Literature DB >> 28587620

Comparing the effect of buprenorphine and methadone in the reduction of methamphetamine craving: a randomized clinical trial.

Jamshid Ahmadi1, Leila Razeghian Jahromi2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We sought to test the effectiveness of methadone and buprenorphine in the treatment of methamphetamine withdrawal craving over a 17-day treatment period.
METHODS: Patients were randomized into one of two groups. The study sample comprised 40 male subjects dependent on methamphetamine who met criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, for methamphetamine dependence and withdrawal and were seeking treatment. Furthermore, they should have a history of daily methamphetamine use for at least 6 months and should have discontinued their use just before starting the protocol. Patients received 40 mg of methadone or 8 mg of buprenorphine per day and were treated in an inpatient psychiatric hospital. We used methamphetamine craving score, negative urine drug screening test (thin-layer chromatography) during the study, and retention in treatment.
RESULTS: All 40 patients completed the study. Both drugs were effective in decreasing methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal. Reduction of craving in the buprenorphine group was significantly more than in the methadone group (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The results favor the efficacy and safety of buprenorphine as a short-term treatment for methamphetamine withdrawal craving. We should mention that it is to be expected that craving declines over time without any medication. Therefore, the conclusion may not be that methadone and buprenorphine both reduce the craving. Because buprenorphine is superior to methadone, only buprenorphine surely reduces craving. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials identifier: IRCT2015112125160N1 . Registered on 4 June 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Buprenorphine; Methadone; Methamphetamine withdrawal craving

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28587620      PMCID: PMC5461765          DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2007-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trials        ISSN: 1745-6215            Impact factor:   2.279


Background

Psychiatric disorders have been advancing problems in worldwide [1-4]. Among psychiatric problems, substance use disorders and substance-induced disorders, particularly those involving stimulants, are an increasing global concern [5-7]. In particular, methamphetamine use disorders and methamphetamine-induced psychiatric presentations to hospitals and outpatient centers are becoming increasingly problematic [8-11]. Using amphetamines can cause feelings of euphoria or irritability associated with increases in energy, wakefulness, concentration, and physical activity [7]. Abuse of methamphetamines is common. For example, in the United States, 18 million people over the age of 12 years have tried methamphetamines during their lives [12]. Similarly to other addictions, methamphetamine dependence is a lengthy, relapsing disorder. As part of a comprehensive treatment plan, medications may be required to prevent relapse. Prolonged consumption of methamphetamine can lead to abuse/dependence, aggression, violence, weight loss, impulsivity, decreased appetite, mood lability, poor concentration, hallucinations, delusions, and memory loss [12, 13]. In Iran, methamphetamine previously was illegally imported from other regions of the world (mainly the West), but now it is illegally provided and prepared in “underground” laboratories [10]. Currently, there is no standard of care, particularly medications, for the treatment of methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal [7]. Buprenorphine and methadone are opioid medications that are widely used to treat opioid withdrawal symptoms, but, to our knowledge, they have not been used to treat methamphetamine withdrawal symptoms [7]. In this study, we examined buprenorphine and methadone as a way of treating craving during severe methamphetamine withdrawal. We theorized that the biochemistry and mechanisms of methamphetamine and opioid dependence are more or less similar because both drugs involve the endogenous opioid system [7, 10–16]. Substances such as methamphetamine, cocaine, and alcohol activate release of dopamine from cells originating in the brain’s ventral tegmental area. It is a component of a neuronal circuit named the mesolimbic dopamine system and is joined to behavioral reward and motivation. Following exposure to alcohol, methamphetamine, or cocaine, dopamine released into the nucleus accumbens and prefrontal cortex strengthens and reinforces alcohol-, methamphetamine-, and cocaine-seeking behaviors [17, 18]. This trial is one of the first studies to provide data obtained by research comparing buprenorphine and methadone in the treatment of methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal. The primary goal of this double-blind clinical trial was to test the effectiveness of 8 mg of sublingual buprenorphine daily and 40 mg of oral methadone daily in the treatment of methamphetamine withdrawal craving.

Methods

Subjects

Forty unpaid male subjects were recruited in 2016 and were diagnosed with severe methamphetamine dependence and withdrawal on the basis of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), criteria by a board-certified psychiatrist using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5, Clinical Version. We considered only males because the main psychiatric ward affiliated with the Shiraz University of Medical Sciences admits only male patients. Prior to each interview, we explained the goals of the study, guaranteed confidentiality, and obtained written informed consent. The interviews and examinations were done on the premises of the treatment hospital because it appeared to be a nonthreatening and proper environment. Family members, friends, or relatives accompanied patients to the hospital. This attendance provided a condition in which we could verify the data and information obtained from the patients. In addition to meeting DSM-5 criteria for methamphetamine use disorder, subjects required a history of daily methamphetamine use for at least 6 months and discontinuation of their use just before starting the trial. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a primary diagnosis other than methamphetamine use disorder (dependency on substances other than methamphetamine) or major medical problems (cardiovascular, pulmonary, renal, or gastrointestinal diseases). All patients provided written informed consent before entering into the trial. The research study was approved and monitored by the ethics committee of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in adherence to the Declaration of Helsinki’s ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.

Randomization

In a double-blind manner, the patients were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups: buprenorphine or methadone. We employed a standard randomization procedure generated by computer to obtain a random sample set.

Procedure

The research staff were precisely trained and included an addiction psychiatrist, general psychiatrist, physician, psychologist, nurse, and statistician. The pills had the same shape and color. The patients and the research team were blinded to the medications for the duration of the trial. The ratings and interviews were performed by an adequately trained physician who was blinded to the medications and side effects. During the trial, no other intervention was allowed. The principal investigator prepared a visual analogue scale (VAS) and verified it empirically for validity and reliability [10, 14–16]. We used the VAS to assess methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal, with scores ranging from 0 to 10 (0 = no craving at all and 10 = severe craving and temptation all the time). Moreover, we trained the subjects precisely and completely about scoring. In addition, a positive urine drug test for methamphetamine (thin-layer chromatography) before the beginning of the protocol and a negative urine drug test twice weekly during the study period were considered. Consecutive patients were randomly assigned to receive either buprenorphine or methadone. Patients were randomly initiated on either 8 mg of sublingual buprenorphine or 40 mg of oral methadone daily. We followed the subjects for up to 17 days. Effectiveness was evaluated by daily interview and precise assessment of craving by asking the subjects about their experience.

Statistical analysis

Data analysis was carried out using PASW Statistics version 18 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). Student’s t test or the Mann-Whitney U test was used to examine the differences in means. Chi-square analysis or Fisher’s exact test was used to test for differences in frequencies. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to examine the trends over time. All P values were two-sided, and statistical significance was set at the 5% level.

Results

The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flowchart and checklist of patients in the trial are shown in Figs. 1 and 2. Forty-five patients were screened for this trial. Five patients were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Of the 40 patients who were randomly allocated into one of the two groups, 20 patients were assigned to the methadone group and 20 patents were allocated to the buprenorphine group.
Fig. 1

Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flowchart of the patients in this trial

Fig. 2

Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomized trial

Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flowchart of the patients in this trial Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomized trial All of the 40 patients completed the 17-day trial. Of the 40 patients, 20 (50%) received 8 mg of buprenorphine and 20 (50%) received 40 mg of methadone. Table 1 displays the demographic characteristics of both groups.
Table 1

Demographic characteristics of the two study groups

Methadone (n = 20)Buprenorphine (n = 20)TotalSignificance
Age, years, mean ± SD31.2 ± 9.0434.35 ± 9.6532.78 ± 9.37 t = 1.065 df = 38 P = 0.294
Job, n (%)Unemployed6 (30)6 (30)12 (30)χ2 = 0.15 P = 0.928
Self-employed9 (45)8 (40)17 (42.5)
Employee5 (25)6 (30)11 (27.5)
Marital statusSingle9 (45)10 (50)19 (47.5) P = 0.64
Married11 (55)10 (50)21 (52.5)
EducationIlliterate5 (25)5 (25)10 (25) P = 1
Middle school9 (45)9 (45)18 (45)
High school4 (20)4 (20)8 (20)
Higher education2 (10)2 (10)4 (10)
Income (million Tooman)<0.52 (10)3 (15.8)5 (12.5) P = 0.736
0.5 < 116 (80)12 (63.2)28 (70)
1 < 1.51 (5)3 (15.8)4 (10)
>1.51 (5)1 (5.3)2 (5)
Demographic characteristics of the two study groups There were not any statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding age, education, employment, marital status, or income. According to Table 1, the mean age of 40 methamphetamine dependents was 32.78 years (SD 9.37, range 21–55). The mean ages were 34.35 years (SD 9.65) for the buprenorphine group and 31.2 years (SD 9.04) for the methadone group. Table 2 indicates t tests and analysis of variance with repeated measures for craving scores of both groups.
Table 2

Independent t test and repeated measures analysis of variance for craving mean at 17 days in treatment groups

Buprenorphine (n = 20)Methadone (n = 20) t value df P valuePower
Day 17 ± 1.347.2 ± 1.280.483380.6320.076
Day 26.05 ± 1.766.55 ± 1.670.921380.3630.147
Day 35.55 ± 1.886.3 ± 1.921.248380.220.23
Day 44.6 ± 1.935.8 ± 1.881.991380.0540.493
Day 54.45 ± 1.765.45 ± 2.111.625380.1120.355
Day 63.85 ± 1.795 ± 2.051.891380.0660.454
Day 73.5 ± 1.574.6 ± 2.141.854380.720.438
Day 82.9 ± 1.594.05 ± 2.161.917380.0630.463
Day 92.7 ± 1.563.7 ± 2.051.734380.0910.394
Day 102.3 ± 1.343.45 ± 1.962.166380.370.558
Day 111.9 ± 1.333.05 ± 1.792.303380.0270.612
Day 121.5 ± 1.322.75 ± 1.552.746380.0090.764
Day 131.15 ± 1.182.45 ± 1.233.402380.0020.914
Day 141 ± 1.032 ± 1.083.008380.0050.832
Day 150.65 ± 0.881.6 ± 1.270.18a 0.763
Day 160.4 ± 0.751.4 ± 1.230.11a 0.854
Day 170.15 ± 0.370.8 ± 0.950.35a 0.783
F 125.572111.169
df 1616
P value0.0000.000
Power10.947
Total of 17 days2.92 ± 1.1893.89 ± 1.5172.251380.030.599

a Mann-Whitney U test

Independent t test and repeated measures analysis of variance for craving mean at 17 days in treatment groups a Mann-Whitney U test Figure 3 depicts our comparison of the mean craving between the two treatment groups.
Fig. 3

Comparison of mean craving between the two treatment groups

Comparison of mean craving between the two treatment groups On the basis of the data shown in Table 2 and Fig. 3, the methamphetamine craving score was reduced significantly in both the methadone and buprenorphine groups. (repeated measures analysis of variance; buprenorphine F = 125.572, P = 0.000; methadone F = 111.169, P = 0.000). All the patients had positive urine drug test results for methamphetamine at the beginning of the study. Furthermore, all the patients had negative urine drug tests for methamphetamine done twice weekly during the 17-day study interval. During the trial, none of the patients developed significant side effects requiring treatment.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine administration of methadone and buprenorphine for the treatment of methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal. This study shows that although buprenorphine and methadone are both effective in treating methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal, the craving in the buprenorphine group was significantly lower than that in the methadone group starting on the tenth day. Therefore, buprenorphine was more effective than methadone. It is to be expected that craving decreases over time without any medication. Thus, the conclusion cannot be drawn that methadone and buprenorphine both reduce the craving. Because buprenorphine is superior to methadone, only buprenorphine surely reduces the craving. Patients in both groups did not report any significant side effects. Furthermore, we did not observe any side effects or complications related to buprenorphine or methadone. Besides, the cost considerations seem to be favorable, especially when we study the possibility of administration for outpatients without a need for hospitalization. We suggest these opioids as short-term inpatient treatments to enhance retention or even as long-term maintenance treatment to minimize relapse. Opioid receptors, mainly the μ opioid receptor, a member of the opioid neuromodulatory system and of the large family of G protein-coupled receptors, are the prominent pharmacological target for the treatment of moderate to severe pain and are of therapeutic value for the management of abuse of methamphetamines, opioids, cannabis, alcohol, and other drugs [19-29]. The mechanism of action by which opioids such as buprenorphine or methadone prevent or decrease methamphetamine craving and dependence is not fully understood; however, there are fundamental and basic interactions between the endogenous opioid neuropeptide systems and dopamine. Naltrexone, which is an opioid antagonist, reduces and interrupts the interactions between dopamine and endogenous opioid neuropeptide systems [19-21]. We theorized that opioid medications such as buprenorphine can enrich and improve the interactions between dopamine and endogenous opioid neuropeptide systems. The findings of this research study are supportive of the effect of buprenorphine for the management of methamphetamine craving. There was superiority of buprenorphine compared with methadone (P = 0.03). We advise buprenorphine as short-term and inpatient treatment to increase retention or even as long-term maintenance treatment to reduce relapse.

Limitations of the study

Although we did not have a no-medication control group or a group treated with placebo in addition to the groups treated with buprenorphine and methadone, the fact that the two medications differed significantly in decrease of methamphetamine craving can compensate for this limitation; comparing the mean of craving between buprenorphine and methadone groups, there is a significant difference- (P = 0.03). We require a follow-up study to observe what happens when subjects are discharged from a controlled environment. It would be required to specify whether buprenorphine prevents short-term or long-term relapse.

Conclusions

The outcomes indicated a considerable reduction not only in the craving within each of the two groups but also between the groups. We believe that buprenorphine is a safe, effective, and valuable medication for decreasing methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal and more effective than methadone. We recommend consideration of buprenorphine as a treatment for methamphetamine craving during methamphetamine withdrawal. It is to be expected that craving declines over time without any treatment. So, the conclusion cannot be that methadone and buprenorphine both decrease the craving. Because the buprenorphine is superior to methadone, only buprenorphine surely decreases the craving.
  14 in total

1.  Methamphetamine induced synesthesia: a case report.

Authors:  Jamshid Ahmadi; Mitra Keshtkar; Saxby Pridmore
Journal:  Am J Addict       Date:  2011-03-31

Review 2.  Opiate pharmacology and relief of pain.

Authors:  Gavril W Pasternak
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Neuropsychological function and delay discounting in methamphetamine-dependent individuals.

Authors:  William F Hoffman; Meredith Moore; Raymond Templin; Bentson McFarland; Robert J Hitzemann; Suzanne H Mitchell
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2006-08-17       Impact factor: 4.530

4.  Substance use among Iranian psychiatric inpatients.

Authors:  J Ahmadi; A Fakoor; P Pezeshkian; R Khoshnood; A Malekpour
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  2001-10

Review 5.  The µ opioid receptor and ligands acting at the µ opioid receptor, as therapeutics and potential therapeutics.

Authors:  Mariana Spetea; Muhammad Faheem Asim; Gerhard Wolber; Helmut Schmidhammer
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.116

6.  Cocaine withdrawal symptoms identify "Type B" cocaine-dependent patients.

Authors:  Jamshid Ahmadi; Kyle Kampman; Charles Dackis; Thorne Sparkman; Helen Pettinati
Journal:  Am J Addict       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb

7.  Crystal structure of the µ-opioid receptor bound to a morphinan antagonist.

Authors:  Aashish Manglik; Andrew C Kruse; Tong Sun Kobilka; Foon Sun Thian; Jesper M Mathiesen; Roger K Sunahara; Leonardo Pardo; William I Weis; Brian K Kobilka; Sébastien Granier
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Gender differences in depression scores of Iranian and german medical students.

Authors:  Jamshid Ahmadi; Nahid Ahmadi; Fereshteh Soltani; Fatemeh Bayat
Journal:  Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci       Date:  2014

9.  Structural insights into µ-opioid receptor activation.

Authors:  Weijiao Huang; Aashish Manglik; A J Venkatakrishnan; Toon Laeremans; Evan N Feinberg; Adrian L Sanborn; Hideaki E Kato; Kathryn E Livingston; Thor S Thorsen; Ralf C Kling; Sébastien Granier; Peter Gmeiner; Stephen M Husbands; John R Traynor; William I Weis; Jan Steyaert; Ron O Dror; Brian K Kobilka
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  μ Opioid receptor: novel antagonists and structural modeling.

Authors:  Teresa Kaserer; Aquilino Lantero; Helmut Schmidhammer; Mariana Spetea; Daniela Schuster
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 4.379

View more
  7 in total

1.  Treatment of amphetamine abuse/use disorder: a systematic review of a recent health concern.

Authors:  Mansour Khoramizadeh; Mohammad Effatpanah; Alireza Mostaghimi; Mehdi Rezaei; Alireza Mahjoub; Sara Shishehgar
Journal:  Daru       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Single high-dose buprenorphine for opioid craving during withdrawal.

Authors:  Jamshid Ahmadi; Mina Sefidfard Jahromi; Dara Ghahremani; Edythe D London
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 3.  Goofballing of Opioid and Methamphetamine: The Science Behind the Deadly Cocktail.

Authors:  Hanis Mohammad Hazani; Isa Naina Mohamed; Mustapha Muzaimi; Wael Mohamed; Mohamad Fairuz Yahaya; Seong Lin Teoh; Rashidi Mohamed Pakri Mohamed; Mohd Fadzli Mohamad Isa; Sundus Mansoor Abdulrahman; Ravi Ramadah; Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin; Jaya Kumar
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 5.988

4.  Effect of Emotional Intelligence Training on Methadone-Treated Methamphetamine Users in Qazvin, Iran.

Authors:  Seyed Mohsen Zamir; Mahshid Khazaei; Seyed Hossein Ghafeleh-Bashi; Samira Dodangeh
Journal:  Addict Health       Date:  2022-01

5.  Pharmacological Treatment of Methamphetamine/Amphetamine Dependence: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Krista J Siefried; Liam S Acheson; Nicholas Lintzeris; Nadine Ezard
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 5.749

6.  Rapid effect of a single-dose buprenorphine on reduction of opioid craving and suicidal ideation: A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study.

Authors:  Jamshid Ahmadi; Ebrahim Moghimi Sarani; Mina Sefidfard Jahromi
Journal:  Ci Ji Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2019-03-14

7.  Associations Between Polysubstance Use Patterns and Receipt of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Among Adults in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder.

Authors:  Becky R Ford; Gavin Bart; Brian Grahan; Riley D Shearer; Tyler N A Winkelman
Journal:  J Addict Med       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.647

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.