Bioequivalence Between Generic and Branded Lamotrigine in People With Epilepsy: The EQUIGEN Randomized Clinical Trial

Lamotrigine add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review last updated in 2020. Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder, affecting 0.5% to 1% of the population. In nearly 30% of cases, epilepsy is resistant to currently available drugs. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. Lamotrigine is a second-generation antiseizure medication. When used as an add-on (in combination with other antiseizure medications), lamotrigine can reduce seizures, but with some adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of add-on lamotrigine, compared with add-on placebo or no add-on treatment in people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid) on 3 October 2022 with no language restrictions. CRS Web includes randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated add-on lamotrigine versus add-on placebo or no add-on treatment in people of any age with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. We used data from the first period of eligible cross-over trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data. Our primary outcome was 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Our secondary outcomes were treatment withdrawal, adverse effects, cognitive effects, and quality of life. Primary analyses were by intention-to-treat. We performed sensitivity best- and worse-case analyses to account for missing outcome data. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% Cls) for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies for this update, so the results and conclusions of the review are unchanged. We included five parallel-group studies in adults or children, eight cross-over studies in adults or children, and one parallel study with a responder-enriched design in infants. In total, these 14 studies enroled 1806 eligible participants (38 infants, 199 children, 1569 adults). Baseline phases ranged from four to 12 weeks and treatment phases ranged from eight to 36 weeks. We rated 11 studies (1243 participants) at low overall risk of bias and three (697 participants) at unclear overall risk of bias due to lack of information on study design. Four studies (563 participants) reported effective blinding. Lamotrigine compared with placebo probably increases the likelihood of achieving 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.23; 12 trials, 1322 participants (adults and children); moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in risk of treatment withdrawal for any reason among people treated with lamotrigine versus people treated with placebo (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.37; 14 trials; 1806 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Lamotrigine compared with placebo is probably associated with a greater risk of ataxia (RR 3.34, 99% Cl 2.01 to 5.55; 12 trials; 1525 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), dizziness (RR 1.76, 99% Cl 1.28 to 2.43; 13 trials; 1768 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), nausea (RR 1.81, 99% CI 1.22 to 2.68; 12 studies, 1486 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and diplopia (RR 3.79, 99% Cl 2.15 to 6.68; 3 trials, 944 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the risk of fatigue between lamotrigine and placebo (RR 0.82, 99% CI 0.55 to 1.22; 12 studies, 1552 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Lamotrigine as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal seizures is probably effective for reducing seizure frequency. Certain adverse effects (ataxia, dizziness, diplopia, and nausea) are probably more likely to occur with lamotrigine compared with placebo. There is probably little or no difference in the number of people who withdraw from treatment with lamotrigine versus placebo. The trials were of relatively short duration and provided no long-term evidence. In addition, some trials had few participants. Further trials are needed to assess the long-term effects of lamotrigine and to compare lamotrigine with other add-on drugs.

Safety of brand name to generic substitution of lacosamide in patients with epilepsy - A prospective single-center observational study

PURPOSE

Lacosamide is a widely used third-generation antiseizure medication. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the safety of substituting brand-name lacosamide with its generic version. This study aimed to determine the clinical outcomes associated with switching from the brand-name to the generic form of lacosamide (LCM) in patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

This prospective observational study involved patients undergoing treatment with LCM at the university epilepsy clinic. In 2018, the price of the brand-name LCM in Poland increased up to 110-fold compared to generic products. Anticipating that most patients would opt to switch to the generic formulations due to financial constraints, we chose to follow up them prospectively to assess the safety of transitioning from the brand-name to the generic form of LCM.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients, aged 18-62 years, diagnosed with focal epilepsy and undergoing LCM treatment at our institution, decided to switch from the brand-name (Vimpat) to generic variations (Lacosamide TEVA, Lacosamide Glenmark, and Lacosamide Accord). Following the switch, no significant difference was observed in terms of seizure frequency before and after (p = 0.55, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Subsequently, adverse events were recorded in four patients (4.9%) during the initial follow-up visit post-switch, including somnolence (2 patients) and dizziness (2 patients). Notably, all adverse events resolved by the second follow-up visit without necessitating treatment modification. Importantly, no patient switched back to brand-name medication CONCLUSION: The generic substitution of lacosamide was found to be generally safe in our study. Nonetheless, to confirm our findings, larger prospective studies are required.

Dissolution-Hollow Fiber Membrane (D-HFM) System to Anticipate Biopharmaceutics Risk of Tablets and Capsules

A dissolution-hollow fiber membrane (D-HFM) system with relatively high area/volume ratio was previously characterized and showed favorably high percent drug absorption. Also, it's in vitro permeation constant (K_p^.Ç.) was close to in vivo human permeation constant (k_p). The objective of the current study was to predict the in vivo human absorption profile and biopharmaceutic performance of five drug products using the D-HFM system. Four immediate-release (IR) and one extended-release (ER) solid oral dosage form were subjected to the D-HFM system. Tablets and capsule dissolution were also measured using USP apparatus II. Drug solutions were also subjected to D-HFM testing. Predicted and observed absorption profiles in D-HFM system showed close agreement for each solid oral dosage form. Levy-Polli plots from D-HFM system successfully predicted the four IR products to be low biopharmaceutic risk due to permeation rate limited or mixed dissolution/permeation rate limited absorption, and successfully predicted metoprolol ER product to be high biopharmaceutic risk due to dissolution rate limited absorption. These observations showed potential of the in vitro D-HFM system to be utilized in biopharmaceutics risk assessment of in vivo tablet and capsule performance.

Supply problems of antiseizure medication are common among epilepsy patients in Germany

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the frequency of reported antiseizure medication (ASM) supply problems among patients with epilepsy (PWE) in Germany.

METHODS

The Epi2020 study was a multicenter study focusing on different healthcare aspects of adult PWE in Germany. In addition to basic clinical and demographic characteristics, PWE were asked to answer a questionnaire regarding supply difficulties regarding their ASM, and if they had to discontinue ASM treatment due to supply problems. Generic switch of medication was recorded, and adverse effects were measured using the Liverpool Adverse Events Profile (LAEP) scale. Data were analyzed to detect predictors of supply problems.

RESULTS

In total, 434 PWE with a mean age of 40 years (median 37 years, SD = 15.5, range: 18-83 years, 254 female) participated in this study. 53.7% of PWE (n = 233) reported that at least once in the past 12 months their ASM was not available at the pharmacy, and 24.9% (n = 108) reported having experienced ASM supply problems three times or more during the past 12 months. Patients with epilepsy treated with carbamazepine and zonisamide reported frequent problems with availability in 45.8% and 44.8% respectively, whereas those treated with lacosamide and valproate reported supply problems less frequently (17.0% and 16.4%, respectively). Nine patients (2.1%) were unable to take their ASM as prescribed at least once in the past 12 months due to supply problems. Forty-nine patients (11.3%) reported having to switch ASM due to supply difficulties with generic replacement occurring in 39.4% (n = 171) of patients. Those with supply problems were more likely to be treated with more ASMs and scored higher on the LAEP.

CONCLUSION

Supply problems with ASM are frequent among PWE in Germany and are reported for older and newer ASMs. Supply problems contribute to ASM nonadherence and are positively correlated with the number of ASM taken and adverse events.

Generic lamotrigine extended-release tablets are bioequivalent to innovator drug in fully replicated crossover bioequivalence study

OBJECTIVE

Lamotrigine is a commonly prescribed antiepileptic drug. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-funded clinical studies have demonstrated bioequivalence (BE) for generic lamotrigine immediate-release (IR) products in epilepsy patients with generic substitution. To address the potential concerns about the risk of generic-brand substitution of lamotrigine extended-release (ER) products, considering the complexity of controlled release systems and pharmacokinetic variations associated with possible within-subject variability (WSV), this prospective study assessed (1) BE of generic and brand lamotrigine ER products in a fully replicated BE study design in healthy subjects and (2) whether such fully replicated study design and WSV data can better support the approval of generic lamotrigine ER products.

METHODS

This open-label, single-dose, two-treatment, four-period, two-sequence, fully replicated crossover BE study compared generic lamotrigine ER tablet to brand Lamictal XR (200 mg) in 30 healthy subjects under fed conditions. Pharmacokinetics (PK) profiles were generated based on intensive blood sampling up to 144 h.

RESULTS

The two products showed comparable peak plasma concentration (C_max ), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to the last measurable time point (AUC_0-t ) and AUC extrapolated to infinity (AUC_0-inf ), whereas median time to C_max (T_max ) values differed, that is, 10 h for generic and 22 h for brand products, respectively. WSVs for PK metrics were small (~8% of C_max and ~6% of AUC) and similar between these two products. PK simulation predicted equivalent PK measurements of both products at steady state and after brand-to-generic switch, except the first day upon switching. No serious adverse events were reported.

SIGNIFICANCE

The generic lamotrigine ER tablet product demonstrates BE to the brand product in a fully replicated BE study design with healthy subjects, supporting the adequacy of the two-way crossover study design to demonstrate BE and generic-brand substitution of lamotrigine ER products.

Characterization of Dissolution-Permeation System using Hollow Fiber Membrane Module and Utility to Predict in Vivo Drug Permeation Across BCS Classes

A dissolution-permeation system has potential to provide insight into the kinetic contributions of dissolution and permeation to overall drug absorption. The goals of the study were to characterize a dissolution-hollow fiber membrane (D-HFM) system and compare its resulting in vitro drug permeation constants (K_p^') to in vivo clinical permeation constants (k_p), for four drugs in various Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS) classes. Model predictions for D-HFM were made based on derived mixing tank (MT) and complete radial (CRM) flow models and independent measurement of membrane permeability. Experimental D-HFM studies included donor flow rate and donor volume sensitivity studies, and drug permeation profile studies. Additionally, for the four drugs, K_p^'from D-HFM system was compared to (k_p) from literature, as well as K_p^' values from side-by-side diffusion cell and dissolution/Caco-2 system. Results show progressive D-HFM system development as a dissolution-permeation tool. Results indicated that D-HFM models using MT or CRM provided close agreement between predicted and observed drug permeation profiles. Drug permeation in D-HFM system was volume dependent, as predicted. Favorably, more drug permeated through the D-HFM system (10-20% in 60 min) compared to side-by-side diffusion cell (1%) and dissolution/Caco-2 system (0.1%). K_p^' from D-HFM system was also closer to in vivo k_p; the two other in vitro models showed lower K_p^'. Overall, studies reflect that HFM module has potential to incorporate drug permeation into the in vitro assessment of in vivo tablet and capsule performance.

Bioequivalence, Drugs with Narrow Therapeutic Index and the Phenomenon of Biocreep: A Critical Analysis of the System for Generic Substitution

The prescription of generic drugs represents one of the main cost-containment strategies of health systems, aimed at reducing pharmaceutical expenditure. In this context, most regulatory authorities encourage or obligate dispensing generic drugs because they are far less expensive than their brand-name alternatives. However, drug substitution can be critical in particular situations, such as the use of drugs with a narrow therapeutic index (NTI). Moreover, generics cannot automatically be considered bioequivalent with each other due to the biocreep phenomenon. In Italy, the regulatory authority has established the Transparency Lists which include the medications that will be automatically substituted for brand-name drugs, except in exceptional cases. This is a useful tool to guide prescribers and guarantee pharmaceutical sustainability, but it does not consider the biocreep phenomenon.

Therapeutic Basis of Generic Substitution of Antiseizure Medications

More than thirty antiseizure medications (ASMs) are available for treating epilepsy. ASMs differ in their potency and efficacy in controlling seizures by acting on diverse targets in the brain, often with variable pharmacokinetics. Moreover, nearly 30% of people with epilepsy have drug-resistant or intractable seizures. Generic substitution of ASMs is a complex issue. It is thought that frequent generic substitution in people with epilepsy may cause problems because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules allow too much variability across products. The standard bioequivalence range (80% to 125%) appears too broad for many ASMs, especially those exhibiting little separation between therapeutic and toxic levels. Hence, sub-therapeutic concentration may lead to therapeutic failure with seizure recurrence, which could be life threatening. A supra-therapeutic level could result in adverse effects or compliance issues. There are reported issues with generic substitutions of phenytoin, topiramate, levetiracetam, carbamazepine, and lamotrigine. There is discussion in the epilepsy community about additional guidelines, including designation of generic ASMs as Narrow Therapeutic Index (NTI) drugs and how patient education plays a role in generic substitution. Overall, based on the published evidence on specific generic ASMs, FDA bioequivalence standards are not the cause of problems with generic ASM substitution. Rather, it is imperative that physicians and pharmacists provide adequate patient education on what to expect when switching to generic ASMs, including changes in medication shape and color. Another suggestion would be to consider that all ASMs be considered for inclusion in NTI class to prevent the clinical outcome issues associated with generic ASM switching. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: There are critical aspects to consider when switching from a brand name antiseizure medication (ASM) when a generic becomes available or switching between generics. Generic ASMs are interchanged with little consideration of differences in therapeutic equivalence and other clinical factors. This article describes key issues on generic substitution of ASMs and highlights critical pharmacotherapeutic issues associated with generic ASMs.

Evaluation of CYP1A2 activity: Relationship between the endogenous urinary 6-hydroxymelatonin to melatonin ratio and paraxanthine to caffeine ratio in dried blood spots

The suitability of the endogenous 6‐hydroxymelatonin/melatonin urinary metabolic ratio as a surrogate for the paraxanthine/caffeine ratio to predict cytochrome P450 1A2 (CYP1A2) activity was assessed in this study. Twelve healthy volunteers completed four study sessions spread over 1 month (including overnight urine collection with first morning voids collected separately). Except for the third session, volunteers were asked to abstain from methylxanthine‐containing beverages and foods at least 24 h before urine collection. At the end of urine collection, subjects were given a caffeinated beverage and capillary blood samples were collected 2 h after the drink administration. A significant linear relationship between the 6‐hydroxymelatonin/melatonin ratios from 12‐h urine samples and first morning voids was observed (R² = 0.876, p < 0.0001). In contrast to the paraxanthine/caffeine ratio, consumption of methylxanthine‐containing beverages during session three did not significantly influence the 6‐hydroxymelatonin/melatonin ratios compared with the other sessions requiring abstinence from caffeine. A larger intra‐ and interindividual variability in the 6‐hydroxymelatonin/melatonin ratios compared with the paraxanthine/caffeine ratio was also observed. A very weak correlation was observed between the paraxanthine/caffeine ratio and both of the endogenous 6‐hydroxymelatonin/melatonin ratios (Pearson r < 0.35, p < 0.05). All these results question whether this endogenous metric could adequately reflect CYP1A2 activity or substitute for the probe caffeine. Additional studies with larger study samples are needed to examine this endogenous metric in more details.

Barriers to Generic Antiseizure Medication Use: Results of a Global Survey by the International League Against Epilepsy Generic Substitution Task Force

The objective of this study was to identify and quantify barriers to generic substitution of antiseizure medications (ASM). A questionnaire on generic ASM substitution was developed by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Task Force on Generic Substitution. Questions addressed understanding of bioequivalence, standards for generic products, experiences with substitution, and demographic data. The survey was web‐based and distributed to ILAE chapters, their membership, and professional colleagues of task force members. Comparisons in responses were between ILAE regions and country income classification. A total of 800 individuals responded, with 44.2% being from the Asia‐Oceania ILAE Region and 38.6% from European Region. The majority of respondents had little or no education in generic substitution or bioequivalence. Many respondents indicated lack of understanding aspects of generic substitution. Common barriers to generic substitution included limited access, poor or inconsistent quality, too expensive, or lack of regulatory control. Increase in seizures was the most common reported adverse outcome of substitution. Of medications on the World Health Organization Essential Medication list, problems with generic products were most frequent with carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and valproic acid. Several barriers with generic substitution of ASM revolved around mistrust of regulatory control and quality of generic ASM. Lack of education on generic substitution is also a concern. Generic ASM products may be the only option in some parts of the world and efforts should address these issues. Efforts to address these barriers should improve access to medications in all parts of the world.

Meeting report: an exploration into the scientific and regulatory aspects of pharmaceutical drug quality in the United States

INTRODUCTION

The University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy hosted a seminar 6-7 March 2021, on the quality of pharmaceutical products in the United States. This meeting report summarizes the topics presented at the seminar and highlights the expert opinions offered by the presenters.Areas Covered: The seminar, held virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic, included slide presentations and faculty-moderated panel discussions from experts in the field. These experts from regulatory, academic, and private sectors discussed bioequivalence standards, existing and emerging efforts to promote quality in brand and generic manufacturing, as well as market-based solutions throughout the drug supply chain.Expert Opinion: The time spent understanding bioequivalence standards during the seminar felt especially important and relevant in our current pandemic environment, given the present need to have confidence in the science of drug development and to advocate for the safety of pharmaceuticals. Also an important point to emphasize from the seminar, was that every stakeholder along the drug supply chain has a responsibility to do their part to maintain its quality. And those in attendance, many of whom were students of healthcare sciences, were encouraged to be leaders in their fields and develop strategies to advance innovative improvements.

Physicians' attitudes toward generic substitutions of antiseizure drugs in epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

The safety of generic substitution of antiseizure drugs (ASDs) has been questioned for many years. This study aimed to identify physicians' attitudes to the generic substitution of ASDs in epilepsy and which factors were of significance when deciding on compound substitutions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cross-sectional web-based survey was sent to neurologists and neurology residents in public health care and at private practices in two Swedish regions between February and March 2020. The 30-item survey covered drug- and patient-related factors, as well as considerations relating to practical, cost-related, and pharmacokinetic issues.

RESULTS

The total response rate was 55.8%. Respondents were generally positive to cutting costs through generic ASD utilization (74%) and prescribing generic compounds when starting a new ASD treatment (84.9%). The most substantial concern was a deterioration in seizure control (17.1%). Physicians refrained from switching if the patient wished to remain on the original compound (76.1%), had a cognitive impairment (52.5%), was on a drug with a narrow therapeutic index (47%), or had shown prior susceptibility to adverse effects (45.6%). Opinions on substitution decisions differed significantly between the Stockholm and Skåne regions. Less than one-third of the respondents were aware of supporting guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurologists generally accept the use of generic antiseizure compounds. Patient preference to remain on brand-name drug treatment was the most important factor that led to avoiding a switch. Our results may constitute material for consensus discussions to decide on quality indicators of interest for future research on substitution outcomes.

Incorporating Breastfeeding-Related Variability with Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling to Predict Infant Exposure to Maternal Medication Through Breast Milk: a Workflow Applied to Lamotrigine

Current methods to assess risk in infants exposed to maternal medication through breast milk do not specifically account for infants most vulnerable to high drug exposure. A workflow applied to lamotrigine incorporated variability in infant anatomy and physiology, milk intake volume, and milk concentration to predict infant exposure. An adult physiologically based pharmacokinetic model of lamotrigine was developed and evaluated. The model was scaled to account for growth and maturation of a virtual infant population (n=100). Daily infant doses were simulated using milk intake volume and concentration models described by a nonlinear equation of weight-normalized intake across infant age and a linear function on the relationship of observed milk concentrations and maternal doses, respectively. Average infant plasma concentration at steady state was obtained through simulation. Models were evaluated by comparing observed to simulated infant plasma concentrations from breastfeeding infants based on a 90% prediction interval (PI). Upper AUC ratio (UAR) was defined as a novel risk metric. Twenty-five paired (milk concentrations measured) and 18 unpaired (milk concentrations unknown) infant plasma samples were retrieved from the literature. Forty-four percent and 11% of the paired and unpaired infant plasma concentrations were outside of the 90% PI, respectively. Over all ages (0-7 months), unpaired predictions captured more observed infant plasma concentrations within 90% PI than paired. UAR was 0.18-0.44 when mothers received 200 mg lamotrigine, suggesting that infants can receive 18-44% of the exposure per dose as compared to adults. UARs determined for further medications could reveal trends to better classify at-risk mother-infant pairs.

Bioequivalence of a Generic Nateglinide Formulation in Healthy Chinese Volunteers under Fasting and Fed Conditions: A Randomized, Open-Label, Double-Cycle, Double-Crossover Study

INTRODUCTION

Nateglinide or N-(trans-4-isopropylcyclohexyl-1-carbonyl)-D-phenylalanine is a drug with a rapid hypoglycemic effect that is mainly used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Very few studies have assessed bioequivalence based on feeding status. This study aimed to assess the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence and safety of nateglinide-containing tablets (0.12 g) in healthy Chinese volunteers under fasting and fed conditions.

METHODS

The studies were performed in 2017-2018 in the Phase I Clinical Trial Ward of the Affiliated Hospital of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, China. Eligible Chinese volunteers received a single 0.12-g dose of the test or reference formulation, followed by a 7-day washout period and administration of the alternate formulation. Blood samples were collected at various time intervals, and plasma nateglinide concentrations were analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Then, the adverse events, laboratory test results, vital signs, and physical exam findings were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The ratios of the geometric means of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-inf of the tested to reference preparations under fasting conditions were 105.03% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 99.53-110.83%), 104.02% (90% CI: 101.37-106.74%), and 104.04% (90% CI: 101.38-106.77%), respectively. The same ratios under fed conditions were 96.55% (90% CI: 85.80-108.65%), 103.08% (90% CI: 100.07-106.18%), and 103.07% (90% CI: 100.21-106.01%), respectively. The 90% CI values for Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-inf fell within the accepted range of bioequivalence (80.00-125.0%). Common adverse events included hypoglycemia, heart rate increase, palpitation, sweating, dizziness, and diarrhea.

CONCLUSIONS

The test formulation (0.12 g) met the CFDA's regulatory definition for bioequivalence to the reference formulation. Both formulations were well tolerated by healthy Chinese subjects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial has been registered in the Chinese Clinical trial registry (ChiCTR2000030694), March 10, 2020.

Bioequivalence and switchability of generic antiseizure medications (ASMs): A re-appraisal based on analysis of generic ASM products approved in Europe

The safety of switching between generic products of antiseizure medications (ASMs) continues to be a hot topic in epilepsy management. The main reason for concern relates to the uncertainty on whether, and when, two generics found to be bioequivalent to the same brand (reference) product are bioequivalent to each other, and the risk of a switch between generics resulting in clinically significant changes in plasma ASM concentrations. This article addresses these concerns by discussing the distinction between bioequivalence and statistical testing for significant difference, the importance of intra-subject variability in interpreting bioequivalence studies, the stricter regulatory bioequivalence requirements applicable to narrow-therapeutic-index (NTI) drugs, and the extent by which currently available generic products of ASMs comply with such criteria. Data for 117 oral generic products of second-generation ASMs approved in Europe by the centralized, mutual recognition or decentralized procedure were analyzed based on a review of publicly accessible regulatory assessment reports. The analysis showed that for 99% of generic products assessed (after exclusion of gabapentin products), the 90% confidence intervals (90% CIs) of geometric mean ratios (test/reference) for AUC (area under the drug concentration vs time curve) were narrow and wholly contained within the acceptance interval (90%-111%) applied to NTI drugs. Intra-subject variability for AUC was <10% for 53 (88%) of the 60 products for which this measure was reported. Many gabapentin generics showed broader, 90% CIs for bioequivalence estimates, and greater intra-subject variability, compared with generics of other ASMs. When interpreted within the context of other available data, these results suggest that any risk of non-bioequivalence between these individual generic products is small, and that switches across these products are not likely to result in clinically relevant changes in plasma drug exposure. The potential for variability in exposure when switching across generics is likely to be greatest for gabapentin.

Widespread skeptic attitudes among people with epilepsy toward generic antiseizure drugs - A Swedish survey study

PURPOSE

To explore associations between the characteristics of people with epilepsy (PWE) and their attitudes toward generic substitution of antiseizure drugs (ASDs) in epilepsy.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional survey study directed at adults with epilepsy using selected brand drugs: Keppra®, Lamictal®, Lyrica® or Topimax®. Symptoms of anxiety and depression, sense of self-efficacy, and beliefs about medicines were assessed. Caregivers were asked to answer for persons with intellectual or communicative difficulties.

RESULTS

The total response rate was 41% (n = 178). Almost half (46%) of subjects stated that they would oppose generic substitution (Gen-NEG) if suggested by their neurologist, while 71% would worry about adverse effects and/or increased seizure frequency after a putative switch. Age ≥50 increased the odds of being Gen-NEG (adjusted OR: 2.20, 95% CI: 1.18-4.11). Negative associations with both Gen-NEG and worriers were found for education level of high-school diploma or above, employment/studies, and prior experience of generic ASD switch. The proportion of worriers was much higher among caregivers (21/22) compared to subjects with epilepsy (106/156).

CONCLUSION

High proportions of PWE express concerns regarding generic substitution of ASDs. The elderly and caregivers seem to express particular concerns. Identifying ways to diminish negative outcomes and worries in connection with a switch is an important future field of research in order to ensure high quality, cost-effective health care for the most vulnerable people in our societies.

Effects of generic exchange of solid oral dosage forms in neurological disorders: a systematic review

Background Generic drug exchange is common practice in most healthcare systems. While generics certainly contribute to economic savings, the altered drug formulation might be associated with potential therapeutic problems. Given the narrow therapeutic windows in neurologic indications, any detrimental effect on the therapy can lead to significant consequences. Aim of the review This review aims to investigate potential problems related to a switch from brand-name to generic or from generic to generic drug products in patients with neurologic diseases. Method The review was conducted following the PICO framework and the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for articles published in English and German language between January 1, 1995 and October 17, 2018. Studies included in this review were randomized controlled studies, reviews, systematic reviews, overviews, cohort studies and case-control studies. Studies excluded were letters, comments, authors view, congress or seminar papers and studies with a focus on economic impact or costs. Results were synthesized qualitatively. The primary outcomes were pharmacokinetic parameters such as the area under the curve (AUC), the peak serum concentration (c_max) or the time at which c_max is observed (t_max). Results The search identified 67 studies with a great variety of endpoints and study designs. The leading indication was epilepsy. Two small RCTs were found on lamotrigine switch. Analysis of the other studies found no significant differences in pharmacokinetic parameters when switching to generic drugs. A more heterogeneous picture was revealed regarding hospitalizations, breakthrough seizures, failure of therapy, adherence and patient concerns. Conclusion While most reports were of poor quality, lamotrigine was the drug with the best available data. Summarizing the results of the available studies, pharmacokinetic parameters of antiepileptic drugs show low deviation. In contrast, data on clinical parameters are less consistent. Some studies found increased seizure frequencies and adverse-drug events, while others showed no complications. Adherence and patient satisfaction seemed to be impaired. In daily practice, generic exchange in epilepsy should be a carefully balanced decision, conducted with great caution. Further research is needed, especially regarding neurologic indications other than epilepsy.

Lamotrigine add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2016. Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder, affecting 0.5% to 1% of the population. For nearly 30% of these people, their epilepsy is resistant to currently available drugs. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. Lamotrigine is one of the newer antiepileptic drugs. Lamotrigine, in combination with other antiepileptic drugs (add-on), can reduce seizures, but with some adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of lamotrigine on (1) seizures, (2) adverse-effect profile, and (3) cognition and quality of life, compared to placebo, when used as an add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update of the review, we searched the following databases on 9 March 2020: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to March 06, 2020). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized, controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy. No language restrictions were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy of any age, in which an adequate method of concealment of randomisation was used. The studies were double-, single- or unblinded, placebo-controlled. For cross-over studies, the first treatment period was treated as a parallel trial. Eligible participants were adults or children with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion, and extracted data. Outcomes included 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, treatment withdrawal (any reason), adverse effects, effects on cognition and quality of life. Primary analyses were by intention-to-treat. Sensitivity best- and worse-case analyses were undertaken to account for missing outcome data. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% Cls) were estimated for the primary outcomes of seizure frequency and treatment withdrawal. For adverse effects, we calculated pooled RRs and 99% Cls.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any new studies for this update, therefore, the results and conclusions are unchanged. In previous updates of this review, the authors found five parallel add-on studies, eight cross-over studies in adults or children with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, and one parallel add-on study with a responder-enriched design in infants. In total, these 14 studies included 1806 eligible participants (38 infants, 199 children, 1569 adults). Baseline phases ranged from four to 12 weeks; treatment phases from eight to 36 weeks. Overall, 11 studies (1243 participants) were rated as having low risk of bias, and three (697 participants) had unclear risk of bias due to lack of reported information around study design. Effective blinding of studies was reported in four studies (563 participants). The overall risk ratio (RR) for 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency was 1.80 (95% CI 1.45 to 2.23; 12 trials, 1322 participants (adults and children); moderate-certainty evidence) indicating that lamotrigine was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing seizure frequency. The overall RR for treatment withdrawal (for any reason) was 1.11 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.37; 14 trials; 1806 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The adverse events significantly associated with lamotrigine were: ataxia, dizziness, diplopia (double vision), and nausea. The RR of these adverse effects were as follows: ataxia 3.34 (99% Cl 2.01 to 5.55; 12 trials; 1525 participants; high-certainty evidence); dizziness 2.00 (99% Cl 1.52 to 2.64;13 trials; 1768 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); diplopia 3.79 (99% Cl 2.15 to 6.68; 3 trials, 944 participants; high-certainty evidence); nausea 1.81 (99% Cl 1.22 to 2.68; 12 studies,1486 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The limited data available precluded any conclusions about effects on cognition and quality of life. No important heterogeneity between studies was found for any of the outcomes. Overall, we assessed the evidence as high to moderate certainty, due to incomplete data for some outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Lamotrigine as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal seizures appears to be effective in reducing seizure frequency, and seems to be fairly well-tolerated. However, the trials were of relatively short duration and provided no evidence for the long term. Further trials are needed to assess the long-term effects of lamotrigine, and to compare lamotrigine with other add-on drugs.

Optimizing Management of Medically Responsive Epilepsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the management of patients with medically responsive epilepsy, including discussion of factors that may lead to transient breakthrough seizures and patient and physician strategies to maintain freedom from seizures.

RECENT FINDINGS

Imperfect adherence, unanticipated changes in ongoing medical therapy, inadvertent use of proconvulsants or concurrent medications that alter epilepsy medication kinetics, and a variety of seizure precipitants such as stress or sleep deprivation may alter long-term seizure control.

SUMMARY

The majority of patients with epilepsy are medically responsive. Many potential factors may lead to breakthrough seizures in these patients. Identification of these factors, patient education, and use of self-management techniques including mindfulness therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy may play a role in protecting patients with epilepsy against breakthrough seizures.

Quality of life after switching to generic levetiracetam - A prospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Improved quality of life (QoL) is one of the most important objectives in the treatment of epilepsy. Recent prospective, clinical studies proved no significant differences between brand antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and their generic equivalents in terms of seizure control, pharmacokinetics, or safety. In this study, we focused on possible changes in QoL and adverse events in connection with generic substitution of levetiracetam (LEV).

METHODS

This was a prospective, naturalistic, two-cohort, twin-center study. After a baseline period of 10 weeks, outpatients with epilepsy on stable treatment with Keppra® either continued on this brand (reference group, n = 16) or switched to generic LEV (1A Pharma®) (study group, n = 16) for an eight-week study period. The Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory-31 (QOLIE-31) and an adverse events' questionnaire were administered at inclusion, after baseline, and at the end of the study period. The study protocol included a close clinical follow-up with repeated LEV serum concentration measurements and nurse-led outpatient visits.

RESULTS

Clinically relevant improvements in overall QOLIE-31 scores according to minimally important change (MIC) estimates were seen in both groups. QOLIE-31 subscales in both groups showed significantly less worry about seizures at the end of the study compared to scores at inclusion (study group: p = 0.01; reference group: p = 0.02). No significant deterioration in QoL or adverse events were observed following generic substitution. No switchbacks occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

We found reduced seizure worries over time among people with epilepsy allocated to either generic switch or continued treatment with brand LEV. We hypothesize that the nurse-led structured follow-up had an impact on seizure worries and switchback rates because of reduced nocebo effects. Further studies on generic AED substitution, focusing on psychological outcome measures, are warranted to test this supposition.

Evaluation of Switching Patterns in FDA's Sentinel System: A New Tool to Assess Generic Drugs

INTRODUCTION

Nearly 90% of drugs dispensed in the US are generic products.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and implement a tool for analyzing manufacturer-level drug utilization and switching patterns within the US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel system.

METHODS

A descriptive tool was designed to analyze data in the Sentinel common data model and was tested with two case studies-metoprolol extended release (ER) and lamotrigine ER-using claims data from four Sentinel data partners. We plotted initiators of each brand and generic product over time. For metoprolol ER, we evaluated rates of switching from generics around the time of manufacturing issues. For lamotrigine ER, we examined rates of switching back to the brand among those who switched from brand to generic.

RESULTS

We identified 1,651,285 initiators of metoprolol ER products between July 2008 and September 2015. We observed a large decrease in monthly metoprolol ER initiators (from 25,465 in December 2008 to 13,128 in February 2009), corresponding to recalls by generic manufacturers. We observed simultaneous increases in utilization of the authorized generic and brand products. We identified 4266 initiators of lamotrigine ER with an epilepsy diagnosis between January 2012 and September 2015. Among those who switched from brand to generic, the cumulative incidence of switching back was close to 20% at 2 years. Switchback rates were higher for the first available generic products.

CONCLUSIONS

This developed tool was able to elucidate novel utilization and switching patterns in two case studies. Such information can be used to support surveillance of generic drugs and biosimilars.

Innovation for Generic Drugs: Science and Research Under the Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2012

Regulatory science is science and research intended to improve decision making in a regulatory framework. Improvements in decision making can be in both accuracy (making better decisions) and in efficiency (making faster decisions). Science and research supported by the Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2012 (GDUFA) have focused on two innovative methodologies that work together to enable new approaches to development and review of generic drugs: quantitative models and advanced in vitro product characterization. Quantitative models faithfully represent current scientific understanding. They are tools pharmaceutical scientists and clinical pharmacologists use for making better and faster product development decisions. Advances in the in vitro product comparisons provide the measurements of product differences that are the critical input into the models. This paper outlines four areas where science and research funded by GDUFA support synergistic use of models and characterization at critical decision points during generic drug product development and review.

A Survey of Patients' Perceptions of Pill Appearance and Responses to Changes in Appearance for Four Chronic Disease Medications

BACKGROUND

Generic versions of a drug can vary in appearance, which can impact adherence.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the preferences, perceptions, and responses of patients who experienced a change in the appearance of a generic medication.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey of patients from a large commercial health plan.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults receiving generic versions of lisinopril, fluoxetine, lamotrigine, or simvastatin who experienced a change in the color or shape of their pills between March 2014 and November 2015.

MAIN MEASURES

Likert-scale responses to questions concerning perceptions of generic drug safety and effectiveness, reliance on and preferences for pill appearance, and responses to pill appearance changes. Multivariable logistic regression-modeled predictors of seeking advice and adjusting use following a pill appearance change.

KEY RESULTS

Of 814 respondents (response rate = 41%), 72% relied on pill appearance to ensure they took the correct medication. A similar percentage wanted their pills to remain the same color (72%), shape (71%), and size (75%) upon refill, but 58% would not have paid a $1 premium on a $5 co-pay to ensure such consistency. Most respondents (86%) wanted their pharmacists to notify them about pill appearance changes, but only 37% recalled such notification; 21% thought they received the wrong medication, and 8% adjusted medication use. Younger respondents (18-33 vs. 50-57 years) were more likely to seek advice (odds ratio [OR] = 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.02-3.59), and respondents with lower household income (< $30,000 vs. > $100,000) were more likely to adjust medication use (OR = 3.40; 95% CI,1.09-10.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Requiring uniform pill appearance may help increase adherence but presents challenges. Standardized pharmacy notification and education policies may be a more feasible short-term solution.

Generic Drugs in the United States: Policies to Address Pricing and Competition

The cost of prescription drugs in the United States continues to be a source of concern for patients, caregivers, and policymakers. Drug prices typically decline rapidly once generic drugs receive US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and enter the market, but the past decade has witnessed rising costs and shortages of generic drugs. We describe the strategies used by brand-name manufacturers to undermine generic competition and the reasons underlying the price increases of off-patent drugs, some of which continue to lack any competition from generic versions, and others that have increased in price despite having generic versions. We discuss the FDA's role in addressing drug prices and promoting competition, including recent agency policies to modify its process of reviewing generic drug applications and to prioritize applications for off-patent drugs with few competitors. We also examine proposed policy solutions and research areas that could help address the price increases of off-patent drugs.

Exploring generic brittleness and the demographic factors for its susceptibility in patients with epilepsy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to provide an algorithm for generic brittleness and to elucidate the demographic factors that anticipate generic brittleness for patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

This exploratory, observational, and nontherapeutic study was conducted in patients with epilepsy who were routinely followed at the University of Maryland epilepsy outpatient clinic in Baltimore, Maryland. Patients were taking at least one antiepileptic drug (AED) for treatment of epilepsy. Based on patient interview and medical history, 12 demographic factors were collected. Each patient was assessed to be either generic brittle (GB) or not GB. Demographic factors were subjected to binary logistical regression and other statistical tests, to elucidate determinants of GB status.

RESULTS

N = 148 patients completed the study. An algorithm to define whether a patient was GB or not GB was devised. The two elements that defined GB status are as follows: patient opinion about generics and (if needed) whether patients were currently taking brand or generic of their most problematic AED. About 40% of patients were GB. From binary logistical regression, two demographic factors that contributed to patients being GB were whether a patient was currently taking a problem AED and total number of current medications for a patient, with odds ratios of 4.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] from 1.53 to 10.81) and 1.10 (95% CI from 1.003 to 1.21), respectively. Of the patients on a problem AED, 46.9% were GB, while only 18.2% of patients not currently on a problem AED were GB. The total number of current medications ranged from 1 to 22, with mode of four medications. From regression, for each additional medication that a patient took, the odds of being GB increased 1.10-fold. Although patient seizure and adverse event history was not employed to define GB status, being GB was associated with less seizure control and greater adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

An algorithm for generic brittleness was derived, and about 40% of patients were GB, usually due to prior history of a switch problem. Two demographic factors favored patients being GB: whether the patient was currently taking a problem AED and the total number of current medications.

Construction of the Design Matrix for Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects Models in the Context of Clinical Trials of Treatment Sequences

The estimation of carry-over effects is a difficult problem in the design and analysis of clinical trials of treatment sequences including cross-over trials. Except for simple designs, carry-over effects are usually unidentifiable and therefore nonestimable. Solutions such as imposing parameter constraints are often unjustified and produce differing carry-over estimates depending on the constraint imposed. Generalized inverses or treatment-balancing often allow estimating main treatment effects, but the problem of estimating the carry-over contribution of a treatment sequence remains open in these approaches. Moreover, washout periods are not always feasible or ethical. A common feature of designs with unidentifiable parameters is that they do not have design matrices of full rank. Thus, we propose approaches to the construction of design matrices of full rank, without imposing artificial constraints on the carry-over effects. Our approaches are applicable within the framework of generalized linear mixed-effects models. We present a new model for the design and analysis of clinical trials of treatment sequences, called Antichronic System, and introduce some special sequences called Skip Sequences. We show that carry-over effects are identifiable only if appropriate Skip Sequences are used in the design and/or data analysis of the clinical trial. We explain how Skip Sequences can be implemented in practice, and present a method of computing the appropriate Skip Sequences. We show applications to the design of a cross-over study with 3 treatments and 3 periods, and to the data analysis of the STAR*D study of sequences of treatments for depression.

Generic antiepileptic drugs-Safe or harmful in patients with epilepsy?

Generic antiepileptic drugs (AED) are significantly cheaper than brand name drugs, and may reduce overall health care expenditures. Regulatory bodies in Europe and North America require bioequivalence between generic and innovator drugs with regard to area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and peak plasma concentration (C_max ); strict cutoff values have been defined. The main issue is if bioequivalence ensures therapeutic equivalence. Are switches from brand to generic, or between generic AEDs entirely safe or potentially harmful in patients with epilepsy? We summarized and evaluated the available evidence from bioequivalence, health care utilization, and clinical studies on safety of generic AEDs. In most cases, variations in AUC and C_max were negligible when comparing innovator and generic AEDs. Due to interindividual pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability, measured differences between innovator and generic drugs may be the same as differences between different lots of the same brand. Studies from several countries based on insurance data have reported an increase in health care usage after switch from brand to generic AEDs; switchback rates are significantly higher for AEDs compared to other compounds. Patients may be confused, and nonadherence may increase, when AEDs are switched between manufacturers, perhaps due to changes in medication shape and color. But clinical studies do not report changes in seizure frequency and tolerability attributable to generics. Sufficient evidence indicates that most generics are bioequivalent to innovator AEDs; they do not pose a relevant risk for patients with epilepsy. However, some patients are reluctant towards variations in color and shape of their AEDs which may result in nonadherence. We recommend administering generics when a new AED is initiated. Switches from brand to generic AEDs for cost reduction and between generics, which is rarely required, generally seem to be safe, but should be accompanied by thorough counseling of patients on low risks.

Advocacy for children with epilepsy: Leveraging the WHA resolution. Advocacy Task Force, Commission of Pediatrics, International League Against Epilepsy

In May 2015 the World Health Assembly (WHA) approved the Resolution on the Global Burden of Epilepsy. This report addresses how the Resolution can be leveraged to improve the care of children with epilepsy worldwide. Children with epilepsy have unique needs and face unique challenges from stigma at all levels of society. Children lack a voice to lobby for their own needs, including their right to have access to education. Effective leadership and governance should be enhanced through the support of stakeholders empowered to counsel, advise, and lobby for appropriate care. National health care plans should integrate primary and specialist care, and they need to be adapted to local specificities. Antiepileptic medicines should be widely accessible in appropriate, sustained, and affordable ways. Public awareness initiatives are needed to improve the inclusion of affected children in society and to reduce stigma. Cost-effective interventions are also needed to address preventable causes of epilepsy. Without greater investment in research, evidence-based interventions cannot be implemented. Through all of this, civil society must be engaged to ensure that the multivariate dimensions from the clinic to the community are addressed to fulfil the needs of children with epilepsy.