Lacosamide efficacy and tolerability in clinical practice – Post marketing analysis from a single dedicated epilepsy center

Lacosamide effectiveness and tolerability in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy and severe disability under polytherapy: Therapy optimization as emerging from an observational study

OBJECTIVE

We explored the efficacy and safety of lacosamide combined with inhibitors of fast-inactivated sodium channels or with other antiepileptic drugs, in patients with drug refractory focal epilepsy associated with intellectual or psychiatric disability.

METHODS

Observational study of lacosamide including the monitoring of lacosamide trough plasma levels and of electroencephalograms.

RESULTS

We followed up 44 patients from the start of lacosamide therapy for up to 3 years, with a clinical, electroencephalogram (EEG), and pharmacological follow-up. Median patients' age was 32.7 years, median age at epilepsy onset was 3.5 years. Intellectual disability was severe in 55.4% of the cohort and drug refractoriness was diagnosed in 88.6% of patients, who had predominantly focal seizures (80%). The severity of their epilepsy was suggested by the use of combined therapies with non-sodium blockers and sodium blockers in 75% of patients. Lacosamide was added to previous therapies and up-titrated to a median of 300 mg/d. Lacosamide add-on led to simplification of the previous drug regimen with a dose reduction in 87.9% of users of sodium blockers and in 66.7% of users of non-sodium blockers, and to withdrawal of previously administered sodium blockers in 48.5% users and non-sodium blockers in 47.6% users. Lacosamide was prescribed at lower doses in the presence of oxcarbazepine (p = 0.029), lamotrigine (p = 0.015), and topiramate (p < 0.001). Mean lacosamide plasma levels were 6.0 ± 2.4 mg/L; they were in linear correlation with the administered dose (R² = 0.38, p < 0.001) and were influenced by the association with lamotrigine (p = 0.008), zonisamide (p = 0.012), and clobazam (p = 0.028). Lacosamide combination regimens led to an average reduction of 42% in baseline seizure frequency, with 50% patients reporting ≥50% seizure frequency reduction. Efficacy was directly correlated with lacosamide dose (R² = 0.47, p < 0.001, B = 0.53) and trough plasma levels (R² = 0.31, p < 0.001, B = 0.16). Electroencephalogram profiles were improved in 40.9% of patients and EEG improvement was not significantly correlated with seizure frequency reduction. Lacosamide safety was good, with 37 adverse reactions in 30 patients, of which 50% were attributed to lacosamide and led to lacosamide withdrawal in 18% of cases. The retention rate of lacosamide was of 88.6% at 1 year, 86.4% at 2 years, and 72.7% after three years. The severity of intellectual disability was directly correlated with increased possibility of lacosamide retention (OR = 0.46 per severity tier, p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Lacosamide add-on allowed dose reduction of previous therapies and reduced the frequency of seizures, showing good tolerability even at high doses, without exceeding reference plasma levels.

Safety and Tolerability of Lacosamide in Patients With Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: As a third-generation antiseizure medication (ASM), lacosamide (LCM) is recommended worldwide for patients with epilepsy. We aimed to provide more conclusive evidence for the safety and tolerability of LCM in patients with epilepsy. Methods: A systematic search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, IDB, VIP Database, and Wanfang Database from inception to 2021 March, and all studies assessing the safety of LCM were included. A meta-analysis was performed for safety data of LCM. Results: Eighty-three studies involving 12268 populations (11 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 16 cohort studies, 53 case series, and 3 case reports) were included in our study. Meta-analysis of the total incidence of adverse events (AEs) of LCM was 38.7% [95% CI (35.1%, 45.8%); n=75 studies]. Incidence of withdrawal due to AEs was 10.8% [95% CI (9.1%, 12.6%); n=56 studies], and incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) was 6.5% [95% CI (4.0%, 8.9%); n=13 studies]. Most AEs were in the nervous system and digestive system. The most common AEs were sedation (15.8%), dizziness (15.7%), fatigue (9.4%), and nausea/vomiting (9.3%). For children, the total incidence of AEs of LCM was 32.8% [95% CI (21.6%, 44.0%); n=16 studies], and the most common AEs were dizziness (8.6%), nausea/vomiting (8.6%), and somnolence (6.8%). Conclusion: Lacosamide is generally safe and well tolerated in patients with epilepsy. Common AEs were sedation, dizziness, and fatigue. It is necessary to pay more attention to the prevention and management of these AEs and conduct more large-scale and high-quality studies to update safety data.

Pharmacology of lacosamide: From its molecular mechanisms and pharmacokinetics to future therapeutic applications

Epilepsy is one of the most common brain disorders, affecting more than 50 million people worldwide. Although its treatment is currently symptomatic, the last generation of anti-seizure drugs is characterized by better pharmacokinetic profiles, efficacy, tolerability and safety. Lacosamide is a third-generation anti-seizure drug that stands out due to its good efficacy and safety profile. It is used with effectiveness in the treatment of partial-onset seizures with or without secondary generalization, primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures and off-label in status epilepticus. Despite scarcely performed until today, therapeutic drug monitoring of lacosamide is proving to be advantageous by allowing the control of inter and intra-individual variability and promoting a successful personalized therapy, particularly in special populations. Herein, the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and clinical data of lacosamide were reviewed, giving special emphasis to the latest molecular investigations underlying its mechanism of action and therapeutic applications in pathologies besides epilepsy. In addition, the pharmacokinetic characteristics of lacosamide were updated, as well as current literature concerning the high pharmacokinetic variability observed in special patient populations and that must be considered during treatment individualization.

Pharmacodynamic interactions of antiepileptic drugs: From bench to clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50% of patients do not achieve seizure control with antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy, and polytherapy, with more than one AED, is often required. To date, no evidence-based criteria on how to combine AEDs exist.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review aimed to provide critical findings of the available literature about the role of pharmacodynamic AEDs' interactions in patients whose epilepsies were treated with polytherapy.

METHODS

Electronic databases, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), were systematically searched to identify relevant studies on pharmacodynamic AEDs' interactions in patients with epilepsy.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Most data on AED combinations are coming from animal models and preclinical studies. Combining AEDs with different mechanisms of actions seems to have greater effectiveness and lower risk of adverse event development. Conversely, the combination of AEDs may cause pharmacodynamic synergistic effects that may result in not only increased efficacy but also more adverse effects. Despite some AED associations that have been proven to be effective in specific epilepsy/seizure type (e.g., phenobarbital+/phenytoin for tonic seizures and ethosiximide + valproate for absences; lamotrigine + valproate for various epilepsy/seizure types), no clear and definitive evidence exists about AED combinations in humans. Examples of pharmacodynamic interactions that possibly explain the synergistic effects on efficacy or adverse effects include the combination between vigabatrin or pregabalin and sodium channel blockers (supra-additive antiseizure effect) and lacosamide combined with other sodium channel blockers (infra-additive antiseizure effect and neurotoxicity synergistic). The pharmacodynamic lamotrigine-valproate interaction is also supported by synergistic adverse events. Therefore, well-designed double-blind prospective studies recruiting a sufficient number of patients possibly with a crossover design and carefully ascertain the role of pharmacokinetic interactions and variations of AEDs' levels in the blood are needed.

Efficacy upon 12-weeks after achievement of maximal dose and tolerability of lacosamide as an adjunctive therapy in epilepsy: Real world clinical experience

Lacosamide (LCM) is a new generation antiepileptic drug. It has only been available in Asia in recent years. A retrospective study at two hospitals in Hong Kong was performed to investigate the post-marketing efficacy and tolerability of the drug. A total of 81 subjects were recruited, among which 88% had drug-resistant epilepsy. The most common type of epilepsy was focal with unknown etiology. All patients used LCM as adjunctive therapy. The 50% responder rate was 42% at 12 weeks after achievement of maximal dose of LCM. No specific factor correlated with responsiveness including concomitant enzyme-inducing or sodium channel blocking anticonvulsants. Withdrawal rate within first 12 weeks after drug initiation was 14% while that at any time upon follow-up was 23%. Two cases of uncommon adverse reaction of myoclonus were also reported. The mechanism was postulated to be the sodium channel inhibiting action of LCM. Our study has shown LCM to have comparable efficacy and tolerability in post-marketing experience when compared with the landmark randomized controlled trials.