High doses of Baclofen as suicide attempt in patients with alcohol use disorders - A serious concern

Baclofen in the treatment of alcohol use disorder: tailored doses matter

AIMS

To address the question of tailored baclofen prescribing in alcohol use disorder (AUD) in relation to dose-dependent efficacy and the potential danger of high doses and to provide suggestions for the use of high doses of baclofen in the treatment of AUD. The context is the approvement in France of baclofen in the treatment of AUD without dose limitation, making French physicians, who usually prescribe baclofen in a tailored manner, often use high or very high doses.

METHODS

A narrative review of the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that used tailored baclofen prescribing and of the severe adverse effects of baclofen that have been reported in the literature.

RESULTS

The results show that RCTs using tailored doses of baclofen in AUD are not completely demonstrative, though they are encouraging according to certain meta-analyses, while observational studies that used tailored doses constantly show a good effectiveness of baclofen treatment. The results suggest that many severe adverse effects of baclofen could be related to a nonrespect by physicians of prescription rules and appropriate treatment monitoring.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of tailored doses shows that the dose required to suppress cravings is highly variable, low or high, depending on each case. Analysis of the circumstances in which severe adverse effects occur suggest that a careful monitoring of baclofen prescribing might prevent a large majority of severe adverse effects. We propose that the education of the patients and the prescription skills, seriousness, and availability of the prescribing physicians are of major importance in the managing of tailored baclofen treatment of AUD.

Non-medical use of baclofen: A case series and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Baclofen is widely used for spastic disorders and, most recently, for addictive disorders. The first signals of baclofen abuse occurred in the last decade. This study aims to assess the motives, diversion sources, and routes of administration associated with the non-medical use of baclofen and examine health problems related to the non-medical use of baclofen.

METHODS

Spontaneous reports of baclofen abuse reported to the addictovigilance centre of East France were analysed. A literature search was conducted using PubMed®, Web of Sciences®, and Google Scholar® databases. Both investigations were performed in February 2021 without a time limit.

RESULTS

Forty-six cases were analysed (33 from the literature review and 13 from the addictovigilance base). Baclofen's non-medical use mainly affected male subjects with addictive history, but issues of primary abuse in subjects without any substance abuse history were also observed. Euphoria search was the most common reason for misuse. The route of administration included oral, snorting, and sublingual use. Some cases involving illegal sources were also observed. Most patients misusing baclofen presented severe complications, mainly represented by neurological and respiratory disturbances. Physical and psychological dependence on baclofen was observed in three persons.

CONCLUSIONS

Although baclofen abuse remains relatively infrequent or (most likely) underestimated, this study helped confirm baclofen's intrinsic abuse potential and make visible the baclofen-abuse-related health visible harms. Careful consideration and benefit-risk analysis should be employed when prescribing baclofen, and emergency departments should be aware of baclofen dangers in abuse situations.

Baclofen for alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is one of the most widespread psychiatric disorders leading to detrimental consequences to people with this disorder and others. Worldwide, the prevalence of heavy episodic drinking (30-day prevalence of at least one occasion of 60 g of pure alcohol intake among current drinkers) is estimated at 20% and the prevalence of AUD at 5% of the adult general population, with highest prevalence in Europe and North America. Therapeutic approaches, including pharmacotherapy, play an important role in treating people with AUD. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2018.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of baclofen on achieving and maintaining abstinence or reducing alcohol consumption in people with AUD compared to placebo, no treatment or any other pharmacological relapse prevention treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 22 November 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least four weeks' treatment duration and 12 weeks' overall study duration comparing baclofen for AUD treatment with placebo, no treatment or other treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. relapse, 2. frequency of use, 3. amount of use, 4. adverse events, 5. dropouts from treatment and 6. dropouts from treatment due to adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 7. craving, 8. anxiety, 9. depression and 10. frequency of most relevant adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs (1818 participants) with a diagnosis of alcohol dependence according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition or International Classification of Diseases 10th edition criteria. Mean age was 46.5 years and 70% were men. Ten studies compared baclofen to placebo or another medication; seven compared two baclofen doses to placebo or another medication. Globally, 15 studies compared baclofen to placebo, two baclofen to acamprosate and two baclofen to naltrexone. In 16 studies, participants received psychosocial treatments. We judged most studies at low risk of selection, performance, detection (subjective outcome), attrition and reporting bias. Ten studies detoxified participants before treatment; in seven studies, participants were still drinking at the beginning of treatment. Treatment duration was 12 weeks for 15 RCTs and longer in two studies. Baclofen daily dose was 30 mg to 300 mg: 10 RCTs used low doses (30 mg or less); eight RCTs medium doses (above 30 and 100 mg or less) and four RCTs high doses (above 100 mg). Compared to placebo, moderate-certainty evidence found that baclofen probably decreases the risk to relapse (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.99; 12 studies, 1057 participants). This result was confirmed among detoxified participants but not among other subgroups of participants. High-certainty evidence found that baclofen increases the percentage of days abstinent (mean difference (MD) 9.07, 95% CI 3.30 to 14.85; 16 studies, 1273 participants). This result was confirmed among all subgroups of participants except non-detoxified or those who received medium doses. There was no difference between baclofen and placebo in the other primary outcomes: heavy drinking days (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.18, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.11; 13 studies, 840 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); number of drinks per drinking days (MD -0.45, 95% CI -1.20 to 0.30; 9 studies, 392 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); number of participants with at least one adverse event (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11; 10 studies, 738 participants; high-certainty evidence); dropouts (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.03; 17 studies, 1563 participants; high-certainty evidence); dropouts due to adverse events (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.18; 16 studies, 1499 participants; high-certainty evidence). These results were confirmed by subgroup analyses except than for the dropouts that resulted lower among participants who received high doses of baclofen and studies longer than 12 weeks. Compared to placebo, there was no difference in craving (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.04; 17 studies, 1275 participants), anxiety (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.11; 15 studies, 1123 participants) and depression (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.27; 11 studies, 1029 participants). Concerning the specific adverse events, baclofen increases fatigue, dizziness, somnolence/sedation, dry mouth, paraesthesia and muscle spasms/rigidity. There was no difference in the other adverse events. Compared to acamprosate, one study (60 participants) found no differences in any outcomes but the evidence was very uncertain: relapse (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.20; very low-certainty evidence); number of participants with at least one adverse event (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.69; very low-certainty evidence); dropouts (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.46; very low-certainty evidence); dropouts due to adverse events (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low-certainty evidence) and craving (MD 5.80, 95% CI -11.84 to 23.44); and all the adverse events evaluated. Compared to naltrexone, baclofen may increase the risk of relapse (RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.56; 1 study, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and decrease the number of participants with at least one adverse event (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.80; 2 studies, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence is very uncertain. One study (60 participants) found no difference between baclofen and naltrexone in the dropouts at the end of treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.10; very low-certainty evidence), craving (MD 2.08, 95% CI -3.71 to 7.87), and all the adverse events evaluated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Baclofen likely reduces the risk of relapse to any drinking and increases the percentage of abstinent days, mainly among detoxified participants. It does not increase the number of participants with at least one adverse event, those who dropout for any reason or due to adverse events. It probably does not reduce number of heavy drinking days and the number of drinks per drinking days. Current evidence suggests that baclofen may help people with AUD in maintaining abstinence. The results of comparisons of baclofen with acamprosate and naltrexone were mainly based on only one study.

Baclofen: To Screen or Not to Screen in Postmortem Blood?

Baclofen (BLF) has been prescribed in the UK since 1972 for the alleviation of spasticity. However, evidence suggests BLF is also recreationally misused. It has been associated with ethanol, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), pregabalin (PGL) and gabapentin (GBP) use/abuse, and deaths have been reported. With current postmortem (PM) toxicological screening approaches, BLF is not routinely included in the general drugs screen and is only screened for if specifically mentioned in the case documents. The extent of BLF misuse is thus unclear. This study was carried out to determine the prevalence and concentrations of BLF in Coroners' toxicology, to investigate whether BLF misuse with ethanol, GHB, PGL and GBP is causing death and to determine the potential extent of the underreporting of BLF-associated deaths. Between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017, 3,750 PM femoral vein bloods were screened for BLF; all positive cases were quantified. Only 0.56% of samples screened positive for BLF, with concentration ranging from 0.08 to 102.00 µg/mL (median = 0.28). It was determined that if routine analysis without additional screening of BLF had been performed, 43% of BLF positives cases would have been missed. However, given the low incidence of detection, this only represents 0.25% of the cohort. Likely illicit use of BLF with GHB was seen in one case only. Death from the recreational use of BLF with PGL and GBP was not observed. Only two cases positive for BLF had an ethanol concentration of ≥50 mg%. Two cases of presumed intentional overdose of BLF were observed. This study highlights that although BLF abuse may be occurring, deaths are rare. It is therefore not cost- or time-effective to screen for BLF in all PM cases. With BLF currently being investigated for the treatment of alcoholism and withdrawal symptoms of illicit drug use, BLF-related deaths may rise in the future.

Toxicological considerations in the prescription of baclofen for the treatment of substance use disorders

Introduction: For many years, applications for baclofen have widened in the treatment of substance abuse disorder (SUD), mainly alcohol use disorder, with a growing rate of off-label prescriptions in Europe. Clinical effects seem to be both a decrease of craving and anxiety, leading to a decrease of drug or alcohol consumption. We described baclofen poisoning circumstances, therapeutic options and outcomes when used in substance use disorders.Areas covered: This review summarizes the toxicological considerations where baclofen was prescribed in humans for substance use or abuse disorder in randomized clinical trials, case series, case reports and observational studies between 1990 and 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic reviews and Meta-Analysis.Expert opinion: The most frequent cause of severe intoxication is self-poisoning. A dose above 180 mg are expected to cause severe toxicity and death. The treatment is only symptomatic as no antidote is available. Off-label prescription remains unsafe because the optimal dose is not known and varies greatly between patients. As SUD are frequently associated with psychiatric disorders and such patients may have suicidal thoughts, the risk of self-poisoning is high. Potential co-ingestants should also be considered, especially CNS depressants, and they need to be closely monitored.

Baclofen for alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and alcohol-related impairments belong to the most widespread psychiatric disorders leading to specific psychophysical, affective and cognitive symptoms and consequences for psychosocial well-being and health. Alcohol consumption is increasingly becoming a problem in many developing regions and AUD prevalence is estimated at 4.1% worldwide, with highest prevalence in European countries (7.5%), and the North America (6.0%). Therapeutic approaches, including pharmacotherapy, play an important role in treating patients with AUD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of baclofen for treating people with AUD, who are currently drinking, with the aim of achieving and maintaining abstinence or reducing alcohol consumption.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two further databases and two clinical trials registries, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles. The date of the most recent search was 30 January 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least four weeks' treatment duration and 12 weeks' overall study duration comparing baclofen for relapse prevention of AUD with placebo, no treatment or other treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs (1128 participants). All studies but three recruited fewer than 100 participants. Participants had a diagnosis of alcohol dependence according the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) IV or the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 criteria who were currently drinking. The mean age of participants was 48 years, and there were more men (69%), than women. All studies compared baclofen to placebo, except for one study that evaluated baclofen versus acamprosate. The included studies considered baclofen at different doses (range 10 mg a day to 150 mg a day). In all but one of the studies, participants in both the baclofen and placebo groups received psychosocial treatment or counselling of various intensity.We judged most of the studies at low risk of selection, performance, detection (subjective outcome), attrition and reporting bias.We did not find any difference between baclofen and placebo for the primary outcomes: relapse-return to any drinking (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.04; 5 studies, 781 participants, moderate certainty evidence); frequency of use by percentage of days abstinent (MD 0.39, 95% CI -11.51 to 12.29; 6 studies, 465 participants, low certainty evidence) and frequency of use by percentage of heavy drinking days at the end of treatment (MD 0.25, 95% CI -1.25 to 1.76; 3 studies, 186 participants, moderate certainty evidence); number of participants with at least one adverse event (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.10; 4 studies, 430 participants, high certainty evidence); the dropout rate at the end of treatment (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.26, 8 studies, 977 participants, high certainty evidence) and dropout due to adverse events (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.07; 7 studies, 913 participants, high certainty evidence).We found evidence that baclofen increases amount of use (drink per drinking days), (MD 1.55, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.77; 2 studies, 72 participants, low certainty evidence).Among secondary outcomes, there was no difference on craving (MD 1.38, 95% CI -1.28 to 4.03, 5 studies, 469 participants), and anxiety (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.28; 5 trials, 509 participants). We found that baclofen increased depression (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.48; 3 studies, 387 participants).Concerning the specific adverse events we found that baclofen increased: vertigo (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.74; 7 studies, 858 participants), somnolence/sedation (RR 1.48, 95%CI 1.11 to 1.96; 8 studies, 946 participants), paraesthesia (RR 4.28, 95% CI 2.11 to 8.67; 4 studies, 593 participants), and muscle spasms/rigidity (RR 1.94, 95%CI 1.08 to 3.48; 3 studies, 551 participants). For all the other adverse events we did not find significant differences between baclofen and placebo.For the comparison baclofen versus acamprosate, we were only able to extract data for one outcome, craving. For this outcome, we found that baclofen increased craving compared with acamprosate (MD 14.62, 95% CI 12.72 to 16.52; 1 study, 49 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

None of the primary or secondary outcomes of the review showed evidence of a difference between baclofen and placebo. The high heterogeneity among primary studies results limits the interpretation of the summary estimate, the identification of moderators and mediators of baclofen's effects on alcohol use remains a challenge for further research. Even though some results from RCTs are promising, current evidence remains uncertain regarding the use of baclofen as a first-line treatment for people with AUDs.

Full-Profile Pharmacokinetic Study of High Dose Baclofen in Subjects With Alcohol Use Disorder

Baclofen a gamma amino-butyric acid type B (GABA-B) receptor agonist, which has raised some interest for the treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD), occasionally at dose up to 300 mg/d. We conducted the first full-profile pharmacokinetic study on baclofen in AUD subjects, up to the oral daily dose of 300 mg. Sixty subjects treated for AUD with marketed baclofen were enrolled in a prospective phase-1 study. Participants were divided into four dose groups (1: <60 mg/d; 2: 60-120 mg/d; 3: >120 mg/d-180 mg/d; and 4: >180 mg/d), and they underwent a full-profile pharmacokinetic analysis of baclofen, using a nonlinear mixed effects modeling. The influence of different clinical and biological covariates was assessed in an upward modeling. Fifty-seven participants completed the study (522 observed concentrations collected). Racemic baclofen showed a linear pharmacokinetic profile, corresponding to a one-compartment model, with no influencing clinical or biological factor. The pharmacokinetic parameters of baclofen were (bootstrap 95% confidence intervals): absorption constant (Ka) 1.64 1/h (1.34-2), clearance (Cl/F) 11.6 L/h (10.8-12.3) and volume of distribution (Vd/F) 72.8 L (66.5-80.4) leading to a half-life of 4.4 h. The interindividual variability (IIV) was 44% (19-65), 21% (16-27), and 22% (11-36) for Ka, Cl/F, and Vd/F, respectively. The residual variability was 24% (21-26). No serious adverse event was reported. Registration: EudraCT #2013-003412-46.

Systematic review: Baclofen dosing protocols for alcohol use disorders used in observational studies

The popularity of baclofen as an anti-craving agent in the treatment of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) has increased, especially in patients with established liver disease. However, evidence-based guidelines to inform practice are lacking. The aim of this systematic review is explore the prescribing practices of baclofen in AUD treatment. Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles from 2002. Assessment of eligibility criteria for inclusion was performed independently by two investigators. The main outcomes of interest were maximum dose, starting dose, titration regimen, effectiveness, and tolerability. Twenty-five studies reporting outcomes in 613 patients treated with baclofen for an AUD were identified. Starting doses ranged between 5 and 50mg/d. Titration was study-dependent, and doses were increased until either therapeutic target (abstinence or study-defined low risk drinking) was achieved or adverse events resulted in a dose reduction or discontinuation. The maximum dose for individual patients ranged between 20 and 630mg/d. Seven studies reported at least one patient using >300mg/d. In studies with 10 or more patients, we found a negative correlation between dose and proportion of patients achieving the therapeutic goal. However, this was skewed by one study. A range of serious adverse events were reported. Most were reported at doses over 100mg/d, but others presented at lower doses. Baclofen is a promising therapeutic in this area. Evidence is required, however, to support practitioners in prescribing doses that optimise outcomes and reduce adverse events.

A prospective cohort study examining the effectiveness of baclofen in the maintenance of abstinence in alcohol use disorder patients attending a joint liver and alcohol treatment clinic

OBJECTIVE

Alcohol-related liver disease (ARLD) is the leading cause of alcohol-related mortality in the UK. Helping patients with ARLD to stop drinking is an important treatment goal. The aim of this study is to explore baclofen's utility in maintaining abstinence.

METHODS - A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

Patients with ARLD were commenced on baclofen; the dose was titrated according to tolerability and response up to 30 mg three times daily. Severity of physical dependence and biochemical markers of liver injury were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 12 months.

RESULTS

Length of follow-up differed. Of 219 patients in the original cohort, 186 and 113 were evaluated at 3 months and 12 months, respectively. Loss to follow-up was due to death, baclofen non-adherence, and failure to attend appointments. Comparison of baseline and 1-year biochemical markers showed significant reductions in GGT (median change = 82.0; 95% CI = -149.0 to -40.0; p < 0.0005), ALT (-10.5; 95% CI = -16.5 to -5.0; p = 0.001), and bilirubin (-4.5; 95% CI = -7.0 to -2.0; p < 0.001). The proportion of eligible patients reporting complete abstinence at 3 and 12 months was 55% and 53%, respectively. A significant reduction in alcohol consumption and Severity of Alcohol Dependence Questionnaire score was observed at both follow-up time points.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the baclofen was good, and it had a positive impact on measures of alcohol consumption. A limitation of our study is its observational nature. Further randomized studies alongside investigation of dosing strategies are required.