This article is a commentary on:
Presence of kratom in opioid overdose deaths: findings from coroner postmortem toxicological report
Oliver Grundmann
Kirsten E. Smith
Walter C. Prozialeck
Charles A. Veltri
Edward W. Boyer- 1Department of Medicinal Chemistry, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
- 2Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
- 3Department of Pharmacology, Midwestern University, Downers Grove, IL, United States
- 4Department of Pharmaceutical Science, College of Pharmacy, Midwestern University, Glendale, AZ, United States
- 5Department of Emergency Medicine, The Ohio State College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, United States
A Commentary on
Presence of kratom in opioid overdose deaths: findings from coroner postmortem toxicological report
By Torrico T, Patel K, Nikolov N, Salam MT, Padhy R and Weinstein D (2024). Front. Psychiatry. 14:1332999. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1332999
1 Introduction
A recent publication in Frontiers in Psychiatry, Addictive Disorders described the forensic analysis of four polydrug fatalities involving kratom in a California county (1). Kratom products derived from the botanical kratom (Mitragyna speciosa Korth.) have gained attention in the United States due to such reports of adverse effects and fatalities associated with their use. The tree from which various products are prepared is native to Southeast Asia where the leaves have been used for centuries to self-treat a variety of ailments (2). Kratom products in the US are estimated to be used by as many as 15 million adults depending on the source of the estimate (3, 4). While unregulated at the federal level in the US, kratom is regulated and considered an illicit novel psychoactive substance in several European and Southeast Asian nations (5, 6). Some of the pharmacological actions of kratom alkaloids, including kratom’s major alkaloid, mitragynine, are mediated through weak agonist activity at opioid receptors, although alpha-adrenergic and serotonergic receptors are also involved (7).
Torrico and colleagues described the forensic analysis of four kratom-related fatal polydrug exposures in a California county (1). Their report, while correct in mentioning some of the context surrounding kratom consumption, incorrectly reported a blood concentration as a lethal dose, neither of which have been established, and lacked details critical to appropriately interpreting the causal contribution of kratom to toxicity or a fatal outcome. Here, we address some ambiguities in that report.
2 Context of kratom use
Complexities of kratom use confound interpretation of use-related risk or adverse events. One example is that kratom persists as a harm-reduction method to reduce opioid and other substance use (8, 9). Previously, some consumers with opioid use disorder (OUD) history reported that kratom is not preferred over illicit opioids and do not report using kratom to achieve a euphoric “high” (10, 11). More recently, among adults who use kratom regularly and prefer it to other substances, most do not use to become intoxicated or “high”, even among people with OUD history (12). Still, within the broader kratom-using population, the subset of consumers with OUD history remain at risk for relapse. As such, the risk-benefit ratio of kratom is complicated. Kratom is also used nonmedically to attenuate withdrawal symptoms from opioids, stimulants and alcohol (13, 14). One survey found that a majority (94.8%) of kratom consumers had abstained from other substance use for at least 6 months, highlighting kratom’s role in nonmedically managing addiction (11, 12, 15, 16).
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which classifies kratom products as new dietary ingredients that require proof of safety before they can enter the market, has issued an import alert that designates kratom-containing products as adulterated and subject to seizure (17). Indeed, some kratom products sold in the US have been found to be adulterated with excessive amounts of kratom alkaloids, in particular the more potent mitragynine metabolite 7-hydroxymitragynine which is not present in fresh kratom leaves (18, 19).
3 Fatalities involving kratom use
Kratom contains a complex mixture of phytochemicals that produce multiple pharmacological effects. As the most abundant alkaloid in kratom, mitragynine has been used by forensics laboratories as the indicator of exposure (20, 21). Torrico et al. incorrectly state that the lethal dose of mitragynine was 0.398 mg/L based on three cases (1). The mitragynine concentration quoted by Torrico et al. is not a dose but rather a blood concentration identified in adults who had mitragynine in their blood. These authors are not alone in reaching the erroneous conclusion that this would be a lethal concentration (20). It is noteworthy that no causative lethal blood concentration, nor a lethal dose for kratom, mitragynine, or other alkaloids, has been established in humans or animals (22). The concentration identified by Torrico et al. is even lower than that found in another study of 6,860 post-mortem blood samples that tested positive for mitragynine (21). This study concluded that mitragynine blood concentrations >1,000 ng/mL are more often associated with severe adverse events, including death. Of note, post-mortem 7-hydroxymitragynine levels are more likely than mitragynine to be a theoretically robust indicator of causality with respect to kratom-related toxicity and death given its relative potency (23). Unfortunately, 7-hydroxymitragynine is unstable in biological samples, thus complicating its interpretive value given variable post-mortem intervals before sample collection and analysis (24). Furthermore, most fatalities associated with kratom involve polydrug exposures that complicate assigning causation to mitragynine (8, 25). In addition, forensic cases involving only mitragynine may reflect incomplete toxicology testing. Thus, a death attributed to polydrug exposure may erroneously include kratom as a contributory but not causative agent, even if other substances are present in concentrations consistent with subtherapeutic, therapeutic, or overdose use.
4 Discussion
Increased awareness of kratom’s complex polypharmacy by the public, clinicians, and public health officials requires accurate information on the current state of scientific knowledge. A diversity of commercial kratom products exists, including highly concentrated formulations with many times the amount of mitragynine and minor alkaloids than exist in native leaf material. The sheer range of commercial products is paralleled by a diversity of recommended serving sizes. This complexity may heighten the risk of using compositions that contain the more potent metabolite 7-hydroxymitragynine (26). While federal regulation and oversight are lacking, the US kratom industry has been left to regulate itself, primarily at the state level (5).
For now, kratom-only fatalities, although rare, must be taken in the context of the specific commercial product used, previous medical and drug use history, and the limitations of testing. The Torico et al. article follows several case study reports that did not document what kratom products were consumed and misinterpreted the mitragynine concentration as being a “dose.” Usual doses or servings of kratom leaf products range from 1-10 g containing between 20 and 200 mg mitragynine while concentrated kratom extracts can contain many times that amount of mitragynine. Although sufficient clinical data are lacking, kratom could be associated with adverse effects if taken in high amounts of leaf or concentrated extract, and at more frequent daily dosing intervals. Documenting clinically unremarkable use and adverse events associated with kratom remains critical. Federal oversight is needed to establish safe dosing recommendations across populations, and to apply a regulatory framework that ensures consumers have access to safe and properly labeled kratom products.
Author contributions
OG: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. KES: Writing – review & editing. WCP: Writing – review & editing. CAV: Writing – review & editing. EWB: Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
EB reports receiving income from NIH grants, poison control funding, and expert witness work. KS has served as a paid scientific advisor to The Kratom Coalition and to The International Plant and Herbal Alliance and receives funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse DA05557.
The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Torrico T, Patel K, Nikolov N, Weinstein D. Presence of kratom in opioid overdose deaths: findings from coroner postmortem toxicological report. Front Psychiatry. (2024) 14:1332999. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1332999
2. Brown PN, Lund JA, Murch SJ. A botanical, phytochemical and ethnomedicinal review of the genus Mitragyna korth: Implications for products sold as kratom. J Ethnopharmacol. (2017) 202:302–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2017.03.020
3. Henningfield JE, Grundmann O, Garcia-Romeu A, Swogger MT. We need better estimates of kratom use prevalence. Am J Prev Med. (2022) 62:132–3. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.07.022
4. Schimmel J, Amioka E, Rockhill K, Haynes CM, Black JC, Dart RC, et al. Prevalence and description of kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) use in the United States: A cross-sectional study. Addict (Abingdon England). (2020) 116(1):176–81. doi: 10.1111/add.15082
5. Ellis MS, Buttram ME, Forber A, Black JC. Associations between kratom-related state policy environments and kratom use in a nationally representative population in the United States. J Psychoactive Drugs. (2023) 11: 1–9. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2023.2223622
6. Kratom Legality 2023: Map, Legal Status, and Ban Updates (2023). Available online at: https://www.americankratom.org/aka-in-your-state (Accessed February 17, 2023).
7. Hiranita T, Obeng S, Sharma A, Wilkerson JL, McCurdy CR, McMahon LR. In vitro and in vivo pharmacology of kratom. In: Advances in Pharmacology. Eds. Li J-X. Cambridge, MA: Academic Pres (2022). 93:35–76. doi: 10.1016/bs.apha.2021.10.001
8. Smith KE, Rogers JM, Feldman JD. Kratom’s emergence and persistence within the US polydrug epidemic. Curr Addict Rep. (2023) 10(2): 1–10. doi: 10.1007/s40429-023-00476-5
9. Stanciu C, Ahmed S, Gnanasegaram S, Gibson S, Penders T, Grundmann O, et al. Kratom as an opioid alternative: harm, or harm reduction? A systematic review of literature. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. (2022) 48:509–28. doi: 10.1080/00952990.2022.2111685
10. Smith KE, Lawson T. Prevalence and motivations for kratom use in a sample of substance users enrolled in a residential treatment program. Drug Alcohol Depend. (2017) 180:340–8. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.08.034
11. Smith KE, Rogers JM, Sharma A, McCurdy CR, Weiss ST, Dunn KE, et al. Responses to a “Typical” Morning dose of kratom in people who use kratom regularly: A direct-observation study. J Addict Med. (2023) 18(2):10–1097. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000001259
12. Smith KE, Panlilio LV, Feldman JD, Grundmann O, Dunn KE, McCurdy CR, et al. Ecological momentary assessment of self-reported kratom use, effects, and motivations among US adults. JAMA Netw Open. (2024) 7:e2353401–e2353401. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.53401
13. Grundmann O. Patterns of Kratom use and health impact in the US—Results from an online survey. Drug Alcohol Depend. (2017) 176:63–70. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.03.007
14. Garcia-Romeu A, Cox DJ, Smith KE, Dunn KE, Griffiths RR. Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa): user demographics, use patterns, and implications for the opioid epidemic. Drug Alcohol Depend. (2020) 208:107849. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.107849
15. Grundmann O, Veltri CA, Morcos D, Knightes IIID, Smith KE, Singh D, et al. Exploring the self-reported motivations of kratom (Mitragyna speciosa Korth.) use: a cross-sectional investigation. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. (2022) 48(4):1–12. doi: 10.1080/00952990.2022.2041026
16. Smith KE, Feldman JD, Dunn KE, McCurdy CR, Weiss ST, Grundmann O, et al. Examining the paradoxical effects of kratom: a narrative inquiry. Front Pharmacol. (2023) 14:1174. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1174139
17. FDA. Import alert 54-15 (2019). Available online at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_1137.html.
18. Lydecker AG, Sharma A, McCurdy CR, Avery BA, Babu KM, Boyer EW. Suspected adulteration of commercial kratom products with 7-hydroxymitragynine. J Med Toxicol. (2016) 12:341–9. doi: 10.1007/s13181-016-0588-y
19. FDA. Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on the agency’s scientific evidence of the presence of opioid compounds in kratom, underscoring its potential for abuse (2018). Available online at: https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm595622.htm.
20. Papsun D, Schroeder W, Brower J, Logan B. Forensic implications of kratom: kratom toxicity, correlation with mitragynine concentrations, and polypharmacy. Curr Addict Rep. (2023) 10(2):1–10. doi: 10.1007/s40429-023-00477-4
21. Papsun DM, Chan-Hosokawa A, Friederich L, Brower J, Graf K, Logan B. The trouble with kratom: analytical and interpretative issues involving mitragynine. J Anal Toxicol. (2019) 43:615–29. doi: 10.1093/jat/bkz064
22. McCurdy CR, Sharma A, Smith KE, Veltri CA, Weiss ST, White CM, et al. An update on the clinical pharmacology of kratom: uses, abuse potential and future considerations. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. (2024) 17(2):131–42. doi: 10.1080/17512433.2024.2305798
23. Corkery JM, Streete P, Claridge H, Goodair C, Papanti D, Orsolini L, et al. Characteristics of deaths associated with kratom use. J Psychopharmacol. (2019) 33:1102–23. doi: 10.1177/0269881119862530
24. Basiliere S, Kerrigan S. Temperature and pH-dependent stability of mitragyna alkaloids. J Anal Toxicol. (2020) 44:314–24. doi: 10.1093/jat/bkz103
25. Tanna RS, Nguyen JT, Hadi DL, Layton ME, White JR, Cech NB, et al. Clinical assessment of the drug interaction potential of the psychotropic natural product kratom. Clin Pharmacol Ther. (2023) 113:1315–25. doi: 10.1002/cpt.2891
Keywords: kratom, mitragynine, toxicology, safety, public health
Citation: Grundmann O, Smith KE, Prozialeck WC, Veltri CA and Boyer EW (2024) Commentary: Presence of kratom in opioid overdose deaths: findings from coroner postmortem toxicological report. Front. Psychiatry 15:1411964. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1411964
Received: 03 April 2024; Accepted: 13 May 2024;
Published: 23 May 2024.
Edited by:
John Martin Corkery, University of Hertfordshire, United KingdomReviewed by:
Annagiulia Di Trana, National Institute of Health (ISS), ItalyCopyright © 2024 Grundmann, Smith, Prozialeck, Veltri and Boyer. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Oliver Grundmann, Z3J1bmRtYW5AdWZsLmVkdQ==