ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Navigating the complex landscape of benzodiazepine- and Z-drug diversity: insights from comprehensive FDA adverse event reporting system analysis and beyond.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Medications which target benzodiazepine (BZD) binding sites of GABAA receptors (GABAARs) have been in widespread use since the nineteen-sixties. They carry labels as anxiolytics, hypnotics or antiepileptics. All benzodiazepines and several nonbenzodiazepine Z-drugs share high affinity binding sites on certain subtypes of GABAA receptors, from which they can be displaced by the clinically used antagonist flumazenil. Additional binding sites exist and overlap in part with sites used by some general anaesthetics and barbiturates. Despite substantial preclinical efforts, it remains unclear which receptor subtypes and ligand features mediate individual drug effects. There is a paucity of literature comparing clinically observed adverse effect liabilities across substances in methodologically coherent ways. Methods: In order to examine heterogeneity in clinical outcome, we screened the publicly available U.S. FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database for reports of individual compounds and analyzed them for each sex individually with the use of disproportionality analysis. The complementary use of physico-chemical descriptors provides a molecular basis for the analysis of clinical observations of wanted and unwanted drug effects. Results and Discussion: We found a multifaceted FAERS picture, and suggest that more thorough clinical and pharmacoepidemiologic investigations of the heterogenous side effect profiles for benzodiazepines and Z-drugs are needed. This may lead to more differentiated safety profiles and prescription practice for particular compounds, which in turn could potentially ease side effect burden in everyday clinical practice considerably. From both preclinical literature and pharmacovigilance data, there is converging evidence that this very large class of psychoactive molecules displays a broad range of distinctive unwanted effect profiles - too broad to be explained by the four canonical, so-called "diazepam-sensitive high-affinity interaction sites". The substance-specific signatures of compound effects may partly be mediated by phenomena such as occupancy of additional binding sites, and/or synergistic interactions with endogenous substances like steroids and endocannabinoids. These in turn drive the wanted and unwanted effects and sex differences of individual compounds.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.