Nonmedical Opioid Research Articles

The Opioid Industry Documents Archive: Advancing Public Health Through Industry Document Disclosure.

More than twenty-five years after the first signs of potential harm, the US remains locked in the grip of an opioid epidemic, with more Americans dying from overdoses than ever before.1 Diversion of prescription opioids plays an important role in opioid-related harms. Much of the scientific and public health focus on diversion has been on end-users, given how commonly non-medical prescription opioid use occurs, as well as the proportion of individuals who report that their source of non-medical opioids was friends or family. However, diversion of opioids, as well as their rampant oversupply, can be discerned higher up the supply chain, including among wholesalers, pharmacies and rogue prescribers whose behavior may trigger well-described "flags" warranting further evaluation and action.

Superiority and cost-effectiveness of monthly extended-release buprenorphine versus daily standard of care medication: a pragmatic, parallel-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

Daily methadone maintenance or buprenorphine treatment is the standard-of-care (SoC) medication for opioid use disorder (OUD). Subcutaneously injected, extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR) may be more effective-but there has been no superiority evaluation. This pragmatic, parallel-group, open-label, multi-centre, effectiveness superiority randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was conducted at five National Health Service community-based treatment clinics in England and Scotland. Participants (adults aged ≥ 18 years; all meeting DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for moderate or severe OUD at admission to their current maintenance treatment episode) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive continued daily SoC (liquid methadone (usual dose range: 60-120mg) or sublingual/transmucosal buprenorphine (usual dose range: 8-24mg) for 24 weeks; or monthly BUP-XR (Sublocade;® two injections of 300mg, then four maintenance injections of 100mg or 300mg, with maintenance dose selected by response and preference) for 24 weeks. In the intent-to-treat population (senior statistician blinded to blinded to treatment group allocation), and with a seven-day grace period after randomisation, the primary endpoint was the count of days abstinent from non-medical opioids between days 8-168 (i.e., weeks 2-24; range: 0-161 days). Safety was reported for the intention-to- treat population. Adopting a broad societal perspective inclusive of criminal justice, NHS and personal social service costs, a trial-based cost-utility analysis estimated the Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of BUP-XR versus SoC at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold. The study was registered EudraCT (2018-004460-63) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05164549), and is completed. Between Aug 9, 2019 and Nov 2, 2021, 314 participants were randomly allocated to receive SoC (n=156) or BUP-XR (n=158). Participants were abstinent from opioids for an adjusted mean of 104.37 days (standard error [SE] 9.89; range: 0-161 days) in the SoC group and an adjusted mean of 123.43 days (SE 4.76; range: 24-161 days) in the BUP-XR group (adjusted incident rate ratio [IRR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.33; p-value 0.004). The incidence of any adverse event was higher in the BUP-XR group than the SoC group (128 [81.0%] of 158 participants versus 67 [42.9%] of 156 participants, respectively-most commonly rapidly-resolving (mild-moderate range) pain from drug administration in the BUP-XR group (121 [26.9%] of 450 adverse events). There were 11 serious adverse events (7.0%) in the 158 participants in the BUP-XR group, and 18 serious adverse events (11.5%) in the 156 participants in the SoC group-none judged to be related to study treatment. The BUP-XR treatment group had a mean incremental cost of £1033 (95% central range [CR]-1189 to 3225) and was associated with a mean incremental QALY of 0.02 (95% CR 0.00-0.05), and an ICER of £47,540 (0.37 probability of being cost-effective at the £30,000/QALY gained willingness-to-pay threshold). However, BUP-XR dominated the SoC among participants who were rated more severe at study baseline, and among participants in maintenance treatment for more that 28 days at study enrolment. Evaluated against the daily oral SoC, monthly BUP-XR is clinically superior, delivering greater abstinence from opioids, and with a comparable safety profile. BUP-XR was not cost-effective in a base case cost-utility analysis using the societal perspective, but it was more effective and less costly (dominant) among participants with more severe OUD, or those whose current treatment episode was longer than 28 days. Further trials are needed to evaluate if BUP-XR is associated with better clinical and health economic outcomes over the longer term. Indivior.

Health care and harm reduction provider perspectives on treating older adults who use non-medical opioids: a qualitative study set in Chicago

BackgroundOpioid overdose death rates are increasing for adults aged 55 and older, with especially high rates in large urban areas. In parallel, admissions to treatment programs for older adults using illicit substances are increasing as well. Despite these trends, there is a lack of information about older adults who use non-medical opioids (NMO) and even less knowledge about their health and service encounters. Conducted in Chicago, Illinois, this qualitative study explores the perspectives of health care and harm reduction service providers who work with older adults using non-medical opioids.MethodsThe study used snowball sampling to locate participants with expertise in working with older adults who use non-medical opioids. In total, we conducted 26 semi-structured interviews from September 2021-August 2022. We explored questions regarding participants’ perceptions of older adult opioid use patterns, comorbidities, and involvement in harm reduction outreach and opioid use disorder treatment.ResultsMany of the providers we interviewed consider older adults who use NMO as a distinct population that employ unique use behaviors with the intent to protect them from opioid overdose. However, these same unique behaviors may potentiate their risk for overdose in today’s climate. Providers report initial encounters that are not care seeking for opioid use and primarily oriented around health conditions. Older adults who use non-medical opioids are seen as complex patients due to the need to diagnostically untangle symptoms of substance use from co-morbidities and conditions associated with aging.Treatment for this population is also viewed as complicated due to the interactions between aging, comorbidities, and substance use. Providers also noted that older adults who use NMO have use behaviors that make them less visible to outreach and treatment service providers, potentially putting them at increased risk for overdose and health conditions associated with opioid use.ConclusionsFindings from this study are intended to inform future research on care provision for older adults who use non-medical opioids and may be especially applicable to large urban reas with histories of opioid use dating back to earlier drug epidemics of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.

Stigma Communication Surrounding Nonmedical Opioid Use Among Affected Family Members

ABSTRACT A growing body of research demonstrates the role of language in stigma toward nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). Terms like “substance abuser” perpetuate stereotypes and evoke punitive judgments. This study examines how affected family members (AFMs) communicate stigma when discussing their loved one’s NMOU. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 adults with a close family member with a history of NMOU. An iterative approach was used to analyze instances when stigmatizing terms or messages were used. AFMs described people engaged in NMOU as underweight, “dirty,” or “nodding off,” and often labeled these individuals “addicts” or opioid “abusers.” Responsibility for the NMOU was attributed to both internal (e.g. choice) and external (e.g. brain disease) factors. People engaged in NMOU were linked to physical danger, resource threats, and threats to the family members’ reputation and relationships. While most stigma messages related to the person engaged in NMOU, stigmatizing messages directed toward AFMs also emerged; family members labeled “enablers” were judged, blamed, and described as a threat to the person engaged in NMOU. Although AFMs expressed care and desire to support their loved ones, they often conveyed stigma in their language choices. This language among AFMs may reflect internalized stigma. Increased efforts are needed to help AFMs cope with the challenges of a loved one’s NMOU and identify effective ways to support their loved one. One way AFMs can support their loved one is by using more inclusive, person-first language.

Health Care Provider Attitudes and Beliefs Toward Nonmedical Opioid Use in Patients with Cancer Pain.

Background: Data on health care providers' (HCPs') perceptions about patients with cancer pain and nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) are lacking. We examined the perceptions and attitudes of HCPs and assessed the usefulness of an interdisciplinary opioid stewardship program (OSP) while caring for these patients. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted among the supportive care HCPs between September and November 2021. Results: Of 85 HCPs, 64 responded (75%) to the survey. Participants perceived that NMOU is underdiagnosed (42/64; 67%), and caring for such patients is difficult (58/64, 91%) and time consuming (54/64, 87%). A majority (50/51, 98%) were aware of the OSP, and (48/51; 94%) found it helpful. Conclusion: HCPs reported that NMOU is underdiagnosed and is challenging to manage. They endorsed the utility of an OSP in managing patients with concurrent cancer pain and NMOU. Future research should identify ways to standardize care and integrate OSP in routine supportive oncology practice.

Perception of Resource Allocations to Address the Opioid Epidemic.

Despite billions of dollars spent on opioid policy initiatives, public knowledge of evidence-based policies to reduce opioid-related morbidity remain low. Consequences of this knowledge gap for support of initiatives remains understudied. Our objective was to evaluate how participants with and without lived experience allocate funding for initiatives to address the opioid epidemic. A secondary objective was to collect proof-of-concept data of an informational intervention designed to improve support for evidence-based policies. Participants (N = 284; 57.2% female) without lifetime nonmedical opioid use (n = 98) and those with lifetime use (past year [n = 81] or nonpast year [n = 105]) of nonmedical opioids were recruited. All participants reported how they would allocate funds to demand reduction, supply reduction, harm reduction, and treatment policies. Half of all participants were then randomized to a brief informational intervention designed to emphasize evidence-based harm reduction and treatment programs. Funding allocations were highest for policies related to community services and treatment and lowest for those related to harm reduction. Participants with lived experience allocated less to supply reduction policies. Participants (12%) who reallocated funds after information exposure increased funding to supervised consumption sites, dz = 0.77, naloxone distribution, dz = 0.85, syringe exchange programs, dz = 0.63, and medications for opioid use disorder access, dz = 0.70. This study illustrates how people with and without lived experience prioritize various policies to address the opioid epidemic and emphasize comparably low support for harm reduction policies. Proof-of-concept data suggest that brief informational interventions may increase funding support for harm reduction strategies, at least in a subset of people.

Extended-release pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder (EXPO): protocol for an open-label randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of injectable buprenorphine versus sublingual tablet buprenorphine and oral liquid methadone

BackgroundSublingual tablet buprenorphine (BUP-SL) and oral liquid methadone (MET) are the daily, standard-of-care (SOC) opioid agonist treatment medications for opioid use disorder (OUD). A sizable proportion of the OUD treatment population is not exposed to sufficient treatment to attain the desired clinical benefit. Two promising therapeutic technologies address this deficit: long-acting injectable buprenorphine and personalised psychosocial interventions (PSI). This study will determine (A) the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness — monthly injectable, extended-release (BUP-XR) in a head-to-head comparison with BUP-SL and MET, and (B) the effectiveness of BUP-XR with adjunctive PSI versus BUP-SL and MET with PSI. Safety, retention, craving, substance use, quality-adjusted life years, social functioning, and subjective recovery from OUD will be also evaluated.MethodsThis is a pragmatic, multi-centre, open-label, parallel-group, superiority RCT, with a qualitative (mixed-methods) evaluation. The study population is adults. The setting is five National Health Service community treatment centres in England and Scotland. At each centre, participants will be randomly allocated (1:1) to BUP-XR or SOC. At the London study co-ordinating centre, there will also be allocation of participants to BUP-XR with PSI or SOC with PSI. With 24 weeks of study treatment, the primary outcome is days of abstinence from non-medical opioids during study weeks 2–24 combined with up to 12 urine drug screen tests for opioids. For 90% power (alpha, 5%; 15% inflation for attrition), 304 participants are needed for the BUP-XR versus SOC comparison. With the same planning parameters, 300 participants are needed for the BUP-XR and PSI versus SOC and PSI comparison. Statistical and health economic analysis plans will be published before data-lock on the Open Science Framework. Findings will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards.DiscussionThis pragmatic randomised controlled trial is the first evaluation of injectable BUP-XR versus the SOC medications BUP-SL and MET, with personalised PSI. If there is evidence for the superiority of BUP-XR over SOC medication, study findings will have substantial implications for OUD clinical practice and treatment policy in the UK and elsewhere.Trial registrationEU Clinical Trials register 2018-004460-63.

Conceptualizing the Socio-Built Environment: An Expanded Theoretical Framework to Promote a Better Understanding of Risk for Nonmedical Opioid Overdose Outcomes in Urban and Non-Urban Settings.

Nonmedical opioid (NMO) use has been linked to significant increases in rates of NMO morbidity and mortality in non-urban areas. While there has been a great deal of empirical evidence suggesting that physical features of built environments represent strong predictors of drug use and mental health outcomes in urban settings, there is a dearth of research assessing the physical, built environment features of non-urban settings in order to predict risk for NMO overdose outcomes. Likewise, there is strong extant literature suggesting that social characteristics of environments also predict NMO overdoses and other NMO use outcomes, but limited research that considers the combined effects of both physical and social characteristics of environments on NMO outcomes. As a result, important gaps in the scientific literature currently limit our understanding of how both physical and social features of environments shape risk for NMO overdose in rural and suburban settings and therefore limit our ability to intervene effectively. In order to foster a more holistic understanding of environmental features predicting the emerging epidemic of NMO overdose, this article presents a novel, expanded theoretical framework that conceptualizes "socio-built environments" as comprised of (a) environmental characteristics that are applicable to both non-urban and urban settings and (b) not only traditional features of environments as conceptualized by the extant built environment framework, but also social features of environments. This novel framework can help improve our ability to identify settings at highest risk for high rates of NMO overdose, in order to improve resource allocation, targeting, and implementation for interventions such as opioid treatment services, mental health services, and care and harm reduction services for people who use drugs.

Becoming our young people’s case managers: caregivers’ experiences, needs, and ideas for improving opioid use treatments for young people using opioids

BackgroundEvidence continues to show that young people, ages 15-24, remain at significant risk of harms from non-medical opioid use and opioid use disorder (OUD), with experts calling for widespread implementation of developmentally-appropriate interventions. These recommendations include the involvement of caregivers in the prevention, early intervention, and treatment of young people using opioids. However, little research has investigated caregivers’ experiences supporting young people, leaving critical gaps in understanding this role. The aim of this study is to explore caregivers’ experiences accessing opioid use treatments with young people and their needs and ideas for improving such treatments.MethodsThis study reports qualitative findings from Phase 1 of the Improving Treatment Together project, a multi-phase, multi-site community-based participatory study broadly aimed at co-designing opioid use treatments to improve the experiences and outcomes of young people using non-medical opioids. During Phase 1, a total of 27 caregivers (parents, guardians) participated in full-day workshops that were conducted in three communities in British Columbia, Canada. Following human-centred co-design methods, caregivers engaged in small and large group discussions of their experiences, needs, and ideas for improving opioid use treatments for young people. Discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analysed.ResultsAcross communities, caregivers’ main experiences were defined as ‘becoming our young people’s case managers’ and ‘enduring a never-ending rollercoaster’. To improve these experiences, two needs themes were identified – expanding organizational and system-level capacity and wider-spread understanding of opioid use as a health issue. Caregivers brainstormed a total of 378 individual ideas to meet these needs, several of which spanned multiple needs themes.ConclusionsCaregivers’ experiences, needs, and ideas reveal critical opportunities for improving the quality of interventions for opioid use among young people. This study represents a substantial contribution to the design and implementation of developmentally-appropriate and family-centred interventions for young people using opioids.

Psychosocial and Drug Use Assessment of Regular vs. Non-Regular Ayahuasca Users in a Brazilian Sample: a Web-Based Survey

Background: Preliminary evidence suggests that long-term ayahuasca use is associated with better psychosocial outcomes and less drug use; however, available data on the association between ayahuasca intake frequency and psychosocial outcomes is limited. Objectives: We sought to characterize and investigate the association of regular ayahuasca use, as compared to non-regular use, on licit (alcohol and tobacco) and illicit (cannabis, psychostimulants, psychedelics, and non-medical opioids) drug use and psychosocial outcomes. Methods: An online-based cross-sectional survey was taken among people who use ayahuasca in Brazil assessing sociodemographic, drug and ayahuasca use, anxiety and depression (HAD-S), intrinsic religiosity (IRI), negative and positive affects (PANAS), satisfaction with life (SWLS), and five quality of life domains (WHOQOL-Brief). Multivariate regressions for each psychosocial outcome and drug use were performed comparing regular to non-regular ayahuasca users while correcting for sociodemographic variables. Results: A total of 286 valid answers were retrieved, divided into people with regular (n = 101) and non-regular (n = 185) ayahuasca use. Groups had similar sociodemographic profiles and lifetime use of drugs. In the multivariate analysis, regular use of ayahuasca was associated with lower anxiety (B: −0.97), negative affect (B: −2.62), general (B: 0.22) and physical (B: 0.17) quality of life, higher intrinsic religiosity scores (B: 4.16), and less past-month licit (OR = 0.30) and illicit (OR = 0.49) use of substances. Conclusions: Our results show that ceremonial regular ayahuasca compared to non-regular use is associated with better psychosocial and mental health outcomes and less drug use. Studies with repeated ayahuasca administration and extended follow-ups are essential to clarify the nature of ayahuasca’s therapeutic effects and to guide future clinical research.

Associations of Lifetime Nonmedical Opioid, Methamphetamine, and Kratom Use within a Nationally Representative US Sample

ABSTRACT Co-use of non-medical opioids (NMO) and methamphetamine is increasing. So too is the use of the psychoactive botanical “kratom,” including among people with NMO and methamphetamine use histories. We assessed characteristics associated with respondent groups who reported lifetime methamphetamine and/or kratom use within a nationally representative US sample using 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data from respondents reporting lifetime NMO use (diverted prescription opioids, heroin). Weighted prevalence estimates for demographic, mental health, and substance use outcomes were determined. Logistic regression examined associations between group membership and outcomes. Among this sample of respondents with lifetime NMO use, 67.6% (95% CI = 65.6–69.4%) reported only NMO use; 4.6% (3.9–5.4%) reported NMO+Kratom; 24.7% (22.7–26.7%) reported NMO+Methamphetamine; and 3.2% (2.5–3.9%) reported NMO+Methamphetamine+Kratom. Compared to those in the NMO-only group, the NMO+Kratom group was more likely to report past-year serious mental illness (SMI; OR = 2.27), suicidality (OR = 1.89), and past-month psychological distress (OR = 1.88). The NMO+Methamphetamine+Kratom group was more likely to report past-year SMI (OR = 2.65), past-month psychological distress (OR = 2.06), and unmet mental health needs (OR = 2.03); increased odds for drug injection, opioid withdrawal, and perceived treatment need also emerged. Risk factors were observed for all groups but were greatest among those reporting use of all three substances.

Association of Substance Use With Behavioral Adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for COVID-19 Mitigation: Cross-sectional Web-Based Survey.

BackgroundSubstance use is a risk factor for COVID-19 infection and adverse outcomes. However, reasons for elevated risk for COVID-19 in substance users are not well understood.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether alcohol or other drug use is associated with adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for COVID-19 mitigation. Preregistered analyses tested the hypothesis that greater use of alcohol and other drugs would be associated with lower CDC guideline adherence. A secondary objective was to determine whether substance use was associated with the likelihood of COVID-19 testing or outcome.MethodsA cross-sectional web-based survey was administered to a convenience sample recruited through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform from June 18 to July 19, 2020. Individuals aged 18 years or older and residing in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, or Rhode Island were eligible to participate. The exposure of interest was past 7-day use of alcohol, cigarettes, electronic cigarettes, cannabis, stimulants, and nonmedical opioids. The primary outcome was CDC guideline adherence measured using a scale developed from behaviors advised to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of COVID-19 testing and a positive COVID-19 test result. All analyses accounted for the sociodemographic characteristics.ResultsThe sample consisted of 1084 individuals (mean age 40.9 [SD 13.4] years): 529 (48.8%) men, 543 (50.1%) women, 12 (1.1%) other gender identity, 742 (68.5%) White individuals, 267 (24.6%) Black individuals, and 276 (25.5%) Hispanic individuals. Daily opioid users reported lower CDC guideline adherence than nondaily users (B=–0.24, 95% CI –0.44 to –0.05) and nonusers (B=–0.57, 95% CI –0.76 to –0.38). Daily alcohol drinkers reported lower adherence than nondaily drinkers (B=–0.16, 95% CI –0.30 to –0.02). Nondaily alcohol drinkers reported higher adherence than nondrinkers (B=0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.17). Daily opioid use was related to greater odds of COVID-19 testing, and daily stimulant use was related to greater odds of a positive COVID-19 test.ConclusionsIn a regionally-specific, racially, and ethnically diverse convenience sample, adults who engaged in daily alcohol or opioid use reported lower CDC guideline adherence for COVID-19 mitigation. Any opioid use was associated with greater odds of COVID-19 testing, and daily stimulant use was associated with greater odds of COVID-19 infection. Cigarettes, electronic cigarettes, cannabis, or stimulant use were not statistically associated with CDC guideline adherence, after accounting for sociodemographic covariates and other substance use variables. Findings support further investigation into whether COVID-19 testing and vaccination should be expanded among individuals with substance-related risk factors.

Frequency and recency of non-medical opioid use and death due to overdose or suicide among individuals assessed for risky substance use: A national registry study in Sweden

Sweden and many other countries have experienced increases in suicide and accidental overdose deaths. An analysis examined the associations between recency of non-medical opioid misuse and frequency of use of non-medical opioids with death due to either suicide or accidental overdose within a sample of 15,000 Swedish adults who completed an Addiction Severity Index (ASI) assessment for risky substance use or a substance use disorder. Methods and materialsSuicide (n = 136) and death due to overdose (n = 405) were identified in the official Cause of Death Registry from the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Control variables included demographic characteristics and risks associated with either overdose or suicide. Cox regression analyses controlled for variables statistically significantly at the bivariate level. ResultsAt the multivariable level: a) a higher (modified) ASI Composite Score for mental health; b) history of suicide attempt; c) having used non-medical opioids for 1–2 times per week for at least a year; d) history of injection drug use; and, e) early onset of drug use, were all significantly and positively associated with death due to suicide. At the multivariable level: a) a higher the revised ASI Composite Score for mental health; b) recency of use of non-medical opioids; c) frequency of non-medical opioid use; d) being a male; and e) being of ages 18–24 years compared to ages 43–51 years were all positively and significantly associated with death due to accidental overdose. ConclusionThese findings underscore the need to integrate mental health and substance use disorder treatment and provide suicide and overdose prevention interventions for individuals with an opioid use disorder. Recency and frequency of non-medical opioids were only associated with death due to overdose and not suicide. However, other drug use related variables (using opioids 1–2 times per week for at least a year, early onset of drug use and drug injection) were significantly associated with death due to suicide.

Reflections and Challenges of Pregnant and Postpartum Participant Recruitment in the Context of the Opioid Epidemic

Opioid use disorder among women of childbearing age has reached epidemic proportions. In rural regions of the United States, recruiting perinatal women who use nonmedical opioids to participate in research is wrought with challenges, including barriers such as community stigma, lack of transportation, and time constraints. The current study describes our process and challenges of recruiting pregnant and postpartum women in rural Indiana consisting of women who misuse opioids and those who do not. We employed multiple strategies to recruit participants. Methods included (1) sampling from healthcare facilities based on referrals from front-desk staff and frontline healthcare workers; (2) dissemination of flyers and brochures within healthcare facilities and the community, supported with onsite research assistant presence; (3) digital methods coupled with snowball sampling; and (4) local community talks that provided information about the study. Our multiple recruitment efforts revealed that building relationships with community stakeholders was key in recruiting women who use nonmedical opioids, but that digital methods were more effective in recruiting a larger sample of pregnant and postpartum women in a short amount of time. We conclude by making several recommendations to enhance academic-community partnerships in order to bolster sample sizes for prolonged research studies. Furthermore, we highlight the need to destigmatize addiction in order to better serve hard-to-reach populations through research and practice.

What Differs between Patients under Methadone and under Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) in Daily Clinical Practice in France? A Short Report.

(1) Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a complex condition that can require long-term treatment. Pharmacological therapy for OUD involves treatment with opioid agonists (OMT) tailored to individual profiles. The aim of our study in daily clinical practice was to compare the profiles of patients treated with methadone (MTD) and those using buprenorphine (BHD or BHD-naloxone-NX). (2) Methods: A cross-sectional multicentre study explored the psychological, somatic and social profiles of patients with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) following Opioid Maintenance Treatment (BHD, BHD/NX, or MTD). Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed (3) Results: 257 patients were included, a majority were men using heroin. 68% (178) were on MTD, 32% (79) were on BHD. Patients with MTD were significantly more likely to report socio-affective damage, and more likely to be younger and not to report oral or sublingual use as the main route for heroin or non-medical opioids (4) Conclusions: In daily clinical practice, regarding OUD damage, only socio-affective damage was significantly more prevalent among patients on MTD than among those on BHD in the multivariate model. Age and route of administration also differed, and our results could raise the issue of the type of OMT prescribed in case of non-medical use of prescribed opioids. These hypothesis should be confirmed in larger studies.

Novel treatment of opioid use disorder using ibogaine and iboga in two adults

AbstractIbogaine is a naturally occurring psychedelic medicine with anti-addictive properties. While research on ibogaine is limited, several observational studies have shown ibogaine can mitigate opioid withdrawal, as seen with reductions in clinical and subjective opioid withdrawal scores and reduced drug use severity (Noller, Frampton, & Yazar-Klosinski, 2018; Brown & Alper 2018). Furthermore, the psychoactive experience may help individuals to realign their values, purpose and sense of connection, as seen with post treatment reductions in depression scores (Noller et al., 2018; Mash et al., 2000).Case seriesThis case series describes two cases of individuals accessing ibogaine through private unregulated clinics in the Vancouver area to treat their opioid use disorder.ConclusionsIn case 1, the client achieved total abstinence from all opioids within 5–6 days of starting ibogaine treatment, did not experience any opioid withdrawal symptoms after ibogaine treatment and maintained abstinence from opioids for 3 years. In case 2, the patient took ibogaine/iboga in multiple treatments over a short period of time (<4 months). The patient stopped all non-medical opioids after the first iboga treatment and then used ibogaine to aid with further dose reductions of her opioid agonist therapy (OAT) and has maintained abstinence from opioids for 2 years. Ibogaine offers a unique and novel therapeutic approach to treating opioid use disorder. Further studies are needed to establish the safety, risks and potential role for ibogaine as a mainstream, evidence-based addiction treatment.

Journal Digest: Riluzole, and Hyperarousal; Children, OCD, and Pandemic; Apathy, Dementia, and Older Adults; Cannabis, and Opioids; COVID, Xenophobia, and Mental Health

Journal Digest: Riluzole, and Hyperarousal; Children, OCD, and Pandemic; Apathy, Dementia, and Older Adults; Cannabis, and Opioids; COVID, Xenophobia, and Mental Health

Impact of cannabis on non-medical opioid use and symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder: a nationwide longitudinal VA study

ABSTRACT Background Multiple states have authorized cannabis as an opioid substitution agent and as a treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Objectives This study sought to investigate the relationship between cannabis use, non-medical opioid use, and PTSD symptoms among U.S. veterans. Methods From 1992–2011, veterans admitted to specialized intensive PTSD treatment participated in a national evaluation with assessments at intake and four months after discharge. Participants with non-medical opioid use ≥ 7 days during the 30 days preceding admission were divided into two groups: those with cannabis use ≥ 7 days, and those without cannabis use. These two groups were compared on measures of substance use and PTSD symptoms at baseline and 4-months outpatient follow-up. We hypothesized that, at both assessments, the group with baseline cannabis use would show less non-medical opioid use and less severe PTSD symptoms. Results Of 1,413 veterans with current non-medical opioid use, 438 (30.3%) also used cannabis, and 985 (69.7%) did not. At baseline, veterans with concurrent non-medical opioid and cannabis use had slightly fewer days of non-medical opioid use (p < .005; d = −0.16), greater use of other substances (p < .0001) and more PTSD symptoms (p = .003; d = 0.16), compared to veterans who used non-medical opioids but not cannabis. At follow-up, substance use or PTSD symptoms did not significantly differ. Conclusion Cannabis use was not associated with a substantial reduction of non-medical opioid use, or either improvement or worsening of PTSD symptoms in this population. Hence, these data do not encourage cannabis use to treat either non-medical opioid use or PTSD.

Is Cannabis being used as a substitute for non-medical opioids by adults with problem substance use in the United States? A within-person analysis.

Ecological studies have suggested that Cannabis legalization might have led to a decrease in opioid overdose deaths. Such studies do not provide information about whether individuals are substituting Cannabis for opioids at different points in time. The current study assessed the magnitude of the daily association between Cannabis and opioid use in individual adults with and without pain who use non-medical opioids. Prospective cohort study. The greater New York area and a suburban inpatient addiction program. Adults with problem substance use who use non-medical opioids, recruited from May 2016-June 2019. The analytical sample included 13 271days of observation among 211 participants (64% male, 41% white, 78% unmarried, 80% unemployed, mean age 43years). Participants completed interviewer- and self-administered computerized surveys, and then responded to an interactive voice response (IVR) system daily for the following 90days. The main exposures, Cannabis use and pain, were defined as responding affirmatively to the IVR question: 'Did you use Cannabis yesterday?' and endorsing moderate or severe pain at baseline, respectively. The main outcome, non-medical or illicit opioid use during 90-day follow-up, was defined as responding affirmatively to IVR question: 'Did you use heroin yesterday?' or 'Did you use prescription opioids more than prescribed or without a prescription yesterday?'. The mean IVR completion rate was 70%. The unadjusted odds ratio (aOR) indicating same-day use of Cannabis and opioids was 2.00 [95% confidence interval (CI)=1.54-2.59]. Controlling for demographic characteristics, recruitment method, opioid types at baseline and pain, the aOR was 1.86 (95% CI=1.44-2.41). A test of interaction between pain and Cannabis use to determine if the association of Cannabis with opioid use differed between people with moderate-to-severe pain and less-than-moderate pain was inconclusive. Among US adults with problem substance use who use non-medical opioids, the odds of opioid use appear to be approximately doubled on days when Cannabis is used. This relationship does not appear to differ between people with moderate or more severe pain versus less than moderate pain, suggesting that Cannabis is not being used as a substitute for illegal opioids.

Marijuana users are likely to report opioid misuse among adults over 50 years in representative sample of the United States (2002–2014)

Background: In the wake of the rising rate of prescription opioid misuse, there has been increased public health interest in the possibility that cannabis might help to curb or prevent opioid use disorder. Previous studies were limited to young adult marijuana use population. Little is known about whether in older adult population, marijuana use is associated with a different type of nonmedical use opioids. We examined the association between marijuana use and nonmedical prescription opioids dependence and use among older adults.Methods: The National Survey on Drug Use and Health is a nationally U.S. representative cross-sectional survey. We analyzed data for 75,949 adults aged ≥ 50 who participated in the year 2002–2014.Results: Within the overall population, 3.8% of the older adults reported past-year marijuana use (estimate 3.5 million older adults Americans). Past-year marijuana use was very common (25%–37%) among nonmedical opioid dependence respondents compared to those who did not report nonmedical opioid dependence and use (3.5%–3.7%). Past-year marijuana user was significantly associated with an increase in odds of reporting opioid dependence (AOR 9.6 95% CI = 5.8–15.7), and past-year nonmedical use opioids (AOR 6.4 95% CI = 5.2–7.8). Illicit drug heroin was the most prevalent nonmedical used opioid (AOR 6.3 95% CI = 5.0–7.9), compared to codeine (AOR 4.5 95% CI = 3.5–5.7), hydrocodone (AOR 4.9 95% CI = 3.8–6.4), methadone or tramadol (AOR 4.9 95% CI = 2.0–12.3).Conclusion: Policymakers and healthcare providers should remain mindful that older adult marijuana users regardless of initial legitimate medical needs are likely to report nonmedical opioid use including illicit drug heroin.