Lamotrigine in epilepsy, pregnancy and psychiatry--a drug for all seasons?

Molecularly Imprinted Drug Carrier for Lamotrigine-Design, Synthesis, and Characterization of Physicochemical Parameters

This study presents the initial attempt at introducing a magnetic molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) designed specifically for lamotrigine with the purpose of functioning as a drug carrier. First, the composition of the magnetic polymer underwent optimization based on bulk polymer adsorption studies and theoretical analyses. The magnetic MIP was synthesized from itaconic acid and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate exhibiting a drug loading capacity of 3.4 ± 0.9 μg g-1. Structural characterization was performed using powder X-ray diffraction analysis, vibrating sample magnetometry, and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. The resulting MIP demonstrated controlled drug released characteristics without a burst effect in the phospahe buffer saline at pH 5 and 8. These findings hold promise for the potential nasal administration of lamotrigine in future applications.

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.

Chinese herbal medicine for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is characterised by both metabolic and reproductive disorders, and affects 5% to 15% of women of reproductive age. Different western medicines have been proposed for PCOS-related subfertility, such as oral contraceptives, insulin sensitisers and laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD). Chinese herbal medicines (CHM) have also been used for subfertility caused by PCOS for decades, and are expected to become an alternative treatment for subfertile women with PCOS.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and six other databases, from inception to 2 June 2020. In addition, we searched three trials registries, the reference lists of included trials and contacted experts in the field to locate trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CHM versus placebo, no treatment or conventional (western) therapies for the treatment of subfertile women with PCOS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We contacted primary study authors for additional information. We conducted meta-analyses. We used the odds ratios (ORs) to report dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs with 609 participants. The comparisons in the included trials were as follows: CHM versus clomiphene, CHM plus clomiphene versus clomiphene (with or without ethinyloestradiol cyproterone acetate (EE/CPA)), CHM plus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction versus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction alone, and CHM plus laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) versus LOD alone. The overall certainty of the evidence for most comparisons was very low. None of the included studies reported the primary outcome, live birth rate. Most studies reported the secondary outcomes, and only one study reported data on adverse events. In trials that compared CHM to clomiphene (with or without LOD in both study arms), we are uncertain of the effect of CHM on pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 3.19; I² = 28%; 3 studies, 140 participants; very low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following clomiphene is assumed to be 21.5%, the chance following CHM would vary between 14.7% and 46.7%. No study reported data on adverse events. When CHM plus clomiphene was compared to clomiphene (with or without EE/CPA), there was low certainty evidence of a higher pregnancy rate in the CHM plus clomiphene group (OR 3.06, 95% CI 2.05 to 4.55; I² = 10%; 6 studies, 470 participants; low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following clomiphene is assumed to be 31.5%, the chance following CHM plus clomiphene would vary between 48.5% and 67.7%. No data were reported on adverse events. In trials that compared CHM plus follicle aspiration and ovulation induction to follicle aspiration and ovulation induction alone, we are uncertain of the effect of CHM on pregnancy rates (OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.68; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following follicle aspiration and ovulation induction is assumed to be 29.2%, the chance following CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction would vary between 15.9% and 70%. Reported adverse events included severe luteinised unruptured follicle syndrome (LUFS) (Peto OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (Peto OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 8.19; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence) or multiple pregnancy (Peto OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence). These results suggest that if the chances of LUFS, OHSS, and multiple pregnancy following follicle aspiration and ovulation induction are assumed to be 8.3%, 4.2%, and 8.3% respectively, the chances following CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction would be 0.5% to 35.8%, 0% to 26.3% and 0.5% to 35.8% respectively.  In trials that compared CHM plus LOD to LOD alone, we are uncertain if CHM improves pregnancy rates (OR 3.50, 95% CI 0.72 to 17.09; 1 study, 30 women; very low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following LOD is assumed to be 40%, the chance following CHM with LOD would vary between 32.4% and 91.9%. No data were reported on adverse events. We are uncertain of the results in the comparison groups for all outcomes. The certainty of the evidence for all other comparisons and outcomes was very low. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to report live birth or adverse events, failure to describe study methods in adequate detail and imprecision due to very low event rates and wide CIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the use of CHM for subfertile women with PCOS. No data are available on live birth. We are uncertain of the effect of CHM on pregnancy rates for there is no consistent evidence to indicate that CHM influences fertility outcomes. However, we find that the addition of CHM to clomiphene may improve pregnancy rates, but there is very limited, low certainty evidence for this outcome. Furthermore, there is insufficient evidence on adverse effects to indicate whether CHM is safe. In the future, well-designed, carefully conducted RCTs are needed, with a particular focus on the live birth rate and other safety indexes.

Lamotrigine-A Review of Analytical Methods Developed for Pharmaceutical Formulations and Biological Matrices

Lamotrigine owing to its excellent inhibitory property of neurotransmitter release especially glutamate is used in the treatment of epilepsy as a second-line antiepileptic drug. It differs from other antiepileptic drugs chemically and pharmacologically and is used as both monotherapy and adjunct therapy in the treatment of epilepsy. The present review focuses on two aspects (a) various analytical methods used in quantification of Lamotrigine in pharmaceutical formulations and (b) various analytical methods used to determine Lamotrigine in biological matrices. Here the various analytical methods are developed using different parameters and validation of employed methods is discussed. Estimated parameters like the linearity, LOD (Limit of detection) and LOQ (Limit of quantification) of validation are discussed for the individual method. The critical quality attributes like the wavelength of detection, mobile phase, columns, flow rate, retention time, and the sample preparation methods for the estimation of Lamotrigine by bioanalytical methods are also discussed.

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program: An update on bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program (PAPHSS) published algorithms for bipolar depression in 1999 and 2010. Developments over the past 9 years suggest that another update is needed.

METHODS

The 2010 algorithm and associated references were reevaluated. A literature search was conducted on PubMed for recent studies and review articles to see what changes in the recommendations were justified. Exceptions to the main algorithm for special patient populations, including those with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance use disorders, anxiety disorders, and women of childbearing potential, and those with common medical comorbidities were considered.

RESULTS

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is still the first-line option for patients in need of urgent treatment. Five medications are recommended for early usage in acute bipolar depression, singly or in combinations when monotherapy fails, the order to be determined by considerations such as side effect vulnerability and patient preference. The five are lamotrigine, lurasidone, lithium, quetiapine, and cariprazine. After trials of these, possible options include antidepressants (bupropion and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are preferred) or valproate (very small evidence-base). In bipolar II depression, the support for antidepressants is a little stronger but depression with mixed features and rapid cycling would usually lead to further postponement of antidepressants. Olanzapine+fluoxetine, though Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for bipolar depression, is not considered until beyond this point, due to metabolic side effects. The algorithm concludes with a table of other possible treatments that have some evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This revision incorporates the latest FDA-approved treatments (lurasidone and cariprazine) and important new studies and organizes the evidence systematically.

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.

Outcomes of pregnancies in women taking antiepileptic drugs for non-epilepsy indications

PURPOSE

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), particularly valproate (VPA), are known to be teratogens when taken by women with epilepsy (WWE), but the risk in women who take these drugs for indications other than epilepsy have been little studied. This study aims to investigate the incidence of birth defects in children born to mothers taking AEDs for non-epilepsy indications.

METHODS

The Australian Pregnancy Register (APR), established in 1998, is a prospective observational study operating with ethical approval and informed written consent for participation. Of the 2066 pregnancies enrolled in the Register, 98% are WWE and the remainder received AEDs for other indications. Data from this Register was analysed to study the rates of congenital malformations (CM) in infants exposed to AEDs in utero in WWE compared to those women taking AEDs for other indications.

RESULTS

The malformation rates in pregnancies of WWE taking AEDs (5%), is higher than the rates of infants born to untreated WWE (2%). There were 32 pregnancies enrolled from 29 mothers taking AEDs for indications other than epilepsy (2 women/2 pregnancies were lost to follow up). Out of 30 pregnancies, 9 of which were exposed to VPA, 1 resulted in a child with a malformation (3%) (cleft palate) on 1700 mg/day of valproate.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first attempt to assess the use of AEDs in a prospective study of women who are pregnant but do not have active epilepsy. Although underpowered, this study suggests that women taking AEDs for non-epilepsy indications have a similar risk of having a child with a CM as compared with women taking AEDs for epilepsy. Larger numbers are required to investigate the risk of AED-associated malformations in this important group.

Analysis of questions about use of drugs in breastfeeding to Norwegian drug information centres

Background

Health professionals may advise women to either stop breastfeeding or drug treatment due to restrictive advice in drug monographs. Regional medicines information and pharmacovigilance centres in Norway (RELIS) provide free and industry-independent answers to questions about drugs and breastfeeding documented in a full-text, searchable database (RELIS database). We used the RELIS database to describe which health care practitioners sought information about medication safety in lactation, most common drugs involved, advice provided and which resources were used to provide the advice.

Methods

A random selection of 100 question-answer pairs (QAPs) from the RELIS database indexed with “BREASTFEEDING” in the period from January 2011 to December 2015 was analysed. Inclusion criteria were queries from health professionals about drugs. Questions about herbal supplements and other exposures not classified as drugs were excluded. The QAPs were manually analysed for compatibility of one or several drugs with breastfeeding, health care profession and workplace of enquirer in addition to advice and search strategy used.

Results

In the 100 QAPs there were enquires about 152 drugs. Seventy-four questions concerned a single drug, but the number of drugs evaluated varied between 1 and 16. Fifty-nine questions were from physicians, 34 from nurses or midwives, two from pharmacists and two from other health professionals. Questions from physicians contained 93 drug evaluations (61%), nurses or midwives 47 (31%) and pharmacists seven (5%). The most frequent categories of drugs were antidepressants, antiepileptics and immunosuppressants. The most asked about drugs were lamotrigine, codeine, quetiapine and escitalopram. Fifty-nine percent of the drugs were deemed safe while breastfeeding, 16% if precautions were taken and 12% not recommended. Thirty-nine percent of the drug evaluations used an advanced literature search strategy, and this was significantly (p < 0.05) more likely when the enquirer was a physician.

Conclusions

This analysis of questions to Norwegian medicines information centres about medicine use in breastfeeding indicates the need for communication about safety of drugs affecting the nervous system, primarily to medical doctors and midwives. In the majority of cases the medicine information centre can reassure about the safety of breastfeeding while taking a drug.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13006-017-0143-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effect of zonisamide on refractory epilepsy during pregnancy in lamotrigine resistant kindled rats

Drug-resistant epilepsy with uncontrolled severe seizures despite state-of-the-art medical treatment continues to be a major clinical problem. Pregnancy is a state where drug pharmacokinetic changes are more pronounced and more rapid than any other period of life. The current study investigated the effect of zonisamide (ZNS) on refractory epilepsy during pregnancy in lamotrigine-resistant kindled rats. Fifty-six lamotrigine (LTG)-resistant kindled Wistar rats were divided into five experimental (four pregnant and one non-pregnant) and 2 positive controls (pregnant and non-pregnant) groups and eight intact Wistar rats were put in the negative pregnant control group. Experimental groups received daily ZNS 50mg/kg by oral gavage and 30min later, pentylenetetrazol (PTZ) (30mg/kg) was injected intraperitoneal (i.p) on Gestational Days 10-15 (in rats with or without ZNS or methanol and ethyl acetate as a ZNS solvent challenge in days -5 to 0) or Days 15-20 and for six days in the non-pregnant group. The positive control groups received the ZNS solvent for the same number of days, but the negative pregnant control group did not receive any treatment. Epilepsy was significantly controlled by ZNS in the experimental groups compared to the positive control groups. It was concluded that ZNS can control refractory epilepsy during pregnancy and increase pregnancy survival in refractory epileptic rats.

Pregnancy Outcomes Following In Utero Exposure to Lamotrigine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Lamotrigine is used in pregnancy to control epilepsy and mood disorders. The reproductive safety of this widely used drug remains undefined and may represent a significant public health concern.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing knowledge related to malformation rates and maternal-neonatal outcomes after in utero exposure to monotherapy with lamotrigine.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified through systematic searches conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CENTRAL (Ovid), and Web of Science (Thomson Reuters) from database inception to July 2016; no language or date restrictions were applied. All publications of clinically relevant outcomes of pregnancies following in utero exposure to lamotrigine were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies describing immediate pregnancy outcomes and rates of congenital malformations fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Compared with disease-matched controls (n = 1412, total number of patients) and healthy controls (n = 774,571, total number of patients), in utero exposure to lamotrigine monotherapy was found to be associated with significantly decreased rates of inborn defects (odds ratio [OR] 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-2.16 and OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.89-1.74, respectively). Rates of miscarriages, stillbirths, preterm deliveries, and small for gestational age (SGA) neonates were not found to have been increased after in-utero exposure to LTG compared to the general population. Similarly, in utero exposure to lamotrigine monotherapy was not found to be associated with increased rates of inborn defects compared with in utero exposure to carbamazepine, and lamotrigine was found to be statistically significantly less teratogenic than valproic acid (n = 12,958 and 10,748; OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.68-1.03 and OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.26-0.39, respectively).

CONCLUSION

No association was found between prenatal lamotrigine monotherapy and increased rates of birth defects and other explored variables related to adverse pregnancy outcomes.

No association between non-bullous skin reactions from lamotrigine and heterozygosity of UGT1A4 genetic variants *2(P24T) or *3(L48V) in Norwegian patients

PURPOSE

High initial serum concentrations increase the risk of cutaneous adverse reactions. Genetic variants of the main metabolizing isoenzyme, uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A4 influence the elimination of lamotrigine (LTG). Our aim was to investigate the potential association between the two best studied variants, *2 (P24T) and *3 (L48V), and the occurrence non-bullous skin reactions from LTG.

METHOD

The study included 29 patients of Caucasian ethnicity with a history of non-bullous skin reactions from LTG. 184 subjects tolerant to LTG for at least three months were used as controls. UGT1A4 genotyping was performed in all patients and controls by sequencing of the first part of exon 1. Six controls were excluded due to rare genetic variants.

RESULTS

Two of 29 subjects (7%) with rash from LTG were heterozygous for UGT1A4 *2, compared to 23 of 178 (13%) tolerant controls (p=0.54). Four of 29 subjects (14%) with rash from LTG were heterozygous for UGT1A4 *3 compared to 25 of 178 (14%) tolerant controls (p=0.97).

CONCLUSION

It is unlikely that heterozygosity of the UGT1A4 genetic variants *2(P24T) or *3(L48V) influences the risk of non-bullous skin reactions in patients treated with LTG.

Chinese herbal medicine for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common reproductive endocrinology abnormalities, and affects 5% to 10% of women of reproductive age. Western medicines, such as oral contraceptives, insulin sensitizers and laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), have been used to treat PCOS. Recently, many studies have been published that consider Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) as an alternative treatment for women with PCOS.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of CHM for subfertile women with PCOS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched sources, including the following databases, from inception to 9 June 2016: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), PsycINFO, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang and trial registries. In addition, we searched the reference lists of included trials and contacted experts in the field to locate trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that considered the use of CHM for the treatment of subfertile women with PCOS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened appropriate trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We contacted primary study authors for additional information. We conducted meta-analyses. We used the odds ratios (ORs) to report dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs with 414 participants. The comparisons in the included trials were as follows: CHM versus clomiphene, CHM plus clomiphene versus clomiphene (with or without ethinyloestradiol cyproterone acetate (CEA)), CHM plus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction versus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction alone, and CHM plus laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) versus LOD alone. The overall quality of the evidence for most comparisons was very low.None of the included studies reported live birth rate, and only one study reported data on adverse events.When CHM was compared with clomiphene (with or without LOD in both arms), there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 5.06; two studies, 90 participants, I² statistic = 0%, very low quality evidence). No study reported data on adverse events. When CHM plus clomiphene was compared with clomiphene (with or without CEA), there was low quality evidence of a higher pregnancy rate in the CHM plus clomiphene group (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.14; three RCTs, 300 women, I² statistic = 0%,low quality evidence). No data were reported on adverse events.When CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction was compared with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.52; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), severe luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome (LUFS) (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 8.19; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence) or multiple pregnancy (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence).When CHM with LOD was compared with LOD alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of pregnancy (OR 3.50, 95% CI 0.72 to 17.09; one study, 30 women, very low quality evidence), No data were reported on adverse events.There was no evidence of a difference between any of the comparison groups for any other outcomes. The quality of the evidence for all other comparisons and outcomes was very low. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to report live birth or adverse events, failure to describe study methods in adequate detail and imprecision due to very low event rates and wide CIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the use of CHM for women with PCOS and subfertility. No data are available on live birth, and there is no consistent evidence to indicate that CHM influences fertility outcomes. However there is very limited low quality evidence to suggest that the addition of CHM to clomiphene may improve pregnancy rates. There is insufficient evidence on adverse effects to indicate whether CHM is safe.

Revisiting the Lamotrigine-Mediated Effect on Hippocampal GABAergic Transmission

Lamotrigine (LTG) is generally considered as a voltage-gated sodium (Na_v) channel blocker. However, recent studies suggest that LTG can also serve as a hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channel enhancer and can increase the excitability of GABAergic interneurons (INs). Perisomatic inhibitory INs, predominantly fast-spiking basket cells (BCs), powerfully inhibit granule cells (GCs) in the hippocampal dentate gyrus. Notably, BCs express abundant Na_v channels and HCN channels, both of which are able to support sustained action potential generation. Using whole-cell recording in rat hippocampal slices, we investigated the net LTG effect on BC output. We showed that bath application of LTG significantly decreased the amplitude of evoked compound inhibitory postsynaptic currents (IPSCs) in GCs. In contrast, simultaneous paired recordings from BCs to GCs showed that LTG had no effect on both the amplitude and the paired-pulse ratio of the unitary IPSCs, suggesting that LTG did not affect GABA release, though it suppressed cell excitability. In line with this, LTG decreased spontaneous IPSC (sIPSC) frequency, but not miniature IPSC frequency. When re-examining the LTG effect on GABAergic transmission in the cornus ammonis region 1 (CA1) area, we found that LTG markedly inhibits both the excitability of dendrite-targeting INs in the stratum oriens and the concurrent sIPSCs recorded on their targeting pyramidal cells (PCs) without significant hyperpolarization-activated current (I_h) enhancement. In summary, LTG has no effect on augmenting I_h in GABAergic INs and does not promote GABAergic inhibitory output. The antiepileptic effect of LTG is likely through Na_v channel inhibition and the suppression of global neuronal network activity.

Lamotrigine add-on for drug-resistant partial epilepsy

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane review published in The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 1.Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder, affecting almost 0.5% to 1% of the population. For nearly 30% of these people, their epilepsy is refractory to currently available drugs. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. Lamotrigine is one of the newer antiepileptic drugs and is the topic of this review. Lamotrigine in combination with other antiepileptic drugs (add-on) can reduce seizures, but with some adverse effects. The aim of this systematic review was to overview the current evidence for the efficacy and tolerability of lamotrigine when used as an adjunctive treatment for people with refractory partial epilepsy.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

For the previous version of the review, the authors searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (January 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1950 to January 2010), and reference lists of articles.For this update, we searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (28 May 2015), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 4), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to May 2015), and reference lists of articles. We also contacted the manufacturers of lamotrigine (GlaxoSmithKline). No language restrictions were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of people with drug-resistant partial epilepsy of any age, in which an adequate method of concealment of randomisation was used. The studies were double-, single- or unblinded. For cross-over studies, the first treatment period was treated as a parallel trial. Eligible participants were adults or children with drug-resistant partial 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 (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% Cl) were estimated for the primary outcomes of seizure frequency and treatment withdrawal. For adverse effects, pooled RRs and 99% Cls were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any new studies for this update, therefore, the results are unchanged.For the previous version of the review, the authors found five parallel add-on studies and eight cross-over studies in adults or children with refractory focal epilepsy, and one parallel add-on study with a responder-enriched design in infants. In total, these 14 studies included 1958 participants (38 infants, 199 children, and 1721 adults). Baseline phases ranged from 4 to 12 weeks; treatment phases from 8 to 36 weeks. Overall, eleven studies (n = 1243 participants) were rated as having a low risk of bias, and three (n = 715 participants) had un unclear risk of bias due to lack of reported information around study design. Effective blinding of studies was reported in three studies (n = 504 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 RCTs) for twelve studies (n = 1322 participants, adults and children) 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 0.90 to 1.36; 14 RCTs) for fourteen studies (n = 1958 participants). The adverse events significantly associated with lamotrigine were: ataxia, dizziness, diplopia, and nausea. The RR of these adverse effects were as follows: ataxia 3.34 (99% Cl 2.01 to 5.55; 12 RCTs; n = 1524); dizziness 2.00 (99% Cl 1.51 to 2.64;13 RCTs; n = 1767); diplopia 3.79 (99% Cl 2.15 to 6.68; 3 RCTs; n = 943); nausea 1.81 (99% Cl 1.22 to 2.68; 12 RCTs; n = 1486). 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 quality, due to incomplete data for some outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Lamotrigine as an add-on treatment for partial 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 it with other add-on drugs.Since we did not find any new studies, our conclusions remain unchanged.

Bipolar Depression: Pregnancy, Postpartum, and Lactation

Medication management of bipolar depression in pregnancy and lactation is best done by assessing each patient's and family's needs in detail. Keeping pregnant patients as psychiatrically stable as possible is the most important principle for clinicians. Unfortunately, there is no risk-free situation for patients with psychiatric illness. This is often the most difficult and hard to accept reality for these patients, families, and clinicians. Clinicians serve these patients best by being as transparent as possible about the risk/benefit analysis of each patient's situation with the realization that ultimately the decisions are made by the patient and family.

Frequencies of UGT1A4*2 (P24T) and *3 (L48V) and their effects on serum concentrations of lamotrigine

The gene encoding uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A4 shows considerable polymorphism. Several common drugs are metabolised by UGT1A4, among them lamotrigine (LTG). Experimental and clinical studies suggest that certain variants of UGT1A4 are associated with altered enzyme activity. However, results are conflicting. This clinical study aimed to investigate the frequencies of two common UGT1A4 variants, *2 (P24T) and *3 (L48V), and their potential effects on serum concentrations of LTG. The *2 variant was associated with a trend towards higher serum concentrations, while the *3 variant was associated with significantly lower serum concentrations of LTG. The calculated allele frequencies were in the same range as in earlier studies on Caucasian populations. To our knowledge, this is the first study suggesting a clinical effect of UGT1A4*2. Further study is needed to confirm this finding.

Direct photodegradation of lamotrigine (an antiepileptic) in simulated sunlight--pH influenced rates and products

Lamotrigine is an antiepileptic and mood stabilizing drug that has been detected in wastewater, groundwater, surface water and drinking water, at frequencies in surface water ranging from 47 to 97%. Because lamotrigine is a weak base (pKa = 5.7) that appears in two protonation states in natural waters, this study examined the direct photodegradation of lamotrigine (11.4 to 12.0 mg L(-1)) in simulated sunlight using liquid chromatography-UV diode array detection and buffered aqueous solutions at pH 3.3, 5.3, and 7.7. Lamotrigine's half-life varied little (100 ± 3 to 112 ± 2 h) with solution pH, but its specific light absorption rate was 12 times higher, and its reaction quantum yield was 13 times lower, at pH 7.7 versus pH 3.3. In the estimated midday, midsummer sunlight in Denver, CO, USA (latitude 39.8617 °N), lamotrigine's estimated photodegradation rate was more than twice as fast at pH 7.7 versus pH 3.3. Lamotrigine's photoproducts were detected by liquid chromatography-UV diode array detection and time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Solution pH was shown to affect the identities and relative abundances of lamotrigine's photoproducts. Some photoproducts appeared only in solutions containing protonated lamotrigine, and others appeared only in solutions containing neutral lamotrigine. As a result, different reaction mechanisms were proposed. Finally, lamotrigine's reaction quantum yield (2.51 ± 0.07 × 10(-5) mol einstein(-1) at pH 7.7) and other results suggested that lamotrigine and three photoproducts are approximately as resistant to direct photodegradation as carbamazepine, a frequently detected pharmaceutical in surface waters.

A review of traditional and novel treatments for seizures in autism spectrum disorder: findings from a systematic review and expert panel

Despite the fact that seizures are commonly associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the effectiveness of treatments for seizures has not been well studied in individuals with ASD. This manuscript reviews both traditional and novel treatments for seizures associated with ASD. Studies were selected by systematically searching major electronic databases and by a panel of experts that treat ASD individuals. Only a few anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) have undergone carefully controlled trials in ASD, but these trials examined outcomes other than seizures. Several lines of evidence point to valproate, lamotrigine, and levetiracetam as the most effective and tolerable AEDs for individuals with ASD. Limited evidence supports the use of traditional non-AED treatments, such as the ketogenic and modified Atkins diet, multiple subpial transections, immunomodulation, and neurofeedback treatments. Although specific treatments may be more appropriate for specific genetic and metabolic syndromes associated with ASD and seizures, there are few studies which have documented the effectiveness of treatments for seizures for specific syndromes. Limited evidence supports l-carnitine, multivitamins, and N-acetyl-l-cysteine in mitochondrial disease and dysfunction, folinic acid in cerebral folate abnormalities and early treatment with vigabatrin in tuberous sclerosis complex. Finally, there is limited evidence for a number of novel treatments, particularly magnesium with pyridoxine, omega-3 fatty acids, the gluten-free casein-free diet, and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic simulation. Zinc and l-carnosine are potential novel treatments supported by basic research but not clinical studies. This review demonstrates the wide variety of treatments used to treat seizures in individuals with ASD as well as the striking lack of clinical trials performed to support the use of these treatments. Additional studies concerning these treatments for controlling seizures in individuals with ASD are warranted.