ライフサイエンスコーパス: buprenorphine

1 lity disorder did not affect the response to buprenorphine.

2 lation after CCL2 treatment was inhibited by buprenorphine.

3 ization, suggesting a mechanism of action of buprenorphine.

4 the hyperalgesia elicited by ultra-low-dose buprenorphine.

5 ritonavir or fosamprenavir-ritonavir but not buprenorphine.

6 renavir-ritonavir induced glucuronidation of buprenorphine.

7 brain slices to characterize the actions of buprenorphine.

8 ication for opioid use disorder will soon be buprenorphine.

9 ects of BU08028 (0.001-0.01 mg/kg, i.m.) and buprenorphine (0.003-0.056 mg/kg, i.m.), the drugs were

10 All animals received buprenorphine (0.05 mg/kg, SC) and imipenem/cilastatin (

11 In contrast, a 15,000-fold lower dose of buprenorphine (0.1 mug.kg(-1)), which caused thermal and

12 ine (8 [22.2%]), tramadol ER (7 [19.4%]), or buprenorphine (3 [9.7%]) groups did not differ significa

13 ed concentrations of the inactive metabolite buprenorphine-3-glucuronide suggested that darunavir-rit

14 assess the feasibility of discontinuing the buprenorphine 72 h before surgery.

15 norbuprenorphine is a high efficacy agonist, buprenorphine a low efficacy agonist, and diprenorphine

16 r OUD are methadone (a full opioid agonist), buprenorphine (a partial agonist), and naltrexone (an op

17 Buprenorphine, a partial mu-opioid agonist, is an altern

18 his study examined drug interactions between buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist used for opioid

19 bers did not offer new appointments or rapid buprenorphine access to callers reporting active heroin

20 Methadone and buprenorphine act by suppressing opioid withdrawal sympt

21 Treatment with buprenorphine after the onset of infection also arrested

22 (MOP) receptor agonist buprenorphine and the buprenorphine analog (2S)-2-[(5R,6R,7R,14S)-N-cyclopropy

23 89.2%) of medication-treated youth receiving buprenorphine and 604 (10.8%) receiving naltrexone.

24 rding to treatment group (with 58 exposed to buprenorphine and 73 exposed to methadone) showed that t

25 files to characterize changes in coverage of buprenorphine and buprenorphine-naloxone for opioid use

26 ustments are not likely to be necessary when buprenorphine and darunavir-ritonavir or fosamprenavir-r

27 g residues W293(6.48) and N150(3.35), whilst buprenorphine and diprenorphine did not.

28 ervations show the unique characteristics of buprenorphine and further demonstrate the range of agoni

29 The pharmacokinetics of buprenorphine and its metabolites and symptoms of opioid

30 Although buprenorphine and methadone are both effective treatment

31 n this period, but little difference between buprenorphine and methadone was noted thereafter or for

32 osing, randomized, controlled study in which buprenorphine and methadone were compared for use in the

33 Opioid-based analgesics such as buprenorphine and morphine also have immunomodulatory pr

34 ever, here we show that mice pretreated with buprenorphine and morphine do not die from clostridial m

35 fy time trends and disparities in receipt of buprenorphine and naltrexone among youth with OUD in the

36 New depot and implant formulations of buprenorphine and naltrexone have been developed to addr

37 In this first national study of buprenorphine and naltrexone receipt among youth, dispen

38 ver, for these outcomes, differences between buprenorphine and naltrexone were not significant.

39 the more experimental medication options of buprenorphine and naltrexone.

40 bstinence during weeks 5-6 were continued on buprenorphine and randomly assigned to receive clonidine

41 the mu opioid peptide (MOP) receptor agonist buprenorphine and the buprenorphine analog (2S)-2-[(5R,6

42 In male rats, buprenorphine and TRV130 decreased extinction responding

43 ists, (eg, methadone), partial agonists (eg, buprenorphine), and alpha2-adrenergic receptor agonists

44 luoroethyl-diprenorphine, [(18)F]fluoroethyl-buprenorphine, and [(18)F]fluoroethyl-phenethyl-orvinol

45 n of a mu- and kappa-opioid partial agonist, buprenorphine, and a mu-opioid antagonist, samidorphan,

46 ntrinsic agonist efficacy, norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine, and diprenorphine.

47 pioid use disorder, which include methadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release naltrexone, signific

48 Morphine, buprenorphine, and oxycodone prescribing rates continued

49 s with opioid use disorder from methadone to buprenorphine, and tapering opioids in patients with chr

50 ntagonist diprenorphine, the partial agonist buprenorphine, and the full agonist phenethyl-orvinol.

51 y related drug group (oripavine derivatives [buprenorphine] and natural opium alkaloids).

52 Buprenorphine appears to produce beneficial HDL- and cra

53 Methadone and buprenorphine are currently the most common pharmacologi

54 Our findings underscore the use of buprenorphine as a therapeutic for neuroinflammation as

55 and safety of very low dosages of sublingual buprenorphine as a time-limited treatment for severe sui

56 These results are consistent with the use of buprenorphine as an acceptable treatment for opioid depe

57 ontrolled trial of ultra-low-dose sublingual buprenorphine as an adjunctive treatment.

58 ioid-dependent pregnant women have suggested buprenorphine as an alternative treatment to methadone d

59 Compared with participants in the buprenorphine-assisted detoxification condition, partici

60 Buprenorphine-assisted detoxification included a 7-day b

61 imens, naltrexone-assisted detoxification or buprenorphine-assisted detoxification, followed by an in

62 , including interdisciplinary pain programs, buprenorphine-assisted dose reduction, and behavioral in

63 opioid agonist treatments (eg, methadone vs buprenorphine) associated with differences in efficacy f

64 ns that lead to P-glycoprotein inhibition in buprenorphine-associated fatalities and respiratory depr

65 ceptor transmembrane domains showed that the buprenorphine-bound receptor occupied a distinct set of

66 entified potential antidepressant effects of buprenorphine (BPN), a drug with high affinity for mu op

67 Methadone (MET) and buprenorphine (BUP) are widely prescribed for opiate mai

68 combination of a mu-opioid partial agonist, buprenorphine (BUP), and a potent mu-opioid antagonist,

69 d use disorder that enhances the benefits of buprenorphine by delivering sustained, optimal exposure,

70 Acute application of buprenorphine caused a hyperpolarization that was preven

71 8 opioid-dependent patients at an outpatient buprenorphine clinic.

72 y Behavior study demonstrates high uptake of buprenorphine collocated with HCV treatment, and it show

73 ded adults (18-64 years of age) who received buprenorphine continuously for >=180 days by cohorts ret

74 In female rats, buprenorphine decreased responding in all 3 tests, while

75 ial agonist, subsaturating concentrations of buprenorphine decreased the [Met](5)enkephalin (ME)-indu

76 Buprenorphine decreases the formation of membrane projec

77 We show that buprenorphine decreases these phosphorylations in CCL2-t

78 the ability of a novel, weekly, subcutaneous buprenorphine depot formulation, CAM2038, to block eupho

79 ific to C. perfringens-mediated myonecrosis; buprenorphine did not protect against disease caused by

80 implants compared with continued sublingual buprenorphine did not result in an inferior likelihood o

81 service use and overdose were high following buprenorphine discontinuation irrespective of treatment

82 Adverse health outcomes following buprenorphine discontinuation were compared among patien

83 usly enrolled in Medicaid for 6 months after buprenorphine discontinuation.

84 This study examined outpatient buprenorphine dispensing patterns in Texas before vs aft

85 is shown that a phenyl ring analogue (1d) of buprenorphine displays the desired profile in vitro with

86 e naltrexone, in conjunction with single-day buprenorphine dosing and adjunctive nonopioid medication

87 However, in human and animal studies, buprenorphine exhibited ceiling respiratory effects, whe

88 Correlative analyses revealed that more buprenorphine exposure duration was associated with bett

89 n lasted 7 days and included a single day of buprenorphine followed by ascending doses of oral naltre

90 Treatment of animals with buprenorphine for 1 week resulted in the inhibition of t

91 Outpatients were prescribed daily sublingual buprenorphine for 6 months or more, were abstinent while

92 Compared with patients retained on buprenorphine for 6-9 months (N=4,126), those retained f

93 nt while taking 8 mg/d or less of sublingual buprenorphine for 90 days or longer, and were determined

94 ysician assistants with waivers to prescribe buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder and assoc

95 acy and safety of longer-term treatment with buprenorphine for young individuals with opioid dependen

96 reated with opioids (morphine, methadone, or buprenorphine) for up to 6 days.

97 ne group (18%) and 28 of the 86 women in the buprenorphine group (33%).

98 Seventy-eight percent of patients in the buprenorphine group (89 of 114 [95% CI, 70%-85%]) vs 37%

99 Eleven percent of patients in the buprenorphine group (95% CI, 6%-19%) used inpatient addi

100 on group, and 57.6% (95% CI, 47%-68%) in the buprenorphine group (P = .17).

101 and from stabilization to post taper in the buprenorphine group (stabilization mean, 0.46 [SE, .05]

102 n adverse events: 61 patients (56.5%) in the buprenorphine group and 29 (52.7%) in the placebo group.

103 administered in 5 of 33 infants (15%) in the buprenorphine group and in 7 of 30 infants (23%) in the

104 The buprenorphine group reduced the number of days of illici

105 and 13.5% of participants in the sublingual buprenorphine group, respectively.

106 norphine(>/= 1 mg/kg) and to a lesser extent buprenorphine (>/= 10 mg/kg) were responsible for dose-d

107 Patients who initiated with buprenorphine had reduced all-cause and drug-related mor

108 ared to methadone-treated subjects, those on buprenorphine had significantly lower rates of metabolic

109 ered oxycodone, fentanyl, or heroin, but not buprenorphine had similar profiles of escalation and inc

110 Treatment with methadone and buprenorphine has the additional risk of diversion and m

111 rm opioid agonist therapy with methadone and buprenorphine have great efficacy for OUD treatment and

112 rats were injected with either the analgesic buprenorphine-HCl or saline every 12 hrs; injections wer

113 uration, but the group that was treated with buprenorphine-HCl showed no significant difference compa

114 and without pre-treatment with the analgesic buprenorphine-HCl.

115 plants or sublingual placebo plus four 80-mg buprenorphine hydrochloride implants (expected efficacy,

116 oxification) from opioids using clonidine or buprenorphine hydrochloride is a widely used treatment.

117 ase naltrexone will be as effective as daily buprenorphine hydrochloride with naloxone hydrochloride

118 erse events occurred in 48.3% and 23% of the buprenorphine implant group and in 52.8% and 13.5% of pa

119 The buprenorphine implant group had significantly more urine

120 naloxone tablets, patients received either 4 buprenorphine implants (80 mg per implant) or 4 placebo

121 Those who received buprenorphine implants also had fewer clinician-rated (P

122 One hundred eight were randomized to receive buprenorphine implants and 55 to receive placebo implant

123 Over 6 months, 72 of 84 (85.7%) receiving buprenorphine implants and 64 of 89 (71.9%) receiving su

124 Eighty-one of 84 (96.4%) receiving buprenorphine implants and 78 of 89 (87.6%) receiving su

125 dose of sublingual buprenorphine, the use of buprenorphine implants compared with continued sublingua

126 g persons with opioid dependence, the use of buprenorphine implants compared with placebo resulted in

127 l of 71 of 108 patients (65.7%) who received buprenorphine implants completed the study vs 17 of 55 (

128 Patients with buprenorphine implants had a mean percentage of urine sa

129 uprenorphine with placebo implants and 87 to buprenorphine implants with sublingual placebo; 165 of 1

130 ly a handful of EECA countries (methadone or buprenorphine in five countries and needle and syringe p

131 lower than that of cocaine, remifentanil, or buprenorphine in monkeys responding under a progressive-

132 ittle is known about the synaptic effects of buprenorphine in nociceptive pathways.

133 spiratory depression have been attributed to buprenorphine in opioid abusers.

134 ials of naloxone, naltrexone, nalmefene, and buprenorphine in patients with schizophrenia to determin

135 CAM2038 produces a rapid initial rise of buprenorphine in plasma with maximum concentration aroun

136 f-administration of oxycodone, fentanyl, and buprenorphine in rats allowed long access sessions (12 h

137 e effective than clonidine and comparable to buprenorphine in reducing opioid withdrawal symptoms dur

138 nal age or older and exposed to methadone or buprenorphine in utero .

139 ent article describes aryl ring analogues of buprenorphine in which the standard C20-methyl group has

140 The ultra-low-dose buprenorphine-induced synaptic facilitation was mediated

141 ian wait time from first contact to possible buprenorphine induction was 8 days (IQR, 4 to 15 days) f

142 ify additional potential mechanisms by which buprenorphine inhibits CCL2-induced monocyte migration,

143 Patients who received ultra-low-dose buprenorphine (initial dosage, 0.1 mg once or twice dail

144 Methadone and buprenorphine initially abolished these changes uniforml

145 osbuvir-velpatasvir for 12-weeks and offered buprenorphine initiation.

146 Buprenorphine is a successful analgesic and treatment fo

147 Buprenorphine is a weak partial agonist at mu-opioid rec

148 Buprenorphine is also a promising treatment for depressi

149 Buprenorphine is an efficacious, widely used treatment f

150 ioid agonist therapies such as methadone and buprenorphine is available in prisons in only a handful

151 adverse events compared with other opioids, buprenorphine is considered a safe option for pain and s

152 If buprenorphine is continued during the perioperative peri

153 Buprenorphine is emerging as the drug of choice for main

154 Buprenorphine is used to treat opiate addiction.

155 000, referred to as BUP-XR (extended-release buprenorphine), is a subcutaneously injected, monthly bu

156 o an interest in developing compounds with a buprenorphine-like pharmacological profile but with lowe

157 We propose that buprenorphine limits CCL2-mediated monocyte transmigrati

158 ts and 64 of 89 (71.9%) receiving sublingual buprenorphine maintained opioid abstinence (hazard ratio

159 nd adverse effects were compared between the buprenorphine-maintained participants and an equal numbe

160 agonist therapy (OAT), such as methadone or buprenorphine maintenance therapy, to optimise HIV outco

161 Prenatal buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) versus methado

162 icacy of adding a behavioral intervention to buprenorphine maintenance treatment.

163 rences in therapeutic efficacy compared with buprenorphine maintenance treatment.

164 icacy of adding a behavioral intervention to buprenorphine maintenance treatment.

165 ans aim for in terms of treatment outcome in buprenorphine maintenance?

166 Buprenorphine may be more effective than morphine for th

167 Our study revealed that buprenorphine mediates its modulatory effects on transmi

168 at understanding the distinctive features of buprenorphine metabolic effects vis-a-vis those of metha

169 ared 4 MOUD treatment strategies: methadone, buprenorphine, methadone taper for detoxification, and n

170 Maintenance treatment with opioid agonists (buprenorphine, methadone) is effective for opioid addict

171 clonidine (n = 36), tramadol ER (n = 36), or buprenorphine (n = 31) was then instituted, and patients

172 the Sweet Taste Test (STT) were measured in buprenorphine- (n = 26) or methadone (n = 32)- treated s

173 the barriers encountered by patients seeking buprenorphine-naloxone ("buprenorphine") treatment.

174 Buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP) is an effective treatment o

175 R-NTX), an opioid antagonist, and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), a partial opioid agonis

176 Buprenorphine-naloxone and extended-release naltrexone.

177 ize changes in coverage of buprenorphine and buprenorphine-naloxone for opioid use disorder in 2007,

178 ease naltrexone group was noninferior to the buprenorphine-naloxone group (difference, -0.1; with 95%

179 weeks 1 through 12, patients in the 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone group reported less opioid use (c

180 ended-release naltrexone was as effective as buprenorphine-naloxone in maintaining short-term abstine

181 Buprenorphine-naloxone is preferred to extended-release

182 -release naltrexone showed noninferiority to buprenorphine-naloxone on group proportion of total numb

183 21 years who were randomized to 12 weeks of buprenorphine-naloxone or a 14-day taper (detox).

184 dence interval [CI] = 47%-75%) vs 58 12-week buprenorphine-naloxone patients (26%; 95% CI = 14%-38%).

185 Brief treatment (phase 1) included 2-week buprenorphine-naloxone stabilization, 2-week taper, and

186 rmes) and BUP-NX was daily self-administered buprenorphine-naloxone sublingual film (Suboxone; Indivi

187 un-in phase of up to 2 weeks' treatment with buprenorphine-naloxone sublingual film.

188 After induction with sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone tablets, patients received either

189 Success rates 8 weeks after completing the buprenorphine-naloxone taper (phase 2, week 24) dropped

190 ase 2 outcomes were more common while taking buprenorphine-naloxone than 8 weeks after taper (49.2% [

191 to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY showed buprenorphine-naloxone to be preferable to extended-rele

192 ccessful outcomes in phase 2 during extended buprenorphine-naloxone treatment (week 12), with no diff

193 if a threshold for rescue use of sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone treatment was exceeded.

194 patients entered phase 2: extended (12-week) buprenorphine-naloxone treatment, 4-week taper, and 8-we

195 are most likely to reduce opioid use during buprenorphine-naloxone treatment; if tapered off bupreno

196 Not enough evidence exists to compare buprenorphine-naloxone with extended-release naltrexone

197 he availability of opioid agonist treatment (buprenorphine-naloxone) and nonpharmacologic therapies (

198 altrexone), agonist-antagonist combinations (buprenorphine-naloxone), or neither agonists nor antagon

199 omization to either daily oral flexible dose buprenorphine-naloxone, 4 to 24 mg/d, or extended-releas

200 enorphine-naloxone treatment; if tapered off buprenorphine-naloxone, even after 12 weeks of treatment

201 or excess were compared in opioid-dependent, buprenorphine-naloxone-maintained, human immunodeficienc

202 s opioid dependence counseling; all received buprenorphine-naloxone.

203 ith lower phase 2 success rates while taking buprenorphine-naloxone.

204 zed to extended-release naltrexone and 79 to buprenorphine-naloxone; 105 (66.0%) completed the trial.

205 signed to treatment with either methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone (Suboxone) over a 24-week open-la

206 d Nor-BNI, we demonstrate that the effect of buprenorphine on CCL2 signaling is opioid receptor media

207 monstrate dose-dependent, bimodal effects of buprenorphine on transmission at C-fiber synapses in rat

208 Outpatients (N=182) maintained on daily buprenorphine or methadone provided self-reports of stre

209 , such as medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine or methadone.

210 treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine or methadone.

211 Dispensing of a medication (buprenorphine or naltrexone) within 6 months of first re

212 ing care models include pharmacotherapy with buprenorphine or naltrexone, provider and community educ

213 inence syndrome to receive either sublingual buprenorphine or oral morphine.

214 There were no significant changes in buprenorphine or PI plasma levels and no significant cha

215 use were randomly assigned to receive either buprenorphine or placebo (in a 2:1 ratio), in addition t

216 The maintenance medication was either buprenorphine or the G protein-biased mu opioid receptor

217 We then implanted osmotic pumps containing buprenorphine or TRV130 (0, 3, 6, or 9 mg/kg/day) and pe

218 ased by incubation with the alkaloid agonist buprenorphine or with either naltrexone or naloxone, str

219 nalysis, use of MOUD maintenance with either buprenorphine (OR = 0.38; 95% CI, .17-.85) or methadone

220 Buprenorphine participants (28 [90.3%]) were significant

221 BUP-XR provides sustained buprenorphine plasma concentrations to block drug-liking

222 ipants were randomized to receive sublingual buprenorphine plus 4 placebo implants or sublingual plac

223 ch design affected the results of studies of buprenorphine plus behavioral treatment?

224 fit from adding a behavioral intervention to buprenorphine plus medical management, and four studies

225 tment centers only and that do not encompass buprenorphine prescribed in ambulatory care settings, pr

226 Many buprenorphine prescribers did not offer new appointments

227 survey sample included only publicly listed buprenorphine prescribers.

228 dministration temporarily relaxed outpatient buprenorphine prescribing regulations in March 2020 in r

229 fered an appointment with the possibility of buprenorphine prescription at the first visit.

230 Rates of new appointments offered, whether buprenorphine prescription was possible at the first vis

231 on database to compare between the number of buprenorphine prescriptions filled and the number of US

232 opioid agonist therapies (eg, methadone and buprenorphine) prevents blood-borne infections via reduc

233 ncreased caudate/putamen metabolism, whereas buprenorphine produced increased ventral striatum and mo

234 rt D plans requiring prior authorization for buprenorphine products before and after a 2017 FDA rquir

235 -XR safety profile was consistent with other buprenorphine products for treatment of opioid use disor

236 al exposure, while reducing risks of current buprenorphine products.

237 nalgesically active dose of 1500 mug.kg(-1), buprenorphine reduced the strength of spinal C-fiber syn

238 pioid substitution therapy with methadone or buprenorphine reduces mortality risk, especially for dru

239 We show that buprenorphine reduces the chemotactic phenotype of monoc

240 ycoprotein inhibitor, significantly enhanced buprenorphine-related effects on TI (p < .01) and TE (p

241 In P-glycoprotein-knockout mice, buprenorphine-related effects on VE (p < .01), TE (p < .

242 vivo and study its role in the modulation of buprenorphine-related respiratory effects in mice.

243 -glycoprotein plays a key-protective role in buprenorphine-related respiratory effects, by allowing n

244 phine withdrawal and subsequent methadone or buprenorphine replacement.

245 treatment, including the pharmacogenomics of buprenorphine response and treatment efficacy.

246 stinence syndrome, treatment with sublingual buprenorphine resulted in a shorter duration of treatmen

247 Buprenorphine/samidorphan (BUP/SAM) combination is an in

248 Buprenorphine/samidorphan (BUP/SAM; ALKS 5461) is an inv

249 ceive adjunctive treatment with 2 mg/2 mg of buprenorphine/samidorphan (the 2/2 dosage group), 8 mg/8

250 dorphan (the 2/2 dosage group), 8 mg/8 mg of buprenorphine/samidorphan (the 8/8 dosage group), or pla

251 The buprenorphine/samidorphan combination is a novel and pro

252 Overall, the buprenorphine/samidorphan combinations were well tolerat

253 irst 4 weeks of opioid substitution therapy, buprenorphine seemed to reduce mortality in this period,

254 When possible, patients maintained on buprenorphine should be evaluated preoperatively to asse

255 predictor of treatment response, followed by buprenorphine stabilization dose.

256 Following a brief period of buprenorphine stabilization, 70 PO-dependent adults were

257 gorous experimental evaluation of outpatient buprenorphine stabilization, brief taper, and naltrexone

258 ine-assisted detoxification included a 7-day buprenorphine taper followed by a week-long delay before

259 7.4; post-taper mean, 2.8; P = .03), but not buprenorphine (taper mean, 6.4; post-taper mean, 7.4).

260 ested that all-cause mortality was lower for buprenorphine than methadone (1.66, 1.40-1.96).

261 of treatment was significantly shorter with buprenorphine than with morphine (15 days vs. 28 days),

262 rials in the context of six questions: 1) Is buprenorphine that effective?

263 abstinence with a stable dose of sublingual buprenorphine, the use of buprenorphine implants compare

264 not different from the acute application of buprenorphine to brain slices.

265 Patients who switched from buprenorphine to methadone during treatment had lower mo

266 ality difference was noted for switches from buprenorphine to methadone or for switches to either med

267 In contrast, in methadone- or buprenorphine-treated animals no respiratory depression

268 creased cingulate cortex metabolism, whereas buprenorphine-treated females showed decreased metabolis

269 Wales, Australia, who started a methadone or buprenorphine treatment episode from Aug 1, 2001, to Dec

270 hine), is a subcutaneously injected, monthly buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder.

271 In the buprenorphine treatment group, however, individuals with

272 the brief intervention group, and 114 to the buprenorphine treatment group.

273 atient parenteral antimicrobial therapy with buprenorphine treatment had similar clinical and drug us

274 We aimed to test whether buprenorphine treatment has a lower mortality risk than

275 The effectiveness of buprenorphine treatment of opioid dependence is limited

276 ounseling is a required part of office-based buprenorphine treatment of opioid use disorders, the nat

277 Although buprenorphine treatment reduces risk of overdose and dea

278 is, there is an urgent need for expansion of buprenorphine treatment research to provide critical inf

279 mong opioid-dependent patients, ED-initiated buprenorphine treatment vs brief intervention and referr

280 earch to date shows the successful impact of buprenorphine treatment, including the pharmacogenomics

281 of behavioral interventions in office-based buprenorphine treatment.

282 vative strategies for enhancing retention in buprenorphine treatment.

283 by patients seeking buprenorphine-naloxone ("buprenorphine") treatment.

284 No supplemental buprenorphine was allowed.

285 t-term use of very low dosages of sublingual buprenorphine was associated with decreased suicidal ide

286 d more than 10-fold, from 3.0% in 2002 (when buprenorphine was introduced) to 31.8% in 2009, but decl

287 The inhibition of desensitization by buprenorphine was not the result of previous desensitiza

288 minated after 22 months of enrolment because buprenorphine was shown to have greater efficacy in an i

289 determination of clenbuterol, fentanyl, and buprenorphine was successfully achieved in human urine.

290 related opioids (morphine-6-glucuronide and buprenorphine) was blocked by JNK inhibition, but not by

291 Recently, norbuprenorphine, in contrast to buprenorphine, was shown in vitro to be a substrate of h

292 wn mu-opioid receptor (MOR) partial agonist, buprenorphine, was structurally elaborated to include an

293 With buprenorphine, we also recorded significantly greater ti

294 oid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine were 0.93 (0.76-1.10) and 1.79 (1.47-2.10)

295 ng chronic treatment, effects of BU08028 and buprenorphine were maintained for several weeks without

296 ts and 78 of 89 (87.6%) receiving sublingual buprenorphine were responders, an 8.8% difference (1-sid

297 This is in contrast to buprenorphine, which can suppress withdrawal, but produc

298 g the risk for misuse and diversion of daily buprenorphine while retaining its therapeutic benefits.

299 g that displays a similar binding profile to buprenorphine with improved affinity and efficacy at NOP

300 9% female), 90 were randomized to sublingual buprenorphine with placebo implants and 87 to buprenorph