Experience and response to a randomised controlled trial of extended-release injectable buprenorphine versus sublingual tablet buprenorphine and oral liquid methadone for opioid use disorder:protocol for a mixed-methods evaluation

INTRODUCTION: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a debilitating and persistent disorder. The standard-of-care treatment is daily maintenance dosing of sublingual buprenorphine (BUP-SL) or oral methadone (MET). Monthly, extended-release, subcutaneous injectable buprenorphine (BUP-XR) has been developed to enhance treatment effectiveness. This study aims to investigate the experiences of participants who have been offered BUP-XR (evaluation 1), health-related quality-of-life among participants who have opted to receive BUP-XR longer term (evaluation 2) and the experiences of participants allocated to receive BUP-XR or BUP-SL or MET with the offer of adjunctive personalised psychosocial intervention (evaluation 3). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Three qualitative–quantitative (mixed-methods) evaluations embedded in a five-centre, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial of BUP-XR versus BUP-SL and MET in the UK. Evaluation 1 is a four-centre interview anchored on an OUD-related topic guide and conducted after the 24-week trial endpoint. Evaluation 2 is a two-centre interview anchored on medications for opioid use disorder-specific quality-of-life topic guide conducted among participants after 12–24 months. Evaluation 3: single-centre interview after the 24-week trial endpoint. All evaluations include selected trial clinical measures, with evaluation 2 incorporating additional questionnaires. Target participant recruitment for evaluations 1 and 2 is 15 participants per centre (n=60 and n=30, respectively). Recruitment for evaluation 3 is 15 participants per treatment arm (n=30). Each evaluation will be underpinned by theory, drawing on constructs from the behavioural model for health service use or the health-related quality-of-life model. Qualitative data analysis will be by iterative categorisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study protocol, consent materials and questionnaires were approved by the London-Brighton and Sussex research ethics committee (reference: 19/LO/0483) and the Health Research Authority (IRAS project number 255522). Participants will be provided with information sheets and informed written consent will be obtained for each evaluation. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2018-004460-63

Open Channel Block of HERG K ϩ Channels by Vesnarinone

ABSTRACT Vesnarinone, a cardiotonic agent, blocks I Kr and, unlike other I Kr blockers, produces a frequency-dependent prolongation of action potential duration (APD). To elucidate the mechanisms, we studied the effects of vesnarinone on HERG, the cloned human I Kr channel, heterologously expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes. Vesnarinone caused a concentration-dependent inhibition of HERG currents with an IC 50 value of 17.7 Ϯ 2.5 M at 0 mV (n ϭ 6). When HERG was coexpressed with the ␤-subunit MiRP1, a similar potency for block was measured (IC 50 : 15.0 Ϯ 3.0 M at 0 mV, n ϭ 5). Tonic block of the HERG channel current was minimal (Ͻ5% at 30 M, n ϭ 5). The rate of onset of block and the steady-state value for block of current were not significantly different for test potentials ranging from Ϫ40 to ϩ40 mV [time constant () ϭ 372 Ϯ 76 ms at ϩ40 mV, n ϭ 4]. Recovery from block at Ϫ60, Ϫ90, and Ϫ120 mV was not significantly different ( ϭ 8.5 Ϯ 1.5 s at Ϫ90 mV, n ϭ 4). Vesnarinone produced similar effects on inactivation-removed mutant (G628C/S631C) HERG channels. The IC 50 value was 10.7 Ϯ 3.7 M at 0 mV (n ϭ 5), and the onset and recovery from block of current findings were similar to those of wild-type HERG. Amino acids important for the binding of vesnarinone were identified using alanine-scanning mutagenesis of residues believed to line the inner cavity of the HERG channel. Six important residues were identified, including G648, F656, and V659 located in the S6 domain and T623, S624, and V625 located at the base of the pore helix. These residues are similar but not identical to those determined previously for MK-499, an antiarrhythmic drug. In conclusion, vesnarinone preferentially blocks open HERG channels, with little effect on channels in the rested or inactivated state. These actions may contribute to the favorable frequency-dependent prolongation in APD

High Frequency Inductive Power Transfer Through Soil for Agricultural Applications

This work was supported by the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), reference numbers: NE/ T011467/1 and NE/T011068/1, and the National Science Foundation (NSF), award no. 1935632: SitS NSF-UKRI: Wireless In-Situ Soil Sensing Network for Future Sustainable Agriculture’. (Corresponding author: Juan M. Arteaga.)Peer reviewedPublisher PD

A Novel Mechanism for Calmodulin Dependent Inactivation of Transient Receptor Potential Vanilloid 6

The paralogues TRPV5 and TRPV6 belong to the vanilloid subfamily of the Transient Receptor Potential (TRP) superfamily of ion channels and both play an important role in overall Cahomeostasis. The functioning of the channels centres on a tightly controlled Ca-dependent feedback mechanism where the direct binding of the universal Ca-binding protein calmodulin (CaM) to the channel's C-terminal tail is required for channel inactivation. We have investigated this interaction at the atomic level and propose that under basal cellular [CaCaM is constitutively bound to the channel's C-tail via CaM C-lobe only contacts. When cytosolic [Ca] increases charging the apo CaM N-lobe with Ca, the CaM:TRPV6 complex rearranges and the TRPV6 C-tail further engages the CaM N-lobe via a crucial interaction involving L707. In a cellular context, mutation of L707 significantly increased the rate of channel inactivation. Finally, we present a model for TRPV6 CaM-dependent inactivation, which involves a novel so-called "two-tail" mechanism whereby CaM bridges between two TRPV6 monomers resulting in closure of the channel pore

A Fishery Manager's Guidebook, Second Edition

A Fishery Managers' Guidebook was first published as an FAO Fisheries Technical Paper in 2002 to meet the need for information and guidance on the broad and often complex task of fisheries management. Based on subsequent experience and feedback gained from publication of the first edition, this new volume, has been expanded to provide broader coverage of the key elements of the task and updated in order to keep track of the rapid developments in theory and practice as academics and practitioners struggle to confront the many challenges facing modern fisheries management

Use of contingency management incentives to improve completion of hepatitis B vaccination in people undergoing treatment for heroin dependence: a cluster randomised trial

Background: Poor adherence to treatment diminishes its individual and public health benefit. Financial incentives, provided on the condition of treatment attendance, could address this problem. Injecting drug users are a high-risk group for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and transmission, but adherence to vaccination programmes is poor. We aimed to assess whether contingency management delivered in routine clinical practice increased the completion of HBV vaccination in individuals receiving opioid substitution therapy. Methods: In our cluster randomised controlled trial, we enrolled participants at 12 National Health Service drug treatment services in the UK that provided opioid substitution therapy and nurse-led HBV vaccination with a super-accelerated schedule (vaccination days 0, 7, and 21). Clusters were randomly allocated 1:1:1 to provide vaccination without incentive (treatment as usual), with fixed value contingency management (three £10 vouchers), or escalating value contingency management (£5, £10, and £15 vouchers). Both contingency management schedules rewarded on-time attendance at appointments. The primary outcome was completion of clinically appropriate HBV vaccination within 28 days. We also did sensitivity analyses that examined vaccination completion with full adherence to appointment times and within a 3 month window. The trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN72794493. Findings: Between March 16, 2011, and April 26, 2012, we enrolled 210 eligible participants. Compared with six (9%) of 67 participants treated as usual, 35 (45%) of 78 participants in the fixed value contingency management group met the primary outcome measure (odds ratio 12·1, 95% CI 3·7–39·9; p<0·0001), as did 32 (49%) of 65 participants in the escalating value contingency management group (14·0, 4·2–46·2; p<0·0001). These differences remained significant with sensitivity analyses. Interpretation: Modest financial incentives delivered in routine clinical practice significantly improve adherence to, and completion of, HBV vaccination programmes in patients receiving opioid substitution therapy. Achievement of this improvement in routine clinical practice should now prompt actual implementation. Drug treatment providers should employ contingency management to promote adherence to vaccination programmes. The effectiveness of routine use of contingency management to achieve long-term behaviour change remains unknown

Superiority and cost-effectiveness of monthly extended-release buprenorphine versus daily standard of care medication: a pragmatic, parallel-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND: Daily methadone maintenance or buprenorphine treatment is the standard-of-care (SoC) medication for opioid use disorder (OUD). Subcutaneously injected, extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR) may be more effective-but there has been no superiority evaluation.METHODS: This pragmatic, parallel-group, open-label, multi-centre, effectiveness superiority randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was conducted at five National Health Service community-based treatment clinics in England and Scotland. Participants (adults aged ≥ 18 years; all meeting DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for moderate or severe OUD at admission to their current maintenance treatment episode) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive continued daily SoC (liquid methadone (usual dose range: 60-120 mg) or sublingual/transmucosal buprenorphine (usual dose range: 8-24 mg) for 24 weeks; or monthly BUP-XR (Sublocade;® two injections of 300 mg, then four maintenance injections of 100 mg or 300 mg, with maintenance dose selected by response and preference) for 24 weeks. In the intent-to-treat population (senior statistician blinded to blinded to treatment group allocation), and with a seven-day grace period after randomisation, the primary endpoint was the count of days abstinent from non-medical opioids between days 8-168 (i.e., weeks 2-24; range: 0-161 days). Safety was reported for the intention-to- treat population. Adopting a broad societal perspective inclusive of criminal justice, NHS and personal social service costs, a trial-based cost-utility analysis estimated the Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of BUP-XR versus SoC at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold. The study was registered EudraCT (2018-004460-63) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05164549), and is completed.FINDINGS: Between Aug 9, 2019 and Nov 2, 2021, 314 participants were randomly allocated to receive SoC (n = 156) or BUP-XR (n = 158). Participants were abstinent from opioids for an adjusted mean of 104.37 days (standard error [SE] 9.89; range: 0-161 days) in the SoC group and an adjusted mean of 123.43 days (SE 4.76; range: 24-161 days) in the BUP-XR group (adjusted incident rate ratio [IRR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.33; p-value 0.004). The incidence of any adverse event was higher in the BUP-XR group than the SoC group (128 [81.0%] of 158 participants versus 67 [42.9%] of 156 participants, respectively-most commonly rapidly-resolving (mild-moderate range) pain from drug administration in the BUP-XR group (121 [26.9%] of 450 adverse events). There were 11 serious adverse events (7.0%) in the 158 participants in the BUP-XR group, and 18 serious adverse events (11.5%) in the 156 participants in the SoC group-none judged to be related to study treatment. The BUP-XR treatment group had a mean incremental cost of £1033 (95% central range [CR] -1189 to 3225) and was associated with a mean incremental QALY of 0.02 (95% CR 0.00-0.05), and an ICER of £47,540 (0.37 probability of being cost-effective at the £30,000/QALY gained willingness-to-pay threshold). However, BUP-XR dominated the SoC among participants who were rated more severe at study baseline, and among participants in maintenance treatment for more that 28 days at study enrolment.INTERPRETATION: Evaluated against the daily oral SoC, monthly BUP-XR is clinically superior, delivering greater abstinence from opioids, and with a comparable safety profile. BUP-XR was not cost-effective in a base case cost-utility analysis using the societal perspective, but it was more effective and less costly (dominant) among participants with more severe OUD, or those whose current treatment episode was longer than 28 days. Further trials are needed to evaluate if BUP-XR is associated with better clinical and health economic outcomes over the longer term.FUNDING: Indivior.</p

Extended-release pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder (EXPO):protocol for an open-label randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of injectable buprenorphine versus sublingual tablet buprenorphine and oral liquid methadone

BACKGROUND: Sublingual tablet buprenorphine (BUP-SL) and oral liquid methadone (MET) are the daily, standard-of-care (SOC) opioid agonist treatment medications for opioid use disorder (OUD). A sizable proportion of the OUD treatment population is not exposed to sufficient treatment to attain the desired clinical benefit. Two promising therapeutic technologies address this deficit: long-acting injectable buprenorphine and personalised psychosocial interventions (PSI). This study will determine (A) the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness — monthly injectable, extended-release (BUP-XR) in a head-to-head comparison with BUP-SL and MET, and (B) the effectiveness of BUP-XR with adjunctive PSI versus BUP-SL and MET with PSI. Safety, retention, craving, substance use, quality-adjusted life years, social functioning, and subjective recovery from OUD will be also evaluated. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, open-label, parallel-group, superiority RCT, with a qualitative (mixed-methods) evaluation. The study population is adults. The setting is five National Health Service community treatment centres in England and Scotland. At each centre, participants will be randomly allocated (1:1) to BUP-XR or SOC. At the London study co-ordinating centre, there will also be allocation of participants to BUP-XR with PSI or SOC with PSI. With 24 weeks of study treatment, the primary outcome is days of abstinence from non-medical opioids during study weeks 2–24 combined with up to 12 urine drug screen tests for opioids. For 90% power (alpha, 5%; 15% inflation for attrition), 304 participants are needed for the BUP-XR versus SOC comparison. With the same planning parameters, 300 participants are needed for the BUP-XR and PSI versus SOC and PSI comparison. Statistical and health economic analysis plans will be published before data-lock on the Open Science Framework. Findings will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic randomised controlled trial is the first evaluation of injectable BUP-XR versus the SOC medications BUP-SL and MET, with personalised PSI. If there is evidence for the superiority of BUP-XR over SOC medication, study findings will have substantial implications for OUD clinical practice and treatment policy in the UK and elsewhere. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU Clinical Trials register 2018-004460-63. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06595-0

New Pyrimido-Indole Compound CD-160130 Preferentially Inhibits the K V

K(V)11.1 (hERG1) channels are often overexpressed in human cancers. In leukemias, K(V)11.1 regulates pro-survival signals that promote resistance to chemotherapy, raising the possibility that inhibitors of K(V)11.1 could be therapeutically beneficial. However, because of the role of K(V)11.1 in cardiac repolarization, blocking these channels may cause cardiac arrhythmias. We show that CD-160130, a novel pyrimido-indole compound, blocks K(V)11.1 channels with a higher efficacy for the K(V)11.1 isoform B, in which the IC50 (1.8 mu M) was approximately 10-fold lower than observed in K(V)11.1 isoform A. At this concentration, CD-160130 also had minor effects on K(ir)2.1, K-V 1.3, K(v)1.5, and K(Ca)3.1. In vitro, CD-160130 induced leukemia cell apoptosis, and could overcome bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC)-induced chemoresistance. This effect was caused by interference with the survival signaling pathways triggered by MSCs. In vivo, CD-160130 produced an antileukemic activity, stronger than that caused by cytarabine. Consistent with its atypical target specificity, CD-160130 did not bind to the main binding site of the arrhythmogenic K(V)11.1 blockers (the Phe656 pore residue). Importantly, in guinea pigs CD-160130 produced neither alteration of the cardiac action potential shape in dissociated cardiomyocytes nor any lengthening of the QT interval in vivo. Moreover, CD-160130 had no myelotoxicity on human bone marrow-derived cells. Therefore, CD-160130 is a promising first-in-class compound to attempt oncologic therapy without cardiotoxicity, based on targeting K(V)11.1. Because leukemia and cardiac cells tend to express different ratios of the A and B K(V)11.1 isoforms, the pharmacological properties of CD-160130 may depend, at least in part, on isoform specificity