Context No randomized trials have examined treatments for prescription opioid dependence, despite its increasing prevalence. Objective To evaluate the efficacy of brief and extended buprenorphine-naloxone treatment, with different counseling intensities, for patients dependent upon prescription opioids. Setting, Participants 653 treatment-seeking outpatients dependent on prescription opioids, at 10 U.S. sites from June 2006-July 2009. Design Multi-site, randomized clinical trial, using a two-phase adaptive treatment research design. Brief treatment (Phase 1) included 2-week buprenorphine-naloxone stabilization, 2-week taper, and 8-week post-medication follow-up. Patients with successful opioid use outcomes exited the study; unsuccessful patients entered Phase 2: extended (12-week) buprenorphine-naloxone treatment, 4-week taper, and 8-week post-medication follow-up. Main outcome measures Pre-defined “successful outcome” in each phase: composite measures indicating minimal or no opioid use, based on urine-confirmed self-reports. Interventions In both phases, patients were randomized to Standard Medical Management (SMM) or SMM+Opioid Drug Counseling (ODC); all received buprenorphine-naloxone. Results During Phase 1, only 6.6% (43/653) of patients had successful outcomes, with no difference between the SMM and SMM+ODC. In contrast, 49.2% (177/360) attained successful outcomes in Phase 2 during extended buprenorphine-naloxone treatment (week 12), with no difference between counseling conditions. Success rates 8 weeks after completing the buprenorphine-naloxone taper (Phase 2, week 24) dropped sharply to 8.6% (31/360), again with no counseling difference. In secondary analyses, successful Phase 2 outcomes were far more common while taking buprenorphine-naloxone than 8 weeks post-taper (49.2% (177/360) vs. 8.6% (31/360), p<0.001). Chronic pain did not affect opioid use outcomes; a history of ever using heroin was associated with lower Phase 2 success rates while taking buprenorphine-naloxone. Conclusions Prescription opioid-dependent patients are most likely to reduce opioid use during buprenorphine-naloxone treatment; if tapered off buprenorphine-naloxone, even after 12 weeks of treatment, the likelihood of unsuccessful outcome is extremely high, even among patients receiving counseling in addition to medical management. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00316277

Context The usual treatment for opioid-addicted youth is detoxification and counseling. Extended medication-assisted therapy may be more helpful. Objective To evaluate the efficacy of continuing buprenorphine-naloxone for 12 weeks vs detoxification for opioid-addicted youth. Design, Setting, and Patients Clinical trial at 6 community programs from July 2003 to December 2006 including 152 patients aged 15 to 21 years who were randomized to 12 weeks of buprenorphine-naloxone or a 14-day taper (detox). Interventions Patients in the 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone group were prescribed up to 24 mg per day for 9 weeks and then tapered to week 12; patients in the detox group were prescribed up to 14 mg per day and then tapered to day 14. All were offered weekly individual and group counseling. Main Outcome Measure Opioid-positive urine test result at weeks 4, 8, and 12. Results The number of patients younger than 18 years was too small to analyze separately, but overall, patients in the detox group had higher proportions of opioid-positive urine test results at weeks 4 and 8 but not at week 12 ( χ22 = 4.93, P = .09). At week 4, 59 detox patients had positive results (61%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 47%-75%) vs 58 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone patients (26%; 95% CI = 14%-38%). At week 8, 53 detox patients had positive results (54%; 95% CI = 38%-70%) vs 52 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone patients (23%; 95% CI = 11%-35%). At week 12, 53 detox patients had positive results (51%; 95% CI = 35%-67%) vs 49 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone patients (43%; 95% CI = 29%-57%). By week 12, 16 of 78 detox patients (20.5%) remained in treatment vs 52 of 74 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone patients (70%; χ12 = 32.90, P < .001). During weeks 1 through 12, patients in the 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone group reported less opioid use ( χ12 = 18.45, P < .001), less injecting ( χ12 = 6.00, P = .01), and less nonstudy addiction treatment ( χ12 = 25.82, P < .001). High levels of opioid use occurred in both groups at follow-up. Four of 83 patients who tested negative for hepatitis C at baseline were positive for hepatitis C at week 12. Conclusions Continuing treatment with buprenorphine-naloxone improved outcome compared with short-term detoxification. Further research is necessary to assess the efficacy and safety of longer-term treatment with buprenorphine for young individuals with opioid dependence.

A dramatic increase in the use and dependence of prescription opioids has occurred within the last 10 years. The consequences of long-term prescription opioid use and dependence on the brain are largely unknown, and any speculation is inferred from heroin and methadone studies. Thus, no data have directly demonstrated the effects of prescription opioid use on brain structure and function in humans. To pursue this issue, we used structural magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging in a highly enriched group of prescription opioid-dependent patients [(n=10); from a larger study on prescription opioid dependent patients (n=133)] and matched healthy individuals (n=10) to characterize possible brain alterations that may be caused by long-term prescription opioid use. Criteria for patient selection included: (i) no dependence on alcohol or other drugs; (ii) no comorbid psychiatric or neurological disease; and (iii) no medical conditions, including pain. In comparison to control subjects, individuals with opioid dependence displayed bilateral volumetric loss in the amygdala. Prescription opioid-dependent subjects had significantly decreased anisotropy in axonal pathways specific to the amygdala (i.e. stria terminalis, ventral amygdalofugal pathway and uncinate fasciculus) as well as the internal and external capsules. In the patient group, significant decreases in functional connectivity were observed for seed regions that included the anterior insula, nucleus accumbens and amygdala subdivisions. Correlation analyses revealed that longer duration of prescription opioid exposure was associated with greater changes in functional connectivity. Finally, changes in amygdala functional connectivity were observed to have a significant dependence on amygdala volume and white matter anisotropy of efferent and afferent pathways of the amygdala. These findings suggest that prescription opioid dependence is associated with structural and functional changes in brain regions implicated in the regulation of affect and impulse control, as well as in reward and motivational functions. These results may have important clinical implications for uncovering the effects of long-term prescription opioid use on brain structure and function.

Findings suggest commercially available AMT may proffer some benefit to women seeking to enhance their QOL following breast cancer diagnosis.

Although gender differences in substance use disorders have been identified, few studies have examined gender differences in prescription drug dependence. The aim of this study was to examine gender differences in clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in a large clinical trial for prescription opioid dependence. Despite no pre-treatment differences in opioid dependence severity, women reported significantly greater functional impairment, greater psychiatric severity, and higher likelihood of using opioids to cope with negative affect and pain than men. Women were also more likely than men to have first obtained opioids via a legitimate prescription and to use opioids via the intended route of administration. Men reported significantly more alcohol problems than women. There were no significant gender differences in medication dose, treatment retention, or opioid outcomes. Thus, despite the presence of pre-treatment gender differences in this population, once the study treatment was initiated, women and men exhibited similar opioid use outcomes.

Background Prescription opioid dependence is a growing problem, but little research exists on its treatment, including patient characteristics that predict treatment outcome. Methods A secondary analysis of data from a large multisite, randomized clinical trial, the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network Prescription Opioid Addiction Treatment Study (POATS) was undertaken to examine baseline patient characteristics (N=360) associated with success during 12-week buprenorphine/naloxone treatment for prescription opioid dependence. Baseline predictor variables included self-reported demographic and opioid use history information, diagnoses assessed via the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, and historical opioid use and related information from the Pain And Opiate Analgesic Use History. Results In bivariate analyses, pre-treatment characteristics associated with successful opioid use outcome included older age, past-year or lifetime diagnosis of major depressive disorder, initially obtaining opioids with a medical prescription to relieve pain, having only used opioids by swallowing or sublingual administration, never having used heroin, using an opioid other than extended-release oxycodone most frequently, and no prior opioid dependence treatment. In multivariate analysis, age, lifetime major depressive disorder, having only used opioids by swallowing or sublingual administration, and receiving no prior opioid dependence treatment remained as significant predictors of successful outcome. Conclusions This is the first study to examine characteristics associated with treatment outcome in patients dependent exclusively on prescription opioids. Characteristics associated with successful outcome after 12 weeks of buprenorphine/naloxone treatment include some that have previously been found to predict heroin-dependent patients’ response to methadone treatment and some specific to prescription opioid-dependent patients receiving buprenorphine/naloxone.

BackgroundPrescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) have been implemented in 49 out of 50 states in an effort to reduce opioid-related misuse, abuse, and mortality, yet the literature evaluating the impact of PDMP implementation remains limited. We conducted a scoping review to: (1) describe available evidence regarding impact of PDMPs in the U.S.; and (2) propose a conceptual model to inform future PDMP implementation and evaluation efforts.MethodsScoping systematic review following Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) methodology. We identified 11 relevant studies based on inclusion criteria using a PubMed database search of English-language studies published 1/1/2000–5/31/16. Data were extracted and thematic analysis conducted to synthesize results.ResultsExtant evidence for the impact of PDMPs as an opioid risk mitigation tool remains mixed. Thematic analysis revealed four domains of opioid-related outcomes frequently examined in original studies evaluating PDMP implementation: (1) opioid prescribing; (2) opioid diversion and supply; (3) opioid misuse; and (4) opioid-related morbidity and mortality. An evaluation framework incorporating these domains is presented that highlights significant gaps in empirical research across each of these domains.ConclusionsEvidence for the impact of state-level PDMPs remains mixed. We propose a conceptual model for evaluating PDMP implementation toward the goals of clarifying PDMP mechanisms of impact, identifying characteristics of PDMPs associated with best outcomes, and maximizing the utility of PDMP policy and implementation to reduce opioid-related public health burden.

No abstract