Effectiveness and safety of therapies for patients with opioid use disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Madhusudan Kabra, Tushar Srivastava, Raju Gautam, Janharpreet Singh, Juha Oksanen, Tim MacDonald, Kenneth Lee, Brent Boyett, Bill Santoro, Anurag Gupta, Anne De Jong-Laird, Shijie Ren
{"title":"Effectiveness and safety of therapies for patients with opioid use disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Madhusudan Kabra, Tushar Srivastava, Raju Gautam, Janharpreet Singh, Juha Oksanen, Tim MacDonald, Kenneth Lee, Brent Boyett, Bill Santoro, Anurag Gupta, Anne De Jong-Laird, Shijie Ren","doi":"10.57264/cer-2025-0171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Opioid use disorder (OUD) leads to significant morbidity and mortality. While opioid agonist therapies like transmucosal buprenorphine and methadone are effective, they face challenges such as poor adherence, diversion risk and suboptimal abstinence rates, prompting the development of long-acting injectable (LAI) buprenorphine. However, comparative evidence among LAIs and versus standard treatments remains limited. The aim of this study is to provide comparative evidence among buprenorphine LAIs and versus oral opioid agonist treatments. <b>Materials & methods:</b> We conducted a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluating the effectiveness and safety of LAI buprenorphine treatments (extended-release buprenorphine [BUP-XR; monthly injection] and other BUP-LAI [weekly and monthly injection]) versus transmucosal buprenorphine, methadone and buprenorphine implants in adults with OUD. The review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs for LAIs (January 2012 and March 2025). Primary outcomes were treatment discontinuation and illicit opioid use. Secondary outcomes were safety and health-related quality of life. Data were synthesized using univariate NMAs, bivariate NMA with surrogate end point modelling. Studies with limited data and single-arm designs were incorporated by using study-level matching techniques. <b>Results:</b> Ninety-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. BUP-XR demonstrated the highest probability of achieving treatment retention and opioid abstinence across analyses. In combined evidence (RCTs and non-RCTs), BUP-XR showed significantly lower risk of illicit opioid use versus transmucosal buprenorphine (rate ratio [RR] 1.99; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.29-3.11) and methadone (RR: 2.66; 95% CrI: 1.40-3.56). BUP-XR showed borderline significantly lower risk of illicit opioid use versus other BUP-LAI (RR: 1.81; 95% CrI: 0.97-3.55) and buprenorphine implant (RR: 2.28; 95% CrI: 0.98-5.38). Treatment discontinuation rates were similar between OUD treatments. Safety outcomes were generally comparable across treatments. Health-related quality of life indicated better recovery among patients treated with BUP-XR. <b>Conclusion:</b> BUP-XR may enhance treatment retention and abstinence over other OUD therapies, supporting its integration into clinical pathways. The results may help guide future updates to OUD treatment guidelines and policies aimed at optimizing the use of long-acting formulations. Additional research is needed to better define the comparative effectiveness of LAIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":15539,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","volume":" ","pages":"e250171"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12884343/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2025-0171","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Opioid use disorder (OUD) leads to significant morbidity and mortality. While opioid agonist therapies like transmucosal buprenorphine and methadone are effective, they face challenges such as poor adherence, diversion risk and suboptimal abstinence rates, prompting the development of long-acting injectable (LAI) buprenorphine. However, comparative evidence among LAIs and versus standard treatments remains limited. The aim of this study is to provide comparative evidence among buprenorphine LAIs and versus oral opioid agonist treatments. Materials & methods: We conducted a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluating the effectiveness and safety of LAI buprenorphine treatments (extended-release buprenorphine [BUP-XR; monthly injection] and other BUP-LAI [weekly and monthly injection]) versus transmucosal buprenorphine, methadone and buprenorphine implants in adults with OUD. The review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs for LAIs (January 2012 and March 2025). Primary outcomes were treatment discontinuation and illicit opioid use. Secondary outcomes were safety and health-related quality of life. Data were synthesized using univariate NMAs, bivariate NMA with surrogate end point modelling. Studies with limited data and single-arm designs were incorporated by using study-level matching techniques. Results: Ninety-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. BUP-XR demonstrated the highest probability of achieving treatment retention and opioid abstinence across analyses. In combined evidence (RCTs and non-RCTs), BUP-XR showed significantly lower risk of illicit opioid use versus transmucosal buprenorphine (rate ratio [RR] 1.99; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.29-3.11) and methadone (RR: 2.66; 95% CrI: 1.40-3.56). BUP-XR showed borderline significantly lower risk of illicit opioid use versus other BUP-LAI (RR: 1.81; 95% CrI: 0.97-3.55) and buprenorphine implant (RR: 2.28; 95% CrI: 0.98-5.38). Treatment discontinuation rates were similar between OUD treatments. Safety outcomes were generally comparable across treatments. Health-related quality of life indicated better recovery among patients treated with BUP-XR. Conclusion: BUP-XR may enhance treatment retention and abstinence over other OUD therapies, supporting its integration into clinical pathways. The results may help guide future updates to OUD treatment guidelines and policies aimed at optimizing the use of long-acting formulations. Additional research is needed to better define the comparative effectiveness of LAIs.

阿片类药物使用障碍患者治疗的有效性和安全性:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
目的:阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)导致显著的发病率和死亡率。虽然经黏膜丁丙诺啡和美沙酮等阿片类激动剂治疗是有效的,但它们面临着依从性差、转移风险和次优戒断率等挑战,促使长效注射(LAI)丁丙诺啡的发展。然而,LAIs与标准治疗之间的比较证据仍然有限。本研究的目的是提供丁丙诺啡LAIs与口服阿片激动剂治疗之间的比较证据。材料与方法:我们进行了系统的文献综述和网络荟萃分析(NMA),评估LAI丁丙诺啡治疗(缓释丁丙诺啡[BUP-XR;每月注射]和其他BUP-LAI[每周和每月注射])与经黏膜丁丙诺啡、美沙酮和丁丙诺啡植入治疗成人OUD的有效性和安全性。该综述包括LAIs的随机对照试验(rct)和非rct(2012年1月和2025年3月)。主要结局是停止治疗和非法使用阿片类药物。次要结局是安全和健康相关的生活质量。数据综合使用单变量NMA,双变量NMA与代理终点建模。采用研究水平匹配技术纳入数据有限和单臂设计的研究。结果:98项研究符合纳入标准。在分析中,BUP-XR显示了实现治疗保留和阿片类药物戒断的最高可能性。在综合证据(随机对照试验和非随机对照试验)中,BUP-XR显示,与经黏膜丁丙诺啡(比率比[RR] 1.99; 95%可信区间[CrI]: 1.29-3.11)和美沙酮(RR: 2.66; 95%可信区间[CrI]: 1.40-3.56)相比,非法使用阿片类药物的风险显著降低。BUP-XR显示,与其他BUP-LAI (RR: 1.81; 95% CrI: 0.97-3.55)和丁丙诺啡植入物(RR: 2.28; 95% CrI: 0.98-5.38)相比,非法使用阿片类药物的风险显着降低。两种OUD治疗的停药率相似。不同治疗的安全性结果一般具有可比性。与健康相关的生活质量表明接受BUP-XR治疗的患者恢复得更好。结论:与其他OUD疗法相比,BUP-XR可能增强治疗保留性和戒断性,支持其融入临床途径。该结果可能有助于指导未来更新OUD治疗指南和政策,旨在优化长效制剂的使用。需要进一步的研究来更好地确定lai的相对有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of comparative effectiveness research
Journal of comparative effectiveness research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides a rapid-publication platform for debate, and for the presentation of new findings and research methodologies. Through rigorous evaluation and comprehensive coverage, the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides stakeholders (including patients, clinicians, healthcare purchasers, and health policy makers) with the key data and opinions to make informed and specific decisions on clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书