IMPORTANCE: Prescription opioid dependence is increasing and creates a significant public health burden, but primary care physicians lack evidence-based guidelines to decide between tapering doses followed by discontinuation of buprenorphine hydrochloride and naloxone hydrochloride therapy (hereinafter referred to as buprenorphine therapy) or ongoing maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of buprenorphine taper vs ongoing maintenance therapy in primary care-based treatment for prescription opioid dependence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a 14-week randomized clinical trial that enrolled 113 patients with prescription opioid dependence from February 17, 2009, through February 1, 2013, in a single primary care site. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to buprenorphine taper (taper condition) or ongoing buprenorphine maintenance therapy (maintenance condition). The buprenorphine taper was initiated after 6 weeks of stabilization, lasted for 3 weeks, and included medications for opioid withdrawal, after which patients were offered naltrexone treatment. The maintenance group received ongoing buprenorphine therapy. All patients received physician and nurse support and drug counseling. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Illicit opioid use via results of urinanalysis and patient report, treatment retention, and reinitiation of buprenorphine therapy (taper group only). RESULTS: During the trial, the mean percentage of urine samples negative for opioids was lower for patients in the taper group (35.2% [95% CI, 26.2%-44.2%]) compared with those in the maintenance group (53.2% [95% CI, 44.3%-62.0%]). Patients in the taper group reported more days per week of illicit opioid use than those in the maintenance group once they were no longer receiving buprenorphine (mean use, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.60-1.94] vs 0.47 [95% CI, 0.19-0.74] days). Patients in the taper group had fewer maximum consecutive weeks of opioid abstinence compared with those in the maintenance group (mean abstinence, 2.70 [95% CI, 1.72-3.75] vs 5.20 [95% CI, 4.16-6.20] weeks). Patients in the taper group were less likely to complete the trial (6 of 57 [11%] vs 37 of 56 [66%]; P < .001). Sixteen patients in the taper group reinitiated buprenorphine treatment after the taper owing to relapse. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Tapering is less efficacious than ongoing maintenance treatment in patients with prescription opioid dependence who receivebuprenorphine therapy in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00555425.
RCT Entities:
IMPORTANCE: Prescription opioid dependence is increasing and creates a significant public health burden, but primary care physicians lack evidence-based guidelines to decide between tapering doses followed by discontinuation of buprenorphine hydrochloride and naloxone hydrochloride therapy (hereinafter referred to as buprenorphine therapy) or ongoing maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of buprenorphine taper vs ongoing maintenance therapy in primary care-based treatment for prescription opioid dependence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a 14-week randomized clinical trial that enrolled 113 patients with prescription opioid dependence from February 17, 2009, through February 1, 2013, in a single primary care site. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized to buprenorphine taper (taper condition) or ongoing buprenorphine maintenance therapy (maintenance condition). The buprenorphine taper was initiated after 6 weeks of stabilization, lasted for 3 weeks, and included medications for opioid withdrawal, after which patients were offered naltrexone treatment. The maintenance group received ongoing buprenorphine therapy. All patients received physician and nurse support and drug counseling. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Illicit opioid use via results of urinanalysis and patient report, treatment retention, and reinitiation of buprenorphine therapy (taper group only). RESULTS: During the trial, the mean percentage of urine samples negative for opioids was lower for patients in the taper group (35.2% [95% CI, 26.2%-44.2%]) compared with those in the maintenance group (53.2% [95% CI, 44.3%-62.0%]). Patients in the taper group reported more days per week of illicit opioid use than those in the maintenance group once they were no longer receiving buprenorphine (mean use, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.60-1.94] vs 0.47 [95% CI, 0.19-0.74] days). Patients in the taper group had fewer maximum consecutive weeks of opioid abstinence compared with those in the maintenance group (mean abstinence, 2.70 [95% CI, 1.72-3.75] vs 5.20 [95% CI, 4.16-6.20] weeks). Patients in the taper group were less likely to complete the trial (6 of 57 [11%] vs 37 of 56 [66%]; P < .001). Sixteen patients in the taper group reinitiated buprenorphine treatment after the taper owing to relapse. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Tapering is less efficacious than ongoing maintenance treatment in patients with prescription opioid dependence who receive buprenorphine therapy in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00555425.
Authors: Lauretta E Grau; Nabarun Dasgupta; Alison Phinney Harvey; Kevin Irwin; Anthony Givens; Mark L Kinzly; Robert Heimer Journal: Am J Addict Date: 2007 May-Jun
Authors: Chris-Ellyn Johanson; Cynthia L Arfken; Salvatore di Menza; Charles Roberts Schuster Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2011-08-21 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Linda R Gowing; Michael Farrell; Reinhard Bornemann; Lynn E Sullivan; Robert L Ali Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-12-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: J Seifert; C Metzner; W Paetzold; M Borsutzky; T Passie; J Rollnik; B Wiese; H M Emrich; U Schneider Journal: Pharmacopsychiatry Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 5.788
Authors: Brent A Moore; David A Fiellin; Declan T Barry; Lynn E Sullivan; Marek C Chawarski; Patrick G O'Connor; Richard S Schottenfeld Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Gilles Fleury; Robert Milin; David Crockford; Leslie Buckley; Dara Charney; Tony P George; Nady el-Guebaly Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 4.356
Authors: Elizabeth E Krans; Debra Bogen; Gale Richardson; Seo Young Park; Shannon L Dunn; Nancy Day Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Gail D'Onofrio; Marek C Chawarski; Patrick G O'Connor; Michael V Pantalon; Susan H Busch; Patricia H Owens; Kathryn Hawk; Steven L Bernstein; David A Fiellin Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jennifer R Schroeder; Karran A Phillips; David H Epstein; Michelle L Jobes; Melody A Furnari; Ashley P Kennedy; Markus Heilig; Kenzie L Preston Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Stacey C Sigmon; Andrew C Meyer; Bryce Hruska; Taylor Ochalek; Gail Rose; Gary J Badger; John R Brooklyn; Sarah H Heil; Stephen T Higgins; Brent A Moore; Robert P Schwartz Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 3.913