Austin Health, Victorian Poisons Information Centre, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Austin Health, Emergency Department, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2024 May;62(5):303-313. doi: 10.1080/15563650.2024.2353265. Epub 2024 Jun 17.
Acute metamfetamine toxicity is characterized by stimulant effects and neuropsychiatric disturbance, which is attenuated by gamma-aminobutyric acid type A receptor agonists including benzodiazepines. We utilized clinical registry data to examine the effect of co-exposure to a gamma-aminobutyric acid type B receptor agonist (gamma-hydroxybutyrate) in illicit drug cases with analytically confirmed exposure to metamfetamine.
The Emerging Drugs Network of Australia Victoria is an ethics board-approved prospective registry collecting clinical and analytical data (utilising blood samples) on emergency department illicit drug presentations. Comparison groups were defined by analytically confirmed exposure: lone metamfetamine, metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate, metamfetamine plus benzodiazepine, metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate plus benzodiazepine. Cases with co-exposure to other stimulants or sedatives were excluded.
Median metamfetamine blood concentrations were significantly greater in metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate ( = 153, median = 0.20 mg/L, interquartile range: 0.10-0.32 mg/L, 95 per cent confidence interval: 0.20-0.23 mg/L) and metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate plus benzodiazepine ( = 160, median = 0.20 mg/L, interquartile range: 0.10-0.30 mg/L, 95 per cent confidence interval: 0.20-0.30 mg/L) positive groups compared to gamma-hydroxybutyrate negative groups including metamfetamine ( = 81, median = 0.10 mg/L, interquartile range: 0.05-0.21 mg/L, 95 per cent confidence interval: 0.09-0.18 mg/L) and metamfetamine plus benzodiazepine ( = 73, median = 0.10 mg/L, interquartile range: 0.06-0.20 mg/L, 95 per cent confidence interval: 0.09-0.20 mg/L) groups ( < 0.0004). Presenting heart rate in metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate cases ( = 153, median = 72 beats per minute, interquartile range: 63-86 beats per minute, 95 per cent confidence interval: 70-78 beats per minute) was significantly lower than metamfetamine plus benzodiazepine cases ( = 73, median = 84 beats per minute, interquartile range: 73-98 beats per minute, 95 per cent confidence interval: 80-90 beats per minute, < 0.0001), and lone metamfetamine cases ( = 81, median = 110 beats per minute, interquartile range: 87-131 beats per minute, 95 per cent confidence interval: 93-120 beats per minute, < 0.0001). Presenting temperature in metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate cases (median = 35.8 °C, interquartile range: 35.0-36.2 °C, 95 per cent confidence interval 35.6-35.9 °C) was significantly lower than metamfetamine plus benzodiazepine cases (median 36.2 °C, interquartile range 35.7-36.6 °C, 95 per cent confidence interval, 36.0-36.4 °C, = 0.017), and lone metamfetamine cases (median = 36.5 °C, interquartile range: 35.8-37.1 °C, 95 per cent confidence interval: 36.2-36.7 °C, < 0.0001). Median presenting systolic blood pressure was significantly ( ≤ 0.001) lower in benzodiazepine positive groups (metamfetamine plus benzodiazepine median = 120 mmHg, interquartile range: 109-132 mmHg, 95 per cent confidence interval: 116-124 mmHg and metamfetamine plus benzodiazepine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate median = 124 mmHg, interquartile range: 110-137 mmHg, 95 per cent confidence interval: 120-129 mmHg). Incidence of sedation (Glasgow Coma Scale less than 9) was significantly greater in metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate cases (63 per cent) compared to metamfetamine plus benzodiazepine cases (27 per cent, < 0.0001) and lone metamfetamine cases (15 per cent, < 0.0001). Incidence of agitation was significantly lower in metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate plus benzodiazepine cases (17 per cent, < 0.0001) and metamfetamine plus gamma-hydroxybutyrate cases (34 per cent, = 0.0004) compared to lone metamfetamine cases (58 per cent).
Differences in gamma-aminobutyric acid type A and B receptor physiology may offer a gamma-aminobutyric acid type B agonist-facilitated alternative pharmacodynamic mechanism able to attenuate metamfetamine stimulant and neuropsychiatric toxicity.
Metamfetamine intoxicated patients with analytically confirmed co-exposure to gamma-hydroxybutyrate had significantly reduced heart rate, body temperature and incidence of agitation compared to patients with lone metamfetamine exposure. Metamfetamine intoxicated patients with analytically confirmed co-exposure to a benzodiazepine had significantly reduced systolic blood pressure compared to patients with lone metamfetamine exposure. We hypothesize that gamma-aminobutyric acid type B receptor agonists may be beneficial in the management of acute metamfetamine toxicity.
急性安非他命中毒的特征为兴奋剂效应和神经精神障碍,其可被包括苯二氮䓬类药物在内的γ-氨基丁酸 A 型受体激动剂所减弱。我们利用临床登记数据,在经分析确认接触安非他命的情况下,检查 γ-氨基丁酸 B 型受体激动剂(γ-羟基丁酸)共存暴露对安非他命的影响。
澳大利亚维多利亚新兴药物网络是一个伦理委员会批准的前瞻性登记处,该登记处收集关于急诊部门非法药物呈现的临床和分析数据(利用血液样本)。分析确认的暴露情况定义了比较组:单独的安非他命、安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸、安非他命加苯二氮䓬类药物、安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸加苯二氮䓬类药物。排除了同时暴露于其他兴奋剂或镇静剂的病例。
安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸( = 153,中位数 = 0.20 mg/L,四分位距:0.10-0.32 mg/L,95%置信区间:0.20-0.23 mg/L)和安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸加苯二氮䓬类药物( = 160,中位数 = 0.20 mg/L,四分位距:0.10-0.30 mg/L,95%置信区间:0.20-0.30 mg/L)阳性组的安非他命血液浓度中位数显著高于 γ-羟基丁酸阴性组,包括安非他命( = 81,中位数 = 0.10 mg/L,四分位距:0.05-0.21 mg/L,95%置信区间:0.09-0.18 mg/L)和安非他命加苯二氮䓬类药物( = 73,中位数 = 0.10 mg/L,四分位距:0.06-0.20 mg/L,95%置信区间:0.09-0.20 mg/L)( < 0.0004)。安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸病例的心率( = 153,中位数 = 72 次/分钟,四分位距:63-86 次/分钟,95%置信区间:70-78 次/分钟)明显低于安非他命加苯二氮䓬类药物病例( = 73,中位数 = 84 次/分钟,四分位距:73-98 次/分钟,95%置信区间:80-90 次/分钟, < 0.0001)和单独的安非他命病例( = 81,中位数 = 110 次/分钟,四分位距:87-131 次/分钟,95%置信区间:93-120 次/分钟, < 0.0001)。安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸病例的体温中位数( = 35.8°C,四分位距:35.0-36.2°C,95%置信区间 35.6-35.9°C)明显低于安非他命加苯二氮䓬类药物病例(中位数 36.2°C,四分位距:35.7-36.6°C,95%置信区间,36.0-36.4°C, = 0.017)和单独的安非他命病例(中位数 = 36.5°C,四分位距:35.8-37.1°C,95%置信区间:36.2-36.7°C, < 0.0001)。苯二氮䓬类阳性组(安非他命加苯二氮䓬类中位数 = 120 mmHg,四分位距:109-132 mmHg,95%置信区间:116-124 mmHg 和安非他命加苯二氮䓬类加 γ-羟基丁酸中位数 = 124 mmHg,四分位距:110-137 mmHg,95%置信区间:120-129 mmHg)的收缩压中位数( ≤ 0.001)显著降低。安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸病例(63%)的镇静发生率(格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分低于 9)明显高于安非他命加苯二氮䓬类药物病例(27%, < 0.0001)和单独的安非他命病例(15%, < 0.0001)。安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸加苯二氮䓬类药物病例(17%, < 0.0001)和安非他命加 γ-羟基丁酸病例(34%, = 0.0004)的激越发生率明显低于单独的安非他命病例(58%)。
γ-氨基丁酸 A 型和 B 型受体生理学的差异可能提供一种 γ-氨基丁酸 B 型受体激动剂介导的替代药效动力学机制,能够减轻安非他命的兴奋剂毒性和神经精神毒性。
与单独接触安非他命的患者相比,经分析确认接触 γ-羟基丁酸的安非他命中毒患者的心率、体温和激越发生率明显降低。与单独接触安非他命的患者相比,经分析确认接触苯二氮䓬类药物的安非他命中毒患者的收缩压明显降低。我们假设 γ-氨基丁酸 B 型受体激动剂可能对急性安非他命中毒的管理有益。