Category: RCT

As good as methadone if not better

equal

Looking at an old drug repurposed to treat opioid addiction, a new study found long-acting formulation of morphine (SROM) promising for curbing the opioid epidemic.

Many people who overdose on fentanyl have untreated opioid addiction. Left untreated, opioid addiction can have devastating consequences. One of the reasons for the low treatment rates is that current medications have limited ability to retain people in treatment. The Canadian National Guideline for the Clinical Management of Opioid Use Disorder recommends treatment with slow-release oral morphine, also known as SROM—prescribed as a third line of therapy. In this study, we wanted to compare Kadian® and Methadone for the treatment of opioid use disorder.

QUICK FACT: Slow release oral morphine (SROM) is given once daily and has been proposed for people who do not tolerate or respond to methadone.

We looked at the scientific literature up until the May of 2018. Then, we wanted to see if SROM (brand name Kadian®) works as well as methadone in the treatment of opioid use disorder. In the study, we included people of any gender, age or ethnicity.

What did the study find?

We found four unique clinical trials that met inclusion criteria (n = 471), and compared Kadian® with methadone. Meta-analysis of existing clinical trials suggests SROM (slow release oral morphine) may be as effective in retaining patients in treatment and reducing heroin use.

This is the first meta-analysis of slow release oral morphine (Kadian®). We included new studies that increase the validity of the study. We included previously unpublished data obtained from primary trials. A pooling of data for craving and adverse events was not possible due to inconsistent reporting of outcome measures across trials

SROM seems as good as methadone for the treatment of opioid use disorder but retains people in treatment longer.

Why is SROM important?

While methadone is effective for many patients, these findings suggest SROM may provide benefits in addressing some of the limitations of methadone. We need to expand uptake and retention of people on opioid use disorder treatments. These data should compel public health agencies and decision makers to find therapeutic tools for people who have opioid addiction.

We are running out of options for helping people overcome opioid addiction and abandon contaminated fentanyl. But revisiting this medication, known from cancer treatment, can have a dramatic impact on addiction treatment success because it is not only equally effective as the current treatment options but also better tolerated by patients. Expanding treatment options responds to patients’ needs by offering drugs with fewer side effects.

Kadian® slow-release oral morphine is available in 10mg, 20mg, 50mg, and 100mg capsules, which may be combined as necessary.

Reference: Klimas, J., Gorfinkel, L., Giacomuzzi, S., Ruckes, C., Socias, E.M., Fairbairn, N., Wood, E. (2019) Slow Release Oral Morphine versus Methadone for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BMJ Open (In Press) 0:e025799. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025799

If you enjoyed reading this blog, you may also enjoy reading about a medication for treatment of stimulant use disorder. Link here

How can we do better job in studying Topiramate?

Dr Wood tells the forum recipe for research-centre success

Wood

In a talk at the 2017 National Institute of Drug Abuse meeting on June 17th, Dr Evan Wood pondered lessons learned and success tips derived from his team’s experiences of building an International centre on substance use. The key ingredients in the recipe for success of research centre on substance use were:

Emphasize research productivity. Integrate educational opportunities and mentorship at every step. Use interdisciplinary approach wherever possible. Integrate research alongside clinical care.

nida

From AIDS to opioids

Historically, the new BC Centre on Substance Use grew out of HIV research centre for excellence. The emergence of powder cocaine in 1990’s led to an HIV outbreak in needle exchange when it was believed to be under control. This helped the team to make a compelling case about their unique situation for funders like the National Institute for Drug Abuse. Next, a centralized database of people treated on anti-retroviral treatment (ART) contains all data on everybody living with HIV in the province. This database enables longitudinal survival analysis of HIV outcomes. Using this data, another prospective cohort study of injecting drug users has demonstrated how the viral load went down between 1996-2004. Furthermore, the first supervised injection facility in North America – Insight – has led to about a dozen of supervised injecting facilities in the area nowadays. In sum, the evolution of the centre from HIV treatment to HIV prevention and now to addiction treatment (because of the population of study) is a result of concentrated efforts by researchers, providers and the community.

Current priorities

The centre’s mission is to provide provincial leadership in substance use and addiction research, education and clinical care guidance and to seamlessly integrate these pillars to help shape a comprehensive, connected system of treatment and care that reaches all British Columbians. (taken from www.bccsu.ca)

Co-speaker presentations

International sites with rapidly evolving HIV epidemics in patients with substance use disorder present an opportunity for rapid scale-up of interventions once proven efficacious with a promise of large public health impact (text taken from www.drugabuse.gov). The three speakers in this session moderated by Petra Jacobs, entitled “Research on HIV and Substance Use Disorder: International Perspectives,” including Drs Wood and Korthuis, have presented several research projects supported by NIDA and other institutions. I have attended the session. The discussant, Dr Metzger, closed the session with concluding remarks.

Double trouble: opioids and pain among people with substance use disorders

tablets

Against the use of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain to people who have active substance use disorders advises the third recommendation in the new opioid therapy guidelines (May 8th, 2017).

However, this “strong” recommendation is based on low quality of evidence from studies that rarely involve people with active substance use disorders (SUD). (more…)

Two birds with one stone: physicians training in research

Combined training in addiction medicine and research is feasible and acceptable for physicians – a new study shows; however, there are important barriers to overcome and improved understanding of the experience of addiction physicians in the clinician-scientist track is required.

Addiction care is usually provided by unskilled lay-persons in most countries. The resulting care is inadequate, effective treatments are overlooked and millions of people suffer despite recent discovery of new treatments for substance use disorders. In rare instances when addiction care is provided by medical professionals, they are not adequately trained in caring for people with substance use disorders and, therefore, feel unprepared to provide such care.  Physician scientists are the bridge between science and practice. Despite large evidence-base upon which to base clinical practice, most health systems have not combined training of healthcare providers in addiction medicine and research. 
In recent years, new programmes have emerged to train the comprehensive addiction medicine professionals internationally.

We undertook a qualitative study to assess the experiences of 26 physicians who completed such a training programme in Vancouver, Canada. They included psychiatrists, internal medicine and family medicine physicians, faculty, mentors, medical students and residents. All received both addiction medicine and research training. Drawing on Kirkpatrick’s model of evaluating training programmes, we analysed the interviews thematically using qualitative data analysis software. We identified five themes relating to learning experience that were influential: (i) attitude, (ii) knowledge, (iii) skill, (iv) behaviour and (v) patient outcome. The presence of a supportive learning environment, flexibility in time lines, highly structured rotations, and clear guidance regarding development of research products facilitated clinician-scientist training.  Competing priorities, to include clinical and family responsibilities, hindered training.

Read more here: http://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12909-017-0862-y
Klimas, J., McNeil, R., Ahamad, K., Mead, A., Rieb, L., Cullen, W., Wood, E., Small, W. (2017) Two birds with one stone: Experiences of Combining Clinical and Research Training in Addiction Medicine. BMC Medical Education, 17:22

Publication Impact of Addiction Clinician-Scientist Fellowship

This study evaluated the impact of an addiction medicine research fellowship. As such, the evaluation here has the potential to radically change addiction medicine clinician-researcher training. 
Clinician-scientists serve to bridge the gap between addiction research and clinical practice but cultivating these clinician-scientists who are able to publish clinical research remains a challenge.
Objective. To determine if a one-year structured fellowship program for addiction medicine physicians would lead to increased rates of publication.
Design. A non-randomized controlled trial.
Setting. A Canadian academic hospital.
Participants. The study sample was drawn from those physicians who applied to a part-time, one-year addiction research immersion training program. Of the 8 top-ranked individuals from the 11 applicants, 4 were selected to participate in the training program and another 4 were designated to serve as a comparison group. Participants were compensated for their time.
Intervention. The addiction research immersion training program consisted of 3 half-days per week of addiction research training, 2 half-days per week of longitudinal research methods training, and 3 half-days per week of mentored publication and grant development. The control group continued in their usual clinical practice.
Main outcome measure. Number of first-author publications at the end of the one-your fellowship.
At the end of the one-year fellowship, the 4 fellows published 7 papers and the controls published 1 paper; however, this difference was not statistically significant.

These preliminary results suggest that a structured clinical-research training program could lead to an increased rate of publications.