Joshua D Lee1, Edward V Nunes2, Patricia Novo3, Ken Bachrach4, Genie L Bailey5, Snehal Bhatt6, Sarah Farkas3, Marc Fishman7, Phoebe Gauthier3, Candace C Hodgkins8, Jacquie King9, Robert Lindblad9, David Liu10, Abigail G Matthews9, Jeanine May9, K Michelle Peavy11, Stephen Ross3, Dagmar Salazar9, Paul Schkolnik12, Dikla Shmueli-Blumberg9, Don Stablein9, Geetha Subramaniam10, John Rotrosen3. 1. Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: joshua.lee@nyumc.org. 2. Department of Psychiatry, New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 4. Tarzana Treatment Centers, Tarzana, CA, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence RI, USA; Stanley Street Treatment and Resources, Fall River, MA, USA. 6. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, NM, USA. 7. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Maryland Treatment Centers, Baltimore, MD, USA. 8. Gateway Community Services Inc, Jacksonville, FL, USA. 9. The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, MD, USA. 10. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Rockville, MD, USA. 11. Evergreen Treatment Services, Seattle, WA, USA. 12. Maryhaven Inc, Columbus, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), an opioid antagonist, and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), a partial opioid agonist, are pharmacologically and conceptually distinct interventions to prevent opioid relapse. We aimed to estimate the difference in opioid relapse-free survival between XR-NTX and BUP-NX. METHODS: We initiated this 24 week, open-label, randomised controlled, comparative effectiveness trial at eight US community-based inpatient services and followed up participants as outpatients. Participants were 18 years or older, had Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 opioid use disorder, and had used non-prescribed opioids in the past 30 days. We stratified participants by treatment site and opioid use severity and used a web-based permuted block design with random equally weighted block sizes of four and six for randomisation (1:1) to receive XR-NTX or BUP-NX. XR-NTX was monthly intramuscular injections (Vivitrol; Alkermes) and BUP-NX was daily self-administered buprenorphine-naloxone sublingual film (Suboxone; Indivior). The primary outcome was opioid relapse-free survival during 24 weeks of outpatient treatment. Relapse was 4 consecutive weeks of any non-study opioid use by urine toxicology or self-report, or 7 consecutive days of self-reported use. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02032433. FINDINGS: Between Jan 30, 2014, and May 25, 2016, we randomly assigned 570 participants to receive XR-NTX (n=283) or BUP-NX (n=287). The last follow-up visit was Jan 31, 2017. As expected, XR-NTX had a substantial induction hurdle: fewer participants successfully initiated XR-NTX (204 [72%] of 283) than BUP-NX (270 [94%] of 287; p<0·0001). Among all participants who were randomly assigned (intention-to-treat population, n=570) 24 week relapse events were greater for XR-NTX (185 [65%] of 283) than for BUP-NX (163 [57%] of 287; hazard ratio [HR] 1·36, 95% CI 1·10-1·68), most or all of this difference accounted for by early relapse in nearly all (70 [89%] of 79) XR-NTX induction failures. Among participants successfully inducted (per-protocol population, n=474), 24 week relapse events were similar across study groups (p=0·44). Opioid-negative urine samples (p<0·0001) and opioid-abstinent days (p<0·0001) favoured BUP-NX compared with XR-NTX among the intention-to-treat population, but were similar across study groups among the per-protocol population. Self-reported opioid craving was initially less with XR-NTX than with BUP-NX (p=0·0012), then converged by week 24 (p=0·20). With the exception of mild-to-moderate XR-NTX injection site reactions, treatment-emergent adverse events including overdose did not differ between treatment groups. Five fatal overdoses occurred (two in the XR-NTX group and three in the BUP-NX group). INTERPRETATION: In this population it is more difficult to initiate patients to XR-NTX than BUP-NX, and this negatively affected overall relapse. However, once initiated, both medications were equally safe and effective. Future work should focus on facilitating induction to XR-NTX and on improving treatment retention for both medications. FUNDING: NIDA Clinical Trials Network.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), an opioid antagonist, and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), a partial opioid agonist, are pharmacologically and conceptually distinct interventions to prevent opioid relapse. We aimed to estimate the difference in opioid relapse-free survival between XR-NTX and BUP-NX. METHODS: We initiated this 24 week, open-label, randomised controlled, comparative effectiveness trial at eight US community-based inpatient services and followed up participants as outpatients. Participants were 18 years or older, had Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 opioid use disorder, and had used non-prescribed opioids in the past 30 days. We stratified participants by treatment site and opioid use severity and used a web-based permuted block design with random equally weighted block sizes of four and six for randomisation (1:1) to receive XR-NTX or BUP-NX. XR-NTX was monthly intramuscular injections (Vivitrol; Alkermes) and BUP-NX was daily self-administered buprenorphine-naloxone sublingual film (Suboxone; Indivior). The primary outcome was opioid relapse-free survival during 24 weeks of outpatient treatment. Relapse was 4 consecutive weeks of any non-study opioid use by urine toxicology or self-report, or 7 consecutive days of self-reported use. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02032433. FINDINGS: Between Jan 30, 2014, and May 25, 2016, we randomly assigned 570 participants to receive XR-NTX (n=283) or BUP-NX (n=287). The last follow-up visit was Jan 31, 2017. As expected, XR-NTX had a substantial induction hurdle: fewer participants successfully initiated XR-NTX (204 [72%] of 283) than BUP-NX (270 [94%] of 287; p<0·0001). Among all participants who were randomly assigned (intention-to-treat population, n=570) 24 week relapse events were greater for XR-NTX (185 [65%] of 283) than for BUP-NX (163 [57%] of 287; hazard ratio [HR] 1·36, 95% CI 1·10-1·68), most or all of this difference accounted for by early relapse in nearly all (70 [89%] of 79) XR-NTX induction failures. Among participants successfully inducted (per-protocol population, n=474), 24 week relapse events were similar across study groups (p=0·44). Opioid-negative urine samples (p<0·0001) and opioid-abstinent days (p<0·0001) favoured BUP-NX compared with XR-NTX among the intention-to-treat population, but were similar across study groups among the per-protocol population. Self-reported opioid craving was initially less with XR-NTX than with BUP-NX (p=0·0012), then converged by week 24 (p=0·20). With the exception of mild-to-moderate XR-NTX injection site reactions, treatment-emergent adverse events including overdose did not differ between treatment groups. Five fatal overdoses occurred (two in the XR-NTX group and three in the BUP-NX group). INTERPRETATION: In this population it is more difficult to initiate patients to XR-NTX than BUP-NX, and this negatively affected overall relapse. However, once initiated, both medications were equally safe and effective. Future work should focus on facilitating induction to XR-NTX and on improving treatment retention for both medications. FUNDING: NIDA Clinical Trials Network.
Authors: Christopher M Jones; Melinda Campopiano; Grant Baldwin; Elinore McCance-Katz Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Paolo Mannelli; Li-Tzy Wu; Kathleen S Peindl; Marvin S Swartz; George E Woody Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-02-15 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Evgeny Krupitsky; Edward V Nunes; Walter Ling; Ari Illeperuma; David R Gastfriend; Bernard L Silverman Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-04-30 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Sandra D Comer; Maria A Sullivan; Elmer Yu; Jami L Rothenberg; Herbert D Kleber; Kyle Kampman; Charles Dackis; Charles P O'Brien Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2006-02
Authors: Babak Tofighi; Arthur Robin Williams; Chemi Chemi; Selena Suhail-Sindhu; Vicky Dickson; Joshua D Lee Journal: Subst Use Misuse Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 2.164
Authors: Brantley P Jarvis; August F Holtyn; Shrinidhi Subramaniam; D Andrew Tompkins; Emmanuel A Oga; George E Bigelow; Kenneth Silverman Journal: Addiction Date: 2018-03-24 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Kathryn E McCollister; Jared A Leff; Xuan Yang; Joshua D Lee; Edward V Nunes; Patricia Novo; John Rotrosen; Bruce R Schackman; Sean M Murphy Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Jennifer Miles; Jason Howell; Dave Sheridan; George Braucht; Amy Mericle Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Alexander Y Walley; Sara Lodi; Yijing Li; Dana Bernson; Hermik Babakhanlou-Chase; Thomas Land; Marc R Larochelle Journal: Addiction Date: 2020-02-25 Impact factor: 6.526