Search

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is no gold-standard and considerable heterogeneity in outcome measures used to evaluate treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) along the opioid treatment cascade. The aim of this study was to develop the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) opioid use disorder core outcomes set (OUD-COS). DESIGN: Four-round, e-Delphi expert panel consensus study and plenary research group discussion and targeted consultation. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: A panel of 25 members including clinical practitioners, clinical researchers and administrative staff from the CTN, the networks affiliated clinical and community sites and the NIDA Centre for the CTN. MEASUREMENTS: From a pool of 24 candidate items in four domains (biomedical/disease status; behaviors, symptoms and functioning; opioid treatment cascade; and morbidity and mortality), the panel completed an on-line questionnaire to rank items with defined specification on a 9-point scale for importance, with a standard 70% consensus criterion. FINDINGS: After the fourth round of the questionnaire and subsequent discussion, consensus was reached for five outcomes: two patient-reported (global impression of improvement and incident non-fatal overdose); one clinician-reported (illicit/non-medical drug toxicology); and two from administrative records (duration of treatment and fatal opioid poisoning). CONCLUSIONS: An e-Delphi consensus study has produced the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network opioid use disorder core outcomes set (version 1) for opioid use disorder treatment efficacy and effectiveness research.

BACKGROUND: A lack of consensus on the optimal outcome measures to assess the efficacy and effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) has hampered the pooling of research data for evidence synthesis and clinical guidelines. A core outcome set (COS) is a minimum set of outcome measures that are recommended for all studies of a particular condition. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) Core Outcome Set for OUD (COS-OUD) is a development study to identify core constructs, meaningful outcomes, and their optimal measurement for all efficacy and effectiveness studies of OUD treatment and service delivery. METHODS/DESIGN: Overseen by an expert workgroup, a modified, stepwise, e-Delphi methodology will be used to gain consensus among a panel of clinical practitioners and researchers involved in the treatment of OUD, who are members of the CTN. Sequential rounds of anonymous, online questionnaires will be used to identify, rate the importance of, and refine a core outcome set. A consensus threshold will be achieved if at least 70% of the panel rate the measure as critical for inclusion in the COS-OUD. Where consensus is not reached or there are suggestions for new measures, these will be brought forward to a further round of review prior to a consensus meeting. Products from this study will be communicated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and conferences. DISCUSSION: This initiative will develop a COS for OUD intervention trials, treatment studies, and service delivery and will support the pooling of research and clinical practice data and efforts to develop measurement-based care within the OUD treatment cascade. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1579.

Background and aims: Extended‐release naltrexone (XR‐NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine (SL‐BUP) are both approved for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment in any medical setting. We aimed to compare the real‐world effectiveness of XR‐NTX and SL‐BUP. Design and setting: This was an observational active comparator, new user cohort study of Medicaid claims records for patients in New Jersey and California, USA, 2016–19. Participants/cases: The participants were adult Medicaid patients aged 18–64 years who initiated XR‐NTX or SL‐BUP for maintenance treatment of OUD and did not use medications for OUD in the 90 days before initiation. Our cohort included 1755 XR‐NTX and 9886 SL‐BUP patients. Measurements: We examined two outcomes up to 180 days after medication initiation: (1) composite of medication discontinuation and death and (2) composite of overdose and death. Findings In adjusted analyses, treatment with XR‐NTX was more likely to result in discontinuation or death by the end of follow‐up than treatment with SL‐BUP: cumulative risk 75.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 73.9%, 77.9%] versus 62.2% (95% CI = 61.2%, 63.2%), respectively (risk difference = 13.7 percentage points, 95% CI = 11.4, 16.0). There was minimal difference in the cumulative risk of overdose or death by the end of follow‐up: XR‐NTX 3.9% (95% CI = 3.0%, 4.8%) versus SL‐BUP 3.3% (95% CI = 2.9%, 3.7%); risk difference = 0.5 percentage points, 95% CI = –0.4, 1.5. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Medicaid patients in California and New Jersey, USA, receiving treatment for opioid use disorder stayed in treatment longer on sublingual buprenorphine than on extended‐release naltrexone, but the risk of overdose was similar. Most patients in this study discontinued medication within 6 months, regardless of which medication was initiated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Dynamic, adaptive pharmacologic treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) has been previously recommended over static dosing to prevent relapse, and is aligned with personalized medicine. However, there has been no quantitative evidence demonstrating its advantage. Our objective was to estimate the extent to which a hypothetical intervention that increased buprenorphine dose in response to opioid use would affect risk of relapse over 24 weeks of follow-up. Design: A secondary analysis of the buprenorphine arm of an open-label randomized controlled 24-week comparative effectiveness trial, 2014-17. Setting: Eight community addiction treatment programs in the United States. Participants: English-speaking adults with DSM-5 OUD, recruited during inpatient admission (n = 270). Participants were mainly white (65%) and male (72%). Intervention(s): Participants were treated with daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), with dose based on clinical indication, determined by the provider. We examined a hypothetical intervention of increasing dose in response to opioid use. Measurements: Outcome was relapse to regular opioid use during the 24 weeks of outpatient treatment, assessed in a survival framework. We estimated the relapse-free survival curves of participants under a hypothetical (i.e. counterfactual) intervention in which their BUP-NX dosage would be increased following their own subject-specific opioid use during the first 12 weeks of treatment versus a hypothetical intervention in which dose would remain constant. Findings: We estimated that increasing BUP-NX dose in response to recent opioid use would lower risk of relapse by 19.17 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI) = -32.17, -6.18) (additive risk)] and 32% (0.68, 95% CI = 0.49, 0.86) (relative risk). The number-needed-to-treat with this intervention to prevent a single relapse is 6. Conclusions: In people with opioid use disorder, a hypothetical intervention that increases sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone dose in response to opioid use during the first 12 weeks of treatment appears to reduce risk of relapse over 24 weeks, compared with holding the dose constant after week 2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic pain is highly prevalent among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, little is known about how pharmacological treatments for OUD, for example, extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), affect pain. To begin addressing this question, we performed a secondary analysis of pain data on a large prospective 24-week, open-label, randomized-controlled comparative effectiveness trial of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX (X:BOT trial). Participants' pain status was measured by the EuroQol (EQ-5D). Based on their responses to the pain question at baseline, participants were dichotomized into "Pain" versus "No Pain" categories. Participant's pain status was evaluated every 4 weeks. A mixed effects longitudinal logistic regression model was fitted to examine the differential effect of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX on pain, modelling pain at all available follow-up assessments, adjusted for age, sex, and baseline pain. A total of 474 individuals who were successfully inducted onto their assigned medications were included in this analysis. Among participants endorsing pain at baseline, substantial reductions in pain were observed over the course of the study in both treatment groups. Howecver reduction in pain was slightly greater in the group treated with XR-NTX than the one treated with BUP-NX (OR = 1.60 [95% CI: 1.07-2.40], P = 0.023). Future research using instruments and design specifically focused on pain could extend the present observations and evaluate their clinical significance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]