Naltrexone ‘Changed Life’ of Fibromyalgia Patient

By Donna Gregory Burch

The pain in Janice Hollander’s legs was so excruciating that she wanted to cut them off. Diagnosed with fibromyalgia in 2013, she’d progressed through the normal litany of prescription drugs doled out by physicians – Lyrica, Cymbalta, gabapentin, muscle relaxers and narcotics – all without finding relief.

Then she happened to catch an episode of the Dr. Oz Show where a guest discussed using low-dose naltrexone (LDN) as a treatment for chronic pain. A few days later, she convinced her doctor to write a prescription and took her first dose of LDN.

“After about seven days, my pain lessened,” said Hollander of Michigan. “It lessened by 10 or 20 percent. That was huge! Even just that little bit of lessening was huge.”

After four weeks, the depression that had been stymying her for years lifted. At six weeks, she saw a noticeable increase in her energy levels. Her brain fog improved, and her memory returned.

Hollander has been taking LDN for about year now, and she’s probably one of its biggest fans within the fibromyalgia community. She regularly shares her success story in online support groups.

Hollander still has fibromyalgia symptoms, but they are more manageable thanks to LDN.

“I would say my leg pain is pretty much gone,” she said. “[LDN] has completely changed my life. I don’t know that I would be here today if it wasn’t for it. I don’t think I could go for another year in the misery I was in.” 

A growing number of fibromyalgia sufferers like Hollander are finding relief using LDN. It’s an unusual discovery since LDN is best known in the addiction treatment community. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved LDN to treat addiction to certain opiate drugs in 1984.

janice hollander

janice hollander

Dr. Jarred Younger, who conducted two LDN/fibromyalgia studies at Stanford University, believes LDN has an anti-inflammatory effect on the brain.

“This is one of the few drugs that can do that in the brain because it crosses the blood-brain barrier,” Younger said.

In simple terms, the brain contains microglial cells that look for problems within the central nervous system. When they discover an abnormality, these cells release chemicals into the body that cause fatigue, pain, cognitive disturbances and other symptoms common among fibromyalgia patients. In a healthy person, these chemicals are intended to slow down the body, to force it to rest, so that it can heal from whatever has caused the abnormality. In fibromyalgia, some researchers hypothesize this normal central nervous system response gets activated and doesn’t shut off.

“It’s like the central nervous system thinks you have an infection when you don’t,” Younger explained.

Fibromyalgia sufferers often speculate about what caused their condition, and researchers have debated various triggers for years. Viruses (herpes, Epstein Barr, etc.), chronic stress, genetics, obesity, aging and pollution are suspects, but according to Younger, it could be all of these.

He believes LDN works because it calms the microglial cells and reduces brain inflammation.

Penn State University researcher Ian Zagon posits a different mechanism behind LDN. Zagon’s opioid blockade hypothesis surmises that LDN blocks the brain’s opioid receptors, essentially tricking the body into increasing production of natural pain-suppressing chemicals.

Theoretically, both hypotheses could be correct.

Younger’s two Stanford University studies showed LDN outperformed Lyrica, Cymbalta and Savella, the three drugs currently approved to treat fibromyalgia in the U.S., and it did so with minimal side effects. The most common side effects are headache, insomnia, vivid dreams and nausea – all of which usually disappear over time.

“Probably 65 percent of people get an appreciable decrease of symptoms,” Younger said.

But more research is needed to confirm these early findings.

Next year, Younger will conduct at least two LDN/fibromyalgia studies at his new facility, the Neuroinflammation, Pain and Fatigue Lab at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

One study will try to parse out the most effective dose of LDN for fibromyalgia. Most LDN users are prescribed the drug off-label, between 1.5mg and 4.5mg daily. But some rheumatologists have shared anecdotal accounts that certain patients respond better to higher doses, ranging up to 9mg.

A second trial will pair LDN with dextromethorphan, a common cough suppressant that’s believed to work similarly to LDN.

But many fibromyalgia sufferers aren’t waiting for the research. They’ve found ways to secure a prescription and try LDN for themselves.

Linda Elsegood, founder of the U.K.-based LDN Research Trust, has helped thousands of people gain access to LDN. She credits LDN with stabilizing her multiple sclerosis. At her worst, Elsegood was wheelchair bound, had no control of her bowels or bladder and had lost much of her sight and hearing. After 18 months on LDN, she was able to walk again on her own and had a reversal of most of her symptoms.

After her remarkable recovery, she wanted to educate others on the benefits of LDN.

“I wanted people to know that there is a choice, if you’ve been told, like me, that there’s nothing else that can be done for you,” she said. “Look into LDN. Do your research. … It is amazing the number of people who’ve found LDN works for them for so many different conditions.”

In addition to fibromyalgia, early research has found LDN to be useful in reducing the symptoms of certain autoimmune and central nervous system conditions, including multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis and others.

But few doctors know about LDN as an emerging treatment, so it can be difficult to get a prescription.

“Some doctors are too busy to read the information,” Elsegood explained. “Some will not think outside of the box. It’s not what they learned in medical school, so they’re not prepared to consider something that is alternative. Other doctors won’t prescribe it because there aren’t enough trials.”

Unfortunately, it’s unlikely that any of the major drug companies will ever study LDN because it’s an older, generic drug and little profit can be made from it. So it falls to innovative researchers, like Younger, who secure donations and grants to fund trials.

Patients often encounter doctors who refuse to prescribe LDN even though it has a proven safety record and a low risk of side effects. The LDN Research Trust includes a list of LDN-friendly doctors and pharmacies on its website. For those who can’t find an LDN-friendly doctor locally, there are physicians who offer phone and online LDN consults.

“My advice is to always research it yourself, and then address it with your doctor,” Hollander said. “And if your doctor won’t agree to letting you try it, then find a doctor who will.

“I would drive to Florida to get it if I had to. It makes that big of a difference. I just wish more doctors would prescribe it, and more people would find help with it.”

For a list of helpful LDN resources, visit www.fedupwithfatigue.com/low-dose-naltrexone.

Donna Gregory Burch was diagnosed with fibromyalgia in 2014 after several years of unexplained symptoms. Donna is the founder of Fed Up with Fatigue, a blog devoted to helping those with fibromyalgia and ME/CFS live better with these conditions.

Donna is an award-winning journalist whose work has appeared online and in local newspapers and magazines throughout Virginia, Delaware and Pennsylvania. She lives in Delaware with her husband and their many fur babies.

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.

Controversy Grows over Journal Article on Pain Treatment

By Pat Anson, Editor

It’s not uncommon for colleagues in the medical profession to disagree. Egos and different medical backgrounds can sometimes lead to heated discussions about the best way to treat patients. But those arguments are usually kept private. 

That is why it is so unusual for a prominent pain physician to publicly call for another doctor to resign or be fired from her faculty position at a prestigious medical school.

“I believe she should resign her academic post,” says Forest Tennant, MD, referring to Jane Ballantyne, MD, a professor at the University of Washington School of Medicine, who recently co-authored a controversial article in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) that said reducing pain intensity should not be the goal of doctors who treat chronic pain. The article also suggests that patients should learn to accept their pain and move on with their lives.

“For somebody in her position as a professor at a university to call for physicians to quit treating pain – or pain intensity – whether acute, chronic, whether rich, poor, disabled or what have you, is totally inappropriate. And it’s an insult to the physicians of the world and an insult to patients. And frankly, she should not be a professor.” Tennant told Pain News Network.

“To suggest that physicians should no longer treat pain intensity and let patients suffer goes beyond any sort of decency or concern for humanity.”

Tennant is a pain management specialist who has treated patients for over 40 years at his pain clinic in West Covina, California. He’s authored over 300 scientific articles and books, is editor emeritus of Practical Pain Management, and is highly regarded  in the pain community for accepting difficult, hard-to-treat patients that other doctors have given up on.

dr. forest tennant

dr. forest tennant

Tennant was surprised the influential, peer-reviewed New England Journal of Medicine, which reaches over 600,000 people each week, even published the article.

I know that they’re biased and they’ve got all their medical device people there and all their academia and all that, but I think they have a responsibility also. They are supposedly representing medicine,” says Tennant. “Why do I have a medical degree if I’m not supposed to treat pain intensity? Give me an answer to that. She didn’t have an alternative did she?”

dr. jane ballantyne

dr. jane ballantyne

Exactly what Ballantyne and co-author Mark Sullivan, MD, meant to say is open to interpretation. Pain News Network has been unable to get comment from either about the controversy.

They began their article by saying “pain that can be relieved should be relieved,” but then veer off in another direction, stating that chronic pain should not be treated with opioid pain medication.

“Is a reduction in pain intensity the right goal for the treatment of chronic pain? We have watched as opioids have been used with increasing frequency and in escalating doses in an attempt to drive down pain scores — all the while increasing rates of toxic drug effects, exposing vulnerable populations to risk, and failing to relieve the burden of chronic pain,” they wrote, dismissing the pain intensity scales that are widely used by physicians to measure pain levels.

“We propose that pain intensity is not the best measure of the success of chronic-pain treatment. When pain is chronic, its intensity isn't a simple measure of something that can be easily fixed.”

Ballantyne and Sullivan offered no alternative “fixes” for pain treatment, other than patients learning to live with pain and sitting down for a chat with their doctors.

“Nothing is more revealing or therapeutic than a conversation between a patient and a clinician, which allows the patient to be heard and the clinician to appreciate the patient's experiences and offer empathy, encouragement, mentorship, and hope,” they wrote.

Angry Comments from Readers

The article infuriated both patients and physicians, including dozens who left angry comments on the NEJM website.

“Great job. I will be going into the coffin business thanks to these believers that people should suck it up. How NEJM even recognizes these people as doctors and not quacks is beyond me,” wrote Michael Shabi, who identified himself as a family practice physician.

“I take just enough narcotic pain meds to cut the edge off of my pain to be coherent enough to love my wife and respond to your constant misinformation. I have had 21 neurological surgeries and procedures and live in constant pain. So why in the heck do you people have such a problem in hearing us?” asked pain patient Kerry Smith.

“Only an idiot might conclude that one can dismiss the effects of living with a healthcare problem that reminds you of its presence with every move you make,” wrote Terri Lewis, PhD, a specialist in rehabilitation.

Both Ballantyne and Sullivan have lengthy careers in medicine and have been active in organizations that discourage the use of opioids. 

According to the University of Washington website, Ballantyne received her medical degree from the Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine in London and trained in anesthesiology at John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford. She moved to Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston in 1990 and then to the University of Washington in 2011, as a Professor of Education and Research and as Director of the UW Pain Fellowship. 

Last year Ballantyne was named president of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an advocacy group funded by Phoenix House, which operates a chain of addiction treatment centers. She also serves as an expert adviser to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as it develops controversial new guidelines that discourage primary care physicians from prescribing opioids. Ballantyne is one of five PROP board members who are advising the CDC on the guidelines.

Sullivan is a Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences -- also at the University of Washington School of Medicine -- and is executive director of Collaborative Opioid Prescribing Education (COPE), a program that educates healthcare providers about safe opioid prescribing practices. He is also a PROP board member.

Sullivan has authored several research articles on opioids, including a recent one warning about the co-prescribing of sedatives and opioids.

“He’s not as well known,” says Tennant. “He doesn’t carry the public influence that she does. She’s sitting on federal committees, advising CDC that pain patients should not be treated and the intensity scale should not be used. I cannot imagine anyone making that statement. I can’t imagine the New England Journal of Medicine publishing it. The atrocity here is just awful.

dr. mark sullivan

dr. mark sullivan

“Any semblance of decency left among physicians in PROP, if that’s what they believe, then I think the whole organization ought to close its doors. I didn’t know they were going to say we didn’t want pain treated at all. They said they wanted to use opioids responsibly. Well, that’s fair. But that’s not what she said.”

Tennant is urging the pain community to contact Paul Ramsey, the CEO of UW Medicine and Dean of the School of Medicine to ask that Ballantyne be fired. He’s gotten a few takers, including Becky Roberts, who suffers from arachnoiditis.

“I do not feel she should be teaching new medical students. Professor influence is big when you are a student. I am sure if any one of them read her article, most were probably shocked,” Roberts said in an email to Pain News Network.

“They did not get into medicine because they are uncaring. Compassion for other human beings is why they went to medical school. To help heal human beings is their goal. I really do think she needs to be removed from that position. How long has she been teaching this kind of logic?”

The UW School of Medicine has about 4,500 students enrolled in undergraduate, professional, and post-graduate programs. 

New Skin Patch Delivers Pain Relief with Ibuprofen

By Pat Anson, Editor

There are many different types of skin patches already on the market to treat pain --- containing everything from lidocaine to capsaicin to powerful opioids like fentanyl. Now British researchers say they’re a step closer to developing the first transdermal patch containing ibuprofen.

Researchers at the University of Warwick have formed a company called Medherent to produce and patent an adhesive patch that can deliver a high dose of ibuprofen through the skin for as long as 12 hours to treat conditions such as back pain, arthritis and neuralgia.

Their patch differs from others already on the market because the medication is embedded into the polymer matrix that sticks the patch to the patient’s skin. The embedding technology allows the patch to contain 5 to 10 times the amount of analgesic currently used in medical patches.

"Many commercial patches surprisingly don't contain any pain relief agents at all, they simply soothe the body by a warming effect,” says University of Warwick research chemist Professor David Haddleton.

image courtesy of medherent

image courtesy of medherent

“Our technology now means that we can for the first time produce patches that contain effective doses of active ingredients such as ibuprofen for which no patches currently exist. Also, we can improve the drug loading and stickiness of patches containing other active ingredients to improve patient comfort and outcome."

The researchers are now testing other analgesics to see if they too can be embedded into the polymers. So far they’ve had good results with methyl salicylate – a wintergreen-scented chemical used in some topical liniments and gels.

“We believe that many other over the counter and prescription drugs can exploit our technology and we are seeking opportunities to test a much wider range of drugs and treatments within our patch," says Haddleton.

In an email to Pain News Network, Medherent’s CEO said the technology is compatible with a wide range of drugs, including opioids. The company is currently seeking partners to help develop the patches.

"Our first products will be over-the-counter pain relief patches and through partnering we would expect to have the first of those products on the market in around 2 years,” said Nigel Davis. “In addition to our pain relief products, our technology also works with drugs in many other therapeutic areas. We can see considerable opportunities in working with pharmaceutical companies to develop innovative products using our next generation transdermal drug-delivery platform."

Adding opioids to the mix is tricky business, because some opioid patches already on the market are being abused. According to CBCNews, transdermal patches containing fentanyl are blamed for over 600 deaths in Canada. Addicts have learned they can cut up fentanyl patches to smoke or ingest them  

Asked if Medherent’s patch technology would prevent similar abuse, Davis said, “We hope so but need to do more work on that before we make claims of that sort. “

Decision on Opioid Implant Nears

Meanwhile, Titan Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: TTNP) has announced that the Food and Drug Administration has scheduled a meeting with the company next month to discuss its new drug application for Probuphine, an implant containing buprenorphine, a weak acting opioid used to treat addiction.

Ironically, some addicts have learned they can get high by abusing buprenorphine and it is prized as a street drug that can ease withdrawal pains from heroin. Buprenorphine, which is more widely known under the brand name Suboxone, is currently only available in pills and oral films.

The Probuphine implant would be difficult to abuse. About the size of a matchstick, it is designed to be inserted subcutaneously under the skin of the upper arm, where it can release steady doses of buprenorphine for as long as six months.

Titan and its partner, Braeburn Pharmaceuticals, believe the implant technology could someday be used to deliver other medications, including opioids for pain relief.

image courtesy of titan pharmaceuticals

image courtesy of titan pharmaceuticals

Probuphine’s path to the marketplace hasn’t been a smooth one. Braeburn and Titan were stunned in 2013 when the FDA denied approval of the implant and asked for a new clinical study of Probuphine’s effectiveness. Since then, the companies have conducted a study showing that the implant was more effective than buprenorphine tablets in treating addiction. The companies are hoping for FDA approval in 2016.

Fed Panel Opposes CDC Opioid Guidelines

By Pat Anson, Editor

A key government panel that oversees pain research will file a formal objection to proposed opioid prescribing guidelines being drafted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Those guidelines, which are set to be released next month, would discourage primary care physicians from prescribing opioid pain medications.

The National Institute of Health’s Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee believes there is little or no evidence to support many of the prescribing guidelines, according to Politico. Some committee members reportedly called the agency’s recommendations “ridiculous” and “an embarrassment to the government” during a meeting Thursday.

The pain research committee includes representatives from the Food and Drug Administration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense, and the CDC itself.

Evidence cited to support the guidelines "is low to very low and that's a problem," said Sharon Hertz, the FDA's director of the Division of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Addiction Products.

The CDC unveiled the draft guidelines in September to a select online audience and then allowed only 48 hours for public comment. The guidelines, a list of which can be found here, recommend “non-pharmacological therapy” as the “preferred” treatment for non-cancer pain, and state that limited quantities and doses of opioids should be prescribed for both acute and chronic pain.  

Complaints immediately arose from physician organizations and patient advocacy groups that the guidelines were developed in secret, with too much input from special interest groups, addiction control specialists, and Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP),  an advocacy group funded by Phoenix House, which operates a chain of addiction treatment centers. Five PROP board members, including its President, Vice-President and founder, are on committees that helped the CDC draft the guidelines.

The CDC developed the guidelines to combat what is often called an epidemic of prescription drug abuse and overdoses, but the agency’s own documents acknowledge there is “low quality of evidence” or “very low quality” to support many of its recommendations. For example, one guideline would greatly expand access to addiction treatment drugs such as buprenorphine and encourages physicians to refer patients to addiction treatment programs. Although "strongly recommended" by the CDC, the quality of evidence for that guideline is considered low.

The agency also admitted it rushed through the process, apparently to meet a January deadline.

“CDC conducted ‘rapid reviews’ of the contextual evidence on alternative treatments, benefits and harms, values and preferences, and resource implications. Rapid reviews are used when there is a need to streamline the systematic review process to obtain evidence in a short time frame. Methods used to streamline the process include limiting searches by databases, years, and languages considered, and truncating quality assessment and data abstraction protocols. Given the public health urgency of developing opioid prescribing recommendations, a rapid review was required for the current guideline,” the agency said in briefing documents obtained by Pain News Network.

A top official in the Department of Health and Human Services told the NIH research committee the CDC’s guidelines were “shortsighted” and there was a rush to judgement.

"You know, damn the torpedoes. Full speed ahead," said Wanda Jones, principal deputy assistant secretary for health at HHS, according to Politico.

Pain patients agree the CDC guidelines are shortsighted and could have a disastrous impact on the pain community. In a survey of over 2,000 patients by Pain News Network and the Power of Pain Foundation, over 90% said the guidelines were discriminatory and would be more harmful than helpful to pain patients. Most said they had already tried non-opioid treatments, such as massage, acupuncture and cognitive behavioral therapy, and found that they didn’t work. Many predicted the guidelines would lead to more suicides in the pain community, and cause more addiction and overdoses, not less.

Last month the Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) accused the CDC of “blatant violations” of federal law for not holding public hearings and refusing to publicly identify members of its advisory committees.

“The overly secretive manner in which CDC has been developing the Guideline serves the interests of neither the healthcare community nor consumers,” wrote WLF chief counsel Richard Samp to CDC director Tom Frieden.

The WLF has a lengthy history of taking government agencies to court to overturn regulations and policies it considers unfriendly to business.

Additional reporting for this story can be found in DrugWonks.

Cancer Painkiller Blamed for Hundreds of Deaths

By Pat Anson, Editor

An Arizona drug maker that developed a powerful painkiller for cancer patients falsified records so the drug would be prescribed to non-cancer pain patients, possibly resulting in hundreds of overdose deaths, according to a new report by the Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation.

Subsys has FDA approval for breakthrough cancer pain, but Insys Therapeutics allegedly misled insurers into paying for the drug and encouraged off-label prescribing for patients suffering from conditions such as joint pain and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Subsys is a fentanyl based spray-on painkiller, said to be 100 times stronger than morphine.

The new report, headlined “Murder Incorporated,”  adds to the growing body of evidence and critical media reports about the aggressive business tactics of Insys Therapeutics. Last month CNBC accused the company of “putting profits before patients as it makes millions off your pain.”

"I've been investigating drug cases for about 15 years now, and the conduct that we saw in this case was among the most unconscionable that I've seen," Oregon Assistant Attorney General told CNBC. "There was harm done to patients on a level I'm not used to seeing."

image courtesy of insys therapeutics

image courtesy of insys therapeutics

Insys is under federal and state investigations in Oregon, California, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Arizona and Illinois. The company has settled a class action lawsuit in Oregon for $1.1 million and another in Arizona for $6.1 million.

The Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation has spent the past year investigating Insys and its business practices. It reported the company set up a special unit to help patients get prior authorization for Subsys prescriptions, often by falsely claiming they were medically urgent cancer diagnoses.

“Our findings suggest that the federal prosecutors are on to something. The prior authorization unit was set up to assist patients with complex insurance paperwork. Its value proposition was simplicity itself: the patient signs a few forms and Insys handles the messy paperwork. Patients would get the medicine, prescribers wouldn't have to scramble for a replacement and Insys would book thousands of dollars in revenue per prescription,” the report says.

Since Subsys was introduced in 2012, the FDAs Adverse Events Reporting System lists 203 deaths where Subsys was listed as the probable cause for triggering an adverse reaction. The pace of Subsys-related deaths is accelerating, with 52 deaths in the second quarter of this year alone.

“Depending on the dosage, one package of 30 Subsys sprays can cost between $900 and $3,000. Insys generates almost all of its revenue from Subsys. Last month the company reported over $91 million in revenue during the third quarter, beating estimates.

CEO Mike Babich resigned the day before earnings were released, saying he wanted to spend more time with his family.

“Insys is committed to developing products for the supportive care of patients through the use of its drug delivery technologies.  Insys takes patient safety very seriously and is committed to working with the health care community,” the company said in a statement. “Based on its interactions with patients and prescribers, Insys believes that the success of Subsys is directly attributable to the clinical benefits of its product.”

Going Off Morphine is Hell

By Crystal Lindell, Columnist

This past weekend, as I tried to get off morphine once and for all, one thought kept going through my mind — if the devil is any good at his job, hell will just be eternal opioid withdrawal.

It’s like, have you ever had the flu, and also food poisoning, and also been hit by a train, and also had the fight or flight anxiety that comes from being chased by a bear for a week straight — all the same time? Well it’s worse than that.

It’s effing hell.

And it’s all made even worse by the fact that I had the cure the whole time. Every single minute that went by, I knew that I all had to do to make it all go away was pop one of those little blue pills in my purse.

I made it to the 72 hour mark last night at midnight. That’s 72 hours without morphine or a hydrocodone. I haven’t gone a full 72 hours without an opioid in almost two and a half years.

I spent all of November tapering down my dose. Going so effing slow. Like three pills, then two pills, then three pills, then two pills. Then after a week, I’d do one pill then two pills, then one pill.

I was down to one pill every other day, of the lowest dose, and I knew the next step was going through withdrawal. I thought maybe it wouldn’t be that bad since I had been going so slowly with the tapering. I was wrong.

Honestly, the first 24 hours weren’t so bad. My body was just chilling, expecting another dose in a day or so. But then, at midnight, exactly 24 hours in, the involuntary leg movements started. I was lying in bed, in the middle of the night, and my right leg would just move. Also, my anxiety started skyrocketing so high you’d have thought I was in a war zone.

By the morning, about 31 hours in, the muscle aches had set in, and everything I had ever eaten over the last two years had started to come out. Diarrhea doesn’t sound like the worst thing in the world, until you literally spend so much time on the toilet that your legs go numb. And then when you do get up, you are so dehydrated that you can’t even walk without holding on to the wall.

There’s other stuff too, the kind of stuff that maybe sounds minor until it happens to you. Like, my nose was randomly running, and I was sneezing like there was a secret cat hidden in the bathtub. And I could not sleep. At all. And if somehow I did get a couple minutes of shut eye, I would wake up drenched in sweat. Also, everything made cry. Seeing the sun? Tears. Facebook posts about makeup? I’d start weeping. Basically the fact that I was alive was enough of a reason.

Again, all these things don’t sound so horrible, but when they are all happening at once, it is literally hell on earth. 

I spent most of the 72 hours watching Breaking Bad — which is either the worst show to watch during withdrawal because it’s all about drugs, or the best because it’s all about the horrible things drugs lead to.

I also spent most of the 72 hours trying to process how I got to this point. Morphine has been so good to me over the last two years. And I stand by the fact that it literally saved my life. If it wasn’t for the pain relief I got from the drug, I don’t know if I would have been able to endure. And I am thankful to morphine for that.

But I wouldn’t wish the morphine withdrawal on Hitler.

And I thought about everyone who has ever had to endure this for whatever reason. And my heart filled with compassion and love for them. Some people like to say that drug addicts are just weak, or lack self-control. Those people are a**holes.

I also thought a lot about how much I wanted to just pop a morphine and make everything better. I thought about it so hard. Vividly picturing the little blue pill in my head and fantasizing about how good it would feel to take just one.

And I thought about how going through withdrawal was a good thing because I wouldn’t even be going off morphine if I wasn’t feeling better. (See Crystal's last column: "Is Vitamin D Making Me Feel Better?")

I felt like this was a final step. A last stand by my pain to suck me in. I had to get off this drug to move on with my life. But it was so incredibly hard.

And I kept thinking about how, I am a good person. I am a strong person. I should be able to get through this. Why am I struggling so much?

My best friend was extremely supportive during the whole thing, constantly checking on me, praying for me, and sending me encouragement. And at one point she sent me a text that said, “I think the last two years were the toughest times of each of our lives (in different ways). Glad I get to see you on the other end.”

The other end. Wow. I honestly never thought I would ever get to see the other end. For a long time, I didn’t even think there was an “other end” to get to.

The idea that I could get to this proverbial “other end” though, it was enough to keep me going.

Honestly, I still feel like I was jumped, and then tossed in front of a train. But I’m doing a lot better than I was doing on day two. From what I can tell, the withdrawal symptoms can last anywhere from a week to months, but it’s those first 72 hours that are the most horrible. And I have made it through those.

I also discovered that there’s a cocktail of over-the-counter drugs that help. Specifically, I have been popping handfuls of Advil, Imodium and Benadryl.

I saw my brother this morning. And as I walked toward him, I felt like I was just regaining my footing after being in a plane crash. Still shaken up, disoriented and feeling like hell, I said, “Well, I’m finally feeling a little better. I made it to 72 hours.”

“Great. Now you have to make it a week,” he said.

Crap, I thought. He’s right.

Crystal Lindell is a journalist who lives in Illinois. She loves Taco Bell, watching "Burn Notice" episodes on Netflix and Snicker's Bites. She has had intercostal neuralgia since February 2013.

Crystal writes about it on her blog, “The Only Certainty is Bad Grammar.”

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.

Should Patients Learn to Live with Chronic Pain?

By Pat Anson, Editor

Chronic pain patients should learn how to live with their pain and pain relief should not be the primary focus of doctors who treat them, according to two influential physicians in a commentary published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

“Is a reduction in pain intensity the right goal for the treatment of chronic pain?” ask Jane Ballantyne, MD, and Mark Sullivan, MD. "We have watched as opioids have been used with increasing frequency and in escalating doses in an attempt to drive down pain scores — all the while increasing rates of toxic drug effects, exposing vulnerable populations to risk, and failing to relieve the burden of chronic pain at the population level."

“We propose that pain intensity is not the best measure of the success of chronic-pain treatment. When pain is chronic, its intensity isn't a simple measure of something that can be easily fixed," they wrote in answer to their question.

Ballantyne is President of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an advocacy group that seeks to end the overprescribing of opioid pain medication. She is also a member of the “Core Expert Group” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is consulting with in drafting new guidelines for opioid prescribing.

Sullivan is a professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Washington School of Medicine, and is executive director of Collaborative Opioid Prescribing Education (COPE), a program that educates healthcare providers about safe opioid prescribing practices.

In their commentary, Ballantyne and Sullivan say it’s a mistake for doctors to treat chronic pain sufferers the same way they would treat patients who are terminally ill or have short-term acute pain. They also recommend that doctors be less reliant on pain scales, such as the Wong-Baker pain scale, to measure pain intensity.

“Reliance on pain-intensity ratings tends to result in the use of opioid treatment for patients with mental health or substance abuse problems who are least likely to benefit from opioid treatment and most likely to be harmed by it,” they wrote.

“Borrowing treatment principles from acute and end-of-life pain care, particularly a focus on pain-intensity scores, has had unfortunate and harmful consequences. The titrate-to-effect principle fails when pain is chronic, because our best chronic-pain treatments don't produce an immediate or substantial change in pain intensity.

Instead of relying on opioids for pain relief, Ballantyne and Sullivan say chronic pain patients need “multimodal treatment” that includes physical and behavioral therapy. They also stress that patients should learn to accept pain and get on with their lives.

Many of the interdisciplinary and multimodal treatments recommended in the National Pain Strategy use coping and acceptance strategies that primarily reduce the suffering associated with pain and only secondarily reduce pain intensity. Willingness to accept pain, and engagement in valued life activities despite pain, may reduce suffering and disability without necessarily reducing pain intensity,” they wrote.

Ballantyne is one of five PROP board members who are advising the CDC about its opioid prescribing guidelines. Those guidelines, which recommend “non-pharmacological” and non-opioid treatments for chronic pain, are scheduled to be finalized in January 2016. A draft version of the guidelines was released in September and can be found here.

In a survey of over 2,000 pain patients by Pain News Network and the Power of Pain Foundation, 9 out of 10 said more people will suffer than be helped by the guidelines. Large majorities also predicted that doctors would prescribe fewer or no opioids, there would be more suicides in the pain community, and that the guidelines will result in more addiction and overdoses, not less.

Lyrica Fails in Nerve Pain Study

By Pat Anson, Editor

Lyrica was originally marketed as an anti-seizure medication for epilepsy, although that’s never stopped Pfizer from looking for new ways to have doctors prescribe its blockbuster drug -- for everything from anxiety to shingles to fibromyalgia.

But efforts to get Lyrica approved as a treatment for post-traumatic nerve pain appear to have reached a dead end. Pfizer says a Phase III clinical study found that pregabalin – the generic name for Lyrica – worked no better than a placebo in controlling chronic nerve pain caused by traumatic accidents or surgery.

“The study did not meet its primary efficacy endpoint,” Pfizer said in a brief statement about its 15-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

There is no treatment currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for post-traumatic neuropathic pain.

Lyrica is currently approved for use in over 130 countries. The FDA has approved Lyrica to treat chronic nerve pain caused by diabetes, fibromyalgia, epilepsy, spinal cord injury and post-herpetic neuralgia caused by shingles. The drug is also prescribed “off label” to treat a variety of other conditions, including lumbar spinal stenosis, the most common type of lower back pain in older adults.

According to ClinicalTrials.gov, dozens of new studies are underway to test the effectiveness of pregabalin on conditions such as muscle cramps, coughs, irritable bowel syndrome, scoliosis, addiction, and phantom limb pain.

Lyrica is Pfizer’s top selling drug with annual worldwide sales of over $5 billion. Earlier this year, the company agreed to pay $400 million to settle a shareholder lawsuit over allegations it marketed Lyrica and several other drugs off-label. The lawsuit stemmed from a $2.3 billion settlement with the federal government in 2009 for fraudulent marketing and illegal kickbacks paid to doctors who prescribed Lyrica and other Pfizer products.

Common side effects of Lyrica are dizziness, blurred vision, nausea, headache, weight gain and fatigue. Pfizer says Lyrica may also cause suicidal thoughts in about 1 in 500 patients who use it. The company also advises patients not stop taking Lyrica without talking to their doctor. Suddenly stopping the medication may result in withdrawal symptoms such as headaches, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, increased sweating, and anxiety.

Pfizer Expands Financial Aid to Patients

Pfizer recently announced it was expanding its financial assistance to patients by doubling the allowable income level for people to receive medications without a copayment.

Under Pfizer's RxPathways program, the company will cover copayments for Lyrica and 43 other medicines for both uninsured and underinsured patients earning up to four times the federal poverty level. The new limits are $47,080 annually for a single person and $97,000 for a family of four.

The RxPathways program helped about 350,000 patients last year, and Pfizer expects more this year because of the soaring cost of many drugs.

For more information about financial aid and discounts offered by other drugmakers, see our Patient Resources section.
 

Will CDC Guidelines Promote Addiction Treatment?

By Alison Knopf, Editor of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly

The quick answer to the question “Will treatment providers be able to treat patients coming in addicted to opioids because they have been thrown off their pain medications next year?” is no. The treatment system can’t even treat all the patients who need help now. But this question is on the minds of federal policymakers as the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) works on its forthcoming guidelines for physicians on prescribing opioids, due out next January (see ADAW, Nov. 16).

While the pain community is creating the loudest noise about the forthcoming guidelines, charging that they are not addicts and don’t want to be lumped in with them, the treatment community has on the one hand seen the benefits of decreasing the amount of prescription opioids available, but also seen the downside: patients who are dependent or addicted, who cannot successfully taper off the pain medications, will switch to heroin. Many started as legitimate pain patients.

But for some, when their doctors felt they no longer needed the pain medication, or thought the patient was doctor-shopping, or simply decided to go along with the calls to reduce the amount of prescriptions for opioids, it was difficult to stop, and they sought illicit sources of opioids.

The CDC confirmed to ADAW that there will be a guideline that “addresses treatment for opioid use disorder.” The draft guidelines leaked in September specifically recommended that an opioid agonist (methadone or buprenorphine) be arranged for patients who need treatment for an opioid use disorder. The CDC said the guidelines are continuing to be revised. Below is the wording of that recommendation from the September draft:

“Providers should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment (usually opioid agonist treatment in combination with behavioral therapies) for patients with opioid use disorder.”

SAMHSA Working With CDC

But how the primary care physician determines whether a patient has an opioid use disorder is unclear. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) expects there to be a change in prescribing practices — that’s the whole point of the guidelines. But according to Robert Lubran, director of the Division of Pharmacologic Therapies at SAMHSA’s Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT), it’s up to the physicians who are prescribing the medications to come up with a referral plan for their patients.

“I go back to what Westley Clark always said,” Lubran told ADAW, referring to the former director of CSAT. “He said the physician has to have an exit strategy for a patient he isn’t going to be prescribing opioids for anymore.” The physician has to determine if the patient is dependent on or addicted to the medication. Dependence is a normal result of regular opioid intake, addiction is pathological, but both will result in withdrawal symptoms when opioids are stopped suddenly. Someone who is dependent can be slowly tapered off the opioids and endure the craving that ensues. Someone who is addicted cannot stop and will seek opioids from another source.

“There has to be a place where the doctor can refer someone when the doctor determines that the patient can’t be safely tapered down because they are addicted,” said Lubran. A treatment provider specializing in opioid use disorders, such as an opioid treatment program (OTP) or office-based opioid treatment (OBOT), would be a good solution, he said. “We’re working with the CDC to make sure the guidelines include information on where to refer these patients,” Lubran told ADAW.

“We’re already struggling on the traditional medicine side with how a patient goes from being a pain patient to being an addict,” said Lubran. “They discharge them, but what about referrals? More states and counties need to be involved in recommendations for care,” said Lu, adding that insurance companies need to be involved as well.

Guidelines Not Mandatory

Mark Parrino, president of the American Association for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence (AA-TOD), said that as far as he knows, OTPs have not been involved in the development of the CDC guidelines. However, he expressed skepticism about the effect of the guidelines. “Will there be a reaction by physicians? Will this really change their practice patterns? Will there necessarily be a wholesale dumping of patients who are getting pain medications? I would hope not. But if that is the result, I would ask how we are going to know whether these patients will show up in treatment, or go into the street for drugs?”

Furthermore, said Parrino, these are just guidelines from the CDC. “Doctors aren’t even required to read the stuff,” he said. “They’ll issue a big press statement, yes. But it’s like package inserts. Do you really think every physician will be watching their computer for the guide-lines, saying ‘Now I need to change my medical practice?’”

The CDC itself says as much. “It is important to note that, like other CDC guidelines, including prevention and treatment of sexually treated diseases, the guidelines are intended to support informed clinical decision-making but are not mandatory (that is, physicians are not required to follow these guidelines),” according to Courtney Lenard of the CDC’s press office. The CDC’s guide-line is meant to “help primary care doctors provide safer, more effective care for patients with chronic pain” and at the same time “help reduce use, abuse and overdose from these powerful drugs,” the CDC’s press office told us last week. “The guideline is intended for primary care providers who treat adult patients (age 18 and older) for chronic pain in outpatient settings, and is not intended for patients who are in active cancer treatment, palliative care or end-of-life care.”

Asked if restrictions on prescription opioids will lead to increased use of heroin, however, the CDC continued to stick to the federal official answer, which is: No. “There is no robust evidence that recently enacted policies regarding prescription opioids are responsible for large-scale shifts to heroin,” said Lenard, adding that only 1 in 25 people who use prescription opioids nonmedically start using heroin within five years. However, she added that this “translates into a major and growing epidemic of heroin use given how widespread the misuse of prescription opioids has become.” Stopping the misuse of prescription opioids is the best way to stop the heroin epidemic, according to the CDC.

This article is republished with permission of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly, which provides news and analysis of federal and state public policy developments, private sector business developments, and provider issues and innovations in addiction treatment.

Most Americans Touched by Opioid Abuse

By Pat Anson, Editor

Over half of Americans say they know someone who has abused, been addicted to, or died from an overdose of opioid pain medication, according to a new survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The survey also found a surprising awareness among many Americans that it is easier for abusers to get access to opioids than it is for pain sufferers. Three out of four (77%) believe it is easy for people to get access to prescription opioids without a prescription.  

“The perception among the public is that the balance is currently in the abuser’s favor. More of the public says it’s easy for people to get access to painkillers not prescribed to them than say it is easy for people who medically need them,” the Kaiser report says.

Over half (58%) of Americans believe it is very easy or somewhat easy to get prescription opioids for medical purposes.

Over a third (40%) believe it is somewhat difficult or very difficult for a patient to get an opioid prescription.

Kaiser surveyed over 1,350 Americans adults by telephone in mid-November for its monthly tracking poll. For the first time the survey included questions about the public’s awareness and attitude about painkiller abuse.

The survey found that whites were far more likely than African-Americans or Hispanics to have a “personal connection” to the abuse of opioids. Nearly two thirds (63%) of whites said they know someone who has abused, been addicted to, or died from an overdose of painkillers. That compares to 44% of African-Americans and 37% of Hispanics.

That finding appears to support evidence of a surprising spike in the death rate of middle aged white Americans that was uncovered by two Princeton University researchers. They estimate that nearly half a million white baby boomers died early between 1999 and 2013, coinciding with a spike in the prescribing of opioid painkillers. Financial stress, pain and disability are also believed to have played a role in the those deaths.

Other findings in the Kaiser survey:

  • 16% of Americans know someone who has died from a prescription opioid overdose
  • 9% know a family member or close friend who died from an opioid overdose
  • 27% know someone who has been addicted to opioids
  • 2% admit they are addicted to opioids  
  • 45% know someone who has taken an opioid not prescribed for them
  • 6% admit taking an opioid not prescribed for them

The survey also found that the public was divided over the role government should have in addressing prescription painkiller abuse. Over a third (36%) believe the federal government should be primarily responsible, while 39% believe state government and 16% believe local government should be responsible for solving the problem.

‘Chili Pepper’ Patch Works Better Than Lyrica

By Pat Anson, Editor

A skin patch containing a synthetic substance found in chili peppers works better than pregabalin in treating patients with neuropathic pain, according to the results of a new study conducted in Europe.

Pregabalin is the generic name for Lyrica, a medication made by Pfizer that is widely prescribed for neuropathy, fibromyalgia and other chronic pain conditions.

Nearly 660 adults with moderate to serve peripheral neuropathic pain (PPN) caused by shingles were randomly assigned to groups receiving either a single treatment with the Qutenza patch or a daily dose of pregabalin.

The 8% capsaicin patch uses a synthetic form of capsaicin, the substance that gives chili peppers their heat, to dull pain-sensing nerves in the skin.

By the 8th week of the study, a little over half of the patients in both groups had achieved pain relief of at least 30 percent. However, the median time to pain relief in the capsaicin group was 7.5 days, compared to 36 days in the pregabalin group. Those who used the Qutenza patch were also more satisfied with their treatment and had fewer side effects.

The study, which is published in the European Journal of Pain, was funded by Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd., which makes the Qutenza patch.

"This is an important and well-conducted study that was designed to mimic everyday practice, allowing those patients randomised to the pregabalin arm to be individually titrated to the optimal tolerated dose,” said lead investigator Maija Haanpää, a professor in the Department of Neurosurgery at Helsinki University in Finland. “We found that topical treatment with the capsaicin 8% patch was non-inferior to the current standard of care. This means that there is now another treatment option for people with peripheral neuropathic pain, especially those patients who are very sensitive to the side effects of systemic medication or for those who do not wish to take tablets every day."

Until now, no head-to-head clinical trials have directly compared the capsaicin patch to pregabalin or other treatments for PNP.

"There is a need to tailor treatment to individual patients and these data show that the capsaicin 8% patch is an efficacious agent to manage patients with peripheral neuropathic pain," said Dr. Andreas Karas, Senior Director, Medical Affairs for Astellas Pharma.

In September of this year, the European Commission approved a label extension for Qutenza to include diabetic patients with neuropathic pain. In the United States, Qutenza has only been approved by the FDA for the management of neuropathic pain associated with postherpetic neuralgia.

Neuropathic pain is characterized by tingling pain that develops as a result of nerve damage caused by conditions such as shingles, diabetes, amputation, inflammation, and cancer. About 8% of adults worldwide suffer from neuropathy. Many drugs used to treat neuropathic pain, such as Neurontin and Lyrica, often don’t work or have unpleasant side effects. Common side effects of Lyrica are dizziness, nausea, headache, weight gain and fatigue.

In addition to neuropathic pain, Lyrica is approved by the FDA to treat chronic pain associated with fibromyalgia, epilepsy, shingles, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, and spinal cord injury. The drug is also prescribed “off label” to treat lumbar spinal stenosis, the most common type of lower back pain in older adults.

Lyrica is Pfizer’s top selling drug with annual worldwide sales of over $5 billion.

FDA Speeds Approval of Naloxone Nasal Spray

By Pat Anson, Editor

It usually takes years for the Food and Drug Administration to approve a new medication.

But it took less than four months for the agency to give the okay to Narcan, the first FDA approved nasal spray containing naloxone, an emergency life-saving medication that can stop or reverse the effects of an opioid overdose.

Opioids – both legal and illegal – can suppress breathing and cause sleepiness. When someone overdoses on an opioid they may fall asleep and be hard to wake, and their breathing can become shallow or even stop – leading to brain damage or death. If naloxone is administered quickly, it can counter the overdose effects, usually within two minutes.

“Combating the opioid abuse epidemic is a top priority for the FDA,” said Stephen Ostroff, MD, acting commissioner of the FDA. “While naloxone will not solve the underlying problems of the opioid epidemic, we are speeding to review new formulations that will ultimately save lives that might otherwise be lost to drug addiction and overdose.”  

image courtesy of adapt pharma

image courtesy of adapt pharma

Until now, naloxone was only approved in injectable forms, usually in a syringe or auto-injector. Many first responders and emergency room physicians felt a nasal spray formulation of naloxone would be easier and safer to deliver.

Narcan does not require assembly and delivers a consistent, measured dose of naloxone. It can be used on adults or children, according to the FDA, and is easily administered by anyone. The drug is sprayed into one nostril while the patient is lying on their back, and can be repeated if necessary.

The FDA granted fast track review of Narcan in July after a getting a new drug application from a unit of Adapt Pharma, which is based in Ireland.  In clinical trials, a single 4 mg dose of Narcan delivered the same levels of naloxone in about the same amount of time as an injection.

“We heard the public call for this new route of administration, and we are happy to have been able to move so quickly on a product we are confident will deliver consistently adequate levels of the medication – a critical attribute for this emergency life-saving drug,” said Janet Woodcock, MD, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

The use of Narcan in patients who are opioid dependent may result in severe withdrawal symptoms, such as body aches, diarrhea, increased heart rate, fever, runny nose, sneezing, sweating, nausea or vomiting, shivering and abdominal cramps.

Adapt Pharma says Narcan will be available after the first of the year and will initially have a “public interest price” of $75 for a package of two doses when ordered by public health  organizations.  The company has not disclosed pricing for other purchasers using private insurance or paying in cash.

“Anyone who uses prescription opioids for the long term management of chronic pain, or those who take heroin, are potentially at risk of experiencing a life-threatening or fatal opioid overdose where breathing and heart beat slow or stop,” the company said in a statement.

Should Johns Hopkins be Policing the Nanny State?

By Terri Lewis, Guest Columnist

I was copied a response to the recently issued document, "The Prescription Opioid Epidemic: An Evidence-Based Approach" published by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 

The 46-page document is full of pronouncements about what the proper course of action should be to rein in the abuse of opioids by people who experience unrelenting chronic pain on a daily basis.  The document is replete with terms like addict, addiction, surveillance, monitoring,  intervention, adherence, and conformance distributed across seven topical areas, all claiming to address the current evidence for the need to ramp up the nanny state:

#1: Prescribing Guidelines
#2: Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs
#3: Pharmacy Benefit Managers and Pharmacies
#4: Engineering Strategies
#5: Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution
#6: Addiction Treatment
#7: Community-Based Prevention

Nowhere, does this document even remotely address the fact that the onset of chronic pain is often an iatrogenic event that occurs as the result of medical harm or insufficiently delivered medical care. 

Nowhere, does this document address the financial and practical impact of these pronouncements on the ability of persons who have lost everything to illness to conform to protocols that turn healthcare delivery into a policing activity.

Everywhere, these protocols engender the further victimization, the institutionalization of marginalization, and stigmatization of the chronically ill as unworthy, incapable of protecting themselves, and potentially harmful to themselves and others because of the characteristics of their illness imposed disabilities. 

Every dollar that is proposed for expenditure in this document should be going to research designed to prevent and minimize the impact of chronic pain -- not punish it.  But this document, from a major public health training institution, completely fails to address the prevention and reduction of chronic pain as a public health issue of significant importance, and is focused instead on counting adherence, conformance and compliance activities that will (a) not lead to improved personal outcomes for consumers who live with chronic pain and (b) rob consumers of precious resources with which to live. 

These pronouncements reflect an ignorance of astounding proportion in understanding who persons with chronic pain actually are and the conditions under which they are forced to live.  Who does this document serve?  Who are we trying to protect?  

I am outraged.

And then this.  Into my email came a response to this smug, sanctimonious document from a woman in California who suffers from interstitial cystitis -- acquired through medications she received after treatment for shoulder and spinal injuries at the hands of her medical provider.  It's too good not to share:

To the misguided folk at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health:

This is my contribution to your little Town Hall hand-wringing session.

So, I guess you are jumping on the anti-opiate frenzy bandwagon.  Just another organization that feels compelled to point at anyone who takes opiates, and call us all "addicts" and not even considering those of us who suffer from severe CHRONIC PAIN (the kind That Never Ends) due to circumstances totally beyond our control.  My pain is not caused by any flaw in my character.  People like myself who see our doctors religiously and always take our medication responsibly.  What, are you being financially rewarded by punishing us?  What did we ever do to you?  Or are you just trying to Thin the Herd?  I guess Chronic Pain Patients' Lives DON'T Matter.

I'm talking to you.  I'm one of those people, who suffer from illnesses and or injuries that have already stolen our quality of life away from us, and pain that causes as much, and sometimes more, pain than cancer.  People who suffer from pain that only opiate prescription medication can dull.  And people like you, whom I will never meet, want to take that away from me.  A patient who has NEVER EVER ABUSED HER MEDICATION.  Not ONCE.  I am a 60 year old lady who worked her entire adult life and never once did anything to invite nor cause the condition that causes me terrible TERRIBLE pain.

My pain saga started with chronic tears to both my rotator cuffs, and a herniated cervical spine.  All from a desk job involving typing and mousing and staring at a computer monitor for years and years and years.  This activity has destroyed the tendons in both my shoulders and neck and herniated my spine.  And while that pain was bad enough, I figured it would eventually end.  I never envisioned that the pain would remain after my shoulders were carved up and stitched back together.  It was during my recovery from this surgery, that I began to experience the horrors of an incurable illness known as Interstitial Cystitis.

On bad days it feels like someone is taking a blowtorch to my genitalia.   In fact, Interstitial Cystitis is considered the Third Worst Pain in all of medicine.  Imagine, if you will, the sensation of hot lava being blasted through your bladder, vagina, colon and pelvic parts.  All the time.  Having the urge to urinate every 15 minutes -- or more often than that -- on bad days.  I am basically chained to a toilet.  And because the pain is ALWAYS much worse at night, I suffer from severe insomnia.  It is impossible to fall asleep or stay asleep with pain this bad.  My urologist opined that I would be better off if I suffered from Bladder Cancer, because there is at least a chance of recovery from that illness.

The only FDA authorized treatment for this condition is Elmiron, and it doesn't work on every patient.  In fact, it only works on maybe 25% of patients who suffer from this horrible condition.  It did nothing to help me with any of my symptoms but cause my hair to fall out and raise my liver enzymes to a dangerous level.  That's all our modern medical machine could do for me medically.  They sure as hell cannot cure this illness yet.  The only thing that medicine CAN offer is pain relief.  The only chance in hell I have of ever having a life without this horrible, searing, burning, aching, stabbing pain is if The Good Lord decides to send me into remission.  All a doctor can really do for me to help me is provide me with pain relief.

The only medication I take that takes the edge off of this pain is Norco.  I tried the Fentanyl patch, but it caused me to develop an intestinal blockage.  For obvious reasons, I had to discontinue that medication.  And while I intensely dislike taking ANY medication, I dislike the awful pain worse.  I have NEVER abused my medication.  I never take more than I am prescribed.  I do everything and anything that is asked of me, whether it involves blood tests and/or pissing into a cup.

So why am I going to be punished?  Answer me that question.  I just found out that my pain medication is going to be cut drastically OR terminated at my next visit to my pain doctor, which is this Friday.  It is not being taken away because I have ever abused my medication, or lied, or deceived, or stolen, or sold it.  I can only assume that my pain doctor is just too afraid of the DEA and the paperwork headache.  It will be easier for him to just dump me as a patient, and limit his practice to injections which make him more money anyway.  Well, guess what?  Injections have never done a thing to help my pain, and I have had quite a few.  I have had TENS units, Physical Therapy, Massage and Ultrasound.  I have tried just about everything that exists to reduce the horrendous pain I experience 24/7.  The only medicine with the fewest side effects that helps reduce pain is Norco.

We are a vulnerable part of the population who are being deprived of compassionate and adequate care to help us live our lives with a semblance of normalcy.  We are being punished for the irresponsible actions of people who would be addicted whether or not it was via opioids or anything else.  All of this noise is just that:  NOISE.  Mark my words:  all this brouhaha will not make one iota of difference in the epidemic you speak of.  People who are addicts will always find a way to get high.  That is what addicts do.  However, what your actions WILL do is cause an increase in suicides of people suffering from terrible TERRIBLE pain, who can no longer get medication that enables them to have something resembling a quality of life, and be semi-productive citizens. 

Yes.  The pain of illnesses like mine can and does drive good people to commit suicide if they can't get pain relief.  Or maybe these same people turn to other drugs they would never EVER consider if they received the compassionate care we are all entitled to.  That is what you will see start to happen.  I am sure that some of this surge in heroin use is by people who are in such terrible pain that they are desperate, and their doctors will not help them because of fear of the DEA and organizations like yours.  And then what will happen?  More "meetings" and "studies" and "head-scratching" about the spike in suicides?  How can you be so obtuse?

No one is speaking up about us. No one is helping us.  Chronic pain patients are being marginalized and treated like addicts, when we are not.  We can barely function because pain robs us of the ability to function, and we are already exhausted from this daily fight.  I guess we are easy targets.  Few of us possess the strength to march on numbers in Washington or anywhere else.  I know I couldn't.  I am so ill that I can barely leave my house.

I know what happens to me when I don't take my pain medication:  I experience much more severe pain.  I don't drool, or hallucinate, or stumble, or vomit, or shiver, or do anything but just cry buckets and buckets of tears, and huddle in a corner of my bed in the fetal position with bags of ice stuffed into my underwear to try and numb the horrible, searing pain of this illness.  And I guarantee that if any of you people making these horribly unjust decisions suffered from the condition I suffer from, that you would be begging for drugs to take the pain away.  I'm willing to stake what few dollars I still possess on that fact, because guess what?  This illness has also rendered me destitute and incapable of working at my job.  I can't even sit in a chair very long because of the pain.

So, in summary, what you are doing is KILLING US.  You, and 60 Minutes, and the CDC and the DEA and every other soulless agency that is carping about this.  If I weren't so sick from this horrible illness, and what it has done to my life, I would be laughing because of the incredible stupidity being displayed by a bunch of suits I will never meet.  Dumping every single person who takes opiates into a category you call "addiction" and shoving us off in the same leaky boat.  Yes.  You are killing us.

Name withheld to protect her privacy

For the record, this person also found out last week that her beloved husband of 20 years is in the throes of stage 4 kidney failure as a result of 5 years of treatment from a physician for arthritis -- resulting in an unidentified drug-drug interaction that has, unbeknownst to the physician, destroyed his patient's kidneys because he failed to monitor his patient or pay attention to known drug-drug interactions.

So who needs to be monitoring and surveilling here?  Who?  Does the public really need protection from persons with chronic pain who can barely leave their homes?  Or do persons in pain need protection from the public purveyors of unsound, impractical, and misguided policies? 

God spare us from the nanny state.

Terri Lewis, PhD, is a specialist in Rehabilitation practice and teaches in the field of Allied Health.  She is the daughter and mother of persons who have lived with chronic pain.

This column was reprinted with permission from the author.

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.

CDC Accused of ‘Blatant Violations’ of Federal Law

By Pat Anson, Editor

A pro-business legal foundation with a history of taking government agencies to court is asking the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to withdraw plans to release new guidelines for the prescribing of opioid pain medications.

In a letter to CDC Director Tom Frieden, the Washington Legal Foundation accused the agency of “blatant violations” of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which requires federal agencies to identify members of advisory committees and hold committee meetings in public. As Pain News Network has reported, the CDC has refused to publicly disclose the identities of the “Core Expert Group” that initially drafted the guidelines.

“The overly secretive manner in which CDC has been developing the Guideline serves the interests of neither the healthcare community nor consumers,” wrote Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) chief counsel Richard Samp in his letter to Frieden.

“More importantly, CDC’s repeated violations of the Federal Advisory Committee Act call into question the viability of the entire enterprise and dictate that any guidelines adopted as a result of the current administration process could not withstand judicial scrutiny. We call on CDC to withdraw the Draft Guideline and to generate reliable data on ways to ensure adequate treatment of patients while preventing opioid abuse before renewing efforts to write a guideline.”

The CDC’s draft guidelines for primary care physicians recommend “non-pharmacological therapy” as the preferred treatment for chronic non-cancer pain. Smaller doses and quantities of opioids are recommended when the drugs are prescribed for acute or chronic pain. Many pain sufferers fear they will lose access to opioids when the CDC plans to adopt the guidelines in January 2016. A complete list of the guidelines can be found here.

The identities of the CDC’s Core Expert Group (CEG) were leaked soon after the draft guidelines were released in September.  The group includes Jane Ballantyne, MD, President of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an advocacy group that seeks to end the overprescribing of opioids. PROP Vice President Gary Franklin, MD, is also part of CEG. Critics say Ballantyne, Franklin and several others who advised the CDC have a conflict of interest and never should have served as consultants on the guidelines.

The CDC says it withheld the identities of the Core Expert Group so its members could “provide honest and independent comment and feedback.” The agency also maintains that CEG does not qualify as a FACA advisory committee.

“CDC’s secrecy, and its apparent indifference to conflicts of interest by those likely to support news restrictions on opioids, have led many to conclude that CDC is uninterested in conducting administrative proceedings that give all interested stakeholders an equal opportunity to attempt to influence the agency’s decision making. If CDC is to overcome its tarnished image, it must immediately eliminate its culture of secrecy and apply its conflict-of-interest rules in an even handed manner,” Ramp wrote in his letter to Frieden and Debra Houry, director of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, which oversaw development of the guidelines.

A spokesman for the Washington Legal Foundation told Pain News Network the CDC had not yet responded to the group’s complaint. He also declined to say how the foundation would respond if the guidelines were not withdrawn.

WLF describes itself as a public interest law firm “that regularly litigates to ensure that federal administrative agencies comply with statutes designed to ensure procedural fairness.”  The non-profit foundation generally supports business groups and companies in litigation against  government agencies, and has represented or acted in behalf of pharmaceutical companies such as Johnson & Johnson and Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin. 

"We’re long-standing supporters of WLF, in addition to several other business and legal organizations. We’ve provided them with unrestricted grants," a spokesman for Purdue Pharma told Pain News Network.

WLF does not disclose the names of its donors. According to Greenpeace, WLF has accepted over $1 million in donations from foundations representing Charles and David Koch, two billionaire brothers who actively support conservative causes.

Senators Support CDC

With the CDC under fire from pain patients and advocacy groups, eight U.S. Senators have written a letter to Frieden expressing their support for the CDC’s guidelines.

“We are committed to doing everything in our power to bring this (opioid) epidemic under control because our communities are hurting. The problem will only grow worse if we fail to act,” the letter says. “We applaud the CDC for developing prescribing guidelines and for your efforts in the fight to end prescription drug abuse. We strongly urge you to maintain this commonsense approach when you release the final guidelines early next year.”

The letter is signed by Sens. Joe Manchin (WVa), Ed Markey (Mass), Tammy Baldwin (Wisc), Dianne Feinstein (Calif),  Jeanne Shaheen (NH), Bill Nelson (Fla), Richard Blumenthal (Conn) and Angus King (Maine).

Study Calls for End to ‘Permissive’ Opioid Prescribing

By Pat Anson, Editor

A major study released by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health is calling for new guidelines in the prescribing of opioid pain medication, including the repeal of “permissive and lax prescription laws and rules.”

The report also calls for sweeping changes in the way opioid prescriptions are dispensed and monitored, and would encourage insurance companies to provide information to federal regulators about “suspicious” pharmacies, prescribers and patients.

The Johns Hopkins report (which can be seen here) grew out of discussions that began last year at a town hall meeting on prescription opioid abuse hosted by the Bloomberg School and the Clinton Foundation. It was prepared primarily by a group of public health researchers, physicians, law enforcement officials and addiction treatment specialists.  

“A public health response to this crisis must focus on preventing new cases of opioid addiction, early identification of opioid-addicted individuals, and ensuring access to effective opioid addiction treatment, while at the same time continuing to safely meet the needs of patients experiencing pain,” wrote G. Caleb Alexander, MD, co-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness at the Bloomberg School.

It is widely recognized that a multi-pronged approach is needed to address the prescription opioid epidemic. A successful response to this problem will target the points along the spectrum of prescription drug production, distribution, prescribing, dispensing, use and treatment that can contribute to abuse; and offer opportunities to intervene for the purpose of preventing and treating misuse, abuse and overdose.”

The report calls on federal and state agencies, state medical boards and medical societies to require "mandatory tracking of pain, mood and function" at every patient visit, as well as patient contracts and urine drug tests.  Patients prescribed high doses of opioids would be required to consult with a pain management specialist.

“It sounds like an aggressive government intrusion into the practice of medicine and is punitive towards providers willing to help people in pain. It certainly is a threat.  Every physician in America should be concerned if these recommendations are adopted,” said Lynn Webster, MD, past President of the American Academy of Pain Medicine.

“I am amazed that one of our finest educational institutions in America failed to address the source of the prescription drug abuse problem in their report.  Not once did the report discuss the lack of safe effective treatments for pain.  They almost totally ignored the needs of people in pain.  Yet it is number one public health problem in America. Their focus was myopic and represents a narrow and prejudicial view of people in pain.”

One of the more controversial recommendations in the report would expand access to prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) to private insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs). Access to those databases, which track prescriptions for opioids and other controlled substances, are currently restricted to regulators, law enforcement and physicians.

"It is a very bad idea to allow law enforcement or even payers to have access to PDMPs without a cause approved by a judge.  This is personal medical information that should be protected," said Webster in an email to Pain News Network.  

Under the Johns Hopkins plan, insurers would be encouraged to report suspicious prescribing activity to federal regulators and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

“Allowing managed care plans and PBMs access to PDMP data will improve upon their current controlled substances interventions that have been shown to positively influence controlled substances utilization,” the report states. “All PBMs should provide a list of suspicious pharmacies, prescribers and beneficiaries to the National Benefit Integrity Medicare Drug Integrity Contractor (MEDICs). Using the actionable PBM data they are receiving, MEDICs should be reporting potential providers for removal to the CMS.” 

The report also calls for mandatory use of PDMPs by prescribers and pharmacies, more training for medical students in pain management, expanded federal funding of addiction treatment, and greater access to naloxone, a drug that can reverse the effect of an opioid overdose.

“What’s important about these recommendations is that they cover the entire supply chain, from training doctors to working with pharmacies and the pharmaceuticals themselves, as well as reducing demand by mobilizing communities and treating people addicted to opioids,” said Andrea Gielen, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Injury Research and Policy at the Bloomberg School and one of the report’s signatories.

“Not only are the recommendations comprehensive, they were developed with input from a wide range of stakeholders, and wherever possible draw from evidence-based research.”

One of the ”stakeholders” and a signatory of the Johns Hopkins report is Andrew Kolodny, MD, founder of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an advocacy group that seeks to end the overprescribing of opioids. Kolodny, who has collaborated with Dr. Alexander on other prescribing studies, is chief medical officer of Phoenix House, a non-profit that operates a chain of addiction treatment centers. According to a note on PROP's website, "PROP is a program of Phoenix House Foundation."

Kolodny has referred to opioid pain medication as “heroin pills” and has called for expanded access to buprenorphine, a weaker opioid widely used to treat both addiction and pain.

The Johns Hopkins report would greatly expand the use of buprenorphine by ending the 100 patient limit on the number of people that DEA licensed physicians can treat with buprenorphine at any one time. It would also require federally funded addiction treatment programs, such as those offered by Phoenix House, to allow patients access to buprenorphine.

Although praised by Kolodny and many addiction treatment specialists as a tool to wean addicts off opioids, some are fearful buprenorphine is already overprescribed and misused. Addicts have learned they can use buprenorphine to ease their withdrawal symptoms and some consider it more valuable than heroin as a street drug.

"The 100 patient limit is going to be lifted. It is going to create buprenorphine pill mills and increase the abuse of heroin. You will have more doctors getting the DEA exemption as they would not be subject to visit by DEA inspectors checking on the patient limit," said Percy Menzes, president of Assisted Recovery Centers of America, which operates four addiction treatment clinics in the St. Louis, Missouri area.

Over three million Americans with opioid addiction have been treated with buprenorphine. According to one estimate, about half of the buprenorphine obtained through legitimate prescriptions is either being diverted or used illicitly.