27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Diacetylmorphine versus Methadone for the Treatment of Opioid Addiction

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Studies in Europe have suggested that injectable diacetylmorphine, the active ingredient in heroin, can be an effective adjunctive treatment for chronic, relapsing opioid dependence. In an open-label, phase 3, randomized, controlled trial in Canada, we compared injectable diacetylmorphine with oral methadone maintenance therapy in patients with opioid dependence that was refractory to treatment. Long-term users of injectable heroin who had not benefited from at least two previous attempts at treatment for addiction (including at least one methadone treatment) were randomly assigned to receive methadone (111 patients) or diacetylmorphine (115 patients). The primary outcomes, assessed at 12 months, were retention in addiction treatment or drug-free status and a reduction in illicit-drug use or other illegal activity according to the European Addiction Severity Index. The primary outcomes were determined in 95.2% of the participants. On the basis of an intention-to-treat analysis, the rate of retention in addiction treatment in the diacetylmorphine group was 87.8%, as compared with 54.1% in the methadone group (rate ratio for retention, 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35 to 1.95; P<0.001). The reduction in rates of illicit-drug use or other illegal activity was 67.0% in the diacetylmorphine group and 47.7% in the methadone group (rate ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.77; P=0.004). The most common serious adverse events associated with diacetylmorphine injections were overdoses (in 10 patients) and seizures (in 6 patients). Injectable diacetylmorphine was more effective than oral methadone. Because of a risk of overdoses and seizures, diacetylmorphine maintenance therapy should be delivered in settings where prompt medical intervention is available. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00175357.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Self-report among injecting drug users: a review.

          The use of behavioural self-reports of drug users is widespread among studies of illicit drug use. Despite widespread use, concerns about the accuracy of these reports continue to be raised. The current paper critically reviews the literature on the reliability and validity of self-reported drug use, criminality and HIV risk-taking among injecting drug users. The literature shows respectable reliability and validity of self-reported behaviours when compared to biomarkers, criminal records and collateral interviews. It concludes that the self-reports of drug users are sufficiently reliable and valid to provide descriptions of drug use, drug-related problems and the natural history of drug use.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A comparison of levomethadyl acetate, buprenorphine, and methadone for opioid dependence.

            Opioid dependence is a chronic, relapsing disorder with important public health implications. In a 17-week randomized study of 220 patients, we compared levomethadyl acetate (75 to 115 mg), buprenorphine (16 to 32 mg), and high-dose (60 to 100 mg) and low-dose (20 mg) methadone as treatments for opioid dependence. Levomethadyl acetate and buprenorphine were administered three times a week. Methadone was administered daily. Doses were individualized except in the group assigned to low-dose methadone. Patients with poor responses to treatment were switched to methadone. There were 55 patients in each group; 51 percent completed the trial. The mean (+/-SE) number of days that a patient remained in the study was significantly higher for those receiving levomethadyl acetate (89+/-6), buprenorphine (96+/-4), and high-dose methadone (105+/-4) than for those receiving low-dose methadone (70+/-4, P<0.001). Continued participation was also significantly more frequent among patients receiving high-dose methadone than among those receiving levomethadyl acetate (P=0.02). The percentage of patients with 12 or more consecutive opioid-negative urine specimens was 36 percent in the levomethadyl acetate group, 26 percent in the buprenorphine group, 28 percent in the high-dose methadone group, and 8 percent in the low-dose methadone group (P=0.005). At the time of their last report, patients reported on a scale of 0 to 100 that their drug problem had a mean severity of 35 with levomethadyl acetate, 34 with buprenorphine, 38 with high-dose methadone, and 53 with low-dose methadone (P=0.002). As compared with low-dose methadone, levomethadyl acetate, buprenorphine, and high-dose methadone substantially reduce the use of illicit opioids.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Medical prescription of heroin to treatment resistant heroin addicts: two randomised controlled trials.

              To determine whether supervised medical prescription of heroin can successfully treat addicts who do not sufficiently benefit from methadone maintenance treatment. Two open label randomised controlled trials. Methadone maintenance programmes in six cities in the Netherlands. 549 heroin addicts. Inhalable heroin (n = 375) or injectable heroin (n = 174) prescribed over 12 months. Heroin (maximum 1000 mg per day) plus methadone (maximum 150 mg per day) compared with methadone alone (maximum 150 mg per day). Psychosocial treatment was offered throughout. Dichotomous, multidomain response index, including validated indicators of physical health, mental status, and social functioning. Adherence was excellent with 12 month outcome data available for 94% of the randomised participants. With intention to treat analysis, 12 month treatment with heroin plus methadone was significantly more effective than treatment with methadone alone in the trial of inhalable heroin (response rate 49.7% v 26.9%; difference 22.8%, 95% confidence interval 11.0% to 34.6%) and in the trial of injectable heroin (55.5% v 31.2%; difference 24.3%, 9.6% to 39.0%). Discontinuation of the coprescribed heroin resulted in a rapid deterioration in 82% (94/115) of those who responded to the coprescribed heroin. The incidence of serious adverse events was similar across treatment conditions. Supervised coprescription of heroin is feasible, more effective, and probably as safe as methadone alone in reducing the many physical, mental, and social problems of treatment resistant heroin addicts.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                New England Journal of Medicine
                N Engl J Med
                Massachusetts Medical Society
                0028-4793
                1533-4406
                August 20 2009
                August 20 2009
                : 361
                : 8
                : 777-786
                Article
                10.1056/NEJMoa0810635
                5127701
                19692689
                b33222e9-19ad-442b-a33c-c6d4bb7b85a4
                © 2009
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article