Effects of antiepileptic comedication on levetiracetam pharmacokinetics: a pooled analysis of data from randomized adjunctive therapy trials

Multicenter double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of levetiracetam as add-on therapy in Chinese patients with refractory partial-onset seizures

PURPOSE

To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam (LEV; Keppra) as add-on therapy in Chinese patients with refractory partial-onset seizures.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 206 patients aged 16-70 years with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures were randomized to receive LEV (n =103) or placebo (n =103); 202 patients (LEV, n =102; placebo, n = 100) comprised the intent-to-treat population. An 8-week historical baseline period confirmed eligibility according to seizure count. The 16-week treatment period consisted of a 4-week up-titration period (LEV, 1,000-3,000 mg/day in two equal divided doses) followed by a 12-week maintenance period. Efficacy assessments were based on weekly frequency of partial-onset seizures during the 16-week treatment period.

RESULTS

LEV significantly decreased weekly partial-onset seizure frequency over placebo by 26.8% (p < 0.001). Median percentage reductions in weekly partial-onset seizure frequency from historical baseline were 55.9% for LEV and 13.7% for placebo (p < 0.001). The >or=50% responder rates were 55.9% for LEV, compared with 26.0% for placebo (p < 0.001). Freedom from partial-onset seizures during treatment period was achieved by 11 LEV patients (10.8%) and 2 placebo patients (2.0%) (p = 0.012). Adverse events were reported by 65 LEV-treated patients (63.1%) and 62 placebo-treated patients (60.2%); most were of mild-to-moderate intensity. The most common adverse events were somnolence (LEV, 17.5%; placebo, 17.5%), decreased platelet count (LEV, 9.7%; placebo, 9.7%), and dizziness (LEV, 7.8%; placebo, 13.6%).

DISCUSSION

Add-on LEV was effective and well-tolerated in Chinese patients with refractory partial-onset seizures.

Levetiracetam in the treatment of epilepsy

Epilepsy is a common chronic disorder that requires long-term antiepileptic drug therapy. Approximately one half of patients fail the initial antiepileptic drug and about 35% are refractory to medical therapy, highlighting the continued need for more effective and better tolerated drugs. Levetiracetam is an antiepileptic drug marketed since 2000. Its novel mechanism of action is modulation of synaptic neurotransmitter release through binding to the synaptic vesicle protein SV2A in the brain. Its pharmacokinetic advantages include rapid and almost complete absorption, minimal insignificant binding to plasma protein, absence of enzyme induction, absence of interactions with other drugs, and partial metabolism outside the liver. The availability of an intravenous preparation is yet another advantage. It has been demonstrated effective as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial-onset seizures, primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures, and myoclonic seizures of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy. In addition, it was found equivalent to controlled release carbamazepine as first-line therapy for partial-onset seizures, both in efficacy and tolerability. Its main adverse effects in randomized adjunctive trials in adults have been somnolence, asthenia, infection, and dizziness. In children, the behavioral adverse effects of hostility and nervousness were also noted. Levetiracetam is an important addition to the treatment of epilepsy.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of levetiracetam by high-performance liquid chromatography with photodiode array ultraviolet detection: preliminary observations on correlation between plasma concentration and clinical response in patients with refractory epilepsy

Levetiracetam is a new antiepileptic drug prescribed for the treatment of patients with refractory partial seizures with or without secondary generalization as well as for the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy. A rapid and specific method by high-performance liquid chromatography diode array detection was developed to measure the concentration of levetiracetam in human plasma. The trough plasma concentrations measured in 69 epileptic patients treated with 500 to 3000 mg/d of levetiracetam ranged from 1.1 to 33.5 microg/mL. The mean (range) levetiracetam plasma concentrations in responders and nonresponders were 12.9 microg/mL (4.6-21 microg/mL) and 9.5 microg/mL (1.1-20.9 microg/mL), respectively. A wide variability in concentration-response relationships was observed in patients. Using a receiver operating characteristic curve, the threshold levetiracetam concentration for a therapeutic response was 11 microg/mL. The sensitivity and specificity for this threshold levetiracetam concentration were 73% and 71%, respectively. According to chi analysis, this finding was not significant probably because of the small number of patients and because of their refractory seizure type. Nevertheless, the levetiracetam plasma concentration could be used to help clinicians detect severe intoxication or to verify compliance by repeating the measurement in patients.

Modeling and simulation of intravenous levetiracetam pharmacokinetic profiles in children to evaluate dose adaptation rules

PURPOSE

To develop a pharmacokinetic model for intravenous levetiracetam in children, based on adult intravenous data and pediatric oral data.

METHODS

Data from two adult Phase-I studies in which levetiracetam was given intravenously were utilized to develop the adult population pharmacokinetic two-compartment intravenous model. After model qualification, combination with an existing pediatric one-compartment oral population pharmacokinetic model enabled simulation of twice-daily intravenous infusions of levetiracetam in children. Median and 90% confidence intervals for C(trough), C(max) (end of infusion) and AUC(tau) were simulated for 2000 children and compared to the values observed in adults.

RESULTS

The population pharmacokinetic two-compartment model successfully described intravenous levetiracetam pharmacokinetics in healthy adults. After combination with the oral pediatric population model, steady-state concentrations at the end of 15-, 30- and 60 min b.i.d. levetiracetam intravenous infusions in children were predicted to be 29-41, 17-24 and 6-13% higher than those observed after oral dosing of 30 mg/kg b.i.d. Concentrations returned to the range of oral exposures within 1h after the infusion peak. The combined model predicted that steady-state peak plasma concentrations and AUC(tau) in children receiving 30 mg/kg twice daily as 15 min intravenous infusions were within the range of predicted and observed C(max,ss) and AUC(tau )values of adults receiving 15 min intravenous infusions of 1500 mg levetiracetam.

CONCLUSIONS

The simulations suggest that levetiracetam may be administered intravenously in children as 15 min infusions.

Levetiracetam: part II, the clinical profile of a novel anticonvulsant drug

The objective of this article was to review and summarize the available reports on the profile of the novel anticonvulsant drug levetiracetam (LEV) in a clinical setting. Therefore, a careful search was conducted in the MEDLINE database and combined with guidelines from regulatory agencies, proceedings of professional scientific meetings, and information provided by the manufacturers. This article is devoted to the clinical pharmacology and clinical trials of LEV investigating its efficacy and safety as add-on therapy or monotherapy for various seizure types. Finally, results from postmarketing surveillance of LEV are briefly discussed. In general, LEV is shown to be a safe, broad-spectrum anticonvulsant drug with highly beneficial pharmacokinetic properties, a favorable long-term retention rate, and a high responder rate, indicating that LEV is an efficient therapeutic option for the treatment of several types of epilepsy.

Effect of Age and Comedication on Levetiracetam Pharmacokinetics and Tolerability

PURPOSE

To compare pharmacokinetics and tolerability of levetiracetam (LEV) in older versus younger adults.

METHODS

As part of the Columbia Antiepileptic Drug Database, we retrospectively studied the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of LEV in patients who had been seen as an outpatient at our center during a 4-year period. We compared apparent clearance (CL) of LEV in the youngest (16-31 years; n=151) and oldest (55-88 years; n=157) quartile of 629 adult outpatients who had taken LEV. We also analyzed the frequency of adverse effects leading to dose change or discontinuation ("intolerability") and specific adverse effects in the younger versus older adults. One-year retention was determined for younger and older adults newly started on LEV at our center.

RESULTS

Mean LEV CL differed significantly between older (46.5 ml/h/kg) and younger adults (78.3 ml/h/kg). On average, older patients had a 40% lower LEV CL than younger patients. Comedication with an enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drug (EIAED; mostly carbamazepine) was associated with a 24% higher clearance of LEV compared to those who were not on EIAEDs. This difference was 37% in a subgroup of patients whose LEV CL was compared while they were on and off EIAEDs. Stepwise linear regression identified younger age and comedication with an EIAED as significant predictors of increased LEV CL. A total of 34.3% of the 629 patients (31.7% of younger vs. 40.7% of older patients; p=0.16) reported intolerability to LEV on at least one occasion. This difference in tolerability reached significance in the group of patients newly started on LEV (26.3% vs. 41.0%; p=0.017). Drowsiness and psychiatric/behavioral side effects were the most common adverse effects associated with LEV use in both age groups. One-year retention was 72% in the older group vs. 54% in the younger group (not significant).

CONCLUSION

Older adults have lower CL than younger adults and require a mean 40% lower dose of LEV to achieve the same serum level. Comedication with an EIAED increases LEV CL by 24-37%. Younger adults tolerate LEV better than older adults, but 1-year retention was (nonsignificantly) higher in the older group.

Saliva and Serum Levetiracetam Concentrations in Patients With Epilepsy

Although antiepileptic drug (AED) monitoring in saliva may have some clinical applicability, it has not yet come into routine use. The correlation between levetiracetam (LEV) saliva and serum concentrations also remains unclear. To confirm LEV saliva assay as a useful, noninvasive alternative to serum measurement, we investigated the possible correlation between saliva and serum LEV concentrations. Samples of saliva and blood were collected from 30 patients with epilepsy receiving chronic therapy with LEV as monotherapy or add-on therapy, and LEV concentrations were assayed in saliva and serum. Linear regression analyses showed a close correlation between saliva and serum LEV concentrations (r2 = 0.90; P < 0.001). LEV blood and saliva concentrations were linearly related to daily drug doses (r2 = 0.78 and 0.70; P < 0.01). When data were analyzed for subgroups (patients receiving LEV in monotherapy, as add-on therapy with enzyme-inducer AEDs, and as add-on therapy with noninducer or moderate-inducer AEDs), no significant difference was found between saliva and serum LEV concentrations among groups. These preliminary results indicate that LEV, like other AEDs, can be measured in saliva as an alternative to blood-based assays. Saliva LEV collection and assay is a valid noninvasive, more convenient alternative to serum measurement.

Prospective assessment of levetiracetam pharmacokinetics during dose escalation in 4- to 12-year-old children with partial-onset seizures on concomitant carbamazepine or valproate

PURPOSE

To assess the multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of levetiracetam and its major metabolite ucb L057 in children with partial-onset seizures and determine whether it is affected by adjunctive carbamazepine or valproate. To correlate levetiracetam concentrations in plasma and saliva and to assess its safety and clinical response.

METHODS

Design was an open-label, multicenter study. Twenty-one children (4-12 years old) with epilepsy taking carbamazepine (13) or valproate (8) received adjunctive levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was initiated at 20 mg/(kg day) and titrated at 2-week intervals to 40 and then 60 mg/(kg day). Twelve-hour pharmacokinetics were determined at the end of each 2-week period. Efficacy was estimated from the partial seizure frequency per week and Global Evaluation Scale.

RESULTS

Levetiracetam was rapidly absorbed following oral dosing, with median t(max) of 0.5 h. Dose proportional increases were observed for C(max) and AUC((0-12)) over the dose range; t(1/2) was 4.9 h. Pharmacokinetics of levetiracetam and ucb L057 were not markedly different with concomitant carbamazepine or valproate; clearance was only 7-13% faster and AUC was decreased by only 15-24% in those on carbamazepine compared to valproate. Levetiracetam did not affect trough carbamazepine or valproate. Concentration in saliva and plasma were strongly correlated. Seizure frequency declined by 50% or more in 43% of subjects in the intent-to-treat population (n=21) and in 56% of those with seizures at baseline (n=16). Marked or moderate improvement occurred in 80% and 75% of patients based on Global Evaluation Scale ratings by investigators and parents/guardians, respectively. Levetiracetam was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Levetiracetam exhibits simple pharmacokinetics in children, with rapid absorption and dose-proportional kinetics. Small but not clinically relevant differences were observed between subjects receiving carbamazepine and valproate, suggesting significant dose adjustment is usually not necessary. This substantiates prior assessments that levetiracetam clearance is higher in children than adults, necessitating a higher dose in children on a mg/kg basis, and suggests it is useful add-on therapy for children with partial-onset seizures regardless of baseline therapy.

Population Pharmacokinetics of??Levetiracetam in Japanese and??Western Adults

OBJECTIVE

To assess the population pharmacokinetics of levetiracetam, a second-generation antiepileptic drug, in adult Japanese and Western populations.

METHODS

Data were pooled from ten matched clinical trials conducted in Japan and in Europe and the USA, in which levetiracetam was administered orally to healthy subjects and subjects with epilepsy. Overall, 5408 plasma concentrations were available from 524 subjects in six clinical pharmacology studies and two confirmatory and two long-term safety studies of add-on treatment for partial epilepsy. A one-compartment open model with first-order absorption and elimination was fitted to the plasma concentrations using nonlinear mixed-effects modelling with first-order estimation.

RESULTS

Ethnicity had no statistically significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of levetiracetam in the presence of the other covariates. Bodyweight, sex, creatinine clearance and concomitant intake of enzyme inducers or valproic acid had a statistically significant effect on apparent plasma clearance of levetiracetam. Bodyweight, disease and valproic acid had a statistically significant effect on the volume of distribution. Levetiracetam exposure (the area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the 12-hour dosing interval at steady state) was 12% higher in females than in males. Decreasing bodyweight from 70 kg to 40 kg was predicted to increase exposure by 16%, while halving creatinine clearance was predicted to increase exposure by 10%. Enzyme inducers reduced exposure by 8%, while valproic acid resulted in a 23% increase in exposure. The latter effect was assumed to arise from the known association between valproic acid and increased body fat, since levetiracetam is negligibly metabolised by cytochrome P450 enzymes.

CONCLUSIONS

Population pharmacokinetic analysis points to the absence of ethnic differences in the pharmacokinetics of levetiracetam between Japanese and Western populations, other than those arising from bodyweight differences. Small, clinically non-relevant differences between individual demographic characteristics suggest that dose adjustment is usually not necessary.

Single-dose bioavailability of levetiracetam intravenous infusion relative to oral tablets and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics and tolerability of levetiracetam intravenous infusion compared with placebo in healthy subjects

BACKGROUND

Antiepileptic drugs are usually administere dorally, but alternative routes of drug delivery may be required when oral administration is not feasible.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the single-dose bioavailability of an IV formulation of levetiracetam relative to oral tablets and the multiple-dose tolerability and pharmacokinetics of this formulation compared with placebo in healthy subjects.

METHODS

This study consisted of 2 phases. Subjects entered the first phase, which was a single-dose, randomized, open-label, 2-way crossover bioavailability comparison of a 15-minute IV infusion of levetiracetam 1,500 mg and three 500-mg oral tablets. Subjects then entered the second phase, a multiple-dose, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled (2:1), parallel-group tolerability and pharmacokinetic study, in which they received 9 successive doses of levetiracetam 1,500 mg IV or placebo at 12-hour intervals. Plasma levetiracetam concentrations were determined by gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorus detection. The comparison of bioavailability was based on the 90% CIs around the geometric mean ratios for AUC and C(max) (IV/oral).

RESULTS

Eighteen subjects (9 men, 9 women) participated in the study. All subjects were white. Their mean (SD) age was 35.0 (9.3) years, mean weight 73.3 (14.2) kg, and mean body mass index 23.9 (2.5) kg/m(2). After a single dose, the IV infusion and oral tablet were similar in terms of C(max) (50.5 and 47.7 microg/mL, respectively) and AUC (392.4 and 427.9 pg x h/mL). The geometric mean IV/oral ratios were 92.2 (90 % CI, 89.0-95.6) for AUC and 103.7 (90% CI, 91.6-117.4) for C(max) indicating that the IV and oral formulations were bioequivalent. After multiple twice-daily infusions, steady state was reached within 48 hours. Seventeen (94%) of 18 subjects had >or=1 treatment-emergent adverse event after single-dose administration. During the single-dose phase, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 89% (16/18) for the IV formulation and 72% (13/18) for the oral tablets; during the multiple-dose phase, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 67% (8/12) in the IV levetiracetam group and 33% (2/6) in the placebo group. The most common adverse events in the single-dose phase were somnolence (61% IV vs 28% oral) and postural dizziness (17% vs 39%, respectively). The most common adverse events with IV levetiracetam in the multiple-dose phase were also somnolence (33% vs 17% placebo) and postural dizziness (25% vs 0% placebo).

CONCLUSIONS

In these healthy subjects, single doses of levetiracetam 1,500 mg administered as a 15-minute IV infusion and as oral tablets were bioequivalent. General and local tolerability during multiple dosing were good. Steady state was reached within 48 hours. Despite the limitations of a study of short duration and small size conducted in healthy subjects, the findings suggest that use of a 15-minute IV infusion of levetiracetam should be further investigated.

Efficacy and safety of levetiracetam in clinical practice: Results of the SKATE™ trial from Belgium and The Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

Aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam as add-on treatment in patients with partial-onset epilepsy in clinical practice.

METHODS

In this observational, multi-centre study patients were treated with levetiracetam for 16 weeks. From a starting dose of 1000 mg/day, dose levels were adjusted at 2-weekly intervals in 1000-mg steps, to a maximum of 3000 mg/day, based on seizure control and tolerance. Analysis of efficacy was based on reduction in seizure frequency relative to baseline, 50% and 100% responder rates (for partial seizures and all seizure types combined) and percentage of patients using levetiracetam at the end of the study. Analysis of safety was based on occurrence of adverse events.

RESULTS

The present analysis concerns the results of patients recruited in Belgium and The Netherlands. Of the 251 patients included in the study, 86.9% completed 16 weeks of treatment. Reduction in frequency of partial-onset seizures was 62.2%, with 19.3% of the patients becoming seizure free and 56.6% having a reduction in seizure frequency of > or = 50%. These percentages were more or less the same when calculated for all seizure types combined. Tolerance of levetiracetam treatment was good, with most adverse events being only mild to moderate in severity, and only 10.0% of the adverse events leading to discontinuation from the study. Asthenia, somnolence, dizziness and headache were the most frequently reported adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Levetiracetam is effective and safe as add-on treatment for partial-onset seizures in clinical practice.

Levetiracetam Intravenous Infusion: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Safety and Pharmacokinetic Study

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this placebo-controlled study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of levetiracetam (LEV) administered intravenously (IV) at higher doses and/or at a faster infusion rate than proposed. The secondary objective was to assess LEV pharmacokinetics.

METHODS

Single ascending doses of LEV administered by IV infusion (2,000, 3,000, 4,000 mg over 15 min; 1,500, 2,000, 2,500 mg over 5 min) were evaluated in 48 healthy subjects in a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled study.

RESULTS

All randomized subjects completed the study. Adverse events reported after IV administration of LEV (<or=4,000 mg infused over 15 min and <or=2,500 mg infused over 5 min) were primarily related to the CNS (dizziness, 52.8%; somnolence, 33.3%; fatigue, 11.1%; headache, 8.3%) and were consistent with the established safety profile for the oral formulation. Safety profiles were similar for each dose level of LEV and for both IV infusion rates, with no clear relation noted between incidence of adverse events and IV dose level or infusion rate. The pharmacokinetics of LEV administered by IV infusion was comparable across all dose groups and infusion rates. Respective geometric means (coefficient of variation) for 4,000 mg administered over 15 min and 2,500 mg infused over 5 min were maximum plasma concentration, 145 (24.6%) and 94.3 (36.2%) mug/ml; area under the plasma concentration-time curve, 1,239 (19.2%) and 585 (9.6%) mug/h/ml; terminal half-life, 8.0 (14.5%) and 7.0 (12.7%) h.

CONCLUSIONS

LEV administered by IV infusion at dosages and/or infusion rates higher than those proposed was well tolerated in healthy subjects, and the pharmacokinetic profile was consistent with that for LEV administered orally.

Onset of Action of Levetiracetam: A RCT Trial Using Therapeutic Intensive Seizure Analysis (TISA)

OBJECTIVES

To correlate the onset of clinical effects of add-on levetiracetam (LEV) therapy with daily serum LEV concentration, in pharmaco-resistant focal epilepsies, using the TISA method.

METHODS

25 adult patients (aged>6 years) with pharmaco-resistant focal epilepsies undergoing presurgical evaluation at the Epilepsy Center Erlangen were enrolled in the study. Eligible patients on a maximum of one other antiepileptic drug (AED) were recruited into the 48-hour baseline phase. Those who had at least two seizures during this phase were randomized into the seven-day treatment phase, when they received either LEV or placebo, under continuous day-and-night video-EEG monitoring. The starting daily dose of LEV was 500 mg bid, titrated from the second treatment day to 1,000 mg bid. The peak serum concentration of LEV was monitored daily at 8:00 am (one hour after drug administration) for every patient. The number and duration of seizures per 24h (N/24h and D/24h respectively) were investigated.

RESULTS

23 patients completed the study (LEV group n=11 and placebo group n=12). Seven patients in the LEV group and two patients in the placebo group achieved seizure-freedom during the treatment phase. The intergroup comparison of the decrease in N/24h and D/24h from the baseline phase to the treatment phase was in favor of the LEV group (p<0.05). A significant effect of LEV on D/24h was seen as early as the second treatment day (p=0.013), becoming more apparent on the third treatment day (p=0.009).

CONCLUSION

The present study objectively quantified the correlation between the anticonvulsant effects of LEV in focal epilepsies and the peak serum concentration of the drug. For the first time, direct measurement was used to demonstrate the onset of action of LEV to be two days after drug initiation.

Use of levetiracetam in treating epilepsy associated with other medical conditions

OBJECTIVE

This prospective, open-label study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of levetiracetam in patients with epilepsy in whom unfavorable metabolism, complex drug interactions, or direct toxic effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) had caused a worsening of comorbid conditions.

METHODS

Study design included the introduction of levetiracetam, discontinuation of other AEDs, and a serial assessment comprising electroencephalograms and blood tests at baseline and 2, 6, and 12 months. Of 21 patients, 16 had partial and five generalized epilepsy. Concomitant pathologies were gastroenterological (six), vascular (four), endocrinological (four), or complex conditions including hematological (four) or dermatological (three) disease. A change of regimen was necessitated by drug-drug interactions in four patients, direct real or potential toxic effects of previous AEDs in 13, and a combination of interactions/toxic effects in four.

RESULTS

After 12 months, 12 patients were seizure-free, nine had reductions in seizure frequency of 50-75%, and improvement in concomitant medical conditions was observed. No side effects were reported.

CONCLUSION

Levetiracetam appears to be effective, well tolerated, and safe in patients with epilepsy and other medical conditions that are difficult to manage because of drug interactions or AED-related side effects.

Pharmacodynamic and Pharmacokinetic Characterization of Interactions between Levetiracetam and Numerous Antiepileptic Drugs in the Mouse Maximal Electroshock Seizure Model: An Isobolographic Analysis

PURPOSE

Approximately 30% of patients with epilepsy do not experience satisfactory seizure control with antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy and often require polytherapy. The potential usefulness of AED combinations, in terms of efficacy and adverse effects, is therefore of major importance. The present study sought to identify potentially useful AED combinations with levetiracetam (LEV) METHODS: With isobolographic analysis, the mouse maximal electroshock (MES)-induced seizure model was investigated with regard to the anticonvulsant effects of carbamazepine (CBZ), phenytoin, phenobarbital (PB), valproate, lamotrigine, topiramate (TPM), and oxcarbazepine (OXC), administered singly and in combination with LEV. Acute adverse effects were ascertained by use of the chimney test evaluating motor performance and the step-through passive-avoidance task assessing long-term memory. Brain AED concentrations were determined to ascertain any pharmacokinetic contribution to the observed antiseizure effect.

RESULTS

LEV in combination with TPM, at the fixed ratios of 1:2, 1:1, 2:1, and 4:1, was supraadditive (synergistic) in the MES test. Likewise, the combination of LEV with CBZ (at the fixed ratio of 16:1) and LEV with OXC (8:1 and 16:1) were supraadditive. In contrast, all other LEV/AED combinations displayed additivity. Furthermore, none of the investigated LEV/AED combinations altered motor performance and long-term memory. LEV brain concentrations were unaffected by concomitant AED administration, and LEV had no significant effect on brain concentrations of concomitant AEDs.

CONCLUSIONS

These preclinical data would suggest that LEV in combination with TPM is associated with beneficial anticonvulsant pharmacodynamic interactions. Similar, but less profound effects were seen with OXC and CBZ.

Properties of antiepileptic drugs in the treatment of idiopathic generalized epilepsies

Although valproate is considered to be the drug of first choice for the treatment of idiopathic generalized epilepsies (IGEs), other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), both old (ethosuximide, clobazam, and clonazepam) and new (lamotrigine, levetiracetam, topiramate, and zonisamide) are also available. These AEDs do not appear to have a common mechanism of action in that both inhibitory gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA; e.g., clobazam, clonazepam, and valproate) and excitatory glutamate (e.g., lamotrigine and topiramate) mechanisms are involved. Ethosuximide primarily acts by blocking T-type voltage-gated calcium channels in thalamic neurones while topiramate and zonisamide have multiple mechanisms of action. In contrast, levetiracetam is unique in that it may act via a specific binding site in the brain. In terms of their pharmacokinetic characteristics, all eight AEDs are rapidly absorbed after oral ingestion with peak blood concentration being achieved within 1-4 hours. Bioavailability is 100% with the exception clonazepam (90%) and topiramate (81-95%). Plasma protein binding is variable with valproate (90%), clobazam (85%) and clonazepam (86%) showing substantial binding, lamotrigine (55%) and zonisamide (50%) intermediate binding, and levetiracetam (0%), ethosuximide (0%) and topiramate (10%) being minimally bound. However, the binding by zonisamide is complicated by its binding to erythrocytes as well as albumin. All AEDs, with the exception of lamotrigine and levetiracetam, undergo elimination as a result of extensive metabolism by hepatic cytochrome P450 enzymes, which are highly amenable to induction and inhibition by other drugs and therefore susceptible to pharmacokinetic interactions. Lamotrigine metabolism is via hepatic glucuronidation, a process that is also susceptible to induction and inhibition by concurrent drugs. Levetiracetam is minimally metabolized (by hydrolysis in blood), is excreted predominantly unchanged in urine, and to date has not been associated with any clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions. Using a semiquantitative pharmacokinetic rating system, based on 16 pharmacokinetic characteristics, a direct comparison between AEDs is possible. Thus valproic acid, regarded as the drug of first choice in the treatment of IGEs, rates lowest with respect to favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics, mostly because of its nonlinear pharmacokinetics, extensive hepatic metabolism, and its high propensity to interact both with other AEDs and non-AEDs. Levetiracetam rates highest with topiramate in second place.

Levetiracetam selectively potentiates the acute neurotoxic effects of topiramate and carbamazepine in the rotarod test in mice

The effect of levetiracetam (LEV) on the acute neurotoxic profiles of various antiepileptic drugs (carbamazepine [CBZ], phenytoin [PHT], phenobarbital [PB], valproate [VPA], lamotrigine [LTG], topiramate [TPM], oxcarbazepine [OXC], and felbamate [FBM]) was evaluated in the rotarod test, allowing the determination of median toxic doses (TD50 values) with respect to impairment of motor coordination in mice. The TD50 of LEV administered singly was 1601 mg/kg. Whilst LEV at 150 mg/kg, being its TID50 (a dose increasing the electroconvulsive threshold by 50%), was without effect with regards to motor coordination impairment associated with PHT, PB, VPA, LTG, OXC, and FBM, it significantly enhanced that associated with CBZ and TPM co-administration. Thus LEV (150 mg/kg) significantly decreased the TD50 of CBZ from 53.6 to 37.3 mg/kg (P<0.01) and that of TPM from 423 to 246 mg/kg (P<0.01). In addition LEV (75 mg/kg) significantly decreased the TD50 of TPM from 423 to 278 (P<0.01). That concurrent measurement of total brain LEV, CBZ, and TPM concentrations showed that concentrations were not significantly different when AEDs were administered singly compared to when they were administered in combination would suggest that there is no pharmacokinetic interaction between these AEDs. Thus, the observed potentialization of the acute neurotoxic effects of CBZ and TPM by LEV is the consequence of a pharmacodynamic interaction. These data support both experimental and clinical published data advocating that LEV may interact with some AEDs by pharmacodynamic mechanisms.

Oral absorption kinetics of levetiracetam: the effect of mixing with food or enteral nutrition formulas

BACKGROUND

Levetiracetam (LEV) is an antiepileptic drug with a favorable pharmacokinetic profile, including negligible protein binding and linear elimination kinetics. Because LEV is likely to be used in populations that include children and the elderly, alternative techniques of administration, such as crushing the tablet and mixing its contents with semisolid food or enteral nutrition formulas (ENFs), may be required in some clinical settings. Although previous studies have suggested that administration with food does not affect the overall absorption of LEV, there is a lack of data regarding concomitant administration with ENFs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the oral absorption of LEV after concomitant administration with food or ENFs.

METHODS

This was an unblinded, 3-way crossover study. After an overnight fast, subjects received a single dose of LEV 500 mg administered either as an intact tablet with 120 mL water (control, treatment A) or crushed and mixed with 4 oz applesauce (treatment B) or 120 mL of a common ENF (treatment C). All subjects received each treatment in a randomized sequence; there was a 7-day washout period between treatments. Serial blood samples were obtained over 24 hours for determination of the LEV serum concentration-time profile using gas chromatography with nitrogen phosphorus detection. AUC(0-24), C(max), and T(max) were calculated using noncompartmental methods and analyzed using analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Ten healthy adult volunteers (6 men, 4 women) participated in the study (mean [SD] age, 28.9 [6.5] years; mean body weight, 78.6 [12.9] kg). No significant differences were noted between control and any other study treatment. Mean AUC values were 191.9 (50.2), 165.7 (43.4), and 168.3 (43.9) microg/mL . h for treatments A, B, and C, respectively. Mean T(max) values were 1.08 (0.65), 1.32 (0.75), and 1.62 (0.73) hours, respectively. Mean C(max) values were 14.8 (5.6), 12.1 (2.8), and 10.8 (2.0) microg/mL for the respective treatments. Mean LEV serum concentrations at 12 hours after dosing were similar for all study treatments (3.9, 4.1, and 4.0 microg/mL). The long-term stability of LEV in the various combinations was not assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

In these healthy volunteers, the overall rate and extent of absorption of oral LEV were not significantly impaired after crushing and mixing of the tablet with either a food vehicle or a typical ENF product. The data suggest that peak serum concentrations of LEV may be slightly reduced after mixing with ENFs, although the difference was not significant compared with control values.

Levetiracetam in patients with refractory epilepsy: Results of the SKATE trial in Austria, Germany and Switzerland

PURPOSE

To further evaluate the safety, efficacy and optimal dose of levetiracetam (LEV) in daily clinical practice among patients with uncontrolled partial epilepsy with or without secondary generalization.

METHODS

In this phase IV, open-label, 16-week community-based study, 178 at least 16-year-old patients with refractory focal epilepsy were treated with 1000, 2000 or 3000 mg levetiracetam as adjunctive therapy. All patients started with 500 mg LEV b.i.d. (1000 mg/day); the dose was adjusted in 2-week intervals up to 1500 b.i.d. (3000 mg/day) depending on seizure control and tolerability. The main objectives were the adverse events, the percentage reduction in partial and total seizure frequency per week from baseline and the retention rate, defined as the percentage of patients taking LEV at the end of the 16-week treatment period.

RESULTS

Of the 178 patients who took at least one dose of LEV 151 completed the study. Thus, the retention rate (number of patients taking LEV at the end of the 16-week treatment period) was 84.8%. Most frequently reported adverse events were asthenia, dizziness, headache, nausea, somnolence and hostility; the majority of these events were of mild to moderate intensity. The seizure-free rate of the ITT population with focal seizures was 16.7%, for all seizures 16.6%; the median reduction of focal seizure frequency was 47.6%, and 46.5% for all seizures. The 50% responder rate was 46.6% for focal seizures and 45.1% for all seizures.

CONCLUSION

Add-on treatment with LEV in patients with refractory partial epilepsy was safe and effective in this study.

Effects of anticonvulsants on soman-induced epileptiform activity in the guinea-pig in vitro hippocampus

Seizures arising from acetylcholinesterase inhibition are a feature of organophosphate anticholinesterase intoxication. Although benzodiazepines are effective against these seizures, alternative anticonvulsant drugs may possess greater efficacy and fewer side-effects. We have investigated in the guinea-pig hippocampal slice preparation the ability of a series of anticonvulsants to suppress epileptiform bursting induced by the irreversible organophosphate anticholinesterase, soman (100 nM). Carbamazepine (300 microM), phenytoin (100 microM), topiramate (100-300 microM) and retigabine (1-30 microM) reduced the frequency of bursting but only carbamazepine and phenytoin induced a concurrent reduction in burst duration. Felbamate (100-500 microM) and clomethiazole (100-300 microM) had no effect on burst frequency but decreased burst duration. Clozapine (3-30 microM) reduced the frequency but did not influence burst duration. Levetiracetam (100-300 microM) and gabapentin (100-300 microM) were without effect. These data suggest that several compounds, in particular clomethiazole, clozapine, felbamate, topiramate and retigabine, merit further evaluation as possible treatments for organophosphate poisoning.

Levetiracetam: treatment in epilepsy

A large number of new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have become available over the last 10 years. Results from placebo-controlled clinical trials and community-based practice have demonstrated that levetiracetam has a broad spectrum of activity in suppressing seizures as add-on treatment and monotherapy and that it is safe and well-tolerated. Levetiracetam also has a favourable pharmacokinetic profile characterised by rapid and nearly complete absorption, very low potential for drug interactions and a prolonged pharmacodynamic effect that permits twice-daily dosing. Although, the mechanism of action of levetiracetam is not completely understood, preclinical studies suggest that it may have antiepileptogenic and neuroprotective effects, with the potential to slow or arrest disease progression.

Effect of levetiracetam on the pharmacokinetics of adjunctive antiepileptic drugs: A pooled analysis of data from randomized clinical trials

The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of levetiracetam on the steady-state serum concentrations of other commonly used antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Serum AED concentrations were measured at baseline and after adjunctive therapy with levetiracetam (1000-4000 mg/day) or placebo in four phase III trials in patients with refractory partial epilepsy receiving stable AED dosages. The data were pooled, and repeated measures covariance analysis was used to calculate the ratio (and 90% confidence intervals) of the geometric mean serum drug concentrations during adjunctive levetiracetam therapy relative to baseline. Levetiracetam did not increase or decrease mean steady-state serum concentrations of carbamazepine, phenytoin, valproic acid, lamotrigine, gabapentin, phenobarbital, or primidone. For each of these AEDs, the 90% confidence interval of the geometric mean drug concentrations ratio was included within the 80-125% bioequivalence range. Serum concentrations of these AEDs did not change over time after adjunctive levetiracetam therapy, irrespective of the dosage of levetiracetam used. For vigabatrin, there was no evidence for a significant change in serum drug concentration after the addition of levetiracetam, but the number of observations was too small for the limits of the confidence interval to fall within the 80-125% range. Thus, adjunctive therapy with levetiracetam does not influence the steady-state serum concentrations of concomitantly administered carbamazepine, phenytoin, valproic acid, lamotrigine, gabapentin, phenobarbital, or primidone. Consequently, no need for adjusting the dosages of these AEDs is anticipated when levetiracetam is added on or removed from a patient's therapeutic regimen.

Benefit-Risk Assessment of Levetiracetam in the Treatment of Partial Seizures

Levetiracetam is a novel antiepileptic drug that has been demonstrated as being effective in the management of partial seizures. It is rapidly and completely absorbed after oral administration and it is predominantly eliminated as unchanged drug in the urine. Its metabolism is independent of the cytochrome P450 enzyme system, nor does it induce cytochrome P450 enzymes. As a result of its pharmacokinetic features, levetiracetam has not been demonstrated to interact with other drugs in either direction. In double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, all the levetiracetam dosages tested were effective, including 1000 mg/day, 2000 mg/day and 3000 mg/day. The ineffective dose is not known. Efficacy seemed to be maintained in long-term studies, with no evidence of tolerance. In major double-blind, placebo-controlled trials discontinuation rates because of adverse events were 6.9-10.9% for levetiracetam-treated patients (all doses) compared with 5.3-8.6% for placebo-treated patients. The most common adverse events that differed between treatment groups and placebo control groups were somnolence, asthenia, dizziness and, in the US study, infection. Since levetiracetam was marketed, behavioural effects have been reported, namely irritability, agitation, anger and aggressive behaviour. These adverse effects are more likely in learning disabled individuals, those with prior psychiatric history and those with symptomatic generalised epilepsy. Overall, the risk has been estimated at 12-15%. Laboratory parameters overall seem to be not significantly affected by levetiracetam, although slight trends to lower white and red blood cell counts were detected in the studies. No organ toxicity has been described so far, with patient exposures exceeding 500,000. In summary, levetiracetam exhibits a very favourable safety profile in patients with partial onset seizures. Whereas somnolence, asthenia and dizziness were the most prominent adverse effects in clinical trials, behavioural adverse effects have generally been the most common reason for drug discontinuation in clinical practice.

Progress report on new antiepileptic drugs: a summary of the Seventh Eilat Conference (EILAT VII)

The Seventh Eilat Conference on New Antiepileptic Drugs (AEDs) (EILAT VII) took place in Villasimius, Sardinia, Italy from the 9th to 13th May 2004. Basic scientists, clinical pharmacologists and neurologists from 24 countries attended the conference,whose main themes included advances in pathophysiology of drug resistance, new AEDs in pediatric epilepsy syndromes, modes of AED action and spectrum of adverse effects and a re-appraisal of comparative responses to AED combinations. Consistent with previous formats of this conference, the central part of the conference was devoted to a review of AEDs in development, as well as updates on second-generation AEDs. This article summarizes the information presented on drugs in development, including atipamezole, BIA-2-093, fluorofelbamate, NPS 1776, pregabalin, retigabine, safinamide, SPM 927, stiripentol, talampanel,ucb 34714 and valrocemide (TV 1901). Updates on felbamate, gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, tiagabine,topiramate, vigabatrin, zonisamide, new oral and parenteral formulations of valproic acid and SPM 927 and the antiepileptic vagal stimulator device are also presented.

Levetiracetam Therapeutic Monitoring in Patients with Epilepsy

The authors assessed the effect of concomitant antiepileptic therapy on steady-state plasma concentrations of the new anti-epileptic drug (AED) levetiracetam in a cohort of 100 adult patients with epilepsy. On the basis of concomitant AEDs, patients were divided into two groups, otherwise comparable for age, gender, weight-adjusted daily dose of levetiracetam, and dosing frequency: group A (n = 65), receiving levetiracetam plus AED inducers of cytochrome P450 (CYP) metabolism, such as carbamazepine, phenobarbital, and phenytoin; group B (n = 35), receiving levetiracetam plus AEDs without inducing properties of CYP metabolism, namely valproic acid and lamotrigine. Plasma levetiracetam concentrations were measured by HPLC with spectrophotometric detection. Median morning trough levetiracetam plasma concentrations were significantly lower in patients of group A than in patients of group B (10.4 microg/mL versus 14.7 microg/mL, P < 0.001). Median weight-normalized levetiracetam apparent oral clearance (CL/F) was 1.3-fold in patients receiving AED inducers compared with patients on AED noninducers (1.93 versus 1.45 mL x min(-1) x kg, P < 0.001). No gender-related difference was observed in CL/F values. Levetiracetam plasma concentrations were linearly related to daily drug doses, regardless of concomitant AED therapy, over a dose range from 500 to 5000 mg/d, although at a given daily dose an appreciable interpatient variability was observed in matched plasma drug concentrations. Concomitant AED inducers can contribute to variability in levetiracetam disposition in patients with epilepsy. The observed differences were moderate and possibly of minor clinical significance.

Serum concentrations of Levetiracetam in epileptic patients: the influence of dose and co-medication

Levetiracetam (LEV) is a new antiepileptic drug approved as add-on therapy. Previous studies indicated that LEV has no relevant interactions with other antiepileptic drugs. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of LEV dose, age, and co-medication on the serum concentration of LEV. In total, 363 samples of 297 inpatients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria (e.g., trough concentration, body weight available) were investigated. A patient was considered twice only if his co-medication had been changed. The LEV serum concentration in relation to LEV dose/body weight [level-to-dose ratio, LDR, (microgram/mL)/(mg/kg)] was calculated and compared for the most frequent drug combinations. Analysis of covariance (using age as covariate) carried out on the log-transformed data showed that co-medication had a highly significant (P < 0.001) effect on LEV serum concentrations. The median LDR of LEV was 0.32 for LEV + phenytoin, 0.32 for LEV + carbamazepine, 0.34 LEV + oxcarbazepine, 0.45 for LEV + lamotrigine, 0.46 for LEV + phenobarital, 0.52 for LEV monotherapy, 0.53 for LEV + valproic acid, and 0.54 LEV + valproic acid + lamotrigine. In co-medication with phenytoin (P < 0.001), carbamazepine (P < 0.001), and oxcarbazepine (P < 0.004), the LDR of LEV was significantly lower than it was with LEV monotherapy, whereas the LDR of LEV of patients on co-medication with valproic acid or lamotrigine did not differ significantly from the LDR of LEV of patients on LEV monotherapy (P > 0.05). Regression analysis including all 363 samples confirmed that other drugs (e.g., phenytoin, carbamazepine) lower LEV concentrations. In addition to co-medication, age had a significant effect on clearance of LEV. Children had lower LEV concentrations than adults on the same LEV dose per body weight. In contrast to other studies, our data point out that other enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (e.g., phenytoin, carbamazepine) can moderately decrease LEV serum concentrations (by 20-30%). However, our observations should be confirmed by prospective pharmacokinetic studies.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Levetiracetam

Since 1989, eight new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have been licensed for clinical use. Levetiracetam is the latest to be licensed and is used as adjunctive therapy for the treatment of adult patients with partial seizures with or without secondary generalisation that are refractory to other established first-line AEDs. Pharmacokinetic studies of levetiracetam have been conducted in healthy volunteers, in adults, children and elderly patients with epilepsy, and in patients with renal and hepatic impairment. After oral ingestion, levetiracetam is rapidly absorbed, with peak concentration occurring after 1.3 hours, and its bioavailability is >95%. Co-ingestion of food slows the rate but not the extent of absorption. Levetiracetam is not bound to plasma proteins and has a volume of distribution of 0.5-0.7 L/kg. Plasma concentrations increase in proportion to dose over the clinically relevant dose range (500-5000 mg) and there is no evidence of accumulation during multiple administration. Steady-state blood concentrations are achieved within 24-48 hours. The elimination half-life in adult volunteers, adults with epilepsy, children with epilepsy and elderly volunteers is 6-8, 6-8, 5-7 and 10-11 hours, respectively. Approximately 34% of a levetiracetam dose is metabolised and 66% is excreted in urine unmetabolised; however, the metabolism is not hepatic but occurs primarily in blood by hydrolysis. Autoinduction is not a feature. As clearance is renal in nature it is directly dependent on creatinine clearance. Consequently, dosage adjustments are necessary for patients with moderate to severe renal impairment. To date, no clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interactions between AEDs and levetiracetam have been identified. Similarly, levetiracetam does not interact with digoxin, warfarin and the low-dose contraceptive pill; however, adverse pharmacodynamic interactions with carbamazepine and topiramate have been demonstrated. Overall, the pharmacokinetic characteristics of levetiracetam are highly favourable and make its clinical use simple and straightforward.

Levetiracetam: its use in partial-onset seizure

Levetiracetam is one of the newer antiepileptic drugs released within the past decade and is indicated for use as adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset seizures. It is a novel antiepileptic drug with a unique activity profile and is chemically unrelated to existing antiepileptic drugs. The mechanism of action of levetiracetam does not involve conventional modulation of any of the three main mechanisms underlying classical antiepileptic drug activity. Levetiracetam pharmacokinetics are linear and time invariant. In addition, levetiracetam has shown clinical efficacy in randomized controlled trials for treatment of partial-onset seizures. Levetiracetam also has favorable pharmacokinetic and safety profiles. The purpose of this article is to examine the drug profile of levetiracetam, based on information derived from its preclinical and clinical studies. Furthermore, this article seeks to highlight key characteristics of levetiracetam that clinicians should consider in order to deliver individualized care to patients with epilepsy.