Dataset Information

The OPTIMA study, buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone models of care for the treatment of prescription opioid use disorder: Study design and rationale.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Rates of non-medical use of opioids, and opioid use disorders (OUD) have been rising throughout North America. Methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone are the recommended first-line treatment options for OUD in Canada. Most studies to date have been conducted among heroin users, in controlled settings, and using similar strict dosing schedules (i.e., daily witnessed ingestion) despite buprenorphine/naloxone's superior safety profile, which allows a more flexible take-home dosing schedule. This study was designed to assess the relative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone- and methadone-based models of opioid agonist therapy (OAT) for the treatment of prescription opioid use disorder (POUD) in routine clinical care. METHODS:OPTIMA is a multicenter, open-label, pragmatic, randomized, two-arm, non-inferiority, 24-week study comparing the relative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone (provided via flexible take-home doses) to methadone (provided via daily witnessed ingestion) models of OAT for the treatment of POUD. Approximately 276 non-pregnant adults meeting DSM-5 criteria for OUD, currently not in OAT, will be randomized across 7 Canadian sites. The primary outcome is reduction of non-medical opioid use, measured by bi-weekly urine drug screens during the 24-week study period. Secondary outcomes include treatment retention and satisfaction, safety, medication adherence, and patient engagement. DISCUSSION:The OPTIMA study is the first randomized clinical trial to compare the relative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone (flexible take-home doses) versus methadone (daily witnessed ingestion) models of OAT for POUD in real-world clinical settings. This study will generate urgently needed evidence towards treatment options to guide the health system response to the ongoing opioid crisis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT03033732.

SUBMITTER: Socias ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6625801 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The OPTIMA study, buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone models of care for the treatment of prescription opioid use disorder: Study design and rationale.

Socias M Eugenia ME Ahamad Keith K Le Foll Bernard B Lim Ron R Bruneau Julie J Fischer Benedikt B Wild T Cameron TC Wood Evan E Jutras-Aswad Didier D

Contemporary clinical trials 20180405

<h4>Background</h4>Rates of non-medical use of opioids, and opioid use disorders (OUD) have been rising throughout North America. Methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone are the recommended first-line treatment options for OUD in Canada. Most studies to date have been conducted among heroin users, in controlled settings, and using similar strict dosing schedules (i.e., daily witnessed ingestion) despite buprenorphine/naloxone's superior safety profile, which allows a more flexible take-home dosing ...[more]

PMID: 29627621

Similar Datasets

Project description:AIMS:To compare long-term criminal justice outcomes among opioid-dependent individuals randomized to receive buprenorphine or methadone. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:A 5-year follow-up was conducted in 2011-14 of 303 opioid-dependent participants entering three opioid treatment programs in California, USA in 2006-09 and randomized to receive either buprenorphine/naloxone or methadone. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR:Participants received buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP; n = 179) or methadone (MET; n = 124) for 24 weeks and then were tapered off their treatment over ? 8 weeks or referred for ongoing clinical treatment. Midway through the study, the randomization scheme was switched from 1 : 1 BUP : MET to 2 : 1 because of higher dropout in the BUP arm. MEASUREMENTS:Study outcomes included arrests and self-reported incarceration. Predictors included randomization condition (buprenorphine versus methadone), age, gender, race/ethnicity, use of cocaine, drug injection in the 30 days prior to baseline and study site. Treatment status (buprenorphine, methadone, none) during follow-up was included as a time-varying covariate. FINDINGS:There was no significant difference by randomization condition in the proportion arrested (buprenorphine: 55.3%, methadone: 54.0%) or incarcerated (40.9%, 47.3%) during follow-up. Among methadone-randomized individuals, arrest was less likely with methadone treatment (0.50, 0.35-0.72) during follow-up (relative to no treatment) and switching to buprenorphine had a lower likelihood of arrest than those receiving no treatment (0.39, 0.18-0.87). Among buprenorphine-randomized individuals, arrest was less likely with receipt of buprenorphine (0.49, 0.33-0.75) during follow-up and switching to methadone had a similar likelihood of arrest as methadone-randomized individuals receiving no treatment. Likelihood of arrest was also negatively associated with older age (0.98, 0.96-1.00); it was positively associated with Hispanic ethnicity (1.63, 1.04-2.56), cocaine use (2.00, 1.33-3.03), injection drug use (2.19, 1.26-3.83), and study site. CONCLUSIONS:In a US sample of people treated for opioid use disorder, continued treatment with either buprenorphine or methadone was associated with a reduction in arrests relative to no treatment. Cocaine use, injection drug use, Hispanic ethnicity and younger age were associated with higher likelihood of arrest.

Project description:IntroductionDespite a recent meta-analysis including 31 randomised controlled trials comparing methadone and buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder, important knowledge gaps remain regarding the long-term effectiveness of different treatment modalities across individuals, including rigorously collected data on retention rates and other treatment outcomes. Evidence from real-world data represents a valuable opportunity to improve personalised treatment and patient-centred guidelines for vulnerable populations and inform strategies to reduce opioid-related mortality. Our objective is to determine the comparative effectiveness of methadone versus buprenorphine/naloxone, both overall and within key populations, in a setting where both medications are simultaneously available in office-based practices and specialised clinics.Methods and analysisWe propose a retrospective cohort study of all adults living in British Columbia receiving opioid agonist treatment (OAT) with methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone between 1 January 2008 and 30 September 2018. The study will draw on seven linked population-level administrative databases. The primary outcomes include retention in OAT and all-cause mortality. We will determine the effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone vs methadone using intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses-the former emulating flexible-dose trials and the latter focusing on the comparison of the two medication regimens offered at the optimal dose. Sensitivity analyses will be used to assess the robustness of results to heterogeneity in the patient population and threats to internal validity.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol, cohort creation and analysis plan have been approved and classified as a quality improvement initiative exempt from ethical review (Providence Health Care Research Institute and the Simon Fraser University Office of Research Ethics). Dissemination is planned via conferences and publications, and through direct engagement and collaboration with entities that issue clinical guidelines, such as professional medical societies and public health organisations.

Project description:Initial medication response has been shown to predict treatment outcome across a variety of substance use disorders, but no studies have examined the predictive power of initial response to buprenorphine-naloxone in the treatment of prescription opioid dependence. We therefore conducted a secondary analysis of data from the Prescription Opioid Addiction Treatment Study to determine whether initial response to buprenorphine-naloxone predicted 12-week treatment outcome in a prescription opioid-dependent population.Using data from a multisite, randomized controlled trial of buprenorphine-naloxone plus counseling for DSM-IV prescription opioid dependence (June 2006-July 2009), we conducted a secondary analysis to investigate the relationship between initial medication response and 12-week treatment outcome to establish how soon the efficacy of buprenorphine-naloxone could be predicted (N = 360). Outcomes were determined from the Substance Use Report, a self-report measure of substance use, and confirmatory urinalysis. Predictive values were calculated to determine the importance of abstinence versus use at various time points within the first month of treatment (week 1, weeks 1-2, 1-3, or 1-4) in predicting successful versus unsuccessful treatment outcome (based on abstinence or near-abstinence from opioids) in the last 4 weeks of buprenorphine-naloxone treatment (weeks 9-12).Outcome was best predicted by medication response after 2 weeks of treatment. Two weeks of initial abstinence was moderately predictive of treatment success (positive predictive value = 71%), while opioid use in both of the first 2 weeks was strongly predictive of unsuccessful treatment outcome (negative predictive value [NPV] = 84%), especially when successful outcome was defined as total abstinence from opioids in weeks 9-12 (NPV = 94%).Evaluating prescription opioid-dependent patients after 2 weeks of buprenorphine-naloxone treatment may help determine the likelihood of successful outcome at completion of the current treatment regimen.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00316277.

Dataset Information

The OPTIMA study, buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone models of care for the treatment of prescription opioid use disorder: Study design and rationale.

Publications

The OPTIMA study, buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone models of care for the treatment of prescription opioid use disorder: Study design and rationale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure