Dataset Information

HIV clinic-based buprenorphine plus naloxone versus referral for methadone maintenance therapy for treatment of opioid use disorder in HIV clinics in Vietnam (BRAVO): an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

UNAIDS recommends integrating methadone or buprenorphine treatment of opioid use disorder with HIV care to improve HIV outcomes, but buprenorphine adoption remains limited in many countries. We aimed to assess whether HIV clinic-based buprenorphine plus naloxone treatment for opioid use disorder was non-inferior to referral for methadone maintenance therapy in achieving HIV viral suppression in Vietnam.

Methods

In an open-label, non-inferiority trial (BRAVO), we randomly assigned people with HIV and opioid use disorder (1:1) by computer-generated random number sequence, in blocks of ten and stratified by site, to receive HIV clinic-based buprenorphine plus naloxone treatment or referral for methadone maintenance therapy in six HIV clinics in Vietnam. The primary outcome was HIV viral suppression at 12 months (HIV-1 RNA ≤200 copies per mL on PCR) by intention to treat (absolute risk difference [RD] margin ≤13%), compared by use of generalised estimating equations. Research staff actively queried treatment-emergent adverse events during quarterly study visits and passively collected adverse events reported during HIV clinic visits. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01936857, and is completed.

Findings

Between July 27, 2015, and Feb 12, 2018, we enrolled 281 patients. At baseline, 272 (97%) participants were male, mean age was 38·3 years (SD 6·1), and mean CD4 count was 405 cells per μL (SD 224). Viral suppression improved between baseline and 12 months for both HIV clinic-based buprenorphine plus naloxone (from 97 [69%] of 140 patients to 74 [81%] of 91 patients) and referral for methadone maintenance therapy (from 92 [66%] of 140 to 99 [93%] of 107). Buprenorphine plus naloxone did not demonstrate non-inferiority to methadone maintenance therapy in achieving viral suppression at 12 months (RD -0·11, 95% CI -0·20 to -0·02). Retention on medication at 12 months was lower for buprenorphine plus naloxone than for methadone maintenance therapy (40% vs 65%; RD -0·53, 95% CI -0·75 to -0·31). Participants assigned to buprenorphine plus naloxone more frequently experienced serious adverse events (ten [7%] of 141 vs four of 140 [3%] assigned to methadone maintenance therapy) and deaths (seven of 141 [5%] vs three of 141 [2%]). Serious adverse events and deaths typically occurred in people no longer taking ART or opioid use disorder medications.

Interpretation

Although integrated buprenorphine and HIV care may potentially increase access to treatment for opioid use disorder, scale-up in middle-income countries might require enhanced support for buprenorphine adherence to improve HIV viral suppression. The strength of our study as a multisite randomised trial was offset by low retention of patients on buprenorphine.

Funding

National Institute on Drug Abuse (US National Institutes of Health).

SUBMITTER: Korthuis PT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8082651 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsTo examine patient and medication characteristics associated with retention and continued illicit opioid use in methadone (MET) versus buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP) treatment for opioid dependence.Design, settings and participantsThis secondary analysis included 1267 opioid-dependent individuals participating in nine opioid treatment programs between 2006 and 2009 and randomized to receive open-label BUP or MET for 24 weeks.MeasurementsThe analyses included measures of patient characteristics at baseline (demographics; use of alcohol, cigarettes and illicit drugs; self-rated mental and physical health), medication dose and urine drug screens during treatment, and treatment completion and days in treatment during the 24-week trial.FindingsThe treatment completion rate was 74% for MET versus 46% for BUP (P < 0.01); the rate among MET participants increased to 80% when the maximum MET dose reached or exceeded 60 mg/day. With BUP, the completion rate increased linearly with higher doses, reaching 60% with doses of 30-32 mg/day. Of those remaining in treatment, positive opioid urine results were significantly lower [odds ratio (OR) = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.52-0.76, P < 0.01] among BUP relative to MET participants during the first 9 weeks of treatment. Higher medication dose was related to lower opiate use, more so among BUP patients. A Cox proportional hazards model revealed factors associated with dropout: (i) BUP [versus MET, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.61, CI = 1.20-2.15], (ii) lower medication dose (<16 mg for BUP, <60 mg for MET; HR = 3.09, CI = 2.19-4.37), (iii) the interaction of dose and treatment condition (those with higher BUP dose were 1.04 times more likely to drop out than those with lower MET dose, and (iv) being younger, Hispanic and using heroin or other substances during treatment.ConclusionsProvision of methadone appears to be associated with better retention in treatment for opioid dependence than buprenorphine, as does use of provision of higher doses of both medications. Provision of buprenorphine is associated with lower continued use of illicit opioids.

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.