Cost-effectiveness of extended release naltrexone to prevent relapse among criminal justice-involved individuals with a history of opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Criminal justice-involved individuals are highly susceptible to opioid relapse and overdose-related deaths. In a recent randomized trial, we demonstrated the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; Vivitrol® ) in preventing opioid relapse among criminal justice-involved US adults with a history of opioid use disorder. The cost of XR-NTX may be a significant barrier to adoption. Thus, it is important to account for improved quality of life and downstream cost-offsets. Our aims were to (1) estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for XR-NTX versus treatment as usual (TAU) and evaluate it relative to generally accepted value thresholds; and (2) estimate the incremental cost per additional year of opioid abstinence. DESIGN: Economic evaluation of the aforementioned trial from the taxpayer perspective. Participants were randomized to 25 weeks of XR-NTX injections or TAU; follow-up occurred at 52 and 78 weeks. SETTING: Five study sites in the US Northeast corridor. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 308 participants were randomized to XR-NTX (n = 153) or TAU (n = 155). MEASUREMENTS: Incremental costs relative to incremental economic and clinical effectiveness measures, QALYs and abstinent years, respectively. FINDINGS: The 25-week cost per QALY and abstinent-year figures were $162 150 and $46 329, respectively. The 78-week figures were $76 400/QALY and $16 371/abstinent year. At 25 weeks, we can be 10% certain that XR-NTX is cost-effective at a value threshold of $100 000/QALY and 62% certain at $200 000/QALY. At 78 weeks, the cost-effectiveness probabilities are 59% at $100 000/QALY and 76% at $200 000/QALY. We can be 95% confident that the intervention would be considered 'good value' at $90 000/abstinent year at 25 weeks and $500/abstinent year at 78 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: While extended-release naltrexone appears to be effective in increasing both quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and abstinence, it does not appear to be cost-effective using generally accepted value thresholds for QALYs, due to the high price of the injection.

A randomized clinical trial of buprenorphine for prisoners: Findings at 12-months post-release.

BACKGROUND: This study examined whether starting buprenorphine treatment prior to prison and after release from prison would be associated with better drug treatment outcomes and whether males and females responded differently to the combination of in-prison treatment and post-release service setting. METHODS: Study design was a 2 (In-Prison Treatment: Condition: Buprenorphine Treatment: vs. Counseling Only)×2 [Post-Release Service Setting Condition: Opioid Treatment: Program (OTP) vs. Community Health Center (CHC)]×2 (Gender) factorial design. The trial was conducted between September 2008 and July 2012. Follow-up assessments were completed in 2014. Participants were recruited from two Baltimore pre-release prisons (one for men and one for women). Adult pre-release prisoners who were heroin-dependent during the year prior to incarceration were eligible. Post-release assessments were conducted at 1, 3, 6, and 12-month following prison release. RESULTS: Participants (N=211) in the in-prison treatment condition effect had a higher mean number of days of community buprenorphine treatment compared to the condition in which participants initiated medication after release (P=0.005). However, there were no statistically significant hypothesized effects for the in-prison treatment condition in terms of: days of heroin use and crime, and opioid and cocaine positive urine screening test results (all Ps>0.14) and no statistically significant hypothesized gender effects (all Ps>0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Although initiating buprenorphine treatment in prison compared to after-release was associated with more days receiving buprenorphine treatment in the designated community treatment program during the 12-months post-release assessment, it was not associated with superior outcomes in terms of heroin and cocaine use and criminal behavior.

Factors Associated With Receiving Rapid HIV Testing Among Individuals on Probation or Parole.

Despite the strong correlation between HIV and corrections, testing and prevention efforts have largely been ignored among community corrections populations. The current study is a secondary analysis to compare characteristics of individuals under community corrections supervision who completed rapid HIV testing with those who refused such testing (N = 2,382) in Baltimore, Maryland, and Providence, Rhode Island. Results indicate that the following variables were significantly associated with the receipt of rapid HIV testing: being female (p = .024), Black race (p = .004), homeless (p = .016), early age of crime onset (p = .001), more drug use during the past 90 days (p = .033), and previously tested for hepatitis C virus/hepatitis B virus (p = .024). Such findings make it especially important that individuals under community supervision be linked with services in the community to ensure that HIV testing and health care planning occur simultaneously.

Extended-Release Naltrexone to Prevent Opioid Relapse in Criminal Justice Offenders.

BACKGROUND: Extended-release naltrexone, a sustained-release monthly injectable formulation of the full mu-opioid receptor antagonist, is effective for the prevention of relapse to opioid dependence. Data supporting its effectiveness in U.S. criminal justice populations are limited. METHODS: In this five-site, open-label, randomized trial, we compared a 24-week course of extended-release naltrexone (Vivitrol) with usual treatment, consisting of brief counseling and referrals for community treatment programs, for the prevention of opioid relapse among adult criminal justice offenders (i.e., persons involved in the U.S. criminal justice system) who had a history of opioid dependence and a preference for opioid-free rather than opioid maintenance treatments and who were abstinent from opioids at the time of randomization. The primary outcome was the time to an opioid-relapse event, which was defined as 10 or more days of opioid use in a 28-day period as assessed by self-report or by testing of urine samples obtained every 2 weeks; a positive or missing sample was computed as 5 days of opioid use. Post-treatment follow-up occurred at weeks 27, 52, and 78. RESULTS: A total of 153 participants were assigned to extended-release naltrexone and 155 to usual treatment. During the 24-week treatment phase, participants assigned to extended-release naltrexone had a longer median time to relapse than did those assigned to usual treatment (10.5 vs. 5.0 weeks, P<0.001; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.68), a lower rate of relapse (43% vs. 64% of participants, P<0.001; odds ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.65), and a higher rate of opioid-negative urine samples (74% vs. 56%, P<0.001; odds ratio, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.48 to 3.54). At week 78 (approximately 1 year after the end of the treatment phase), rates of opioid-negative urine samples were equal (46% in each group, P=0.91). The rates of other prespecified secondary outcome measures--self-reported cocaine, alcohol, and intravenous drug use, unsafe sex, and reincarceration--were not significantly lower with extended-release naltrexone than with usual treatment. Over the total 78 weeks observed, there were no overdose events in the extended-release naltrexone group and seven in the usual-treatment group (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving criminal justice offenders, extended-release naltrexone was associated with a rate of opioid relapse that was lower than that with usual treatment. Opioid-use prevention effects waned after treatment discontinuation. (Funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00781898.).

Buprenorphine dose induction in non-opioid-tolerant pre-release prisoners.

BACKGROUND: In a previously reported randomized controlled trial, formerly opioid-dependent prisoners were more likely to enter community drug abuse treatment when they were inducted in prison onto buprenorphine/naloxone (hereafter called buprenorphine) than when they received counseling without buprenorphine in prison (47.5% vs. 33.7%, p=0.012) (Gordon et al., 2014). In this communication we report on the results of the induction schedule and the adverse event profile seen in pre-release prisoners inducted onto buprenorphine. METHOD: This paper examines the dose induction procedure, a comparison of the proposed versus actual doses given per week, and side effects reported for 104 adult participants who were randomized to buprenorphine treatment in prison. Self-reported side effects were analyzed using generalized estimated equations to determine changes over time in side effects. RESULTS: Study participants were inducted onto buprenorphine at a rate faster than the induction schedule. Of the 104 (72 males, 32 females) buprenorphine recipients, 64 (37 males, 27 females) remained on medication at release from prison. Nine participants (8.6%) discontinued buprenorphine because of unpleasant opioid side effects. There were no serious adverse events reported during the in-prison phase of the study. Constipation was the most frequent symptom reported (69 percent). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that buprenorphine administered to non-opioid-tolerant adults should be started at a lower, individualized dose than customarily used for adults actively using opioids, and that non-opioid-tolerant pre-release prisoners can be successfully inducted onto therapeutic doses prior to release.

A Phase 4, Pilot, Open-Label Study of VIVITROL® (Extended-Release Naltrexone XR-NTX) for Prisoners.

This was a Phase 4, pilot, open-label feasibility study of extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX) administered to pre-release prisoners having a history of pre-incarceration opioid disorder. We evaluated the relationship between XR-NTX adherence and criminal recidivism (re-arrest and re-incarceration) and opioid and cocaine use. Twenty-seven pre-release male and female prisoners who had opioid disorders during the year prior to index incarceration were recruited and received one XR-NTX injection once each month for 7 months (1 injection pre-release from prison and 6 injections in the community) and of those 27, 10 (37%) were retained in treatment at 7-months post release. Results indicate those completing 6 compared to those completing <6 injections were less likely to test positive for opioids in the community (0% vs. 62.5%, respectively; p=0.003). Although not statistically significant, individuals who did not complete all 6 injections were more likely to be re-arrested compared to those completing all 6 community injections (31.3% vs. 0%, respectively; p=0.123). Contingent upon further study of a randomized controlled trial, XR-NTX may be a feasible option in the prison setting in view of the lack of potential for diversion. Furthermore, these data suggest that completing the entire course of treatment (6 injections) may reduce opioid use and, to a lesser degree, re-arrest and re-incarceration.

Extended-release naltrexone to prevent relapse among opioid dependent, criminal justice system involved adults: rationale and design of a randomized controlled effectiveness trial.

BACKGROUND: Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX, Vivitrol; Alkermes Inc.) is an injectable monthly sustained-release mu opioid receptor antagonist. XR-NTX is a potentially effective intervention for opioid use disorders and as relapse prevention among criminal justice system (CJS) populations. METHODS: This 5-site open-label randomized controlled effectiveness trial examines whether XR-NTX reduces opioid relapse compared with treatment as usual (TAU) among community dwelling, non-incarcerated volunteers with current or recent CJS involvement. The XR-NTX arm receives 6 monthly XR-NTX injections at Medical Management visits; the TAU group receives referrals to available community treatment options. Assessments occur every 2 weeks during a 24-week treatment phase and at 12- and 18-month follow-ups. The primary outcome is a relapse event, defined as either self-report or urine toxicology evidence of ≥10 days of opioid use in a 28-day (4 week) period, with a positive or missing urine test counted as 5 days of opioid use. RESULTS: We describe the rationale, specific aims, and design of the study. Alternative design considerations and extensive secondary aims and outcomes are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: XR-NTX is a potentially important treatment and relapse prevention option among persons with opioid dependence and CJS involvement. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00781898.

Buprenorphine Treatment for Probationers and Parolees.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy studies involving buprenorphine have rarely been conducted with U.S. community corrections populations. This is one of the first reports of buprenorphine treatment outcomes of adult opioid-dependent probationers and parolees. METHODS: This longitudinal study examined the 3-month treatment outcomes for a sample of probation and parole clients (N = 64) who received community-based buprenorphine treatment. RESULTS: Approximately two thirds of the sample (67%) were still in treatment at 3 months post baseline. Furthermore, there was a significant decline in the number of self-reported heroin use days and crime days from baseline to 3 months post baseline. Although there was not a significant reduction in reincarcerations, there was no evidence that they had increased. CONCLUSIONS: Given that buprenorphine is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a safe, effective treatment for opioid use disorders, individuals on parole or probation should have the opportunity to benefit from it through community-based programs.

A randomized controlled trial of prison-initiated buprenorphine: prison outcomes and community treatment entry.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is a promising treatment for heroin addiction. However, little is known regarding its provision to pre-release prisoners with heroin dependence histories who were not opioid-tolerant, the relative effectiveness of the post-release setting in which it is provided, and gender differences in treatment outcome in this population. METHODS: This is the first randomized clinical trial of prison-initiated buprenorphine provided to male and female inmates in the US who were previously heroin-dependent prior to incarceration. A total of 211 participants with 3-9 months remaining in prison were randomized to one of four conditions formed by crossing In-Prison Treatment Condition (received buprenorphine vs. counseling only) and Post-release Service Setting (at an opioid treatment center vs. a community health center). Outcome measures were: entered prison treatment; completed prison treatment; and entered community treatment 10 days post-release. RESULTS: There was a significant main effect (p=.006) for entering prison treatment favoring the In-Prison buprenorphine Treatment Condition (99.0% vs. 80.4%). Regarding completing prison treatment, the only significant effect was Gender, with women significantly (p<.001) more likely to complete than men (85.7% vs. 52.7%). There was a significant main effect (p=.012) for community treatment entry, favoring the In-Prison buprenorphine Treatment Condition (47.5% vs. 33.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine appears feasible and acceptable to prisoners who were not opioid-tolerant and can facilitate community treatment entry. However, concerns remain with in-prison treatment termination due to attempted diversion of medication.

Gender Differences Among Prisoners With Pre-Incarceration Heroin Dependence Participating in a Randomized Clinical Trial of Buprenorphine Treatment.

The primary focus of the current study is to examine whether gender and other baseline characteristics were significantly associated with more severe patterns of drug use. It involves data from 260 male and female pre-release prison inmates with pre-incarceration heroin dependence who enrolled in a randomized clinical trial of prison-initiated buprenorphine. Three outcomes are examined: 1) Lifetime Intravenous drug use; 2) Lifetime number of drugs used; and 3) Heroin use in prison. Regarding lifetime intravenous drug use; race (p = .0001), education (p = .009), age (p = .0001), and psychological treatment (p = .028) were significant. Concerning lifetime number of drugs used; race (p =.0001) and age of first crime (p = .001) were significant. Finally, gender (p = .004), was the only significant variable in terms of using heroin while in prison. All of these differences may have important clinical, treatment, and research implications, which are discussed.

Rapid HIV testing for individuals on probation/parole: outcomes of an intervention trial.

Many probationers and parolees do not receive HIV testing despite being at increased risk for obtaining and transmitting HIV. A two-group randomized controlled trial was conducted between April, 2011 and May, 2012 at probation/parole offices in Baltimore, Maryland and Providence/Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Male and female probationers/parolees were interviewed (n = 1,263) and then offered HIV testing based on random assignment to one of two conditions: (1) On-site rapid HIV testing conducted at the probation/parole office; or (2) Referral for rapid HIV testing off site at a community HIV testing clinic. Outcomes were: (1) undergoing HIV testing; and (2) receipt of HIV testing results. Participants were significantly more likely to be tested on-site at a probation/parole office versus off-site at a HIV testing clinic (p < 0.001). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of receiving HIV testing results. Findings indicate that probationers/parolees are willing to be tested on-site and, independent of testing location, are equally willing to receive their results. Implications for expanding rapid HIV testing to more criminal justice related locations and populations are discussed.

Individual Patient and Program Factors Related to Prison and Community Treatment Completion in Prison-Initiated Methadone Maintenance Treatment.

While prison-initiated methadone maintenance treatment is effective, it is largely unknown as to what patient and program factors are related to outcomes. These issues were studied in a secondary analysis of data from 67 male prerelease prison inmates with preincarceration heroin addiction. Three outcomes are examined: completed prison treatment; completed 1 year of community treatment; and number of days in community treatment. Being employed (p = .045) during the three years prior to index incarceration was significantly and positively related to community treatment completion. Increased frequency of urine tests taken was significantly associated with a greater number of days in community treatment (p < .001). Limitations, policy implications, and directions for future research are discussed.

A cluster randomized trial of an organizational linkage intervention for offenders with substance use disorders: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders are highly prevalent in community correctional populations, yet these settings frequently are ill-equipped to identify and refer offenders to community-based treatment services. In particular, community corrections staff are often opposed to the use of medication in addiction treatment because of inadequate knowledge, resources, and organizational structures to facilitate client linkages to evidence-based services. METHODS/DESIGN: Each of the NIDA-funded Research Centers recruited 2 criminal justice agencies to participate in the study. Eligibility rules required study sites that were focused on community corrections (i.e., probation or parole), had few or no formal relationships with treatment providers for referring clients to medication-assisted treatment, and had no state or local policies prohibiting such relationships. Sites under the oversight of the same parent agency were eligible only if they were in geographically distinct catchment areas, and could be assigned to different study arms without cross-contamination at any level. The 18 clusters consisted of community corrections officers and their offender caseloads nested within agencies, each of which was partnered with at least one community-based substance abuse treatment program. Randomization was blocked by Research Center, within which one cluster was randomly assigned to a training-only condition (comparison) and the other to training followed by a strategic organizational linkage process (intervention). Line staff received a scientifically-grounded, systematically-delivered training session that addresses gaps in existing knowledge, perceptions, and information about medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and local availability of MAT services. Key decision-makers subsequently were asked to collaborate in a strategic planning process to enhance formal and informal linkages between criminal justice agencies and local MAT providers. It was hypothesized that the two implementation intervention components together would be more likely than staff training alone to improve the process of referring opioid- and alcohol-dependent adults under community supervision to appropriate addiction pharmacotherapy. Outcomes were measured at the client (referrals), line staff (attitudes), and organizational (linkage) levels. DISCUSSION: Through closer collaboration among criminal justice agencies and treatment providers, improved linkages to effective substance abuse treatment should yield significant clinical, public health and public safety benefits.

The Severity, Frequency, and Variety of Crime in Heroin-Dependent Prisoners Enrolled in a Buprenorphine Clinical Trial.

Data were obtained on four dimensions of criminal activity (frequency, variety, severity, and income) from male and female prisoners (N = 200) with preincarceration heroin dependence who participated in a randomized clinical trial of buprenorphine treatment. The article examines the above-mentioned dimensions of crime and their relationships with demographic characteristics, substance use, legitimate employment, drug treatment episodes, and psychological problems. Results largely show several important similarities to results on previous prison inmate cohorts with histories of heroin addiction, although the present sample may have more of a tendency toward violent crime than earlier cohorts of heroin-dependent offenders. This study's findings may have implications for the design of appropriate treatment interventions for prisoners with preincarceration heroin dependence that address not only substance use but also criminal activity.

Postprison release HIV-risk behaviors in a randomized trial of methadone treatment for prisoners.

BACKGROUND: This secondary analysis examined the impact of methadone initiated in prison on postrelease HIV risk behaviors. The parent study was a three-group randomized clinical trial in which participants received drug abuse counseling in prison and were randomly assigned to: (1) passive referral to substance abuse treatment upon release; (2) guaranteed methadone treatment admission upon release; and (3) methadone in prison and guaranteed continuation of methadone upon release. METHODS: Participants were 211 adult males with preincarceration histories of opiate dependence. The AIDS Risk Assessment was administered at baseline (in prison) and at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month postrelease. Data were analyzed for the entire sample (N = 211) as well as the subsamples who reported injecting drugs in the 30 days prior to incarceration (n = 131) and who reported having unprotected sex in that time frame (n = 144) using generalized linear mixed model on an intent-to-treat basis. RESULTS: There were no significant changes in sex- or drug-risk by Condition over Time. There were significant Time and Condition main effects for the total sample as well as the injector subsample for drug-risk behaviors. There were no significant Condition main effects for HIV sex-risk behaviors, but there were significant Time main effects. CONCLUSIONS: Methadone initiated in prison or immediately postrelease is associated with reduced HIV drug-risk compared to counseling in prison without methadone and passive referral to treatment at release. Participation in several drug- and sex-risk behaviors also showed significant declines during the postrelease time periods.

Medication-assisted treatment in criminal justice agencies affiliated with the criminal justice-drug abuse treatment studies (CJ-DATS): availability, barriers, and intentions.

Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) is underutilized in the treatment of drug-dependent, criminal justice populations. This study surveyed criminal justice agencies affiliated with the Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies (CJ-DATS) to assess use of MAT and factors influencing use of MAT. A convenience sample (N = 50) of criminal justice agency respondents (e.g., jails, prisons, parole/probation, and drug courts) completed a survey on MAT practices and attitudes. Pregnant women and individuals experiencing withdrawal were most likely to receive MAT for opiate dependence in jail or prison, whereas those reentering the community from jail or prison were the least likely to receive MAT. Factors influencing use of MAT included criminal justice preferences for drug-free treatment, limited knowledge of the benefits of MAT, security concerns, regulations prohibiting use of MAT for certain agencies, and lack of qualified medical staff. Differences across agency type in the factors influencing use and perceptions of MAT were also examined. MAT use is largely limited to detoxification and maintenance of pregnant women in criminal justice settings. Use of MAT during the community reentry period is minimal. Addressing inadequate knowledge and negative attitudes about MAT may increase its adoption, but better linkages to community pharmacotherapy during the reentry period might overcome other issues, including security, liability, staffing, and regulatory concerns. The CJ-DATS collaborative MAT implementation study to address inadequate knowledge, attitudes, and linkage will be described.

Opioid agonist maintenance for probationers: patient-level predictors of treatment retention, drug use, and crime.

This study examined outcomes and their predictors among 181 probationers enrolling in opioid agonist maintenance with methadone or levo-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM). Participants were interviewed at treatment entry and 2-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Treatment retention and frequency of heroin use, cocaine use, and income-generating criminal activity were examined using survival and longitudinal analyses. Participants reported marked reductions in drug use and crime relative to treatment entry. A number of patient characteristics associated with various outcomes were identified. The findings support engaging probationers in treatment and highlight patient factors that might influence outcomes.

A multisite pilot study of extended-release injectable naltrexone treatment for previously opioid-dependent parolees and probationers.

A feasibility study was conducted to pilot test the ability of 5 sites to recruit, treat, and retain opioid-dependent offenders in a trial of extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX). The participants, 61 previously opioid-dependent individuals under legal supervision in the community, received up to 6 monthly injections of Depotrex brand naltrexone and completed a 6-month follow-up interview. Six-month outcomes showed that those who completed treatment had significantly fewer opioid-positive urines and were less likely to have been incarcerated than those who had not completed treatment. The findings indicate that XR-NTX holds promise as a feasible, effective treatment option for opioid-dependent offenders.

A Randomized Clinical Trial of Methadone Maintenance for Prisoners: Prediction of Treatment Entry and Completion in Prison.

The present report is an intent-to-treat analysis involving secondary data drawn from the first randomized clinical trial of prison-initiated methadone in the United States. This study examined predictors of treatment entry and completion in prison. A sample of 211 adult male prerelease inmates with preincarceration heroin dependence were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions: counseling only (counseling in prison; n= 70); counseling plus transfer (counseling in prison with transfer to methadone maintenance treatment upon release; n= 70); and counseling plus methadone (methadone maintenance in prison, continued in a community-based methadone maintenance program upon release; n= 71). Entered prison treatment (p <. 01), and completed prison treatment (p< .001) were significantly predicted by the set of 10 explanatory variables and favored the treatment conditions receiving methadone. The present results indicate that individuals who are older in age and have longer prison sentences may have better outcomes than younger individuals with shorter sentences, meaning they are more likely to enter and complete prison-based treatment. Furthermore, implications for the treatment of prisoners with prior heroin dependence and for conducting clinical trials may indicate the importance of examining individual characteristics and the possibility of the examination of patient preference.

Medication-assisted treatment research with criminal justice populations: challenges of implementation.

Creating, implementing and evaluating substance abuse interventions, especially medication-assisted treatments, for prisoners, parolees, and probationers with histories of heroin addiction is an especially challenging endeavor because of the difficulty in coordinating and achieving cooperation among diverse criminal justice, substance abuse treatment, research, and social service agencies, each with its own priorities and agenda. In addition, there are special rules that must be followed when conducting research with criminal justice-involved populations, particularly prisoners. The following case studies will explore the authors' experience of over 10 years conducting pharmacotherapy research using methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone with criminal justice populations. The major obstacles and how they were overcome are presented. Finally, recommendations are provided with regard to implementing and conducting research with criminal justice populations.