Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27687743›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials2016

Ethical and clinical safety considerations in the design of an effectiveness trial: A comparison of buprenorphine versus naltrexone treatment for opioid dependence.

Edward V Nunes, Joshua D Lee, Dominic Sisti, Andrea Segal, Arthur Caplan, Marc Fishman, Genie Bailey, Gregory Brigham, Patricia Novo, Sarah Farkas and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Modeling Recurrent Events: A Tutorial Based on Relapse and Remitting Episodes during Medication-Assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Edward V NunesColumbia University Medical Center, New York State Psychiatric Institute, United States. Electronic address: nunesed@nyspi.columbia.edu.
Joshua D LeeNYU School of Medicine, Department of Population Health, United States.
Dominic SistiPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, United States.
Andrea SegalPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, United States.
Arthur CaplanNYU School of Medicine, Division of Medical Ethics, United States.
Marc FishmanJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Mountain Manor Treatment Program, United States.
Genie BaileyWarren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Stanley Street Treatment and Resources, United States.
Gregory BrighamADAPT, Roseburg, OR, United States.
Patricia NovoNYU School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, United States.
Sarah FarkasNYU School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, United States.
John RotrosenNYU School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, United States.
New York University · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USBrown University · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USJohns Hopkins University · USVA Roseburg Healthcare System · US

Funding

Project-003UG1DA013035 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Aimee N Campbell, Jennifer McNeely · 2015 to 2026
$130.3M
The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials NetworkUG1DA015831 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Gail D'Onofrio, Roger D. Weiss · 2015 to 2026
$110.8M
CU PARTNERS: NY/LONG ISLAND REGIONAL NODEU10DA013035 · NIDA · NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE DBA RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE, INC · PI NUNES, EDWARD V., ROTROSEN, JOHN P · 2001 to 2015
$47.6M
The Ohio Valley Node of the Clinical Trials Network (CTN-0153)UG1DA013732 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI T John WINHUSEN · 2015 to 2026
$42.5M
NIDA CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK - NYC EAST SIDE NODEU10DA013046 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI ROTROSEN, JOHN P · 2000 to 2009
$20.2M
Clinical Trials Network: Mid-Atlantic Integrated Care Research CollaborativeUG1DA013034 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BIGELOW, GEORGE, SCHWARTZ, ROBERT P · 2015 to 2019
$11.0M
Drug Abuse Treatment Development and Research MentoringK24DA022412 · NIDA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI NUNES, EDWARD V. · 2007 to 2016
$1.7M
NIDA NIH HHS HHSN271201200017CNIDA NIH HHS HHSN271201500065CNIDA NIH HHS K24 DA022412NIDA NIH HHS U10 DA013035NIDA NIH HHS U10 DA013046NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013034NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013035NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013732NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA015831
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We examine ethical challenges encountered in the design of an effectiveness trial (CTN-0051; X:BOT), comparing sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), an established treatment for opioid dependence, to the newer extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX). Ethical issues surrounded: 1) known poor effectiveness of one possible, commonly used treatment as usual control condition-detoxification followed by counseling without medication; 2) the role of patients' preferences for treatments, given that treatments were clinically approved and available to the population; 3) differences between the optimal "usual treatment" clinical settings for different treatments making it challenging to design a fair comparison; 4) vested interest groups favoring different treatments exerting potential influence on the design process; 5) potentially vulnerable populations of substance users and prisoners; 6) potential therapeutic misconception in the implementation of safety procedures; and 7) high cost of a large trial limiting questions that could be addressed. We examine how the design features underlying these ethical issues are characteristic of effectiveness trials, which are often large trials that compare treatments with varying degrees of existing effectiveness data and familiarity to patients and clinicians, in community-based treatment settings, with minimal exclusion criteria that could involve vulnerable populations. Hence, investigators designing effectiveness trials may wish to remain alert to the possibility of similar ethical issues.

Indexed as

Administration, SublingualBuprenorphine, Naloxone Drug CombinationComparative Effectiveness ResearchCounselingDelayed-Action PreparationsEthics, ResearchHumansInformed ConsentInjections, IntramuscularNaltrexoneNarcotic AntagonistsOpioid-Related DisordersPatient PreferencePatient SafetyPrisonersRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicBuprenorphine, Naloxone Drug CombinationDelayed-Action PreparationsNaltrexoneNarcotic AntagonistsBuprenorphineClinical trialEffectivenessEthicsNaltrexoneOpioid dependence

Identifiers

PMID27687743
PMCPMC5466164
OpenAlexW2413464033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.