Kakko Johan, Grönbladh Leif, Svanborg Kerstin Dybrandt, von Wachenfeldt Joachim, Rück Christian, Rawlings Bob, Nilsson Lars-Håkan, Heilig Markus
Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Am J Psychiatry. 2007 May;164(5):797-803. doi: 10.1176/ajp.2007.164.5.797.
Both methadone and buprenorphine are effective therapy for heroin dependence. Efficacy is best documented for methadone maintenance therapy, but safety concerns limit its use. Buprenorphine offers lower overdose risk and improved access, but efficacy may be lower. The authors compared adaptive, buprenorphine-based stepped care to optimal methadone maintenance treatment.
This randomized controlled trial was undertaken 2004-2006. It consisted of a 24-day uniform double-blind induction phase followed by single-blind flexible dosing based on structured clinical criteria, for a total of 6 months. Ninety-six self-referred subjects with heroin dependence were randomly assigned to methadone or to stepped treatment initiated with buprenorphine/naloxone and escalated to methadone if needed. All subjects received intensive behavioral treatment. Primary outcome was retention in treatment. Secondary outcomes were completer analyses of problem severity (Addiction Severity Index) and proportion of urine samples free of illicit drugs.
Overall, 6-month retention was 78%. Stepped treatment and methadone maintenance therapy outcomes were virtually identical. Among completers of stepped therapy, 46% remained on buprenorphine/naloxone. Proportion of urine samples free of illicit opiates increased over time and ultimately reached approximately 80% in both arms. Problem severity decreased significantly and uniformly in both arms.
A stepped treatment of heroin dependence as described here appears equally efficacious compared to optimally delivered methadone maintenance therapy. Together with prior data on the advantageous safety of buprenorphine, this suggests that broad implementation of strategies using buprenorphine as first-line treatment should be considered.
美沙酮和丁丙诺啡都是治疗海洛因依赖的有效疗法。美沙酮维持治疗的疗效已有充分记录,但安全问题限制了其使用。丁丙诺啡的过量用药风险较低且更容易获得,但疗效可能较低。作者比较了以丁丙诺啡为基础的适应性阶梯式治疗与优化的美沙酮维持治疗。
这项随机对照试验于2004年至2006年进行。包括一个为期24天的统一双盲诱导期,随后根据结构化临床标准进行单盲灵活给药,共6个月。96名自我转诊的海洛因依赖受试者被随机分配到美沙酮组或开始接受丁丙诺啡/纳洛酮治疗并在需要时升级为美沙酮的阶梯式治疗组。所有受试者均接受强化行为治疗。主要结局是治疗保留率。次要结局是对问题严重程度(成瘾严重程度指数)的完整分析以及无非法药物尿液样本的比例。
总体而言,6个月的保留率为78%。阶梯式治疗和美沙酮维持治疗的结局几乎相同。在阶梯式治疗的完成者中,46%仍使用丁丙诺啡/纳洛酮。无非法阿片类药物的尿液样本比例随时间增加,最终两组均达到约80%。两组的问题严重程度均显著且一致地降低。
与优化实施的美沙酮维持治疗相比,本文所述的海洛因依赖阶梯式治疗似乎同样有效。结合先前关于丁丙诺啡有利安全性的数据,这表明应考虑广泛实施以丁丙诺啡作为一线治疗的策略。