Feasibility and safety of extended‐release naltrexone treatment of opioid and alcohol use disorder in HIV clinics: a pilot/feasibility randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: HIV-infected people with substance use disorders are least likely to benefit from advances in HIV treatment. Integration of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) into HIV clinics may increase engagement in the HIV care continuum by decreasing substance use. We aimed to compare (1) XR-NTX treatment initiation, (2) retention and (3) safety of XR-NTX versus treatment as usual (TAU) for treating opioid use disorder (OUD) and/or alcohol use disorder (AUD) in HIV clinics. DESIGN: Non-blinded randomized trial of XR-NTX versus pharmacotherapy TAU. SETTING: HIV primary care clinics in Vancouver, BC, Canada and Chicago, IL, USA. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-one HIV-infected patients seeking treatment for OUD (n = 16), AUD (n = 27) or both OUD and AUD (n = 8). MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were XR-NTX initiation (receipt of first injection within 4 weeks of randomization) and retention at 16 weeks. Secondary outcomes generated point estimates for change in substance use, HIV viral suppression [HIV RNA polymerase chain reaction (pcr) < 200 copies/ml] and safety. FINDINGS: Two-thirds (68%) of participants assigned to XR-NTX initiated treatment, and 88% of these were retained on XR-NTX at 16 weeks. In comparison, 96% of TAU participants initiated treatment, but only 50% were retained on medication at 16 weeks. Mean days of opioid use in past 30 days decreased from 17.3 to 4.1 for TAU and from 20.3 to 7.7 for XR-NTX. Mean heavy drinking days decreased from 15.6 to 5.7 for TAU and 12.5 to 2.8 for XR-NTX. Among those with OUD, HIV suppression improved from 67 to 80% for XR-NTX and 58 to 75% for TAU. XR-NTX was well tolerated, with no precipitated withdrawals and one serious injection-site reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is feasible and safe for treatment of opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder in HIV clinics. Treatment initiation appears to be lower and retention greater for XR-NTX compared with treatment as usual (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01908062).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".