Predictors of successful initiation of buprenorphine in enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal clinical trials in both opioid experienced and naïve participants: a participant-level meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: No prediction models exist for the success for buprenorphine initiation in opioid-naïve patients or in transition from other opioids in patients treated for chronic pain. Objectives: To create a prediction model for the successful use of buprenorphine to treat chronic pain. Methods: Stepwise Akaike information criterion prediction modeling procedures were applied to a harmonized participant-level data set of 10 enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal clinical trials of buprenorphine submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. Available baseline factors and nine patient-reported outcomes were considered to predict success with the titration (10 studies) and maintenance of benefit after randomization (5 studies). Patient-reported outcomes were modeled separately given inconsistent use across studies. Results: No prediction model reached an area under the receiver operator curve ≥0.70, the threshold for clinical usefulness. Successful initiation or transition of buprenorphine was accomplished in 3541 of 6052 (58.7%) participants, and 614 of 877 (70.0%) completed the 12-week maintenance phase with no difference between opioid-experienced and opioid-naïve participants. Only a medical history of obesity and baseline pain were retained in the overall titration model and only baseline pain in the maintenance model. Only brief pain inventory and subject opioid withdrawal scores were retained in the titration subsets containing those measures. Conclusion: No clinically useful prediction models of clinical benefit were identified, but a few covariates may be of interest in future studies of the initiation of buprenorphine in opioid-naïve patients or of transition from other opioids to buprenorphine. The lack of a predictor supports considering a trial of buprenorphine in clinically relevant scenarios for patients without known opioid use disorder, including careful monitoring and an a priori plan to deal with any problems that may occur.
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 | 0.033 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".