Oral and injectable opioid agonist treatments for people who use street opioids: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.036 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".