Impairment due to intake of carisoprodol

Driving under the influence of cocaine and MDMA: Relationship between blood concentrations and results from clinical test of impairment

The general use of cocaine is increasing in recent years, while the trend for 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) is less clear. The relationship between blood concentrations and impairment is poorly understood, which complicates interpretation. The aims of this study were to report prevalence and blood concentrations of cocaine and MDMA in drugged drivers, and to investigate the relationship between blood concentrations and impairment. Samples of whole blood were collected from apprehended drivers in the period 2000-2022, and a clinical test of impairment (CTI) was simultaneously performed. The samples were initially analyzed for cocaine and MDMA using gas chromatography mass spectrometry (until 2009 and 2012, respectively), and later using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Overall, cocaine was detected in 2,331 cases and MDMA in 2,569 cases. There were 377 and 85 mono cases of cocaine and MDMA, respectively. In the mono cases, the median cocaine concentration was 0.09 mg/L (range: 0.02-1.15 mg/L), and 54% of the drivers were clinically impaired. The median MDMA concentration was 0.19 mg/L (range: 0.04-1.36 mg/L), and 38% were clinically impaired. There was a statistically significant difference in the median cocaine concentration between drivers assessed as not impaired (0.07 mg/L) and drivers assessed as impaired (0.10 mg/L) (P = 0.009). There was also a significant effect of the blood concentration of cocaine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 6.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13-36.53, P = 0.036) and driving during the evening/night-time (aOR = 2.17, 95% CI = 1.34-3.51, P = 0.002) on the probability of being assessed as impaired on the CTI. No significant differences were found for MDMA. Many drivers are not assessed as impaired on a CTI following cocaine or especially MDMA use. For cocaine, a relationship between blood concentrations and impairment was demonstrated, but this could not be shown for MDMA.

Pain management considerations in patients living with both pain syndromes and cardiovascular diseases and disorders

Concomitant pain syndromes and cardiovascular disease (CVD) and disorders are associated with significant morbidity, impaired quality of life, and neuropsychiatric disorders. There is an interplay between the mechanisms of pathophysiology of both CVD and pain syndromes. Patients with CVD (and/or disorders) as well as pain syndromes have an increased propensity for drug-drug/disease interactions. Therefore, an understanding of how to use pharmacotherapy to treat pain syndromes, in the context of patients who have diagnoses of CVD and/or disorders, is paramount to patients' success in achieving adequate pain control and appropriately managing CVD and/or disorders, all while decreasing the risk of adverse events (AEs) both from pharmacotherapy to treat pain and CVD (and/or disorders). Based on the appraisal of literature and authors' clinical expertise, it was determined that gabapentinoids, opioids, skeletal muscle relaxants, tricyclic antidepressants, clonidine, serotonin norepinephrine-reuptake inhibitors, dronabinol, carbamazepine, second-generation antipsychotics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, aspirin, corticosteroids, and topical anesthetics have the most evidence for use in patients with CVD and/or disorders. However, the literature surrounding the use of pharmacotherapy for pain management is limited to retrospective studies and there is a lack of well-designed, prospective, randomized trials; this also includes head-to-head comparator studies. Unlike many CVD-related pharmacotherapy studies, data studying pain management in patients with CVD lacks standardized outcomes that are consistent among the pool of data. Overall, the decision to prescribe specific pain management therapies in patients with CVD and/or disorders should include assessment of pain severity, type of pain, drug-drug/disease interactions, adjuvant therapies required, and the risk or presence of AEs.

Carisoprodol Single and Multiple Dose PK-PD. Part II: Pharmacodynamics Evaluation Method for Central Muscle Relaxants. Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial in Healthy Volunteers

Centrally acting skeletal muscle relaxants (CMR) such as carisoprodol are used to treat acute, painful musculoskeletal conditions, though its precise mode of action has not been characterized. A double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial was designed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics–pharmacodynamics (PKPD) of CMR after single (350 mg), double (700 mg), and multiple doses (up to 350 mg/8 h, 14 days) of carisoprodol. Muscular (Electromyogram–EMG, muscular strength dynamometry), central (sedation), and tolerability (psychomotor activity test, adverse events) parameters, as well as withdrawal symptoms, were evaluated. Thirteen healthy volunteers were enrolled. No evidence of direct muscle relaxation was evidenced, but some differences on sedation were evidenced throughout the study, suggesting that CMRs act, at least partly, through sedation. Most significant differences were detected at 1.5 h after dosing. The effect on psychomotor impairment was variable, most prominently after 1.5 h, too, suggesting that it is produced by carisoprodol rather than by meprobamate. No withdrawal symptoms were detected, so the risk of dependence following maximum doses and duration of treatment recommended, and under medical supervision, should be low.

A Single Amino Acid Residue at Transmembrane Domain 4 of the α Subunit Influences Carisoprodol Direct Gating Efficacy at GABAA Receptors

The muscle relaxant carisoprodol has recently been controlled at the federal level as a Schedule IV drug due to its high abuse potential and consequences of misuse, such as withdrawal syndrome, delusions, seizures, and even death. Recent work has shown that carisoprodol can directly gate and allosterically modulate the type A GABA (GABA_A) receptor. These actions are subunit-dependent; compared with other GABA_A receptors, carisoprodol has nominal direct gating effects in α3β2γ2 receptors. Here, using site-directed mutagenesis and whole-cell patch-clamp electrophysiology in transiently transfected human embryonic kidney 293 cells, we examined the role of GABA_A receptor α subunit transmembrane domain 4 (TM4) amino acids in direct gating and allosteric modulatory actions of carisoprodol. Mutation of α3 valine at position 440 to leucine (present in the equivalent position in the α1 subunit) significantly increased the direct gating effects of carisoprodol without affecting its allosteric modulatory effects. The corresponding reverse mutation, α1(L415V), decreased carisoprodol direct gating potency and efficacy. Analysis of a series of amino acid mutations at the 415 position demonstrated that amino acid volume correlated positively with carisoprodol efficacy, whereas polarity inversely correlated with carisoprodol efficacy. We conclude that α1(415) of TM4 is involved in the direct gating, but not allosteric modulatory, actions of carisoprodol. In addition, the orientation of alkyl or hydroxyl groups at this position influences direct gating effects. These findings support the likelihood that the direct gating and allosteric modulatory effects of carisoprodol are mediated via distinct binding sites.

Impact of Expanding ELISA Screening in DUID Investigations to Include Carisoprodol/Meprobamate and Zolpidem

In 2013, the National Safety Council's Alcohol Drugs and Impairment Division added zolpidem and carisoprodol and its metabolite meprobamate to the list of Tier 1 drugs that should be tested for in all suspected drug impaired driving and motor vehicle fatality investigations. We describe the validation of an enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) for both drugs in whole blood, and the utilization of the ELISA to assess their positivity in a sample of 322 suspected impaired driving cases that was retrospectively screened using the validated assays. The occurrence of carisoprodol/meprobamate was found to be 1.2%, and for zolpidem, 1.6%. In addition, we analyzed a large dataset (n = 1,672) of Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) test results from a laboratory performing high volume DUID testing to assess the frequency of detection of both drugs after implementing the expanded NSC scope. Carisoprodol or meprobamate were found positive in 5.9% (n = 99) of these samples, while zolpidem was found positive in 5.3% (n = 89) in drivers who in many cases had been found to be negative for other drugs. Carisoprodol and zolpidem are both potent CNS depressants and are appropriate additions to the recommended NSC scope of testing.

Mass spectrometric analysis of carisoprodol and meprobamate in rat brain microdialysates

We report the evaluation of several mass spectrometry-based methods for the determination of carisoprodol and meprobamate in samples obtained from the rat brain by in vivo intracranial microdialyis. Among the techniques that aspire to perform analyses without chromatographic separation and thereby increase throughput, chip-based nanoelectrospray ionization and the use of an atmospheric pressure solids analysis probe fell short of requirements because of insufficient detection sensitivity and hard ionization, respectively. Although direct analysis in real time provided the required soft ionization, shortcomings of a tandem mass spectrometry-based assay also included inadequate detection sensitivity and, in addition, poor quantitative reproducibility. Therefore, liquid chromatography coupled with atmospheric pressure chemical ionization tandem mass spectrometry was developed to determine carisoprodol and meprobamate from artificial cerebrospinal fluid as the medium. No desalting and/or extraction of the samples was necessary. The assay, combined with in vivo sampling via intracranial microdialyis, afforded time-resolved concentration profiles for the drug and its major metabolite from the nucleus accumbens region of the brain in rats after systemic administration of carisoprodol. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Assessment of direct gating and allosteric modulatory effects of meprobamate in recombinant GABA(A) receptors

Meprobamate is a schedule IV anxiolytic and the primary metabolite of the muscle relaxant carisoprodol. Meprobamate modulates GABAA (γ-aminobutyric acid Type A) receptors, and has barbiturate-like activity. To gain insight into its actions, we have conducted a series of studies using recombinant GABAA receptors. In αxβzγ2 GABAA receptors (where x=1-6 and z=1-3), the ability to enhance GABA-mediated current was evident for all α subunit isoforms, with the largest effect observed in α5-expressing receptors. Direct gating was present with all α subunits, although attenuated in α3-expressing receptors. Allosteric and direct effects were comparable in α1β1γ2 and α1β2γ2 receptors, whereas allosteric effects were enhanced in α1β2 compared to α1β2γ2 receptors. In "extrasynaptic" (α1β3δ and α4β3δ) receptors, meprobamate enhanced EC20 and saturating GABA currents, and directly activated these receptors. The barbiturate antagonist bemegride attenuated direct effects of meprobamate. Whereas pentobarbital directly gated homomeric β3 receptors, meprobamate did not, and instead blocked the spontaneously open current present in these receptors. In wild type homomeric ρ1 receptors, pentobarbital and meprobamate were ineffective in direct gating; a mutation known to confer sensitivity to pentobarbital did not confer sensitivity to meprobamate. Our results provide insight into the actions of meprobamate and parent therapeutic agents such as carisoprodol. Whereas in general actions of meprobamate were comparable to those of carisoprodol, differential effects of meprobamate at some receptor subtypes suggest potential advantages of meprobamate may be exploited. A re-assessment of previously synthesized meprobamate-related carbamate molecules for myorelaxant and other therapeutic indications is warranted.

Assessment of subunit-dependent direct gating and allosteric modulatory effects of carisoprodol at GABA(A) receptors

Carisoprodol is a widely prescribed muscle relaxant, abuse of which has grown considerably in recent years. It directly activates and allosterically modulates α1β2γ2 GABAARs, although the site(s) of action are unknown. To gain insight into the actions of carisoprodol, subunit-dependent effects of this drug were assessed. Whole-cell patch clamp recordings were obtained from HEK293 cells expressing α1β2, α1β3 or αxβzγ2 (where x = 1-6 and z = 1-3) GABAARs, and in receptors incorporating the δ subunit (modeling extrasynaptic receptors). The ability to directly gate and allosterically potentiate GABA-gated currents was observed for all configurations. Presence or absence of the γ2 subunit did not affect the ability of carisoprodol to directly gate or allosterically modulate the receptor. Presence of the β1 subunit conferred highest efficacy for direct activation relative to maximum GABA currents, while presence of the β2 subunit conferred highest efficacy for allosteric modulation of the GABA response. With regard to α subunits, carisoprodol was most efficacious at enhancing the actions of GABA in receptors incorporating the α1 subunit. The ability to directly gate the receptor was generally comparable regardless of the α subunit isoform, although receptors incorporating the α3 subunit showed significantly reduced direct gating efficacy and affinity. In extrasynaptic (α1β3δ and α4β3δ) receptors, carisoprodol had greater efficacy than GABA as a direct gating agonist. In addition, carisoprodol allosterically potentiated both EC20 and saturating GABA concentrations in these receptors. In assessing voltage-dependence, we found direct gating and inhibitory effects were insensitive to membrane voltage, whereas allosteric modulatory effects were affected by membrane voltage. Our findings demonstrate direct and allosteric effects of carisoprodol at synaptic and extrasynpatic GABAARs and that subunit isoform influences these effects.

Factors affecting carisoprodol metabolism in pain patients using urinary excretion data

Carisoprodol is a skeletal muscle relaxant prescribed to treat pain. Carisoprodol is metabolized to meprobamate, an active metabolite with anxiolytic effects, by the genetically polymorphic CYP2C19 enzyme. Concomitant use of CYP2C19 substrates or inhibitors may alter carisoprodol metabolism, with therapeutic and/or toxic implications for effectively treating patients with pain. This was a retrospective analysis of urinary excretion data collected from patients with pain from March 2008 to May 2011. Carisoprodol and meprobamate urine concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and the metabolic ratio (MR) of meprobamate to carisoprodol concentrations was determined in 14,965 subjects. The MR geometric mean and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the young group (105, 95% CI = 99.1-113) were ∼47.4% higher than the middle-aged group (71.9, 95% CI = 70-73.8) and nearly two times higher than the elderly group (54.4, 95% CI = 51.3-57.6). Females had a 20.7% higher MR compared with males. No significant change in the MR was observed with overall CYP2C19 inhibitor or substrate use. However, evaluation of individual inhibitors showed co-administration with esomeprazole or fluoxetine was associated with a 31.8 and 24.6% reduction in MR, respectively, compared with controls (P < 0.05). Omeprazole did not significantly affect the MR. Patient-specific factors such as age, sex and co-medications may be important considerations for effective carisoprodol therapy.

Medications and impaired driving

OBJECTIVE

To describe the association of specific medication classes with driving outcomes and provide clinical recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published from January 1973 to June 2013 on classes of medications associated with driving impairment. The search included outcome terms such as automobile driving, motor vehicle crash, driving simulator, and road tests.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Only English-language articles that contained findings from observational or interventional designs with ≥ 10 participants were included in this review. Cross-sectional studies, case series, and case reports were excluded.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Driving is an important task and activity for the majority of adults. Some commonly prescribed medications have been associated with driving impairment measured by road performance, driving simulation, and/or motor vehicle crashes. This review of 30 studies identified findings with barbiturates, benzodiazepines, hypnotics, antidepressants, opioid and nonsteroidal analgesics, anticonvulsants, antipsychotics, antiparkinsonian agents, skeletal muscle relaxants, antihistamines, anticholinergic medications, and hypoglycemic agents. Additional studies of medication impact on sedation, sleep latency, and psychomotor function, as well as the role of alcohol, are also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychotropic agents and those with central nervous system side effects were associated with measures of impaired driving performance. It is difficult to determine if such associations are actually a result of medication use or the medical diagnosis itself. Regardless, clinicians should be aware of the increased risk of impaired driving with specific classes of medications, educate their patients, and/or consider safer alternatives.

Carisoprodol: an underrecognized drug of abuse in north India

BACKGROUND

There is limited literature on clinical profile of subjects abusing carisoprodol.

METHODS

Our series of 34 subjects shows that a typical subject was an unmarried, unemployed, urban resident from a nuclear family set up; was a substance abuser before being introduced to carisoprodol by another substance abuser; initiated the use to get a better "kick" and after regular use reported craving and withdrawal symptoms.

RESULTS

The effect of carisoprodol was dose dependent: a majority reported a feeling of general wellbeing on consuming up to three tablets; a hypomanic state with 4-10 tablets and confusion, disorientation and drowsiness with >10 tablets at a time.

CONCLUSION

Thus being an underrecognized drug of abuse, carisoprodol is in need of wider awareness and regulatory measures to prevent its emergence as a greater menace in the future.

Carisoprodol tolerance and precipitated withdrawal

AIMS

Carisoprodol is a muscle relaxant that acts at the GABA(A) receptor. Concerns about the abuse liability of carisoprodol are increasing, but evidence that carisoprodol produces tolerance and a significant withdrawal syndrome has yet to be established. The purpose of the current study was to determine if repeated administration of carisoprodol produces tolerance and withdrawal signs in a mouse model.

METHODS

Carisoprodol (0, 100, 200, 300, or 500 mg/kg bid, i.p.) was administered to Swiss-Webster mice for 4 days and loss-of-righting reflex was measured 20-30 min following each administration. On the fourth day, bemegride (20 mg/kg), flumazenil (20 mg/kg), or vehicle was administered following carisoprodol and withdrawal signs were measured. Separate groups of mice receiving the same treatment regimen and dose range were tested for spontaneous withdrawal at 6, 12 and 24 h after the last dose of carisoprodol.

RESULTS

The righting reflex was dose-dependently impaired following the first administration of carisoprodol. A 75-100% decrease in the magnitude of the impairment occurred over the four days of exposure, indicating the development of tolerance to the carisoprodol-elicited loss-of-righting reflex. Withdrawal signs were not observed within 24h following spontaneous withdrawal; however, bemegride and flumazenil each precipitated withdrawal within 15-30 min of administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Carisoprodol treatment resulted in tolerance and antagonist-precipitated withdrawal, suggesting it may have an addiction potential similar to that of other long-acting benzodiazepine or barbiturate compounds.

Subjective and psychomotor effects of carisoprodol in combination with oxycodone in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

Some chronic pain patients on long-term opioid therapy also take centrally active skeletal muscle relaxants. One of those muscle relaxants is carisoprodol, a drug that is abused and capable of producing impairment. It would be of relevance to characterize the effects of an opioid and carisoprodol when taken together to determine if abuse liability-related measures and psychomotor impairment are increased compared to when the drugs are taken alone.

METHODS

As part of a larger crossover, randomized, double-blind study, we examined the subjective and psychomotor responses of 15 healthy volunteers to four experimental conditions: placebo, 350 mg carisoprodol, 10mg oxycodone, and 350 mg carisoprodol followed 60 min later by 10mg oxycodone (intended to test the interaction of the two drugs when they were producing their maximal effects).

RESULTS

Preliminary data analyses indicated that some of carisoprodol's effects were declining when we tested for drug interactions. Despite this, on some outcome measures in which the drugs alone did not differ from placebo, when tested together subjective effects were increased, including those that were abuse liability-related, and psychomotor performance decreased, relative to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study that we are aware of that has shown that carisoprodol and oxycodone, two drugs that are sometimes co-prescribed for relief of pain, produce effects when administered "together" (i.e., separated by 60 min) that are of greater magnitude than when they are administered alone. Some of the effects were not benign, and are of concern from both abuse liability and public safety standpoints.

Characterizing the subjective and psychomotor effects of carisoprodol in healthy volunteers

Carisoprodol is a centrally acting drug used to relieve skeletal muscle spasms and associated pain in acute musculoskeletal conditions. There is evidence from different sources that this oral muscle relaxant is abused and that it is associated with impairment leading to arrests for "driving under the influence" as well as increased risk of automobile accidents. Its subjective and psychomotor effects in healthy volunteers at therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses have not been well-characterized, and form the basis of this report. Fifteen healthy volunteers (8 males, 7 females) were administered 0, 350, and 700 mg of carisoprodol in separate sessions and for 6h afterwards they completed a battery of tests at fixed time intervals so as to assess the subjective and psychomotor effects of the drug. The supratherapeutic dose, 700 mg, increased visual analog scale ratings of terms that were more reflective of sedation (e.g., "sleepy," "heavy, sluggish feeling") than those of abuse liability, and produced impaired performance on several psychomotor tests. The therapeutic dose, 350 mg, while producing few and mild subjective effects, still produced psychomotor impairment. The fact that the therapeutic dose of carisoprodol produced minimal subjective effects while adversely affecting performance is of concern in that patients prescribed this drug may feel relatively normal and engage in tasks (driving) that could put themselves and others at risk.

Impairment due to cannabis and ethanol: clinical signs and additive effects

AIMS

Studies have shown that the impairing effects of Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are dose-related. Cannabis intake increases the risk of traffic accidents. The purpose of this study was to see how different clinical tests and observations were related to blood THC concentrations and to determine whether the combined influence of THC and ethanol was different from either drug alone.

DESIGN

A retrospective cross-sectional forensic database study.

SETTING

Drivers apprehended by the police suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol and other drugs.

PARTICIPANTS

We investigated 589 cases positive for THC only. In addition, 894 cases with THC and ethanol were included. A comparison was made with 3480 drivers with only ethanol in their blood and 79 drivers who tested negative.

MEASUREMENTS

Data were analytical results of blood samples and the 27 clinical tests and observations included in the Norwegian clinical test for impairment (CTI).

FINDINGS

No relationship was found between blood THC concentration and most of the CTI tests. Blood THC concentration was, however, related to conjunctival injection, pupil dilation and reaction to light and to the overall risk of being judged impaired. When THC and ethanol were detected together the risk of being judged impaired was increased markedly.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that cannabis impairs driving ability in a concentration-related manner. The effect is smaller than for ethanol. The effect of ethanol and cannabis taken simultaneously is additive. Conjunctival injection, dilated pupils and slow pupil reaction are among the few signs to reveal THC influence.

Impairment related to blood drug concentrations of zopiclone and zolpidem compared to alcohol in apprehended drivers

BACKGROUND

About 3-7% of the adult population receives prescribed hypnotics. The benzodiazepine-like hypnotics, zopiclone and zolpidem, are the most commonly prescribed and may cause traffic-relevant impairment similar to that found for benzodiazepines. We investigated the relationship between blood zopiclone and zolpidem concentrations and driving impairment, as assessed by the clinical test for impairment. We compared these groups of drivers to a group suspected of alcohol-related impairment.

METHODS

Blood samples from suspected impaired drivers during 2000-2007, screened for approximately 25 possible impairing drugs with only one single drug detected, were studied in relation to the assessment of impairment. The 79 zopiclone positive drivers, the 43 zolpidem positive drivers, and the 3480 alcohol positive drivers were divided into groups depending on blood drug concentrations.

RESULTS/DISCUSSION

The proportion of drivers judged as impaired tended to increase the higher the blood zopiclone concentrations. Such a positive relationship was not found for zolpidem. For alcohol the proportion of impaired drivers was significantly related to blood alcohol concentrations (BACs). There were few drivers with low zopiclone or zolpidem concentrations included, which may have obscured any positive significant relationship. The percentage of impaired drivers among drivers with blood zopiclone concentrations above 130 microg/l roughly corresponded to the percentage of impaired drivers among drivers with BACs higher than 0.1%.

Carisoprodol-mediated modulation of GABAA receptors: in vitro and in vivo studies

Carisoprodol is a frequently prescribed muscle relaxant. In recent years, this drug has been increasingly abused. The effects of carisoprodol have been attributed to its metabolite, meprobamate, a controlled substance that produces sedation via GABA(A) receptors (GABA(A)Rs). Given the structural similarities between carisoprodol and meprobamate, we used electrophysiological and behavioral approaches to investigate whether carisoprodol directly affects GABA(A)R function. In whole-cell patch-clamp studies, carisoprodol allosterically modulated and directly activated human alpha1beta2gamma2 GABA(A)R function in a barbiturate-like manner. At millimolar concentrations, inhibitory effects were apparent. Similar allosteric effects were not observed for homomeric rho1 GABA or glycine alpha1 receptors. In the absence of GABA, carisoprodol produced picrotoxin-sensitive, inward currents that were significantly larger than those produced by meprobamate, suggesting carisoprodol may directly produce GABAergic effects in vivo. When administered to mice via intraperitoneal or oral routes, carisoprodol elicited locomotor depression within 8 to 12 min after injection. Intraperitoneal administration of meprobamate depressed locomotor activity in the same time frame. In drug discrimination studies with carisoprodol-trained rats, the GABAergic ligands pentobarbital, chlordiazepoxide, and meprobamate each substituted for carisoprodol in a dose-dependent manner. In accordance with findings in vitro, the discriminative stimulus effects of carisoprodol were antagonized by a barbiturate antagonist, bemegride, but not by the benzodiazepine site antagonist, flumazenil. The results of our studies in vivo and in vitro collectively suggest the barbiturate-like effects of carisoprodol may not be due solely to its metabolite, meprobamate. Furthermore, the functional traits we have identified probably contribute to the abuse potential of carisoprodol.

Is the frequency of carisoprodol withdrawal syndrome increasing?

Carisoprodol is a commonly used centrally acting muscle relaxant. A number of case reports have suggested that the drug may have abuse potential, presumably because it is metabolized to the anxiolytic drug, meprobamate, which is a controlled substance at the federal level. Two recent case reports described symptoms of withdrawal after the cessation of carisoprodol. We present two additional cases that support the concept of a withdrawal syndrome with this drug. Symptoms of carisoprodol withdrawal include anxiety, tremulousness, insomnia, jitteriness, muscle twitching, and hallucinations. These symptoms are most likely caused by withdrawal from the meprobamate that accumulates after large amounts of carisoprodol are ingested. Although carisoprodol is not a controlled substance at the federal level, clinicians should be aware of its significant potential for abuse.

The risk of traffic accidents after prescriptions of carisoprodol

OBJECTIVE

Carisoprodol, a drug used for acute lower back pain, may cause psychomotor impairment. We wanted to investigate if patients using carisoprodol had increased risk of being involved in a traffic accident.

METHODS

Data were retrieved from three population-based registries for the period April 2004-September 2005. The Norwegian Prescription Database contained individual information on all dispensed drugs at all pharmacies outside hospitals. The Norwegian Road Accident Registry contained information on all drivers involved in motor vehicle accidents with person injury. The Norwegian Central Population Registry was used to control for emigration or death. The accident incidence among carisoprodol exposed and unexposed subjects was compared by standardized incidence ratio.

RESULTS

Having a prescription for carisoprodol dispensed increased the standardized incidence ratio for being involved in an accident with person injury to 3.7 (95% CI 2.9-4.8) the first week after the date of dispensing. This was similar to diazepam (2.8; 2.2-3.6), but higher than for salbutamol (1.1; 0.6-1.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving carisoprodol seem to have an increased risk of being involved in traffic accidents involving person injury. The study gives support to earlier work published on the impairing effects of carisoprodol.

Neuropsychiatric Effects of Prescription Drug Abuse

Prescription drugs have become a major category of abused substances, and there is evidence that the prevalence of prescription drug abuse may soon overtake that of illicit drugs. Study of prescription drugs has been hampered by vague terminology, since prescription drugs are only separated from other drugs of abuse by social and legal constructs. Reviewed herein is published literature on the abuse of four major categories of abused prescription drugs: sedative-hypnotics, stimulants, anabolic steroids, and anticholinergics. The review emphasizes evidence regarding the effects of these drugs on neural systems. Other abused prescription drugs that fall outside of the major categories are also briefly addressed.

Heroin-using drivers: importance of morphine and morphine-6-glucuronide on late clinical impairment

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between major heroin metabolites (morphine, morphine-6-glucoronide), pattern of drug use, and late impairment of psychomotor functions.

METHODS

From the database of the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, blood morphine concentration in samples from heroin users (n=70) containing only morphine were correlated with results of the clinical test for impairment (CTI). For comparison, test results were explored in individuals without any positive analytical finding in blood samples (n=79) selected from the same database.

RESULTS

In the "no drug" cases, 86% were judged as not impaired and 14% as impaired. In the morphine only cases, 20% were judged as not impaired, and 80% as impaired. Both daily users and non-daily users had the same proportion of impaired cases. Median blood morphine concentration (M) was 0.09 micromol/l in the "not impaired" group and 0.15 micromol/l in the "impaired" group (P=0.067). For morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G), the median blood concentration was 0.09 micromol/l in the "not impaired" group and 0.14 micromol/l in the "impaired" group (P=0.030). A significant correlation between concentration quartiles and number of cases determined as "impaired" was found for M6G (P=0.018) and for the sum M+M6G (P=0.013).

CONCLUSION

In our population of heroin-drugged drivers, blood concentrations of M6G and the sum M+M6G appeared to have concentration-dependent effects on the CNS that may lead to impairment as judged from a CTI. Variations in pattern of use did not seem to have any bearing on the judgement of impairment.

Relationship between THC concentration in blood and impairment in apprehended drivers

OBJECTIVE

The most important psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, Delta (9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is one of the most frequently detected substances in blood samples from suspected impaired drivers in Norway. There is growing concern over possible links between the use of cannabis and increased risk of motor-vehicle crashes. Experimental studies have provided useful information on the role of THC and dose-effect relations with respect to psychomotor performance. The main purpose of the present study was to investigate whether a physician's judgment on impairment in a real-life setting among suspected drugged drivers, was related to blood THC concentration.

METHODS

In Norway a police physician performs a clinical test for impairment (CTI) shortly after apprehension. The Norwegian Institute of Public Health analyze blood samples from all drivers suspected of driving under the influence of non-alcoholic drugs. In the present study 589 samples from approximately 30,000 cases of suspected drug impaired driving from the period 1997-99, contained THC as the only drug. In 456 of these cases a conclusion of the CTI was available.

RESULTS

230 (54%) drivers were considered not impaired and 226 (46%) impaired. Impaired drivers had higher blood THC concentration than the drivers who were judged as not impaired (median; 2.5 ng/mL (range; 0.3-45.3 ng/mL) vs 1.9 ng/mL (range; 0.32-24.8 ng/mL), (p < 0.05). Furthermore, drivers with blood THC concentrations above 3 ng/mL had an increased risk for being judged impaired compared to drivers with lower concentration ranges.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between the concentration of THC in blood and risk of being assessed impaired found in this cross-sectional study of suspected drugged drivers, supports findings from previous experimental studies of concentration related effects of THC on psychomotor performance and driving skills.

Impairment related to blood amphetamine and/or methamphetamine concentrations in suspected drugged drivers

Experimental studies have investigated effects of low oral doses of amphetamine and methamphetamine on psychomotor functions, while less work has been done on effects of high doses taken by abusers in real-life settings. There are indications that intake of high doses may impair traffic related skills, and that abuse of amphetamines may cause hypersomnolence at the end-of-binge. The present study aimed at investigating the concentration-effect relationship between blood amphetamines concentrations and impairment in a population of real-life users. Eight hundred and seventy-eight cases with amphetamine or methamphetamine as the only drugs present in the blood samples were selected from the impaired driver registry at The Norwegian Institute of Public Health. In each case the police physician had concluded on whether the driver was impaired or not. 27% of the drivers were judged as not impaired, while 73% were judged as impaired. There was a positive relationship between blood amphetamines concentrations and impairment. The relationship reached a ceiling at blood amphetamines concentrations of 0.27-0.53 mg/l. Younger drivers were more often judged impaired than older drivers at similar concentrations. Despite the performance enhancing qualities of amphetamines demonstrated in some low dose laboratory experiments; this study revealed a positive relationship between blood amphetamines concentration and traffic related impairment.

Mortality among subjects previously apprehended for driving under the influence of traffic-hazardous medicinal drugs

BACKGROUND

Most studies in the field of impaired driving have focused on the hazards represented by impaired drivers to the rest of society; there has been little follow-up of the drivers themselves. The aim of this study was to establish mortality rates among subjects previously apprehended for driving under the influence of traffic-hazardous medicinal drugs, alone or in combination with alcohol.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of all drivers aged 20-49 years, apprehended in Norway in 1992-1996 and testing positive for traffic-hazardous medicinal drugs in blood, outcome variable: death.

STUDY POPULATION

805 drivers (598 males, 207 females). Mean follow-up period: 6.8 years. Information on deaths was collected from Statistics Norway.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, 139 of the previously apprehended drivers died (110 males, 29 females). The calculated standardised mortality ratio (SMR) was 15.8 (95% CI: 13.0-19.0) for male and 20.0 (95% CI: 13.4-28.7) for female drivers.

CONCLUSIONS

Apprehension on suspicion of driving under the influence of drugs, combined with detection of traffic-hazardous medicinal drugs in the blood, seems to indicate an elevated risk of premature death in the age group 20-49 years. Secondary prevention of continued drug use could save lives in this drug user group.

The CYP2C19 genotype and the use of oral contraceptives influence the pharmacokinetics of carisoprodol in healthy human subjects

AIMS

The aim of the present study was to investigate if subjects with one normal and one non-functional CYP2C19 allele (intermediate metabolizers; IMs) metabolized carisoprodol differently than individuals with two normal CYP2C19 alleles (extensive metabolizers; EMs) We also wanted to investigate whether the use of oral contraceptives influences the metabolism of carisoprodol in EMs and IMs. Impairing effects on psychomotor coordination and feelings of sedation were studied by comparing IMs with EMs following their ingestion of a single dose of 700 mg carisoprodol.

METHODS

Thirty-seven healthy Caucasian volunteers participated in the study, of whom 25 were not using any drugs known to interact with CYP2C19, including two poor metabolizers (PMs) (CYP2C19 *2/*2 or CYP2C19 *2 /*4), 11 IMs (CYP2C19 *1/*2 or CYP2C19 *1/*4) and 12 EMs (CYP2C19 *1/*1); the remaining 12 participants were six EMs and six IMs using oral contraceptives. A single oral dose of 700 mg of carisoprodol was given, and blood drug concentrations were followed for 11 h and 45 min. During this time period, different pharmacodynamic measurements were made.

RESULTS

IMs had a longer elimination half life (T(1/2)) (127 min; 95% confidence interval (CI) 95, 159) than EMs (96 min; 95% CI 84, 107) and a larger area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)) for carisoprodol (16.3 microg h ml(-1) ; 95% CI 11.9, 20.7) than EMs (11.3 microg h ml(-1) ; 95% CI 7.8, 14.8). The use of oral contraceptives was accompanied by larger AUC(0-infinity) for carisoprodol in both EMs (18.5 microg h ml(-1); 95% CI 10.7, 26.3) and IMs (26.0 microg h ml(-1) ; 95% CI 18.8, 33.2). EMs using oral contraceptives also had a longer T(1/2) (117 min; 95% CI 92, 143) and higher maximum carisoprodol concentration than EMs not using oral contraceptives. No significant differences in pharmacodynamic parameters were found between subjects in the different genotype groups or between users and non-users of oral contraceptives.

CONCLUSIONS

Subsequent to a single-dose administration of carisoprodol, the carisoprodol AUC was approximately 45% larger in CYP2C19 IMs than in EMs. The use of oral contraceptives increased the AUC by approximately 60% in both EMs and IMs. Despite these pharmacokinetic effects, no significant differences with respect to the CYP2C19 IM and EM genotypes were observed in the acute impairing effects of a single dose of carisoprodol.

Carisoprodol intoxications and serotonergic features

The symptoms and signs of carisoprodol intoxications do not resemble those caused by its metabolite meprobamate. Meprobamate most probably produces its effects through the GABAergic neurotransmitter system. The signs and symptoms of carisoprodol intoxications, however, are not easily explained by interaction with this neurotransmitter system. In the present study, four cases of carisoprodol intoxications are presented with emphasis on the presence of serotonergic signs and symptoms. All four cases fulfilled three different sets of criteria for the diagnosis of serotonin syndrome. These findings could indicate that an increased serotonin level in the central nervous system could explain some of the symptoms and signs of carisoprodol intoxications. This may have implications for the clinical evaluation and treatment of such intoxications. Since few laboratories routinely screen for carisoprodol it is important to keep this drug in mind when encountering intoxications displaying serotonergic symptoms.