Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39127891›Full record

Trial reportThe American journal on addictions2025

Opioid agonist treatment outcomes among individuals with a history of nonfatal overdose: Findings from a pragmatic, pan-Canadian, randomized control trial.

Hannah Crepeault, Lianping Ti, Paxton Bach, Evan Wood, Didier Jutras-Aswad, Bernard Le Foll, Ron Lim, Maria E Socias

Abstract readPragmatic Clinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The American journal on addictions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

8 authors.

Hannah CrepeaultBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Lianping TiBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Paxton BachBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2413-9133
Evan WoodBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Didier Jutras-AswadResearch Centre, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8474-508X
Bernard Le FollDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Sciences Building, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ron LimDepartment of Family Medicine and Psychiatry, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Maria E SociasBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2556-7049

Funding

CAMHCanada Research Chair by CIHRCanadian Research Initiative in Substance MisuseCIHR CIS-144301CIHR CIS-144302CIHR CIS-144303CIHR CIS-144304CIHR SMN-139148CIHR SMN-139149CIHR SMN-139150CIHR SMN-139151Cordula and Gunter Paetzold Fellowship and the Canadian Graduate Scholarships Master's Program through the University of British ColumbiaFonds de Recherche du Québec en SantéHealth Professional-Investigator Award from Michael Smith Health Research BC, the British Columbia Centre on Substance Use, and the St. Paul's FoundationMichael Smith Health Research BC (MSHRBC)/St. Paul's Foundation Scholar AwardMSHRBC Scholar Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesHistory of nonfatal overdose (NFO) is common among people who use opioids, but little is known about opioid agonist treatment (OAT) outcomes for this high-risk subpopulation. The objective of this study was to investigate the relative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone on retention and suppression of opioid use among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) and history of NFO.

methodsSecondary analysis of a pan-Canadian pragmatic trial comparing flexible take-home buprenorphine/naloxone and supervised methadone for people with OUD and history of NFO. Logistic regression was used to examine the impact of OAT on retention in the assigned or in any OAT at 24 weeks and analysis of covariance was used to examine the mean difference in opioid use between treatment arms.

resultsOf the 272 randomized participants, 155 (57%) reported at least one NFO at baseline. Retention rates in the assigned treatment were 17.7% in the buprenorphine/naloxone group and 18.4% in the methadone group (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.17-1.54). Rates of retention in any OAT were 28% and 20% in the buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone arms, respectively (AOR = 1.55, 95% CI: 0.65-3.78). There was an 11.9% adjusted mean difference in opioid-free urine drug tests, favoring the buprenorphine/naloxone arm (95% CI: 3.5-20.3; p = .0057). CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Among adults with OUD and a history of overdose, overall retention rates were low but improved when retention in any treatment was considered. These findings highlight the importance of flexibility and patient-centered care to improve retention and other treatment outcomes in this population.

Indexed as

MethadoneOpiate Substitution TreatmentOpioid-Related DisordersAdultAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineBuprenorphine, Naloxone Drug CombinationCanadaDrug OverdoseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNaloxoneNarcotic AntagonistsTreatment OutcomeAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineBuprenorphine, Naloxone Drug CombinationMethadoneNaloxoneNarcotic Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID39127891
PMCPMC11673458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.