Bansback Nick, Tam Alexander C T, Palis Heather, Kanters Steve, Popoff Evan, Schechter Martin T, Anis Aslam H, Marsh David C, Oviedo-Joekes Eugenia
School of Population and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Centre for Advancing Health Outcomes, Providence Research, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
BMC Public Health. 2025 Aug 30;25(1):2974. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-24365-w.
OBJECTIVE: To synthesize and determine the relative effectiveness of diverse opioid agonist treatment (OAT) medications, including injectables, for opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: We searched EMBASE, PubMed, and CENTRAL for Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) (CRD42018109469) and previously published systematic reviews of head-to-head trials of OAT medications. The primary outcome was treatment retention, and secondary outcomes included days of opioid use, days of cocaine use, and proportion of participants involved in criminalized activities. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) and corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrI) using Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs) to indirectly compare treatments at varying lengths of follow-up (3 to 12 months). Sensitivity analyses examined influence of follow-up duration and other trial factors. RESULTS: Twenty-four RCTs were included. Diacetylmorphine plus oral methadone and injectable hydromorphone plus oral methadone had similar retention compared to one another (OR: 1.05; 95%CrI: 0.27, 4.10). Diacetylmorphine plus oral methadone had similar or statistically favourable retention versus low, medium, and high doses of conventional OATs: buprenorphine (OR: 13.55; 95%CrI: 4.51, 42.52; OR: 5.07; 95%CrI: 2.03, 12.47; OR: 2.21; 95%CrI: 0.18, 21.54) and methadone (OR: 5.88; 95%CrI: 2.34, 16.33; OR: 3.66; 95%CrI: 1.57, 8.82; OR: 3.67; 95%CrI: 1.83, 8.35). Similarly, injectable hydromorphone plus oral methadone also showed favourable or similar retention relative to conventional OATs. Limiting analyses to trials that included only OAT-experienced patients, that offered no extra participation incentive, and/or with 6 months (± 0.5) of follow-up generally did not change the direction of the findings. Injectable hydromorphone plus oral methadone was also statistically favoured in terms of reduced days of opioid use relative to methadone, but mean differences in days of cocaine use were similar. Diacetylmorphine plus oral methadone was associated with a smaller proportion of participation in criminalized activities relative to methadone alone. CONCLUSION: Both diacetylmorphine and injectable hydromorphone supplemented with methadone showed favourable retention compared to methadone and buprenorphine, depending on the strength of the OAT being co-prescribed or being compared to. These results provide further support for alternatives to conventional OATs such as diacetylmorphine or injectable hydromorphone for treatment retention.
目的:合成并确定包括注射剂在内的多种阿片类激动剂治疗(OAT)药物用于阿片类物质使用障碍(OUD)的相对有效性。 方法:我们检索了EMBASE、PubMed和CENTRAL中的随机对照试验(RCTs)(检索号:CRD42018109469)以及先前发表的关于OAT药物头对头试验的系统评价。主要结局是治疗保留率,次要结局包括阿片类物质使用天数、可卡因使用天数以及参与犯罪活动的参与者比例。我们使用贝叶斯网络荟萃分析(NMA)计算比值比(ORs)和均值差(MDs)以及相应的95%可信区间(CrI),以间接比较不同随访时长(3至12个月)的治疗方法。敏感性分析考察了随访时长和其他试验因素的影响。 结果:纳入了24项随机对照试验。二乙酰吗啡加口服美沙酮与注射用氢吗啡酮加口服美沙酮的保留率相似(OR:1.05;95%CrI:0.27,4.10)。与低、中、高剂量的传统OAT药物(丁丙诺啡和美沙酮)相比,二乙酰吗啡加口服美沙酮的保留率相似或在统计学上更优:丁丙诺啡(OR:13.55;95%CrI:4.51,42.52;OR:5.07;95%CrI:2.03,12.47;OR:2.21;95%CrI:0.18,21.54)和美沙酮(OR:5.88;95%CrI:2.34,16.33;OR:3.66;95%CrI:1.57,8.82;OR:3.67;95%CrI:1.83,8.35)。同样,注射用氢吗啡酮加口服美沙酮相对于传统OAT药物也显示出更优或相似的保留率。将分析限于仅纳入有OAT治疗经验患者、未提供额外参与激励措施和/或随访6个月(±0.5)的试验,通常不会改变研究结果的方向。相对于美沙酮,注射用氢吗啡酮加口服美沙酮在减少阿片类物质使用天数方面在统计学上也更具优势,但可卡因使用天数的均值差相似。与单独使用美沙酮相比,二乙酰吗啡加口服美沙酮参与犯罪活动的参与者比例更小。 结论:与美沙酮和丁丙诺啡相比,补充美沙酮的二乙酰吗啡和注射用氢吗啡酮在治疗保留率方面表现良好,这取决于同时开具或与之比较的OAT药物的强度。这些结果为使用二乙酰吗啡或注射用氢吗啡酮等传统OAT药物的替代药物进行治疗保留提供了进一步支持。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-7-6
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-4-27
Health Technol Assess. 2007-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-9-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-2-21
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-6-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-5-9
Harm Reduct J. 2024-12-4