The management of epilepsy in the 1990s. Acquisitions, uncertainties and priorities for future research

Clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring of antiepileptic drugs: Systematic review

Objective

To systematically review and evaluate the available evidence supporting or refuting clinical use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in patients with epilepsy.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Cochrane, PubMed, Africa-Wide Information, Web of Science, and grey literature. Randomized controlled studies and observational studies that compared the clinical outcomes of TDM vs non-TDM were included. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. The primary outcome was seizure control; adverse effects were considered as secondary outcomes. The PROSPERO ID of this systematic review's protocol is CRD42018089925.

Results

Sixteen studies were identified meeting eligibility requirements. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 meta-analysis, and 11 quasiexperimental (QE) studies were included in the systematic review. Results from the analysis of RCTs showed no significant positive effect of TDM on seizure outcome (only 25% positive effect of phenytoin). However, some of the QE studies found that TDM was associated with better seizure control or lower rates of adverse effects. The existing evidence from various designs has shown various methodological implications, which warrants inconclusive results and highlights the requirement of more number of studies in this line.

Conclusions

If optimally implemented, TDM may enhance clinical care, particularly for phenytoin and other AEDs with complex pharmacokinetics. However, the ideal method for implementation is unclear, and serum drug levels should be considered in context with patient-reported clinical data regarding seizure control and adverse events.

Effects of CYP3A5 and UGT2B7 variants on steady-state carbamazepine concentrations in Chinese epileptic patients

Carbamazepine (CBZ) is a widely used antiepileptic drug with large interindividual variability in serum concentrations. Previous studies found that CYP3A5*3 (rs776746), UGT2B7*2 (802C>T), and UGT2B7*3 (211G>T) variants could change the enzymes' activity, which may influence drug concentrations. Our study aims to investigate whether these variants affect steady-state CBZ concentrations in Chinese epileptic patients. In our study, 62 epileptic patients who received CBZ as monotherapy were monitored for steady-state CBZ concentrations. We used polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based Sanger sequencing to assess the variants CYP3A5*3, UGT2B7*2, and UGT2B7*3. The results showed a positive correlation between dose and CBZ serum concentration in all patients and in patients with 3 different variants (all P < .05). After CBZ concentrations were normalized by the dose administered, negative correlations between dose-normalized CBZ concentrations and CBZ doses were observed in all patients, and in CYP3A5*3 and UGT2B7*3 patients (all P < .05), but not in UGT2B7*2 patients (P = .1080). UGT2B7*2 patients exhibited lower dose-normalized CBZ concentrations and larger CBZ dose requirements than UGT2B7*1/*1 patients (P = .0139, P = .032, respectively). There were no differences between UGT2B7*3, UGT2B7*1/*1 and CYP3A5*3, and CYP3A5*1/*1 patients with regard to steady-state CBZ concentration, dose-normalized concentration, required CBZ dose, and body weight-normalized dose (all P > .05). Moreover, a significant difference in body weight-normalized CBZ dose between UGT2B7 GC and TT haplotype patients was observed (P = .0154). In conclusion, our study found that the UGT2B7*2 variant, but not the CYP3A5*3 or UGT2B7*3 variant, could affect steady-state CBZ concentrations in epileptic patients.

Emerging drugs for partial-onset epilepsy: a review of brivaracetam

There are more than 12 new antiepileptic drugs approved in the last 2 decades. Even with these newer agents, seizure remission is still unachievable in around 30% of patients with partial-onset seizures (POS). Brivaracetam (BRV) is chemically related to levetiracetam (LEV) and possesses a strong binding affinity for the synaptic vesicle protein 2A tenfold above that of LEV, and other possible modes of antiepileptic actions. BRV is now under Phase III development for POS, but data from one Phase III trial also suggested its potential efficacy for primary generalized seizures. The purpose of this review is to provide updated information on the mechanisms of action of the available antiepileptic drugs, with a focus on BRV to assess its pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability in patients with uncontrolled POS. To date, six Phase IIb and III clinical trials have been performed to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of BRV as an adjunctive treatment for patients with POS. Generally, BRV was well tolerated and did not show significant difference in safety profile, compared to placebo. The efficacy outcomes of BRV, although not consistent across trials, did indicate that BRV was a promising add-on therapy for patients with POS. In conclusion, the many favorable attributes of BRV, like its high oral efficacy, good tolerability, dosing regimen, and minimal drug interaction, make it a promising antiepileptic therapy for patients with uncontrolled partial-onset epilepsy.

Carbamazepine-Induced Liver Injury Requires CYP3A-Mediated Metabolism and Glutathione Depletion in Rats

Carbamazepine (CBZ) is widely used as an antiepileptic agent and causes rare but severe liver injury in humans. It has been generally recognized that reactive metabolites formed via the metabolic activation reaction contribute to the onset of liver injuries by several drugs. However, the role of CBZ metabolism in the development of liver injury is not fully understood. In this study, we developed a novel rat model of CBZ-induced liver injury and attempted to elucidate the associated mechanisms by focusing on the metabolism of CBZ. The repeated administration of CBZ for 5 days in combination with l-buthionine sulfoximine (BSO), a glutathione (GSH) synthesis inhibitor, resulted in increases in the plasma alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels and centrilobular necrosis in the liver that were observed in various degrees. The CBZ and 2-hydroxy-CBZ concentrations in the plasma after the last CBZ administration were lower in the rats with high plasma ALT levels compared with those with normal plasma ALT levels, showing the possibility that the further metabolism of CBZ and/or 2-hydroxy-CBZ is associated with the liver injury. Although a single administration of CBZ did not affect the plasma ALT levels, even when cotreated with BSO, pretreatment with dexamethasone, a CYP3A inducer, increased the plasma ALT levels. In addition, the rats cotreated with troleandomycin or ketoconazole, CYP3A inhibitors, suppressed the increased plasma ALT levels. In conclusion, reactive metabolite(s) of CBZ produced by CYP3A under the GSH-depleted condition might be involved in the development of liver injury in rats.

Alternative monotherapy or add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy whose seizures do not respond to the first monotherapy: an Italian multicenter prospective observational study

A prospective multicenter observational study was undertaken on children and adults with epilepsy in whom first monotherapy failed, to assess indications and effects of alternative monotherapy vs. polytherapy. Patients were followed until 12-month remission, drug withdrawal, or up to 18months. Monotherapy and polytherapy were compared for patients' baseline features, indication, retention time, remission, adverse events (AE), quality of life, and direct and indirect costs. Included were 157 men and 174 women, aged 2-86years. Of the patients, 72.2% were switched to alternative monotherapy. Baseline treatment was changed for lack of efficacy (73.9%) or adverse events (26.1%). Two hundred forty-three completed the study (remission: 175; 72.0%). Retention time, hospital admissions, days off-work and off-school, and quality of life did not differ between the two treatment groups. Patients were followed for 365.3person-years. Three hundred eighty-three incident AEs were reported by 46.4% of patients in monotherapy and 40.2% in polytherapy (serious AEs: 9.6% vs. 8.7%, mostly nondrug-related).

Effect of CYP3A5*3 genotype on serum carbamazepine concentrations at steady-state in Korean epileptic patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Carbamazepine (CBZ) is metabolized mainly by the CYP3A family of enzymes, which includes CYP3A4 and CYP3A5. Several studies have suggested that the CYP3A5*3 genotype influences the pharmacokinetics of CYP3A substrates. The present study aimed to assess the effect of the CYP3A5*3 genotype on serum concentration of CBZ at the steady-state in Korean epileptic patients.

METHOD

The serum concentrations of CBZ in 35 Korean epileptic patients were measured and their CYP3A5 genotype was determined. Fourteen patients were CYP3A5 expressors (two for CYP3A5*1/*1 and 12 for CYP3A5*1/*3) and 21 patients were CYP3A5 non-expressors (CYP3A5*3/*3). Dose-normalized concentrations (mean +/- SD) of CBZ were 9.9 +/- 3.4 ng/mL/mg for CYP3A5 expressors and 13.1 +/- 4.5 ng/mL/mg for CYP3A5 non-expressors (P = 0.032). The oral clearance of CBZ was significantly higher in CYP3A5 non-expressors than that of CYP3A5 expressors (0.056 +/-0.017 L/h/kg vs. 0.040 +/- 0.014 L/h/kg, P = 0.004). The CYP3A5 genotype affected the CBZ concentrations in Korean epileptic patients and is a factor that may contribute to inter-individual variability in CBZ disposition in epileptic patients.

Evaluation of anticonvulsant and analgesic effects of benzyl- and benzhydryl ureides

The anticonvulsant effects of benzyl- and benzhydryl ureides in mice models of seizures (maximal electroshock seizure test, pentylenetetrazol test, picrotoxin-induced seizure test) and the influence on spontaneous locomotor activity has been assessed. Furthermore, the analgesic effect of ureide derivatives was studied in the hot-plate test in mice. Selected compounds were investigated for their in vitro interaction with adenosine receptors as well as the benzodiazepine binding site of GABA(A) receptors. This study demonstrated the strong anticonvulsant activity of several ureides in electrically or chemically induced seizure models, and structure-activity relationships were discussed. 1-Benzyl-3-butyrylurea (9) was found to be equipotent to ethosuximide in the pentylenetetrazol test with regard to the number of attacks as well as the time of the onset of seizures. The ureide 9 also revealed the highest protective activity against seizures in the other models, maximal electroshock seizure and picrotoxin test. Moreover, 1-benzyl-3-butyrylurea was not neurotoxic at doses up to 200 mg/kg. Benzylureides 8-10 showed affinity to the adenosine A1 receptors at low micromolar concentrations. However, the apparent anticonvulsant activity in different seizure models does not appear to result from direct activation of adenosine A1 receptors or GABA(A) receptors, respectively. In the hot-plate test, the majority of investigated compounds exhibited analgesic activity. Again, compound 9 was superior to the other substances investigated, suggesting a potential therapeutic value of that ureide derivative.

Overtreatment in epilepsy: how it occurs and how it can be avoided

In pharmacotherapy, overtreatment may be defined as an excessive drug load (that is, excessive drug dosages or unnecessary polypharmacy) leading to a suboptimal risk-to-benefit ratio. The risk of overtreatment in the pharmacological management of epilepsy is substantial and may have serious consequences in terms of a greater incidence and severity of adverse effects. These effects can range from subtle CNS impairment to overt toxic effects, including teratogenicity. Overtreatment also causes increased treatment costs and may even lead to a paradoxical deterioration in seizure control. The prevention and correction of overtreatment requires a thorough understanding of the situations and mechanisms that lead to inappropriate prescribing of antiepileptic drugs. These include initiating treatment in conditions where it is not indicated (for example, long-term prophylaxis after head trauma or supratentorial surgery in seizure-free patients), use of excessively fast titration rates, prescription of excessively high initial target dosages, failure to consider conditions associated with reduced dosage requirements (for example, old age or comorbidities associated with impaired drug clearance), and failure to consider the dose-response characteristics of the selected drug. Many patients whose seizures do not respond to the initially prescribed medication can be optimally managed by switching to monotherapy with an alternative agent; premature use of combination therapy represents another common form of overtreatment. Overtreatment may also result from a failure to adjust the dosage to prevent or compensate for adverse pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic drug interactions, and from a failure to reduce drug load in patients who have not benefited from high dosages or polypharmacy. While the measurement of drug concentrations can aid in minimising adverse effects, there is also a danger of overtreatment resulting from inappropriate interpretation of drug concentration data. Continuation of drug therapy in seizure-free patients in whom the risk-benefit ratio is in favour of gradual withdrawal may also be regarded as overtreatment. Tailoring therapy to the needs of the individual patient is the key to the successful management of epilepsy. Even though the importance of complete seizure control cannot be overemphasised, no patient should be made to suffer more from the adverse effects of treatment than from the manifestations of the seizure disorder.

Postsurgical treatment of epilepsy

In people with localization-related epilepsy who do not respond well to medication and continue to have seizures despite having been evaluated and treated by an epilepsy specialist, current recommendations are to consider surgery as an alternative to continued trials of different antiepileptic drugs (AEDs).

An Introduction to Antiepileptic Drugs

In recent years, the number of commercially available antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) has increased steadily. Although this may complicate management choices, it also offers welcome new options to individualize treatment more effectively. Because each of the available AEDs differs from others in many clinically relevant properties, opportunities to tailor drug treatment to the characteristics of the individual patient have never been greater. Properties that are especially important in drug selection in patients with epilepsy include spectrum of efficacy in different seizure types, adverse effects profile, pharmacokinetic properties, susceptibility to cause or be a target of clinically important drug-drug interactions, ease of use, and cost. Other factors that need to be considered in tailoring drug choice include availability of user-friendly pediatric formulations, and potentially favorable effects on co-morbid conditions. In fact, a number of AEDs are efficacious and widely prescribed in additional indications, particularly psychiatric disorders, migraine prophylaxis, and neuropathic pain. Recently, advances have been made in understanding the mechanisms of actions of AEDs at the molecular level. While a fully mechanistic approach to the clinical use of these agents is not yet feasible, knowledge of mechanisms of action offers useful clues in predicting their efficacy profile and spectrum of potential adverse effects.

Effect of probenecid on the pharmacokinetics of carbamazepine in healthy subjects

OBJECTIVES

Carbamazepine (CBZ) undergoes biotransformation by CYP3A4 and CYP2C8, and glucuronide conjugation. There has been no clear demonstration to reveal the role of glucuronidation in the disposition of CBZ. We evaluated the effect of probenecid, a UDP-glucuronosyltransferase inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics of CBZ in humans.

METHODS

In a randomized, open-label, two-way crossover study, ten healthy male subjects were treated twice daily for 10 days with 500 mg probenecid or with a matched placebo. On day 6, a single dose of 200 mg CBZ was administered orally. Concentrations of CBZ and CBZ 10,11-epoxide (CBZ-E) in plasma and urine were measured.

RESULTS

Probenecid decreased the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of CBZ from 1253.9 micromol h/l to 1020.7 micromol h/l (P < 0.001) while increasing that of CBZ-E from 137.6 micromol h/l to 183.5 micromol h/l (P = 0.033). The oral clearance of CBZ was increased by probenecid by 26% (90% confidence interval, 17-34%; P < 0.001). Probenecid increased the AUC ratio of CBZ-E/CBZ from 0.11 to 0.16 (P < 0.001). However, probenecid had minimal effect on the recovery of the conjugated and free forms of CBZ and CBZ-E in urine.

CONCLUSION

Although probenecid showed a minimal effect on the glucuronidation of CBZ and CBZ-E, it increased CBZ biotransformation to CBZ-E, most likely reflecting the induction of CYP3A4 and CYP2C8 activities, in humans. These results demonstrate that glucuronide conjugation plays a minor role in the metabolism of CBZ and CBZ-E in humans, and that probenecid has an inducing effect on the disposition of CBZ.

Uncontrolled epilepsy following discontinuation of antiepileptic drugs in seizure-free patients: a review of current clinical experience

PURPOSE

We reviewed the impact of planned discontinuation of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in seizure-free patients on seizure recurrence and the seizure outcome of reinstituted treatment.

METHODS

A literature review was performed yielding 14 clinical observations of seizure recurrence after discontinuation and its treatment outcome.

RESULTS

Seizure recurrence rate after AED discontinuation ranged between 12 and 66% (mean 34%, 95%CI: 27-43) in the 13 reviewed studies (no data in one study). Reinstitution of AEDs after recurrence was efficacious between 64-91% (mean of 14 studies, 80%, 95%CI: 75-85%) at follow-up. Mean follow-up ranged from 1-9 years. Seizure outcome of resumed treatment was not different for series in children and adolescents (84%, mean of 4 studies, 95%CI: 75-93) or in adults only (80%, mean of 9 studies, 95%CI: 74-86). Although seizure control was regained within approximately one year in half of the cases becoming seizure free, it took some patients as many as 5-12 years. In addition, in 19% (mean of 14 studies, 95%CI: 15-24%), resuming medication did not control the epilepsy as before, and chronic drug-resistant epilepsy with many seizures over as many as five years was seen in up to 23% of patients with a recurrence. Factors associated with poor treatment outcome of treating recurrences were symptomatic etiology, partial epilepsy and cognitive deficits.

CONCLUSIONS

These serious and substantial risks weigh against discontinuation of AEDs in seizure-free patients, except perhaps for selected patients with idiopathic epilepsy syndromes of childhood or patients with rare seizures.

Managing Bipolar Disorder in the Elderly

Clinical research in geriatric psychopharmacology has been a relatively neglected focus compared with the wealth of information on younger populations, and there is a dearth of published, controlled trials. Similarly, these are limited data in the area of geriatric bipolar disorder. Although there is an absence of rigorous, evidence-based information, preliminary data on older adults with bipolar disorder suggest some promising treatment options and important differences in older versus younger patients with bipolar illness. Lithium, while widely utilised in younger populations, is often poorly tolerated in the elderly. Clinical evidence regarding use of antiepileptic compounds in late-life bipolar disorder is generally compiled from bipolar disorder studies in mixed populations, studies in older adults with seizure disorders, and studies on dementia and psychotic conditions other than bipolar disorder. Valproate semisodium and carbamazepine are widely prescribed compounds in older adults with bipolar disorder. However, the popularity of these compounds has occurred in context of an absence of evidence-based data. The atypical antipsychotics have expanded the treatment armamentarium for bipolar disorder in mixed populations and may offer particular promise in management of bipolar illness in older populations as well. Olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone and aripiprazole are atypical antipsychotics that have been approved by the US FDA for the treatment of bipolar disorder; however, there are no published, controlled trials with atypical antipsychotics specific to mania in geriatric patients. Preliminary reports on the use of clozapine, risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine suggest a role for the use of these agents in late-life bipolar disorder. Information with ziprasidone and aripiprazole specific to geriatric bipolar disorder is still lacking.

The Use of Antiepileptic Drugs-Principles and Practice

Up to 70% of people developing epilepsy may expect to become seizure free with optimum antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy. The remaining 30% are the most difficult to treat. Most patients are controlled on a single AED, but a small proportion requires a combination of two agents. Add-on therapy with a second drug, rather than substitution, may be a viable and rational approach in some patients, particularly if the first drug is relatively well tolerated. Precise classification of the type of seizures, as well as the epilepsy syndrome, together with careful recording of both seizures and adverse effects, are essential if rational management decisions are to be made. The goal of therapy should be complete seizure freedom with a single drug taken once or twice a day and without adverse effects. If control is difficult to achieve, the maximum tolerated dose of each drug should be explored, but a balance needs to be struck between adverse effects and control of seizures. In patients in whom treatment appears to be ineffective, the diagnosis of epilepsy and adherence to therapy should be reviewed. Drugs used in combination must be carefully selected, as poor adherence, drug interactions, and toxicity are more likely if more than one drug is prescribed. Agents are usually chosen according to seizure type, patient characteristics, and often by clinician preference. Those that are better tolerated have a low potential for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions, and those that can be easily introduced without any complicated titration schedule have an advantage.

Adjunctive therapy versus alternative monotherapy in patients with partial epilepsy failing on a single drug: a multicentre, randomised, pragmatic controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the value of alternative monotherapy versus adjunctive therapy in partial epilepsy refractory to single antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy.

DESIGN AND METHODS

In a multicentre, parallel-group, open-label study, patients with cryptogenic or symptomatic partial epilepsy not controlled after single or sequential AED monotherapies were randomised to monotherapy with an alternative AED or to adjunctive therapy with a second AED. The AED to be added/substituted and dose adjustments were determined by the physician's best judgement. Patients were followed up until withdrawal from the allocated treatment or for 12 months, whichever first. Outcome measures included proportion of patients continuing on the assigned treatment strategy, proportion of patients seizure-free after achieving the target maintenance dose, and adverse effects rates. Data were analysed by actuarial life tables, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression model.

RESULTS

Of a total of 157 patients (including 94 previously exposed to only one AED), 76 were randomised to alternative monotherapy and 81 to adjunctive therapy. The two groups were balanced in clinical characteristics. The 12-month cumulative probability of remaining on the assigned treatment was 55% in patients randomised to alternative monotherapy and 65% in those randomised to adjunctive therapy (P=0.74). The 12-month probability of remaining seizure-free was 14 and 16%, respectively (P=0.74). Adverse effects were similar in the two groups. No significant differences in outcome within or between groups were identified based on etiology of epilepsy and previous AED exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Although these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the low statistical power resulting from the relatively small sample size, alternative monotherapy and adjunctive therapy were associated with similar outcomes. Further work is required to determine whether outcome could be improved through identification of specific AED combinations with synergistic activity.

Current trends in antiepileptic drug therapy

Over the last two decades, drug therapy for epilepsy has improved substantially. This can be ascribed to a large extent to three factors, including the demonstration of the advantages of monotherapy; the realization of the need for dosage tailoring, coupled [for some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs)] with control of pharmacokinetic variability through therapeutic drug monitoring; and the introduction of newer agents with improved tolerability profiles. What further advances should we expect for the future? Current trends that are expected to increasingly affect our prescribing patterns include greater reliance on evidence-based medicine and treatment guidelines, a trend that will be facilitated by completion of therapeutically meaningful randomized trials (including cost-effectiveness studies) and high-quality observational studies (including multinational pregnancy registries), as well as initiatives from scientific societies and government organizations aimed at condensing the most relevant information into therapeutic guidelines. The explosion in communication technology will accelerate dissemination of this information and its application to clinical practice. Other factors include a more rational patient-tailored AED selection and dose individualization, aided by characterization of predictors of outcome as defined by clinical parameters (sex, age, epilepsy syndrome, and etiology), pathophysiological mechanisms, and newly discovered genetic markers of outcome; improved definition of the role of new AEDs, resulting in their increased use in newly diagnosed epilepsy; and reappraisal of the value of combination therapy in refractory epilepsies, based on evidence produced by experimental and clinical studies designed to identify favorable pharmacodynamic interactions. Additional important developments may come from the discovery of novel, more efficacious AEDs and from exploration of potential new targets, such as prevention of epileptogenesis.

Serum carbamazepine concentrations in elderly patients: a case-matched pharmacokinetic evaluation based on therapeutic drug monitoring data

PURPOSE

To assess the influence of aging on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of carbamazepine (CBZ) in a large population of patients evaluated in a therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) setting.

METHODS

The database of a large TDM service was used to identify retrospectively steady-state serum CBZ concentrations in 157 elderly patients with epilepsy (65 years and older) treated with CBZ alone or in combination with phenobarbital (PB). CBZ apparent oral clearance (CL/F) values were calculated and compared with those determined in an equal number of controls aged 20 to 50 years, and matched for gender, body weight, and comedication.

RESULTS

Compared with corresponding controls, mean CBZ CL/F values were 23% and 24% lower, respectively, in the groups of elderly patients receiving monotherapy (57.1 +/- 20.6 vs. 74.6 +/- 28.3 ml/h/kg; p < 0.0001) and PB comedication (74.7 +/- 25.5 vs. 98.7 +/- 34.9 ml/h/kg; p < 0.01). Within each age group, patients comedicated with PB showed significantly higher CBZ CL/F values than those on monotherapy. A negative correlation between CL/F and age was found both within the monotherapy and the PB comedicated groups. In addition, CL/F values showed a positive relation with the administered daily dosage, which persisted within subgroups homogeneous for age and comedication. The independent influence of age, CBZ dosage, and comedication on CBZ CL/F was confirmed by multiple regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

CBZ CL/F is decreased in an age-dependent manner in elderly patients compared with younger subjects, presumably because a reduction in the rate of CYP3A4-mediated drug metabolism. Elderly patients retain their sensitivity to dose-dependent autoinduction and to heteroinduction by enzyme-inducing AEDs, but their metabolic rates remain considerably below those observed in matched controls. As a result of this, patients in old age will require lower CBZ dosages to achieve serum concentrations comparable with those found in nonelderly adults.

Clinically important drug interactions in epilepsy: general features and interactions between antiepileptic drugs

There are two types of interactions between drugs, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic. For antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), pharmacokinetic interactions are the most notable type, but pharmacodynamic interactions involving reciprocal potentiation of pharmacological effects at the site of action are also important. By far the most important pharmacokinetic interactions are those involving cytochrome P450 isoenzymes in hepatic metabolism. Among old generation AEDs, carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital, and primidone induce the activity of several enzymes involved in drug metabolism, leading to decreased plasma concentration and reduced pharmacological effect of drugs, which are substrates of the same enzymes (eg, tiagabine, valproic acid, lamotrigine, and topiramate). In contrast, the new AEDs gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, tiagabine, topiramate, vigabatrin, and zonisamide do not induce the metabolism of other AEDs. Interactions involving enzyme inhibition include the increase in plasma concentrations of lamotrigine and phenobarbital caused by valproic acid. Among AEDs, the least potential interaction is associated with gabapentin and levetiracetam.

The ideal characteristics of antiepileptic therapy: an overview of old and new AEDs

New and improved anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) have made the concept of choice, according to the individual prognosis and probable response to specific regimens, increasingly feasible. Inter-individual variability in syndrome severity and complexity make individualization necessary. We propose three categories of disorder control according to the individual objectives of the patient: (1) seizure control, (2) epilepsy control and ultimately, (3) "epilepsy cure"; the latter remaining a largely idealistic target today. An AED is likely to be successful if it exhibits "optimal" characteristics, such as drug efficacy, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, interactions and cost-effectiveness. This review discusses the "optimal" characteristics of add-on AEDs, which, in addition to seizure control, will contribute to the achievement of epilepsy control and therefore address the currently unmet clinical needs of epilepsy treatment.

Pharmacological and therapeutic properties of valproate: a summary after 35 years of clinical experience

Thirty-five years since its introduction into clinical use, valproate (valproic acid) has become the most widely prescribed antiepileptic drug (AED) worldwide. Its pharmacological effects involve a variety of mechanisms, including increased gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-ergic transmission, reduced release and/or effects of excitatory amino acids, blockade of voltage-gated sodium channels and modulation of dopaminergic and serotoninergic transmission. Valproate is available in different dosage forms for parenteral and oral use. All available oral formulations are almost completely bioavailable, but they differ in dissolution characteristics and absorption rates. In particular, sustained-release formulations are available that minimise fluctuations in serum drug concentrations during a dosing interval and can therefore be given once or twice daily. Valproic acid is about 90% bound to plasma proteins, and the degree of binding decreases with increasing drug concentration within the clinically occurring range. Valproic acid is extensively metabolised by microsomal glucuronide conjugation, mitochondrial beta-oxidation and cytochrome P450-dependent omega-, (omega-1)- and (omega-2)-oxidation. The elimination half-life is in the order of 9 to 18 hours, but shorter values (5 to 12 hours) are observed in patients comedicated with enzyme-inducing agents such as phenytoin, carbamazepine and barbiturates. Valproate itself is devoid of enzyme-inducing properties, but it has the potential of inhibiting drug metabolism and can increase by this mechanism the plasma concentrations of certain coadministered drugs, including phenobarbital (phenobarbitone), lamotrigine and zidovudine. Valproate is a broad spectrum AED, being effective against all seizure types. In patients with newly diagnosed partial seizures (with or without secondary generalisation) and/or primarily generalised tonic-clonic seizures, the efficacy of valproate is comparable to that of phenytoin, carbamazepine and phenobarbital, although in most comparative trials the tolerability of phenobarbital was inferior to that of the other drugs. Valproate is generally regarded as a first-choice agent for most forms of idiopathic and symptomatic generalised epilepsies. Many of these syndromes are associated with multiple seizure types, including tonic-clonic, myoclonic and absence seizures, and prescription of a broad-spectrum drug such as valproate has clear advantages in this situation. A number of reports have also suggested that intravenous valproate could be of value in the treatment of convulsive and nonconvulsive status epilepticus, but further studies are required to establish in more detail the role of the drug in this indication. The most commonly reported adverse effects of valproate include gastrointestinal disturbances, tremor and bodyweight gain. Other notable adverse effects include encephalopathy symptoms (at times associated with hyperammonaemia), platelet disorders, pancreatitis, liver toxicity (with an overall incidence of 1 in 20,000, but a frequency as high as 1 in 600 or 1 in 800 in high-risk groups such as infants below 2 years of age receiving anticonvulsant polytherapy) and teratogenicity, including a 1 to 3% risk of neural tube defects. Some studies have also suggested that menstrual disorders and certain clinical, ultrasound or endocrine manifestations of reproductive system disorders, including polycystic ovary syndrome, may be more common in women treated with valproate than in those treated with other AEDs. However, the precise relevance of the latter findings remains to be evaluated in large, prospective, randomised studies.

Overtreatment in epilepsy: adverse consequences and mechanisms

The most important determinant of quality of life in patients with epilepsy is complete seizure control, and therefore this should be the ultimate goal of pharmacological therapy. Seizure freedom, or a reduction in seizure frequency, however, should not be sought at all costs, and the situation should never arise where a person with epilepsy is made to suffer more from the side effects of treatment than from the consequences of the underlying disease. Overtreatment is not uncommon in patients taking antiepileptic drugs, and it may occur in many forms and with a variety of mechanisms. Long-term use (or continuation) of anticonvulsant therapy in situations where it is not indicated (e.g. in children with simple febrile seizures, or in non-epileptic seizure-free patients who underwent brain surgery) constitutes a blatant case of overtreatment. Other forms of overtreatment include the use of unnecessarily fast dose escalation rates, which may expose the patient to potentially serious or severe side effects, or the prescription of unnecessarily high maintenance dosages. The latter occurrence may result from inadequate understanding of dose-response relationships, from misinterpretation of serum drug concentrations (e.g. targeting concentrations within the 'range' in patients who are well controlled at lower concentrations) or, at times, from failure to recognize a paradoxical increase in seizure frequency as a manifestation of drug toxicity. The most common form of overtreatment, however, involves the unnecessary use of combination therapy (polypharmacy) in patients who could be treated optimally with a single drug. Adverse effects associated with polypharmacy often result from undesirable drug-drug interactions. While pharmacokinetic interactions are somewhat predictable and can be minimized or controlled by monitoring serum drug concentrations and/or dose adjustment, pharmacodynamic interactions leading to enhanced neurotoxicity (as seen, for example, in some patients given a combination of lamotrigine and carbamazepine) can only be identified by careful clinical observation. There is evidence that not all antiepileptic drug combinations are equally adverse, and that the combined use of specific drugs (e.g. lamotrigine and valproic acid) may even exhibit an improved therapeutic index compared with either agent given alone, provided appropriate dose adjustments are made. Although the suggestion has been made that adverse effects are more likely to result from combining anticonvulsants having a similar mode of action, our knowledge of the pharmacology of individual agents is insufficient to allow a reliable prediction of the clinical effects of specific drug combinations.

Drug utilization pattern of anti-epileptic drugs: a pharmacoepidemiologic study in Oman

PURPOSE

To get an insight into the type and aetiology of epileptic seizures; to describe the drug utilization pattern of anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) for the treatment of various forms of epileptic seizures in this tertiary referral centre in Oman; and to compare our drug utilization pattern with that from other countries. In addition, the tolerability of AEDs and the use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) were evaluated.

METHODS

In a 6-month study, all epileptic patients aged 14 and above who were prescribed an AED were considered for analysis. Demographic data, type and aetiology of epileptic seizures, AED data, tests performed and adverse drug reaction (ADR) data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 1039 prescriptions originated from 488 epileptic patients. The age ranged from 14 to 77 years (median, 24 years). Generalized tonic-clonic seizures (51%) of idiopathic/cryptogenic origin (83%) were the most common type and aetiology of epileptic seizures, respectively. An average of 1.34 AEDs per patient was prescribed with 78% of patients being on monotherapy. Sodium valproate (49%) was the most frequently prescribed AED, followed by carbamazepine (44%), phenytoin (12%) and lamotrigine (11%). Ten patients suffered an ADR and phenobarbital followed by carbamazepine were most commonly the subject of TDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike the results in most other studies, generalized seizures represented the majority of epileptic seizures. The selection of the AEDs corresponded well with their known efficacy profiles for specific epileptic seizure types. Monotherapy was the type of therapy most frequently used, and sodium valproate and carbamazepine were the most commonly used AEDs.

Pattern of diagnostic and therapeutic care of childhood epilepsy in Alexandria, Egypt

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the quality of care delivered to children with epilepsy and study the predictors of seizure recurrence after initial control.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was conducted during 4-month period (1 January to 30 April 1999).

SETTING

Children's hospitals providing out-patient and in-patient services to the majority of children in Alexandria, Egypt.

OUTCOME

Seizure recurrence after at least 6 months from anti-epileptic drug (AED) adjustment.

RESULTS

Electroencephalogram was performed in 82.1% of cases, whereas plasma assay was performed in only 7% of cases. AEDs were initiated after the first seizure rather than the first recurrence of seizure. Carbamazepine was the most frequently prescribed drug, followed by valproate, except for generalized absence type, which was mainly managed by valproate. Suboptimal quality of care consisted mainly of poor diagnostic assessment of children with epilepsy, underuse of plasma monitoring for AED levels, unjustified use of oral AEDs during breakthrough fits, and defective health education to the caregivers of children with epilepsy that was manifested by non-compliance with AEDs in 30.1% of cases. The outcome of the current healthcare was a 71.6% recurrence of seizures after initial control. Continuous seizures before treatment, a polytherapy regimen, and non-compliance with management procedures were significant predictors for seizure recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

More specialized neurological care and health education programs for the caregivers of children with epilepsy are warranted. By exploring the details of medical practice, a foundation is provided upon which to build a quality improvement program, using the parameters in our study as an initial framework.

Marketed new antiepileptic drugs: are they better than old-generation agents?

Until a decade ago, the pharmacologic armamentarium for the management of epilepsy was restricted to a little more than a handful of drugs that had been introduced 20 to 70 years earlier. This situation has changed dramatically, with as many as nine new-generation drugs (oxcarbazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, tiagabine, topiramate, zonisamide, vigabatrin, and felbamate, in addition to the water-soluble phenytoin prodrug fosphenytoin) having been introduced in Europe, the United States, or other parts of the world. These drugs represent a welcome addition because they produce an appreciable reduction in seizure frequency in up to 40% to 50% of patients who had been refractory to older-generation drugs. However, only a few patients with truly refractory disease can be made seizure-free by these new drugs, and the search for more effective anticonvulsants should continue. Although in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy the efficacy of new-generation drugs is not superior to that of older agents, some of the newer drugs offer advantages in terms of improved tolerability, ease of use, and reduced interaction potential. However, the increased availability of treatment options implies that drug choice in patients with epilepsy is more complicated than in the past, and there is a concern that inadequate knowledge of indications, contraindications, and mode of use of the newer drugs could result in some patients receiving suboptimal treatment or being exposed to undue risks from side effects and drug interactions. Although measurement of plasma drug concentrations is often used to adjust the dosage of classic antiepileptic drugs, therapeutic drug monitoring has been claimed to be of little or no value with newer-generation drugs. This view has been challenged in light of the evidence that pharmacokinetic variability contributes to an important extent to differences in dosage requirements for most of these drugs.

Oxcarbazepine: an update of its efficacy in the management of epilepsy

Oxcarbazepine (10,11-dihydro-10-oxo-5H-dibenz[b,f]azepine-5-carboxamide) is a 10-keto analogue of carbamazepine with anticonvulsant activity. In newly diagnosed adult patients, oxcarbazepine monotherapy is as effective as phenytoin and vaiproic acid at reducing generalised tonic-clonic and partial seizure frequency. Furthermore, oxcarbazepine 2400 mg/day as monotherapy has also proved effective in the treatment of refractory partial seizures in adult patients. Oxcarbazepine 600, 1200 and 2400 mg/day as adjunctive therapy significantly reduced seizure frequency compared with placebo in 692 patients with refractory partial seizures. The efficacy of oxcarbazepine monotherapy is similar to that of phenytoin in the treatment of children and adolescents with newly diagnosed partial or generalised tonic-clonic seizures. Additionally, adjunctive therapy with oxcarbazepine was significantly more effective than placebo at reducing seizure frequency in children and adolescents with refractory partial seizures. The most commonly reported adverse events associated with oxcarbazepine monotherapy and/or adjunctive therapy in adults and/or children are somnolence, dizziness, headache, nausea and vomiting. Oxcarbazepine monotherapy is better tolerated than phenytoin (in both adults and children) and valproic acid (in adults), and although 75 to 90% of adult patients in 5 recent monotherapy studies reported adverse events while receiving oxcarbazepine, <8% withdrew from treatment because of them. Acute hyponatraemia, although usually asymptomatic, develops in 2.7% of patients treated with oxcarbazepine. Adverse events most likely to resolve upon switching to oxcarbazepine therapy from treatment with carbamazepine are undetermined skin reactions (rashes, pruritus, eczema), allergic reactions and a combination of malaise, dizziness and headache. Although oxcarbazepine does have a clinically significant interaction with some drugs (e.g. phenytoin and oral contraceptives), it has a lower propensity for interactions than older antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) because its major metabolic pathway is mediated by noninducible enzymes.

CONCLUSION

Oxcarbazepine as monotherapy is a viable alternative to established AEDs in the treatment of partial and generalised tonic-clonic seizures in adults and children. Furthermore, it is also effective as adjunctive therapy in the treatment of refractory partial seizures in both age groups. In addition, the drug is tolerated better than the older, established AEDs, and has a lower potential for drug interactions. These attributes make oxcarbazepine an effective component in the initial treatment of newly diagnosed partial and generalised tonic-clonic seizures, and also as an adjunct for medically intractable partial seizures in both adults and children.

Clinical pharmacology and therapeutic use of the new antiepileptic drugs

Although older generation antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) such as carbamazepine, phenytoin and valproic acid continue to be widely used in the treatment of epilepsy, these drugs have important shortcomings such as a highly variable and nonlinear pharmacokinetics, a narrow therapeutic index, suboptimal response rates, and a propensity to cause significant adverse effects and drug interactions. In an attempt to overcome these problems, a new generation of AEDs has been introduced in the last decade. Compared with older agents, some of these drugs offer appreciable advantages in terms of less variable kinetics and, particularly in the case of gabapentin, levetiracetam and vigabatrin, a lower interaction potential. Lamotrigine, topiramate, zonisamide and felbamate protect against partial seizures and a variety of generalized seizure types, vigabatrin is effective against partial seizures (with or without secondary generalization) and infantile spasms, while the use of oxcarbazepine, tiagabine and gabapentin is mainly restricted to patients with partial epilepsy (and, in the case of oxcarbazepine, also primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures). Levetiracetam, the latest AED to be introduced, has been found to be effective in partial seizures, but its potentially broader efficacy spectrum remains to be determined in clinical studies. Currently, the main use of new generation AEDs is in the adjunctive therapy of patients refractory to older agents. However, due to advantages in terms of tolerability and ease of use, some of these drugs are increasingly used for first-line management in certain subgroups of patients. Due to serious toxicity risks, felbamate and vigabatrin should be prescribed only in patients refractory to other drugs. In the case of vigabatrin, however, first line use may be justified in infants with spasms.

Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of epilepsy

Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of epilepsies are discussed with special consideration of epidemiology and classification, progress in neuroimaging, electrophysiological studies using EEG and MEG, initiation of medical and surgical treatment, the role of new antiepileptic drugs and selected aspects of genetics of idiopathic epilepsies. In addition from conclusions obtained by the review of recent developments suggestions for future work in Europe are discussed. A constructive approach from multicenter studies requires homologous definitions, documentations and standardization of procedures of trials for European multicenter studies.

Harnessing the clinical potential of antiepileptic drug therapy: dosage optimisation

For patients with epilepsy, effective seizure control is the most important determinant of good quality of life. To achieve this, antiepileptic drug (AED) dosages should be individualised to maximise therapeutic benefit and to avoid most--if not all--adverse effects. Several studies suggest that, in routine clinical practice, dosage individualisation is often suboptimal. This may lead to patients receiving unnecessarily large dosages. Conversely, it may lead to patients switching to an alternative therapy (when clinical response is deemed insufficient), without exploration of the full dosage range. Indeed, dosage optimisation--which should involve consideration of the treatment setting and individual patient characteristics--can be a complicated process requiring skill and patience. In general neurological practice, most AEDs should be started at a low dosage and gradually titrated upwards. Starting dosages are similar in most types of epilepsy; however, if a rapid onset of therapeutic action is required, phenytoin, phenobarbital (phenobarbitone), levetiracetam and gabapentin are probably the best tolerated AEDs for starting at full dosage. The initial target maintenance dosage of an AED should be based on the dose-response profile of the drug, and on specific patient characteristics. Usually, the lowest effective daily dose expected to provide seizure control should be used, although various factors (e.g. stage and severity of epilepsy, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations, attitude of the patient) will markedly influence dosage selection. If seizures are not controlled on the initial target dose, the dosage should be increased gradually until complete seizure control is achieved or intolerable adverse effects occur. In most patients who fail to respond to the initially prescribed drug, switching to another AED (monotherapy) is the best option. Combination therapy may be appropriate for patients unresponsive to 2 or more sequential monotherapies. Therapeutic drug monitoring (measurement of serum drug concentrations) is useful in various settings, such as when drug interactions are expected, toxicity is suspected, or when AEDs with nonlinear pharmacokinetics (e.g. phenytoin, carbamazepine) are used. No indications currently exist for routine therapeutic drug monitoring of the newer AEDs. In summary, dosage regimens of AEDs should be assessed regularly, and adjusted if necessary, so that patients can derive optimal therapeutic benefit. For patients considered 'difficult to treat' (i.e. those in whom seizures remain incompletely controlled after several attempts at treatment), referral to a specialist is recommended.

Effects of Paeoniae Radix, a traditional Chinese medicine, on the pharmacokinetics of phenytoin

BACKGROUND

Phenytoin (PHT), one of the most widely prescribed antiepileptic drugs, has been reported to be associated with numerous drug-drug interactions. However, there are far fewer reports about the pharmacokinetic interactions between PHT and traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs). Paeoniae Radix (PR), one of the well-known TCMs, is used as an adjunct in some epileptic patients.

OBJECTIVE

In the present work, we studied the influences of PR on the pharmacokinetics of PHT in rats to identify the possible interactions between PR and PHT.

METHOD

A single dose of PHT (100 mg/kg) alone or in combination with PR extract (300 mg/kg) was administered by gavage to male SD rats. Serial blood samples of PHT were obtained for up to 24 h post-administration and measured by high-performance liquid-chromatography. The free (unbound) plasma concentrations of PHT were determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay. The plasma concentrations were used to construct pharmacokinetic profiles by plotting drug concentration-time curves. All data were subsequently processed by the computer program WINNONLIN. Statistical comparisons of pharmacokinetic parameters were performed with the unpaired Student t-test.

RESULTS

The mean maximum plasma concentration of PHT was attained 2 h after oral administration of PHT alone and 4-6 h after oral administration of PHT in combination with PR. The plasma level of PHT declined with a half-life of 5.38 h after PHT alone and 4.03 h after PHT and PR given together. No statistically significant differences were obtained in most of the pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, AUC, t1/2, MRT and CL/F) and protein binding rates of PHT between the two treatments. However, significant differences in Tmax and Vd/F between groups were noted.

CONCLUSION

The significant increase in Tmax indicated that simultaneous oral administration of PR delayed the absorption of PHT. The delayed absorption of PHT might lead to its slow onset of clinical effect. There were no significant differences in Cmax, AUC, t1/2, MRT and CL/F of PHT between the two groups, showing that PR could not significantly affect the extent of absorption, metabolism and elimination of PHT. No significant difference in protein binding rate was found, indicating that PR might not significantly alter the protein binding of PHT. While a significant decrease in Vd/F was noted, the mechanism underlying the apparently decreased Vd/F of PHT influenced by PR needs further study.

Assessing risk to benefit ratio in antiepileptic drug therapy

Assessment of risk to benefit ratio in patients with epilepsy is crucial in determining the need for treatment, the choice of drugs and the use of monitoring tools such as laboratory tests and other investigations. Active epilepsy per se carries significant risks in terms of increased mortality, susceptibility to psychopathology and physical injury, and reduced quality of life as a result of restricted lifestyle, stigma and prejudice. By preventing the occurrence of seizures, antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) attenuate or eliminate altogether seizure-related risks, but other risks may arise due to the side effects of the drugs, all of which have a relatively narrow therapeutic index. While there are no major differences in the degree of efficacy between AEDs which are effective in any given seizure type, side effect profiles differ considerably from one agent to another and represent a major factor in determining choice of treatment. Assessment of risk to benefit ratio should also take into consideration patient-specific factors such as type and severity of the epilepsy, age, sex, childbearing potential, medical and drug history, associated disease, use of concomitant medication (including the contraceptive pill) and the prospected patient's compliance. In some benign epilepsy syndromes, such as idiopathic partial epilepsy with centro-temporal spikes, the risk of side effects from AEDs may outweigh potential benefits in terms of seizure control, and treatment is generally not indicated. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the serious morbidity and mortality associated with severe epileptic encephalopathies, such as the Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, justifies aggressive treatment even with drugs associated with a relatively high risk of life threatening side effects such as felbamate. The present article will provide an overview of specific risks associated with epilepsy and with the various drugs used for its treatment, and will attempt to evaluate the complex balance between these risks and therapeutic benefits in different categories of patients.

Quality of care of children with chronic diseases in Alexandria, Egypt: the models of asthma, type I diabetes, epilepsy, and rheumatic heart disease. Egyptian-Italian Collaborative Group on Pediatric Chronic Diseases

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the quality of care delivered to children suffering from index chronic diseases using specific indicators of health care delivery and to study the predictors of suboptimal quality of care (SQC) and its outcome on children.

DESIGN

Over a 9-month period, guidelines for optimal care were formulated. A specific questionnaire for every studied chronic disease was prepared in collaboration with the clinicians in charge of the diseased children (66% pediatricians and pediatric specialists and 34% adult specialists). The clinicians were asked to write the details of daily practice, ie, how these children were managed on a routine basis as well as in an emergency situation. A cross-sectional study was conducted over a 4-month period and included 953 children suffering from bronchial asthma (BA), childhood epilepsy (CE), type I diabetes mellitus (IDDM), and rheumatic heart disease (RHD). A systematic random sample of children was selected from children visiting the ambulatory settings of all children's hospitals. Every fourth child was selected on 2 randomly chosen days each week, while all diseased children admitted in the hospital settings of the children's hospitals during the study were included. A general form describing the impact of the diseases on the child was prepared. A network of clinicians was created in all children's hospitals; seminars were held during which the content validity of the questionnaire was tested. Items were evaluated for their internal consistency using the Cronbach alpha. According to the degree of adherence to the recent therapeutic guidelines concerning selected indicators of the quality of care specific to every disease, children were categorized as receiving optimal quality of care or SQC. These indicators were: the use of inhaled bronchodilators in acute asthmatic attacks in mild asthma and the use of the prophylactic drugs (inhaled sodium cromoglycate or inhaled beclomethasone) in moderate to severe chronic BA in between acute asthmatic attacks; compliance with antiepileptic drugs in epileptic children; regular performance of self-monitoring of blood glucose and/or urine testing in diabetic children; and compliance with prophylactic antibiotics in children suffering from RHD. The records of the outpatient clinics for ambulatory and hospitalized cases were reviewed to assess the degree of compliance with the prescribed management before the index visit. Sociodemographic characteristics and health care system-related predictors of SQC were analyzed via stepwise logistic regression analysis. The impact of illness on the child was assessed by 7 items which were: dependence on parents in domestic activities, level of activity compared with peers, mood compared with peers, level of socializing, degree of discomfort attributable to illness, level of physical disadvantage, and urinary incontinence. Factor analysis with Varimax rotation was performed on items related to the impact of illness. Parental satisfaction with care was rated as excellent, very good, fair, or poor. Information on school outcome was obtained by asking the caretakers whether the child was able to attend school regularly despite his sickness. Scholastic achievement was also rated as excellent, very good, good, and acceptable. Parents were asked whether the child had ever repeated a grade because of his sickness.

SETTING

Ambulatory and hospital settings of all children's hospitals in Alexandria, Egypt.

RESULTS

Only 52% of mild asthmatics were given inhaled bronchodilators during acute attacks and 6.84% of moderate to severe asthmatics were taking prophylactic drugs (inhaled sodium cromoglycate and/or inhaled beclomethasone) between acute attacks. Similarly, only 53 of 134 (39.6%) of diabetic children were regularly performing self-monitoring of blood glucose and/or urine testing. In contrast, in epileptic children, 121 of 173 (69.9%) were judged as being compliant by their managing clinicians and more than two

A multicenter randomized controlled trial on the clinical impact of therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. The Italian TDM Study Group in Epilepsy

PURPOSE

To assess the clinical impact of monitoring serum concentrations of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

METHODS

One-hundred eighty patients with partial or idiopathic generalized nonabsence epilepsy, aged 6 to 65 years, requiring initiation of treatment with carbamazepine (CBZ), valproate (VPA), phenytoin (PHT), phenobarbital (PB), or primidone (PRM) were randomly allocated to two groups according to an open, prospective parallel-group design. In one group, dosage was adjusted to achieve serum AED concentration within a target range (10-20 microg/ml for PHT, 15-40 microg/ml for PB, 4-11 microg/ml for CBZ, and 40-100 microg/ml for VPA), whereas in the other group, dosage was adjusted on clinical grounds. Patients were followed up for 24 months or until a change in therapeutic strategy was clinically indicated.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics did not differ between the two groups. Most patients with partial epilepsy were treated with CBZ, whereas generalized epilepsies were most commonly managed with PB or VPA. PHT was used only in a small minority of patients. A total of 116 patients completed 2-year follow-up, and there were no differences in exit rate from any cause between the monitored group and the control group. The proportion of assessable patients with mean serum drug levels outside the target range (mostly below range) during the first 6 months of the study was 8% in the monitored group compared with 25% in the control group (p < 0.01). There were no significant differences between the monitored group and the control group with respect to patients achieving 12-month remission (60% vs. 61%), patients remaining seizure free since initiation of treatment (38% vs. 41%), and time to first seizure or 12-month remission. Frequency of adverse effects was almost identical in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small minority of patients were treated with PHT, the drug for which serum concentration measurements are most likely to be useful. With the AEDs most commonly used in this study, early implementation of serum AED level monitoring did not improve overall therapeutic outcome. and the majority of patients could be satisfactorily treated by adjusting dose on clinical grounds. Monitoring the serum levels of these drugs in selected patients and in special situations is likely to be more rewarding than routine measurements in a large clinic population.

Clinical aspects and biological bases of drug-resistant epilepsies

The definition of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) is elusive and still controversial owing to some unresolved questions such as: how many drugs should be tried before a patient is considered intractable; to which extent side-effects may be acceptable; how many years are necessary before establishing drug resistance. In some cases, the view of epilepsy as a progressive disorder constitutes another important issue. Despite the use of new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), intractable epilepsy represents about 20-30% of all cases, probably due to the multiple pathogenetic mechanisms underlying refractoriness. Several risk factors for pharmacoresistance are well known, even if the list of clinical features and biological factors currently accepted to be associated with difficult-to-treat epilepsy is presumably incomplete and, perhaps, disputable. For some of these factors, the biological basis may be common, mainly represented by mesial temporal sclerosis or by the presence of focal lesions. In other cases, microdysgenesis or dysplastic cortex, with abnormalities in the morphology and distribution of local-circuit (inhibitory) neurons, may be responsible for the severity of seizures. The possible influence of genes in conditioning inadequate intraparenchimal drug concentration, and the role of some cytokines determining an increase in intracellular calcium levels or an excessive growth of distrophic neurites, constitute other possible mechanisms of resistance. Several hypotheses on the mechanisms involved in the generation of DRE have been indicated: (a) ontogenic abnormalities in brain maturation; (b) epilepsy-induced alterations in network, neuronal, and glial properties in seizure-prone regions such as the hippocampus; (c) kindling phenomenon; (d) reorganization of cortical tissue in response to seizure-induced disturbances in oxygen supply. Such hypotheses need to be confirmed with suitable experimental models of intractable epilepsy that are specifically dedicated, which have until now been lacking.

Monotherapy trials with the new antiepileptic drugs: study designs, practical relevance and ethical implications

Traditional randomized clinical trials for the monotherapy assessment of antiepileptic drugs (AED) involve allocation of newly diagnosed patients to long-term treatment with different AEDs in order to determine remission rates and side effect profile. Apart from being time-consuming, however, these trials are unlikely to show significant differences in seizure control between the various drugs, which may lead some regulatory agencies to argue that remission rates could be related to the natural history of the disease rather than to efficacy of the administered drugs. To circumvent this problem, a number of innovative designs for the monotherapy assessment of new AEDs have been developed in recent years. They all share the common feature of being aimed at demonstrating a difference in response rate over a short treatment period between a high dosage of a new AED and some form of suboptimal treatment (placebo or low-dose active control). Patients allocated to suboptimal treatment show unacceptable seizure control more rapidly than patients on high-dose active treatment and therefore they exit the trial at a faster rate: evidence of antiepileptic activity is therefore based on demonstration of differences in rate of deterioration rather than improvement. These trials are conducted with titration schedules, dosages and durations of treatment which are totally unrelated to optimal use of the same AEDs in routine clinical practice. No comparative data with an established reference agent are provided, and allocation of patients to suboptimal treatment raises serious ethical concerns. For these reasons, justification for the continued implementation of these trials is questionable. Randomized long-term comparative trials should be considered the gold-standard for the monotherapy assessment of new AEDs. A review of the literature, however, reveals that long-term trials with new AEDs completed to date had significant shortcomings in their design, including excessively rigid or inappropriate dosing schedules, enrollment of patients with heterogeneous seizure disorders, low statistical power and insufficient duration of follow-up. Because these studies are usually aimed at addressing regulatory requirements, the information obtained cannot be meaningfully applied to routine clinical practice. Large longer-term randomized comparative trials using more pragmatic approaches are highly needed to determine the real value of first-line therapy with new AEDs in patients with well defined seizure disorders.

Profile of antiepileptic pharmacotherapy in a tertiary referral center in South India: a pharmacoepidemiologic and pharmacoeconomic study

PURPOSE

To study the current pharmacotherapy practices of epilepsy and its economics in a developing country by correlating the epidemiology and economics of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment in general epilepsy care and comprehensive epilepsy care.

METHODS

We compared the AED-use profiles, efficacy, and tolerability at entry and at last follow-up for 972 patients seen at a comprehensive epilepsy care program in South India from 1993 to 1995. The relative cost was expressed as the average percentage of the per capita gross national product (GNP/capita) each individual spent for AED treatment.

RESULTS

At entry, 562 (57.8%) subjects were receiving polytherapy; at last follow-up, 743 (76.4%) patients were receiving monotherapy, an increase of 34.3% in the use of monotherapy. One or more adverse drug reactions were reported by 28.6% of patients at entry and by 19.8% at last follow-up. The proportion of patients who were seizure free increased from 29.0 to 44.8%. Carbamazepine (CBZ) was the most frequently used AED, followed by diphenylhydantoin (DPH), valproate (VPA), and phenobarbitone (PB). The relative cost (% GNP/capita) for standard AEDs were as follows: PB, 4.4%; DPH, 7.1%; CBZ, 16.8%; and VPA, 29.5%. The average annual cost of AED treatment per patient in U.S. dollars was $64.32 at entry and $47.73 at last follow-up. Reduction in polytherapy resulted in the net annual saving of $16,128 ($16.59 per patient, or 5.4% GNP/capita).

CONCLUSIONS

The more frequent use of relatively expensive drugs like CBZ and VPA and the use of polytherapy-still quite prevalent in developing countries-has escalated the cost of AED therapy. Although in recent years AEDs have become more available in developing regions, primary and secondary care physicians have not been adequately educated about the current trends in the pharmacotherapy of epilepsy.

Therapeutic strategies against epilepsy in Mediterranean countries: a report from an international collaborative survey

A collaborative survey was performed to compare prescribing strategies for the treatment of epilepsy in Mediterranean countries, based on analysis of 500 questionnaires compiled by physicians in 14 different countries. For partial seizures, carbamazepine was the drug of choice in most countries, whereas the second choice of drug differed widely. For primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures, valproic acid was usually preferred, but other drugs used widely in some countries included phenobarbital, phenytoin and carbamazepine. Lamotrigine was the most popular second-line drug for primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures in the European countries. In patients where the initial drug failed, switching to an alternative monotherapy was usually the preferred strategy, but advocates of early use of combination therapy exceeded 30% in the respondents of seven countries. Most respondents, in all countries except Turkey, did not prescribe drugs to prevent recurrence of febrile seizures; however, intermittent prophylaxis with a benzodiazepine was advocated by a considerable number of physicians, and continuous prophylaxis was prescribed by a significant minority of respondents in France, Syria and Tunisia. New drugs were rarely used as first-line treatment due to high cost and inadequate experience. Overall, this survey indicates that there is a wide variability in therapeutic practices between and within countries. This information may be useful for the implementation of national educational activities and for the design of pragmatic trials aimed at comparing different therapeutic strategies.

Evaluation of drug treatment outcome in epilepsy: a clinical perspective

This article provides a comprehensive discussion of clinical outcome measures used in trials aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of antiepileptic drugs. For efficacy, assessment still relies on careful documentation of changes in ictal activity as determined by seizure counts based on patients recall, direct clinical observation and (for absence seizures) EEG monitoring. In selected cases, assessment of seizure severity may also be indicated. The precise choice of outcome measures is largely dependent upon the specific trial design. In short-term regulatory trials, parameters such as time to nth seizure after randomization (or after achievement of target dosage) may be used as an index of antiepileptic efficacy, but the clinical relevance of such measures is questionable. In add-on trials in refractory patients, changes, in seizure counts and proportion of patients achieving 50%, 75% and 100% reduction in seizure frequency may be appropriate. For long-term monotherapy trials in newly diagnosed patients, proportion of patients achieving prolonged remission (1-year or longer) usually represents the most clinically meaningful efficacy outcome. Retention of patients on the allocated treatment over time is also a valuable measure, but it should be regarded as a composite endpoint because decision to continue treatment is dependent on both efficacy and tolerability. At present, there is no universally accepted method for evaluating side effects, particularly those which can not be documented objectively. Spontaneous reports of symptoms or use of specific checklists have advantages and disadvantages. Studies aimed at ensuring greater standardization in safety assessment should be encouraged, especially with respect to need of obtaining quantitative estimates, and information on both prevalence and incidence of side effects should be reported in all trials.

The new generation of antiepileptic drugs: advantages and disadvantages

1. After a hiatus of over 20 years, several new antiepileptic drugs (vigabatrin, lamotrigine, gabapentin, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, felbamate, zonisamide and tiagabine) have reached or approached the registration phase. 2. Compared with older agents, many new drugs exhibit simpler pharmacokinetics. This is especially true for vigabatrin and gabapentin, which are renally eliminated and have a low interaction potential. 3. Unlike most of the older agents, vigabatrin, lamotrigine, gabapentin and tiagabine are devoid of significant enzyme inducing or inhibiting properties. Topiramate, oxcarbazepine and felbamate may induce the metabolism of steroid oral contraceptives. In addition, felbamate also acts as a metabolic inhibitor. 4. To date, the efficacy of new drugs has been evaluated extensively only under add-on conditions in patients with partial seizures (with or without secondary generalization) refractory to conventional treatment. However, there is evidence that lamotrigine, zonisamide, felbamate and, possibly, topiramate may also be effective in generalized epilepsies. 5. In placebo-controlled studies, typically between 15 and 40% of patients with difficult-to-treat partial epilepsy have shown an improvement (defined as a 50% or greater decrease in seizure frequency) after addition of a new drug. Only a small minority of these patients achieved complete seizure control. 6. Compared with older agents, some of the new drugs may have a better tolerability profile. Felbamate, however, has been associated with a high risk of aplastic anaemia and hepatotoxicity. 7. At present, the main use of the new agents is in patients refractory to first-line drugs such as carbamazepine or valproate, and further studies are required to characterize their activity spectrum as well as their potential value in monotherapy. In most patients, new drugs cannot be recommended for first-line use until evidence is obtained that potential advantages in tolerability or ease of use outweigh the drawback of their high cost.