Drug and alcohol dependence · 2022
Methamphetamine/amphetamine use over time among persons with opioid use disorders treated with buprenorphine/naloxone versus extended-release naltrexone.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tsui Judith I, Campbell Aimee N C, Pavlicova Martina, Choo Tse-Hwei, Lee Joshua D, Cook Ryan R, Shulman Matisyahu, Nunes Edward V, Rotrosen John
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine use is increasing among persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). The study aims were to describe methamphetamine/amphetamine (MA/A) use among patients treated for OUD with buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP-NX) or extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), and to explore associations between treatment arm and MA/A use.
METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from a multi-site, open-label, randomized controlled trial of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX for 24 weeks. The outcome variable was MA/A use defined by either positive urine drug toxicology or self-report. The main predictor was treatment assignment (BUP-NX v. XR-NTX). Longitudinal mixed-effects logistic regression models were fit to model the odds of MA/A use during the study. Additional predictors included study visit and baseline MA/A use.
RESULTS: Among the sample of 570 participants with OUD, baseline use of MA/A was observed in 105 (18.4%). There was no significant treatment effect over the study period, though BUP-NX subjects, on average, had about half the odds of MA/A use compared to XR-NTX subjects (OR=0.50; p = 0.051). In the same model, baseline MA/A use and study visit were both significantly associated with MA/A use over time.
CONCLUSION: In this sample of treated OUD patients, nearly a fifth of participants had MA/A use at baseline and the frequency of use did not decline over time: in fact, the odds of use slightly increased for each later visit. These secondary analyses found no significant difference in MA/A use between BUP-NX and XR-NTX treatment arms, however, the observation of less MA/A in the buprenorphine arm merits further investigation.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02032433).
METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from a multi-site, open-label, randomized controlled trial of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX for 24 weeks. The outcome variable was MA/A use defined by either positive urine drug toxicology or self-report. The main predictor was treatment assignment (BUP-NX v. XR-NTX). Longitudinal mixed-effects logistic regression models were fit to model the odds of MA/A use during the study. Additional predictors included study visit and baseline MA/A use.
RESULTS: Among the sample of 570 participants with OUD, baseline use of MA/A was observed in 105 (18.4%). There was no significant treatment effect over the study period, though BUP-NX subjects, on average, had about half the odds of MA/A use compared to XR-NTX subjects (OR=0.50; p = 0.051). In the same model, baseline MA/A use and study visit were both significantly associated with MA/A use over time.
CONCLUSION: In this sample of treated OUD patients, nearly a fifth of participants had MA/A use at baseline and the frequency of use did not decline over time: in fact, the odds of use slightly increased for each later visit. These secondary analyses found no significant difference in MA/A use between BUP-NX and XR-NTX treatment arms, however, the observation of less MA/A in the buprenorphine arm merits further investigation.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02032433).