Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33300578›Full record

Trial reportThe international journal of neuropsychopharmacology2021

No Abuse Potential of Silexan in Healthy Recreational Drug Users: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Erich Seifritz, Hans-Jürgen Möller, Hans-Peter Volz, Walter E Müller, Talar Hopyan, Anna Wacker, Sandra Schläfke, Siegfried Kasper

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Erich SeifritzDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Psychiatric Hospital, University of Zürich, Switzerland.
Hans-Jürgen MöllerClinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Hans-Peter VolzHospital for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine Schloss Werneck, Werneck, Germany.
Walter E MüllerDepartment of Pharmacology, Biocenter Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany.
Talar HopyanScientific Affairs-Neuropsychology | Early Phase; Syneos Health, Toronto, Canada.
Anna WackerDr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co. KG, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Sandra SchläfkeDr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co. KG, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Siegfried KasperCenter for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Dr Willmar Schwabe (Germany) · DEBDH-Klinik Hessisch Oldendorf · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEMedical University of Vienna · ATUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSilexan is a lavender essential oil with established anxiolytic and calming efficacy. Here we asked whether there is a potential for abuse in human patients.

methodsWe carried out a phase I abuse liability single-center, double-blind, 5-way crossover study in healthy users of recreational central nervous system depressants. They received single oral doses of 80 mg (therapeutic dose) and 640 mg Silexan, 2 mg and 4 mg lorazepam (active control) and placebo in randomized order, with 4- to 14-day washout periods between treatments. Pharmacodynamic measures included validated visual analogue scales assessing positive, negative, and sedative drug effects and balance of effects; a short form of the Addiction Research Center Inventory; and a drug similarity assessment. The primary outcome measure was the individual maximum value on the drug liking visual analogue scale during 24 hours post-dose.

resultsForty participants were randomized and 34 were evaluable for pharmacodynamic outcomes. In intraindividual head-to-head comparisons of the drug liking visual analogue scale maximum value, both doses of Silexan were rated similar to placebo whereas differences were observed between Silexan and lorazepam and between placebo and lorazepam (P < .001). These data were supported by all secondary measures of positive drug effects and of balance of effects. Differences between placebo and both doses of Silexan were always negligible in magnitude. Moreover, Silexan showed no sedative effects and was not perceived to be similar to commonly used drugs that participants had used in the past.

conclusionsSilexan did not exhibit any abuse potential in a standard abuse potential detection screen study and is unlikely to be recreationally abused.

Indexed as

Recreational Drug UseAdolescentAdultAnti-Anxiety AgentsCentral Nervous System DepressantsCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodHumansLavandulaLorazepamMiddle AgedOils, VolatilePlant OilsSubstance-Related DisordersYoung AdultAnti-Anxiety AgentsCentral Nervous System Depressantslavender oilLorazepamOils, VolatilePlant Oilsabuse potential assessmentanxiolytic druglavender oilrecreational drug usersSilexan

Identifiers

PMID33300578
PMCPMC7968617
OpenAlexW3110844927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.