Pharmacokinetic Considerations with the Use of Antiepileptic Drugs in Patients with HIV and Organ Transplants

The evolution of antiseizure medication therapy selection in adults: Is artificial intelligence -assisted antiseizure medication selection ready for prime time?

Antiseizure medications (ASMs) are the mainstay of symptomatic epilepsy treatment. The primary goal of pharmacotherapy with ASMs in epilepsy is to achieve complete seizure remission while minimizing therapy-related adverse events. Over the years, more ASMs have been introduced, with approximately 30 now in everyday use. With such a wide variety, much guidance is needed in choosing ASMs for initial therapy, subsequent replacement monotherapy, or adjunctive therapy. The specific ASMs are typically tailored by the patient's related factors, including epilepsy syndrome, age, sex, comorbidities, and ASM characteristics, including the spectrum of efficacy, pharmacokinetic properties, safety, and tolerability. Weighing these key clinical variables requires experience and expertise that may be limited. Furthermore, with this approach, patients may endure multiple trials of ineffective treatments before the most appropriate ASM is found. A more reliable way to predict response to different ASMs is needed so that the most effective and tolerated ASM can be selected. Soon, alternative approaches, such as deep machine learning (ML), could aid the individualized selection of the first and subsequent ASMs. The recognition of epilepsy as a network disorder and the integration of personalized epilepsy networks in future ML platforms can also facilitate the prediction of ASM response. Augmenting the conventional approach with artificial intelligence (AI) opens the door to personalized pharmacotherapy in epilepsy. However, more work is needed before these models are ready for primetime clinical practice.

Vitamin U prevents valproic acid-induced liver injury through supporting enzymatic antioxidant system and increasing hepatocyte proliferation triggered by inflammation and apoptosis

The aim of this study was to investigate the cellular mechanisms that cause valproic acid (VPA)-induced liver damage and the therapeutic effect of Vitamin U (Vit U) on these mechanisms. Female Sprague Dawley rats were randomly divided into four groups: intact control animals, animals that received Vit U (50 mg/kg/day), animals given VPA (500 mg/kg/day), and animals given both VPA and Vit U. The rats in the Vit U + VPA group were administered Vit U by gavage an hour before VPA administration every day for 15 days. Liver tissues were evaluated through histopathological, biochemical, immunohistochemical, and Western blotting techniques. Administration of Vit U with VPA resulted in (i) prevention of histopathological changes caused by VPA; (ii) blockage of the decrease in catalase (CAT), glutathione reductase (GR), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activities; prevention of the elevation in gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) activity and advanced oxidation protein products (AOPP) level; (iii) increased in the levels of interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), active caspase-3, and cytoplasmic cytochrome c; (iv) increase in cleaved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) level and decrease in LC3B (II/I) ratio; (v) increase in the number of proliferating cells nuclear antigen (PCNA) positive hepatocytes. These findings show that Vit U prevents liver damage caused by VPA through increasing the antioxidant enzyme capacity and hepatocyte proliferation by triggering inflammation and apoptosis. These findings suggest that Vit U provides its protective effects against VPA-induced liver damage by stimulating homeostasis and regeneration.

The association between systemic autoimmune disorders and epilepsy and its clinical implications

Systemic autoimmune disorders occur more frequently in patients with epilepsy than in the general population, suggesting shared disease mechanisms. The risk of epilepsy is elevated across the spectrum of systemic autoimmune disorders but is highest in systemic lupus erythematosus and type 1 diabetes mellitus. Vascular and metabolic factors are the most important mediators between systemic autoimmune disorders and epilepsy. Systemic immune dysfunction can also affect neuronal excitability, not only through innate immune activation and blood-brain barrier dysfunction in most epilepsies but also adaptive immunity in autoimmune encephalitis. The presence of systemic autoimmune disorders in subjects with acute seizures warrants evaluation for infectious, vascular, toxic and metabolic causes of acute symptomatic seizures, but clinical signs of autoimmune encephalitis should not be missed. Immunosuppressive medications may have antiseizure properties and trigger certain drug interactions with antiseizure treatments. A better understanding of mechanisms underlying the co-existence of epilepsy and systemic autoimmune disorders is needed to guide new antiseizure and anti-epileptogenic treatments. This review aims to summarize the epidemiological evidence for systemic autoimmune disorders as comorbidities of epilepsy, explore potential immune and non-immune mechanisms, and provide practical implications on diagnostic and therapeutic approach to epilepsy in those with comorbid systemic autoimmune disorders.

Enzyme-inducing antiseizure medication utilization in patients with epilepsy and vascular risk factors

OBJECTIVES

Several lines of evidence have suggested that exposure to enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (EIASMs) may result in the subsequent development of hyperlipidemia, a well-known risk factor for vascular disease. This may be an issue of concern particularly in the context of additional comorbid vascular risk factors. We therefore aimed to investigate trends of and associations with the use of these medications among adult patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

The cross-sectional Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) was interrogated to ascertain the prevalence of use of EIASMs by noninstitutionalized adult patients with epilepsy in the United States between the years 2004 and 2015. Any patient prescribed carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital, or primidone within a given year was defined as having been prescribed an EIASM. Trends over three-year epochs were evaluated with univariate logistic regression, while associations with demographic factors, vascular risk factors, and vascular disease were evaluated using a chi-square test corrected for survey design as well as multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 2281 (unweighted) patients were identified, representing 1,781,237 individuals. Between 2004 and 2015, 45.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 42.4%-49.4%) were prescribed EIASMs. Approximately one-quarter of patients aged 65 years and above used EIASMs compared with 18.5% of younger patients (odds ratio [OR]: 1.83, 95% CI = 1.27-2.65). Female patients (OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.47-0.79) and those with heart disease (OR: 0.63, 95% CI = 0.45-0.89) were significantly less likely to be prescribed EIASMs. Among those prescribed EIASMs, 38.9% had hypertension, 12.2% had diabetes, 61.6% were overweight or obese, 17.3% heart disease, 17.2% had a history of a cerebrovascular event, and 28.5% had diagnosed hyperlipidemia. Nonetheless, between 2004-2006 and 2013-2015, the odds of EIASM prescription decreased significantly (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.28-0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of patients with comorbid vascular disease or vascular risk factors (e.g., hypertension and older age) is prescribed EIASMs. This could potentially increase patients' risk for subsequent negative outcomes such as cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease. Though utilization of these medications has decreased, further efforts toward increasing use of newer antiseizure medications (ASMs) that are not associated with similar risks may be warranted.

Understanding and Responding to Prescribing Patterns of Sodium Valproate-Containing Medicines in Pregnant Women and Women of Childbearing Age in Western Cape, South Africa

INTRODUCTION

Growing evidence of the teratogenic potential of sodium valproate (VPA) has changed prescribing practices across the globe; however, the impact of this research and the consequent dissemination of a Dear Health Care Professional Letter (DHCPL) in December 2015, recommending avoidance of the teratogen VPA in women of childbearing age (WOCBA) and pregnant women in South Africa, is unknown. We explored trends and reasons for VPA use among pregnant women and WOCBA in the public sector in Western Cape Province from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2017.

METHODS

Using the provincial health information exchange that collates routine electronic health data via unique patient identifiers, we analysed clinical and pharmacy records from 2015 to 2017 to determine prescription patterns of VPA and other antiepileptic drug (AED) and mood-stabilising medicine (MSM) use in WOCBA and pregnant women. Senior clinicians and policy makers were consulted to understand the determinants of VPA use.

RESULTS

At least one VPA prescription was dispensed to between 8205 (0.79%) and 9425 (0.94%) WOBCA from a cohort of approximately 1 million WOCBA attending provincial health care facilities per year. Prescriptions were more likely in HIV-infected women compared with HIV-uninfected women (1.1-1.3% vs. 0.7-0.9%; p < 0.001). VPA use in WOCBA remained stable at 0.8-0.9% over the review period despite the 2016 DHCPL. VPA was the most prescribed AED/MSM, constituting 43.2-45.5% of all WOCBA taking at least one such agent, while lamotrigine, the other recommended first-line agent, was only prescribed in 7.8-8.9% of WOCBA. Over 3 years, approximately 663 pregnancies were exposed to VPA, with a steady rise in the number of exposures each year (n = 204, 214 and 245, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Despite warnings, VPA remained the most frequently prescribed AED or MSM in WOCBA. Contributing factors are described.

Seizures and epilepsy secondary to viral infection in the central nervous system

Viral infection in the central nervous system (CNS) is a common cause of seizures and epilepsy. Acute symptomatic seizures can occur in the context of almost all types of acute CNS viral infection. However, late unprovoked seizures and epilepsy may not be frequent after viral infection of the CNS. The incidence of seizures and epilepsy after CNS viral infection is mainly dependent on the brain region of infection. It remains to be determined whether treatment of CNS viral infection using antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) can prevent seizures and subsequent epilepsy in patients, particularly with regard to the timing, drug choice and dosage, and duration of AEDs. The postoperative outcome of seizures in patients with intractable epilepsy caused by viral encephalitis primarily depends on the epileptogenic zone. In addition, neuroinflammation is known to be widely involved in the generation of seizures during CNS viral infection, and the effects of anti-inflammatory therapies in preventing seizures and epilepsy secondary to CNS viral infection require further studies. In this review, we discuss the incidence, mechanisms, clinical management and prognosis of seizures and epilepsy secondary to CNS viral infection, and summarize common CNS viral infections that cause seizures and epilepsy.

Brivaracetam efficacy and safety in focal epilepsy

Introduction: Brivaracetam (BRV) is an analog of levetiracetam (LEV) with 15-30 times greater affinity to SV2A and greater brain permeability than LEV. These properties have stimulated interest in its clinical trial data and post-marketing experience. Areas covered: The authors provide a background on epilepsy and its treatment, discuss the racetam family of antiepileptic drugs to which BRV belongs, and then discuss BRV properties and its efficacy and tolerability in the treatment of epilepsy. Expert opinion: While preclinical data suggest a broad spectrum of efficacy, BRV is only approved for focal epilepsy. The recommended starting dose is 100 mg per day, but in the absence of urgency, it may be prudent to start at 50 mg per day, considered the lowest effective dose. There was no added benefit when BRV was used adjunctively with LEV in clinical trials. However, post-marketing data suggest that some patients may experience improved seizure control when switching from LEV. Behavioral adverse effects seemed less common than with LEV, and most patients switched to BRV after experiencing behavioral adverse effects on LEV reported improvement. Prior or anticipated intolerability to LEV is the strongest indication for BRV in clinical practice.