Levetiracetam compared to valproic acid: plasma concentration levels, adverse effects and interactions in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

A review of the pharmacology and clinical applications of levetiracetam in dogs and cats

OBJECTIVE

To review and summarize the pharmacology of the antiepileptic drug (AED), levetiracetam (LEV), and to discuss its clinical utility in dogs and cats.

DATA SOURCES

Veterinary and human peer-reviewed medical literature and the authors' clinical experience.

SUMMARY

LEV is an AED with mechanisms of action distinct from those of other AEDs. In people and small animals, LEV exhibits linear kinetics, excellent oral bioavailability, and minimal drug-drug interactions. Serious side effects are rarely reported in any species. LEV use is gaining favor for treating epilepsy in small animals and may have wider clinical applications in patients with portosystemic shunts, neuroglycopenia, and traumatic brain injury. In people, LEV may improve cognitive function in patients with dementia.

CONCLUSION

LEV is a well-tolerated AED with well-documented efficacy in human patients. Although its use is becoming more common in veterinary medicine, its role as a first-line monotherapy in small animal epileptics remains to be determined. This review of the human and animal literature regarding LEV describes its role in epileptic people and animals as well as in other disease states and provides recommendations for clinical usage.

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.

Bioavailability of Orally Administered Drugs in Critically Ill Patients

Critically ill patients managed in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) suffer from several pathophysiological alterations due to critical illness resulting in potential changes in the pharmacokinetics of drugs including systemic absorption. Nevertheless, these patients are still given some medications in unadjusted doses thereby putting the patients at a risk for therapy failure. The objective for this study was to summarize the available evidence regarding oral drug absorption in the ICU. A literature search of the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed was conducted on (February 24, 2020). Articles discussing the rate and/or extent of orally administered drugs in critically ill patients were included. A total of 58 studies were found: 17 interventional studies, 33 observational studies (30 prospective, 3 retrospective) and 8 case reports. A total of 43 articles reported altered drug absorption in critically ill patients suggesting the need for alternative measures to facilitate treatment success. The absorption of orally administered drugs may be altered in critically ill patients. Measures for altered drug absorption in critically ill patients were suggested such as holding tube feeding before and after medication administration, increasing doses of orally administrated drugs and using alternate routes of administration.

Relevant pharmacological interactions between alkylating agents and antiepileptic drugs: Preclinical and clinical data

Seizures are relatively common in cancer patients, and co-administration of chemotherapeutic and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is highly probable and necessary in many cases. Nonetheless, clinically relevant interactions between chemotherapeutic drugs and AEDs are rarely summarized and pharmacologically described. These interactions can cause insufficient tumor and seizure control or lead to unforeseen toxicity. This review focused on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between alkylating agents and AEDs, helping readers to make a rational choice of treatment optimization, and thus improving patients' quality of life. As an example, phenobarbital, phenytoin, and carbamazepine, by increasing the hepatic metabolism of cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide and busulfan, yield smaller peak concentrations and a reduced area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of the prodrugs; alongside, the maximum concentration and AUC of their active products were increased with the possible onset of severe adverse drug reactions. On the other side, valproic acid, acting as histone deacetylase inhibitor, showed synergistic effects with temozolomide when tested in glioblastoma. The present review is aimed at providing evidence that may offer useful suggestions for rational pharmacological strategies in patients with seizures symptoms undertaking alkylating agents. Firstly, clinicians should avoid the use of enzyme-inducing AEDs in combination with alkylating agents and prefer the use of AEDs, such as levetiracetam, that have a low or no impact on hepatic metabolism. Secondly, a careful therapeutic drug monitoring of both alkylating agents and AEDs (and their active metabolites) is necessary to maintain therapeutic ranges and to avoid serious adverse reactions.

Levetiracetam for Seizure Prophylaxis in Neurocritical Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Levetiracetam is commonly used for seizure prophylaxis in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), traumatic brain injury (TBI), supratentorial neurosurgery, and spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). However, its efficacy, optimal dosing, and the adverse events associated with levetiracetam prophylaxis remain unclear.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials (CENTRAL) database was conducted from January 1, 2000, to October 30, 2020, including articles addressing treatment with levetiracetam for seizure prophylaxis after SAH, ICH, TBI, and supratentorial neurosurgery. Non-English, pediatric (aged < 18 years), preclinical, reviews, case reports, and articles that included patients with a preexisting seizure condition or epilepsy were excluded. The coprimary meta-analyses examined first seizure events in (1) levetiracetam versus no antiseizure medication and (2) levetiracetam versus other antiseizure medications in all ICH, TBI, SAH, and supratentorial neurosurgery populations. Secondary meta-analyses evaluated the same comparator groups in individual disease populations. Risk of bias in non-randomised studies - of interventions (ROBINS-I) and risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2) tools were used to assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies (n = 6 randomized trials, n = 9 prospective studies, and n = 15 retrospective studies), including 7609 patients (n = 4737 with TBI, n = 701 with SAH, n = 261 with ICH, and n = 1910 with neurosurgical diseases) were included in analyses. Twenty-seven of 30 (90%) studies demonstrated moderate to severe risk of bias, and 11 of 30 (37%) studies used low-dosage levetiracetam (250-500 mg twice daily). In the primary meta-analyses, there were no differences in seizure events for levetiracetam prophylaxis (n = 906) versus no antiseizure medication (n = 2728; odds ratio [OR] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-1.16, P = 0.23, fixed-effect, I² = 26%, P = 0.23 for heterogeneity) or levetiracetam (n = 1950) versus other antiseizure prophylaxis (n = 2289; OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55-1.28, P = 0.41, random-effects, I² = 49%, P = 0.005 for heterogeneity). Only patients with supratentorial neurosurgical diseases benefited from levetiracetam compared with other antiseizure medications (median 0.70 seizure events per-patient-year with levetiracetam versus 2.20 seizure events per-patient-year for other antiseizure medications, OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.20-0.58, P < 0.001, fixed-effects, I² = 39%, P = 0.13 for heterogeneity). There were no significant differences in meta-analyses of patients with ICH, SAH, or TBI. Adverse events of any severity were reported in a median of 8% of patients given levetiracetam compared with 21% of patients in comparator groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current moderately to seriously biased heterogeneous data, which frequently used low and possibly subtherapeutic doses of levetiracetam, our meta-analyses did not demonstrate significant reductions in seizure incidence and neither supports nor refutes the use of levetiracetam prophylaxis in TBI, SAH, or ICH. Levetiracetam may be preferred post supratentorial neurosurgery. More high-quality randomized trials of prophylactic levetiracetam are warranted.

Utility of monitoring the serum levetiracetam concentration for intraoperative seizure control during awake craniotomy

Awake craniotomy is an established procedure for resecting brain tumors in eloquent lesions, and intraoperative seizure is one of the most important complications. Phenytoin is normally used to control intraoperative seizures. Recently, phenytoin was replaced with levetiracetam at our institution because the latter has fewer side effects. While the phenytoin dose is calibrated in accordance with the serum concentration, there is currently no consensus on a method of monitoring the serum concentration of levetiracetam or the effective concentration range needed to control intraoperative seizures during awake craniotomy. The present study therefore aimed to determine whether monitoring the serum levetiracetam concentration is useful for controlling intraoperative seizures during awake craniotomy. The intraoperative serum concentration of levetiracetam during awake craniotomy was measured in 34 patients and compared with that of phenytoin in 33 patients undergoing the same procedure. The levetiracetam concentration inversely correlated with body surface area (BSA) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Levetiracetam was superior to phenytoin in terms of the correlation between the serum concentration and the dose adjusted for BSA and eGFR (correlation coefficient, 0.49 vs 0.21). Furthermore, the serum levetiracetam concentration in patients with intraoperative seizures was below the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the regression line whereas the serum phenytoin concentration of two patients with seizures was within the 95% CI, indicating that evaluating the serum levetiracetam concentration against the BSA and eGFR-adjusted dosage may be useful in preventing intraoperative seizures during awake craniotomy by allowing prediction of the seizure risk and enabling more accurate dosage calibration.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Patients with severe trauma exhibit augmented renal clearance, which can alter the dosing requirement of renally eliminated drugs. This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic model for levetiracetam in patients with severe traumatic brain injury and aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, and use it to describe optimal dosing regimens.

METHODS

This was a prospective open-label observational study. Critically ill adult patients with severe traumatic brain injury or aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage without renal dysfunction and receiving levetiracetam were eligible. Serial levetiracetam plasma concentrations were analyzed to develop a population pharmacokinetic model and perform dosing simulations.

RESULTS

A two-compartment model best described the concentration-time data from 30 patients. The mean ± standard deviation parameter estimates were bioavailability (F) of 0.8 ± 0.2, absorption rate constant of 2.4 ± 2 h^-1, clearance 2.5 ± 1.1 L/h, central volume of distribution 8.9 ± 3.0 L/h, and transfer rate constraints of 1.8 ± 1.1 h^-1 from central to peripheral compartments and 0.7 ± 0.3 h^-1 from peripheral to central compartments. For the simulated intermittent dosing regimens, on average, the median trough concentration reduced by 50% for every 40-mL/min/1.73 m² increase in urinary creatinine clearance. Simulated doses of at least 6 g/day were required for some levels of augmented renal clearance.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe traumatic brain injury and aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage with augmented renal clearance are at risk of not achieving target levetiracetam plasma concentrations. We suggest dose titration guided by measured creatinine clearance, and/or, therapeutic drug monitoring if available, to minimize the risk of seizures.

Effect of drug interactions between carbapenems and valproate on serum valproate concentration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Concurrent use of valproate and carbapenem antibiotics may decrease serum valproate concentration (SVC). This study evaluated the effects of carbapenem-valproate drug interactions. Research design and methods: We screened PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for eligible prospective or retrospective studies that evaluated the effect of concurrent use of carbapenem and valproate compared with valproate alone on SVC. Primary outcomes were the change in SVC from before the addition of the carbapenem to the SVC during the use of carbapenems and after carbapenem discontinuation, and seizure-related outcomes. Secondary outcomes were the influence of valproate or carbapenem dose on SVC and Drug Interaction Probability Scale scores. Results: Twelve studies (633 patients) were included. Compared with valproate alone, combination treatment with carbapenem substantially decreased mean SVC (mean difference, -43.98 mg/L; 95% confidence interval, -48.18 to -39.78). The onset of SVC decreases was within 1-3 days following carbapenem initiation. Seizure frequency increased by 26.3% during combination treatment. No difference was found in mean SVC between the different doses of valproate or carbapenem during combination treatment. Mean SVC increased to similar pre-carbapenem level within 1 to 2 weeks after carbapenem discontinuation. Conclusions: The drug interaction between valproate and carbapenem causes substantial SVC decreases, even to subtherapeutic levels, which may increase the risk of seizures.

Antibiotic-induced epileptic seizures: mechanisms of action and clinical considerations

In recent years, there has been growing interest in the development of epileptic seizures as an adverse effect of antibiotic therapy. The most commonly accepted mechanisms underlying the development of antibiotic-induced seizures include direct- and indirect gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) antagonism, inhibition of GABA synthesis, and glutaminergic N-methyl-D-Aspartate (NMDA) receptor agonistic activity. Inhibitory pathway inhibition leads to increased neuronal excitability and lowered seizure threshold. Blockage of myoneural presynaptic acetylcholine release, mitochondrial dysfunction, interference of neural protein synthesis, and oxidative stress caused by the generation of neurotoxic radicals also contributes to the development of neurotoxicity. Patients with pre-existing risk factors such as renal or hepatic insufficiency, central nervous system pathology, neurological diseases, history of epilepsy or seizures, critical illness, and increased age are more susceptible to seizure development as a consequence of antibiotic therapy. Administration of antibiotics, together with antiseizure drugs, may also lead to enhanced seizure risk due to drug interactions, which predisposes to alterations in drug metabolism and therapeutic efficacy.

Epileptogenesis and oncogenesis: An antineoplastic role for antiepileptic drugs in brain tumours?

The first description of epileptic seizures due to brain tumours occurred in 19th century. Nevertheless, after over one hundred years, scientific literature is still lacking on how epilepsy and its treatment can affect tumour burden, progression and clinical outcomes. In patients with brain tumours, epilepsy dramatically impacts their quality of life (QoL). Even antiepileptic therapy seems to affect tumor lesion development. Numerous studies suggest that certain actors involved in epileptogenesis (inflammatory changes, glutamate and its ionotropic and metabotropic receptors, GABA-A and its GABA-AR receptor, as well as certain ligand- and voltage-gated ion channel) may also contribute to tumorigenesis. Although some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are known operating on such mechanisms underlying epilepsy and tumor development, few preclinical and clinical studies have tried to investigate them as targets of pharmacological tools acting to control both phenomena. The primary aim of this review is to summarize known determinants and pathophysiological mechanisms of seizures, as well as of cell growth and spread, in patients with brain tumors. Therefore, a special focus will be provided on the anticancer effects of commonly prescribed AEDs (including levetiracetam, valproic acid, oxcarbazepine and others), with an overview of both preclinical and clinical data. Potential clinical applications of this finding are discussed.

Seizures and Choice of Antiepileptic Drugs Following Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Review

Seizures are important complications following a subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). The evidence for the use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in treatment and prevention of those seizures is conflicting. The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date evidence summary of the incidence and outcomes of seizures following an SAH as well as the use of different AEDs post-SAH in order to evaluate the need for seizure prophylaxis, the choice of AEDs, and their dosing considerations in SAH patients. A literature search of PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed. A total of 37 studies were reviewed, mostly observational. Definitions of seizures in temporal relation to initial hemorrhage were variable. Similarly, the rates of seizures varied in the literature, ranging from 0 to 31%. Given the reported adverse outcomes associated with AED usage, seizure prophylaxis is not warranted. Levetiracetam appears to be better tolerated than phenytoin in SAH patients, though further research is needed. Higher initial dosing of levetiracetam might be required due to its enhanced clearance in SAH patients. In conclusion, there is a lack of quality evidence to definitively recommend the use of one AED over another. Further prospective research comparing the use of different AEDs in patients with an SAH is needed.

Seizures and Epileptiform Patterns in SAH and Their Relation to Outcomes

In subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), seizures are frequent and occur at different time points, likely reflecting heterogeneous pathophysiology. Young patients, those with more severe SAH (by clot burden or presence of severe mental status changes at onset or focal neurologic deficits at any time), those with associated increased cortical irritation (by infarction or presence of underlying hematoma), and patients undergoing craniotomy are at higher risk. Advanced neurophysiologic monitoring allows for seizure burden quantification, identification of subclinical seizures, and interictal patterns as well as neurovascular complications that may have an independent impact on the outcome in this population. Practice regarding seizure prophylaxis varies widely; its institution is often guided by the risk-benefit ratio of seizures and medication side effects. Newer anticonvulsants seem to be equally effective and may have a more favorable profile. However, questions regarding the association of seizures and vasospasm, the therapeutic dosing, timing, and duration of antiepileptic treatment and the impact of seizures and antiepileptics on the outcome remain unanswered. In this review, we provide a broad overview of the work in this area and offer a diagnostic and therapeutic approach based on our own expert opinion.

A Mitochondrial Role of SV2a Protein in Aging and Alzheimer's Disease: Studies with Levetiracetam

Aberrant neuronal network activity associated with neuronal hyperexcitability seems to be an important cause of cognitive decline in aging and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Out of many antiepileptics, only levetiracetam improved cognitive dysfunction in AD patients and AD animal models by reducing hyperexcitability. As impaired inhibitory interneuronal function, rather than overactive neurons, seems to be the underlying cause, improving impaired neuronal function rather than quieting overactive neurons might be relevant in explaining the lack of activity of the other antiepileptics. Interestingly, improvement of cognitive deficits by levetiracetam caused by small levels of soluble Aβ was accompanied by improvement of synaptic function and plasticity. As the negative effects of Aβ on synaptic plasticity strongly correlate with mitochondrial dysfunction, wehypothesized that the effect of levetiracetam on synaptic activity might be raised by an improved mitochondrial function. Accordingly, we investigated possible effects of levetiracetam on neuronal deficits associated with mitochondrial dysfunction linked to aging and AD. Levetiracetam improved several aspects of mitochondrial dysfunction including alterations of fission and fusion balance in a cell model for aging and early late-onset AD. We demonstrate for the first time, using immunohistochemistry and proteomics, that the synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2a), the molecular target of levetiracetam, is expressed in mitochondria. In addition, levetiracetam shows significant effect on the opening of the mitochondrial permeability transition pore. Importantly, the effects of levetiracetam were significantly abolished when SV2a was knockdown using siRNA. In conclusion, interfering with the SV2a protein at the mitochondrial level and thereby improving mitochondrial function might represent an additional therapeutic effect of levetiracetam to improve symptoms of late-onset AD.

Clinical effects of surgical and Gamma Knife treatments on hippocampal sclerosis-induced intractable epilepsy of children below age 10 years

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the treatment effects and costs of surgery and Gamma Knife on hippocampal sclerosis (HS)-induced intractable epilepsy of children below age 10 years.

METHODS

The children below age 10 years who suffered from HS-induced intractable epilepsy from June 2010 to June 2012 were subjected to surgical and Gamma Knife treatments respectively according to their preference.

RESULTS

The short-term curative rates of the surgical group and the Gamma Knife group were 93.51% and 54.87%, respectively. The average expenses of the two groups were 10,000 CNY (Chinese Yuan) and 22,000 CNY, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The two groups were treated safely and effectively, but the surgical treatment led to better results at a reduced cost.

Levetiracetam compared with valproic acid for the prevention of postoperative seizures after supratentorial tumor surgery: a retrospective chart review

INTRODUCTION

Antiepileptic drugs are commonly given for perioperative prophylaxis after brain tumor surgery, and there has been growing interest in levetiracetam, a second-generation antiepileptic drug. This retrospective study compared the seizure outcomes, side effects and durability of levetiracetam with valproic acid after a craniotomy for supratentorial brain tumors.

METHODS

Between 2009 and 2012, 282 consecutive patients with a supratentorial brain tumor underwent a craniotomy at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Of these patients, 51 (18.1%) and 231 (81.9%) were pre-operatively administered levetiracetam and valproic acid, respectively. The postoperative seizure outcomes (within 1 month after surgery) and the long-term side effects of both drugs were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 51 patients in the levetiracetam group, 4 (7.8%) experienced postoperative seizures after brain tumor surgery, and 15 (6.5%) of the 231 patients in the valproic acid group experienced postoperative seizures (p = 0.728). The long-term complication rate of the valproic acid group (26.8%; 62/231) was significantly higher than that of the levetiracetam group (9.8%; 5/51) [p = 0.010]. In the valproic acid group, 10 hepatotoxicities, 20 hyperammonemias and 10 hematologic abnormalities (6 thrombocytopenias, 3 pancytopenias, and 1 leucopenia) occurred. Moreover, 89 patients (38.5%) in the valproic acid group changed or added other anticonvulsants because of side effects or uncontrolled seizures, whereas only 9 patients (17.6%) in the levetiracetam group changed or added other anticonvulsants (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

The postoperative seizure control rates of levetiracetam and valproic acid were not statistically significantly different; however, levetiracetam may be superior to valproic acid in terms of its safety and durability after supratentorial tumor surgery.

Levetiracetam use in the critical care setting

Intravenous (IV) levetiracetam (LEV) is currently approved as an alternative or replacement therapy for patients unable to take the oral form of this antiepileptic drug (AED). The oral form has Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indications for adjunctive therapy in the treatment of partial onset epilepsy ages 1 month or more, myoclonic seizures associated with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy starting with the age of 12 and primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in people 6 years and older. Since the initial introduction, oral and IV LEV has been evaluated in various studies conducted in the critical care setting for the treatment of status epilepticus, stroke-related seizures, seizures following subarachnoid or intracerebral hemorrhage, post-traumatic seizures, tumor-related seizures, and seizures in critically ill patients. Additionally, studies evaluating rapid infusion of IV LEV and therapeutic monitoring of serum LEV levels in different patient populations have been performed. In this review we present the current state of knowledge on LEV use in the critical care setting focusing on the IV uses and discuss future research needs.

Seizures and the neurosurgical intensive care unit

The cause of seizures in the neurosurgical intensive care unit (NICU) can be categorized as emanating from either a primary brain pathology or from physiologic derangements of critical care illness. Patients are typically treated with parenteral antiepileptic drugs. For early onset ICU seizures that are easily controlled, data support limited treatment. Late seizures have a more ominous risk for subsequent epilepsy and should be treated for extended periods of time or indefinitely. This review ends by examining the treatment algorithms for simple seizures and status epilepticus and the role newer antiepileptic use can play in the NICU.

Drug-nutrient interactions in the intensive care unit: literature review and current recommendations

OBJECTIVE

To describe the interactions between drugs and nutrients and their frequency in the intensive care unit and to assess the professional team's awareness regarding this subject.

METHODS

The keywords "drug interactions" and "nutrition therapy" were searched in the PubMed (specifically MeSH) electronic database. The studies were systematically reviewed for descriptions of the types of interactions between drugs and nutrients, including their frequency and consequences.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven articles were found. Among these, 20 articles were appropriate for the methodology adopted and accomplished the objectives of the study. Of these 20 articles, 14 articles described interactions between drugs and enteral nutrition, three described interactions between drugs and parenteral nutrition, and three described the importance and care required to avoid such interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature about drug and nutrient interactions is limited and suggests the inability of health care teams to recognize the potential for these interactions. Possibly, the elaboration of a protocol to evaluate drug-nutrient interactions will increase the safety and efficacy of therapeutics.