ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Real-world data on the abuse potential of medications for the treatment of insomnia: a disproportionality analysis of the FAERS database.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Insomnia disorder is a chronic medical condition estimated to affect 12% of adults. The potential for abuse of hypnotics often contributes to physician reluctance to prescribe medications to treat insomnia as a chronic condition. This study examined the real-world abuse potential of approved and off-label medications used to treat insomnia, employing data from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: Data from 1 January 2014 to 31 March 2024 were retrieved. Drugs of interest included Schedule IV drugs (benzodiazepines, Z-drugs, dual orexin receptor antagonists [DORAs]) and non-scheduled drugs (trazodone, doxepin, ramelteon). Relevant reported adverse events denoting drug abuse were identified if they contained an event with any preferred terms from the SMQ Drug abuse, dependence, and withdrawal (MedDRA v26.1), with cases of overdose due to suicide attempts excluded. The reporting odds ratios (ROR) and proportional reporting ratios (PRR) were used as disproportionality measures. Results: Rates of adverse event cases of abuse, dependence, and withdrawal retrieved were highest for benzodiazepines approved for any indication, followed by benzodiazepines approved for insomnia, trazodone, doxepin, Z-drugs, ramelteon, and DORAs. DORAs were associated with a low ROR value relative to Z-drugs (ROR = 0.150; 95% CI [0.131, 0.171]) and to trazodone (ROR = 0.092; 95% CI [0.081, 0.105]). Similar results were obtained using the PRR. The DORA class had the lowest rates of adverse event denoting drug abuse, even lower than the unscheduled drugs ramelteon and doxepin, which are known not to be prone to abuse or dependence. Furthermore, the DORA class had significantly lower odds of reporting for adverse events denoting drug abuse when compared with zolpidem or the unscheduled medication trazodone. Conclusion: This study identified significantly fewer reported cases of real-world abuse, misuse, overdose, and other safety risks for DORAs compared with the unscheduled drug trazodone and scheduled Z-drugs. This suggests that categorization of DORAs as Schedule IV drugs may overstate their abuse potential.
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.