BACKGROUND:The average length of buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder is less than 6 months. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to determine what factors were associated with longer retention in buprenorphine treatment. DESIGN: We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in February 2018. Articles were restricted to randomized controlled trials on human subjects, written in English, which contained ≥ 24 weeks of objective data on retention in buprenorphine treatment. MAIN MEASURES:We assessed whether dose of buprenorphine, treatment setting, or co-administration of behavioral therapy was associated with retention rates. KEY RESULTS: Over 14,000 articles were identified. Thirteen articles (describing 9 studies) met inclusion criteria. Measures of retention varied widely. Three studies compared doses of buprenorphine between 1 and 8 mg and showed significantly higher rates of retention with higher doses (p values < 0.01). All other studies utilized buprenorphine doses between 8 and 24 mg daily, without comparison. No study found a significant difference in r e t e n t i o n b e t w e e n b u p r e n o r p h i n e a l o n e a n d buprenorphine plus behavioral therapy (p values > 0.05). Initiating buprenorphine while hospitalized or within criminal justice settings prior to outpatient treatment programs was significantly associated with retention in buprenorphine treatment (p values < 0.01 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Setting of treatment initiation and a higher buprenorphine dose are associated with improved long-term treatment retention. More objective data on buprenorphine treatment programs are needed, including a standardized approach to defining retention in buprenorphine treatment programs. REGISTRATION: This review was registered with PROS-PERO (#CRD42019120336) in March 2019.
PurposeThis study aimed to investigate the differential responses of trabecular meshwork stem cells (TMSCs) and trabecular meshwork (TM) cells to endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress inducers.MethodsHuman TM cells and TMSCs were exposed to tunicamycin, brefeldin A, or thapsigargin. Cell apoptosis was evaluated by flow cytometry. ER stress markers were detected by quantitative PCR, Western blotting, and immunostaining. Morphologic changes were evaluated by transmission electron microscopy. Cells were treated with the PERK inhibitor GSK2606414 or the elF2α dephosphorylation inhibitor Salubrinal together with tunicamycin to evaluate their effects on ER stress.ResultsBoth TMSCs and TM cells underwent apoptosis after 48- and 72-hour treatment with ER stress inducers. ER stress triggered the unfolded protein response (UPR) with increased expression of GRP78, sXBP1, and CHOP, which was significantly lower in TMSCs than TM cells. Swollen ER and mitochondria were detected in both TMSCs and TM cells. Neither GSK2606414 nor salubrinal alone activated UPR. GSK2606414 significantly reduced cell survival rates after tunicamycin treatment, and salubrinal increased cell survival rates. The increased expression of GRP78, sXBP1, CHOP, and GADD34 peaked at 6 or 12 hours and lasted longer in TM cells than TMSCs. Salubrinal treatment dramatically increased OCT4 and CHI3L1 expression in TMSCs.ConclusionsIn response to ER stress inducers, TMSCs activated a lower level of UPR and lasted shorter than TM cells. Inhibition of elF2α dephosphorylation had a protective mechanism against cell death. Stem cells combined with salubrinal may be a more effective way for TM regeneration in glaucoma.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.