Neurocognitive indicators predict results of an informed-consent quiz among substance-dependent treatment seekers entering a randomized clinical trial

Extended-release vs. oral naltrexone for alcohol dependence treatment in primary care (XON)

BACKGROUND

Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX, Vivitrol®) and daily oral naltrexone tablets (O-NTX) are FDA-approved mu opioid receptor antagonist medications for alcohol dependence treatment. Despite the efficacy of O-NTX, non-adherence and poor treatment retention have limited its adoption into primary care. XR-NTX is a once-a-month injectable formulation that offers a potentially more effective treatment option in reducing alcohol consumption and heavy drinking episodes among persons with alcohol use disorders.

METHODS

This pragmatic, open-label, randomized controlled trial examines the effectiveness of XR-NTX vs. O-NTX in producing a Good Clinical Outcome, defined as abstinence or moderate drinking (<2 drinks/day, men; <1 drink/day, women; and < 2 heavy drinking occasions/month) during the final 20 of 24 weeks of primary care-based Medical Management treatment for alcohol dependence. Secondary aims will estimate the cost effectiveness of XR-NTX vs. O-NTX, in conjunction with primary-care based Medical Management for both groups, and patient-level characteristics associated with effectiveness in both arms. Alcohol dependent persons are recruited from the community into treatment in a New York City public hospital primary care setting (Bellevue Hospital Center) for 24 weeks of either XR-NTX (n = 117) or O-NTX (n = 120).

RESULTS

We describe the rationale, specific aims, design, and recruitment results to date. Alternative design considerations and secondary aims and outcomes are reported.

CONCLUSIONS

XR-NTX treatment in a primary care setting is potentially more efficacious, feasible, and cost-effective than oral naltrexone when treating community-dwelling persons with alcohol use disorders. This study will estimate XR-NTX's treatment and cost effectiveness relative to oral naltrexone.

Assessing informed consent in an opioid relapse prevention study with adults under current or recent criminal justice supervision

Concerns persist that individuals with substance use disorders who are under community criminal justice supervision experience circumstances that might compromise their provision of valid, informed consent for research participation. These concerns include the possibilities that desire to obtain access to treatment might lead individuals to ignore important information about research participation, including information about risks, or that cognitive impairment associated with substance use might interfere with attending to important information. We report results from a consent quiz (CQ) administered in a multisite randomized clinical trial of long-acting naltrexone to prevent relapse to opioid use disorder among adults under community criminal justice supervision-a treatment option difficult to access by this population of individuals. Participants were required to answer all 11 items correctly before randomization. On average, participants answered 9.8 items correctly (89%) at baseline first attempt (n=306). At week 21 (n=212), participants scored 87% (9.5 items correct) without review. Performance was equivalent to, or better than, published results from other populations on a basic consent quiz instrument across multiple content domains. The consent quiz is an efficient method to screen for adequate knowledge of consent information as part of the informed consent process. Clinical researchers who are concerned about these issues should consider using a consent quiz with corrected feedback to enhance the informed consent process. Overall, while primarily useful as an educational tool, employing a CQ as part of the gateway to participation in research may be particularly important as the field continues to advance and tests novel experimental treatments with significant risks and uncertain potential for benefit.

Informed Assent Recall Among Adolescents in Substance Use Disorder Treatment Research

Evidence suggests that vulnerable populations such as substance users, those involved in the criminal justice system, and those with cognitive deficits often fail to recall information regarding the informed assent process. This study investigated correlates of assent quiz errors (AQE) among adolescents enrolling in a substance use disorder treatment study.

METHOD

Adolescents (age 13-19) entering substance use treatment completed a standard informed consent procedure to participate in a longitudinal research study, followed by a brief 6-item assent quiz.

RESULTS

Informed assent quiz errors were lower in this study relative to those observed in the adult literature. Being male and having lower treatment resistance was associated with making an AQE. Both days of marijuana use and days spent in the criminal justice system were associated with AQE. Hyperactivity-impulsivity approached significance (p = .057) but was not a correlate of AQE.

CONCLUSION

Those collecting assent should be aware that heavily-using males involved in the criminal justice system are prone to make more errors, and should use procedures such as assent quizzes to enhance their understanding of study procedures. Future research should investigate the impact of motivation and consider using experimental designs to test adolescent recall of study procedures under various assenting conditions.

Extended-release naltrexone opioid treatment at jail reentry (XOR)

BACKGROUND

Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is an injectable monthly sustained-release mu opioid receptor antagonist, which blocks the typical effects of heroin and other opioid agonists. Use of XR-NTX among opioid dependent persons leaving jails and prisons is increasing despite scant high-quality evidence regarding XR-NTX's effectiveness at re-entry.

METHODS

This 24-week, open-label randomized controlled trial examines the effectiveness of XR-NTX as opioid relapse prevention at release from jail (N=85) compared to enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU, N=85). A third, non-randomized, quasi-experimental naturalistic arm of participants who have newly initiated a jail-to-community methadone treatment program (MTP, N=85) allows for comparisons to a methadone standard-of-care.

RESULTS

We describe the rationale, design, and primary and secondary outcomes of the study. The primary outcome is an opioid relapse event; the primary contrast is a time-to-relapse comparison of XR-NTX and ETAU over a 24-week treatment phase. Secondary outcomes are rates of: (a) post-release opioid treatment participation, (b) opioid, alcohol, and cocaine use, (c) injection drug use and HIV sexual risk behaviors, (d) overdose (fatal and non-fatal) and all-cause mortality, and, (e) re-incarceration.

CONCLUSIONS

XR-NTX is a potentially important, effective treatment and relapse prevention option for a large US population of persons with opioid use disorders leaving jails. This study will estimate XR-NTX's effectiveness relative to existing standards of care, including counseling-only treatment-as-usual and methadone maintenance.

Adolescents with substance use disorder and assent/consent: Empirical data on understanding biobank risks in genomic research

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed whether a customized disclosure form increases understanding for adolescents with substance use disorder (SUD) when compared to a standard disclosure for genomic addiction research.

METHOD

We gathered empirical data from adolescents with SUD, family members, former patients followed since adolescence, and community counterparts. The study was conducted in four stages. Stage 1: national experts (n=32) identified current, future, speculative risks of broadly shared biobanks. Stage 2 assessed participants' (n=181) understanding of current risks as a prerequisite for rating saliency of risks via a Visual Analog Scale. Salient risks were incorporated into a customized disclosure form. Stage 3 compared the understanding of customized disclosure by participants (n=165) at baseline; all groups scored comparably. Stage 4 conducted a direct comparison of the standard disclosure to standard disclosure plus customized disclosure (n=195). Independent t-tests compared understanding in those receiving the standard disclosure to standard disclosure plus customized disclosure within 6 groups.

RESULTS

The customized disclosure significantly improved understanding in adolescent patients (p=0.002) and parents of patients (p=0.006) to the level of their counterparts. The customized disclosure also significantly improved understanding in siblings of former patients (p=0.034). Understanding of standard disclosure in patients versus controls was significantly different (p=0.005). The groups receiving the customized disclosure scored significantly higher. Understanding of the standard disclosure plus customized disclosure in patients versus controls was not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Adolescents with addictions understand the risks of participating in genomic addiction research as well as their community counterparts when information provided is salient to them.

Decision-making capacity for research participation among addicted people: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Informed consent is a key element of ethical clinical research. Addicted population may be at risk for impaired consent capacity. However, very little research has focused on their comprehension of consent forms. The aim of this study is to assess the capacity of addicted individuals to provide consent to research.

METHODS

53 subjects with DSM-5 diagnoses of a Substance Use Disorder (SUD) and 50 non psychiatric comparison subjects (NPCs) participated in the survey from December 2014 to March 2015. This cross-sectional study was carried out at a community-based Outpatient Treatment Center and at an urban-located Health Centre in Spain. A binary judgment of capacity/incapacity was made guided by the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR) and a clinical interview. Demographics and clinical characteristics were assessed by cases notes and the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Global Assessment Functional Scale and the Clinical Global Impression Scale.

RESULTS

NPCs performed the best on the MacCAT-CR, and patients with SUD had the worst performance, particularly on the Understanding and Appreciation subscales. 32.7% SUD people lacked research-related decisional capacity. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of capacity to consent to research.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of our study provide evidence that a large proportion of individuals with SUD had decisional capacity for consent to research. It is therefore inappropriate to draw conclusions about capacity to make research decisions on the basis of a SUD diagnosis. In the absence of advanced cognitive impairment, acute withdrawal or intoxication, we should assume that addicted persons possess decision-making capacity. Thus, the view that people with SUD would ipso facto lose decision-making power for research consent is flawed and stigmatizing.