Initial anticonvulsant monotherapy in routine care of children and adolescents: levetiracetam fails more frequently than valproate and oxcarbazepine due to a lack of effectiveness

Safety and efficacy of levetiracetam and carbamazepine monotherapy in the management of pediatric focal epilepsy: a randomized clinical trial

Due to the limited number of studies in children with focal epilepsy and the importance of choosing the most suitable drug to control seizures in children, the administration of the most effective medication with the most negligible adverse events is vital. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse events of carbamazepine vs. levetiracetam monotherapy in children with focal seizures. A monocentric, randomized, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trial was designed. This study was approved by the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (registration number: IRCT20170216032603N2) on June 19, 2020, and conducted at the neurology department of Imam Ali Hospital, Karaj, Iran, from February 2020 to March 2021. This study assessed 120 patients with recently diagnosed focal seizures aged 2 to 14. Patients were randomly divided into two groups, who received carbamazepine (CBZ) 15 to 20 mg/kg and levetiracetam (LEV) 20 to 40 mg/kg daily, respectively. Patients were evaluated for improvement and complications at weeks 4, 12, and 24. Out of 120 patients included in the study, six patients were excluded due to various complications of CBZ. The mean number of seizures at the end of the fourth, twelfth, and twenty-fourth weeks were 1.09 ± 0.75, 0.62 ± 0.27, and 0.39 ± 0.12 in the carbamazepine group and 1.11 ± 0.63, 0.52 ± 0.21, and 0.37 ± 0.11 in the LEV group, respectively (P > 0.05). Similarly, the number of seizure-free patients was 34, 44, and 48 in the CBZ group compared to 41, 50, and 54 in the LEV group, respectively (P > 0.05). On the other hand, the frequency of somnolence, dermatologic complications, and agitation was considerably higher in the CBZ group (P < 0.05). Although both medicines were equally effective in seizure control, CBZ was associated with considerably more adverse events and less patient compliance. Physicians should be aware of this difference to prevent unwanted consequences.

Efficacy and safety of levetiracetam vs. oxcarbazepine in the treatment of children with epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Levetiracetam (LEV) and oxcarbazepine (OXC) are new antiseizure medications (ASMs). In recent years, OXC monotherapy is widely used in children with epilepsy; however, no consensus exists on applying LEV monotherapy among children with epilepsy.

Objective

The present work focused on comparing the efficacy and safety of LEV and OXC monotherapy in treating children with epilepsy.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Database, VIP, and China Biology Medicine disc, covering studies from inception to August 26, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of LEV and OXC monotherapy for treating epilepsy in children. We utilized Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool in RevMan 5.3 software for assessing included RCTs quality. In addition, included cohort studies quality was determined using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). A random-effects model was utilized to summarize the results.

Results

This meta-analysis included altogether 14 studies, including 893 children with epilepsy. LEV and OXC monotherapy was not statistical different among children with epilepsy in seizure-free rate (relative risk [RR] = 1.010, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.822, 1.242], P > 0.05) and seizure frequency decrease of ≥50% compared with baseline [RR = 0.938, 95% CI (0.676, 1.301), P > 0.05]. Differences in total adverse reaction rate [RR = 1.113, 95% CI (0.710, 1.744), P > 0.05] and failure rate because of serious adverse reaction [RR = 1.001, 95% CI (0.349, 2.871), P > 0.05] were not statistical different between LEV and OXC treatments among children with epilepsy. However, the effects of OXC monotherapy on thyroid among children with epilepsy was statistically correlated than that of LEV (thyroid stimulating hormone: standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.144, 95% CI [-0.613, 0.325], P > 0.05; free thyroxine: SMD = 1.663, 95% CI [0.179, 3.147], P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The efficacy of LEV and OXC monotherapy in treating children with epilepsy is similar. However, OXC having a more significant effect on the thyroid than that of LEV. Therefore, LEV may be safer for children with epilepsy who are predisposed to thyroid disease than OXC.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42024514016).

Physicians' perspectives on adverse drug reactions in pediatric routine care: a survey

BACKGROUND

Children and adolescents are at particular risk for adverse drug reactions (ADRs). We investigated physicians' perceptions on ADRs in pediatric routine care.

METHODS

In this exploratory study from April to November 2020, we invited physicians treating pediatric patients across Germany to complete an online questionnaire consisting mainly of closed questions.

RESULTS

Completion rate was 98% (127/129). Of all participants, 23% (29/127) stated they were not able to estimate how many of their pediatric patients experienced ADRs during drug therapy. The remaining physicians estimated that 7.5% (median; Q25/Q75 3%/20%) of their pediatric patients were affected by ADRs. Regarding counseling on ADRs, 61% (77/127) stated they do not ask regularly the extent to which parents want to be informed. In total, 26% (33/127) stated they avoid counseling on ADRs concerning commonly used approved therapies, whereas only 4% (5/127) did so concerning off-label use (P < 0.001). Altogether, 16% (20/127) stated they rather prescribe new medicines as they hope for better effectiveness; 72% (91/127) said they are cautious about doing so owing to yet unknown ADRs. Of all respondents, 46% (58/127) stated they do not report ADRs to the authorities. Concerning the black triangle symbol, a European pharmacovigilance measure, 11% (14/127) stated they knew it and 6% (7/127) stated they reported any suspected ADR for drugs with that symbol.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians' perspectives on ADRs were ambivalent: ADRs influenced their parent counseling and drug prescribing; yet, they struggled to estimate the impact of ADRs on their patients and were not aware of specific pharmacovigilance measures.

Effects of levetiracetam and oxcarbazepine monotherapy on intellectual and cognitive development in children with benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes

Levetiracetam (LEV) and oxcarbazepine (OXC) are commonly used in the treatment of epilepsy, but their efficacy and safety have seldom been compared for the treatment of children with benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (BECTS). We thus assessed the efficacy of LEV and OXC monotherapy in the treatment of children with BECTS, and the effect of this treatment on children’s intelligence and cognitive development. This was a randomized, single-center trial. Children with BECTS were randomized (1:1) into LEV and OXC groups, and were assessed at 1, 3 and 6 months after treatment. The primary outcomes were the frequency of seizures and changes in intelligence and cognitive function. Secondary outcomes were electroencephalogram (EEG) results and safety. Seventy children were enrolled and randomized to the LEV group or the OXC group, and 32 of the 35 children in each group completed the study. After 6 months, the effective treatment rate of the OXC group was significantly higher than that of the LEV group (78.12 vs. 53.12%, p = 0.035). However, no significant inter-group difference was observed in EEG improvement (p = 0.211). In terms of intelligence and cognitive development, children in the OXC group exhibited significantly improved choice reaction time, mental rotation, and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test results (all p < 0.05). Both LEV and OXC were well tolerated, with 18.75 and 21.88% of children reporting mild adverse events (p = 0.756). OXC monotherapy was more effective than LEV for children with BECTS. In addition, children with OXC monotherapy had higher improvements in children’s intelligence and cognitive function than those with LEV monotherapy.

Initial levetiracetam versus valproate monotherapy in antiseizure medicine (ASM)-naïve pediatric patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy with tonic-clonic seizures

INTRODUCTION

Levetiracetam (LEV) is a second-generation antiseizure medicine (ASM) with broad-spectrum efficacy and tolerability. Few studies have compared the efficacy of valproate (VPA) and LEV as monotherapy in the pediatric population. Herein, we compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety of LEV monotherapy with those of VPA monotherapy in ASM-naïve pediatric patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy with tonic-clonic (GTC) seizures.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical and electroencephalographic (EEG) data of these ASM-naïve pediatric patients who were treated with either oral VPA or oral LEV as monotherapy for over 2 years at our center.

RESULTS

This study included 60 patients with a seizure onset age between 2 months and 12 years. The patients on VPA (29 patients) and LEV monotherapy (31 patients) showed similar favorable 6-month treatment outcomes (complete seizure control in 79.31% vs 80.64%, p = 0.468052). Age at epilepsy onset, epilepsy syndrome, EEG features and ASM dose were not significant predictors of the 6-month treatment outcomes in either group. Lower seizure frequency at presentation was a predictor of favorable 6-month treatment outcomes in the LEV group but not in the VPA group. VPA and LEV treatment showed similar favorable 6-month treatment outcomes in the febrile seizures plus and patients with unidentified epilepsy syndrome subgroups. None of the patients discontinued VPA or LEV due to treatment-associated adverse effects.

DISCUSSION

Our study showed that compared to VPA monotherapy, LEV monotherapy in ASM-naïve infants and children with idiopathic generalized epilepsy with GTC seizures has a similarly favorable efficacy and tolerability, independent of age, EEG features and epilepsy syndrome.

How do pediatric patients perceive adverse drug events of anticonvulsant drugs? A survey

Anticonvulsant drugs have a high risk of adverse drug events. Little is known about the perception of those events by pediatric patients. We performed a survey in the neuropediatric departments of two university hospitals. Using a questionnaire, we interviewed patients aged 6-18 years with current anticonvulsant treatment regarding (i) their fears about potential adverse drug events, (ii) experienced adverse drug events, and (iii) perceived burden of experienced adverse drug events. One hundred patients took part in the interview. (i) 40 (40%) expressed fears that the medication could harm them. Eighteen of 40 (45%) named fears concerning specific adverse drug events. Of those, 12/18 (67%) feared neurologic or psychiatric symptoms. (ii) 37 (37%) of children described altogether 60 experienced adverse drug events. Of those, 38 (63%) concerned neurologic or psychiatric symptoms. (iii) 32/37 (82%) children who experienced adverse drug events felt bothered by the experienced event. Among others, they described an emotional burden (11/37, 30%), and restrictions in school performance (8/37, 22%) and favorite leisure activities (4/37, 11%).Conclusion: School-aged children are well able to describe adverse drug events of their anticonvulsant medication. Almost two thirds of the described events concern neurologic or psychiatric symptoms that cause an emotional burden and restrictions according to the patients. What is Known: • Anticonvulsants have a high potential of adverse drug events. • In an earlier survey, parents expressed fears of severe adverse drug events such as liver failure, which seldom occur, and reported a high number of neurological and psychological adverse drug events. What is New: • Many children fear that their anticonvulsants could harm them, and they fear and experience neurological and psychological adverse drug events. • According to the children, adverse drug events cause an emotional burden and restrictions in school performance and favorite leisure activities.

How do parents perceive adverse drug events of their children's anticonvulsant medication?

BACKGROUND

The main source of knowledge on adverse drug events (ADE) are physicians' reports in controlled clinical trials. In contrast, little is known about the parents' perception of ADE of anticonvulsants their children receive.

METHODS

After approval by the local ethics committee, we performed a survey in a neuropediatric outpatient clinic of a university hospital. Based on a structured questionnaire, we interviewed parents of children with current anticonvulsant treatment regarding (i) their fears about potential ADE, (ii) experienced ADE according to parents, and (iii) implications of ADE on the child's life.

RESULTS

Parents of 150 patients took part in the interview. (i) 95 (63.3%) parents expressed fears concerning ADE, mostly liver injury/liver failure (33 [22%]). (ii) 129 (86%) parents reported experienced ADE, mostly sedation (65 [43.3%]) and abnormal behavior (54 [36%]). (iii) Parents reported substantial implications of ADE on the child's daily life for 84 (56%) children, and 63 (42%) parents expressed a negative impact on the child's development.

CONCLUSION

We recognized a great discrepancy between those ADE that were feared and those that were experienced. Parents feared life-threatening ADE and experienced less severe ADE that nevertheless have a negative impact on the child's daily life.

Levetiracetam Monotherapy in Children with Epilepsy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Levetiracetam, a second-generation anti-epileptic drug (AED) with a good efficacy and safety profile, is licensed as monotherapy for adults and children older than 16 years with focal seizures with or without secondary generalization. However, it is increasingly being used off-label in younger children.

OBJECTIVES

We critically reviewed the available evidence and discuss the present status of levetiracetam monotherapy in children 0-16 years old.

DATA SOURCES

We systematically searched the literature using PubMed, Web of Science and Embase up to August 2014 for articles on levetiracetam monotherapy in children. Keywords were levetiracetam, monotherapy and child*. The titles and abstracts of 532 articles were evaluated by AW, of which 480 were excluded. The full texts of the other 52 articles were assessed for relevance.

RESULTS

We covered one review, one opinion statement and 32 studies in this review, including four randomized controlled trials, ten open-label prospective studies, eight retrospective studies, and ten case reports. The formal evidence for levetiracetam monotherapy in children is minimal: it is potentially efficacious or effective as initial monotherapy in children with benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes. In all of the published studies, however, efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam seemed to be good and comparable to other AEDs.

CONCLUSION

The data of 32 studies on levetiracetam monotherapy in children were insufficient to confirm that levetiracetam is effective as initial monotherapy for different types of seizures and/or epilepsy syndromes. There is still an urgent need for well designed trials to justify the widespread use of levetiracetam monotherapy in children of all ages.