Types of benzodiazepines abused by chemically dependent inpatients

Metabolic diversity as a reason for unsuccessful detoxification from benzodiazepines: the rationale for serum BZD concentration monitoring

PURPOSE

Many harms secondary to benzodiazepine (BZD) dependence force users towards detoxification treatment. However, even strongly motivated patients tolerate the process badly or experience early relapse. The detoxification procedure has not yet been standardized. The objective of this paper is to examine the hypothesis that faulty detoxification routines may have caused some failures.

METHODS

The detoxification approaches found in the literature were compared stage by stage. The review was used to identify possible common, across-the-board systematic errors.

RESULTS

The presented literature review confirms that the widespread divergence in the BZD metabolism rate is effectively neglected during detoxification routines. Without laboratory measurements, these differences, additionally interfered with by auxiliary drugs, undermine not only the scheduled but even the symptom-driven procedures. An initial substitution with a long-acting BZD, although recommended, may lead to over-accumulation. This excess, varying between patients and incompatible with the current tapering stage, may lead to repeated overestimation of the patient's adjustments to reduced doses. Consequently, the patient's good clinical presentation at withdrawal, resulting in a conclusion of detoxification, may actually reflect a persistently high serum BZD concentration. The low-concentration stage, if shifted past the end of treatment, exposes patients to unexpected, unassisted withdrawal crises. With laboratory feedback, these crises, unlike the symptoms related to deficient re-adaptation mechanisms, could be prevented. Moreover, by minimizing the high-concentration phase, time can be saved for properly assisted low-concentration challenges.

CONCLUSION

A customized detoxification procedure driven not only by the intensity of withdrawal symptoms but also by serum BZD monitoring may prevent some failures. As the standard regimen, it would make detoxification from BZDs more reliable and effective.

The epidemiology of benzodiazepine misuse: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepine misuse is a growing public health problem, with increases in benzodiazepine-related overdose deaths and emergency room visits in recent years. However, relatively little attention has been paid to this emergent problem. We systematically reviewed epidemiological studies on benzodiazepine misuse to identify key findings, limitations, and future directions for research.

METHODS

PubMed and PsychINFO databases were searched through February 2019 for peer-reviewed publications on benzodiazepine misuse (e.g., use without a prescription; at a higher frequency or dose than prescribed). Eligibility criteria included human studies that focused on the prevalence, trends, correlates, motives, patterns, sources, and consequences of benzodiazepine misuse.

RESULTS

The search identified 1970 publications, and 351 articles were eligible for data extraction and inclusion. In 2017, benzodiazepines and other tranquilizers were the third most commonly misused illicit or prescription drug in the U.S. (approximately 2.2% of the population). Worldwide rates of misuse appear to be similar to those reported in the U.S. Factors associated with misuse include other substance use, receipt of a benzodiazepine prescription, and psychiatric symptoms and disorders. Benzodiazepine misuse encompasses heterogeneous presentations of motives, patterns, and sources. Moreover, misuse is associated with myriad poor outcomes, including mortality, HIV/HCV risk behaviors, poor self-reported quality of life, criminality, and continued substance use during treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Benzodiazepine misuse is a worldwide public health concern that is associated with a number of concerning consequences. Findings from the present review have implications for identifying subgroups who could benefit from prevention and treatment efforts, critical points for intervention, and treatment targets.

Patterns of zolpidem use among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans: A retrospective cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Although concern exists regarding the adverse effects and rate of zolpidem use, especially long-term use, limited information is available concerning patterns of zolpidem use.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence and correlates of zolpidem exposure in Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans (IAVs).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of zolpidem prescriptions was performed with National Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data. We gathered national VA inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy data files for IAV's who received VA care between fiscal years (FY) 2013 and 2014. The VA pharmacy database was used to identify the prevalence of long term (>30 days), high-dose zolpidem exposure (>10mg immediate-release; >12.5mg extended-release) and other medications received in FY14. Baseline characteristics (demographics, diagnoses) were identified in FY13. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to examine the demographic, clinical, and medication correlates of zolpidem use.

RESULTS

Of 493,683 IAVs who received VHA care in FY 2013 and 2014, 7.6% (n = 37,422) were prescribed zolpidem in FY 2014. Women had lower odds of high-dose zolpidem exposure than men. The majority (77.3%) of IAVs who received zolpidem prescriptions had long-term use with an average days' supply of 189.3 days and a minority (0.9%) had high-dose exposure. In multivariable analyses, factors associated with long-term zolpidem exposure included age greater than 29 years old, PTSD, insomnia, Selim Index, physical 2-3 conditions, opioids, antidepressants, benzodiazepines, atypical antipsychotics, and stimulants. High dose exposure was associated with PTSD, depression, substance use disorder, insomnia, benzodiazepines, atypical antipsychotics, and stimulant prescriptions.

CONCLUSION

The current practices of insomnia pharmacotherapy in IAVs fall short of the clinical guidelines and may reflect high-risk zolpidem prescribing practices that put Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans at risk for adverse effects of zolpidem and poor health outcomes.

Benzodiazepine prescription for patients in treatment for drug use disorders: a nationwide cohort study in Denmark, 2000-2010

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines are frequently prescribed to patients with drug use disorders. However, it has previously been difficult to distinguish whether this frequent prescribing was due to underlying psychiatric disorders or inappropriate prescribing. In a nationwide cohort study, we investigated the prescribing of benzodiazepines to patients with drug use disorders in connection with treatment admission.

METHODS

Benzodiazepine prescriptions to patients (N = 33203) aged 18 to 67 years admitting for outpatient treatment for drug use disorders in Denmark, 2000 to 2010, were studied by using linked data from nationwide health registries. Factors associated with increasing amounts of benzodiazepine use within the first year after admission were assessed by multinomial logistic regression. Proportions of very long-term benzodiazepine prescription were calculated.

RESULTS

During the first year after admission to treatment, 26.2 % of patients were prescribed benzodiazepines. Of these, 35.5 % were prescribed benzodiazepines at dose levels that might indicate inappropriate use (>365 Defined Daily Dose per year), and 34.6 % were prescribed more than one type of benzodiazepines. Diazepam was the most commonly prescribed type. Among patients with opioid use, 43.2 % were prescribed benzodiazepines which were three times higher than for patients with cannabis (12.2 %) or central stimulating drugs (13.8 %) as their primary drug use. Admitting to treatment for a drug use disorder did not increase the specialized psychiatric treatment coverage of this patient group, disregarding use of prescribed benzodiazepines. 29.5 % were new users of prescribed benzodiazepines, and of these, 27.5 % continued into very long-term use (≥4 years after admission) during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Benzodiazepines were commonly prescribed to patients admitting to treatment for drug use disorders, and included prescription of multiple and non-optimal types, high doses, and very long-term prescriptions. These findings point towards inappropriate prescribing of benzodiazepines in many cases more than treatment for psychiatric disorders.

Coadministration of disulfiram and lorazepam in the treatment of alcohol dependence and co-occurring anxiety disorder: an open-label pilot study

BACKGROUND

Anxiety is common among persons with alcohol use disorder during early abstinence from alcohol. Although benzodiazepines are effective for short-term treatment of anxiety, they are rarely used beyond acute detoxification due to concerns about misuse or interactions with alcohol.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted an open-label trial to explore the effects of coadministering lorazepam and disulfiram to alcohol-dependent patients with anxiety disorder symptoms. The rationale for this model is to minimize the risks of the benzodiazepine, while also potentially enhancing adherence to disulfiram.

METHODS

Forty-one participants with DSM-IV alcohol dependence who also met syndromal criteria for anxiety disorder with or without co-occurring major depressive syndrome initiated treatment with lorazepam (starting dose 0.5 mg three times daily) and disulfiram (starting dose 500 mg three times weekly). Participants received 16 weeks of monitored pharmacotherapy with manualized medical management.

RESULTS

Adherence to treatment decreased steadily with time (85.4% at 4 weeks, 36.6% at 16 weeks). Participants showed significant increases in percent abstinent days during treatment and at 24 weeks follow-up. Large reductions in anxiety, depression, and craving were observed during treatment, and improvement remained significant at 24 weeks. Duration of adherence with disulfiram strongly predicted abstinence at 16 weeks. There was no evidence of misuse of lorazepam or dose escalation during the study.

CONCLUSION

Lorazepam can be safely used for short-term treatment of anxiety in combination with disulfiram treatment of alcohol use disorder. However, it is not clear that making lorazepam dispensing contingent on adherence to disulfiram enhances retention in disulfiram treatment.

Assessment of abuse potential of benzodiazepines from a prescription database using 'doctor shopping' as an indicator

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines are widely used for different purposes because of their pharmacological properties, but their abuse potential may represent a limitation to their use. Data suggest that this abuse potential may vary between products and available dosages. Doctor shopping (the simultaneous use of several physicians by a patient) is one of the most important ways in which prescription drugs, in particular benzodiazepines, are diverted.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the potential for abuse of several benzodiazepines using doctor shopping in a French administrative area as a proxy for abuse.

METHODS

All prescriptions reimbursed during the year 2003 in Haute-Garonne, France (one million inhabitants) for benzodiazepines that were available in ambulatory care through community pharmacies as solid oral forms were extracted from a reimbursement database. The benzodiazepines were alprazolam (0.25 mg, 0.50 mg), bromazepam 6 mg, clonazepam 2 mg, clorazepate (5 mg, 10 mg, 50 mg), diazepam (1 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg), flunitrazepam 1 mg, lorazepam (1 mg, 2.5 mg) and tetrazepam 50 mg. For each patient, the quantities prescribed, dispensed and obtained by doctor shopping (i.e. overlap between prescriptions from different prescribers) were computed. Benzodiazepines were compared using their 'doctor shopping indicator' (DSI, the percentage of each drug obtained through doctor shopping among the total reimbursed quantity).

RESULTS

About 128 000 patients received at least one benzodiazepine during the year. Four groups of benzodiazepines were identified according to their abuse potential: very high abuse potential (flunitrazepam, DSI = 42.8%); high abuse potential (diazepam 10 mg, DSI = 3.2%; clorazepate 50 mg, DSI = 2.7%); intermediate abuse potential (alprazolam 0.50 mg, bromazepam, clonazepam, DSI ranging from 1.8% to 1.9%); and low abuse potential (other benzodiazepines and dosages, DSI ranging from 0.3% to 1.1%).

CONCLUSION

The DSI can be used to assess the relative abuse liability of benzodiazepines and to detect signals of new patterns of abuse in settings where centralized records of prescription or deliveries are available for the great majority of patients.

Oxazepam does not modulate the behavioral effects of d-amphetamine in humans

Benzodiazepines, which are gamma-aminobutyric acid-A (GABA(A)) receptor positive modulators, can block the behavioral effects of psychomotor stimulants. In the present study, the ability of oxazepam, which may have less abuse potential compared to some other benzodiazepines, to attenuate the discriminative-stimulus, subject-rated and psychomotor performance effects of d-amphetamine in humans was determined. Six healthy participants (2 female, 4 male) learned to discriminate 15 mg oral d-amphetamine. After acquiring the discrimination (i.e., > or = 80% correct responding on 4 consecutive days), the effects of d-amphetamine (0, 2.5, 5, 10 and 15 mg), alone and in combination with acutely administered oxazepam (0 and 20 mg) were assessed. d-Amphetamine alone functioned as a discriminative stimulus, produced stimulant-like subject-rated effects (e.g., increased ratings of Stimulated on a Drug-Effect Questionnaire) and enhanced psychomotor performance. Oxazepam alone increased subject ratings of sedation (e.g., increased ratings of Sluggish, Fatigued and Lazy on a Drug-Effect Questionnaire) and impaired psychomotor performance. Oxazepam alone did not occasion d-amphetamine-like discriminative-stimulus effects, and had no effect on the discriminative-stimulus or subject-rated effects of d-amphetamine when given in combination. The results of this experiment are discordant with previous research and suggest that benzodiazepines differ in their ability to modulate the behavioral effects of d-amphetamine.

Long-term outcome after benzodiazepine withdrawal treatment in subjects with complicated dependence

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to monitor subjects with benzodiazepine (BZ) dependence after withdrawal treatment in order to evaluate long-term outcome and predictors of remaining BZ-free. Subjects with high-dose dependence or co-occurring alcohol problems were not excluded.

METHOD

Seventy-six participants in an earlier, randomized, controlled trial of outpatient BZ discontinuation were interviewed, and documents from their treatment settings obtained, along with urine and serum samples for BZ use. Long-term outcomes for a cognitive-behavioral treatment group and a treatment-as-usual group were measured.

RESULTS

BZ discontinuation treatment outcomes were maintained in both treatment groups. No between-group differences were found. At the end of the study 25% of the subjects were BZ-free, and the median dose decrease from pre-treatment levels was 16.1 mg in diazepam equivalents. Subjects with pre-treatment doses exceeding 40 mg were able to maintain their doses at therapeutic levels through the follow-up. Pre-treatment low BZ dose, no previous withdrawal attempts, and high life satisfaction predicted success in staying BZ-free.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with complicated BZ dependence, the benefits of BZ discontinuation treatment may persist, but more studies are needed.

Analgesia and abuse potential: an accidental association or a common substrate?

The fact that centrally acting analgesics have abuse potential commensurate with their analgesic activity raises the question of whether these effects are related. The abuse potential of drugs depends on their ability to produce reinforcing effects, which are mediated by a neural system that includes the ventral tegmental dopamine cells and their connections with the ventral striatum. Morphine and amphetamine are both powerful analgesics and have high abuse potential. Their analgesic and reinforcing effects are mediated by similar receptors, similar sites of action, and overlapping neural substrates. These coincidences suggest that reinforcers may produce analgesia by transforming the aversive affective state evoked by pain into a more positive affective state. The implications of this hypothesis and its relation to other known mechanisms of analgesia are discussed. The hypothesis predicts that drugs with reinforcing effects should produce analgesia. A survey of drugs acting through 21 classes of receptors reveals that in 13 classes there is evidence for both analgesic and reinforcing effects that are approximately equipotent. The GABA(A) agonists were found to be the only drugs with confirmed abuse potential that lack analgesic activity. The interpretation of this and several other anomalous cases is discussed.

Multiple drug use and psychiatric comorbidity in patients admitted to the hospital with severe benzodiazepine dependence

This study aimed to evaluate the concurrent and lifetime psychiatric comorbidity and drug use patterns in patients admitted to the hospital for detoxification from benzodiazepines. Psychiatric assessments using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R with a psychosis screening module (SCID-P and II) were conducted in 30 inpatients admitted to the medical unit treatment unit of the Clinical Research and Treatment Institute of the Addiction Research Foundation for the treatment of severe benzodiazepine dependence. Patients (mean age, 36 years; range, 22-58; number of DSM-III-R criteria met for benzodiazepine substance dependence, > or = 7 out of 9 [73%], all 9 criteria [40%]) used benzodiazepines and other drugs over prolonged periods of time at high doses, and their daily functioning was substantially impaired (Mean Global Assessment of Functioning Score, 48; range, 31-60). The most common lifetime psychiatric diagnoses were major depression (33%), other psychoactive drug dependence (100%) (opioids, 77%; alcohol, 53%), and panic disorder (30%). Current psychiatric diagnoses in addition to benzodiazepine dependence included other psychoactive substance use disorders (83%) (opioids, 67%; cocaine, 13%; multiple concurrent substance use, 17%), panic disorder (13%), and generalized anxiety disorder, (20%). Personality disorders included antisocial (42%), avoidant (25%), and borderline (17%). These findings demonstrate that in patients severely dependent on benzodiazepines, additional psychoactive substance use and mental disorders are prominent. The pattern of drug use and psychiatric comorbidity differentiates these patients from therapeutic-dose benzodiazepine users.

Quantitative urine drug monitoring in methadone programs: potential clinical uses

An on-site clinical laboratory in a methadone program can provide semiquantitative urine drug monitoring by using fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) technology. This report documents a wide range of urine drug levels from threshold to near 2,000,000 ng/ml in this patient population, suggesting how laboratory measures can assist in assessing the severity of addiction. Urine drug level data are reported for drugs of abuse (opioid, amphetamines, cocaine) as well as therapeutic drugs (benzodiazepines and methadone). Clinical uses of quantitation illustrated include screening of all admissions prior to induction on methadone, identification of unusually heavy users, monitoring drug washout, and assessing compliance with prescribed benzodiazepine and methadone regimens. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act (CLIA88) has set national certification standards for moderate complexity laboratories using immunoassays and set up a mechanism for monitoring quality in such clinic-based laboratories.