Trial of tramadol plus gabapentin for opioid detoxification

Electroacupuncture prevents cocaine-induced conditioned place preference reinstatement and attenuates ΔFosB and GluR2 expression

Acupuncture has been used for treating drug addiction since the 1970s, but little is known about the mechanisms by which acupuncture affects drug cue-induced relapse. The transcription factor delta-FosB (ΔFosB) plays a critical role in behavior and pathology after chronic use of cocaine. ΔFosB regulates glutamate receptor signaling and dendritic spine morphology in animal models. This experimental study compared the effects of electroacupuncture (EA) at acupoints LI4 and LI11 with those of another potentially beneficial intervention, gabapentin (GBP), alone or in combination, on reinstatement of cocaine-induced conditioned place preference (CPP) and levels of ΔFosB and glutamate receptor subunit 2 (GluR2) expression in the nucleus accumbens (NAc). EA at LI4 and LI11 significantly prevented cue-induced cocaine CPP reinstatement, whereas needle insertion without electrical stimulation at these acupoints had no such effect. EA also significantly attenuated cocaine-induced increases in ΔFosB and GluR2 expression in the NAc. Unexpectedly, these effects were reversed when GBP was combined with EA. Treatment with EA at LI4 and LI11 prevented cocaine-induced increases in dendritic spine density in the NAc core and shell. Our results suggest that EA at LI4 and LI11 may prevent cocaine relapse by modulating ΔFosB and GluR2 expression, as well as dendritic spine density.

The effects of cytochrome P450 2D6 inhibitors on a high-dose tramadol taper for medically supervised opioid withdrawal: a retrospective chart review

Background: Tramadol is used off-label for medically supervised opioid withdrawal. Tramadol is metabolized by CYP2D6 to an active metabolite with significantly more pharmacologic activity compared to the parent compound.Objectives: The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of CYP2D6 inhibitors on patient response to a tramadol taper for medically supervised opioid withdrawal.Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients who received a tramadol taper for medically supervised opioid withdrawal was conducted comparing patients who received concomitant moderate-to-strong CYP2D6 inhibitors to patients without concomitant therapy. The primary outcome was the change in Clinical Institute Narcotic Assessment (CINA) scores from baseline to discharge. Secondary outcomes included area under the curve of CINA scores over time, additional CINA outcomes, length of stay, and readmissions.Results: Of 100 charts reviewed, 30 patients received a concomitant moderate-to-strong CYP2D6 inhibitor. There were no statistically significant differences between the baseline demographics of the two groups. Change from baseline CINA to discharge did not differ significantly between the Non-2D6 group and the 2D6 group (-4.0 ± 3.83 and -4.5 ± 4.48 respectively; p = 0.606). The average CINA score for nausea and vomiting was significantly higher in the Non-2D6 group compared to the 2D6 group (0.34 ± 0.35 and 0.18 ± 0.33 respectively; p = 0.019). Otherwise there were no significant differences found in any secondary outcomes.Conclusions: Based on these results, moderate-to-strong CYP2D6 inhibitors do not appear to have a significant impact on the withdrawal course for patients treated with a high-dose tramadol taper.

Review: Does Gabapentin Relieve Opioids, Cannabis and Methamphetamines Addictions?

The study reviews the suitability of using Gabapentin for treating opioid, cannabis and methamphetamine use disorders. This revision consists of 61 biographical references based on a PubMed database search (January of 1983-May of 2018). Gabapentin displayed respectively 50% and 66.7% of success for treating methamphetamine dependence and opioid withdrawal symptoms. Furthermore, a few research studies have reported Gabapentin´s efficacy for alleviating cannabis dependence (two studies), and cannabis withdrawal symptoms (one study). Similarly, a single study reported Gabapentin reduction of opioid consumption during the detoxification process. Based on the revision, we can conclude that: (a) Gabapentin is useful for treating opioid withdrawal symptoms, (b) additional studies are necessary for elucidating the effectiveness of Gabapentin for treating methamphetamine dependence, cannabis dependence and its withdrawal symptoms, and (c) more studies are necessary to confirm the efficacy of Gabapentin in reducing opioid consumption during detoxification.

Comparison of Buprenorphine and Buprenorphine/naloxone in Detoxification of Opioid-dependent Men

Background

Buprenorphine sublingual tablets are now available in Iran for opioid detoxification in clinics. Aim of the present study was to compare the efficiency of buprenorphine with buprenorphine/naloxone in short-term detoxification in a group of Iranian male opioid-dependent patients.

Methods

A double-blind trial was carried out on a group of male opioid dependent patients in a psychiatric hospital in Kerman, Iran, during year 2017. A group of 100 men who met the diagnostic criteria for opiate dependence were included in the study from individuals who had referred for detoxification. They were allocated to the two groups receiving either buprenorphine (n = 51) or buprenorphine/naloxone (n = 49). Severity of withdrawal symptoms and signs were evaluated by Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) and Adjective Rating Scale for Withdrawal (ARSW).

Findings

The mean scores of COWS and ARSW in the two groups treated with buprenorphine and buprenorphine/naloxone significantly reduced from the first day to the fifth day of detoxification (P < 0.050). Moreover, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of objective and subjective symptom reduction (P > 0.050).

Conclusion

Buprenorphine/naloxone is as effective as buprenorphine in controlling opiate withdrawal symptoms.

Use of Gabapentin in the Treatment of Substance Use and Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review

Objective: Gabapentin (GBP) is an anticonvulsant medication that is also used to treat restless legs syndrome (RLS) and posttherapeutic neuralgia. GBP is commonly prescribed off-label for psychiatric disorders despite the lack of strong evidence. However, there is growing evidence that GBP may be effective and clinically beneficial in both psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders. This review aimed to perform a systematic analysis of peer-reviewed published literature on the efficacy of GBP in the treatment of psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders. Methods: This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE literature databases were screened and filtered by using specific search terms and inclusion/exclusion criteria. The full texts of selected studies were subsequently retrieved and reviewed. The search terms generated 2,604 results from the databases. After excluding all duplicates, 1,088 citations were left. Thereafter, we applied inclusion and exclusion criteria; a total of 54 papers were retained for detailed review. Results: This literature review concludes that GBP appears to be effective in the treatment of various forms of anxiety disorders. It shows some effectiveness in bipolar disorder as an adjunctive therapeutic agent, while the evidence for monotherapy is inconclusive. In substance use disorders, GBP is effective for acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) with mild to moderate severity; it reduces cravings, improves the rate of abstinence, and delays return to heavy drinking. GBP may have some therapeutic potential in the treatment of opioid addiction and cannabis dependence, but there is limited evidence to support its use. No significant benefit of GBP has been conclusively observed in the treatment of OCD, PTSD, depression, or cocaine and amphetamine abuse. Conclusion: GBP appears to be effective in some forms of anxiety disorders such as preoperative anxiety, anxiety in breast cancer survivors, and social phobia. GBP has shown to be safe and effective in the treatment of alcohol dependence. However, the literature suggests that GBP is effective as an adjunctive medication rather than a monotherapy. More clinical trials with larger patient populations are needed to support gabapentin's off-label use in psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders. It is worth noting that numerous clinical studies that are discussed in this review are open-label trials, which are inherently less rigorously analyzed. Therefore, more extensive investigations are required to examine not only the efficacy of GBP, but also its safety and tolerance.

Pharmacological therapies for management of opium withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Pharmacologic therapies for management of heroin withdrawal have been studied and reviewed widely. Opium dependence is generally associated with less severe dependence and milder withdrawal symptoms than heroin. The evidence on withdrawal management of heroin might therefore not be exactly applicable for opium.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of various pharmacologic therapies for the management of the acute phase of opium withdrawal.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to September 2017: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, regional and national databases (IMEMR, Iranmedex, and IranPsych), main electronic sources of ongoing trials, and reference lists of all relevant papers. In addition, we contacted known investigators to obtain missing data or incomplete trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled clinical trials and randomised controlled trials on pharmacological therapies, compared with no intervention, placebo, other pharmacologic treatments, different doses of the same drug, and psychosocial intervention, to manage acute withdrawal from opium in a maximum duration of 30 days.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials involving 1096 participants. No pooled analysis was possible. Studies were carried out in three countries, Iran, India, and Thailand, in outpatient and inpatient settings. The quality of the evidence was generally very low.When the mean of withdrawal symptoms was provided for several days, we mainly focused on day 3. The reason for this was that the highest severity of opium withdrawal is in the second to fourth day.Comparing different pharmacological treatments with each other, clonidine was twice as good as methadone for completion of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.69 to 2.38; 361 participants, 1 study, low-quality evidence). All the other results showed no differences between the considered drugs: baclofen versus clonidine (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.80; 66 participants, 1 study, very low-quality evidence); clonidine versus clonidine plus amantadine (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.24; 69 participants, 1 study); clonidine versus buprenorphine in an inpatient setting (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20; 1 study, 35 participants, very low-quality evidence); methadone versus tramadol (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.37; 1 study, 72 participants, very low-quality evidence); methadone versus methadone plus gabapentin (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.43; 1 study, 40 participants, low-quality evidence), and tincture of opium versus methadone (1 study, 74 participants, low-quality evidence).Comparing different pharmacological treatments with each other, adding amantadine to clonidine decreased withdrawal scores rated at day 3 (mean difference (MD) -3.56, 95% CI -5.97 to -1.15; 1 study, 60 participants, very low-quality evidence). Comparing clonidine with buprenorphine in an inpatient setting, we found no difference in withdrawal symptoms rated by a physician (MD -1.40, 95% CI -2.93 to 0.13; 1 study, 34 participants, very low-quality evidence), and results in favour of buprenorpine when rated by participants (MD -11.80, 95% CI -15.56 to -8.04). Buprenorphine was superior to clonidine in controlling severe withdrawal symptoms in an outpatient setting (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64; 1 study, 76 participants). We found no difference in the comparison of methadone versus tramadol (MD 0.04, 95% CI -2.68 to 2.76; 1 study, 72 participants) and in the comparison of methadone versus methadone plus gabapentin (MD -2.20, 95% CI -6.72 to 2.32; 1 study, 40 participants).Comparing clonidine versus buprenorphine in an outpatient setting, more adverse effects were reported in the clonidine group (1 study, 76 participants). Higher numbers of participants in the clonidine group experienced hypotension at days 5 to 8, headache at days 1 to 8, sedation at days 5 to 8, dizziness and dry mouth at days 1 to 10, and nausea at days 1 to 9. Sweating was reported in a significantly higher number of participants in the buprenorphine group at days 1 to 10. We found no difference between groups for all the other comparisons considering this outcome.Comparing different dosages of the same pharmacological detoxification treatment, a high dose of clonidine (1 to 1.2 mg/day) did not differ from a low dose of clonidine (0.5 to 0.6 mg/day) in completion of treatment in an inpatient setting (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.19; 1 study, 68 participants), however a higher number of participants with hypotension was reported in the high-dose group (RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.77 to 5.98). Gradual reduction of methadone was associated with more adverse effects than abrupt withdrawal of methadone (RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.02 to 4.94; 1 study, 20 participants, very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Results did not support using any specific pharmacological approach for the management of opium withdrawal due to generally very low-quality evidence and small or no differences between treatments. However, it seems that opium withdrawal symptoms are significant, especially at days 2 to 4 after discontinuation of opium. All of the assessed medications might be useful in alleviating symptoms. Those who receive clonidine might experience hypotension.

Gabapentin for the treatment of alcohol use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol misuse is the fifth leading risk factor for premature death and disability worldwide. Fewer than 10% of afflicted Americans receive pharmacological treatment for alcohol use disorder. Gabapentin is a calcium channel GABAergic modulator that is widely used for pain. Studies showing reduced drinking and decreased craving and alcohol-related disturbances in sleep and affect in the months following alcohol cessation suggest therapeutic potential for alcohol use disorder. Areas covered: Human laboratory and clinical studies assessing gabapentin for alcohol use disorder are reviewed. Data were obtained by searching for English peer-reviewed articles on PubMed, reference lists of identified articles, and trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov. Additionally, the mechanism of action of gabapentin specific to alcohol use disorder, and studies of gabapentin for alcohol withdrawal and non-alcohol substance use disorders are summarized. Expert opinion: Alcohol use disorder represents a challenge and large, unmet medical need. Evidence from single-site studies lend support to the safety and efficacy of gabapentin as a novel treatment for alcohol use disorder, with unique benefits for alcohol-related insomnia and negative affect, relative to available treatments. Proprietary gabapentin delivery systems may open a path to pivotal trials and registration of gabapentin as a novel treatment for alcohol use disorder.

Efficacy of Tramadol Extended-Release for Opioid Withdrawal: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a significant public health problem. Supervised withdrawal (ie, detoxification) from opioids using clonidine or buprenorphine hydrochloride is a widely used treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether tramadol hydrochloride extended-release (ER), an approved analgesic with opioid and nonopioid mechanisms of action and low abuse potential, is effective for use in supervised withdrawal settings.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomized clinical trial was conducted in a residential research setting with 103 participants with OUD. Participants' treatment was stabilized with morphine, 30 mg, administered subcutaneously 4 times daily. A 7-day taper using clonidine (n = 36), tramadol ER (n = 36), or buprenorphine (n = 31) was then instituted, and patients were crossed-over to double-blind placebo during a post-taper period. The study was conducted from October 25, 2010, to June 23, 2015.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Retention, withdrawal symptom management, concomitant medication utilization, and naltrexone induction. Results were analyzed over time and using area under the curve for the intention-to-treat and completer groups.

RESULTS

Of the 103 participants, 88 (85.4%) were men and 43 (41.7%) were white; mean (SD) age was 28.9 (10.4) years. Buprenorphine participants (28 [90.3%]) were significantly more likely to be retained at the end of the taper compared with clonidine participants (22 [61.1%]); tramadol ER retention was intermediate and did not differ significantly from that of the other groups (26 [72.2%]; χ2 = 8.5, P = .01). Time-course analyses of withdrawal revealed significant effects of phase (taper, post taper) for the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score (taper mean, 5.19 [SE, .26]; post-taper mean, 3.97 [SE, .23]; F2,170 = 3.6, P = .03) and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) score (taper mean,8.81 [SE, .40]; post-taper mean, 4.14 [SE, .30]; F2,170 = 15.7, P < .001), but no group effects or group × phase interactions. Analyses of area under the curve of SOWS total scores showed significant reductions (F2,159 = 17.7, P < .001) in withdrawal severity between the taper and post-taper periods for clonidine (taper mean, 13.1; post-taper mean, 3.2; P < .001) and tramadol ER (taper mean, 7.4; post-taper mean, 2.8; P = .03), but not buprenorphine (taper mean, 6.4; post-taper mean, 7.4). Use of concomitant medication increased significantly (F2,159 = 30.7,  P < .001) from stabilization to taper in the clonidine (stabilization mean, 0.64 [SE, .05]; taper mean, 1.54 [SE, .10]; P < .001) and tramadol ER (stabilization mean, 0.53 [SE, .05]; taper mean, 1.19 [SE, .09]; P = .003) groups and from stabilization to post taper in the buprenorphine group (stabilization mean, 0.46 [SE, .05] post-taper mean, 1.17 [SE, .09]; P = .006), suggesting higher withdrawal for those groups during those periods. Naltrexone initiation was voluntary and the percentage of participants choosing naltrexone therapy within the clonidine (8 [22.2%]), tramadol ER (7 [19.4%]), or buprenorphine (3 [9.7%]) groups did not differ significantly (χ2 = 2.5, P = .29).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The results of this trial suggest that tramadol ER is more effective than clonidine and comparable to buprenorphine in reducing opioid withdrawal symptoms during a residential tapering program. Data support further examination of tramadol ER as a method to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01188421.

A Decade of Gabapentinoid Misuse: An Analysis of the European Medicines Agency's 'Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions' Database

INTRODUCTION

The gabapentinoids pregabalin and gabapentin are being increasingly prescribed for a range of clinical conditions. Recently, although gabapentinoids at therapeutic dosages may present with low addictive liability levels, cases of misuse and rising numbers of related fatalities have been reported.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to identify and assess cases of gabapentinoid misuse or dependence as reported to the European Medicines Agency's EudraVigilance database, to identify the magnitude of this problem and the characteristics of these reactions.

METHODS

All spontaneous reports of both gabapentin- (2004-2015) and pregabalin- (2006-2015) related misuse/abuse/dependence were retrieved. A descriptive analysis by source, sex, age, and type of report was performed.

RESULTS

From the EudraVigilance database 7639 (6.6 % of a total of 115,616) and 4301 (4.8 % of 90,166) adverse drug reaction reports of misuse/abuse/dependence were, respectively, associated with pregabalin and gabapentin, with an overall reporting frequency increasing over time. For both molecules, subjects typically involved were female adults. A total of 27 and 86 fatalities, respectively, associated with pregabalin and gabapentin, and mostly in combination with opioids, were identified. Analysis of proportional reporting ratios for drug abuse/dependence/intentional product misuse values seem to indicate that these adverse drug reactions were more frequently reported for pregabalin (1.25, 1.39, and 1.58, respectively) compared with gabapentin.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite data collection/methodological approach limitations, the present data seem to suggest that gabapentinoid misuse may be a cause for concern, especially in patients with a history of substance misuse. Hence, healthcare professionals should be vigilant when prescribing these molecules.