Cost-Effectiveness of Buprenorphine-Naloxone Versus Extended-Release Naltrexone to Prevent Opioid Relapse

The Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Study: Methods and Initial Outcomes From an 18-Month Study of Patients in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Opioid use disorder (OUD) affects approximately 5.6 million people in the United States annually, yet rates of the use of effective medication for OUD (MOUD) treatment are low. We conducted an observational cohort study from August 2017 through May 2021, the MOUD Study, to better understand treatment engagement and factors that may influence treatment experiences and outcomes. In this article, we describe the study design, data collected, and treatment outcomes.

METHODS

We recruited adult patients receiving OUD treatment at US outpatient facilities for the MOUD Study. We collected patient-level data at 5 time points (baseline to 18 months) via self-administered questionnaires and health record data. We collected facility-level data via questionnaires administered to facility directors at 2 time points. Across 16 states, 62 OUD treatment facilities participated, and 1974 patients enrolled in the study. We summarized descriptive data on the characteristics of patients and OUD treatment facilities and selected treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

Approximately half of the 62 facilities were private, nonprofit organizations; 62% focused primarily on substance use treatment; and 20% also offered mental health services. Most participants were receiving methadone (61%) or buprenorphine (32%) and were predominately non-Hispanic White (68%), aged 25-44 years (62%), and female (54%). Compared with patient-reported estimates at baseline, 18-month estimates suggested that rates of abstinence increased (55% to 77%), and rates of opioid-related overdoses (7% to 2%), emergency department visits (9% to 4%), and arrests (15% to 7%) decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated the benefits of treatment retention not only on abstinence from opioid use but also on other quality-of-life metrics, with data collected during an extended period. The MOUD Study produced rich, multilevel data that can lay the foundation for an evidence base to inform OUD treatment and support improvement of care and patient outcomes.

Informing evidence-based medicine for opioid use disorder using pharmacoeconomic studies

INTRODUCTION

The health and economic consequences of inadequately treated opioid use disorder (OUD) are substantial. Healthcare systems in the United States (US) and other countries are facing a growing healthcare crisis due to opioids. Although effective medications for OUD exist, relying solely on clinical information is insufficient for addressing the opioid crisis.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the role of pharmacoeconomic studies in informing evidence-based medication treatment for OUD is discussed, with a particular emphasis on the US healthcare system, where the economic burden is significantly higher than the global average. The scope/objective of pharmacoeconomics as a distinct scientific research program is briefly defined, followed by a discussion of existing evidence informed by data from systematic reviews, in addition to a convenience sample of recently published pharmacoeconomic studies and protocols. The review also explores the need for methodological advancements in the field.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the potential of pharmacoeconomic research in shaping evidence-based medicine for OUD, significant challenges limiting its real-world application remain. How to address these challenges are explored, including how to combine cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses to address the needs of the healthcare system as a whole and specific stakeholders interested in adopting new OUD treatment strategies.

Reducing overdose deaths among persons with opioid use disorder in connecticut

BACKGROUND

People in Connecticut are now more likely to die of a drug-related overdose than a traffic accident. While Connecticut has had some success in slowing the rise in overdose death rates, substantial additional progress is necessary.

METHODS

We developed, verified, and calibrated a mechanistic simulation of alternative overdose prevention policy options, including scaling up naloxone (NLX) distribution in the community and medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) among people who are incarcerated (MOUD-INC) and in the community (MOUD-COM) in a simulated cohort of people with OUD in Connecticut. We estimated how maximally scaling up each option individually and in combinations would impact 5-year overdose deaths, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-years. All costs were assessed in 2021 USD, employing a health sector perspective in base-case analyses and a societal perspective in sensitivity analyses, using a 3% discount rate and 5-year and lifetime time horizons.

RESULTS

Maximally scaling NLX alone reduces overdose deaths 20% in the next 5 years at a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER); if injectable rather than intranasal NLX was distributed, 240 additional overdose deaths could be prevented. Maximally scaling MOUD-COM and MOUD-INC alone reduce overdose deaths by 14% and 6% respectively at favorable ICERS. Considering all permutations of scaling up policies, scaling NLX and MOUD-COM together is the cost-effective choice, reducing overdose deaths 32% at ICER $19,000/QALY. In sensitivity analyses using a societal perspective, all policy options were cost saving and overdose deaths reduced 33% over 5 years while saving society $338,000 per capita over the simulated cohort lifetime.

CONCLUSIONS

Maximally scaling access to naloxone and MOUD in the community can reduce 5-year overdose deaths by 32% among people with OUD in Connecticut under realistic budget scenarios. If societal cost savings due to increased productivity and reduced crime costs are considered, one-third of overdose deaths can be reduced by maximally scaling all three policy options, while saving money.

Out-of-pocket spending and health care utilization associated with initiation of different medications for opioid use disorder: Findings from a national commercially insured cohort

INTRODUCTION

Buprenorphine and naltrexone are effective medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Naltrexone requires complete detoxification from opioids before initiation while buprenorphine does not, which leads to a differential clinical induction challenge. Few studies have evaluated economic costs associated with MOUD initiation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using the 2014-2019 Merative MarketScan database. We included individuals diagnosed with opioid use, abuse, or dependence from 2014 to 2019 who initiated one of three MOUD types: 1) buprenorphine, 2) extended-release naltrexone, or 3) oral naltrexone. We calculated total and monthly out-of-pocket spending, for overall and MOUD-specific claims, for the three months prior through three months after MOUD initiation. We also calculated utilization of detoxification, inpatient, and outpatient services monthly over this period.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 27,133 individuals; 19,536, 1886, and 5711 initiated buprenorphine, extended-release naltrexone, and oral naltrexone, respectively. Individuals who initiated naltrexone had the highest out-of-pocket spending over the study period. MOUD-specific spending did not contribute substantially to total out-of-pocket spending. Difference in overall spending by MOUD type was driven by a subset of individuals who initiated naltrexone and had very high out-of-pocket spending in the month prior to MOUD initiation. In this month, mean monthly out-of-pocket spending for high-spenders (above 90th percentile within MOUD type category) was $5734 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: $5181-$6286) and $4622 (95 % CI: $4161-$5082) for those who initiated oral and extended-release naltrexone, respectively, compared with $1852 (95 % CI: $1754-$1950) for those who initiated buprenorphine. In the month prior to MOUD initiation, those who initiated naltrexone also had higher detoxification, inpatient, and outpatient episode/visit frequency. In the month prior to initiation, 28.8 % (95 % CI: 27.7 %-30.0 %) and 25.5 % (95 % CI: 23.6 %-27.5 %) of individuals who initiated oral and extended-release naltrexone had detoxification episodes, compared with 9.7 % (95 % CI: 9.3 %-10.1 %) of those who initiated buprenorphine.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that individuals who initiated naltrexone utilized more intensive health services, including detoxification, in the period prior to MOUD initiation, resulting in significantly higher out-of-pocket spending. Out-of-pocket spending is a patient-centered outcome reflecting potential patient burden. Our results should be considered as part of the shared decision-making process between patients and providers when choosing treatment for OUD.

Barriers and Best Practices on the Management of Opioid Use Disorder

Opioids refer to chemicals that agonize opioid receptors in the body resulting in analgesia and sometimes, euphoria. Opiates include morphine and codeine; semi-synthetic opioids include heroin, hydrocodone, oxycodone, and buprenorphine; and fully synthetic opioids include tramadol, fentanyl and methadone. In 2021, an estimated 5.6 million individuals met criteria for opioid use disorder. This article provides an overview of the pharmacology of heroin and non-prescription fentanyl (NPF) and its synthetic analogues, and summarizes the literature related to the management of opioid use disorder, overdose, and withdrawal. This is followed by a description of barriers to treatment and best practices for management with a discussion on recent updates and their potential impact on this patient population. This is followed by a description of barriers to treatment and best practices for management with a discussion on recent updates and their potential impact on this patient population.

The cost-effectiveness of collegiate recovery programs

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a preliminary cost-effectiveness analysis of collegiate recovery programs in the United States and to create a tailorable cost-effectiveness calculator based on the preliminary cost-effectiveness model.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness was assessed with a base case, one-way sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses for the societal and health systems (institutions of higher education) perspectives, comparing CRPs to treatment as usual. Models were estimated using secondary data sources. A cost-effectiveness calculator was constructed using the models developed for the cost-effectiveness analysis.

RESULTS

CRPs were found to be cost-effective across all models. Institutional and societal models were robust to changes in parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

CRPs are a cost-effective intervention and are cost-saving under certain conditions. A free online calculator developed form this analysis is available to estimate program-specific cost-effectiveness.

Impact of Medication-Based Treatment on Health Care Utilization Among Individuals With Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the association between medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and health care utilization over time among a sample of treatment-seeking individuals with opioid use disorder. In contrast to previous studies, this study used a novel measure of MOUD adherence, more comprehensive utilization data, and analyses that controlled for detailed individual and social determinants of health.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of a comparative effectiveness trial (N=570) of extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine-naloxone. The outcome of interest was usage of nonstudy acute care, inpatient and outpatient addiction services, and other outpatient services across 36 weeks of assessment. Adherence (percentage of days taking MOUD) was defined as low (<20%), medium (≥20% but <80%), or high (≥80%). A two-part model evaluated the probability of utilizing a resource and the quantity (utilization days) of the resource consumed. A time-varying approach was used to examine the effect of adherence in a given month on utilization in the same month, with analyses controlling for a wide range of person-level characteristics.

RESULTS

Participants with high adherence (vs. low) were significantly less likely to use inpatient addiction (p<0.001) and acute care (p<0.001) services and significantly more likely to engage in outpatient addiction (p=0.045) and other outpatient (p=0.042) services.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings reinforce the understanding that greater MOUD adherence is associated with reduced usage of high-cost health services and increased usage of outpatient care. The results further suggest the need for enhanced access to MOUD and for interventions that improve adherence.

Economic Evaluation Design within the HEAL Prevention Cooperative

The rapid rise in opioid misuse, disorder, and opioid-involved deaths among older adolescents and young adults is an urgent public health problem. Prevention is a vital part of the nation's response to the opioid crisis, yet preventive interventions for those at risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder are scarce. In 2019, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched the Preventing Opioid Use Disorder in Older Adolescents and Young Adults cooperative as part of its broader Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) Initiative ( https://heal.nih.gov/ ). The HEAL Prevention Cooperative (HPC) includes ten research projects funded with the goal of developing effective prevention interventions across various settings (e.g., community, health care, juvenile justice, school) for older adolescent and young adults at risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD). An important component of the HPC is the inclusion of an economic evaluation by nine of these research projects that will provide information on the costs, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of these interventions. The HPC economic evaluation is integrated into each research project's overall design with start-up costs and ongoing delivery costs collected prospectively using an activity-based costing approach. The primary objectives of the economic evaluation are to estimate the intervention implementation costs to providers, estimate the cost-effectiveness of each intervention for reducing opioid misuse initiation and escalation among youth, and use simulation modeling to estimate the budget impact of broader implementation of the interventions within the various settings over multiple years. The HPC offers an extraordinary opportunity to generate economic evidence for substance use prevention programming, providing policy makers and providers with critical information on the investments needed to start-up prevention interventions, as well as the cost-effectiveness of these interventions relative to alternatives. These data will help demonstrate the valuable role that prevention can play in combating the opioid crisis.

Economic Evaluation of Extended-Release Buprenorphine for Persons With Opioid Use Disorder

Importance

In 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a monthly injectable form of buprenorphine, extended-release buprenorphine; published data show that extended-release buprenorphine is effective compared with no treatment, but its current cost is higher and current retention is lower than that of transmucosal buprenorphine. Preliminary research suggests that extended-release buprenorphine may be an important addition to treatment options, but the cost-effectiveness of extended-release buprenorphine compared with transmucosal buprenorphine remains unclear.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of extended-release buprenorphine compared with transmucosal buprenorphine.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation used a state transition model starting in 2019 to simulate the lifetime of a closed cohort of individuals with OUD presenting for evaluation for opioid agonist treatment with buprenorphine. The data sources used to estimate model parameters included cohort studies, clinical trials, and administrative data. The model relied on pharmaceutical costs from the Federal Supply Schedule and health care utilization costs from published studies. Data were analyzed from September 2021 to January 2023.

Interventions

No treatment, treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine, or treatment with extended-release buprenorphine.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mean lifetime costs per person, discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results

The simulated cohort included 100 000 patients with OUD receiving (61% male; mean [SD] age, 38 [11] years) or not receiving medication treatment (58% male, mean [SD] age, 48 [18] years). Compared with no medication treatment, treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine yielded an ICER of $19 740 per QALY. Compared with treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine, treatment with extended-release buprenorphine yielded lower effectiveness by 0.03 QALYs per person at higher cost, suggesting that treatment with extended-release buprenorphine was dominated and not preferred. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine was the preferred strategy 60% of the time. Treatment with extended-release buprenorphine was cost-effective compared with treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine at a $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold only after substantial changes in key parameters.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this economic evaluation of extended-release buprenorphine compared with transmucosal buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD, extended-release buprenorphine was not associated with efficient allocation of limited resources when transmucosal buprenorphine was available. Future initiatives should aim to improve retention rates or decrease costs associated with extended-release buprenorphine.

Cost-effectiveness of Increasing Buprenorphine Treatment Initiation, Duration, and Capacity Among Individuals Who Use Opioids

Importance

Buprenorphine is an effective and cost-effective medication to treat opioid use disorder (OUD), but is not readily available to many people with OUD in the US. The current cost-effectiveness literature does not consider interventions that concurrently increase buprenorphine initiation, duration, and capacity.

Objective

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis and compare interventions associated with increased buprenorphine treatment initiation, duration, and capacity.

Design and Setting

This study modeled the effects of 5 interventions individually and in combination using SOURCE, a recent system dynamics model of prescription opioid and illicit opioid use, treatment, and remission, calibrated to US data from 1999 to 2020. The analysis was run during a 12-year time horizon from 2021 to 2032, with lifetime follow-up. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis on intervention effectiveness and costs was conducted. Analyses were performed from April 2021 through March 2023. Modeled participants included people with opioid misuse and OUD in the US.

Interventions

Interventions included emergency department buprenorphine initiation, contingency management, psychotherapy, telehealth, and expansion of hub-and-spoke narcotic treatment programs, individually and in combination.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Total national opioid overdose deaths, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, and costs from the societal and health care perspective.

Results

Projections showed that contingency management expansion would avert 3530 opioid overdose deaths over 12 years, more than any other single-intervention strategy. Interventions that increased buprenorphine treatment duration initially were associated with an increased number of opioid overdose deaths in the absence of expanded treatment capacity. With an incremental cost- effectiveness ratio of $19 381 per QALY gained (2021 USD), the strategy that expanded contingency management, hub-and-spoke training, emergency department initiation, and telehealth was the preferred strategy for any willingness-to-pay threshold from $20 000 to $200 000/QALY gained, as it was associated with increased treatment duration and capacity simultaneously.

Conclusion and Relevance

This modeling analysis simulated the effects of implementing several intervention strategies across the buprenorphine cascade of care and found that strategies that were concurrently associated with increased buprenorphine treatment initiation, duration, and capacity were cost-effective.

Estimated Clinical Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness Associated With Provision of Addiction Treatment in US Primary Care Clinics

Importance

US primary care practitioners (PCPs) are the largest clinical workforce, but few provide addiction care. Primary care is a practical place to expand addiction services, including buprenorphine and harm reduction kits, yet the clinical outcomes and health care sector costs are unknown.

Objective

To estimate the long-term clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of integrated buprenorphine and harm reduction kits in primary care for people who inject opioids.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this modeling study, the Reducing Infections Related to Drug Use Cost-Effectiveness (REDUCE) microsimulation model, which tracks serious injection-related infections, overdose, hospitalization, and death, was used to examine the following treatment strategies: (1) PCP services with external referral to addiction care (status quo), (2) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing with referral to offsite harm reduction kits (BUP), and (3) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing and harm reduction kits (BUP plus HR). Model inputs were derived from clinical trials and observational cohorts, and costs were discounted annually at 3%. The cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a lifetime from the modified health care sector perspective, and sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty. Model simulation began January 1, 2021, and ran for the entire lifetime of the cohort.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Life-years (LYs), hospitalizations, mortality from sequelae (overdose, severe skin and soft tissue infections, and endocarditis), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results

The simulated cohort included 2.25 million people and reflected the age and gender of US persons who inject opioids. Status quo resulted in 6.56 discounted LYs at a discounted cost of $203 500 per person (95% credible interval, $203 000-$222 000). Each strategy extended discounted life expectancy: BUP by 0.16 years and BUP plus HR by 0.17 years. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR reduced sequelae-related mortality by 33%. The mean discounted lifetime cost per person of BUP and BUP plus HR were more than that of the status quo strategy. The dominating strategy was BUP plus HR. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR was cost-effective (ICER, $34 400 per LY). During a 5-year time horizon, BUP plus HR cost an individual PCP practice approximately $13 000.

Conclusions and Relevance

This modeling study of integrated addiction service in primary care found improved clinical outcomes and modestly increased costs. The integration of addiction service into primary care practices should be a health care system priority.

Critical access medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment facilities in the continental United States

Research objective

Medication opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment is the first-line approach to the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). This analysis seeks to identify "critical access" MOUD facilities that ensure geographic access for MOUD patients. Using public-source data and spatial analysis, we identify the top 100 "critical access" MOUD units across the continental U.S.

Study design

We use locational data from SAMHSA's Behavioral Health Treatment Services Locator and DATA 2000 waiver buprenorphine providers. We identify the closest MOUDs to each ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA)'s geographic centroid. We then construct a difference-in-distance metric by computing the difference in this distance measure between closest and second-closest MOUD, multiplied by ZCTA population, ranking MOUDs by difference-distance scores.

Population studied

All listed MOUD treatment facilities and all listed ZCTA's across the continental U.S., and all listed MOUD providers proximate to these areas.

Principal findings

We identified the top 100 critical access MOUD units in the continental United States. Many critical providers were in rural areas in the central United States, as well as a band extending east from Texas to Georgia. Twenty-three of the top 100 critical access providers were identified as providing naltrexone. Seventy-seven were identified as providing buprenorphine. Three were identified as providing methadone.

Conclusions

Significant areas of the United States are dependent on a single critical access MOUD provider.

Implications for policy or practice

Place-based supports may be warranted to support MOUD treatment access in areas dependent upon critical access providers.

Econometric Issues in Prospective Economic Evaluations Alongside Clinical Trials: Combining the Nonparametric Bootstrap With Methods That Address Missing Data

Prospective economic evaluations conducted alongside clinical trials have become an increasingly popular approach in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a public health initiative or treatment intervention. These types of economic studies provide improved internal validity and accuracy of cost and effectiveness estimates of health interventions and, compared with simulation or decision-analytic models, have the advantage of jointly observing health and economics outcomes of trial participants. However, missing data due to incomplete response or patient attrition, and sampling uncertainty are common concerns in econometric analysis of clinical trials. Missing data are a particular problem for comparative effectiveness trials of substance use disorder interventions. Multiple imputation and inverse probability weighting are 2 widely recommended methods to address missing data bias, and the nonparametric bootstrap is recommended to address uncertainty in predicted mean cost and effectiveness between trial interventions. Although these methods have been studied extensively by themselves, little is known about how to appropriately combine them and about the potential pitfalls and advantages of different approaches. We provide a review of statistical methods used in 29 economic evaluations of substance use disorder intervention identified from 4 published systematic reviews and a targeted search of the literature. We evaluate how each study addressed missing data bias, whether the recommended nonparametric bootstrap was used, how these 2 methods were combined, and conclude with recommendations for future research.

Cost-effectiveness of extended-release injectable naltrexone among incarcerated persons with opioid use disorder before release from prison versus after release

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly prevalent among incarcerated populations, and the risk of fatal overdose following release from prison is substantial. Despite efficacy, few correctional facilities provide evidence-based addiction treatment. Extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX) administered prior to release from incarceration may improve health and economic outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of XR-NTX before release from prison (n = 38) vs. XR-NTX referral after release (n = 48) of incarcerated participants with OUD, both groups continuing treatment at a community addiction treatment center. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) assessed the cost-effectiveness of XR-NTX before release compared to referral after release for three stakeholder perspectives at 12- and 24-week periods: state policymaker, health care sector, and societal. Effectiveness measures included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and abstinent years from opioids. In addition, we categorized resources as OUD-related and non-OUD-related medical care, state transfer payments, and other societal costs (productivity, criminal justice resources, etc.).

RESULTS

Results showed an association between XR-NTX and greater OUD-related costs and total costs from the state policymaker perspective. QALYs gained were positive but statistically insignificant between arms; however, results showed XR-NTX had an estimated 15.5 more days of opioid abstinence over 24 weeks and statistically significant at a 95 % confidence level based on the distribution of bootstrapped samples. We found that estimated ICERs to be > $500,000 per QALY for all stakeholder perspectives. For the abstinent-year effectiveness measure, we found XR-NTX before release to be cost-effective at a 95 % confidence level for willingness-to-pay values >$49,000 per abstinent-year, across all perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

XR-NTX administered to persons who are incarcerated with OUD before release may provide value for stakeholders and bridge a well-known treatment gap for this vulnerable population. Lower than expected participant engagement and missing data limit our results, and study outcomes may be sensitive to methods that address missing data if replicated.

Modeling the cost-effectiveness and impact on fatal overdose and initiation of buprenorphine-naloxone treatment at syringe service programs

AIM

To estimate the number of treatment initiations, averted fatal opioid overdoses and the cost-effectiveness associated with offering buprenorphine-naloxone (buprenorphine) treatment on-site within existing syringe service programs (SSPs) in Massachusetts, USA.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a cohort-based mathematical model and cost-effectiveness analysis. We derived model inputs from state and national surveillance data, clinical trials and observational cohort studies. We compared an intervention scenario where 30% of SSP clients initiated buprenorphine treatment on-site at least once annually to a status quo scenario where no buprenorphine was available on-site among community treatment providers in Massachusetts, 2020-30. In individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) we assumed that 80% of SSP clients had recently injected drugs and that treatment within SSPs would have similar or improved retention compared with standard-of-care buprenorphine programs, but higher rates of active opioid use while in treatment.

MEASUREMENTS

Number of treatment initiations (i.e. individuals began treatment on a medication for opioid use disorder or entered medically managed withdrawal), averted fatal opioid overdoses, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and life-time discounted costs from a health sector and a limited societal perspective.

FINDINGS

The status quo scenario resulted in 23 051 fatal overdoses and 1 511 613 treatment initiations over a 10-year simulation period. An intervention scenario with on-site SSP buprenorphine treatment averted 4797 (-20.8%) fatal opioid overdoses and resulted in 129 359 (+8.6%) additional treatment initiations compared with the status quo. The intervention scenario was the dominating scenario: providing OUD treatment through Massachusetts SSPs cost less (-$3612 per person) with patients accumulating more QALYs (0.2 per person) compared with the status quo scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

Offering buprenorphine treatment on-site within syringe service programs has the potential to decrease fatal overdoses substantially, improve treatment engagement and save on costs.

Opioid agonist treatment for people who are dependent on pharmaceutical opioids

BACKGROUND

There are ongoing concerns regarding pharmaceutical opioid-related harms, including overdose and dependence, with an associated increase in treatment demand. People dependent on pharmaceutical opioids appear to differ in important ways from people who use heroin, yet most opioid agonist treatment research has been conducted in people who use heroin.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of maintenance opioid agonist pharmacotherapy for the treatment of pharmaceutical opioid dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to January 2022: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, four other databases, and two trial registers. We checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs with adults and adolescents examining maintenance opioid agonist treatments that made the following two comparisons. 1. Full opioid agonists (methadone, morphine, oxycodone, levo-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM), or codeine) versus different full opioid agonists or partial opioid agonists (buprenorphine) for maintenance treatment. 2. Full or partial opioid agonist maintenance versus non-opioid agonist treatments (detoxification, opioid antagonist, or psychological treatment without opioid agonist treatment).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight RCTs that met inclusion criteria (709 participants). We found four studies that compared methadone and buprenorphine maintenance treatment, and four studies that compared buprenorphine maintenance to either buprenorphine taper (in addition to psychological treatment) or a non-opioid maintenance treatment comparison. We found low-certainty evidence from three studies of a difference between methadone and buprenorphine in favour of methadone on self-reported opioid use at end of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.86; 165 participants), and low-certainty evidence from four studies finding a difference in favour of methadone for retention in treatment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43; 379 participants). We found low-certainty evidence from three studies showing no difference between methadone and buprenorphine on substance use measured with urine drug screens at end of treatment (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.17; 206 participants), and moderate-certainty evidence from one study of no difference in days of self-reported opioid use (mean difference 1.41 days, 95% CI 3.37 lower to 0.55 days higher; 129 participants). There was low-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference between methadone and buprenorphine on adverse events (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.93; 206 participants). We found low-certainty evidence from four studies favouring maintenance buprenorphine treatment over non-opioid treatments in terms of fewer opioid positive urine drug tests at end of treatment (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.84; 270 participants), and very low-certainty evidence from four studies finding no difference on self-reported opioid use in the past 30 days at end of treatment (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.01; 276 participants). There was low-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference in the number of days of unsanctioned opioid use (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.09; 205 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence from four studies favouring buprenorphine maintenance over non-opioid treatments on retention in treatment (RR 3.02, 95% CI 1.73 to 5.27; 333 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference in adverse effects between buprenorphine maintenance and non-opioid treatments (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.48; 252 participants). The main weaknesses in the quality of the data was the use of open-label study designs, and difference in follow-up rates between treatment arms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is  very low- to moderate-certainty evidence supporting the use of maintenance agonist pharmacotherapy for pharmaceutical opioid dependence. Methadone or buprenorphine did not differ on some outcomes, although on the outcomes of retention and self-reported substance use some results favoured methadone. Maintenance treatment with buprenorphine appears more effective than non-opioid treatments. Due to the overall very low- to moderate-certainty evidence and small sample sizes, there is the possibility that the further research may change these findings.

Population-level impact of initiating pharmacotherapy and linking to care people with opioid use disorder at inpatient medically managed withdrawal programs: an effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are shown to reduce opioid use and the risk of overdose. People with opioid use disorder (OUD) who exit inpatient medically managed withdrawal programs (detox) without initiating MOUD and linking to outpatient care have high rates of overdose. While detox encounters provide a theoretical opportunity for MOUD initiation, this is not ubiquitous in the United States. We used simulation modeling to estimate the population-level health effects and cost-effectiveness of a policy encouraging MOUD initiation during inpatient detox encounters.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We employed a dynamic population state-transition model to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using detox programs as venues for initiating MOUD in Massachusetts, United States. We compared standard of care, where no detox patients initiate MOUD or link to outpatient MOUD providers, to strategies of offering MOUD to detox patients and linking those patients to outpatient MOUD.

MEASURES

Budgetary impact to the Massachusetts health-care sector, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and total counts and percentage differences of fatal overdoses prevented.

FINDINGS

Initiating MOUD in detox with perfect linkage to outpatient MOUD would reduce fatal overdoses by 4.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.3-5.9], at an ICER of $56 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, compared with the standard of care. With moderate linkage, fatal overdoses would be reduced by 2.3% (95% CI= 1.2-3.1) with an ICER of $78 500 per QALY gained, compared with standard of care. Budgetary increase to Massachusetts health-care spending ranged from 0.5-1%.

CONCLUSION

A simulation model indicates that initiation of medications for opioid use disorder and linkage policies among detox patients in Massachusetts, USA could prevent fatal opioid overdoses in the opioid use disorder population and would be cost-effective from a health-care sector perspective.

Opioid Use Disorder Diagnosis and Management

Opioid Use Disorder Diagnosis and ManagementThe last 20 years have seen a staggering increase in opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Although the consequences of untreated OUDs are significant, OUD is a treatable illness. This article reviews the epidemiology of OUD and its complications, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and harm reduction interventions.

Variation in Initiation, Engagement, and Retention on Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Based on Health Insurance Plan Design

BACKGROUND

The association between cost-sharing and receipt of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is unknown.

METHODS

We constructed a cohort of 10,513 commercially insured individuals with a new diagnosis of opioid use disorder and information on insurance cost-sharing in a large national deidentified claims database. We examined 4 cost-sharing measures: (1) pharmacy deductible; (2) medical service deductible; (3) pharmacy medication copay; and (4) medical office copay. We measured MOUD (naltrexone, buprenorphine, or methadone) initiation (within 14 d of diagnosis), engagement (second receipt within 34 d of first), and 6-month retention (continuous receipt without 14-d gap). We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between cost-sharing and MOUD initiation, engagement, and retention. We calculated total out-of-pocket costs in the 30 days following MOUD initiation for each type of MOUD.

RESULTS

Of 10,513 individuals with incident opioid use disorder, 1202 (11%) initiated MOUD, 742 (7%) engaged, and 253 (2%) were retained in MOUD at 6 months. A high ($1000+) medical deductible was associated with a lower odds of initiation compared with no deductible (odds ratio: 0.85, 95% confidence interval: 0.74-0.98). We found no significant associations between other cost-sharing measures for initiation, engagement, or retention. Median initial 30-day out-of-pocket costs ranged from $100 for methadone to $710 for extended-release naltrexone.

CONCLUSIONS

Among insurance plan cost-sharing measures, only medical services deductible showed an association with decreased MOUD initiation. Policy and benefit design should consider ways to reduce cost barriers to initiation and retention in MOUD.

Simulated Cost-effectiveness and Long-term Clinical Outcomes of Addiction Care and Antibiotic Therapy Strategies for Patients With Injection Drug Use-Associated Infective Endocarditis

IMPORTANCE

Emerging evidence supports the use of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) and, in many cases, partial oral antibiotic therapy for the treatment of injection drug use-associated infective endocarditis (IDU-IE); however, long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the added value of inpatient addiction care services and the cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes of alternative antibiotic treatment strategies for patients with IDU-IE.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This decision analytical modeling study used a validated microsimulation model to compare antibiotic treatment strategies for patients with IDU-IE. Model inputs were derived from clinical trials and observational cohort studies. The model included all patients with injection opioid drug use (N = 5 million) in the US who were eligible to receive OPAT either in the home or at a postacute care facility. Costs were annually discounted at 3%. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from a health care sector perspective over a lifetime starting in 2020. Probabilistic sensitivity, scenario, and threshold analyses were performed to address uncertainty.

INTERVENTIONS

The model simulated 4 treatment strategies: (1) 4 to 6 weeks of inpatient intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy along with opioid detoxification (usual care strategy), (2) 4 to 6 weeks of inpatient IV antibiotic therapy along with inpatient addiction care services that offered medication for opioid use disorder (usual care/addiction care strategy), (3) 3 weeks of inpatient IV antibiotic therapy along with addiction care services followed by OPAT (OPAT strategy), and (4) 3 weeks of inpatient IV antibiotic therapy along with addiction care services followed by partial oral antibiotic therapy (partial oral antibiotic strategy).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Mean percentage of patients completing treatment for IDU-IE, deaths associated with IDU-IE, life expectancy (measured in life-years [LYs]), mean cost per person, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS

All modeled scenarios were initialized with 5 million individuals (mean age, 42 years; range, 18-64 years; 70% male) who had a history of injection opioid drug use. The usual care strategy resulted in 18.63 LYs at a cost of $416 570 per person, with 77.6% of hospitalized patients completing treatment. Life expectancy was extended by each alternative strategy. The partial oral antibiotic strategy yielded the highest treatment completion rate (80.3%) compared with the OPAT strategy (78.8%) and the usual care/addiction care strategy (77.6%). The OPAT strategy was the least expensive at $412 150 per person. Compared with the OPAT strategy, the partial oral antibiotic strategy had an ICER of $163 370 per LY. Increasing IDU-IE treatment uptake and decreasing treatment discontinuation made the partial oral antibiotic strategy more cost-effective compared with the OPAT strategy. When assuming that all patients with IDU-IE were eligible to receive partial oral antibiotic therapy, the strategy was cost-saving and resulted in 0.0247 additional discounted LYs. When treatment discontinuation was decreased from 3.30% to 2.65% per week, the partial oral antibiotic strategy was cost-effective compared with OPAT at the $100 000 per LY threshold.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this decision analytical modeling study, incorporation of OPAT or partial oral antibiotic approaches along with addiction care services for the treatment of patients with IDU-IE was associated with increases in the number of people completing treatment, decreases in mortality, and savings in cost compared with the usual care strategy of providing inpatient IV antibiotic therapy alone.

Rural and urban differences in undersupply of buprenorphine provider availability in the United States, 2018

BACKGROUND

Medications to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) including buprenorphine products are evidence-based and cost-effective tools for combating the opioid crisis. However, limited availability to buprenorphine is pervasive in the United States (US) and may serve to exacerbate the deadly epidemic. Although prior research points to rural counties as especially needy of strategies that improve buprenorphine availability, it is important to investigate the availability of waivered providers according to treatment need as defined by the county-level rate of opioid-overdose deaths (OOD). This study examined differences in buprenorphine provider availability relative to treatment need among rural and urban counties in the US.

METHODS

Buprenorphine provider availability relative to need in each county was defined as the number of waivered providers divided by the rate of OODs (i.e., number of OODs/100,000 population), according to 2018 data. Counties with ratios in the bottom tertile of their state were classified as buprenorphine undersupplied. We estimated logit models to statistically test the association of rurality and state main effects and their interaction terms (independent variables) and the county classified as buprenorphine undersupplied (dependent variable).

RESULTS

A total of 38 states and 2595 counties had sufficient non-suppressed data to remain in the analysis. A larger percent of urban counties (36.43%) than rural counties (32.01%) were classified as buprenorphine undersupplied (p  = 0.001). The likelihood of a rural county being undersupplied varied considerably by state (Chi Square  = 82.88, p  = 0.000). All states with significant (p  < 0.05 or p  < 0.10) interaction terms showed lower likelihood of buprenorphine undersupply in rural counties.

CONCLUSIONS

The rural-urban distribution in undersupply of waivered buprenorphine providers relative to need varied markedly by state. Strategies for improving access to buprenorphine-waivered providers should be state-centric and informed by county-specific indicators of need.

Onsite buprenorphine inductions at harm reduction agencies to increase treatment engagement and reduce HIV risk: Design and rationale

BACKGROUND

Despite dramatic increases in opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths, the U.S. has been unable to consistently deliver OUD treatment to those who need it. Syringe services programs (SSPs) can engage an out-of-treatment population of people with OUD that has elevated overdose risk. Buprenorphine treatment is safe and effective, and US regulations allow for prescribing from diverse locations, including SSPs. This study's objective is to test buprenorphine treatment initiation at SSPs. We hypothesize that offering onsite buprenorphine treatment initiation will improve OUD treatment engagement without reducing buprenorphine treatment effectiveness or safety.

METHODS

We will recruit 250 out-of-treatment SSP participants with OUD in a large urban area. Participants will be randomized to onsite buprenorphine treatment initiation or enhanced referral. Over 2 weeks, participants in the onsite treatment arm will see a buprenorphine provider twice at the SSP, receive weekly medication packs, and then their care will be transferred to a community health center for treatment continuation. In the control arm, within one week, participants will receive an appointment at the same community health center as in the intervention arm for buprenorphine initiation and continuation. Participants will be assessed with urine drug tests, questionnaires, and medical record review. The primary outcome will be engagement in buprenorphine treatment at 30 days. Secondary outcomes include buprenorphine diversion, opioid-free urine drug tests, and intervention cost-effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

Our study will contribute to the growing literature on SSPs as a conduit to OUD treatment. SSPs hold promise to deliver needed care to people with OUD.

Design and protocol of the Buprenorphine plus Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy (B-OPAT) study: a randomized clinical trial of integrated outpatient treatment of opioid use disorder and severe, injection-related infections

Introduction

A marked increase in hospitalizations for severe, injection-related infections (SIRI) has been associated with the opioid epidemic. Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) is typically not offered to persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) and SIRI, though increasing evidence suggests it may be feasible and safe. This study evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an integrated care model combining Buprenorphine treatment of OUD with OPAT for SIRI (B-OPAT) compared with treatment as usual on key OUD, infectious disease, and health economic outcomes. B-OPAT expands and incorporates key elements of established clinical models, including inpatient initiation of buprenorphine for OUD, inpatient infectious disease consultation for SIRI, office-based treatment of OUD, and OPAT, and includes more frequent clinical outpatient visits than standard OPAT. A qualitative evaluation is included to contextualize effectiveness outcomes and identify barriers and facilitators to intervention adoption and implementation.

Methods

B-OPAT is a single-site, randomized, parallel-group, superiority trial recruiting 90 adult inpatients hospitalized with OUD and SIRI who require at least 2 weeks of intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. After screening, eligible participants are randomized 1:1 to either discharge once medically stable to an integrated outpatient treatment care model combining Buprenorphine and OPAT (B-OPAT) or to Treatment As Usual (TAU). The primary outcome measure is the proportion of urine samples negative for illicit opioids in the 12 weeks after discharge from the hospital. Key secondary OUD outcomes include self-reported number of days of illicit opioid abstinence and 12-week retention in buprenorphine treatment. The infection outcomes are completion of recommended IV antibiotic therapy, peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) complications, and readmission related to primary SIRI.

Conclusions

The B-OPAT study will help address the important question of whether it is clinically effective and cost-effective to discharge persons with OUD and SIRI to an integrated outpatient care model combining OUD treatment with OPAT relative to TAU (Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04677114).

Clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based strategies for addressing the US opioid epidemic: a modelling study

Background

The syndemic of injection drug use and serious injection-related infections is leading to increasing mortality in the USA. Although outpatient treatment with medications for opioid use disorder reduces overdose risk and recurrent infections, hospitalisation remains common. We evaluated the clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based strategies to address the US opioid epidemic.

Methods

We developed a microsimulation model to compare the cost-effectiveness of: standard hospital care—detoxification for opioids, no addiction consult service (status quo); expanded inpatient prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder, including bridge prescriptions (ie, medication until they can see an outpatient provider) when possible (medications for opioid use disorder with bridge); implementation of addiction consult services within the hospital (addiction consult services alone); and a combined medication for opioid use disorder with addiction consult services strategy (combined). We used clinical trials and observational cohorts to inform model inputs. Outcomes were life-years, discounted costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, hospitalisations, and deaths. We did deterministic sensitivity analyses on key model inputs related to costs and sequelae of drug use and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to further address uncertainty.

Findings

Among people who inject opioids in the USA, we estimated that expanding medications for opioid use disorder with bridge prescriptions would reduce hospitalisations and overdose deaths by 3·2% and 3·6%, respectively, and the combination of expanded medications with opioid use disorder along with addiction consult sevices would reduce hospitalisations and overdoses by 5·2% and 6·6%, respectively, compared with the status quo. Mean lifetime costs ranged from US$731 400 (95% credible interval 447 911–859 189 for the medications for opioid use disorder strategy) to $741 200 (470 930–868 551 for the combined strategy) per person. Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per life-year gained, medications for opioid use disorder with bridge and combined strategies were cost-effective ($7600 and $14 300, respectively). A scenario that assumed ideal access to harm reduction services came to the same conclusions as the base case and our results were robust in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Interpretation

The combined interventions of expanding hospital-based prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder and implementing addiction consult services could improve life expectancy, be cost-effective, and could be the basis for a comprehensive hospital-based strategy for addressing the opioid epidemic in the USA and countries with similar opioid epidemics.

Funding

National Institute on Drug Abuse and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Cost-effectiveness implications of increasing the efficiency of the extended-release naltrexone induction process for the treatment of opioid use disorder: a secondary analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In a US randomized-effectiveness trial comparing extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) with buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) for the prevention of opioid relapse among participants recruited during inpatient detoxification (CTN-0051), the requirement to complete opioid detoxification prior to initiating XR-NTX resulted in lower rates of initiation of XR-NTX (72% XR-NTX versus 94% BUP-NX).

DESIGN

This was a retrospective secondary analysis of CTN-0051 trial data, including follow-up data over 24-36 weeks.

SETTING

Eight community-based, inpatient-detoxification and follow-up outpatient treatment facilities in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 283 participants randomized to receive XR-NTX.

MEASUREMENTS

Efficiency was estimated using a multivariable generalized structural equation model to explore simultaneous determinants of XR-NTX induction and induction duration (detoxification + residential days). Cost-effectiveness was estimated from the health-care sector perspective and included expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

FINDINGS

Treatment site was the only modifiable factor that simultaneously increased the likelihood of XR-NTX induction and decreased induction duration. Incorporating the higher predicted probability of XR-NTX induction, and fewer predicted days of detoxification and subsequent residential treatment into the cost-effectiveness framework, reduced the incremental average 24-week total cost of XR-NTX treatment from $5317 more than that of BUP-NX (P = 0.01) to a non-statistically-significant difference of $1016 (P = 0.63). QALYs gained remained similar across arms.

CONCLUSION

Adopting an efficient model of extended-release naltrexone initiation could result in extended-release naltrexone and buprenorphine-naloxone being of comparable economic value from the health-care sector perspective over 24-36 weeks for patients seeking treatment for opioid use disorder at an inpatient detoxification facility.

Oleanolic Acid Attenuates Morphine Withdrawal Symptoms in Rodents: Association with Regulation of Dopamine Function

Introduction

Oleanolic acid (OA) has been shown to be useful for the treatment of mental disorders.

Methods

In this study, we investigated the effects of OA in animal models of spontaneous withdrawal and naloxone-precipitated withdrawal and evaluated the effects of OA on the acquisition, extinction, and reinstatement of morphine-induced conditioned place preference (CPP).

Results

OA significantly improved symptoms of withdrawal, and significantly reduced the acquisition and reinstatement of morphine-induced conditioned place preference. Moreover, OA significantly reduced the serum content of 5-hydroxy tryptamine (5-HT) and dopamine (DA) in a dose-dependent manner, and reduced norepinephrine (NE) and 5-HT content in the frontal cortex (PFC), while significantly increasing endorphin content in rats. OA also significantly reduced serum DA content in mice.

Conclusion

These results indicate that OA can improve the withdrawal symptoms of rats and mice by regulating the DA system and suggest that OA may be useful in treatment of morphine addiction.

Cost-effectiveness of Treatments for Opioid Use Disorder

IMPORTANCE

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US, yet many individuals with OUD do not receive treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of OUD treatments and association of these treatments with outcomes in the US.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This model-based cost-effectiveness analysis included a US population with OUD.

INTERVENTIONS

Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with buprenorphine, methadone, or injectable extended-release naltrexone; psychotherapy (beyond standard counseling); overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND); and contingency management (CM).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Fatal and nonfatal overdoses and deaths throughout 5 years, discounted lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and costs.

RESULTS

In the base case, in the absence of treatment, 42 717 overdoses (4132 fatal, 38 585 nonfatal) and 12 660 deaths were estimated to occur in a cohort of 100 000 patients over 5 years, and 11.58 discounted lifetime QALYs were estimated to be experienced per person. An estimated reduction in overdoses was associated with MAT with methadone (10.7%), MAT with buprenorphine or naltrexone (22.0%), and when combined with CM and psychotherapy (range, 21.0%-31.4%). Estimated deceased deaths were associated with MAT with methadone (6%), MAT with buprenorphine or naltrexone (13.9%), and when combined with CM, OEND, and psychotherapy (16.9%). MAT yielded discounted gains of 1.02 to 1.07 QALYs per person. Including only health care sector costs, methadone cost $16 000/QALY gained compared with no treatment, followed by methadone with OEND ($22 000/QALY gained), then by buprenorphine with OEND and CM ($42 000/QALY gained), and then by buprenorphine with OEND, CM, and psychotherapy ($250 000/QALY gained). MAT with naltrexone was dominated by other treatment alternatives. When criminal justice costs were included, all forms of MAT (with buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone) were associated with cost savings compared with no treatment, yielding savings of $25 000 to $105 000 in lifetime costs per person. The largest cost savings were associated with methadone plus CM. Results were qualitatively unchanged over a wide range of sensitivity analyses. An analysis using demographic and cost data for Veterans Health Administration patients yielded similar findings.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cost-effectiveness analysis, expanded access to MAT, combined with OEND and CM, was associated with cost-saving reductions in morbidity and mortality from OUD. Lack of widespread MAT availability limits access to a cost-saving medical intervention that reduces morbidity and mortality from OUD. Opioid overdoses in the US likely reached a record high in 2020 because of COVID-19 increasing substance use, exacerbating stress and social isolation, and interfering with opioid treatment. It is essential to understand the cost-effectiveness of alternative forms of MAT to treat OUD.

Economic Evaluations of Pharmacologic Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVE

The crisis of opioid use puts a strain on resources in the United States and worldwide. There are 3 US Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for treatment of opioid use disorder: methadone, buprenorphine, and injectable extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). The comparative effectiveness and cost vary considerably among these 3 medications. Economic evaluations provide evidence that help stakeholders efficiently allocate scarce resources. Our objective was to summarize recent health economic evidence of pharmacologic treatment of opioid use disorder interventions.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for peer-reviewed studies in English from August 2015 through December 2019 as an update to a 2015 review. We used the Drummond checklist to evaluate and categorize economic evaluation study quality. We summarized results by economic evaluation methodology and pharmacologic treatment modality.

RESULTS

We identified 105 articles as potentially relevant and included 21 (4 cost-offset studies and 17 cost-effectiveness/cost-benefit studies). We found strengthened evidence on buprenorphine and methadone, indicating that these treatments are economically advantageous compared with no pharmacotherapy, but found limited evidence on XR-NTX. Only half of the cost-effectiveness studies used a generic preference-based measure of effectiveness, limiting broad comparison across diseases/disorders. The disease/disorder-specific cost-effectiveness measures vary widely, suggesting a lack of consensus on the value of substance use disorder treatment.

CONCLUSION

We found studies that provide new evidence supporting the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine compared with no pharmacotherapy. We found a lack of evidence supporting superior economic value for buprenorphine versus methadone, suggesting that both are attractive alternatives. Further economic research is needed on XR-NTX, as well as other emerging pharmacotherapies, treatment modalities, and dosage forms.

Medications Development for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

This review describes methods for preclinical evaluation of candidate medications to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). The review is founded on the propositions that (1) drug self-administration procedures provide the most direct method for assessment of medication effectiveness, (2) procedures that assess choice between opioid and nondrug reinforcers are especially useful, and (3) states of opioid dependence and withdrawal profoundly influence both opioid reinforcement and effects of candidate medications. Effects of opioid medications and vaccines on opioid choice in nondependent and opioid-dependent subjects are reviewed. Various nonopioid medications have also been examined, but none yet have been identified that safely and reliably reduce opioid choice. Future research will focus on (1) strategies for increasing safety and/or effectiveness of opioid medications (e.g., G-protein-biased μ-opioid agonists), and (2) continued development of nonopioid medications (e.g., clonidine) that might serve as adjunctive agents to current opioid medications.

Health economic design for cost, cost-effectiveness and simulation analyses in the HEALing Communities Study

BACKGROUND

The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) is designed to implement and evaluate the Communities That HEAL (CTH) intervention, a conceptually driven framework to assist communities in selecting and adopting evidence-based practices to reduce opioid overdose deaths. The goal of the HCS is to produce generalizable information for policy makers and community stakeholders seeking to implement CTH or a similar community intervention. To support this objective, one aim of the HCS is a health economics study (HES), the results of which will inform decisions around fiscal feasibility and sustainability relevant to other community settings.

METHODS

The HES is integrated into the HCS design: an unblinded, multisite, parallel arm, cluster randomized, wait list-controlled trial of the CTH intervention implemented in 67 communities in four U.S. states: Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio. The objectives of the HES are to estimate the economic costs to communities of implementing and sustaining CTH; estimate broader societal costs associated with CTH; estimate the cost-effectiveness of CTH for overdose deaths avoided; and use simulation modeling to evaluate the short- and long-term health and economic impact of CTH, including future overdose deaths avoided and quality-adjusted life years saved, and to develop a simulation policy tool for communities that seek to implement CTH or a similar community intervention.

DISCUSSION

The HCS offers an unprecedented opportunity to conduct health economics research on solutions to the opioid crisis and to increase understanding of the impact and value of complex, community-level interventions.

Relative Cost Differences of Initial Treatment Strategies for Newly Diagnosed Opioid Use Disorder: A Cohort Study

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

Relative costs of care among treatment options for opioid use disorder (OUD) are unknown.

Methods:

We identified a cohort of 40,885 individuals with a new diagnosis of OUD in a large national de-identified claims database covering commercially insured and Medicare Advantage enrollees. We assigned individuals to 1 of 6 mutually exclusive initial treatment pathways: (1) Inpatient Detox/Rehabilitation Treatment Center; (2) Behavioral Health Intensive, intensive outpatient or Partial Hospitalization Services; (3) Methadone or Buprenorphine; (4) Naltrexone; (5) Behavioral Health Outpatient Services, or; (6) No Treatment. We assessed total costs of care in the initial 90 day treatment period for each strategy using a differences in differences approach controlling for baseline costs.

Results:

Within 90 days of diagnosis, 94.8% of individuals received treatment, with the initial treatments being: 15.8% for Inpatient Detox/Rehabilitation Treatment Center, 4.8% for Behavioral Health Intensive, Intensive Outpatient or Partial Hospitalization Services, 12.5% for buprenorphine/methadone, 2.4% for naltrexone, and 59.3% for Behavioral Health Outpatient Services. Average unadjusted costs increased from $3250 per member per month (SD $7846) at baseline to $5047 per member per month (SD $11,856) in the 90 day follow-up period. Compared with no treatment, initial 90 day costs were lower for buprenorphine/methadone [Adjusted Difference in Differences Cost Ratio (ADIDCR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52–0.80], naltrexone (ADIDCR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42–0.67), and behavioral health outpatient (ADIDCR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44–0.66). Costs were higher for inpatient detox (ADIDCR 2.30; 95% CI, 1.88–2.83).

Conclusion:

Improving health system capacity and insurance coverage and incentives for outpatient management of OUD may reduce health care costs.

Financing Buprenorphine Treatment in Primary Care: A Microsimulation Model

PURPOSE

We sought to determine the financial impact to primary care practices of alternative strategies for offering buprenorphine-based treatment for opioid use disorder.

METHODS

We interviewed 20 practice managers and identified 4 approaches to delivering buprenorphine-based treatment via primary care practice that differed in physician and nurse responsibilities. We used a microsimulation model to estimate how practice variations in patient type, payer, revenue, and cost across primary care practices nationwide would affect cost and revenue implications for each approach for the following types of practices: federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), non-FQHCs in urban high-poverty areas, non-FQHCs in rural high-poverty areas, and practices outside of high-poverty areas.

RESULTS

The 4 approaches to buprenorphine-based treatment included physician-led visits with nurse-led logistical support; nurse-led visits with physician oversight; shared visits; and solo prescribing by physician alone. Net practice revenues would be expected to increase after introduction of any of the 4 approaches by $18,000 to $70,000 per full-time physician in the first year across practice type. Yet physician-led visits and shared medical appointments, both of which relied on nurse care managers, consistently produced the greatest net revenues ($29,000-$70,000 per physician in the first year). To ensure positive net revenues with any approach, providers would need to maintain at least 9 patients in treatment, with a no-show rate of <34%.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a simulation model, we estimate that many types of primary care practices could financially sustain buprenorphine-based treatment if demand and no-show rate requirements are met, but a nurse care manager-based approach might be the most sustainable.

Health-related quality of life and opioid use disorder pharmacotherapy: A secondary analysis of a clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To examine the health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) of persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) seeking treatment in an inpatient detoxification or short-term residential setting; continuing treatment as outpatients.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a clinical trial (N = 508) where participants were randomized to extended-release naltrexone or buprenorphine-naloxone for the prevention of opioid relapse. We used a generalized structural equation regression mixture model to identify associations of HRQoL (EQ-5D) trajectories, including latent characteristics, over the 24-week trial and 36-week follow-up period, among participants who reported HRQoL beyond baseline. This novel framework accounted for baseline and time-varying characteristics, while simultaneously identifying latent classes.

RESULTS

We identified two subpopulations: HRQoL "pharmacotherapy responsive" (82.3 %) and HRQoL "characteristic sensitive" (17.7 %). The pharmacotherapy responsive subpopulation was characterized by a shortterm HRQoL improvement and then stable HRQoL over time, and by a positive association between HRQoL and receiving pharmacotherapy in the past 30 days. The characteristic sensitive subpopulation was characterized by an initial improvement in HRQoL with a gradual decline over time, and no significant HRQoL response to pharmacotherapy. HRQoL changes over time in this subpopulation were more influenced by baseline demographic, socioeconomic, and psychosocial characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that while HRQoL may be improved and sustained through targeted efforts to promote use of pharmacotherapy for many persons with OUD, an identifiable subpopulation may require additional services that address socioeconomic and psychosocial issues to achieve HRQoL benefits. Our analysis provides insight for improving individualized care for persons with opioid use disorder seeking treatment.

Health and economic outcomes of treatment with extended-release naltrexone among pre-release prisoners with opioid use disorder (HOPPER): protocol for an evaluation of two randomized effectiveness trials

BACKGROUND

Persons with an opioid use disorder (OUD) who were incarcerated face many challenges to remaining abstinent; concomitantly, opioid-overdose is the leading cause of death among this population, with the initial weeks following release proving especially fatal. Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is the most widely-accepted, evidence-based OUD pharmacotherapy in criminal justice settings, and ensures approximately 30 days of protection from opioid overdose. The high cost of XR-NTX serves as a barrier to uptake by many prison/jail systems; however, the cost of the medication should not be viewed in isolation. Prison/jail healthcare budgets are ultimately determined by policymakers, and the benefits/cost-offsets associated with effective OUD treatment will directly and indirectly affect their overall budgets, and society as a whole.

METHODS

This protocol describes a study funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) to: evaluate changes in healthcare utilization, health-related quality-of-life, and other resources associated with different strategies of XR-NTX delivery to persons with OUD being released from incarceration; and estimate the relative "value" of each strategy. Data from two ongoing, publicly-funded, randomized-controlled trials will be used to evaluate these questions. In Study A, (XR-NTX Before vs. After Reentry), participants are randomized to receive their first XR-NTX dose before release, or at a nearby program post-release. In Study B, (enhanced XR-NTX vs. XR-NTX), both arms receive XR-NTX prior to release; the enhanced arm receives mobile medical (place of residence) XR-NTX treatment post-release, and the XR-NTX arm receives referral to a community treatment program post-release. The economic data collection instruments required to evaluate outcomes of interest were incorporated into both studies from baseline. Moreover, because the same instruments are being used in both trials on comparable populations, we have the opportunity to not only assess differences in outcomes between study arms within each trial, but also to merge the data sets and test for differences across trials.

DISCUSSION

Initiating XR-NTX for OUD prior to release from incarceration may improve patient health and well-being, while also producing downstream cost-offsets. This study offers the unique opportunity to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiple strategies, according to different stakeholder perspectives.

Slow release oral morphine versus methadone for opioid use disorder in the fentanyl era (pRESTO): Protocol for a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

North America is facing an unprecedented public health crisis of opioid-related morbidity and mortality, increasingly as a result of the introduction of illicitly manufactured fentanyl into the street drug market. Although the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is a key element in the response to the opioid overdose epidemic, currently available pharmacotherapies (e.g., methadone, buprenorphine) may not be acceptable to or effective in all patients. Available evidence suggests that slow-release oral morphine (SROM) has similar efficacy rates as methadone with respect to promoting abstinence, and with improvements in a number of patient-reported outcomes among persons using heroin. However, little is known about the relative effectiveness and acceptability of SROM compared to methadone in the context of fentanyl use. This study aims to address this research gap.

METHODS

pRESTO is a 24-week, open-label, two arm, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial comparing SROM versus methadone for the treatment of OUD. Participants will be 298 clinically stable, non-pregnant adults with OUD, recruited from outpatient clinics in Vancouver, Canada, where the majority of the illicit opioids are contaminated with fentanyl. The primary outcome is suppression of illicit opioid use, measured by bi-weekly urine drug screens. Secondary outcomes include: treatment retention, medication safety, overdose events, treatment satisfaction, psychological functioning, changes in drug-related problems, changes in quality of life, opioid cravings, other substance use, and cost-effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

pRESTO will be among the first studies to evaluate treatment options for individuals primarily using synthetic street opioids, providing important evidence to guide treatment strategies for this population.

Economic evaluation in the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network: Past, present, and future

Economic evaluations provide evidence that informs stakeholders on how to efficiently allocate real and financial healthcare resources. The purpose of this study was to review and discuss the integration of economic evaluations into the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) since its inception, as well as expectations for the future of this relationship. A systematic review was performed on published and planned CTN economic evaluations in the CTN dissemination library and PubMed. The well-established Drummond checklist was used to evaluate the comprehensiveness and methodological rigor of published articles. One hundred thirty-eight ancillary, follow-up, or original protocols were reviewed, and 78 potentially relevant published articles were identified. A total number of 14 protocols included an economic evaluation. Of these, 6 protocols were completed, 2 were reported as active, and 6 were reported as in-development at the time of this review. Of the 78 published articles, 9 met the inclusion criteria. As gauged by the Drummond checklist, the quality of CTN published economic evaluations were found to improve over time, and recent published articles were identified as guides to cutting-edge economic research. As the CTN continues to grow and mature, it is imperative that high-quality economic evaluations are incorporated alongside trials in order to maximize the public health impact of the CTN.

The Washington State Hub and Spoke Model to increase access to medication treatment for opioid use disorders

INTRODUCTION

The federal Opioid State Targeted Response (Opioid STR) grants provided funding to each state to ramp up the range of responses to reverse the ongoing opioid crisis in the U.S. Washington State used these funds to develop and implement an integrated care model to expand access to medication treatment and reduce unmet need for people with opioid use disorders (OUD), regardless of how they enter the treatment system. This paper examines the design, early implementation and results of the Washington State Hub and Spoke Model.

METHODS

Descriptive data were gathered from key informants, document review, and aggregate data reported by hubs and spokes to Washington State's Opioid STR team.

RESULTS

The Washington State Hub and Spoke Model reflects a flexible approach that incorporates primary care and substance use treatment programs, as well as outreach, referral and social service organizations, and a nurse care manager. Hubs could be any type of program that had the required expertise and capacity to lead their network in medication treatment for OUD, including all three FDA-approved medications. Six hub-spoke networks were funded, with 8 unique agencies on average, and multiple sites. About 150 prescribers are in these networks (25 on average). In the first 18 months, nearly 5000 people were inducted onto OUD medication treatment: 73% on buprenorphine, 19% on methadone, and 9% on naltrexone.

CONCLUSIONS

The Washington State Hub and Spoke Model built on prior approaches to improve the delivery system for OUD medication treatment and support services, by increasing integration of care, ensuring "no wrong door," engaging with community agencies, and supporting providers who are offering medication treatment. It used essential elements from existing integrated care OUD treatment models, but allowed for organic restructuring to meet the population needs within a community. To date, there have been challenges and successes, but with this approach, Washington State has provided medication treatment for OUD to nearly 5000 people. Sustainability efforts are underway. In the face of the ongoing opioid crisis, it remains essential to develop, implement and evaluate novel models, such as Washington's Hub and Spoke approach, to improve treatment access and increase capacity.

Assessing the impact of drug courts on provider-directed marketing efforts by manufactures of medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) has become an increasingly consequential public health concern, especially in the United States where 47,600 opioid overdose deaths occurred in 2017 (Scholl, Seth, Kariisa, Wilson, & Baldwin, 2019). Medications for OUD (MOUD) are effective for decreasing opioid-related morbidity and mortality, including within the criminal justice system (Hedrich et al., 2012; Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Save Lives, 2019; Moore et al., 2019).While a stronger evidence base exists for agonist MOUD than for antagonist MOUD, a national study of drug courts found that half prohibited agonist MOUD (Matusow et al., 2013).Furthermore, recent media reports suggest that the pharmaceutical manufacturer of an antagonist MOUD has marketed its product towards drug court judges (Goodnough & Zernike, 2017; Harper, 2017). However, no study to date has systematically examined the relationship between MOUD marketing practices and drug courts. This ecological study examines the association at the county level between MOUD manufacturer payments to prescribers and drug court locations.

METHOD

We extracted provider-directed payments from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)'s Sunshine Act Open Payments data 2014-2017, isolating those records mentioning any MOUD. We compared provider-directed payments for two major MOUDs: buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone, in counties with and without drug courts.

RESULTS

The presence of any adult drug courts in the county is associated with a 7.86 percentage-point increase in the likelihood of providers in that county receiving any MOUD-related payments (about 22.46% of the sample mean, p<0.001) and with a 10.70% increase in the amount of these payments per 1000 county residents (p<0.001). The association between other forms of drug courts such as juvenile drug courts and Driving-Under-the-Influence courts (DUI) courts are less significant and slightly smaller in magnitude compared to those of adult drug courts. We did not find significant difference between payments by the manufacturer of Vivitrol and manufacturers of Zubsolv, Bunavail, and Suboxone (oral forms of buprenorphine).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show an ecological association at the county level between MOUD manufacturer payments to prescribers and drug court presence. However, we did not examine a causal association between these variables.

Emergency Department Initiation of Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder: Current Status, and Future Potential

Patients experiencing the consequences of opioid use often present to the emergency department (ED) at times of crisis, such as following overdose or when in withdrawal. This highlights the important role of the ED in recognizing opioid use disorder and engaging these patients into ongoing treatment. Given the limited ability of the healthcare system to provide timely addiction treatment, initiation of therapy in the ED, with referral to long-term care, is associated with improved outcomes. The primary evidence-based treatment used in EDs for this indication is buprenorphine. Although clinicians may find the initiation of buprenorphine therapy daunting, it is straightforward and well-tolerated, and many of the barriers are surmountable. This article addresses these barriers, which include stigma, complicated pharmacology, and confusing regulations, and provides a basis for the use of buprenorphine in acute care clinical practice.

Global patterns of opioid use and dependence: harms to populations, interventions, and future action

We summarise the evidence for medicinal uses of opioids, harms related to the extramedical use of, and dependence on, these drugs, and a wide range of interventions used to address these harms. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study estimated that in 2017, 40·5 million people were dependent on opioids (95% uncertainty interval 34·3-47·9 million) and 109 500 people (105 800-113 600) died from opioid overdose. Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) can be highly effective in reducing illicit opioid use and improving multiple health and social outcomes-eg, by reducing overall mortality and key causes of death, including overdose, suicide, HIV, hepatitis C virus, and other injuries. Mathematical modelling suggests that scaling up the use of OAT and retaining people in treatment, including in prison, could avert a median of 7·7% of deaths in Kentucky, 10·7% in Kiev, and 25·9% in Tehran over 20 years (compared with no OAT), with the greater effects in Tehran and Kiev being due to reductions in HIV mortality, given the higher prevalence of HIV among people who inject drugs in those settings. Other interventions have varied evidence for effectiveness and patient acceptability, and typically affect a narrower set of outcomes than OAT does. Other effective interventions focus on preventing harm related to opioids. Despite strong evidence for the effectiveness of a range of interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of people who are dependent on opioids, coverage is low, even in high-income countries. Treatment quality might be less than desirable, and considerable harm might be caused to individuals, society, and the economy by the criminalisation of extramedical opioid use and dependence. Alternative policy frameworks are recommended that adopt an approach based on human rights and public health, do not make drug use a criminal behaviour, and seek to reduce drug-related harm at the population level.

Introduction to the special issue on innovative interventions and approaches to expand medication assisted treatment: Seizing research opportunities made available by the opioid STR program

The 21st Century Cures Act is the most significant piece of U.S. legislation aimed at tackling the opioid epidemic to date. This special issue comprises papers reflecting medication-assisted treatment (MAT)-related research made possible through the Cures Act-authorized State Targeted Response (STR) grant mechanism. Work related to both STR evaluation and original research conducted within the context of STR activities are included in the issue, with topics including community assessments of MAT-related needs, MAT access and linkage, criminal justice-oriented MAT implementation, and adjunctive MAT supports and treatments. All of the research represented this issue is early-stage, with results reflecting data collected primarily within the first of STR's two year funding cycle. While such formative work does have inherent limitations, the gravity of the opioid epidemic requires rapid assessment and dissemination of results to inform the public health response in a manner that will have a timely and meaningful impact.

Physicians' satisfaction with providing buprenorphine treatment

Background

Buprenorphine is a critically important treatment for addressing the opioid epidemic, but there are virtually no studies of physicians’ job satisfaction with providing buprenorphine. Physicians’ job satisfaction has been linked to burnout and turnover as well as patients’ adherence to treatment recommendations, so it is important to understand how physicians’ satisfaction with providing buprenorphine treatment compares to their overall job satisfaction.

Methods

As part of a cluster randomized clinical trial (RCT) focused on expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder, 55 physicians working in 38 organizations in Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin completed a baseline web-based survey. Study measures included global job satisfaction, career satisfaction, and specialty satisfaction. Physicians who were waivered to prescribe buprenorphine were asked to rate their satisfaction with their current buprenorphine practice.

Results

Overall, physicians were generally satisfied with their jobs, their careers, and their specialties. When waivered physicians (n = 40) were compared to non-waivered physicians (n = 15) on 13 satisfaction items, there were no statistically significant differences. Among waivered physicians, ratings for buprenorphine work were significantly lower than ratings for general medical practice for finding such work personally rewarding, being pleased with such work, and overall satisfaction.

Conclusions

Although waivered and non-waivered physicians both reported high global job satisfaction, these data suggest that some waivered physicians may view their buprenorphine work as somewhat less satisfying than their global medical practice. Given that job dissatisfaction is a risk factor for turnover and burnout, managers of treatment organizations should consider whether strategies may be able to mitigate some sources of lower satisfaction in the context of buprenorphine treatment.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02926482. Date of registration: September 9, 2016. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02926482