Population Pharmacokinetics of Levetiracetam in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Exhibiting Augmented Renal Clearance

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sodium valproate versus levetiracetam in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVE

To observe the efficacy and safety of sodium valproate (VPA) compared to levetiracetam (LEV) in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI).

METHODS

In this blind, prospective study, eighty-four sTBI patients who had craniotomy from August 2021 to August 2023 were randomly split into two groups through random number table method: LEV and VPA, each with 42 patients. Both received comprehensive treatment post-craniotomy. LEV group: LEV injection on surgery day, transitioning to LEV tablets from day two. VPA group: VPA injection on surgery day, switching to VPA extended-release tablets from day two. The study compared hospital stay, neurological function, clinical outcomes, seizures, and drug reactions between groups.

RESULTS

The length of hospital stay showed no significant difference between the LEV and VPA groups. Both groups demonstrated improved neurological function post-treatment (NIHSS and BI scores), with no significant between-group differences. Clinical outcomes at 3 months post-treatment were similar in both groups. Seizure occurrence within 3 months after treatment showed no significant difference between the LEV (19.05%) and VPA (23.81%) groups. However, the VPA group experienced a significantly higher rate of drug-related adverse reactions (40.48%) compared to the LEV group (21.43%).

CONCLUSION

Both VPA and LEV are effective in treating sTBI, showing no significant difference in improving neurological function, daily life abilities, treatment outcomes, and seizure occurrence. However, VPA treatment exhibited a significantly higher incidence of drug-related adverse reactions compared to LEV, indicating that LEV might be a safer option for sTBI treatment.

Enhanced renal clearance impacts levetiracetam concentrations in patients with traumatic brain injury with and without augmented renal clearance

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of ARC on levetiracetam concentrations during the first week following acute TBI. The hypothesis was levetiracetam concentrations are significantly lower in TBI patients with augmented renal clearance (ARC) compared to those with normal renal clearance.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort pharmacokinetic study of adults with moderate to severe TBI treated with levetiracetam during the first week after injury. Serial blood collections were performed daily for analysis of levetiracetam, cystatin C, and 12-hr creatinine clearance (CrCl) determinations. Patients were divided into two cohorts: with (CrCl ≥130 ml/min/1.73 m2) and without ARC.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients with moderate to severe TBI were included. The population consisted primarily of young male patients with severe TBI (mean age 40 years old, 68% male, median admission GCS 4). Each received levetiracetam 1000 mg IV every 12 h for the study period. ARC was present in 77.3% of patients, with significantly lower levetiracetam concentrations in ARC patients and below the conservative therapeutic range (< 6mcg/mL) for all study days. In patients without ARC, the serum concentrations were also below the expected range on all but two study days (Days 4 and 5). Four of the 22 (18.2%) patients exhibited seizure activity during the study period (two of these patients exhibited ARC). Cystatin C concentrations were significantly lower in patients with ARC, though the mean for all patients was within the typical normal range.

CONCLUSIONS

ARC has a high prevalence in patients with moderate to severe TBI. Levetiracetam concentrations after standard dosing were low in all TBI patients, but significantly lower in patients with ARC. This study highlights the need to consider personalized drug dosing in TBI patients irrespective of the presence of ARC.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at cliicaltrials.gov (NCT02437838) Registered on 08/05/2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02437838 .

Optimal Dosing of Levetiracetam for Seizure Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

Critically ill patients eliminate levetiracetam (LEV) more rapidly than healthy controls, yet low doses are commonly used for seizure prophylaxis in the ICU setting. We compared the rates of achievement of target serum levels and new onset seizure (clinical and/or electrographic) among patients who received low (500 mg bid) versus high (750-1,000 mg bid) dose LEV.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary care, academic center.

PATIENTS

We included patients who received prophylactic LEV following traumatic brain injury, intracerebral hemorrhage, spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage, or supratentorial neurosurgery between 2019 and 2021. Patients with a history of seizure, antiseizure medication use, or renal failure requiring dialysis were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS

LEV levels were obtained at steady state. The impact of low-dose versus high-dose LEV on the primary outcome of target LEV levels (12-46 μg/mL), and the secondary outcome of clinical and/or electrographic seizure, were assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for age, LEV loading dose, BMI, primary diagnosis and creatinine clearance (CrCl).

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 205 subjects included in analyses, n = 106 (52%) received LEV 500 mg bid (median 13 mg/kg/d), and n = 99 (48%) received LEV 750-1,000 mg bid (median 25 mg/kg/d). Overall, 111 of 205 patients (54%) achieved target levels: 48 (45%) from the low-dose group versus 63 (64%) from the high-dose group (odds ratio [OR] 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7; p = 0.009). In multivariable analyses, high-dose LEV predicted target levels (adjusted OR [aOR] 2.23; 95% CI, 1.16-4.27; p = 0.016), and was associated with lower seizure odds (aOR 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.82; p = 0.018) after adjusting for age, loading dose, BMI, diagnosis, and CrCl.

CONCLUSIONS

Underdosing of LEV was common, with only 54% of patients achieving target serum levels. Higher doses (750-1,000 mg bid) were more than twice as likely to lead to optimal drug levels and reduced the odds of seizure by 68% compared with low-dose regimens (500 mg bid).

Augmented Renal Clearance in the Hematology and Oncology Populations: A Scoping Review for Pharmacists

INTRODUCTION

Until recently, interest in renal function has focused on impairment to limit drug toxicity and increase medication safety. Augmented renal clearance (ARC) has been increasingly studied in multiple patient populations, including oncology, and could lead to decreased drug efficacy from faster elimination resulting in subtherapeutic concentrations. This scoping review sought to summarize ARC literature in cancer and identify areas of research to better inform pharmacy practitioners.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases were searched for English articles related to augmented/enhanced renal function/clearance following a framework for scoping reviews.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Fourteen articles were analyzed, divided according to article objective: descriptive studies or ARC's impact on pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics. ARC was most defined as creatinine clearance >130 mL/min/1.73 m2, reported in 10%-100% of patients. Febrile neutropenia in adult and pediatric patients, and age <50-65 years, hematologic malignancy, and lower serum creatinine in adult patients were notable risk factors for ARC. The impact of ARC has only been evaluated with antimicrobial agents consistently resulting in lower than anticipated trough levels. Identified gaps include: elucidation of ARC's mechanism and associated biomarkers, an inclusive ARC definition for relative renal enhancement, and study of additional drug classes to ascertain the breadth of ARC impact on drug therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

ARC is proving to be a frequent phenomenon in patients with cancer which pharmacists could play a vital role. Further research is needed to better understand the impact of ARC in patient care and a potential need to stage ARC based on degree of renal enhancement to establish specific drug dosing recommendations.

Personalized antiseizure medication therapy in critically ill adult patients

Precision medicine has the potential to have a significant impact on both drug development and patient care. It is crucial to not only provide prompt effective antiseizure treatment for critically ill patients after seizures start but also have a proactive mindset and concentrate on epileptogenesis and the underlying cause of the seizures or seizure disorders. Critical illness presents different treatment issues compared with the ambulatory population, which makes it challenging to choose the best antiseizure medications and to administer them at the right time and at the right dose. Since there is a paucity of information available on antiseizure medication dosing in critically ill patients, therapeutic drug monitoring is a useful tool for defining each patient's personal therapeutic range and assisting clinicians in decision-making. Use of pharmacogenomic information relating to pharmacokinetics, hepatic metabolism, and seizure etiology may improve safety and efficacy by individualizing therapy. Studies evaluating the clinical implementation of pharmacogenomic information at the point-of-care and identification of biomarkers are also needed. These studies may make it possible to avoid adverse drug reactions, maximize drug efficacy, reduce drug-drug interactions, and optimize medications for each individual patient. This review will discuss the available literature and provide future insights on precision medicine use with antiseizure therapy in critically ill adult patients.

Pharmacokinetics of Levetiracetam Seizure Prophylaxis in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

BACKGROUND

Drug pharmacokinetics (PK) are altered in neurocritically ill patients, and optimal levetiracetam dosing for seizure prophylaxis is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates levetiracetam PK in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) receiving intravenous levetiracetam 1000 mg every 8 (LEV8) to 12 (LEV12) hours for seizure prophylaxis.

METHODS

This prospective, open-label study was conducted at a level 1 trauma, academic, quaternary care center. Patients with sTBI receiving seizure prophylaxis with LEV8 or LEV12 were eligible for enrollment. Five sequential, steady-state, postdose serum levetiracetam concentrations were obtained. Non-compartmental analysis (NCA) and compartmental approaches were employed for estimating pharmacokinetic parameters and projecting steady-state trough concentrations. Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between LEV8 and LEV12 patients. Monte Carlo simulations (MCS) were performed to determine probability of target trough attainment (PTA) of 6 to 20 mg/L. A secondary analysis evaluated PTA for weight-tiered levetiracetam dosing.

RESULTS

Ten male patients (5 LEV8; 5 LEV12) were included. The NCA-based systemic clearance and elimination half-life were 5.3 ± 1.2 L/h and 4.8 ± 0.64 hours. A one-compartment model provided a higher steady-state trough concentration for the LEV8 group compared with the LEV12 group (13.7 ± 4.3 mg/L vs 6.3 ± 1.7 mg/L; P = 0.008). Monte Carlo simulations predicted regimens of 500 mg every 6 hours, 1000 mg every 8 hours, and 2000 mg every 12 hours achieved therapeutic target attainment. Weight-tiered dosing regimens achieved therapeutic target attainment using a 75 kg breakpoint.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Neurocritically ill patients exhibit rapid levetiracetam clearance resulting in a short elimination half-life. Findings of this study suggest regimens of levetiracetam 500 mg every 6 hours, 1000 mg every 8 hours, or 2000 mg every 12 hours may be required for optimal therapeutic target attainment. Patient weight of 75 kg may serve as a breakpoint for weight-guided dosing to optimize levetiracetam therapeutic target attainment for seizure prophylaxis.

Quantification of levetiracetam in plasma and urine and its application to a pharmacokinetic study of traumatic brain injury patients

Background: Levetiracetam is an antiepileptic drug used to prevent or treat seizure in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. This study aimed to develop and validate methodology suitable for measuring levetiracetam concentrations in human plasma and urine. Methods: Plasma or urine (10 μl) samples were spiked with [²H₆]-levetiracetam and processed using an acetonitrile precipitation. ESI-LC-MS/MS was employed for analyte detection. Results: The levetiracetam calibration was linear from 0.1 to 50 mg/l in a combined matrix of plasma and urine. Intra- and inter-assay imprecision and accuracy in plasma were <7.7 and 109%, and in urine were <7.9 and 108%, respectively. Conclusion: The validated method was applied to a pharmacokinetic study of levetiracetam in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury.

Pharmacokinetic considerations surrounding the use of levetiracetam for seizure prophylaxis in neurocritical care - an overview

INTRODUCTION

Levetiracetam (LEV) is one of the most widely used anti-seizure medications (ASMs) in clinical practice. This is due both to a different mechanism of action when compared to other ASMs and its easy handling. Indeed, because of its interesting pharmacokinetic properties, it is often used outside of the labelled indications, notably in the neurocritical setting as prophylaxis of epileptic seizures.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was conducted and the most relevant studies on the pharmacokinetic properties of LEV were selected by two independent investigators. Current evidence on the use of ASM prophylaxis in the neurocritical setting was also reviewed, highlighting and discussing the strengths and limits of LEV as drug of choice for anti-epileptic prophylaxis in this scenario.

EXPERT OPINION

LEV has a "near-ideal" pharmacokinetic profile, which makes it an attractive drug for ASM prophylaxis in neurocritical care. However, current recommendations restrict ASMs prophylaxis to very selected circumstances and the role of LEV is marginal. Moreover, studies are generally designed to compare LEV versus phenytoin, whereas studies comparing LEV versus placebo are lacking. Further randomized trials will be needed to better elucidate LEV utility and its neuroprotective role in the neurocritical setting.

Drug Dosing in Critically Ill Adult Patients with Augmented Renal Clearance

Augmented renal clearance (ARC) is a phenomenon of enhanced renal function seen in critically ill patients. ARC alters the disposition of renally eliminated medications currently used in the intensive care unit, resulting in underdosing and potential therapy failure. Our review addresses the rising concern of inadequate dosing in patients with ARC by summarizing the currently available evidence. To our knowledge, this guide is the first to provide clinicians with dose recommendation insights for renally eliminated agents in adult critically ill patients with ARC. A comprehensive literature search using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global was conducted until 3 November 2021. Screening and data extraction were conducted in two steps: title and abstract screening followed by full-text review. Full text review resulted in a total of 51 studies included in this review. The results demonstrated the need for higher-than-standard doses for meropenem, imipenem, and vancomycin and reduced dosing intervals for ceftriaxone in patients with ARC. The potential need for increased dosing frequency in patients with ARC was also found for both enoxaparin and levetiracetam. In conclusion, ARC has been shown to influence the probability of target attainment in several medications requiring dosing changes to mitigate the risk of therapeutic failure.

Optimization of levetiracetam dosing regimen in critically ill patients with augmented renal clearance: a Monte Carlo simulation study

Background

Levetiracetam pharmacokinetics is extensively altered in critically ill patients with augmented renal clearance (ARC). Consequently, the dosage regimens commonly used in clinical practice may not be sufficient to achieve target plasma concentrations. The aim of this study is to propose alternative dosage regimens able to achieve target concentrations in this population. Furthermore, the feasibility of the proposed dosing regimens will be discussed from a clinical point of view.

Methods

Different dosage regimens for levetiracetam were evaluated in critically ill patients with ARC. Monte Carlo simulations were conducted with extended or continuous infusions and/or high drug doses using a previously developed population pharmacokinetic model. To assess the clinical feasibility of the proposed dosages, we carried out a literature search to evaluate the information on toxicity and efficacy of continuous administration or high doses, as well as the post-dilution stability of levetiracetam.

Results

According to the simulations, target concentrations in patients with CrCl of 160 or 200 mL/min can be achieved with the 3000 mg daily dose by prolonging the infusion time of levetiracetam. For patients with CrCl of 240 mL/min, it would be necessary to administer doses higher than the maximum recommended. Available evidence suggests that levetiracetam administration in continuous infusion or at higher doses than those approved seems to be safe. It would be desirable to re-examinate the current recommendations about drug stability and to achieve a consensus in this issue.

Conclusions

Conventional dosage regimens of levetiracetam (500–1500 mg twice daily in a short infusion) do not allow obtaining drug plasma concentrations among the defined target in critically ill patients with ARC. Therefore, new dosing guidelines with specific recommendations for patients in this subpopulation are needed. This study proposes new dosages for levetiracetam, including extended (4 or 6 h) infusions, continuous infusions or the administration of doses higher than the recommended in the summary of product characteristics (> 3000 mg). These new dosage recommendations take into account biopharmaceutical and pharmacokinetic aspects and meet feasibility criteria, which allow them to be transferred to the clinical environment with safety and efficacy. Nevertheless, further clinical studies are needed to confirm these results.

Intravenous Brivaracetam in the Management of Acute Seizures in the Hospital Setting: A Scoping Review

Background

Clinical considerations for drug treatment of acute seizures involve variables such as safety, tolerability, drug-drug interactions, dosage, route of administration, and alterations in pharmacokinetics because of critical illness. Therapy options that are easily and quickly administered without dilution, well tolerated, and effective are needed for the treatment of acute seizures. The objective of this review is to focus on the clinical considerations relating to the use of intravenous brivaracetam (IV BRV) for the treatment of acute seizures in the hospital, focusing on critically ill patients.

Methods

This was a scoping literature review of PubMed from inception to April 13, 2021, and search of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) 2021 Annual Meeting website for English language publications/conference abstracts reporting the results of IV BRV use in hospitalized patients, particularly in the critical care setting. Outcomes of interest relating to the clinical pharmacology, safety, tolerability, efficacy, and effectiveness of IV BRV were reviewed and are discussed.

Results

Twelve studies were included for analysis. One study showed that plasma concentrations of IV BRV 15 min after the first dose were similar between patients receiving IV BRV as bolus or infusion. IV BRV was generally well tolerated in patients with acute seizures in the hospital setting, with a low incidence of individual TEAEs classified as behavioral disorders. IV BRV demonstrated efficacy and effectiveness and had a rapid onset, with clinical and electrophysiological improvement in seizures observed within minutes. Although outside of the approved label, findings from several studies suggest that IV BRV reduces seizures and is generally well tolerated in patients with status epilepticus.

Conclusions

IV BRV shows effectiveness, and is generally well tolerated in the management of acute seizures in hospitalized patients where rapid administration is needed, representing a clinically relevant antiseizure medication for potential use in the critical care setting.

The Pharmacokinetics of Levetiracetam in Critically Ill Adult Patients: An Intensive Care Unit Clinical Study

The aim of this study was to investigate levetiracetam pharmacokinetics in critically ill adult intensive care patients and to identify pathophysiological factors affecting its kinetics. Fourteen critically ill patients in an intensive care unit were enrolled in the study and received intravenous levetiracetam. Blood samples were collected at specific time points to determine the levetiracetam pharmacokinetics. Patient characteristics such as renal function, demographics, disease severity, organ dysfunction, and biochemical laboratory tests were evaluated for their influence on the kinetics of levetiracetam. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) had a statistically significant (p = 0.001) effect on levetiracetam clearance. None of the other patient characteristics had a statistically significant effect on the pharmacokinetics. Simulations of dosing regimens revealed that even typically administered doses of levetiracetam may result in significantly increased concentrations and risk of drug toxicity in patients with impaired renal function. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score differed significantly among the three groups with different epileptic activity (p = 0.034). The same groups also differed in terms of renal function (p = 0.031). Renal dysfunction should be considered when designing levetiracetam dosage. Patients with a low APACHE II score had the lowest risk of experiencing epileptic seizures.

Population Pharmacokinetics of Levetiracetam and Dosing Evaluation in Critically Ill Patients with Normal or Augmented Renal Function

Levetiracetam is a broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug commonly used in intensive care units (ICUs). The objective of this study is to evaluate the adequacy of levetiracetam dosing in patients with normal or augmented renal clearance (ARC) admitted to the ICU by population modelling and simulation. A multicentre prospective study including twenty-seven critically ill patients with urinary creatinine clearance (CrCl) > 50 mL/min and treated with levetiracetam was developed. Levetiracetam plasma concentrations were best described by a two-compartment model. The parameter estimates and relative standard errors (%) were clearance (CL) 3.5 L/h (9%), central volume of distribution (V1) 20.7 L (18%), intercompartmental clearance 31.9 L/h (22%), and peripheral volume of distribution 33.5 L (13%). Interindividual variability estimates were, for the CL, 32.7% (21%) and, for V1, 56.1% (29%). The CrCl showed significant influence over CL. Simulations showed that the administration of at least 500 mg every 8 h or 1000 mg every 12 h are needed in patients with normal renal function. Higher doses (1500 or 2000 mg, every 8 h) are needed in patients with ARC. Critically ill patients with normal or ARC treated with levetiracetam could be at high risk of being underdosed.