ArticleClinical drug investigation2010
Safety and efficacy of buprenorphine/naloxone in opioid-dependent patients: an Italian observational study.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Buprenorphine Pharmacodynamics: A Bridge to Understanding Buprenorphine Clinical Benefits.Drugs · 2025Review
- Beneficial Effects of Opioid Rotation to Buprenorphine/Naloxone on Opioid Misuse, Craving, Mental Health, and Pain Control in Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Patients with Opioid Use Disorder.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Budgetary impact analysis of buprenorphine-naloxone combination (Suboxone®) in Spain.Health economics review · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Opioid dependence is a growing problem. Methadone is an established agent for the treatment of opioid dependence, but there is a risk of this agent being abused, a potential for interaction with antiretroviral agents and a risk of cardiac toxicity. Another option is the partial mu-opioid receptor opioid agonist buprenorphine, which has been used successfully to manage opioid dependence. While the risk of abuse is lower than that for methadone, there is still a risk. The sublingual combination formulation of buprenorphine and the opioid receptor antagonist naloxone (buprenorphine/naxolone) is a newer agent with reduced abuse potential, and has been shown to have promising efficacy for opioid dependence. We describe the results of an observational study investigating the safety and efficacy of buprenorphine/naloxone in opioid-dependent patients. A total of 77 patients were included and were switched from buprenorphine to sublingual tables of buprenorphine/naloxone; the buprenorphine dosage was titrated to achieve good control of withdrawal symptoms. The prevalence of withdrawal symptoms, craving, constipation, cramps, insomnia, sexual activity, depression, sweating, distress, bone/joint pain and drowsiness were compared over the first 30 days of treatment (period 1) and the total 120-day study duration (period 2). The average buprenorphine/naloxone dose in period 1 was 7.3 mg/day and 12.7 mg/day in period 2. Most patients did not experience any withdrawal symptoms in either period 1 or period 2. Fewer than 20% of patients experienced any cravings over the 120-day study period. Importantly, the adverse effects observed were usually mild, with very few patients experiencing significant adverse effects. This study shows that buprenorphine/naloxone is an effective and well tolerated treatment for opioid withdrawal when the dosage is titrated to achieve good control of withdrawal symptoms. Switching from buprenorphine alone to buprenorphine/naloxone was possible with very little discomfort for the patient and effective retained patients in treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.