Steroids Raise Risk of Hospitalization for Sickle Cell Patients

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

People with sickle cell disease who are prescribed a corticosteroid – an anti-inflammatory medicine often used to treat pain – are significantly more likely to be hospitalized with a severe pain episode, according to a new study.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a genetic disorder that causes red blood cells to form in a crescent or sickle shape, which creates painful blockages in blood vessels known as vaso-occlusive episodes (VOE), which can lead to infections, strokes and organ failure. About 100,000 Americans live with SCD, primarily people of African or Hispanic descent.

“Individuals living with SCD often suffer crippling episodes of pain, which can greatly impair their quality of life,” said Ondine Walter, MD, of Toulouse University Hospital in France, lead author of the study published in the journal Blood.

Walter and her colleagues looked at medical data for over 5,100 patients with SCD in the French National Health Insurance Database between 2010 and 2018. Patients had to have at least one hospitalization for VOE to be included, and their corticosteroid exposure was identified using outpatient prescribing records.

Researchers found that patients exposed to a corticosteroid in the month prior to a pain flare were nearly four times more likely to be hospitalized for VOE than those who did not get a steroid. The median time between filling a prescription for a corticosteroid and hospitalization was just five days.

Nearly half the patients (46%) were prescribed a corticosteroid during the study period, an indication of just how common steroid treatment is for SCD. Walter said the results demonstrate the need for better education of clinicians and patients about the potential risks of corticosteroids, especially when there isn’t a clear reason to use them.

“Based on our data, corticosteroids are commonly prescribed for conditions unrelated to their underlying SCD. Vaso-occlusive events and related hospitalization appear to follow corticosteroid prescription fairly quickly. This evidence suggests corticosteroids may be contributing to the events and should be avoided as much as possible in these patients,” Walter said. “Corticosteroids are mostly easy to avoid, and in circumstances when they are necessary, it’s important to start them in collaboration with an SCD expert and to take all appropriate precautionary measures to administer them safely.”

The American Society of Hematology’s Clinical Practice Guideline recommends against using corticosteroids for acute pain in SCD patients.

The French research team also found that SCD patients taking the drug hydroxyurea had about half the risk of being hospitalized for VOE than those not taking it, which may indicate the drug has a protective effect. Hydroxyurea is often prescribed to SCD patients to reduce the number of pain flares and the need for blood transfusions. Men benefited from hydroxyurea more than women and children.

It’s not uncommon for someone with SCD to visit an emergency room a few times each year due to acute pain or complications such as anemia. Many are disappointed by the experience. A 2021 survey of SCD patients in the U.S. found that nearly two-thirds felt ER staff were rude, ignorant or misinformed about sickle cell disease, didn’t take their pain seriously or believed they were drug seekers.

A Pained Life: My Teaching Moment

By Carol Levy, PNN Columnist

There are not many positives to being in chronic pain, or having the disorders and diseases that cause it. But I think I found one.

Being harassed for not being able to wear a mask was a horrific experience for me. No good could come out of it, I thought, until I realized it could have been a perfect teaching moment.

I complained to a friend, who also has trigeminal neuralgia, how upsetting it was to be mask shamed, and that I feared it would happen again.

Her response was to send me a business-sized card to hand out that explained why I couldn't mask.

It reads: “I have facial pain. Any touch to the side of my face causes horrific pain. That is why I can’t wear a mask.”

I liked the card, but didn't feel comfortable handing it out. I put it in a drawer and left it there. But then, at the dental clinic, I was repeatedly handed a mask and told, “You need to put this on.”

Each time I had to pull out my doctor's note and explain why I would not and could not mask. It became very tiresome.

Then I remembered the card. I thought it needed to be more explicit and instructive, so I made another card that says this:

“Trigeminal neuralgia is a neurological disorder of the 5th cranial nerve that gives sensation to your face. With trigeminal neuralgia the sensation is severe, often excruciating pain, on its own as well with any touch to the affected area of the face involved.”

On my next visit to the dental clinic, I was handed a mask. Instead of saying, “I can't” and having the back and forth of “Why not?” and “A mask can't hurt you,” I handed her my and card said, “This is why I can't mask.”

She read it and said, “Okay. You don’t need to mask.”

It was a perfect way to educate her about trigeminal neuralgia, and cut off the debate that often ensues.

It’s easy to make a card. The small size of a business card makes it difficult to do anything but present the most important parts of the disorder or disease we have. For instance, for CRPS it could read:

“I have a disorder called CRPS, or complex regional pain syndrome. It is caused by dysfunction of nerves that carry pain signals to the brain. It causes spontaneous and touch-induced pain that is often disabling.”

Of course, that is not a full description of CRPS, but gives just enough information to be instructive and hopefully understandable to those who ask why you can’t do something.

Handing out the card makes me feel good. It’s a teachable moment. Being able to educate others may be the best thing we can do for ourselves. 

Carol Jay Levy has lived with trigeminal neuralgia, a chronic facial pain disorder, for over 30 years. She is the author of “A Pained Life, A Chronic Pain Journey.”  Carol is the moderator of the Facebook support group “Women in Pain Awareness.” Her blog “The Pained Life” can be found here.

UK Warns Pregnant Women About Taking Pregabalin

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Health officials in the UK are warning women of childbearing age that pregabalin (Lyrica), a drug commonly prescribed for pain, anxiety and epilepsy, raises the risk of major birth defects.

A recent study in four Nordic countries of over 2,700 pregnancies found that 5.6% of babies born to women who took pregabalin in the first three months of pregnancy had birth abnormalities. That compares to 4.1% of babies whose mothers did not use pregabalin.  

“The study showed that taking pregabalin during early pregnancy was associated with a slightly increased chance of having a baby who is born with a physical birth abnormality. It is important to note that this study could not show that pregabalin was the cause of the physical birth abnormalities,” the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said in a new safety alert.

The birth defects associated with pregabalin primarily involved the nervous system, eyes, face, urinary system and genitals. The MHRA – which regulates drugs in the UK – cautioned pregnant women not to stop taking pregabalin without talking to a doctor first.

“If you think you may be pregnant and are currently taking pregabalin, you should set up an appointment with your GP, specialist or nurse at your earliest opportunity, to discuss any concerns you may have. However, do continue to take pregabalin as prescribed until you can speak to them,” the MHRA alert said. “Untreated epilepsy, pain, or anxiety could be harmful to you and your unborn baby. It is important that you talk to your healthcare professional before stopping pregabalin or making any changes to your usual medicines.”

An international study in 2016 also linked pregabalin to birth defects. Women taking pregabalin were found to be six times more likely to have a baby with a major birth defect, including abnormalities in the heart, central nervous system (CNS) and other organs.

Pregabalin Concerns

In recent years, pregabalin has come under increased scrutiny in the UK.  In 2021, the MHRA said pregabalin was associated with serious breathing problems in people over age 65 and in patients with compromised respiratory systems.

Doctors in Northern Ireland were also told last year not to prescribe pregabalin for neuropathic pain due to a “significant increase” in drug-related deaths involving the drug.

In 2019, pregabalin and gabapentin (Neurontin) were both rescheduled as Class C drugs in the UK due to a rising number of overdose deaths. Health experts said the medications cause “an elevated mood in users” and could have serious side effects when combined with other drugs.

Lyrica and Neurontin are two of Pfizer’s top selling drugs and generate billions of dollars in annual sales. They belong to a class of nerve medication called gabapentinoids that were originally developed to treat seizures, but are now widely prescribed as an alternative to opioid painkillers. A 2019 study found little evidence that gabapentinoids should be used to treat pain and said their effectiveness was often exaggerated by prescribing guidelines.

In the United States, where Lyrica is approved for fibromyalgia, neuropathic pain, seizures and postherpetic neuralgia, the FDA’s lengthy warning label states that “there are no adequate and well-controlled studies with Lyrica in pregnant women,” but at the same time cautions that “Lyrica may harm your unborn baby.”  

An earlier warning label said it was “not known if Lyrica will harm your unborn baby.”

What Are the Long-Term Risks of Prescription Opioids?

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

A standard critique of prescription opioids is the absence of good long-term data on safety and efficacy. Clinical trials are generally short-term and last only a few weeks, so questions about cumulative long-term risks, including addiction and overdose, remain unclear.

Clinical trials that run for a year or more are complex and costly. Attrition may be high and outcomes may be muddied by the inevitable effects of aging, disease progression, and life events. There are also ethical issues involved with subjecting patients to long-term trials where they may receive nothing more than a placebo.

In other words, launching new trials is often impractical. Fortunately, there are a few other ways to answer questions about long-term opioid risk.

Compare Outcomes

First, we can compare outcomes among patients whose key difference is opioid dosage. In a recent Canadian study, researchers looked at over 2 million individuals in Ontario given an opioid prescription between 2013 and 2016 for pain. They identified 1,121 patients who had a fatal or non-fatal overdose – a minuscule overdose rate of 0.0055 percent.

But when compared to patients getting relatively low daily doses of 20 morphine milligram equivalents (MME), those who received 200 MME or more had a “high hazard of overdose.”  

A dose of 200 MME may be an extreme example, since Canadian guidelines recommend that initial doses be limited to no more than 50 MME. But researchers said their study proves the value of guidelines. 

“Although the absolute risk of an opioid overdose within the first year of prescription opioid use is low, better alignment of opioid initiation practices with guidelines may reduce opioid-related harm,” they concluded. 

Compare Opioids 

Second, we can compare two opioids: oxycodone and hydrocodone. In a retrospective analysis of patients in Oregon between 2015 and 2017, researchers found that after an initial prescription in opioid-naive people, 0.3% experienced a fatal or non-fatal overdose and 2.8% refilled an opioid prescription at least six times, what the researchers considered “chronic opioid use.” 

Patients who received oxycodone were less likely to develop chronic use than those receiving hydrocodone, but the oxycodone patients had a slightly higher risk of overdose.  

Based on that finding, researchers concluded that “hydrocodone may be the favorable agent” when starting people on opioids. 

Compare Odds

We can also use statistical inference to estimate risks. In an analysis of 13,884 U.S. adults living with chronic pain between 1999 and 2004, epidemiologists found that 5% died from all causes within 3 years and 9% died within 5 years.  

Researchers found that chronic pain patients on opioids had a slightly higher risk of death – and calculated an odds ratio of 1.06 for them dying within three years and 1.03 at five years compared to those not taking opioids.  

It’s hard to infer much from a study like that, because researchers didn’t establish a causal relationship between opioids and death. Since chronic pain itself raises the risk of dying, the findings could simply mean that patients on opioids are sicker, in more pain, and closer to death.  

Despite this, researchers came to the sweeping conclusion that “chronic pain increased the risk of all-cause mortality through opioid prescriptions.” 

Compare Health Outcomes 

Last, we can look at health outcomes. An alarming, preliminary study from Taiwan evaluated chronic pain patients on long-term opioid therapy and found they have significantly higher risk for cancer compared to those not taking opioids. 

The overall hazard ratio for the opioid group was 2.66 – which means they have over twice the risk of having many different types of cancer. 

“Long-term opioid use might be a significant risk factor for breast, gastric, colorectal, ovarian, prostate, lung, pancreatic, head and neck, and esophageal cancers and HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma),” researchers concluded in their study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed. 

Risks of Other Drugs 

These findings help shed light on the long-term risks of prescription opioids, at least compared to healthy control subjects who do not take opioids. However, that is not the situation faced by most people with chronic illness, who are often on multiple medications to manage their pain and other symptoms.  

As a result, we need to know the risks of non-opioid pain management options. For instance, the consequences of cannabis addiction are low compared to opioids. But the cancer risk appears to be substantially higher. A major review in BMC Archives of Public Health found that “cannabinoids including THC and cannabidiol are important community carcinogens exceeding the effects of tobacco or alcohol.”

The risks of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are well-known. According to a 2011 review, “chronic NSAID use increases the risk of peptic ulcer disease, acute renal failure, and stroke/myocardial infarction. Moreover, chronic NSAID use can exacerbate a number of chronic diseases including heart failure and hypertension.” 

For other non-opioid medications, we lack long-term studies. For instance, a 2017 Cochrane review on gabapentin for chronic neuropathic pain notes that “study duration was typically four to 12 weeks.” Cochrane also notes that only short-term trials were conducted for serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors like duloxetine for fibromyalgia.  

As for non-pharmacological options like spinal cord stimulators, the situation is similarly uncertain. A new Australian study in the Journal of Patient Safety found that for every 10 stimulators that were surgically implanted, four had to me removed for various reasons. That outcome went unnoticed in short-term studies and emphasizes the need for more careful patient selection and monitoring of outcomes.  

There are real risks to prescription opioids but it would be simplistic to dismiss them entirely. As pain physician Antje Barreveld notes in a recent STAT News op-ed: “Opioids do have a place in pain control and can be safely prescribed, even at high doses, by following best practices while monitoring for risks and side effects.” 

Understanding the long-term risks of prescription opioids will be important as the CDC finalizes its revised opioid guideline, and as regulators, insurers and clinicians decide how to act on them. But more generally, we need long-term studies of all pain management modalities so that we can better understand their risks.

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. 

Prescription Opioid Use Fell Nearly 7% in 2021

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Prescription opioid use in the United States fell by 6.9% in 2021, the tenth consecutive year the volume of opioid pain medication has declined, according to a new report by the IQVIA Institute, a healthcare data tracking firm.

The decline in opioid consumption came even as prescription drug use overall reached record levels in 2021, fueled in part by new COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics. Spending on medicines rose 12% to $407 billion last year, according to IQVIA, with 194 billion doses of medication dispensed.

While longer opioid prescriptions were written in the early stages of the pandemic to accommodate patients who didn’t see their doctors as often, prescribing quickly returned to its decade-long downward trend.

“Prescription opioid use has fallen by 48% over the past five years and is now at levels last seen in 2000, reflecting efforts by many stakeholders to limit and manage appropriate prescription opioid use,” IQVIA said in its annual report on medicines in the U.S.      

IQVIA tracks opioid prescriptions in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). The company estimates that per capita opioid use fell to 309 MME last year (about 0.84 MME per day), down from a peak of nearly 800 MME in 2011.

Some providers have reduced their opioid prescribing more than others. Since 2016, surgeons, anesthesiologists, dentists and general practitioners have cut their opioid prescribing by over 50 percent, while nurse practitioners and physician assistants have reduced their prescribing by 27 percent.

Prescription Opioid Use and by Prescriber Specialty

Opioid consumption by Americans has fallen so sharply in recent years that Canada, Australia and several European countries have overtaken the U.S. and become the highest consumers of opioid medication. A recent study ranks the U.S. as 8th globally in per capita opioid sales.

The decline in U.S. opioid prescribing has failed to stop the surge in overdoses. The CDC estimates that 106,854 people died from drug overdoses in the 12-month period ending November 2021, with drug deaths more than doubling in the last six years. Synthetic opioids – primarily illicit fentanyl – were involved in about two-thirds of fatal overdoses in the past year.

Patients Blamed for Diversion 

Despite the historic decline in prescription opioid use, some politicians continue to blame opioid medication, prescribers and even patients for the nation’s overdose epidemic.

In comments recently submitted to the CDC on its revised opioid guideline, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and 10 other state attorneys general said the agency needs to do more to prevent the diversion of prescription opioids.

“Diversion must remain a key consideration of any prescribing guideline,” said Morrisey.

“Although drug dealers and unethical physicians are responsible for much of the opioid diversion nationwide, legitimate prescriptions remain a prime source of diversion, too. Diverted opioids most commonly reach drug abusers through friends and family members who filled a legitimate prescription.

“The amount of opioids prescribed in recent years has been excessive and far beyond the amount necessary to support legitimate medical need.”

— Patrick Morrisey, West Virginia Attorney General

“Indeed, the amount of opioids prescribed in recent years has been excessive and far beyond the amount necessary to support legitimate medical need. And over-prescription allows legitimate prescriptions to fall into the hands of patients’ family and friends.”

How common is it for prescription opioids to be diverted? Not common at all, according to the DEA’s National Drug Threat Assessment, an annual report that estimates less than 1% of legally prescribed opioids are diverted.  “The number of opioid dosage units available on the retail market and opioid thefts and losses reached their lowest levels in nine years,” the DEA’s 2020 report found.

Despite this, Morrisey puts the onus on pain patients to prove that they’re not abusing or selling their prescriptions. He and the other attorneys general called for routine drug testing of pain patients – rejecting evidence that fraud is common is the drug testing industry and that widely used point-of-care urine tests often give false results that lead to patient abandonment.

“The given reasons that toxicology screenings might lead to ‘stigmatization,’ encourage ‘inappropriate termination from care,’ or be ‘misinterpreted’ are unsatisfactory,” Morrisey wrote. “First, what stigma would the patient face? Diagnostic results are private information. The only people who would know that the test is performed are the patient and the prescriber. The prescriber is already familiar with the patient’s prescriptions, so this process would not reveal any new information -- unless, of course, the patient had lied or not followed the prescriber’s directions.”

Remarkably, the 7-page letter from Morrisey never acknowledges that most drug deaths involve street drugs, not prescription opioids, and makes no mention of fentanyl. The most recent overdose data from West Virginia – Morrisey’s home state – indicates nearly 3 out of 4 drug deaths involve fentanyl.    

Morrisey’s letter was co-signed by the attorneys general of Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi,
Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Kentucky and Virginia.

FDA Warns Supplements for Pain Contain Undeclared Drugs

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers not to purchase or use dietary supplements marketed for pain relief under the brand names “Artri King” or “Ortiga” due to potentially dangerous ingredients not listed on their labels. Use of the products has led to at least one death, according to the FDA.

The Artri King and Ortiga supplements are promoted as treatments for arthritis, muscle aches, osteoporosis, bone cancer and other painful conditions – and list ingredients such as glucosamine, turmeric and Omega 3. But FDA laboratory analyses found the supplements also contain undeclared drugs such as steroids, muscle relaxants and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs):

• Dexamethasone (a corticosteroid) is commonly used to treat inflammatory conditions. It can impair a person’s ability to fight an infection and at high doses can cause increased blood glucose levels, changes in blood pressure, damage to bones, psychiatric problems and adrenal dysfunction.

• Diclofenac sodium (a NSAID) can raise the risk of cardiovascular problems, such as heart attack and stroke; serious gastrointestinal damage, including bleeding, ulcers, and fatal tears of the stomach and intestines; and liver toxicity that can result in death or the need for a liver transplant.

• Methocarbamol (a muscle relaxant) can cause sedation, dizziness and low blood pressure.

Artri King advertisement

The FDA urges consumers taking the supplements to immediately talk to a healthcare provider about safely discontinuing their use because suddenly stopping the undeclared drugs may be dangerous. The drugs may also interact with other medications a person is taking.

The FDA said it has received reports of adverse events, including liver toxicity and death, associated with the use of Artri Ajo King supplements since the agency issued its first warning on January 5, 2022. A second warning about Artri King was issued this week.

The FDA’s new warnings include Ortiga Mas Ajo Rey and Ortiga Mas Ajo Rey Extra Forte supplements, which are promoted as treatments for joint pain and arthritis.

Artri King and Ortiga sold their products on various websites, including Amazon, Walmart and E-Bay, as well as some retail stores, primarily targeting Spanish-speaking consumers.

Acetaminophen Warning Labels Ineffective

Sometimes warnings from government health agencies don’t have their intended impact. Such is the case for warnings from Health Canada about taking high doses of acetaminophen, a pain reliever widely used in over-the-counter medicines for headache, cough, cold and flu.

Product labels for acetaminophen were changed in Canada in 2009 to warn of the risk of possible liver damage. In 2016, the labeling was updated with additional information about safe dosing and to identify products containing acetaminophen.

But those changes did not decrease rates of hospitalization for acetaminophen overdoses, according to a new study published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).  In an analysis of more than 12 000 hospital admissions for acetaminophen overdoses in Canada between 2004 and 2020, researchers found the updated warning labels had little impact.

"We found that changes to acetaminophen labels that communicated the risks of overdose and the presence of acetaminophen in over-the-counter products did not affect rates of hospital admission for accidental acetaminophen overdose, ICU admission for accidental acetaminophen overdose and admission for acetaminophen overdoses involving opioids," writes lead author Dr. Tony Antoniou, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto.

Previous research has found that less than half of patients regularly read labels for over-the counter analgesics, and only 26% read the active ingredients before using them the first time. Acetaminophen is used in so many different products that consumers may be unaware how much they’re taking. As a result, up to 6% of patients exceed the maximum daily recommended dose.

The FDA warned U.S. consumers about the risk of acetaminophen causing liver injury in 2009. Five years later, the agency told manufacturers to stop selling drug products with more than 325 milligrams of acetaminophen per dose.

Those actions have done little to prevent adverse reactions to acetaminophen. According to the FDA’s Adverse Events Reporting System, nearly 2,800 adverse events involving acetaminophen were reported in 2009. By 2021, the number of adverse events had grown to over 15,000, a 440% increase. Over 27,000 drug deaths involving acetaminophen were reported from 2009 to 2021.

Breathless: My Anger at a Failing Body

By Cynthia Toussaint, PNN Columnist

Once upon a time, life was easy. Breathing was a breeze, lungs filled with promise and hope.

Then I got sick. Really sick. Of late, when I look back at the last forty years, I’m uncharacteristically angry that my Complex Regional Pain Syndrome stole my life, taking that breath away.

I’m spitting mad that my body keeps failing me. It’s seemingly giving me the finger for having a positive attitude and taking care of myself, as all I get is sicker and sicker. I’m tired of being the good sport, forever the one with “super human strength” who flashes a smile no matter what.

I hate 2022, as it’s trending to be my most miserable year yet. If it ain’t one thing, it’s another. To start, I had a monster of a virus all of January, most of March, and my symptoms are here again in mid-April. I can’t shake this ever-revolving bug that perplexes my doctors.

They can’t figure out my debilitating fatigue, laryngitis and diarrhea, all complimented by vertigo and, yes, difficulty breathing. Even my once heavenly swims have turned into an exercise of wheezing and gasping.

I recently got a work-up including labs and chest x-ray, but everything came out normal. A friend mentioned her concern that I might have symptoms of an impending heart attack. Yeah, wouldn’t be surprised.

I’m also mad as hell because COVID never ends. At least not for me. When we were all in this together, the isolation was do-able. In fact, it was comforting because, for once, I wasn’t the only one alone.

But now I’m left behind because being immuno-compromised with an assembly of autoimmune conditions puts me at high risk for long COVID. I feel lonelier than ever watching the world reconnect, while hearing of new variants and upcoming surges.

To top it off, my vaccines and booster shots were hell. With each dose, I’m left reeling with intense fibro flares, hives and many of my previous chemotherapy side-effects. Oh, did I mention I fought Triple Negative Breast Cancer in 2020, the WORST thing I’ve ever been through?

Breathe, Cynthia. Breathe.      

And then there’s this. During the rare times I escape the condo, N95 dutifully strapped on, I resent the never-ending pity looks and pointing because I use a wheelchair. Folks, it’s been FOUR DECADES of this transportation humiliation. I feel like I’m going to lose it the next time someone looks beyond me to ask my partner John what my name is. Or gives me the classic, “It’s so good that people like you get out.”

I find myself staring in awe at people who can walk without a thought. They’re free and don’t even know it. I must admit, these days I resent them for it. When I’m outside, seems it’s always just me and some little old man who are in this wheeled imprisonment. I even resent the old man, cuz he got his turn at life.

This post wouldn’t be complete without exhaling a potentially catastrophic cliff-hanger. Yeah, I’m talking about the aforementioned “Big C.” Since remission, I live in constant fear that it will recur much more aggressively in the first two years, what Triple-Negative is masterful at!

A few days ago, I went in for my periodic breast exam, a ritual that keeps me from hyperventilating during my MRIs. The exams have always been clear, which helps me get through the maelstrom of “scanxiety.”

I felt oddly confident this go-around, even enjoying small talk with my oncologist. After all, this was the lead up to my two-year MRI. I was almost home free when the energy in the room shifted. Completely. My doctor found an enlarged lymph node under my arm that he thinks is a recurrence. Or, better yet, a whole new cancer.

I’m suffocating.   

While I await my imaging results, I’m short-tempered and yell a lot. The cats run under the bed. Fearing the worst, I wonder if my body can fight aggressive cancer again. Let’s face it, I won’t have a good shot the second time around.

Also, in my darkest moments, I’m not certain I have a life worth fighting for. I love myself deeply, but am struggling these days to find gratitude in a world that feels devoid of grace.

I don’t get it. I swear, I’ve been a good person my whole life. I’ve played by the rules, worked hard and always helped the less fortunate.

People tell me to be positive, but I’m just angry. Maybe my rage will turn back to strength and unflagging perseverance. Maybe not. All I know is that I can’t catch my breath. 

Cynthia Toussaint is the founder and spokesperson at For Grace, a non-profit dedicated to bettering the lives of women in pain. She has lived with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) and 19 co-morbidities for four decades, and became a cancer survivor in 2020. Cynthia is the author of “Battle for Grace: A Memoir of Pain, Redemption and Impossible Love.”

Cannabis Legalization Reduced Rx Drug Use for Several Conditions, Not Just Pain

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Cannabis products are often touted for their pain relieving properties and some studies have shown that medical marijuana can even help patients reduce their use of opioids.

But a large new study by researchers at Cornell University found that legalization of recreational marijuana significantly reduced demand for a broad range of prescription drugs used to treat depression, anxiety, seizures and other health conditions.

The study, published in the journal Health Economics, looked at prescription data for Medicaid patients in all 50 states from 2011 to 2019, focusing on 11 states where the recreational use of cannabis was legalized: Arizona, Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

Researchers found significant reductions in Medicaid prescribing rates for pain and five other condition-specific drug classes after the first year of legalization:

• -12.2% Anxiety

• -11.1% Depression

• -10.8% Sleep  

• -10.7% Psychosis

•  -9.5% Seizures

•    -8% Pain

Prescribing rates for the six conditions declined even more in the second and third years after recreational cannabis was legalized.

"These results have important implications," wrote lead author Shyam Raman, a doctoral student in the Cornell Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy. "The reductions in drug utilization that we find could lead to significant cost savings for state Medicaid programs. The results also indicate a potential harm reduction opportunity, as pharmaceutical drugs often come with dangerous side effects or – as with opioids – potential for misuse.”

Raman and his colleagues did not see a measurable change in the prescribing of drugs used to treat nausea, spasticity or glaucoma. They also note that their study did not look at the health of patients who stopped or reduced their use of prescription drugs, or at the long-term effects of substituting cannabis for pharmaceuticals.

A small study at Harvard Medical School recently found that chronic pain patients reported significant improvements in their pain, sleep, mood, anxiety and quality of life after six months of cannabis therapy.

Recreational cannabis is now legal in 18 states and Washington, DC, while medical marijuana is legal in 37 states and Washington, DC. Cannabis has become so popular — and accessible — that a recent Harris poll found that twice as many Americans are using cannabis or cannabidiol (CBD) to manage their pain than opioids.

While the findings are intriguing, the small number of patients involved in most cannabis studies makes it hard to draw firm conclusions. In 2021, two professional pain societies – the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) and the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists -- released policy statements saying they could not endorse the use of cannabis for pain because there are no large, high-quality clinical trials of cannabis as an analgesic.

HIPAA-critical Vaccine Exemptions

By Mia Maysack, PNN Columnist

A friend recently invited me to a concert that demanded proof of full vaccination against covid or at least a medical exemption from getting one. 

I want to make it clear that I'm not an "anti-vaxxer." But I personally do not feel that I can tell another person what to do with their own body. I exist as a chronically ill person due to circumstances that were entirely out of my control as a child. Through the years, managing these ailments has been daunting, and mainstream treatment options inflicted even more complications that I still live with to this day. 

For credibility’s sake, you should know that I received an average of 30 injections every three months for about 15 years as a method for pain control. The last time I went in, my world was flipped upside down by such a bad reaction to the shots that I haven't returned for that treatment or any other mainstream approaches to medicine.  

Although I'm aware it could've been an allergic reaction (they've been producing cheap medication overseas), I have no reason to expect such a thing won’t occur again. The words “rare” and “unlikely” don’t mean much when bacterial meningitis threatened my young life through an untreated ear infection. That wasn’t a foreseeable circumstance either. So the fact remains: no one can be sure what they are getting. Due to how difficult it has been to survive in this body up to now, I'm not content on taking any more unnecessary risks. 

I requested and was denied a vaccine exemption, the desire for which did not stem from any place of entitlement, but because I cannot gamble with my quality of life. The fact that I'm expected to is an illustration of the deeply rooted problems within our healthcare system and proves that, despite what they claim, it is not operating from a place of patient-centeredness.  

I don't find contentment with the reassurance that few adverse reactions have been reported from covid vaccines, because I personally know people who have experienced them and there simply hasn't been enough time passed for anyone to even begin to know what things could happen down the line. 

I was told that an exemption isn’t something my clinic can do, not even for religious reasons, because they consider it a “personal choice.” The only way to have it granted is to literally attempt an injection and experience adverse effects. But that’s something I’ve already – and barely -- lived through. 

Suffice to say, this is not a one-size-fits-all situation. They encourage everyone to get vaccinated, but why does that encouragement feel more like I’m being forced? I know what's best for my body and if/when I do take the jab, it’ll be on my terms and not because I was bullied into it. 

The job of medical professionals is to honor and be a partner in care. I know this because I was once one of them, but had to step off my beloved hospital floor for good after a setback in my health. Back then, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), we could’ve lost our jobs for peeking into our own medical charts. Yet now we’re suddenly expected to carry personal health information on us at all times and surrender it to everyone who demands it.  How is that not a HIPAA violation? 

Regardless of your stance on the science, it’s undeniable that this conduct is questionable at best. Why are we continuing to allow it? The intention here is not to shame anyone for their choices, but to draw attention to our freedom of choice essentially being eliminated. 

There are many different forms of “justice” but our systems have been designed in ways that evade them, along with any responsibility for their lack of equity.  It’s undoubtedly a hindrance, not only for patients, but our constitutional rights. If this is how our institutions are operating, we should be holding them to public accountability.  

Mia Maysack lives with chronic migraine, cluster headache and fibromyalgia. Mia is the founder of Keepin’ Our Heads Up, a Facebook advocacy and support group, and Peace & Love, a wellness and life coaching practice for the chronically ill. 

Mistrust Shadows CDC Over New Opioid Dose Guidance

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Pain patients and healthcare providers are giving mixed reviews to proposed changes to the CDC opioid guideline, according to a large new survey that found many are skeptical the revisions will make doctors more willing to prescribe opioids. Others fear the revised draft could lead to even lower and ineffective doses of opioids being prescribed.

Over 2,500 patients, providers and caregivers responded to PNN’s survey on the revised opioid guideline, which is intended to undo some of the damage caused by the agency’s 2016 guideline.

States, insurers, regulators and law enforcement made many of the original guideline’s voluntary recommendations mandatory, resulting in millions of patients being abruptly tapered or taken off opioids. Fearing scrutiny or even prosecution for “overprescribing” opioids, some doctors stopped treating pain altogether.

Like the original guideline, the revised draft still discourages the use of opioids, but clearly states the CDC’s recommendations are intended “to support, not supplant, clinical judgment” and “should not be applied as inflexible standards of care.”

When asked if the revised 211-page guideline is an improvement over the original, only four out of ten people (39%) said it was “improved” or “much improved.”  Most respondents said it was about the same or even worse.

“It is very long and involved but seems like a bait and switch. Starts out speaking to the damage done by 2016 guideline. Then seems to restrict needed medication even more,” a patient told us. 

“Both the original and the revised guidelines are fraught with politics. Nothing's changed. The guidelines are still as harmful as they were when they were published in 2016. No appreciable improvements have been made,” said another. 

IS THE REVISED GUIDELINE AN IMPROVEMENT OVER 2016 GUIDELINE?

“It looks like a step in the right direction, but I'm not sure. I don't think the CDC should be interfering between doctors and their patients,” another patient said.  “My current doctor had his practice raided in a Gestapo-like action that found zero violations. CDC and DEA need to back off and let doctors treat their patients.”

50 MME Perceived As New Hard Limit

The 2016 guideline strongly encouraged doctors not to write prescriptions that exceed doses of 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day. That 90 MME limit has been dropped from the revised draft, but doctors are still urged to be cautious about going over 50 MME because higher doses have “diminishing returns in benefits relative to risks.”

The language about 50 MME is essentially unchanged from the 2016 guideline, but many patients and providers are worried about it. Over 97% of survey respondents said they are “somewhat concerned” or “very concerned” that 50 MME will be seen as the new hard limit for doses, a level many consider inadequate for pain relief.

“The CDC is assuming that, by reducing the misapplied 90 MME standard to 50 MME, it will reduce misapplication of the standard. Faulty logic. It will, in fact, make it even harder for pain patients to be prescribed more than 50 MME, and the result will be more people in more pain and an increase in pain patient suicides,” one patient told us.

“There should be NO MME! It is too specific to use for everyone. We shouldn't be treated all the same. Each person's pain is different. It was bad enough when it was 90, to now reduce it to 50 MME is just awful,” another patient wrote.  

“50 MME will be the new 90 MME. That’s the crux of it, despite the flowery fenestration and hollow words that 2016 gave the wrong impression. They are merely patronizing us, while lowering the guidelines for how much doctors will actually prescribe,” said another.

ARE YOU CONCERNED 50 MME WILL BE SEEN AS THE NEW HARD LIMIT FOR OPIOIDS?

“There should be no specific numbers concerning daily dosages. This should be between a patient and their doctor. All of the state laws that control opioid medications need to be overturned and the CDC needs to stop attempting to practice medicine,” a patient said.

‘Leave Pain Management to the Experts’

People are also skeptical that the revisions will ease doctors’ concerns about prescribing opioids. Nearly two-thirds (61%) said the changes won’t make doctors more willing to prescribe the drugs. 

“I'm glad they are changing, but I think the damage has already been done. My doctor took me off pain meds completely and life has been a living hell! Now that he's done that, I don't think he will be open to prescribing them again no matter how many chronic pain issues I have!” said a patient. 

“My doctors took me off pain meds because they were afraid of losing their license and they still are. I sent (them) the link to the new guidelines and they still will not do anything for my pain,” another patient said. “One doctor said, ‘If we give pain meds to our patients who need it, CDC will still be after us for giving pain meds so we can’t take that chance.’” 

DO YOU THINK REVISIONS WILL MAKE DOCTORS MORE WILLING TO PRESCRIBE OPIOIDS?

“I think the CDC needs to keep his nose out of providers business. I’ve been practicing pain management for 22 years,” a doctor told us. “The CDC guidelines of 2016 have ruined untold lives because they stuck their nose somewhere they shouldn’t have. Leave pain management to the experts and let them decide what each patient needs based on their individual condition.” 

Guideline Expansion

Patients and providers are a bit more receptive about the guideline being expanded to include recommendations for treating short-term acute pain (55%), as well as a handful of specific pain conditions, such as low back pain and migraine (53%).  

Patients with severe constant pain — known an intractable pain — feel left out of the guideline. The word “intractable” is not even mentioned in the draft revision. While some types of severe pain, like cancer pain and sickle cell pain, are specifically excluded from the guideline, others are not.

“I wish that consideration would be given for patients who have intractable pain and have already jumped through the hoops of therapy and other treatments and have found that they didn’t help. It is beyond discouraging to have to repeat trials of treatments that never work for that particular patient,” said one patient.

“There is no difference in cancer and non-cancer pain. Pain is pain. If they’re going to include any conditions (which I don’t think they should) they should recognize rare and incurable illnesses, not just low back pain, sickle cell, and cancer,” another patient wrote. 

End Mandatory Policies

Large majorities also think the CDC needs to do a better job tracking the impact of its guideline on patients (95%) and making sure it is not used to create mandatory policies (96%).

The American Medical Association has even recommended that the CDC undertake a “a national marketing and communications campaign” to make clear to law enforcement and healthcare providers that the revised guideline should not be used like its predecessor to adopt rules that replace individualized patient care. 

Many of our survey respondents agree. Without the elimination of laws and policies that dictate how pain should be treated, no amount of revisions to the guideline will not undo the damage the CDC’s recommendations have already caused. 

“It should be made clear to the doctors willing, but currently afraid, to prescribe opioids now for fear of fines, loss of income and even jail, that they won't be penalized for properly caring for their patients,” said one patient. “These doctors feel their livelihood has been threatened just for doing their job, which is to help people in pain. They are no longer doing that.” 

For more survey findings, including whether respondents think the CDC guideline should be revised or revoked, click here. You can see the full survey results here.

The CDC recently close a public comment period on the guideline revisions. Over 5,400 comments have been received and publicly posted, which you can read here. The CDC is not expected to adopt the final version of its revised guideline until late this year.  

Too Little, Too Late: Patients and Providers Say Changes to CDC Opioid Guideline Inadequate

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Proposed changes to the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline are inadequate and will not undo the damage caused to patients and the practice of pain management, according to a large new survey by Pain News Network.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a long-awaited draft revision of its 2016 guideline in February, giving healthcare providers more flexibility in how they manage pain with opioids. Although voluntary, the original guideline was widely misapplied as a rigid “standard of care” by many states, insurers, doctors and law enforcement, causing millions of patients to be taken off opioids or tapered to lower doses.

The revised guideline states that “opioids can be essential medications for the management of pain” and encourages doctors to use their own best judgement when prescribing them. But many patients and providers believe the changes don’t go far enough and may even make the crisis in pain care worse.

“Appreciate the effort, but too little too late. These revisions are like trying to prevent disaster by course correcting the Titanic after it hit the iceberg,” one patient told us. “The revisions offer no protection against overzealous DEA interference and prosecution, and are meaningless in court. Until the draconian laws spawned by the guidelines are changed, things will only continue to get worse.”

“I believe it is a small step in the right direction, though the damage has already been done. The doctors who truly care about their patients and would like to help them are still terrified of the potential repercussions from the governing bodies,” another patient said.

“In 45 years of treating patients with pain, I have never seen it so difficult for patients to have their reports of pain taken seriously and get access to pain treatment,” a doctor said. “Patients often feel treated like addicts, and have had many professionals and family members supporting that erroneous and stigmatizing label.”

‘I Barely Leave the House’

Over 2,500 patients, providers and caregivers in the U.S. responded to PNN’s survey, the vast majority (94%) identifying themselves as patients with either chronic or short-term acute pain.

Over half the patients (57%) rated the quality of their pain care as poor or very poor. Only one in five (20%) rated it good or very good.

This was the fifth survey we’ve conducted on the CDC guideline. Like the others, people expressed strong opinions about the agency’s recommendations and how they’ve impacted pain care.

“My pain medication was involuntarily reduced by 75% since the the last guideline was published,” a patient told us. “Now I barely leave the house. I can't do my physical therapy due to excessive pain.”

HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CURRENT QUALITY OF YOUR PAIN CARE?

“The 2016 guidelines caused me to have to go on disability, spend 20 hours a day in bed due to severe back pain, and sell a bank consulting company that I had run successfully for 20 years. The CDC needs to get out of pain medicine,” another patient said.

Should CDC Have Opioid Guideline?

When asked if the CDC should even have guidelines for pain management and opioid prescribing, eight out of ten respondents (84%) said no. Many said the agency overstepped its authority.

“It is outside the CDC's charter and purpose to publish opioid guidelines. If an opioid guideline is needed, that would be the FDA's responsibility. Why is our government even allowing the CDC to do this? They are expending resources on something that is unnecessary and outside of their area of responsibility,” a patient wrote.

“The "D" in "CDC' is for "disease." Pain is not a disease. CDC should stick to its mission,” said another patient. 

“The CDC should not be allowed to regulate pain medications. The CDC conveniently made a disease to justify getting involved in an area that was not their area to regulate. The guidelines were biased against chronic pain. The (guideline) panel was biased by people with preconceived ideas,” a provider wrote. 

‘Made Each Day a Living Hell’

Asked if the 2016 opioid guideline improved the quality of pain care or made it worse, nearly nine out of ten respondents (88%) said pain care in the U.S. was significantly worse. Only 2% believe the guideline improved pain care. 

“I had a friend that was seeing a pain management physician, and he was on high dose opiates for 10 years due to a car accident, and because of the 2016 guidelines, his doctor became very fearful and took him off his meds,” a patient told us. “That person committed suicide.”

“CDC regulations may have saved the lives of some addiction-prone people, but it's made each day a living hell for millions of us with progressive chronic pain,” another patient said.

“The damage has been done. Patients are still dead, physicians are still terrified, and these deaths and loss of practice were totally unnecessary. It is a disgusting example of ill-informed government over reach,” said another.

DID 2016 GUIDELINE IMPROVE PAIN CARE OR MAKE IT WORSE?

‘Pain Drove Me to Street Drugs’

Perhaps the most damning assessment of the 2016 guideline is that it made the opioid crisis worse – an opinion shared by nearly eight out of ten survey respondents (78%). When denied access to opioids, some patients have turned to street drugs.

“Chronic pain drove me to use street drugs, including fentanyl, when all I needed was a doctor to prescribe a safe medicine for me,” a patient told us. “It's messed up I have to do this for relief.”

“Patients know about their pain, doctors know their patients, the CDC does not know individual patients. Making it harder to get much needed medications is what causes people to try and obtain opioids illegally,” said a patient.

“People in chronic pain who cannot get relief from doctors are turning to street drugs - and THEN getting hooked. The CDC is CAUSING drug addiction,” wrote another patient.

“The people who benefit from the CDC guidelines are lawyers, politicians and drug dealers. The drug dealers can sit back and rake in the money while the CDC, lawyers and politicians do their work for them.”

DO YOU THINK THE 2016 GUIDELINE MADE THE OPIOID CRISIS WORSE?

 ‘Revoke the Guidelines’

What should be done with the 2016 guideline? Should it be revised? Can it be fixed? Nearly two-thirds of respondents (63%) believe it should be completely revoked or withdrawn. About 36% believe changes are needed to make opioid medication more accessible.

“The CDC needs to completely revoke the 2016 guidelines and let trained professionals treat their patients for pain. Unfortunately, some of the damage that was done is irreversible and some patients have lost their lives as a consequence, and that lies squarely on the shoulders and consciousnesses of the CDC,” a provider told us.

“DESTROY IT NOW! No updates are needed,” a patient wrote. “Just get rid of these guidelines completely and get out of the middle, coming between a doctor and his pain patient, as well as the patient and their pharmacy.”

“Revoke the guidelines and revoke the CDC’s ability to have anything to do with medications, leave that to the FDA and doctors. Also revoke the DEA’s ability to prosecute and/or harass doctors and make them focus on drug dealers and cartels,” another patient wrote.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH 2016 GUIDELINE?

‘CDC Has Lost All Credibility’

Given all the problems created by the 2016 guideline and the lengthy delay in revising it, many people have lost faith in the CDC — once one of the most trusted government agencies in the U.S. Asked if the CDC could be trusted to handle the revision of the opioid guideline in an unbiased and scientific manner, nearly 96% said no.

“I do not and will never trust them. This revision is nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig,” a patient said.

“The CDC has lost all credibility with me. They lie, falsify records to suit their argument, pick and choose things in studies to support their argument, and they have anti-opioid zealots writing these guidelines. Clear conflict of interest! CDC and DEA need to get the hell out of my doctor-patient relationship!” said another patient.

“The CDC were warned their Guidelines would harm patients, and they moved forward anyway. They refused to monitor harm to patients or acknowledge it. The CDC's unethical behavior continues over and over at shocking levels. They have broken the public trust over and over. Nothing they've written can be trusted after these deliberate and intentional unethical choices,” a patient wrote.

For more survey findings, including what respondents think about the CDC’s new guidance about doses, click here. You can see the full survey results here.

When Symptoms Linger, Is It Long Covid?

By Nina Feldman, WHYY

Many Americans are discovering that recovering from covid-19 may take weeks or even months longer than expected, leaving them with lingering symptoms like intense fatigue or a racing pulse. But does that mean they have what’s known as long covid?

Though such cases may not always amount to debilitating long covid, which can leave people bedridden or unable to perform daily functions, it is common to take weeks to fully recover.

“There could be more to help people understand that it’s not always a quick bounce back right away after the initial infection,” said Dr. Ben Abramoff, director of the Post-COVID Assessment and Recovery Clinic at Penn Medicine in Philadelphia. “This is still a very significant viral infection, and sometimes it’s just a more gradual recovery process than people’s previous viral illnesses.“

Recent federal health guidelines — which recommend only five days of isolation for those who test positive and are symptom-free — may inadvertently suggest most recoveries are, if not just five days long, pretty quick.

That’s the message I got, at least.

I’ve reported on the coronavirus pandemic since it started, and I thought I knew what an infection would be like for a young, otherwise healthy person like me. I knew even mild cases could develop into long covid. I thought they were relatively rare.

Like many Americans, I found myself slowed by a recovery that took more than a month — far longer than I had expected.

I got covid over Christmas. I was vaccinated and boosted, and my symptoms were mild: sore throat, sinus pressure and headache, extreme fatigue. I felt better after eight days, and I tested negative two days in a row on a rapid antigen test.

Soon after ending isolation, I had dinner with a friend. One glass of wine left me feeling like I’d had a whole bottle. I was bone-achingly exhausted but couldn’t sleep.

The insomnia continued for weeks. Activities that once energized me — walking in the cold, riding an exercise bike, taking a sauna — instead left me intensely tired.

The waves of fatigue, which I started calling “crashes,” felt like coming down with an illness in real time: weakened muscles, aches, the feeling that all you can do is lie down. The crashes would last a couple of days, and the cycle would repeat when I accidentally pushed myself beyond my new, unfamiliar limit.

My colleague Kenny Cooper is also young, healthy, vaccinated, and boosted. He was sick for almost two weeks before testing negative. His symptoms lingered a few more weeks. A persistent cough kept him from leaving the house.

“I just felt like there were weights on my chest. I couldn’t sleep properly. When I woke up, if I moved around too much, I would start coughing immediately,” he said.

Abramoff has seen about 1,100 patients since Penn’s post-covid clinic opened in June 2020. There is no official threshold at which someone officially becomes a long-covid patient, he said.

The clinic takes a comprehensive approach to patients who have had symptoms for months, evaluating and referring them to specialists, like pulmonologists, or social workers who can assist with medical leave and disability benefits.

Those coming to the clinic with symptoms lasting six to eight weeks, Abramoff said, are generally sent home to rest. They will likely get better on their own. He advises patients with lingering symptoms to adopt a “watchful waiting” approach: Keep in contact with a primary care doctor, and take things slowly while recovering.

“You have got to build based on your tolerance,” he said. “People were very sick, even if they weren’t in the hospital.”

A National Institutes of Health-funded study on long covid, called Recover, designates any case with symptoms lasting more than 30 days as long covid.

Dr. Stuart Katz, a New York University cardiologist who is the study’s principal investigator, said he estimates 25% to 30% of the nearly 60,000 covid patients in the study will fit the long-covid criteria.

The 30-day mark is an arbitrary cutoff, Katz said. “There’s this whole spectrum of changing symptoms over time.”

A study published in Nature last year tracked more than 4,000 covid patients from initial infection until symptoms subsided. Roughly 13% reported symptoms lasting more than 28 days. That dropped to 4.5% after eight weeks and 2.3% after 12 weeks, indicating most people with symptoms lasting more than a month will recover within another month or two.

That leaves potentially millions of Americans suffering from a variety of covid symptoms — some debilitating — and a lingering burden on the health care system and workforce.

Recent research from the Brookings Institution estimated that lasting covid symptoms could be responsible for up to 15% of the unfilled jobs in the U.S. labor market.

It took me about six weeks to start feeling better. My crashes got better, slowly, as a result of diligent rest and almost nothing else.

My colleague, Cooper, has also improved. His coughing fits have subsided, but he’s still dealing with brain fog.

The way most studies to date describe long covid would leave us out.

But what I’ve come to think of as my “medium covid” affected my life. I couldn’t socialize much, drink, or stay up past 9:30 p.m. It took me 10 weeks to go for my first run — I’d been too afraid to try, fearing another crash that would set me back again.

Failing to treat covid as a serious condition could prolong recovery. Patients should monitor and care for themselves attentively, no matter how mild the infection may seem, Abramoff said.

“It’s something that could kill somebody who’s in their 70s,” he said. “It’s not nothing.”

This story is part of a partnership that includes WHYY, NPR, and Kaiser Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Overdose Deaths Double for Teenagers Amid Fentanyl Surge

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Drug deaths among U.S. teenagers have risen sharply in the last two years, according to a new study that found the number of fatal overdoses doubled for adolescents aged 14 to 18 years.

In 2019, there were 492 drug deaths among adolescents. In 2021, there were an estimated 1,146 fatal overdoses, a 133% increase.

The vast majority of adolescent drug deaths last year involved illicit fentanyl (77%), followed by benzodiazepines (13%), methamphetamines (10%) and cocaine (7%). Less than 6% of the overdoses among teens involved a prescription opioid.

The study findings, reported in the journal JAMA, reflect what is happening in the overall U.S. population, with drug overdoses rising to record levels. They also mark the reversal of a decade long trend of fewer overdose deaths among teens, which coincided with declining rates of illicit drug use.

Researchers say adolescents may be unaware or naive about the risks posed by fentanyl, a synthetic opioid up to 100 times more potent than morphine and 50 times stronger than heroin. In a prescription, fentanyl plays a valuable role in treating severe pain, but as a street drug it can be deadly

“Beginning in 2020, adolescents experienced a greater relative increase in overdose mortality than the overall population, attributable in large part to fatalities involving fentanyls,” lead author Joseph Friedman, MPH, University of California, Los Angeles, reported in the journal JAMA.

“In the context of decreasing adolescent drug use rates nationally, these shifts suggest heightened risk from illicit fentanyls, which have variable and high potency. Since 2015, fentanyls have been increasingly added to counterfeit pills resembling prescription opioids, benzodiazepines, and other drugs, which adolescents may not identify as dangerous and which may be playing a key role in these shifts.”

U.S. Adolescent Overdose Deaths

SOURCE: jama

Friedman and his colleagues found the highest overdose rates among Native American, Alaska Native and Latino adolescents, reflecting what they called a “wider pattern of increasing racial and ethnic inequalities” in drug deaths.

Fentanyl is even killing kids who have not reached their teenage years. In California, a boy was recently arrested and charged with murder in the death of 12-year-old Dalilah Guerrero. The 16-year-old suspect allegedly sold a counterfeit pill made with fentanyl to the girl, who overdosed after crushing and snorting the tablet at a party in San Jose.

The spike in adolescent drug deaths comes even as substance abuse by teens fell to record lows. An annual survey by the University of Michigan found significant declines in all types of drug use by adolescents in 2021, with the use of prescription opioids falling to the lowest level in nearly two decades.    

DEA Warns of Fentanyl Mass Overdoses

Public health experts and law enforcement agencies are growing increasingly alarmed by the rising number of fentanyl overdoses. Last week, the DEA warned of a nationwide spike in fentanyl-related mass overdose events, in which three or more overdoses occur in the same location.

In the past three months, at least seven mass overdoses were reported in Florida, Texas, Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and Washington, DC, resulting in 29 deaths. Three people died in a hotel room in Cortez, Colorado after ingesting what that they thought were 30mg oxycodone pills, but were actually counterfeit pills containing fentanyl.

“Tragic events like these are being driven by fentanyl. Fentanyl is highly-addictive, found in all 50 states, and drug traffickers are increasingly mixing it with other types of drugs — in powder and pill form — in an effort to drive addiction and attract repeat buyers,” DEA Administrator Anne Milgram said in a letter to federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. 

“We recommend that the members of your offices assume that all drugs encountered during enforcement activities now contain fentanyl. Given fentanyl’s extreme toxicity and the increases we are seeing in the distribution of polydrug substances containing fentanyl, please take all the precautions you would take when handling fentanyl whenever you interdict any illicit substance.”

A recent study by the National Institute of Drug Abuse estimated that over 9.6 million counterfeit pills containing fentanyl were seized by U.S. law enforcement agencies last year.

Deadline Nears for Public Comments on Revised CDC Opioid Guideline

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The public comment period on the revised draft of the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline ends Monday, April 11th. So far, over 4,200 comments have been submitted in the Federal Register. You can leave a comment and read the ones already submitted by clicking here. A final revised guideline is not expected to be released by the CDC until late this year.

Like the original guideline, the revised version still maintains that opioids should not be used as a first line or routine therapy for pain, but takes a more flexible approach to dosing. Providers are urged to weigh the individual needs of each patient and not take a one-size-fits-all approach to pain care.

“It’s important to point out that the guideline is not final and the step that we’re at now is a real critical point in the process to wrestle with and get feedback,” Christopher Jones, PharmD, Acting Director of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, told PNN in February.

“And that’s why it’s important that we hear from readers of Pain News Network to get feedback, to get that experience, so as we move toward a final guideline, we can incorporate that feedback. We hope that insurers, medical community, law enforcement and others will also review the guideline and provide feedback.”

Does 50 MME replace 90 MME?

Perhaps the most controversial change in the opioid guideline is the elimination of dose thresholds. The original guideline strongly encouraged providers not to exceed doses of 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day. That 90 MME limit has been dropped from the revised draft, but providers are still urged to be cautious about going over 50 MME because higher doses have “diminishing returns in benefits relative to risks.”

That change has led to significant confusion about what CDC is trying to do. Many patients are concerned that 50 MME will be seen as the new recommended limit, a dose they consider low for severe pain.

“Does the 50 MMEs replace the 90 MMEs? This is asking for more and more suicides. Much of the proposed guidelines are the same except you removed 90 MMEs and replaced it with 50 MMEs. Go back to the beginning and start over,” Pamela Hoard wrote in her comment.

“It is ridiculous to put a numerical number, such as 50 MME/day, to a risk/benefit outcome when there is no scientific evidence to support MME's,” wrote Joe Benotz, who said he was a pharmacist. “Using unvalidated MME to guide dosing opioid pain meds has in the past led to significant harms to pain patients. Continued use of MME numbers will cause more harm in the future.”

“I'm a doctor in Michigan who has lost his license because of the 90 MME requirement. It doesn't matter if you add caveats, prosecutors see a limit and it becomes the law. The 50 MME ‘suggestion’ is even worse,” wrote Jonathan Roberston.

The anti-opioid activist group Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP) posted a letter in the Federal Register supporting many of the guideline changes, including the cautionary language about exceeding 50 MME. PROP continues to maintain that long-term use of opioids is too risky.

“Available evidence indicates modest benefits of opioids for acute pain relative to placebo, while benefits for chronic pain have not been shown,” PROP said. “New evidence also demonstrates significant risks of high dose opioids (>50 MME/day) and shows that alternatives to opioids often provide equal or superior benefit with a markedly better safety profile. These are important findings which PROP fully supports being widely disseminated to medical professionals and to the public.”

Medical Societies Weigh In

Other medical societies and physician groups generally support the guideline changes, but with important caveats. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) is concerned about the CDC making new recommendations for treating postoperative pain that are based on “inconsistent” evidence from a small number of clinical trials.

“The agency fails to recognize the complexities around the many different types of surgery that require different forms of pain control, especially that some patient populations may need more pain relief and different therapies than others,” the ASA said in a letter that basically told the CDC to stay in its lane.

“ASA recommends that the agency note in the updated Guideline that clinicians defer to professional medical society guidelines and standards of care for surgical procedures. Medical specialty societies, including ASA, are the experts in perioperative pain care, including postsurgical pain, and are best suited to develop clinical guidelines in this specific area.”

In a move apparently timed to preempt the CDC, the ASA recently joined the American Medical Association and 13 other medical societies in releasing new advice for managing postoperative pain in “complex patients,” such as those with chronic pain and those taking opioids prior to surgery. The societies said patients should be allowed to stay on opioids before, during and after surgery.

Other medical organizations urged the CDC to avoid the mistakes of the past, such as allowing insurers, states, regulators and law enforcement to adopt its voluntary recommendations as inflexible standards of practice.  

“It is imperative that the CDC assure the new guidelines emphasize not only support for safe, quality pain care, but also strive for clarity to prevent rigid application of the guidelines and prevent misunderstandings and misapplications that may result in substandard care and needless suffering by patients with unrelieved pain,” said Maureen Cooney, DNP, President of the American Society for Pain Management Nursing.

Other professional societies took offense that their particular specialties were omitted or only briefly covered in the revised guideline.

The American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine urged the CDC to include a “robust discussion” on the use of nerve blocks, epidural steroid injections and other interventional pain procedures.

The American Association of Neurological Surgeons said it was “disappointed” that the revised guideline “fails to adequately explore” implanted neuromodulation devices such as spinal cord stimulators.

And the American Psychological Association was offended by “the obvious, and unfortunate, omission of clinical hypnosis” from the guideline as an alternative pain therapy.

Study Finds Cannabis Oil Effective in 9 out of 10 Pain Patients

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Medical cannabis improved symptoms in 9 out of 10 chronic pain patients taking oral formulations of cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), according to a large new study in Colombia.

The observational study, the largest of its kind in Latin America, is the first clinical peer-reviewed evidence on the effectiveness and safety of cannabis products made by Khiron Life Sciences. Over 2,100 patients with a variety of chronic pain conditions self-reported their symptoms after taking CBD and THC oil-based formulations at a Khiron clinic in Bogota.

The findings are published in the peer-reviewed journal Frontiers in Pain Research.

"We believe these findings to be generalizable across patient populations, considering that our results are extremely well-aligned with those reported by researchers working with similar clinical populations in nations with long-standing medicinal cannabis access programs, such as Israel and Canada," lead author Guillermo Moreno-Sanz, Global Scientific Director of Khiron Life Sciences, said in a press release.

While most previous studies only looked at the short-term effects of cannabis ingested through a variety of different methods, this study focused on the safety and efficacy of cannabis oils for up to 26 weeks. Most participants were female, with an average age of 59 years.

Patients received cannabis oils composed primarily of CBD (30mg CBD/2mg THC) or a more balanced formulation (14mg CBD/12mg THC). 

Key findings in the study include:

• 92.5% of patients reported some degree of improvement in their chronic pain.

• 75% reported moderate or robust reduction in chronic pain

• 72% reported no adverse side effects

The degree of improvement was similar between both formulations, although males reported less effectiveness in the first 4 weeks of treatment.

Most side effects were mild, such as somnolence (13%), dizziness (8%) and dry mouth (4%), and faded away after 12 weeks of treatment. No serious adverse events requiring hospitalization or medical intervention were reported.

"This study, based on Khiron's medical products, is critical to reassure physicians and health insurance providers of the efficacy of medicinal cannabis to treat chronic pain. The global impact and economic burden of chronic pain in our society, mounting medical evidence will increase access to cannabinoid-based medicines worldwide." says Alvaro Torres, Khiron CEO and Director.

Khiron Life Sciences is a medical cannabis company based in Colombia. Its products are sold in Colombia, Peru, Germany, UK and Brazil, and will soon be available in Mexico.

Recent studies have also found cannabis oil effective in treating fibromyalgia and migraine.