Mary M Mitchell1, Robert P Schwartz2, Tse-Hwei Choo3, Martina Pavlicova4, Kevin E O'Grady5, Jan Gryczynski2, Maxine L Stitzer2, Edward V Nunes3, John Rotrosen6. 1. Friends Research Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: mmitchell@friendsresearch.org. 2. Friends Research Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Drive, New York, NY, 10031, USA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 West 168th St, New York, NY, 10032, USA. 5. Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, 20742, USA. 6. New York University School of Medicine, 550 1st Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The distinct pharmacological properties and clinical uses of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) present challenges in analyzing patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-site randomized trial comparing XR-NTX with sublingual BUP-NX treatment for opioid use disorder initiated during inpatient detoxification and continued in outpatient treatment. Urine testing data for non-study opioids from the last 22 weeks of the 24-week trial were analyzed in both a per-protocol sample (n = 474 participants who received at least one dose of medication) and a completers sample (n = 211 participants who received all XR-NTX doses or all BUP-NX prescriptions). The present analyses sought to identify differences in the weekly percentages of opioid-positive urine tests between participants treated with the two medications. RESULTS: The proportion of opioid-positive tests in both conditions was less than 20 % for 21 of the 22 weeks in the per-protocol sample and all 22 weeks in the completers sample. Generalized linear mixed model analyses revealed a significant treatment (XR-NTX vs. BUP-NX) X week (weeks 3-24) interaction in the per-protocol sample but not the completers sample. In the per-protocol analysis, the BUP-NX, compared to XR-NTX, had significantly greater proportions of opioid-positive tests in 14 out of the 22 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal modeling approaches that utilize flexible procedures for handling missing data can offer a different perspective on study findings. Results from the present analyses suggest that XR-NTX appeared to be somewhat more effective than BUP-NX in reducing illicit opioid use in the per-protocol sample.
BACKGROUND: The distinct pharmacological properties and clinical uses of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) present challenges in analyzing patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-site randomized trial comparing XR-NTX with sublingual BUP-NX treatment for opioid use disorder initiated during inpatient detoxification and continued in outpatient treatment. Urine testing data for non-study opioids from the last 22 weeks of the 24-week trial were analyzed in both a per-protocol sample (n = 474 participants who received at least one dose of medication) and a completers sample (n = 211 participants who received all XR-NTX doses or all BUP-NX prescriptions). The present analyses sought to identify differences in the weekly percentages of opioid-positive urine tests between participants treated with the two medications. RESULTS: The proportion of opioid-positive tests in both conditions was less than 20 % for 21 of the 22 weeks in the per-protocol sample and all 22 weeks in the completers sample. Generalized linear mixed model analyses revealed a significant treatment (XR-NTX vs. BUP-NX) X week (weeks 3-24) interaction in the per-protocol sample but not the completers sample. In the per-protocol analysis, the BUP-NX, compared to XR-NTX, had significantly greater proportions of opioid-positive tests in 14 out of the 22 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal modeling approaches that utilize flexible procedures for handling missing data can offer a different perspective on study findings. Results from the present analyses suggest that XR-NTX appeared to be somewhat more effective than BUP-NX in reducing illicit opioid use in the per-protocol sample.
Authors: Michelle R Lofwall; Sharon L Walsh; Edward V Nunes; Genie L Bailey; Stacey C Sigmon; Kyle M Kampman; Michael Frost; Fredrik Tiberg; Margareta Linden; Behshad Sheldon; Sonia Oosman; Stefan Peterson; Michael Chen; Sonnie Kim Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Barbara R Haight; Susan M Learned; Celine M Laffont; Paul J Fudala; Yue Zhao; Amanda S Garofalo; Mark K Greenwald; Vijay R Nadipelli; Walter Ling; Christian Heidbreder Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-02-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Joshua D Lee; Edward V Nunes; Patricia Novo Mpa; Genie L Bailey; Gregory S Brigham; Allan J Cohen; Marc Fishman; Walter Ling; Robert Lindblad; Dikla Shmueli-Blumberg; Don Stablein; Jeanine May; Dagmar Salazar; David Liu; John Rotrosen Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2016-08-10 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: W Ling; C Charuvastra; J F Collins; S Batki; L S Brown; P Kintaudi; D R Wesson; L McNicholas; D J Tusel; U Malkerneker; J A Renner; E Santos; P Casadonte; C Fye; S Stine; R I Wang; D Segal Journal: Addiction Date: 1998-04 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Edward V Nunes; Joshua D Lee; Dominic Sisti; Andrea Segal; Arthur Caplan; Marc Fishman; Genie Bailey; Gregory Brigham; Patricia Novo; Sarah Farkas; John Rotrosen Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Joshua D Lee; Edward V Nunes; Patricia Novo; Ken Bachrach; Genie L Bailey; Snehal Bhatt; Sarah Farkas; Marc Fishman; Phoebe Gauthier; Candace C Hodgkins; Jacquie King; Robert Lindblad; David Liu; Abigail G Matthews; Jeanine May; K Michelle Peavy; Stephen Ross; Dagmar Salazar; Paul Schkolnik; Dikla Shmueli-Blumberg; Don Stablein; Geetha Subramaniam; John Rotrosen Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 79.321