Influence of co-medication on the metabolism of valproate

Pharmacological considerations in the use of stiripentol for the treatment of epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Despite the fact that more than 20 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are currently available, about one-third of patients still present drug resistance. Further efforts are required to develop novel and more efficacious therapeutic strategies, especially for refractory epileptic syndromes showing few and anecdotic therapeutic options.

AREAS COVERED

Stiripentol (STP) is a second generation AED that shows GABAergic activity, with immature brain selectivity, and an indirect metabolic action on co-administered AEDs. Two pivotal studies demonstrated STP efficacy in patients with Dravet syndrome with refractory partial seizures, and marketing authorization in Europe, Canada and Japan was granted thereafter. Post-marketing surveys reported a good efficacy and tolerability profile. In addition, interesting data is currently emerging regarding off-label experimentation of STP in other forms of epilepsy.

EXPERT OPINION

STP is an important addition to the limited treatment options available for patients resistant to common AEDs. The possibility to inhibit seizures through the metabolic pathway of lactate dehydrogenase and the inhibitory effects on the entry of Na(+) and Ca(2+) are the most recent findings to emerge about STP and could be proof of its neuroprotective action. Moreover, its positive effects on cognitive function, its good safety and tolerability profile and the increasing data about STP efficacy on other refractory epileptic syndromes may prove to be fertile grounds for further investigation.

Influence of CYP2C9 polymorphism on metabolism of valproate and its hepatotoxin metabolite in Iranian patients

Sodium valproate (VPA) has 16 known metabolites in humans. The 2-ene-VPA has anti-convulsant efficacy and 4-ene-VPA is reported to contribute in VPA hepatotoxicity. The formation of 4-ene-VPA is catalyzed by cytochrome P450 2C9 (CYP2C9). CYP2C9 allele mutation is closely related to the attenuation of the enzymatic activity and 4-ene-VPA production. In the present work, VPA, 2-ene-VPA, and 4-ene-VPA in serum of patients receiving VPA were determined and the correlation between CYP2C9 polymorphism and 4-ene-VPA concentration was examined. Blood samplings in 68 patients were performed at two time-points (peak and trough) and one sample blood obtained from 50 healthy volunteers for genotype evaluation. Patients were divided into three groups (22 cases of monotherapy, 19 cases of enzyme inducer therapy, and 27 cases of polytherapy). There was a significant reduction in concentration of VPA and 4-ene-VPA between peak and trough time. In peak concentration, there was a significant correlation between 2-ene-VPA and VPA in all groups. The concentration of 4-ene-VPA in the enzyme inducer and polytherapy group was significantly higher than that of the monotherapy group. The allele frequencies of CYP2C9*1, CYP2C9*2, and CYP2C9*3 were 88.97%, 8.09%, and 2.94% in the patient group and 91%, 6%, and 3% in the normal group, respectively. There was no significant difference in allele frequency in two groups. Mutated alleles didn't have any significant effect on 4-ene-VPA production. No patient showed toxic level of 4-ene-VPA or saturation of ß-oxidation pathway. In conclusion, the role of CYP2C9*2 and CYP2C9*3 in attenuation of 4-ene-VPA formation cannot be confirmed.

The far-reaching influence of hepatic enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs

Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs on Lipids, Homocysteine, and C-Reactive Protein. Mintzer S, Skidmore CT, Abidin CJ, Morales MC, Chervoneva I, Capuzzi DM, Sperling MR. Ann Neurol 2009;65:448–456. OBJECTIVE: The widely prescribed anticonvulsants phenytoin and carbamazepine are potent inducers of cytochrome P450 enzymes, which are involved in cholesterol synthesis. We sought to determine whether these drugs have an effect on cholesterol and other serological markers of vascular risk. METHODS: We recruited 34 epilepsy patients taking carbamazepine or phenytoin in monotherapy whose physicians had elected to change treatment to one of the noninducing anticonvulsants lamotrigine or levetiracetam. Fasting blood samples were obtained both before and 6 weeks after the switch to measure serum lipid fractions, lipoprotein(a), C-reactive protein, and homocysteine. A comparator group of 16 healthy subjects underwent the same serial studies. RESULTS: In the epilepsy patients, switch from either phenytoin or carbamazepine produced significant declines in total cholesterol (-24.8 mg/dL), atherogenic (non-high-density lipoprotein) cholesterol (-19.9 mg/dL), triglycerides (-47.1 mg/dL) (all p < 0.0001), and C-reactive protein (-31.4%; p = 0.027). Patients who stopped taking carbamazepine also had a 31.2% decline in lipoprotein(a) level ( p = 0.0004), whereas those taken off phenytoin had a decrease in homocysteine level (-1.7 μmol/L; p = 0.005). All of these changes were significant when compared with those seen in healthy subjects ( p < 0.05). Results were similar whether patients were switched to lamotrigine or levetiracetam. INTERPRETATION: Switching epilepsy patients from the enzyme-inducers carbamazepine or phenytoin to the noninducing drugs levetiracetam or lamotrigine produces rapid and clinically significant amelioration in several serological markers of vascular risk. These findings suggest that phenytoin and carbamazepine may substantially increase the risk for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease.

Effect of concomitant administration of meropenem and valproic acid in an elderly Chinese patient

BACKGROUND

Meropenem is a carbapenem with a broad spectrum of activity against beta-lactamase-producing organisms. Valproic acid is widely used in the treatment of generalized tonic-clonic and partial seizures. Concomitant administration of meropenem and valproic acid reportedly leads to a rapid decline in serum concentrations of valproic acid, which is sometimes associated with seizures.

CASE SUMMARY

This report describes an 85-year-old Chinese male inpatient who twice received concomitant administration of meropenem and valproic acid for the treatment of pneumonia and poststroke epilepsy, respectively. Rapid declines in valproic acid concentrations were observed both times after meropenem administration. No seizures occurred in the first treatment period; however, when the patient suffered pneumonia again 3 months later, the same concomitant therapy was prescribed, and seizures occurred. It is difficult to identify a single etiology of the seizures. Based on a score of 7 on the Naranjo adverse drug reaction probability scale, the seizures were considered to be probably related to the concomitant administration of meropenem and valproic acid.

CONCLUSIONS

Various factors make the effect of concomitant administration of meropenem and valproic acid unpredictable, even in the same patient. Caution should be used when administering meropenem and valproic acid concomitantly, especially in elderly patients with central nervous system disorders, even if the patient has had a successful prior experience with these 2 drugs. If concomitant administration is essential, very close serum concentration monitoring and clinical observation are necessary.

Interaction between valproate and meropenem: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Valproate and meropenem are frequently used in the intensive care unit to treat seizures and serious infections, respectively. Several case reports have described a remarkable interaction between the drugs when administered concurrently. The interaction leads to a significant drop in plasma concentrations of valproate within 24 hours and relapse of seizures in some patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a consecutive population of hospitalized patients who were simultaneously treated with meropenem and valproate and assess the effect on epileptic activity.

METHODS

A retrospective study of an 18 month period was performed to assess the extent and clinical impact of this interaction. To assess the relevance of the interaction, the time-relationship between the drop in plasma concentrations and relapse in seizure activity and/or deterioration of electroencephalogram recordings was determined. We investigated other contributing proconvulsive cofactors and concomitant antiepileptic treatment. Drug interaction probability scale (DIPS) scores were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were treated simultaneously with valproate and meropenem. The pharmacokinetic interaction was observed in all 39 patients, with an average drop in valproate plasma concentrations of 66%. The decrease occurred within 24 hours, as shown in 19 patients who had daily plasma concentration monitoring. The clinical impact of the interaction could not be assessed in 19 (49%) patients due to death (n = 13) or incomplete charts (n = 6). In the remaining 20 (51%) patients, DIPS scores were calculated and clinical relevance was assessed. The interaction was considered to be probable in 16 patients and possible in 4, as calculated by the DIPS. The interaction contributed to electroclinical deterioration in 11 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacokinetic interaction between valproate and meropenem was present in all patients and led to a drop of valproate concentrations with an average of 66% within 24 hours. This interaction was clinically relevant with electroclinical deterioration in 55% of patients. To avoid patients' possible neurologic deterioration, meropenem and valproate should not be administered together.

Meropenem –valproic acid interaction in patients with cefepime-associated status epilepticus

PURPOSE

Two case reports of rapid decreases in valproic acid levels after initiation of meropenem in patients who developed new-onset seizure activity during treatment with cefepime are presented.

SUMMARY

A 60-year-old Caucasian woman with myelodysplasia was transferred to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) on day 11 of her hospitalization. Cefepime was given as empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia. Pulmonary invasive aspergillosis was diagnosed. On day 16 of hospitalization, epileptic activity was confirmed. Valproic acid was initiated. Cefepime was discontinued and meropenem was initiated for treatment of cefepime-resistant pneumonia. Serum valproic acid levels decreased to subtherapeutic levels within 24 hours. Meropenem was discontinued and ceftazidime was started on day 22; serum valproic acid levels gradually increased but never reached therapeutic levels again. The patient died of intractable invasive aspergillosis on day 33. A 54-year-old Caucasian man with myelodysplasia was admitted to the MICU for nonconvulsive status epilepticus. Ten days before admission, cefepime had been started empirically for the treatment of neutropenic fever. One day before MICU admission, valproic acid was initiated as treatment for status epilepticus. The next day, serum valproic acid levels were therapeutic; cefepime was switched to meropenem. Serum valproic acid levels decreased within 24 hours and phenytoin was added. On day 4, the patient's serum valproic acid levels decreased further and meropenem was discontinued. Although the valproic acid dosage was increased, valproic acid levels did not return to the therapeutic range. The patient died on day 11.

CONCLUSION

Following cefepime therapy, a clinically important interaction between meropenem and valproic acid occurred in two critically ill patients with new-onset status epilepticus.

Disposition of valproic acid in self-poisoned adults

Acute intoxication with valproic acid is increasingly being observed in clinical practice. In Poland, such intoxication frequently occurs as a result of mixing different drugs or alcohol. We studied the pharmacokinetics of valproic acid in five intoxicated patients. Apart from valproic acid, barbiturates, chlorprotixene, tricyclic antidepressants, tetrahydrocannabinols and alcohol were detected and measured. The absorption of the drug was rapid and the maximum concentration was observed after the period of 3.5-5.6 hr. The lowering of the valproic acid level in plasma was biphasic, with terminal half-life ranging between 8.8-30.9 hr. The calculated apparent volume of distribution was 0.17-0.72 l/kg and could be affected by varied levels of doses as well as time of drug intake (data from interviews of patients) used for calculation and reduction in plasma protein binding at higher concentration of valproic acid. Frequent multiple drug poisonings oblige toxicological laboratories not only to monitor valproic acid concentration in serum, but also to perform the toxicological screenings.

An overview of psychotropic drug-drug interactions

The psychotropic drug-drug interactions most likely to be relevant to psychiatrists' practices are examined. The metabolism and the enzymatic and P-glycoprotein inhibition/induction profiles of all antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood stabilizers are described; all clinically meaningful drug-drug interactions between agents in these psychotropic classes, as well as with frequently encountered nonpsychotropic agents, are detailed; and information on the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic results, mechanisms, and clinical consequences of these interactions is presented. Although the range of drug-drug interactions involving psychotropic agents is large, it is a finite and manageable subset of the much larger domain of all possible drug-drug interactions. Sophisticated computer programs will ultimately provide the best means of avoiding drug-drug interactions. Until these programs are developed, the best defense against drug-drug interactions is awareness and focused attention to this issue.

The importance of drug interactions in epilepsy therapy

Long-term antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy is the reality for the majority of patients diagnosed with epilepsy. One AED will usually be sufficient to control seizures effectively, but a significant proportion of patients will need to receive a multiple AED regimen. Furthermore, polytherapy may be necessary for the treatment of concomitant disease. The fact that over-the-counter drugs and nutritional supplements are increasingly being self-administered by patients also must be considered. Therefore the probability of patients with epilepsy experiencing drug interactions is high, particularly with the traditional AEDs, which are highly prone to drug interactions. Physicians prescribing AEDs to patients with epilepsy must, therefore, be aware of the potential for drug interactions and the effects (pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic) that can occur both during combination therapy and on drug discontinuation. Although pharmacokinetic interactions are numerous and well described, pharmacodynamic interactions are few and usually concluded by default. Perhaps the most clinically significant pharmacodynamic interaction is that of lamotrigine (LTG) and valproic acid (VPA); these drugs exhibit synergistic efficacy when coadministered in patients with refractory partial and generalised seizures. Hepatic metabolism is often the target for pharmacokinetic drug interactions, and enzyme-inducing drugs such as phenytoin (PHT), phenobarbitone (PB), and carbamazepine (CBZ) will readily enhance the metabolism of other AEDs [e.g., LTG, topiramate (TPM), and tiagabine (TGB)]. The enzyme-inducing AEDs also enhance the metabolism of many other drugs (e.g., oral contraceptives, antidepressants, and warfarin) so that therapeutic efficacy of coadministered drugs is lost unless the dosage is increased. VPA inhibits the metabolism of PB and LTG, resulting in an elevation in the plasma concentrations of the inhibited drugs and consequently an increased risk of toxicity. The inhibition of the metabolism of CBZ by VPA results in an elevation of the metabolite CBZ-epoxide, which also increases the risk of toxicity. Other examples include the inhibition of PHT and CBZ metabolism by cimetidine and CBZ metabolism by erythromycin. In recent years, a more rational approach has been taken with regard to metabolic drug interactions because of our enhanced understanding of the cytochrome P450 system that is responsible for the metabolism of many drugs, including AEDs. The review briefly discusses the mechanisms of drug interactions and then proceeds to highlight some of the more clinically relevant drug interactions between AEDs and between AEDs and non-AEDs. Understanding the fundamental principles that contribute to a drug interaction may help the physician to better anticipate a drug interaction and allow a graded and planned therapeutic response and, therefore, help to enhance the management of patients with epilepsy who may require treatment with polytherapy regimens.

Methsuximide reduces valproic acid serum levels

The authors investigated whether methsuximide affects serum levels of valproic acid. Pre-morning-dose serum valproic acid levels were measured in 17 patients (12 male, 5 female; age range, 8-19; mean, 14.5 years) who either started or stopped taking methsuximide but whose dose of valproate and other medication remained unchanged. Four of these patients both started and stopped taking methsuximide. For the whole group the mean valproic acid level (+/- standard error) while not taking methsuximide was 81.9 +/- 5.3 mg/L and while taking methsuximide was 55.7 +/- 4.3 mg/L. The difference between the means was highly significant (paired t test, p < 0.001). The mean valproic acid serum level before taking methsuximide was 85.4 +/- 4.5 mg/L (14 patients), which decreased to 58.2 +/- 4.8 mg/L while taking methsuximide (difference highly significant, p < 0.001). In the eight patients who stopped taking methsuximide the mean serum level increased from 49.8 +/- 7.5 mg/L to 71.7 +/- 8.5 mg/L (difference significant p = 0.025). Because methsuximide reduces valproic acid serum levels, it may be necessary to increase the valproate dose when methsuximide is added or reduce the valproate dose when methsuximide therapy stops, to avoid loss of seizure control or valproate toxicity respectively.

Establishing individual metabolite patterns for patients on valproate therapy

The aim of this study was to establish individual metabolic profiles of patients receiving valproate (VPA) mono- or polytherapy in order to estimate inter- and intraindividual variability under normal conditions. Serum levels of VPA and 15 metabolites were measured by gas chromotography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) with selected ion monitoring (SIM). Because of a huge inter-subject variability, calculating means for large epileptic populations resulted in broad and vague ranges for serum levels of VPA and its metabolites. It therefore remained difficult to recognize any significant alteration in the individual metabolic profile. Over long term periods, within-patient changes appeared to be much less intense than inherent interindividual differences. In epileptics consecutively receiving various forms of polytherapy, alterations in the metabolic profiles occurred. Therefore, integrating different kinds of co-medication into a single polytherapy group seemed to be inadequate. An adult patient on VPA monotherapy, suffering form intrahepatic metastasis and renal insufficiency, showed an extremely altered metabolic pattern, with the 4-ene and the omega-/omega1-metabolites being strongly elevated and the major beta-metabolites (E)-2-ene and (E,E)-2,3'-diene being significantly diminished. We suggest determining the individual metabolic profile, consisting of accessible major and minor metabolites, for every patient when VPA therapy has been started or been modified. The moment any clinical complications arise, the previously obtained specific pattern of the individual can be taken as reference in order to assess the possible presance of significant alterations which might indicate or even cause any severe side effects. There seems to be no need of monitoring metabolite levels of the average patient continuously except for the high risk group (e.g. infants under 3 years age receiving polytherapy) which exhibited the highest between-subject as well as within-patient variability.

Valproate and carbamazepine comedication changes hepatic enzyme activities in sera of epileptic children

Previous observation that valproic acid (VPA) and carbamazepine (CBZ) caused hepatic damage prompted us to investigate the effects of VPA or CBZ monotherapy and VPA + CBZ comedication on the number of hepatic enzyme activities in sera of epileptic children. This study compares alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) activities in sera of children treated with VPA (n=42), or CBZ (n=36) taken as a monotherapy, with VPA + CBZ combined therapy (n=36). The effect of VPA alone is greater on the activity of AST than on other enzymes, while CBZ therapy changes primarily the activities of GGT. The mean catalytic activity of AST was significantly elevated in groups on VPA, CBZ and VPA + CBZ treatment (2.02-, 1.49- and 1.45-fold increase, respectively) as compared to the control values. Changes in the ALT activity followed different patterns. The maximal increase was observed in the CBZ group with a smaller increase in the group on VPA + CBZ polytherapy, whereas only 15% of patients receiving VPA showed an average 1.38-fold increase of the mean enzyme activity. Increase in the catalytic activity of GGT probably reflects the induction produced by the CBZ treatment, either alone or in combination. Children on CBZ monotherapy showed an increase of mean catalytic activity of about twofold in 56% of patients. Children on VPA + CBZ comedication showed a similar behaviour, while VPA alone produced a moderate (1.44-fold) increase in 23% of children. However, concentrations of VPA and CBZ in sera of patients receiving monotherapy were within the expected therapeutic limits, whereas subtherapeutic levels of VPA were found in 30% of children on VPA + CBZ comedication. We propose that individual dosage adjustment in VPA + CBZ polytherapy should be combined with monitoring of relevant enzyme activities in serum.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of new antiepileptic drugs

We have reviewed the pharmacokinetics of six antiepileptic drugs that are marketed (felbamate, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, vigabatrin, and zonisamide) and six drugs that are undergoing evaluation (levetiracetam, ralitoline, remacemide, stiripentol, tiagabine, and topiramate). In addition, we have compared the prodrugs eterobarb and fosphenytoin and the controlled-release formulations of valproic acid and carbamazepine with their parent compounds. Finally, we have devised a scoring system to compare the pharmacokinetics of new antiepileptic drugs. Using this system, vigabatrin, levetiracetam, gabapentin, and topiramate appea to have the most favourable pharmacokinetic profiles, whilst ralitoline and stiripentol have the least favourable.