Select a psychoactive drug that is of pharmacological interest to you, but not one you will review as part of your Critical Review. For this paper, you may choose drugs of abuse; however, the paper mu

REVIEW ARTICLE The Clinical and Forensic Toxicology of Z-drugs Naren Gunja Published online: 13 February 2013 # American College of Medical Toxicology 2013 AbstractThe Z-drugs zolpidem, zopiclone, and zaleplon were hailed as the innovative hypnotics of the new millen- nium, an improvement to traditional benzodiazepines in the management of insomnia. Increasing reports of adverse events including bizarre behavior and falls in the elderly have prompted calls for caution and regulation. Z-drugs have significant hypnotic effects by reducing sleep latency and improving sleep quality, though duration of sleep may not be significantly increased. Z-drugs exert their effects through increasedγ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) transmis- sion at the same GABA-type A receptor as benzodiazepines.

Their pharmacokinetics approach those of the ideal hypnotic with rapid onset within 30 min and short half-life (1–7 h).

Zopiclone with the longest duration of action has the great- est residual effect, similar to short-acting benzodiazepines.

Neuropsychiatric adverse events have been reported with zolpidem including hallucinations, amnesia, and parasom- nia. Poisoning with Z-drugs involves predominantly seda- tion and coma with supportive management being adequate in the majority. Flumazenil has been reported to reverse sedation from all three Z-drugs. Deaths from Z-drugs are rare and more likely to occur with polydrug overdose. Z- drugs can be detected in blood, urine, oral fluid, and post- mortem specimens, predominantly with liquid chromatog- raphy–mass spectrometry techniques. Zolpidem and zaleplon exhibit significantpostmortem redistribution.

Zaleplon with its ultra-short half-life has been detected in few clinical or forensic cases possibly due to assay unavail- ability, low frequency of use, and short window of detection.

Though Z-drugs have improved pharmacokinetic profiles,their adverse effects, neuropsychiatric sequelae, and inci- dence of poisoning and death may prove to be similar to older hypnotics.

KeywordsZolpidem.

Zopiclone.

Zaleplon.

Poisoning.

Analysis Introduction Zolpidem, zopiclone, and zaleplon are non-benzodiazepine drugs used in the treatment of insomnia and commonly re- ferred to as the“Z-drugs.”Insomnia is an underrecognized and undertreated medical condition that leads to lifestyle impairment, loss of occupational productivity, and potential physical harm from accidents as well as exacerbation of other medical conditions. The rate of diagnosed insomnia in the UK and North America is estimated at 5–15 %, with up to 40 % of the population experiencing symptoms of daytime sleepiness [1,2]. Some studies quote that up to a third of elderly North Americans are prescribed either a Z-drug or benzodiazepine for sleep disturbance, an alarming statistic given the risks associated with hypnotics in the elderly [3].

Traditional therapy for insomnia has predominantly in- volved the use of benzodiazepines for several decades. Since the 1980s, development of non-benzodiazepine drugs for the management of insomnia has been driven by the significant adverse effect profile of the former group of drugs. The Z- drugs have unique advantages over benzodiazepines both in their pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. Z- drugs have significant hypnotic effects by reducing sleep latency and improving sleep quality, though their ability to prolong total sleep time is debatable [4]. Currently, there are three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved, com- mercially available, non-benzodiazepine drugs in the USA for the treatment of insomnia: zaleplon, zolpidem, and eszopi- clone (the active enantiomer of zopiclone) [5].

N. Gunja NSW Poisons Information Centre, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia N. Gunja (*) Discipline of Emergency Medicine, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia e-mail: [email protected] J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162 DOI 10.1007/s13181-013-0292-0 The ideal anti-insomnia drug is a potent sedative during the night without causing the same residual sedation during the daytime. Suboptimal clinical and adverse effects of traditional benzodiazepines have driven the development of alternative sedative–hypnotic drugs. While hypnosis and sedation are adequately achieved from oral benzodiaze- pines, they invariably alter sleep architecture, reduce deep (stage 3 and 4) sleep, and lead to dependence, tolerance, and withdrawal [6]. Furthermore, benzodiazepines carry the risk of residual daytime effects such as impairment of cognitive and psychomotor function. Like benzodiazepines, the newer Z-drugs are agonists at the sameγ-aminobutyric acid-type A (GABA A) receptor. However, they possess shorter duration of action and half-life, do not disturb overall sleep architecture, and cause less residual effects during daytime hours, making them more clinically attractive than benzodiazepines.

Initial trials and experience with the Z-drugs were prom- ising with respect to lower incidence of adverse effects and reduced potential for dependence and abuse. Over the last 15 years, increasing reports of bizarre and complex behav- ioral effects from Z-drugs have prompted drug regulatory agencies to issue warnings and restrictions on the prescrib- ing, dispensing, and use of Z-drugs [7]. This review focuses on the pharmacology and toxicology of Z-drugs with respect to their adverse effect profile, toxicity, and forensic consid- erations of detection and analysis. Ovid MEDLINE (1980– Nov 2012), Embase (1980–Nov 2012), and Google Scholar were searched using the terms:“zolpidem,”“zopiclone,” “eszopiclone,”“zaleplon”in combination with“mecha- nism,”“pharmacokinetics,”“detection,”“analysis,”“level,” “interaction,”“poisoning,”“toxicity,”or“death”. Articles relevant to human pharmacology, toxicology, and analysis of Z-drugs were retrieved. Furthermore, the bibliographies of the retrieved articles as well as textbooks, FDA, and other drug agency reports were searched for additional relevant publications. The hypnotic effects of Z-drugs and their clinical efficacy in treating insomnia are not reviewed here.

Neither does this review examine the purported benefits of Z-drugs over traditional benzodiazepines in the manage- ment of insomnia.

Pharmacology Benzodiazepines primarily cause their sedative–hypnotic effect by binding non-selectively to theω 1(BZ 1) andω 2 (BZ 2) receptor subtypes of the GABA Areceptor complex.

This leads to increased binding of GABA, a major inhibitory neurotransmitter in the central nervous system (CNS), to its own separate binding site and thereby increases the frequen- cy of chloride channel opening [8]. Type 1 (BZ 1) benzodi- azepine receptors containα 1β1-3 γ2subunits while BZ 2 subtypes containα 2,3,5 β1-3 γ2subunits [9]. Sedation andamnesia are mediated through theα 1subunit, the most commonly distributed subunit throughout the brain, while those mediated via theα 2andα 3subunits appear to be involved in sleep regulation and anxiolysis [10]. Z-drugs bind to the same binding site as benzodiazepines, both of which rely on the presence of GABA to exert their effects— hence the term“GABAergic.”There appears to be differen- tial binding of Z-drugs to the various GABA A receptor isoforms.

Zolpidem, an imidazopyridine agent, mediates its effects largely through activation of theα 1-containing GABA A (BZ 1) receptor, though it has some agonist activity atα 2 andα 3subunits, and very little at theα 5subunit. Hence, zolpidem is considered a potent sedative and hypnotic with minimal anxiolytic efficacy. The standard oral dose is 10 mg taken at bedtime, though a lower 5 mg dose is recommended in the elderly or in patients with hepatic impairment.

Zolpidem is also available as an extended-release prepara- tion (12.5 and 6.25 mg) intended for better management of sleep maintenance [11,12]. Treatment duration is com- monly for 1 to 6 months depending on patient age, comorbidities, and type of pharmacokinetic preparation (immediate- or extended-release). Clinical efficacy of zolpidem for insomnia has been shown in multiple trials to be comparable to both short-acting and long-acting benzodia- zepines, with regard to time to sleep onset, duration, and quality of sleep [13].

Zopiclone is a cyclopyrrolone drug with a chemical structure unrelated to zolpidem, benzodiazepines, or other CNS depressants; it has similar pharmacodynamic and phar- macokinetic properties to zolpidem. It is available as a racemic mixture of two enantiomers one of which is mar- keted in the USA, the (S)-enantiomer, eszopiclone.

Zopiclone shows preferential agonist activity at theα 1sub- unit of the GABA Areceptor and its duration of action is the longest of the Z-drugs, comparable with some short-acting benzodiazepines. Hence, zopiclone is useful in both induction and maintenance of sleep. Eszopiclone differs from its racemic mixture in that it has greater efficacy at theα 2andα 3subunits. The addition of the R-enantiomer in racemic zopiclone may augment efficacy at theα 1sub- unit and potentially lead to increased sedation and residual effects [14].

Zaleplon, a pyrazolopyrimidine drug, has unique proper- ties in its receptor affinity as well as pharmacokinetics, potentially increasing its utility in select sleep disorders.

Zaleplon exerts its effects through selective binding at BZ 1 receptors (α 1subunit); it has low affinity and potency atα 2 andα 3subunits [10]. It is an ultra-short-acting Z-drug that has the benefit of reducing sleep latency and can be taken after trying but failing to fall asleep. Zaleplon, though not appropriate for sleep maintenance therapy, may be taken for middle-of-the-night awakening [15]. 156J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162 Pharmacokinetics The pharmacokinetics of the three Z-drugs are similar in that they are all rapidly absorbed and have short half-lives.

These characteristics emulate the ideal hypnotic agent, one with rapid peak levels to reduce sleep latency and fast clearance to minimize undesirable residual effects. This is in comparison with short-acting benzodiazepines that have elimination half-lives around 8–10 h. However, too short a half-life may be a problem for patients that require sleep maintenance therapy. Pharmacokinetic properties of Z-drugs are shown in Table1; major metabolic pathways are in italics [10,12,15–19].

Zolpidem is approximately 90 % protein-bound and is extensively metabolized to inactive metabolites by cyto- chrome P450 enzymes in the liver, predominantly CYP3A4. Elderly patients and those with hepatic impair- ment are known to have higher area under curve (AUC), time to maximal concentration (T max ), and half-life, neces- sitating dosage reduction in these patient groups. A newer sublingual formulation appears to further reduce sleep la- tency compared with the oral tablet in a subset of insom- niacs [20]. In January 2013, The FDA released a safety announcement advising lower than standard zolpidem doses, particularly in women, due to delayed elimination and residual daytime effects [21].

Zopiclone has the longest latency and half-life of all the Z-drugs with potential for residual effects. Although the pharmacokinetics of eszopiclone is less well characterized, they appear to be more advantageous than the racemic mixture. Eszopiclone’s onset is shorter and its offset more rapid than when the racemic mixture is administered to healthy volunteers [22,23]. This may be explained by the reduced AUC and half-life of the active metabolite, (S)- desmethylzopiclone, following eszopiclone administration as compared to racemic zopiclone [22]. Metabolism of zopiclone involves oxidation, methylation, and decarboxyl- ation with active metabolites that are renally excreted. It is the only Z-drug where dosage reduction in patients with renal impairment is recommended, though accumulation ofmetabolites has not been shown in studies; no such reduc- tion is recommended for eszopiclone.

Zaleplon has the shortestT max and half-life providing it with a rapid onset and offset profile. Its low bioavailability is due to significant first-pass effect and dosage should be reduced in patients with hepatic impairment. Hepatic metab- olism is primarily through the enzyme aldehyde oxidase, with a minor pathway through CYP3A4, to inactive metabolites.

Drug interactions are predictable for Z-drugs metabolized by CYP3A4, especially zolpidem and zopiclone. Flumazenil has been reported to antagonize the sedative effects of all three Z-drugs [24–27]. Zaleplon has few significant inter- actions due to its main metabolic pathway being aldehyde oxidase. Smoking and oral contraceptive use have been studied in young women, with little effect on zolpidem kinetics [28]. The combination of zolpidem and benzodia- zepines has been shown to significantly increase the risk of hospitalization and hip fractures in the elderly [29].

Clinically significant drug interactions of Z-drugs are shown in Table2[8,18,30–34].

Adverse Effects In general, Z-drugs are well tolerated and the most common adverse effects include headache, gastrointestinal upset, and dizziness [4,6]. For a given dose, adverse reactions appear to be worse in elderly patients; hence, lower doses are recommended in this group [4,16]. A bitter or unpleasant taste has been reported in a dose-dependent fashion in 10– 35 % of patients taking zopiclone or eszopiclone, enough to cause cessation of the drug; less common adverse effects include pruritus, visual disturbance, and xerostomia [19].

The daytime residual effects of hypnotic drugs on cognitive and psychomotor performance are a major concern in patients regularly taking these medications.

In March 2007, the US FDA released a list of 13 drugs, including all three Z-drugs, for which stronger labeling was required regarding potential risk from complex sleep-related behaviors, such as sleep-eating and sleep-driving [35]. Of the Table 1Pharmacokinetic properties of Z-drugs Z-drugT max (h) Oral bioavailability Eliminationt ½(h) Dose range Metabolism Zolpidem IR 1–265–70 % 2.5–35–10 mgCYP 3A4, 2C9, 1A2 Zolpidem ER 1.5–2.5 65–70 % 2.5–3 6.25–12.5 mg Zopiclone 1.5–275–80 % 5–6 3.75–7.5 mgCYP 3A4, 2C8 Eszopiclone 1–1.5 75–80 % 6–71–3mgCYP 3A4, 2E1 Zaleplon 0.7–1.4 30 %∼15–20 mgAldehyde oxidase, CYP 3A4 Major metabolic pathways are in italics. References include [10,12,15–19] IRimmediate-release preparation,ERextended/controlled-release preparation,T max time to maximal concentration (hours),t ½half-life (hours), CYPcytochrome P450 enzyme J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162157 Z-drugs, the majority of these events appear to relate to zolpidem though this may merely reflect its higher usage rates or higher doses [7]. Z-drugs have the potential to cause resid- ual effects post-awakening that relate to cognition, memory, parasomnia, and bizarre behavior. They have a profound effect on nocturnal and next-day psychomotor performance includ- ing body balance, reaction times, and the ability to multi-task.

Z-drug-induced neuropsychiatric adverse effects such as hal- lucinations and psychosis have been described for over 15 years, particularly with zolpidem [36–38]. The mechanism does not appear to be entirely dose-related or due to elevated plasma concentrations of zolpidem. Drug interactions be- tween zolpidem and various serotonergic and noradrenergic agents including SSRIs, venlafaxine, and tricyclic antidepres- santshavebeenreportedtoinducehallucinations[39].

Tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal are all reported with Z-drugs, though this appears to be less severe and with lower incidence than for traditional benzodiazepines in the treatment of insomnia [5,13,40,41]. Withdrawal symptom- atology resembles that from benzodiazepines, including in- somnia, delirium, craving, anxiety, tremor, palpitations, and rarely, seizures and psychosis [42]. Rebound insomnia, upon immediate cessation of the hypnotic drug, has been reported with higher doses of zolpidem [43]. This phenomenon has not been reported with therapeutic doses of zopiclone and zale- plon [1,8]. The potential for zolpidem abuse and dependence in insomniacs is being increasingly recognized with warnings on product labels appearing since 2004 [44]. Though abuse potential exists for all Z-drugs, it is more commonly reported for zolpidem and zopiclone [43,45].

Analysis and Detection of Z-drugs The Z-drugs can be analyzed and detected in all common biological matrices, both clinical and forensic samples. Theprincipal mode of analysis remains gas or liquid chromatog- raphy with the detection method of choice being mass spectrometry, due to its rapid turnaround time and low limits of quantification [46]. These techniques are also useful in screening for CNS depressants, including benzodiazepines and Z-drugs, such as in cases of unknown drug exposure.

With increasing frequency of Z-drug prescriptions and abuse in Europe and North America, benzodiazepine screen- ing tests that employ highly sensitive mass spectrometers are recommended to routinely include Z-drugs. Techniques used in the analysis and detection of Z-drugs in various biological matrices are shown in Table3[46–52].

Blood and urine are the commonest matrices for detection of Z-drugs. Urine is most likely to be useful in cases of drug- facilitated crimes where the detection window is longer than in blood or plasma. The detection window in plasma for therapeutic doses of Z-drugs is projected to be around 6– 20 h, in urine, roughly 24–48 h [16,53]. This window is likely to be increased with supratherapeutic ingestions and Z-drug poisoning, though more definitive data are lacking. In drug-facilitated crimes, where higher doses may have been administered, maximum recommended time intervals for Z- drug detection is 48 h in blood and 72 h in urine [54].

Therapeutic maximal concentrations (C max ) and those found in fatalities are shown in Table4[47,51,53,55–62].

Oral fluid testing provides a simple and noninvasive method for roadside and workplace-based testing. Risk of transmissible infection is much less than blood testing and there is evidence that oral fluid is more likely to show recent drug exposure [63]. With increasing incidence of driving under the influence of drugs, there is an incentive for im- proving oral fluid testing technique and methodology.

Disadvantages of oral fluid as a reliable matrix include significant operator variability, inadequate saliva volumes, interference from food and beverages including deliberate adulteration, and lower drug concentrations than in urine. Table 2Z-drug interactions References include [8,18,30–34]Z-drug Pharmacodynamic Pharmacokinetic Increased Z-drug effect Decreased Z-drug effect Zolpidem CNS depressants (including benzodiazepines and ethanol)Azole antifungals Rifampicin Cimetidine St. John’s wort Ciprofloxacin Carbamazepine Chlorpromazine Fluvoxamine Flumazenil Protease inhibitors SSRIs Zopiclone CNS depressants Azole antifungals Rifampicin Chlorpromazine Erythromycin Flumazenil Zaleplon CNS depressants Cimetidine Rifampicin Flumazenil Thioridazine 158J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162 Oral fluid samples are usually tested for benzodiazepines and Z-drugs using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry or liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry techniques.

Hair analysis may be useful in confirming prior exposure to Z-drugs, such as in cases of chronic use or drug-facilitated sexual assault. It can potentially complement tests done on blood and urine, though in some scenarios hair may be the only matrix available. Hair as a biological matrix has several advantages including ease of sampling, storage, and transpor- tation [64]. In general, detection of Z-drugs in hair is difficult due to the low level of uptake into hair. The most developed and sensitive method to detect Z-drugs in hair is liquid chro- matography coupled with tandem mass spectroscopy [52].

Depending upon the dose and frequency of Z-drug use, length of hair sampling, and analytical technique utilized, exposure may be confirmed by hair testing weeks, if not months, later.

Hair testing must be interpreted appropriately based on limitsof detection, inability to determine dose ingested, and poten- tial for poor drug uptake into hair at very low doses [65].

Z-drugs are becoming increasingly part of forensic toxi- cology testing in postmortem cases. Z-drugs can be quanti- fied in a variety of postmortem specimens including blood, urine, bile, liver, kidney, spleen, vitreous humor, and gastric contents. Central and peripheral postmortem blood speci- mens show differential concentration for some Z-drugs.

This postmortem redistribution (PMR) is observed for many drugs, including benzodiazepines [50]. With PMR, drugs diffuse rapidly across membranes and tissues after death causing differential concentrations between central and pe- ripheral blood compartments. Both zolpidem and zaleplon exhibit significant PMR, though this seems to be low or negligible for zopiclone [48,66–68]. Zolpidem has been reported to have a central to peripheral blood concen- tration ratio of 3.74 in postmortem specimens, though previous studies have had lower values [48]. The extent of PMR for zaleplon has yet to be quantified as it is detected in few postmortem cases; this may be related to its lower frequency of use or its very short half-life and antemortem elimination.

Clinical Toxicology of Z-drugs Overdose, chronic abuse, poisoning, and death have been reported from all Z-drugs. The relative frequency of toxicity appears to be related more to availability and prescription numbers rather than the inherent toxicity of the agents themselves. Comparative toxicity between the Z-drugs has been difficult to quantify due to the fact that the denomina- tor is unknown. However, for zaleplon, the improved Table 3Detection of Z-drugs Z-drug Clinical specimens Analytical techniques Postmortem considerations Zolpidem Plasma HPLC, LC-MS/MS Exhibits postmortem redistribution (PMR) Urine LC-MS/MS with electrospray ionization (ESI) Hair LC-MS/MS (ESI), GC-MS Oral fluid LC-MS/MS (ESI), GC-MS PM specimens GC-MS Zopiclone Plasma LC-fluorescence or UV detection Low PMR. Unstable in vitro, in methanol and alkaline solvents Urine Non-chiral: LC-MS/MS, GC-MS Chiral: capillary electrophoresis (LIF detection) and LC-fluorescence detection Zaleplon Plasma LC-MS (ESI or chemical ionization) Exhibits PMR Urine Capillary electrophoresis (LIF detection) and LC-MS Positive in very few postmortem cases PM specimens GC-electron capture detection (LLE and SPE) References include [46–52] ESIelectrospray ionization,GCgas chromatography,HPLChigh-performance liquid chromatography,LCliquid chromatography,LIFlaser- induced fluorescence,LLEliquid–liquid extraction,MSmass spectroscopy,SPEsolid-phase extraction,UVultraviolet,PMpostmortem,PMR postmortem redistribution Table 4Z-drug blood concentrations (in nanogram per milliliter) Z-drug Therapeutic C max (dose)Postmortem levels in poisoning fatalities Zolpidem 100–200 (10 mg) >4,000 (zolpidem only) 1,100–4,500 (co-ingestants) Zopiclone 60–90 (7.5 mg) >600 (zopiclone only) 250–4,000 (co-ingestants) Zaleplon 20–30 (10 mg) >1,000 (none solely attributed to zaleplon) Therapeutic maximal concentrations are in plasma and shown with corresponding administered doses (in parentheses). Postmortem levels are in whole blood; blood/plasma ratio for zopiclone and zaleplon is 1.

References include [47,51,53,55–62] C max maximal concentration J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162159 pharmacokinetic profile may contribute to its apparent lower rate of toxicity and fatalities; a confounder to this postulate is that the detection window is more limited and zaleplon ingestion may be missed. In an American Poison Control Center study, zolpidem overdose was more likely to lead to intensive care admission when co-ingested with over-the- counter cold and flu preparations, other psychotropic med- ication, or ethanol [69].

Garnier et al. reported the first large series of zolpidem poisoning cases in 1994, where the toxicity predominantly involved sedation with ingestions up to 1.4 g [56]. Rarely did zolpidem cause coma, respiratory depression, cardiovas- cular toxicity, or death. Since then, reports of agitation, hallucinations, psychosis, and coma from Z-drug overdose have been published [70–73]. Other unusual reports include hemolytic anemia and methemoglobinemia from zopiclone, suggesting oxidative stress from either the parent drug or its metabolites, one of which is anN-oxide derivative [74–76].

Onset of drowsiness from Z-drug overdose is early, and recovery is often complete within several hours. Pediatric cases of Z-drug ingestion have similarly demonstrated min- imal toxicity in accidental poisoning [77]. Onset of drows- iness was invariably within the first hour of ingestion and few cases required any intervention. Manufacturers have altered some zaleplon products by adding a blue colorant, in order to minimize covert drug administration into liquids and drinks. The blue colorant, indigo carmine, has been observed in overdose patients’gastric contents and urine (chromaturia) [27].

Treatment of Z-drug overdose is largely supportive, as for benzodiazepine poisoning, with complete recovery expected within 6 h. Attention to airway patency and sup- portive management of ventilation and hemodynamics are usually sufficient. With rapid absorption, potential for early sedation and short duration of effect, decontamination meth- ods are rarely warranted. The administration of activated charcoal is likely to be more harmful than beneficial in pure Z-drug overdose. Flumazenil, a competitive benzodiazepine antagonist, has been shown to reverse the sedative effects of all three Z-drugs [24–27]. Flumazenil has also been reported to reverse sedation within minutes in pediatric ingestions of zolpidem [78]. In pure Z-drug poisoning, where sedation is of short duration and flumazenil may be indicated, bolus doses are likely to be sufficient, with infusions being un- necessary. Caution is advised when administering flumaze- nil in unknown or polydrug overdose, as unmasking of ingested pro-convulsant drugs may lead to seizure activity.

Z-drug Deaths Early clinical trials failed to show major morbidity or mor- tality from Z-drugs either used therapeutically or inoverdose. Over the past 15 years, increasing red flags from forensic cases, drug-facilitated crimes, and motor vehicle crash statistics indicate that mortality from Z-drugs may be similar to benzodiazepines. Bizarre behavior, falls, acci- dents, and other injuries may also lead to death.

In the study by Garnier et al., 6 % of zolpidem overdose cases died; however, none were directly attributable to zol- pidem [56]. A 10-year audit of coronial deaths in New South Wales, Australia identified over 90 cases where zolpidem was detected in postmortem blood or liver [79]. A quarter of these cases had femoral blood zolpidem levels above 1,000 ng/mL (therapeuticC max 100–200 ng/mL). Of note, the majority of cases in which zolpidem was thought to contribute to death were mixed drug overdoses, with the most common co-ingestants being alcohol, antidepressants, benzodiazepines, and opioids.

Z-drugs had a significantly lower fatal toxicity index (FTI) than benzodiazepines and barbiturates in a UK review of deaths from 1983 to 1999 [80]. Zolpidem and zopiclone caused∼2 deaths per million prescriptions in England and Scotland, compared with∼7 for benzodiazepines and∼150 for barbiturates. In this study, cumulative data on zopiclone- related deaths suggest that it may have the lowest FTI of anti-insomnia drugs. However, a New Zealand study contra- dicted these findings showing that zopiclone had a similar FTI to commonly prescribed benzodiazepines [81]. Caution should be used in interpreting FTI as a reliable marker of inherent drug toxicity, as it may merely represent frequency of drug abuse or prescribing patterns in patients with higher suicidality.

Z-drug concentrations in forensic cases are shown in Ta b l e4with comparison plasma levels from therapeutic dosing. Their short half-lives make them seldom found substances in forensic cases, both in drug-related deaths as well as in drug-facilitated crimes. Interpretation is compli- cated by considerable individual variation, small sample sizes, and the presence of co-ingestants. Polydrug overdose is a major confounder in deciding whether the fatalities are attributable to detected Z-drugs. Although there have been several reported fatalities where zaleplon has been ingested along with other drugs, none have been solely attributable to zaleplon [66,82]. This may represent lower zaleplon use or difficulties in measuring zaleplon levels due to its ultra-short half-life and rapid antemortem metabolism.

Summary Z-drugs have few distinct advantages over their predeces- sors, the benzodiazepines, and in many ways they have similar adverse and toxic effects, especially zopiclone. The effects of Z-drugs largely derive from their GABAergic action and pharmacokinetic profiles, which decide the 160J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162 extent of efficacy and toxicity. Adverse Z-drug effects and toxicity are more likely with polydrug use in therapeutics and co-ingested psychoactive substances in overdose. Z- drug poisoning is clinically similar to benzodiazepine over- dose with supportive care sufficient in managing the major- ity of cases. The increasing ability to detect Z-drugs in various biological matrices is promising for future forensic endeavors. Postmortem redistribution appears to be signifi- cant for zolpidem and likely also for zaleplon. It is recom- mended that public health and drug regulatory authorities maintain a high level of toxicovigilance with regard to Z- drugs and their adverse outcomes.

Conflict of InterestNone References 1. Montplaisir J, Hawa R, Moller H et al (2003) Zopiclone and zaleplon vs benzodiazepines in the treatment of insomnia: Canadian consen- sus statement. Hum Psychopharmacol 18(1):29–38 2. Stewart R, Besset A, Bebbington P et al (2006) Insomnia comor- bidity and impact and hypnotic use by age group in a national survey population aged 16 to 74 years. Sleep 29(11):1391–1397 3. Glass J, Lanctot KL, Herrmann N et al (2005) Sedative hypnotics in older people with insomnia: meta-analysis of risks and benefits.

BMJ 331(7526):1169 4. Dolder C, Nelson M, McKinsey J (2007) Use of non- benzodiazepine hypnotics in the elderly: are all agents the same?

CNS Drugs 21(5):389–405 5. Dang A, Garg A, Rataboli PV (2011) Role of zolpidem in the management of insomnia. CNS Neurosci Ther 17(5):387–397 6. Wagner J, Wagner ML (2000) Non-benzodiazepines for the treat- ment of insomnia. Sleep Med Rev 4(6):551–581 7. Dolder CR, Nelson MH (2008) Hypnosedative-induced complex behaviours: incidence, mechanisms and management. CNS Drugs 22(12):1021–1036 8. Barbera J, Shapiro C (2005) Benefit-risk assessment of zaleplon in the treatment of insomnia. Drug Saf 28(4):301–318 9. Verster JC, Veldhuijzen DS, Volkerts ER (2004) Residual effects of sleep medication on driving ability. Sleep Med Rev 8(4):309–325 10. Nutt DJ, Stahl SM (2010) Searching for perfect sleep: the continu- ing evolution of GABA Areceptor modulators as hypnotics. J Psychopharmacol 24(11):1601–1612 11. Sanofi-Aventis (2012) Product Information: Stilnox ® CR Modified Release Tablets.http://products.sanofi.com.au/aus_pi_ stilnoxCR.pdfAccessed on 1 Dec 2012 12. Barkin RL (2007) Zolpidem extended-release: a single insomnia treatment option for sleep induction and sleep maintenance symp- toms. Am J Ther 14(3):299–305 13. Holm KJ, Goa KL (2000) Zolpidem: an update of its pharmacol- ogy, therapeutic efficacy and tolerability in the treatment of insom- nia. Drugs 59(4):865–889 14. Nutt DJ, Feetam CL (2010) What one hand giveth the other taketh away: some unpredicted effects of enantiomers in psychopharma- cology. J Psychopharmacol 24(8):1137–1141 15. George CF (2001) Pyrazolopyrimidines. Lancet 358(9293):1623– 162616. Drover DR (2004) Comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmaco- dynamics of short-acting hypnosedatives: zaleplon, zolpidem and zopiclone. Clin Pharmacokinet 43(4):227–238 17. Greenblatt DJ, Legangneux E, Harmatz JS et al (2006) Dynamics and kinetics of a modified-release formulation of zolpidem: com- parison with immediate-release standard zolpidem and placebo. J Clin Pharmacol 46(12):1469–1480 18. Halas CJ (2006) Eszopiclone. Am J Health Syst Pharm 63(1):41– 48 19. Najib J (2006) Eszopiclone, a nonbenzodiazepine sedative- hypnotic agent for the treatment of transient and chronic insomnia.

Clin Ther 28(4):491–516 20. Staner L, Eriksson M, Cornette F et al (2009) Sublingual zolpidem is more effective than oral zolpidem in initiating early onset of sleep in the post-nap model of transient insomnia: a polysomno- graphic study. Sleep Med 10(6):616–620 21. US Food & Drug Administration (2013) FDA requires lower recommended doses for certain drugs containing zolpidemhttp:// www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm334033.htmAccessed 20 Jan 2013 22. Brunello N, Bettica P, Amato D et al (2008) Pharmacokinetics of (S)-zopiclone and (S)-desmethylzopiclone following dosing with zopiclone and eszopiclone. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 18(S4):

S581–S582 23. Fernandez C, Maradeix V, Gimenez F et al (1993) Pharmacokinetics of zopiclone and its enantiomers in Caucasian young healthy volun- teers. Drug Metab Dispos 21(6):1125–1128 24. Cienki JJ, Burkhart KK, Donovan JW (2005) Zopiclone overdose responsive to flumazenil. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 43(5):385–386 25. Yang C-C, Deng J-F (2008) Utility of flumazenil in zopiclone overdose. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 46(9):920–921 26. Patat A, Naef MM, van Gessel E et al (1994) Flumazenil antago- nizes the central effects of zolpidem, an imidazopyridine hypnotic.

Clin Pharmacol Ther 56(4):430–436 27. Hojer J, Salmonson H, Sundin P (2002) Zaleplon-induced coma and bluish-green urine: possible antidotal effect by flumazenil. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 40(5):571–572 28. Olubodun JO, Ochs HR, Truten V et al (2002) Zolpidem pharma- cokinetic properties in young females: influence of smoking and oral contraceptive use. J Clin Pharmacol 42(10):1142–1146 29. Hines LE, Murphy JE (2011) Potentially harmful drug–drug inter- actions in the elderly: a review. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother 9(6):364–377 30. Hesse LM, von Moltke LL, Greenblatt DJ (2003) Clinically im- portant drug interactions with zopiclone, zolpidem and zaleplon.

CNS Drugs 17(7):513 –532 31. Hojo Y, Echizenya M, Ohkubo T et al (2011) Drug interaction between St John’s wort and zolpidem in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharm Ther 36(6):711–715 32. Swainston Harrison T, Keating GM (2005) Zolpidem: a review of its use in the management of insomnia. CNS Drugs 19(1):65–89 33. Vlase L, Popa A, Neag M et al (2011) Pharmacokinetic interaction between zolpidem and carbamazepine in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 51(8):1233–1236 34. Vlase L, Popa A, Neag M et al (2011) Pharmacokinetic interaction between zolpidem and ciprofloxacin in healthy volunteers. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 35(3–4):83–87 35. US Food & Drug Administration (2007) FDA Requests Label Change for All Sleep Disorder Drug Products.http://www.fda.

gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2007/ ucm108868.htmAccessed 1 Dec 2012 36. Duggal HS (2007) New-onset transient hallucinations possibly due to eszopiclone: a case study. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry 9(6):468–469 37. Stone JR, Zorick TS, Tsuang J (2008) Dose-related illusions and hallucinations with zaleplon. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 46(4):344–345 J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162161 38. Tsai MJ, Huang YB, Wu PC (2003) A novel clinical pattern of visual hallucination after zolpidem use. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 41(6):869–872 39. Elko CJ, Burgess JL, Robertson WO (1998) Zolpidem-associated hallucinations and serotonin reuptake inhibition: a possible inter- action. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 36(3):195–203 40. Sanger DJ (2004) The pharmacology and mechanisms of action of new generation, non-benzodiazepine hypnotic agents. CNS Drugs 18(S1):9–15 41. Hajak G, Muller WE, Wittchen HU et al (2003) Abuse and depen- dence potential for the non-benzodiazepine hypnotics zolpidem and zopiclone: a review of case reports and epidemiological data.

Addiction 98(10):1371–1378 42. Chien C-C, Huanga H-T, Lung F-W et al (2011) Zolpidem with- drawal delirium, seizure, and acute psychosis: case reports and literature review. J Subs Use 16(4):330–338 43. Greenblatt DJ, Roth T (2012) Zolpidem for insomnia. Expert Opin Pharmacother 13(6):879–893 44. Victorri-Vigneau C, Dailly E, Veyrac G et al (2007) Evidence of zolpidem abuse and dependence: results of the French Centre for Evaluation and Information on Pharmacodependence (CEIP) net- work survey. Br J Clin Pharmacol 64(2):198–209 45. Cimolai N (2007) Zopiclone: is it a pharmacologic agent for abuse? Can Fam Physician 53(12):2124–2129 46. Tonon MA, Bonato PS (2012) Methods for the analysis of non- benzodiazepine hypnotic drugs in biological matrices. Bioanalysis 4(3):291–304 47. Boniface PJ, Russell SG (1996) Two cases of fatal zopiclone overdose. J Anal Toxicol 20(2):131–133 48. Han E, Kim E, Hong H et al (2012) Evaluation of postmortem redistribution phenomena for commonly encountered drugs.

Forensic Sci Int 219(1–3):265–271 49. Kintz P, Villain M, Concheiro M et al (2005) Screening and confirmatory method for benzodiazepines and hypnotics in oral fluid by LC-MS/MS. Forensic Sci Int 150(2–3):213–220 50. Leikin JB, Watson WA (2003) Post-mortem toxicology: what the dead can and cannot tell us. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 41(1):47–56 51. Levine B (2010) Principles of forensic toxicology. AACC, Washington, DC 52. Rust KY, Baumgartner MR, Meggiolaro N et al (2012) Detection and validated quantification of 21 benzodiazepines and 3“z-drugs” in human hair by LC-MS/MS. Forensic Sci Int 215(1–3):64–72 53. Drover D, Lemmens H, Naidu S et al (2000) Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and relative pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of zaleplon and zolpidem. Clin Ther 22(12):1443–1461 54. Scott-Ham M, Burton FC (2005) Toxicological findings in cases of alleged drug-facilitated sexual assault in the United Kingdom over a 3-year period. J Clin Forensic Med 12(4):175–186 55. Bramness JG, Arnestad M, Karinen R et al (2001) Fatal overdose of zopiclone in an elderly woman with bronchogenic carcinoma. J Forensic Sci 46(5):1247–1249 56. Garnier R, Guerault E, Muzard D et al (1994) Acute zolpidem poisoning—analysis of 344 cases. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 32(4):391–404 57. Gjerde H, Christophersen AS, Normann PT et al (2011) Toxicological investigations of drivers killed in road traffic acci- dents in Norway during 2006–2008. Forensic Sci Int 212(1– 3):102– 109 58. Gock SB, Wong SH, Nuwayhid N et al (1999) Acute zolpidem overdose—report of two cases. J Anal Toxicol 23(6):559–562 59. Jones AW, Holmgren A (2012) Concentrations of zolpidem and zopiclone in venous blood samples from impaired drivers comparedwith femoral blood from forensic autopsies. Forensic Sci Int 222(1– 3):118–123 60. Sanofi-Aventis (2011) Product monograph: Imovane (zopiclone).

http://products.sanofi.ca/en/imovane.pdfAccessed 1 Dec 2012 61. Takayasu T, Ishida Y, Kimura A et al (2008) Distribution of zolpidem in body fluids and organ tissues in five autopsy cases.

Forensic Toxicol 26(2):80–84 62. Baselt RC (2004) Disposition of toxic drugs and chemicals in man.

Biomedical, Foster 63. Bosker WM, Huestis MA (2009) Oral fluid testing for drugs of abuse. Clin Chem 55(11):1910–1931 64. Laloup M, Ramirez Fernandez Mdel M, De Boeck G et al (2005) Validation of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the simultaneous determination of 26 benzodiazepines and metabolites, zolpidem and zopiclone, in blood, urine, and hair.

J Anal Toxicol 29(7):616–626 65. Kintz P (2012) Value of the concept of minimal detectable dosage in human hair. Forensic Sci Int 218(1–3):28–30 66. Anderson DT, Budd RD (2009) Zaleplon (Sonata) analysis in postmortem specimens by gas chromatography-electron capture detection. J Anal Toxicol 33(8):481–485 67. Levine B, Wu SC, Smialek JE (1999) Zolpidem distribution in postmortem cases. J Forensic Sci 44(2):369–371 68. Pounder DJ, Davies JI (1994) Zopiclone poisoning: tissue distri- bution and potential for postmortem diffusion. Forensic Sci Int 65(3):177–183 69. Zosel A, Osterberg EC, Mycyk MB (2011) Zolpidem misuse with other medications or alcohol frequently results in intensive care unit admission. Am J Ther 18(4):305–308 70. Louis CJ, Fernandez B, Beaumont C et al (2008) A case of zaleplon overdose. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 46(8):782 71. Kuzniar TJ, Balagani R, Radigan KA et al (2010) Coma with absent brainstem reflexes resulting from zolpidem overdose. Am J Ther 17(5):e172–e174 72. Hamad A, Sharma N (2001) Acute zolpidem overdose leading to coma and respiratory failure. Intensive Care Med 27(7):1239 73. Lovett B, Watts D, Grossman M (2007) Prolonged coma after eszopiclone overdose. Am J Emerg Med 25(6):735, e735-736 74. Fung HT, Lai CH, Wong OF et al (2008) Two cases of methemo- globinemia following zopiclone ingestion. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 46(2):167–170 75. Fung HT, Lai CH, Wong OF et al (2009) Hemolytic anemia after zopiclone overdose. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 47(9):902–903 76. Kung SW, Tse ML, Chan YC et al (2008) Zopiclone-associated methemoglobinemia and renal impairment. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 46(10):1099–1100 77. Kurta DL, Myers LB, Krenzelok EP (1997) Zolpidem (Ambien): a pediatric case series. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 35(5):453–457 78. Carbajal R, Blanc P, Paupe A et al (1996) Flumazenil dans les intoxications au Zolpidem chez l'enfant. Arch Ped 3(2):191–192 79. Darke S, Deady M, Duflou J (2012) Toxicology and characteristics of deaths involving zolpidemin New South Wales, Australia 2001–2010. J Forensic Sci 57(5):1259–1262 80. Buckley NA, McManus PR (2004) Changes in fatalities due to overdose of anxiolytic and sedative drugs in the UK (1983–1999). Drug Saf 27(2):135–141 81. Reith DM, Fountain J, McDowell R et al (2003) Comparison of the fatal toxicity index of zopiclone with benzodiazepines. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 41(7):975–980 82. Moore KA, Zemrus TL, Ramcharitar V et al (2003) Mixed drug intoxication involving zaleplon (“Sonata”). Forensic Sci Int 134(2–3):120–122 162J. Med. Toxicol. (2013) 9:155–162