Methadyl acetate and methadone as maintenance treatments for heroin addicts. A veterans administration cooperative study. Evaluation of clinic attendance schedules for LAAM and methadone: a controlled study. The behavioral, cognitive and physiologic effects of long-term methadone and methadyl treatment. 1973 [proceedings]. Levomethadyl in maintenance treatment of opiate dependence. Relationship between LAAM-methadone preference and treatment outcomes. A 48-week study of methadone, methadyl acetate, and minimal services. 1974 [proceedings]. Methadyl acetate and methadone. An open comparison. Failure of methadone and levomethadyl acetate (levo-alpha-acetylmethadol, LAAM) maintenance to affect memory. LAAM instead of take-home methadone. A comparison of thrice weekly LAAM and daily methadone in employed heroin addicts. The use of 1-alpha-acetyl-methadol (LAAM) as compared to methadone in the maintenance and detoxification of young heroin addicts. 1973 [proceedings]. A comparison of levomethadyl acetate, buprenorphine, and methadone for opioid dependence. A clinical, controlled study of l-alpha-acetylmethadol in the treatment of narcotic addiction. A cooperative clinical study of methadyl acetate. I. Three-times-a-week regimen. A methadone/1-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM) maintenance study [proceedings].
This was a double-blind comparison of methadyl acetate and two dose levels of methadone hydrochloride in the maintenance of 430 street heroin addicts from 12 Veterans Administration hospitals. The starting sample consisted of 146 patients receiving low-dose methadone, 142 patients receiving methadyl acetate. Patients were first given 30 mg of both drugs, and doses were incremented by 10 mg/week until they stabilized at methadyl acetate, 80 mg three times a week, and methadone hydrochloride, 50 mg daily or 100 mg daily. Dosage was fixed for the balance of the 40-week treatment period. Safety was evaluated by clinical and laboratory observations conducted at frequent intervals throughout the study. Relative efficacy was evaluated by illicit drug use, program retention and attendance, and global staff judgments. It is concluded that methadyl acetate is as safe a drug as methadone and that it compares favorably with highdose methoadone in terms of efficacy. Both methyadyl acetate and high-dose methadone appear to be better maintenance regimens than low-dose methadone under the conditions of this study. nan nan nan Studies of relative LAAM-methadone preference have indicated that a significant proportion of patients prefer levo-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM). The present study was designed to determine whether this preference is associated with better treatment outcomes. Sixty-two stable methadone patients participated in a randomised crossover clinical trial. They received LAAM (alternate days) and methadone (daily) for 3 months each, followed by a further 6-month period during which they were free to choose between the drugs. LAAM maintenance was associated with a lower rate of heroin use than methadone maintenance based on analysis of morphine concentration in hair and equivalent health outcomes. The majority of subjects showed a preference for LAAM (n=27, 69.2%) rather than methadone (n=12, 30.8%). The main reasons given for the LAAM preference were that it produced less withdrawal (39.3%), fewer side effects (28.5%), less craving for heroin (17.9%), and entailed fewer pick-up days (14.3%). Those who chose LAAM had lower levels of heroin use during LAAM maintenance, significantly better outcomes on two sub-scales of the SF-36 (Vitality and Mental Health), and reported that they felt more normal and that they were 'held' better when on LAAM. For those who chose methadone, there were no differences in outcomes between the LAAM and methadone maintenance periods. Preference for LAAM is associated with treatment outcomes as good or better than those with methadone. nan Heroin addicts were recruited for a 14-week open clinical comparison of methadone hydrochloride and methadyl acetate. Patients were randomly assigned to a methadyl acetate clinic in which methadyl acetate was dispensed to patients three times per week or to a methadone clinic in which methadone was dispensed six days per week. No statistically significant differences were observed between groups in retention rates, illicit drug use, employment rates, or arrest rates. The group treated with methadyl acetate had more dropouts in the first seven weeks than the second seven weeks: this pattern was reversed for the methadone-treated group. The differences were significant (P = .01). Spontaneously reported symptoms suggest that induction with methadyl acetate may be a more clinically variable phenomenon than induction with methadone. The reduction of number of clinic visits in the group treated with methadyl acetate was not a source of variance in treatment effectiveness. Memory tests were administered to 30 patients taking methadone hydrochloride and 31 taking levomethadyl acetate (levo-alpha-acetylmethadol, LAAM) both prior to treatment and after one and three months of continuous treatment. A group of nonopiate using matched control subjects was administered the tests at similar intervals. No statistically significant difference in test performance was found among these groups at any of the three sessions. The methadone and control groups also did not differ significantly in the frequency of subjective reports of decreased memory function. Previous reports of memory deflicits during long-term methadone administration may be a result of comparing methadone and control groups at a single point in time and assuming that prior to methadone maintenance the groups were equivalent. nan Forty-eight employed heroin addicts were maintained on daily doses of methadone for four months and then randomly assigned to continue methadone maintenance or be switched to thrice weekly levo-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM). LAAM patients had significantly less illicit drug use and longer treatment retention times than those remaining on methadone. They also preferred LAAM to methadone on nine of 15 criteria such as the dosage schedule, feeling 'normal', and reduction of craving for heroin. LAAM may be particularly useful with employed patients owing to the reduced frequency of clinic visits. nan Opioid dependence is a chronic, relapsing disorder with important public health implications.
                In a 17-week randomized study of 220 patients, we compared levomethadyl acetate (75 to 115 mg), buprenorphine (16 to 32 mg), and high-dose (60 to 100 mg) and low-dose (20 mg) methadone as treatments for opioid dependence. Levomethadyl acetate and buprenorphine were administered three times a week. Methadone was administered daily. Doses were individualized except in the group assigned to low-dose methadone. Patients with poor responses to treatment were switched to methadone.
                There were 55 patients in each group; 51 percent completed the trial. The mean (+/-SE) number of days that a patient remained in the study was significantly higher for those receiving levomethadyl acetate (89+/-6), buprenorphine (96+/-4), and high-dose methadone (105+/-4) than for those receiving low-dose methadone (70+/-4, P<0.001). Continued participation was also significantly more frequent among patients receiving high-dose methadone than among those receiving levomethadyl acetate (P=0.02). The percentage of patients with 12 or more consecutive opioid-negative urine specimens was 36 percent in the levomethadyl acetate group, 26 percent in the buprenorphine group, 28 percent in the high-dose methadone group, and 8 percent in the low-dose methadone group (P=0.005). At the time of their last report, patients reported on a scale of 0 to 100 that their drug problem had a mean severity of 35 with levomethadyl acetate, 34 with buprenorphine, 38 with high-dose methadone, and 53 with low-dose methadone (P=0.002).
                As compared with low-dose methadone, levomethadyl acetate, buprenorphine, and high-dose methadone substantially reduce the use of illicit opioids. The authors compared l-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM) with methadone for clinical effectiveness in the treatment of narcotic addiction. LAAM was as effective as methadone on all outcome measures, including length of stay in treatment. Two clinicopharmacologic properties of LAAM caused some patients to ask for a switch to methadone. The authors describe these phenomena and discuss their impact on the clinical effectiveness of LAAM. This was an open clinical trial of methadyl acetate (LAAM) compared with methadone in the maintenance of 636 heroin addicts who had previously been stabilized on a maintenance regimen of methadone. The starting sample assembled by the 13 cooperating clinics were randomly assigned to continued maintenance on methadone (= 308) or crossed over to methadyl acetate (= 328) for a period of 40 weeks. The starting dose was identical to the previously established dose of methadone, but beginning with the second visit, dosage was flexible. Safety was evaluated by clinical and laboratory observations conducted at four-week intervals throughout the study. Relative efficacy was evaluated by illicit drug use, program retention and attendance, and global staff judgments. It is concluded that methadyl acetate is as safe as methadone and, when given three times a week, is an acceptable and effective maintenance drug for many heroin addicts. nan
LAAM appears more effective than methadone at reducing heroin use. More LAAM patients than methadone ceased their allocated medication during the studies, but many transferred to methadone and so the significance of this is unclear. There was no difference in safety observed, although there was not enough evidence to comment on uncommon adverse events.