Stop Demonizing the ‘Holy Trinity’     

Lynn Kivell Ashcraft, Guest Columnist    

If we are to have any hope of a rational, scientific discussion about the issues involved in both pain management and addiction treatment, we need to end patient shaming and the use of sensational language that has no basis in clinical practice.

First on my list is to stop using the term “Holy Trinity” when referring to the use of multiple medication classes to manage pain. It is a sensational propagandizing use of terminology that has no place in any meaningful clinical discussion.

Holy Trinity was a term coined by law enforcement when discussing the behavior of addicts. The original Holy Trinity – the so-called “Houston Cocktail” -- referred to the simultaneous ingestion of the short acting drugs hydrocodone (Vicodin), alprazolam (Xanax) and carisoprodol (Soma) by addicts. Other combinations of opioids, muscle relaxants and anti-anxiety drugs such as benzodiazepines are also used.

“The cocktail is commonly known on the black market as the ‘holy trinity’ and is particularly sought-after by addicts, but is also particularly dangerous,” is how the DEA describes the drugs in criminal complaints, search warrants and training guides.  

SOURCE: DEA TRAINING GUIDE

SOURCE: DEA TRAINING GUIDE

Taken together, the three drugs can be risky and cause respiratory depression, overdose and death. But when used under medical supervision, they enable individuals with painful and disabling conditions to improve their quality of life and restore bodily functions.

Holy Trinity was never used originally to refer to any medication combination prescribed by physicians caring for pain patients. But with the advent of the opioid crisis, the term is being used as a scare tactic by law enforcement and even some medical providers to deny patients a combination of medications previously used successfully.

The unintended consequence of this careless usage has been the deaths and needless renewal of pain and disability for patients who were being safely prescribed these medications.  

There is no one-size-fits-all treatment for chronic severe centralized pain. In fact, the current Pain Management and Dosing Guide from the American Pain Society lists opioids plus other central nervous system depressants and valium (a diazepine) as potential treatments for neuropathic pain.

It is well acknowledged that successful treatment often requires polypharmacy regimens tailored to the needs of individual patients to achieve pain relief and provide quality of life. The potential risks of using multiple medications can be reduced by prescribing both long-acting forms of these drugs and by directing patients to take them separately. 

To use the Holy Trinity as an inflammatory term is to demonize certain medications that have been abused by addicts while being used successfully by intractable pain patients. The use of this derogatory term has caused the undeserved transference of the deeply held negative societal bias against “addicts” onto some of the frailest and medically complex patients, many of whom are struggling to achieve some quality of life. 

According to the CDC, about 20 percent of adults in the U.S. have chronic pain and 8 percent have severe “high impact” chronic pain that frequently limits their life or work activities. The 2011 Institute of Medicine report puts the number of Americans with pain at 100 million, which is more than those living with diabetes, heart disease and cancer combined.

The difference between the two reports highlights some of the issues with using and understanding statistics.  However, no matter which report you use, both numbers represent a staggering number of Americans living in pain who deserve effective treatment.

Let’s lose the term Holy Trinity and allow doctors to prescribe whatever medications they deem necessary for the restoration of function and the relief of pain in their patients. Name calling and the use of disrespectful terminology doesn’t solve either the problem of addiction or the problem of pain.

LBKA_04SEP2019.jpg

Lynn Kivell Ashcraft is an Analytic Software Consultant and writer who lives in Arizona. Lynn has lived with chronic intractable pain for almost 30 years and works with Dr. Forest Tennant as part of the Arachnoiditis Research and Education Project. 

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Crackdown on Opioids and Benzodiazepines Ignores Their Benefits

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

The overdose crisis is driving a lot of panicky policy to more closely regulate the prescribing of scheduled drugs, from oxycodone and other opioids to clonazepam and other benzodiazepines, which are used to treat anxiety.

A California doctor was recently accused of unprofessional conduct and could lose her license for prescribing “excessive amounts of opioid medications and benzodiazepines.” And a New Jersey doctor faces criminal charges for prescribing the so-called “Holy Trinity” of opioids, benzodiazepines and muscle relaxers.

The crackdown on opioids and benzodiazepines may help reduce overdose fatalities, but it also risks depriving people of beneficial drugs. Research is finding new benefits for familiar drugs that may slow diseases and improve quality of life.

In a recent Phase III clinical trial, a “novel” combination drug was shown to ease Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease. The drug – called PXT3003 -- provided “meaningful improvement” for people with a hereditary neuropathy that results in a progressive loss of sensation and motor function.

bigstock-Mature-doctor-working-on-lapto-14508200.jpg

This is a significant advance for people with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, which currently has no treatment. The FDA recently gave PXT3003 its “fast track” designation, which speeds the development of drugs for which there is an unmet medical need.

PXT3003 is a combination of three familiar drugs, naltrexone (an opioid receptor blocker), baclofen (a muscle relaxant), and sorbitol (an alcohol sugar). The how and why of this combination of drugs is not well-understood at present. The manufacturer Pharnext says there are “multiple main mechanisms of action” that improve nerve, muscle and immune cells.

In other words, research on existing drugs with known risk profiles has led to a novel treatment. Ordinarily, the use of an opioid and a muscle relaxant is regarded as clinically inadvisable and is actively counseled against in many prescribing guidelines.

Benzodiazepine Research

A similar outcome is occurring with long-term benzodiazepine therapy in congestive heart failure (CHF). An editorial in Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics reported that low-to-moderate doses of benzodiazepines “seem to be helpful in silent myocardial ischemia, angina, essential hypertension, and CHF, especially in patients with comorbid anxiety.”

This builds on research from Taiwan in 2014 showing that anti-anxiety medications are “associated with a decreased risk of cardiac mortality and heart failure hospitalization in patients after a new myocardial infarction.”

Long-term benzodiazepine therapy is already seen as important in the treatment of rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, a condition in which causes people to act out vivid and violent dreams, often injuring themselves or bed partners. Low-dose clonazepam therapy for months or even years turns out to be a highly effective treatment.

In the same fashion, benzodiazepines are used to treat stiff-person syndrome, a rare neurological disorder that causes extreme muscle rigidly and spasms that can make walking impossible. According to the National Institutes of Health, therapy to treat stiff-person syndrome includes “anti-anxiety drugs, muscle relaxants, anti-convulsants, and pain relievers.”

‘Political Interference’ in Medicine

But treatments for these disorders and the development of new regimens for other disorders may be impeded under current federal and state laws and guidelines. Recently a coalition of six physician groups called on state legislatures to end their “political interference” in the practice of medicine and the patient-physician relationship.

“The insertion of politics between patients and their physicians undermines the foundation of trust this relationship is built on and inhibits the delivery of safe, timely, and comprehensive care. Outside interference endangers our patients’ health by limiting, and sometimes altogether eliminating, access to medically accurate information and to the full range of health care,” the coaltion warned.

Physicians should never face imprisonment or other penalties for providing necessary care. These laws force physicians to decide between their patients and facing criminal proceedings.
— Coalition of physician groups

“Physicians should never face imprisonment or other penalties for providing necessary care. These laws force physicians to decide between their patients and facing criminal proceedings. Physicians must be able to practice medicine that is informed by their years of medical education, training, experience, and the available evidence, freely and without threat of criminal punishment.”

The statement was released by the American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Osteopathic Association and American Psychiatric Association.

As the past couple of years have shown, prescribing guidelines have a way of leading to blanket prohibitions. And a risk of blanket prohibitions is that we may miss important benefits.

Roger Chriss.jpg

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society. Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.