respectively; P < 0.001). The final classification tree (overall accuracy, 80%) identified the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) as the strongest independent risk factor associated with reporting COVID-19 impact. Individuals with a BDI-II score ≥10 had 6.45 times greater odds of negative impact (95% confidence interval, 3.29-13.30) relative to those who scored <10. Among individuals with higher BDI-II scores, less progress in managing substance use and treatment of OUD within the past 2 to 3 years were also associated with negative impacts.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings underscore the importance of monitoring depressive symptoms and perceived progress in managing substance use among those in recovery from OUD, particularly during large-magnitude crises.

An overview of buprenorphine prescribing for the advanced practice psychiatric nurse

PURPOSE

Rates of at-risk opioid use, opioid use disorder, and opioid overdose remain alarmingly high. There are medications that can be used to treat opioid use disorder, including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone, although access to care remains difficult. This review seeks to provide advanced practice psychiatric nurses (APPNs) with an overview of buprenorphine prescribing, with an emphasis on novel, long-acting delivery systems.

CONCLUSIONS

APPNs should be familiar with best practices regarding buprenorphine prescribing. Some patients may benefit from long-acting delivery methods, such as subdermal implants, or subcutaneous injections.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

APPNs can reduce barriers to buprenorphine access and should be familiar with best practices related to buprenorphine prescribing.

Can a new formulation of opiate agonist treatment alter stigma?: Place, time and things in the experience of extended-release buprenorphine depot

INTRODUCTION

Stigma has corrosive effects on all aspects of care and can undermine individual and population health outcomes. Addiction-related stigma has implications for opiate agonist treatment (OAT) and the people who receive, provide and fund it. It is important to understand how stigma is made in OAT and the political purposes that it serves, in order to change the relations of stigma and avoid the reproduction of stigma in the delivery of new treatment formulations, such as extended release buprenorphine (BUP-XR).

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted at two time points with participants in a prospective single-arm, multicentre, open-label trial of monthly BUP-XR. Thirty-six participants (25 men, 11 women) were interviewed, and of these 32 participated in a second interview to explore their experience of transition from other treatment to BUP-XR.

RESULTS

Participants were highly aware of the of the social and material effects of stigma through the negative stereotypes attached to OAT and those who receive it. Participants narrated examples of how stigma governed as a biopower in the relations and practices of OAT provision at numerous levels: structural (such as in public discourse about OAT and the people who receive it, in media, in perceptions about the decisions of investment in medical technologies); organisational (policies about legitimate access to OAT); interpersonal (with health workers) and individual (self-identities). BUP-XR allowed greater freedom and normalcy for clients. The experience of BUP-XR drew attention to the stigmatising potential of time, place and things associated with other OAT requiring daily (or frequent) dosing, accentuating how stigma comes to be materialised as a relational effect of everyday practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving BUP-XR allowed participants to avoid some of the everyday biopolitical powers of other forms of OAT and to reshape self-identities. The altering of relations between time, place and things associated with other forms of OAT allowed participants to feel as though they "pass as normal" . However, the negative public discourse and stigma of OAT is a potential threat to BUP-XR to realise its potential for individual and population benefits.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2020

This paper is the forty-third consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2020 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonists and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (1), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (2) and humans (3), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (4), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (5), stress and social status (6), learning and memory (7), eating and drinking (8), drug abuse and alcohol (9), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (10), mental illness and mood (11), seizures and neurologic disorders (12), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (13), general activity and locomotion (14), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (15), cardiovascular responses (16), respiration and thermoregulation (17), and immunological responses (18).

Clinical Case Conference: Strategies for Transferring From Methadone to Buprenorphine

The mainstay of treatment for opioid use disorder are medications, methadone (a full opioid agonist), or buprenorphine (a partial opioid agonist), in conjunction with psychosocial interventions. Both treatments are effective but safety, efficacy, and patient preference can lead to a decision to change from one treatment to the other. Transfer from buprenorphine to methadone is not clinically challenging; however, changing from methadone to buprenorphine is more complex. Published reports describe varied approaches to manage this transfer to both minimize patient symptoms associated with withdrawal from methadone and reduce risk of precipitating withdrawal symptoms with introduction of the partial agonist buprenorphine [Lintzeris et al. J Addict Med. 2020; in press]. There is no single approach for methadone to buprenorphine that is superior to others and no approach that is suitable for all case presentations. This case conference describes three different approaches to achieve a successful methadone to buprenorphine transfer and provides commentary on how the case may be managed based on published transfer "strategies."

The Predictive Value of Degree of Preference for Extended-Release Naltrexone for Treatment Adherence, Opioid Use, and Relapse

BACKGROUND

Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is effective for illicit opioid abstinence as an opioid maintenance treatment. To improve treatment outcomes, patient's preference for the modality of treatment is an important factor.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to test the relationship between baseline preference for XR-NTX and adherence to treatment, use of illicit opioids, and risk of relapse.

METHODS

In an open-label, Norwegian clinical trial participants with opioid use disorder were randomized to either monthly injections with XR-NTX or daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BP-NLX) for 12 weeks. Subsequently, participants could continue with their preferred medication in a 36-week follow-up and in a prolonged period of 104 weeks.

RESULTS

Of 153 participants who completed detoxification, 72% were men, with a mean age of 36 years. Preference levels were similar across the randomized groups, with no significant associations between preference and adherence to treatment, opioid use, or relapse. The BP-NLX group had a significantly higher risk of first relapse to opioids than the XR-NTX group for all levels of preference (p < 0.001) and a significantly higher number of days of illicit opioid use. In the follow-up period, the adherence rate was twice as high among participants with the highest preference compared to participants with the lowest preference, both among those who switched to XR-NTX and those who continued (hazard ratio 2.2; 1.2-4.0, p = 0.013). Opioid use was significantly higher among participants who switched to XR-NTX with the lowest preference than the medium (p = 0.003) or the highest (p = 0.001) preference. The risk of relapse to opioids, however, was significantly higher among XR-NTX continuing participants with the lowest (p = 0.002) or the medium (p = 0.043) preference than those with the highest preference.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals who matched with their preferred treatment used less illicit opioids than those who did not during short-term treatment. However, baseline preference for XR-NTX treatment primarily influenced longer term opioid use and treatment adherence.

Extended-release buprenorphine outcomes among treatment resistant veterans

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine Extended-Release (BUP-XR) is an FDA approved, monthly subcutaneous injection for opioid use disorder. This formulation provides an alternative for patients who have difficulty adhering to daily sublingual buprenorphine; however, its cost may be prohibitive compared to other medication alternatives.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this project was to evaluate the effectiveness of BUP-XR and provide a rationale for its utilization in health care facilitates.

METHODS

Across two VA outpatient clinics, twenty-six (22 male, 4 female) clinically complex patients received at least one BUP-XR injection between December 1, 2018 and April 1, 2020. The sample was high risk for hospital admission and mortality. Data was collected retrospectively from the medical records. Outcomes examined included: medication adherence, urine drug and alcohol screenings, emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and housing status. Within-subject comparisons were made between the six month period prior to and following the first injection.

RESULTS

Treatment retention was robust, as 81% of the sample received six or more monthly BUP-XR injections. Most patients (77%) maintained 300 mg dosage and a majority (70%) missed or were late for at least one injection. BUP-XR was associated with reduction in: emergency department visits, days of hospitalization, non-prescribed opioid use, and homelessness. Mortality rate was 23%.

CONCLUSIONS

BUP-XR with a flexible dosing schedule and a nonstandard default dose of 300 mgs resulted in robust retention, provided effective treatment of OUD, and reduced health care utilization for these complex patients with high mortality risk. However, due to the lack of statistical significance generalization of these findings is limited.

Outcomes of a single-arm implementation trial of extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine depot injections in people with opioid dependence

BACKGROUND

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is an effective intervention for opioid dependence. Extended-release buprenorphine injections (BUP-XR) may have additional potential benefits over sublingual buprenorphine. This single-arm trial evaluated outcomes among people receiving 48 weeks of BUP-XR in diverse community healthcare settings in Australia, permitting examination of outcomes when BUP-XR is delivered in standard practice.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from a network of specialist public drug treatment services, primary care and some private practices in three states. Following a minimum 7 days on 8-32 mg of sublingual buprenorphine (±naloxone), participants received monthly subcutaneous BUP-XR injections administered by a healthcare practitioner and completed monthly research interviews. The primary endpoint was retention in treatment at 48 weeks.

FINDINGS

Participants (n = 100) were 28% women, mean age 44 years with a long history of OAT (median 5.8 years); heroin was the most common opioid of concern (58%). Treatment retention at 24 and 48 weeks was 86% and 75%, respectively. Participants with past-month injecting drug use (OR 0.23; 95%CI: 0.09-0.61) or heroin use (OR 0.23; 95%CI: 0.08-0.65) at baseline had lower odds of being retained in treatment to 48 weeks. Reductions in multiple forms of extra-medical drug use were observed. Improvements in quality of life, participation in employment, and treatment satisfaction measures were also observed.

INTERPRETATION

This real-world implementation study of BUP-XR demonstrated high retention and treatment satisfaction. This study provides important additional data on the uptake and experience of clients, with relevance for policy makers, health service planners, administrators, and practitioners.

FUNDING

Indivior.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03809143.

Differential impacts of COVID-19 across racial-ethnic identities in persons with opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated health disparities, particularly among at-risk people with opioid use disorder (OUD). We sought to characterize the direct and indirect impacts of COVID-19 on this group to understand how the pandemic has affected this group, this group's public health response to COVID-19, and whether there were differences by race/ethnicity.

METHODS

This study recruited its sample from a drug treatment setting in the northeast region of the United States. We surveyed 110 individuals on methadone as treatment for OUD and assessed COVID-19-related impacts on their health behaviors and other indices of social, physical, and mental well-being, including sexual health behaviors, substance use, mental health status, health care access, income, and employment.

RESULTS

Our findings highlight overall increases in depression, anxiety, loneliness, and frustration among the sample of people with OUD; the study also observed decreases in financial stability. Significant differences between groups indicated a greater financial burden among racial-ethnic minorities; this subgroup also reported greater direct adverse effects of COVID-19, including being more concerned about contracting COVID-19, not being able to get a COVID-19 test, and knowing someone who had died from COVID-19. A greater proportion of Whites indicated increases in alcohol consumption and non-prescription drug use than did racial-ethnic minorities.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment providers must be vigilant in managing direct and indirect outcomes of COVID-19 among people with OUD. Findings highlight the need to develop culturally competent, differentiated interventions in partnership with community-based organizations to meet the unique challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic presents for people in treatment for OUD.

Real-world evidence for a prescription digital therapeutic to treat opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate patient engagement and usage of a prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) and associated outcomes of opioid use and treatment retention in a large real-world dataset of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) treated with buprenorphine medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). PDTs are software-based disease treatments evaluated for safety and effectiveness in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat disease with approved directions for use (label).

METHODS

A real-world observational evaluation of an all-comer population of patients who redeemed a 12-week prescription for the reSET-O PDT. Engagement and therapeutic use data were collected and analysed on a population level. Substance use was evaluated as a composite of self-reports recorded with reSET-O and urine drug screens (UDS).

RESULTS

Data from 3144 individuals with OUD were evaluated. 45.5% were between ages 30 and 39 years. 80% completed at least 8 of the 67 possible therapeutic modules, 66% completed half of all modules, and 49% completed all modules. Abstinence during the last 4 weeks of treatment was calculated with two imputation methodologies: 66% abstinent using "missing data excluded (patients with no data as positive)", and 91% abstinent with "missing data removed (patients with no data excluded)". 91% of patients met the responder definition of ≥80% of self-report or UDS negative. 74.2% of patients were retained through the last 4 weeks of treatment. Subgroup analysis of patients using reSET-O appropriately (4 or more modules per week for the first 4 weeks) showed 88.1% abstinence using "missing data excluded (patients with no data as positive)", and retention at weeks 9-12 of 85.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Results demonstrate that reSET-O is readily and broadly used by patients with OUD and that high real-world engagement with the therapeutic is positively associated with abstinence and retention in treatment. ReSET-O is a potentially valuable adjunct to buprenorphine MOUD therapy for patients with OUD.

Addiction Recovery Among Opioid-Dependent Patients Treated With Injectable Subcutaneous Depot Buprenorphine: Study Protocol of a Non-randomized Prospective Observational Study (ARIDE)

Introduction: Once-weekly or once-monthly injectable depot buprenorphine is a new opioid substitution treatment (OST) medication that provides clinically relevant plasma concentrations without daily peaks. Together with a high tolerability and acceptance reported by patients, the prolonged release of injectable depot buprenorphine might have beneficial implications on the patients' quality of life and social participation. The primary objective of this prospective non-interventional observational study is to evaluate the effects of subcutaneous injectable depot buprenorphine on the quality of life of patients in routine OST care in Germany. Secondary outcomes like illicit substance use, psychological distress, social participation and activity are assessed to provide an overall evaluation toward addiction recovery. Methods and Analysis: The present study is a non-randomized prospective observational study with a control group (treatment-as-usual). To ensure comparability between both patient groups, suitable control patients (n = 213) from the same OST unit will be matched pairwise to each patient treated with injectable depot buprenorphine (n = 213). Matching variables are gender, duration of OST, take-home prescription and psychosocial functioning (according to the Global Assessment of Functioning scale). Primary study endpoint is the difference of change in quality of life, assessed with the recently developed Opioid Substitution Treatment Quality of Life scale (OSTQOL), within the depot buprenorphine group between baseline and month 12. The primary analysis will be carried out according to the intention-to-treat principle (ITT) by comparing OSTQOL mean scores using dependent t-tests. For secondary analyses, group comparisons will be done by mixed model approaches with baseline OSTQOL score and the (pairwise) cluster term as covariates. Discussion: The study combines clinical, routine OST care data with relevant patient reported outcome data. The pairwise matching allows conclusions on effects of different OST medications. The study findings will provide new insights in the addiction recovery processes of OST patients treated with depot buprenorphine. Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hamburg Chamber of Physicians (Ärztekammer Hamburg) (reference number: PV7078). The study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations on scientific conferences. Clinical Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS-ID: DRKS00020797.