4.7 Article

Association Between Prescription Opioid Therapy for Noncancer Pain and Hepatitis C Virus Seroconversion

期刊

JAMA NETWORK OPEN
卷 5, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.43050

关键词

-

资金

  1. British Columbia Centre for Disease Control
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [PJT-156117, NHC-142832]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that initiation of injection drug use may be more frequent among individuals on long-term prescription opioid therapy for noncancer pain, leading to a higher risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) acquisition.
IMPORTANCE Initiation of injection drug use may be more frequent among people dispensed prescription opioid therapy for noncancer pain, potentially increasing the risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) acquisition. OBJECTIVE To assess the association between medically dispensed long-term prescription opioid therapy for noncancer pain and HCV seroconversion among individuals who were initially injection drug use-naive. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A population-based, retrospective cohort study of individuals tested for HCV in British Columbia, Canada, with linkage to outpatient pharmacy dispensations, was conducted. Individuals with an initial HCV-negative test result followed by 1 additional test between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2017, and who had no history of substance use at baseline (first HCV-negative test), were included. Participants were followed up from baseline to the last HCV-negative test or estimated date of seroconversion (midpoint between HCV-positive and the preceding HCV-negative test). EXPOSURES Episodes of prescription opioid use for noncancer pain were defined as acute (<90 days) or long-term (>= 90 days). Prescription opioid exposure status (long-term vs prescription opioid-naive/acute) was treated as time-varying in survival analyses. In secondary analyses, longterm exposure was stratified by intensity of use (chronic vs. episodic) and by average daily dose in morphine equivalents (MEQ). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the association between time-varying prescription opioid status and HCV seroconversion. RESULTS A total of 382 478 individuals who had more than 1 HCV testwere included, of whom more than half were female (224 373 [58.7%]), born before 1974 (201 944 [52.8%]), and younger than 35 years at baseline (196 298 [53.9%]). Participants were followed up for 2 057 668 person-years and 1947 HCV seroconversions occurred. Of the participants, 41 755 people (10.9%) were exposed to long-term prescription opioid therapy at baseline or during follow-up. The HCV seroconversion rate per 1000 person-years was 0.8 among the individuals who were prescription opioid-naive/acute (1489 of 1947 [76.5%] seroconversions; 0.4% seroconverted within 5 years) and 2.1 with long-term prescription opioid therapy (458 of 1947 [23.5%] seroconversions; 1.1% seroconverted within 5 years). In multivariable analysis, exposure to long-term prescription opioid therapy was associated with a 3.2-fold (95% CI, 2.9-3.6) higher risk of HCV seroconversion (vs prescription opioid-naive/acute). In separate Cox models, long-term chronic use was associated with a 4.7-fold higher risk of HCV seroconversion (vs naive/acute use 95% CI, 3.9-5.8), and long-term higher-dose use (>= 90 MEQ) was associated with a 5.1-fold higher risk (vs naive/acute use 95% CI, 3.7-7.1). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study of people with more than 1 HCV test, longterm prescription opioid therapy for noncancer pain was associated with a higher risk of HCV seroconversion among individuals who were injection drug use-naive at baseline or at prescription opioid initiation. These results suggest injection drug use initiation risk is higher among people dispensed long-term therapy and may be useful for informing approaches to identify and prevent HCV infection. These findings should not be used to justify abrupt discontinuation of long-term therapy, which could increase risk of harms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据