Gabapentinoid-induced peripheral edema and acute heart failure: A translational study combining pharmacovigilance data and in vitro animal experiments

History of Preoperative Use of Gabapentin Before Lower Extremity Bypass Predisposes Patients to a High Risk of Opioid Use and Dependence in a Dose-dependent Manner

INTRODUCTION

This study assesses the association of preoperative use of gabapentinoids (GBPs) with postoperative risk of opioid-related disorders in peripheral artery disease patients undergoing lower extremity bypass operation.

METHODS

This is a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of patients undergoing peripheral artery bypass in TriNetX, a multicenter national database. Two study groups were constituted based on the preoperative history of prescribed GBPs. Primary outcomes were opioid-related disorders and mortality. The outcomes were reported at two-time endpoints that is, at 1 and 5 y.

RESULTS

This study population included a total of 23,706 patients. After propensity score-matched analysis, each group contained 5130 patients. The primary outcomes showed a significant increase in postoperative opioid-related disorders at the 1 and 5-y time points between GBPs and no GBPs groups: 1-y outcome (2.0% versus 1.1%; adj. P = 0.007) and 5-y outcome (4.5% versus 3.5%; adj. P = 0.035). Logistic regression analysis revealed an increase in the 1-y (adjusted odds ratio= 1.664; 95% CI [1.217, 2.273], P = 0.001) and 5-y (OR = 1.353; 95% CI [1.107, 1.653], P = 0.003) odds of opioid-related disorders in patients on GBPs. A secondary analysis showed a significant dose-dependent increase in the associated risk of 5-y opioid-related disorders in patients with a history of prescribed gabapentin.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing lower extremity bypass with a history of gabapentin use, there is an associated increased long-term risk of opioid-related disorders in a dose-dependent fashion. Overall, this study highlights weighing risks and benefits of prescribing GBPs for pain control versus their long-term associated risk of opioid-related disorders among other adverse outcomes.

Association of adverse cardiovascular events with gabapentin and pregabalin among patients with fibromyalgia

OBJECTIVE

Fibromyalgia, a chronic pain disorder, impacts approximately 2% of adults in the US. Gabapentin and pregabalin are common treatments to manage fibromyalgia-related pain. Our recent study showed the risk of adverse cardiovascular events increased in diabetic neuropathy patients who were prescribed gabapentin or pregabalin. Here, we investigated whether the prescription of gabapentin or pregabalin has similar cardiovascular risk in patients with fibromyalgia.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study leveraged electronic health records from 64 US healthcare organizations with 112 million patients. The study population included 105,602 patients first diagnosed with fibromyalgia and followed by a prescription of gabapentin, pregabalin, or other FDA-approved drugs for treating fibromyalgia from 2010 to 2019. Outcomes were deep venous thrombosis (DVT), myocardial infarcts (MI), peripheral vascular disease (PVD), strokes, heart failure, and pulmonary embolism (PE). In propensity-score-matched cohorts, 1-year and 5-year hazard ratios (HRs) were computed with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Additionally, we conducted sensitivity analyses on the subpopulations without other possible indications.

RESULTS

For 5-year follow-up, gabapentin increased the risk of PVD (HR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.17-1.80), MI (HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.03-1.66), heart failure (HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.10-1.48), DVT (HR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.33-2.44), and PE (HR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.62-3.07). Pregabalin increased the risk of DVT (HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.01-2.20), and PE (HR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.43-3.50). For 1-year follow-up, gabapentin increased the risk of PVD (HR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.11-1.57), DVT (HR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.09-1.68), and PE (HR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.17-1.57). Pregabalin increased the risk of PVD (HR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.06-1.63) and PE (HR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.03-1.52). Sensitivity analyses showed similar trends.

CONCLUSION

In fibromyalgia patients, the prescription of gabapentin and pregabalin moderately increased the risk of several adverse cardiovascular events. This risk, together with benefits and other adverse reactions, should be considered when prescribing these medications for fibromyalgia patients.

Which older adults are at highest risk of prescribing cascades? A national study of the gabapentinoid-loop diuretic cascade

BACKGROUND

Prescribing cascades are important contributors to polypharmacy. Little is known about which older adults are at highest risk of experiencing prescribing cascades. We explored which older veterans are at highest risk of the gabapentinoid (including gabapentin and pregabalin)-loop diuretic (LD) cascade, given the dramatic increase in gabapentinoid prescribing in recent years.

METHODS

Using Veterans Affairs and Medicare claims data (2010-2019), we performed a prescription sequence symmetry analysis (PSSA) to assess loop diuretic initiation before and after gabapentinoid initiation among older veterans (≥66 years). To identify the cascade, we calculated the adjusted sequence ratio (aSR), which assesses the temporality of LD relative to gabapentinoid initiation. To explore high-risk groups, we used multivariable logistic regression with prescribing order modeled as a binary dependent variable. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (aORs), measuring the extent to which factors are associated with one prescribing order versus another.

RESULTS

Of 151,442 veterans who initiated a gabapentinoid, there were 1,981 patients who initiated a LD within 6 months after initiating a gabapentinoid compared to 1,599 patients who initiated a LD within 6 months before initiating a gabapentinoid. In the gabapentinoid-LD group, the mean age was 73 years, 98% were male, 13% were Black, 5% were Hispanic, and 80% were White. Patients in each group were similar across patient and health utilization factors (standardized mean difference <0.10 for all comparisons). The aSR was 1.23 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.34), strongly suggesting the cascade's presence. People age ≥85 years were less likely to have the cascade (compared to 66-74 years; aOR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56-0.96), and people taking ≥10 medications were more likely to have the cascade (compared to 0-4 drugs; aOR 1.39, 95% CI: 1.07-1.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Among older adults, those who are younger and taking many medications may be at higher risk of the gabapentinoid-LD cascade, contributing to worsening polypharmacy and potential drug-related harms. We did not identify strong predictors of this cascade, suggesting that prescribing cascade prevention efforts should be widespread rather than focused on specific subgroups.

The Effect of Oral Gabapentin and Pregabalin as a Prodrug in Pain Control after Orthopedic Surgery on the Upper Limb: A Double-Blind Parallel Randomized Clinical Trial Study

Objective

To compare the effects of oral gabapentin (GBP) and pregabalin (PGB) in pain control after orthopedic surgery on the upper limb.

Methods

In this double-blind randomized clinical trial study, 80 patients who were the candidates for elective orthopedic surgery on one of the parts of the upper limb were divided into two groups using balance-block randomization. For the first group, a 150 mg capsule of PGB (one hour before the surgery) and for the second group, a 300 mg capsule of GBP (two hours before the surgery) were prescribed. Patients were subjected to standard monitoring at the beginning and during surgery. The pain scores were evaluated at before surgery, in PACU (postanesthesia care unit), and 6 and 12 hours after the surgery by VAS (visual analog scale).

Results

In this study, 37 subjects were allocated to each group. The participation rate was 92.5%. The mean with 95% confidence interval (CI) of pain scores over 4 times in the PGB group was 4.03 (3.25-4.79), 3.76 (3.02-4.49), 3.65 (3.06-4.23), and 3.41 (2.88-3.93) and in the GBP group was 4.08 (3.33-4.83), 2.78 (2.11-4.45), 2.3 (2.05-2.54), and 2 (1.51-2.50), respectively. The within-group comparisons showed a significant decrease in the pain score over time (P < 0.001). Also, the between-group comparison showed significant differences between the two groups in terms of pain score (P < 0.001). In the end, results showed that there is a significant interaction between time and intervention for pain score (P=0.042).

Conclusion

Although two medicines led to a reduction in the pain score, but the rate reduction in the PGB group was significantly more than that in the GBP group. This trial is registered with IRCT20211013052759N1.

Edema related to treatment with psychotropic drugs

Edema as an adverse drug reaction is a commonly underestimated yet potentially debilitating condition. This study analyzes the incidence of severe psychotropic drug-induced edema (e.g., edema affecting the face, legs, or multiple body parts and lasting for more than 1 week, or in any case necessitating subsequent diuretic use) among psychiatric inpatients. The cases under examination are derived from an observational pharmacovigilance program conducted in German-speaking countries ("Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie", AMSP) from 1993 to 2016. Among the 462,661 inpatients monitored, severe edema was reported in 231 cases, resulting in an incidence of 0.05%. Edema occurred more frequently in women (80% of all cases) and older patients (mean age 51.8 years). Pregabalin had the highest incidence of severe edema, affecting 1.46‰ of patients treated with pregabalin, followed by mirtazapine (0.8‰). The majority of edema cases showed a positive response to appropriate countermeasures, such as dose reduction and drug discontinuation, and resolved by the end of the observation period. While most instances of drug-induced edema are reversible, they can have a significant impact on patient well-being and potentially result in decreased treatment adherence. It is, therefore, crucial to remain vigilant regarding risk-increasing circumstances during treatment with psychotropic drugs.

Etiology of Drug-Induced Edema: A Review of Dihydropyridine, Thiazolidinedione, and Other Medications Causing Edema

Edema is an accumulation of fluid in the body's tissues that affects millions of Americans yearly. It can affect multiple body parts, for example, the brain or eyes, but often occurs in the periphery, including the feet and legs. Medications, such as dihydropyridine and thiazolidinediones (TZDs), can be the etiology of edema. Edema can develop in association with problems in the vasculature or lymphatic flow. In recent years, a better understanding of these drug-induced mechanisms has been appreciated. Specifically, dihydropyridines can increase hydrostatic pressure and cause selective pre-capillary vessel vasodilation. TZDs can cause edema through increased vascular permeability and increased hydrostatic pressure. Specifically, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) stimulation increases vascular endothelial permeability, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) secretion, renal sodium, and fluid retention. Other drugs that can cause edema include neuropathic pain agents, dopamine agonists, antipsychotics, nitrates, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAIDS), steroids, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and insulin. There are various clinical presentations of edema. Since multiple mechanisms can induce edema, it is important to understand the basic mechanisms and pathophysiology of drug-induced edema. Edema can even become fatal. For example, angioedema can occur from ACE inhibitor therapy. In this regard, it is considered a medical emergency when there is laryngeal involvement. This review aims to thoroughly appreciate the multiple causes of drug-induced edema and the ways it can be treated or prevented.

Drug clustering to anticipate new aspects of drug safety profile: Application to gabapentinoids and other voltage-gated calcium channel ligand drugs

AIMS

Gabapentin and pregabalin bind to α2-δ subunit of voltage-gated calcium channels (Cav ). Other drugs targeting Cav include cardiovascular calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and anticonvulsants (levetiracetam, ethosuximide and zonisamide). In addition to pharmacodynamics, the safety profile of gabapentinoids seems to overlap with the one of cardiovascular CCBs (oedema) and Cav -blocking anticonvulsants (suicide and ataxia). The objective of this study was to cluster the safety profile of different Cav -ligand drugs by focusing on whether gabapentinoids present a distinct adverse drug reaction (ADR) signature from cardiovascular CCBs and anticonvulsants.

METHODS

We extracted all ADRs with at least one significant disproportionate reporting (reporting odds ratio) related to gabapentinoids, CCBs or anticonvulsants in VigiBase. After principal component analysis preprocessing, a hierarchical ascendent classification was performed to cluster gabapentinoids and other Cav -ligand drugs that share a similar ADR signature. The robustness of the results was determined through four sensitivity analyses, varying on the dataset or the clustering method.

RESULTS

A total of 16 drugs and 65 ADRs were included. Gabapentinoids were in Cluster #1, which included eight other drugs (isradipine, nicardipine, lacidipine, lercanidipine, ethosuximide, levetiracetam, zonisamide and nimodipine). Cluster #2 contained two drugs (diltiazem and verapamil) and Cluster #3 contained four drugs (amlodipine, felodipine, nifedipine and nitrendipine). The clustering results were consistent in all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety profile of gabapentinoids overlaps with those of some dihydropyridine CCBs and Cav -blocking anticonvulsants. These results could be used to anticipate some unidentified ADRs of gabapentinoids from information accumulated with older drugs and sharing a common molecular target and ADR signature.

Effects of Acute and Chronic Gabapentin Treatment on Cardiovascular Function of Rats

Gabapentin (GBP), a GABA analogue, is primarily used as an anticonvulsant for the treatment of partial seizures and neuropathic pain. Whereas a majority of the side effects are associated with the nervous system, emerging evidence suggests there is a high risk of heart diseases in patients taking GBP. In the present study, we first used a preclinical model of rats to investigate, firstly, the acute cardiovascular responses to GBP (bolus i.v. injection, 50 mg/kg) and secondly the effects of chronic GBP treatment (i.p. 100 mg/kg/day × 7 days) on cardiovascular function and the myocardial proteome. Under isoflurane anesthesia, rat blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and left ventricular (LV) hemodynamics were measured using Millar pressure transducers. The LV myocardium and brain cortex were analyzed by proteomics, bioinformatics, and western blot to explore the molecular mechanisms underlying GBP-induced cardiac dysfunction. In the first experiment, we found that i.v. GBP significantly decreased BP, HR, maximal LV pressure, and maximal and minimal dP/dt, whereas it increased IRP-AdP/dt, Tau, systolic, diastolic, and cycle durations (* p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01 vs. baseline; n = 4). In the second experiment, we found that chronic GBP treatment resulted in hypotension, bradycardia, and LV systolic dysfunction, with no change in plasma norepinephrine. In the myocardium, we identified 109 differentially expressed proteins involved in calcium pathways, cholesterol metabolism, and galactose metabolism. Notably, we found that calmodulin, a key protein of intracellular calcium signaling, was significantly upregulated by GBP in the heart but not in the brain. In summary, we found that acute and chronic GBP treatments suppressed cardiovascular function in rats, which is attributed to abnormal calcium signaling in cardiomyocytes. These data reveal a novel side effect of GBP independent of the nervous system, providing important translational evidence to suggest that GBP can evoke adverse cardiovascular events by depression of myocardial function.

Cardiovascular risk of gabapentin and pregabalin in patients with diabetic neuropathy

Background

Gabapentin and pregabalin are commonly prescribed medications to treat pain in patients with diabetic neuropathy. Gabapentin and pregabalin can cause fluid retention, which is hypothesized to be associated with cardiovascular diseases. However, whether long-term use of gabapentin and pregabalin is associated with adverse cardiovascular diseases remains unknown. This study aims to examine the association between gabapentin use, pregabalin use and several adverse cardiovascular events.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used propensity score matching within patient electronic health records (EHRs) from a multicenter database with 106 million patients from 69 health care organizations in the US. The study population comprised 210,064 patients who had a diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy and were prescribed diabetic neuropathy medications in their EHRs. The exposure cohort comprised patients who were prescribed gabapentin or pregabalin to treat diabetic neuropathy. The comparison cohort comprised patients who were not prescribed either gabapentin or pregabalin but were prescribed other drugs to treat diabetic neuropathy. The outcomes of interest were myocardial infarcts, strokes, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, and venous thromboembolic events. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 3-month and 5-year risk for adverse cardiovascular events between the propensity score-matched cohorts.

Results

Both gabapentin and pregabalin were associated with increased risk of 5-year adverse cardiovascular events compared with the comparison group. In patients prescribed gabapentin, the highest risk was observed for deep venous thrombosis (HR: 1.58, 95% CI 1.37–1.82), followed by pulmonary embolism (HR: 1.5, 95% CI 1.27–1.76), peripheral vascular disease (HR: 1.37, 95% CI 1.27–1.47), stroke (HR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.2–1.43), myocardial infarction (HR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.14–1.38) and heart failure (HR: 1.14, 95% CI 1.07–1.21). In patients prescribed pregabalin, the highest risk was observed for deep venous thrombosis (HR: 1.57, 95% CI 1.31–1.88), followed by peripheral vascular disease (HR: 1.35, 95% CI 1.22–1.49), myocardial infarction (HR: 1.29, 95% CI 1.13–1.47), pulmonary embolism (HR: 1.28, 95% CI 1.04–1.59), stroke (HR: 1.26, 95% CI 1.12–1.42), and heart failure (HR: 1.2, 95% CI 1.11–1.3). There were significant associations between short-term (3 month) gabapentin use and heart failure, myocardial infarction, peripheral vascular disease, deep venous thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism. Short-term (3 month) pregabalin use was associated with deep venous thrombosis, peripheral vascular disease.

Conclusion

In patients with diabetic neuropathy who were prescribed gabapentin and pregabalin, there is an increased risk for heart failure, myocardial infarction, peripheral vascular disease, stroke, deep venous thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism with long-term use. Our findings suggest that increased risk for adverse cardiovascular events, along with other side effects, the efficacy of pain control and the degree of tolerance of the patient, should be considered when prescribing gabapentin and pregabalin long-term in patients with diabetic neuropathy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12933-022-01610-9.