MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Agonist substitution for high‐dose benzodiazepine‐dependent patients: let us not forget the importance of flumazenil

2011· letter· en· W1831658948 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fabio Lugoboni, Marco Faccini, Gianluca Quaglio, Rebecca Casari, Anna Albiero, Benedetta Pajusco

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClonazepamBenzodiazepineLorazepamFlumazenilAlprazolamMedicineAnesthesiaDiazepamAgonistPharmacologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We read with great attention the paper by Liebrenz et al. about the potential use of an agonist substitution with long-half-life benzodiazepines (BZD) in cases of high-dose BZD dependence [1]. We would like to contribute to this debate, because in our hospital in-patient unit, BZD represent the main reason for people seeking detoxification. We fully agree about the difference between the liability of BZD having a fast- versus slower-onset of action. Lormetazepam, lorazepam and alprazolam (available world-wide, except for lormetazepam which is not approved for sale in the United States and Canada) represent 81% of the BZD abused by our patients, while clonazepam, clobazam and ketazolam (three drugs eligible as possible substitutes) represent fewer than 1% of the recovered cases. Liebrenz et al. did not discuss the slow infusion of flumazenil (FLU-I) [2–5] as one of the fastest and most effective treatments for BZD high abuse [4,5]. In our 8-year experience with FLU-I we have treated 294 severe BZD-dependent patients (median daily BZD dose was 14-fold greater than the maximum recommended dose). Patients usually immediately stop using the abused BZD and move rapidly to low doses of clonazepam in 3 days and then no BZD on day 4. FLU-I (1–2 mg/24 h) starts on day 1 and lasts up to discharge at days 8–10. For patients eligible for an agonist substitution, the most suitable dose (usually about 1–2 mg of clonazepam) can be reached rapidly and stopped after patient discharge. Although we have not submitted our results to peer review, we are able to state that no patients have dropped out of treatment during hospitalization and preliminary data suggests promising results, although these will need to be confirmed through peer-reviewed research publications. One of the more critical aspects of Liebrenz et al. agonist substitution method resides, in our opinion, in the starting phase, when it is difficult to keep patients in treatment by proposing substitution with a slow-onset BZD (subjects are normally taking very high doses of BZD, mainly of the fast-onset action type, and many of the patients are also polydrug users). The receptor resensibilization obtained with 4–6 days of FLU-I allows patients to experience a good therapeutic effect with very small doses of low-power BZD, without significant withdrawal symptoms. Nevertheless, we should clarify that for the majority of patients being treated with FLU-I, the real aim is total abstinence from BZD. None.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207