Risks and management of antiepileptic drug induced skin reactions in the adult out-patient setting

Clinical observation and analysis of rash caused by lacosamide in children with epilepsy

PURPOSE

To draw clinical attention to rashes caused by lacosamide.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included patients admitted to the Department of Pediatrics, Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University between January 2021 and September 2023. We focused on patients who developed rashes after lacosamide treatment and analyzed all patients who exhibited rashes after lacosamide treatment to analyze the risk factors.

RESULTS

In total, 190 patients received lacosamide, of whom four developed allergies (2.1 %). Three patients had severe rashes, and two patients had high fever. All of these adverse events improved after the withdrawal of lacosamide. Of the 13 patients reported to date, including the four patients in this study, eight used various antiseizure medicines, including seven patients who used four or more antiseizure medicines. Four patients underwent testing for HLA-B*1502, and two patients were positive. Patients developed rashes within 1-10 days after treatment initiation, and the duration of the rash ranged 2-37 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide-induced rash was detected in 2.1 % of patients in our cohort. Rashes are potentially serious, and prompt evaluation is required. Rashes are more likely to occur when multiple antiseizure medicines are used simultaneously, typically within 10 days of treatment initiation.

EAACI/ENDA position paper on drug provocation testing

In drug hypersensitivity, drug provocation testing (DPT), also called drug challenge, is the gold standard for investigation. In recent years, risk stratification has become an important tool for adjusting the diagnostic strategy to the perceived risk, whilst still maintaining a high level of safety for the patient. Skin tests are recommended before DPT but may be omitted in low-risk patients. The task force suggests a strict definition of such low-risk patients in children and adults. Based on experience and evidence from studies of allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics, an algorithm on how to adjust DPT to the risk, and when to omit skin tests before DPT, is presented. For other antibiotics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and other drugs, skin tests are poorly validated and DPT is frequently necessary. We recommend performing DPT with chemotherapeutics and biologicals to avoid unnecessary desensitization procedures and DPT with skin tests negative contrast media. We suggest DPT with anesthetics only in highly specialized centers. Specifics of DPT to proton pump inhibitors, anticonvulsants and corticosteroids are discussed. This position paper provides general recommendations and guidance on optimizing use of DPT, whilst balancing benefits with patient safety and optimizing the use of the limited available resources.

Cenobamate in refractory epilepsy: Overview of treatment options and practical considerations

Management of drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) represents a challenge to the treating clinician. This manuscript addresses DRE and provides an overview of treatment options, medical, surgical, and dietary. It addresses treatment strategies in polytherapy, then focuses on the role cenobamate (CNB) may play in reducing the burden of DRE while providing practical advice for its introduction. CNB is a recently approved, third generation, anti-seizure medication (ASM), a tetrazole-derived carbamate, thought to have a dual mechanism of action, through its effect on sodium channels as well as on GABAA receptors at a non-benzodiazepine site. CNB, having a long half-life, is an effective add-on ASM in refractory focal epilepsy with a higher response rate and a higher seizure-freedom rate than is usually seen in regulatory clinical trials. Experience post-licensing, though still limited, supports the findings of clinical trials and is encouraging. Its spectrum of action in relation to generalized epilepsies and seizures remains to be established, and there are no data on its efficacy in monotherapy. At the time of writing, CNB has been prescribed for some 50 000 individuals with DRE and focal epilepsy. A larger number is needed to fully establish its safety profile. It should at all times be introduced slowly to minimize the risk of serious allergic drug reactions. It has clinically meaningful interactions which must be anticipated and managed to maximize tolerability and likelihood of successful treatment. Despite the above, it may well prove to be of major benefit in the treatment of many patients with drug resistant epilepsy.

Cutaneous adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs

Antiepileptic drugs (AED) are widely used in therapy. They are mainly indicated in the treatment of epilepsy and some psychiatric pathologies as well as for their analgesic action. Their cutaneous adverse effects (CAE) are common, often mild but sometimes serious. The aim of this work was to study the epidemiological and clinical features of CAE occurring in adults and elderly patients (aged over 20 years-old) and to identify the most implicated AED. We conducted a descriptive retrospective study over a period of five years from January 2017 to December 2022 about CAE of AED in adults and elderly patients notified to The National Center Chalbi Belkahia of Pharmacovigilance (Tunis,Tunisia). All cases were analyzed according to the updates French methods of imputability. We collected 71 cases of patients aged over 20 years old who presented CAE to AED. The age ranged from 20 to 79 years (mean age=44.8 years). The sex ratio F/M was 0.7. AED were indicated for neurological pathology in 70.5% of cases, for psychiatric pathology in 15.9% of cases and for their analgesic action in 12.9% of cases. Epilepsy was the first indication (51.1% of cases). The most notified CAE in our study were drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS syndrome; 34% of cases), maculopapular exanthema (MPE; 26% of cases), erythematous rash (8% of cases) and photosensitivity in 5% of cases. Severe cutaneous adverse reactions were accounted for 37% of all CAE. The most implicated AED were carbamazepine (52%), phenobarbital (24%) and lamotrigine (18%). However, further study with a larger number of patients and in collaboration with prescribing physicians are needed to better clarify features of CAE associated with AED intake and specify the risk factors, specific to our Tunisian population.

Black-Box Warnings of Antiseizure Medications: What is Inside the Box?

Antiseizure medications can cause serious adverse reactions and have deleterious drug interactions that often complicate the clinical management of patients. When the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wants to alert healthcare providers and patients about the risk of potentially serious or fatal drug reactions, the FDA requires the manufacturers of these medications to format these warnings within a "black-box" border, and prominently display this box on the first section of the package insert; such warnings are called "black-box warnings (BBWs)". The BBW is a way for the FDA to urge physicians to evaluate patients more rigorously and carefully weigh the risks and benefits, before prescribing medication that has the potential to cause serious adverse reactions, and to formulate a plan for close monitoring during therapy. The FDA BBW provides the extra layer of safety but many healthcare providers fail to comply with these warnings. Currently, there are 26 FDA-approved antiseizure medications in the US market, 38% of which have received BBWs, and most of the antiseizure medications with BBWs are older-generation drugs. Some antiseizure medications have multiple BBWs; for example, valproic acid has three BBWs including hepatotoxicity, fetal risk, and pancreatitis, carbamazepine has BBWs of serious skin and hematological reactions, and felbamate also has two BBWs including hepatic failure and aplastic anemia. The purpose of this review is to provide insight into each BBW received by antiseizure medications and discuss the FDA recommendations for evaluating the drug benefit/risk, and for monitoring parameters before the initiation of and during treatment.

Adherence to and persistence with lacosamide, perampanel, lamotrigine, and levetiracetam in adult patients with focal epilepsy in Japan: A descriptive cohort study using a claims database

Objective

We evaluated adherence to and 1-year persistence of two third-generation anti-seizure medications (ASMs), lacosamide and perampanel, in adult patients with focal epilepsy, compared with lamotrigine and levetiracetam.

Methods

A cohort study was conducted using a Japanese health insurance claims database (JMDC Inc.). We identified patients with adult-onset focal epilepsy who initiated any of the four ASMs between August 31, 2016, and October 31, 2019. Patients were further classified into ASM-naïve patients initiating any of the four ASMs as first-line treatment, and ASM-experienced patients initiating any of the four ASMs as second- or later-line treatment. Outcomes included adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC], defined as the total number of days covered by ASMs divided by the total number of days in the follow-up period) and 1-year persistence for the four ASMs.

Results

We identified 141 lacosamide, 75 perampanel, 80 lamotrigine, and 530 levetiracetam initiators. Among these, the proportion of ASM-naïve patients was highest in the levetiracetam group (60.8%), followed by the lamotrigine (25.0%), lacosamide (20.6%), and perampanel groups (1.3%). Mean PDC (standard deviation) was similar across the four groups, at 0.95 (0.08) for lacosamide, 0.93 (0.12) for perampanel, 0.92 (0.10) for lamotrigine and 0.94 (0.11) for levetiracetam. The proportion of patients persisting with treatment for 1 year was highest in the lacosamide group (73.0%), followed by the levetiracetam (58.3%), lamotrigine (57.5%), and perampanel groups (54.7%). In ASM-naïve patients, adherence and 1-year persistence were almost identical in the lacosamide, lamotrigine, and levetiracetam groups. Results for ASM-experienced patients did not significantly differ from those of all patients.

Significance

With regard to adherence and 1-year persistence, lacosamide may be equal to or better than lamotrigine and levetiracetam, especially in patients with experienced ASM, while perampanel may be comparable to lamotrigine and levetiracetam in patients with experienced ASM.

Increased seizure frequency in an epilepsy patient receiving medium cut-off dialysis

This paper presents the case of a male dialysis patient, with generalised epilepsy, who experienced complications after starting medium cut-off (MCO) dialysis. While receiving haemodiafiltration, the patient's epilepsy had been relatively well controlled using two antiseizure medications (brivaracetam and sodium valproate). However, the patient's seizure frequency increased when he was changed to MCO dialysis. MCO is a new dialysis method that has been developed to allow for better clearance of uraemic toxins through its larger pore size. We hypothesise that using the highly permeable MCO membrane changed the seizure threshold by an unknown mechanism. This is the first reported case to observe increased seizure frequency in a patient receiving MCO dialysis. The case highlights the need for caution when prescribing dialysis methods to patients with epilepsy.

The high incidence and risk factors of levetiracetam and lacosamide-related skin rashes in glioma patients

OBJECTIVE

Antiseizure drug (ASD)-induced skin rash remains the main side effect of seizure management in patients with glioma. New generations of ASDs, such as levetiracetam (LEV) and lacosamide (LCM) are associated with less frequent skin rashes than conventional ASDs. However, there are few reports regarding the incidence of skin rashes by LEV and LCM in patients with glioma. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors of LEV- and LCM-associated skin rashes in patients with glioma.

METHODS

We compared the incidence of ASD-associated skin rash between 353 patients with glioma and 125 patients with meningioma, who received LEV or LCM and underwent surgery between 2017 and 2019 at our institution. Furthermore, to evaluate the association between potential risk factors and ASD-associated skin rashes, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The incidence of ASD-associated skin rash in patients with glioma was higher (11 %) than in those with meningiomas (1.6 %). The multivariate regression analysis showed that adjuvant treatment with radiotherapy (p = 0.023) and a history of drug allergy (p = 0.023) were significant risk factors for ASD-associated skin rash. The rate of ASD-related skin rashes in patients with glioma was also higher than the previously reported rates of 1-3 % in patients with epilepsy.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that adjuvant treatment with radiotherapy and a history of drug allergy correlated with a high incidence of ASD-related skin rashes in patients with glioma who receive LEV and LCM. Patients with these two factors should be carefully checked for skin rashes.

Drug-Induced Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions: Insights Into Clinical Presentation, Immunopathogenesis, Diagnostic Methods, Treatment, and Pharmacogenomics

SCARs are rare and life-threatening hypersensitivity reactions. In general, the increased duration of hospital stays and the associated cost burden are common issues, and in the worst-case scenario, they can result in mortality. SCARs are delayed T cell-mediated hypersensitivity reactions. Recovery can take from 2 weeks to many months after dechallenging the culprit drugs. Genetic polymorphism of the HLA genes may change the selection and presentation of antigens, allowing toxic drug metabolites to initiate immunological reactions. However, each SCARs has a different onset latency period, clinical features, or morphological pattern. This explains that, other than HLA mutations, other immuno-pathogenesis may be involved in drug-induced severe cutaneous reactions. This review will discuss the clinical morphology of various SCARs, various immune pathogenesis models, diagnostic criteria, treatments, the association of various drug-induced reactions and susceptible alleles in different populations, and the successful implementation of pharmacogenomics in Thailand for the prevention of SCARs.

A Comprehensive Review of HLA and Severe Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions: Implication for Clinical Pharmacogenomics and Precision Medicine

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) encoded by the HLA gene is an important modulator for immune responses and drug hypersensitivity reactions as well. Genetic polymorphisms of HLA vary widely at population level and are responsible for developing severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions (SCARs) such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), maculopapular exanthema (MPE). The associations of different HLA alleles with the risk of drug induced SJS/TEN, DRESS and MPE are strongly supportive for clinical considerations. Prescribing guidelines generated by different national and international working groups for translation of HLA pharmacogenetics into clinical practice are underway and functional in many countries, including Thailand. Cutting edge genomic technologies may accelerate wider adoption of HLA screening in routine clinical settings. There are great opportunities and several challenges as well for effective implementation of HLA genotyping globally in routine clinical practice for the prevention of drug induced SCARs substantially, enforcing precision medicine initiatives.

Rash during lamotrigine treatment is not always drug hypersensitivity: A retrospective cohort study among children and adults

Purpose Cutaneous adverse drug reactions (cADRs) are a major cause of lamotrigine (LTG) discontinuation. Remarkable variation in their reported incidence suggests confounders and diverse terms and definitions. The aim of this study was to identify immunological cADRs and to throw light on classification and differential diagnoses in children and adults. Methods Hospital records of 2683 patients with epilepsy (1897 adults, 786 children) were retrospectively screened. Of these, 403 patients (236 adults, 167 children) with first time exposure to LTG were reviewed. Skin reactions were categorized into possible or probable cADRs due to LTG hypersensitivity, and other skin reactions (OSRs) unlikely to be caused by this mechanism. Results 29 of 403 patients (7.2%) reported emergent skin symptoms within 3 months of treatment with LTG of which 20 (5%: 5.9% adults, 3.6% children) were categorized as possible or probable cADRs. Concomitant infection appeared to be present in several cases, particularly in children. OSRs were found in 4.2% of the children using LTG, compared to 0.8% of the adults (p = 0.04). Conclusions Rash during the early phase of LTG treatment is not always drug hypersensitivity. Whenever skin symptoms occur, other potential causes should receive attention to avoid needless discontinuation, particularly in children. However, when early symptoms and signs of severe cADRs are suspected, LTG should promptly be discontinued.

Severe cutaneous adverse reaction associated with antiseizure medications: Diagnosis, management, and prevention

Severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) are potentially life-threatening, with considerable morbidity and mortality. They are nonimmediate hypersensitivity reactions that occur in specifically predisposed patients with delayed T-cell-mediated hypersensitivity reaction. Antiseizure medications (ASMs) are among the drugs that can induce SCAR. Increased awareness of SCAR among clinicians treating patients with ASMs is critically important for early recognition of symptoms, prompt identification and removal of the causal drug, and early intervention to reduce SCAR-related acute and long-term morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis, management, and prevention of Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) are reviewed, along with the current understanding of the pathomechanisms and role of genetics in SCAR development. Supportive care and immunomodulating treatments for SCAR are discussed.

The ups and downs of alkyl-carbamates in epilepsy therapy: How does cenobamate differ?

Since 1955, several alkyl-carbamates have been developed for the treatment of anxiety and epilepsy, including meprobamate, flupirtine, felbamate, retigabine, carisbamate, and cenobamate. They have each enjoyed varying levels of success as antiseizure drugs; however, they have all been plagued by the emergence of serious and sometimes life-threatening adverse events. In this review, we compare and contrast their predominant molecular mechanisms of action, their antiseizure profile, and where possible, their clinical efficacy. The preclinical, clinical, and mechanistic profile of the prototypical γ-aminobutyric acidergic (GABAergic) modulator phenobarbital is included for comparison. Like phenobarbital, all of the clinically approved alkyl-carbamates share an ability to enhance inhibitory neurotransmission through modulation of the GABA_A receptor, although the specific mechanism of interaction differs among the different drugs discussed. In addition, several alkyl-carbamates have been shown to interact with voltage-gated ion channels. Flupirtine and retigabine share an ability to activate K⁺ currents mediated by KCNQ (Kv7) K⁺ channels, and felbamate, carisbamate, and cenobamate have been shown to block Na⁺ channels. In contrast to other alkyl-carbamates, cenobamate seems to be unique in its ability to preferentially attenuate the persistent rather than transient Na⁺ current. Results from recent randomized controlled clinical trials with cenobamate suggest that this newest antiseizure alkyl-carbamate possesses a degree of efficacy not witnessed since felbamate was approved in 1993. Given that ceno-bamate's mechanistic profile is unique among the alkyl-carbamates, it is not clear whether this impressive efficacy reflects an as yet undescribed mechanism of action or whether it possesses a unique synergy between its actions at the GABA_A receptor and on persistent Na⁺ currents. The high efficacy of cenobamate is, however, tempered by the risk of serious rash and low tolerability at higher doses, meaning that further safety studies and clinical experience are needed to determine the true clinical value of cenobamate.

Diagnostic Test Criteria for HLA Genotyping to Prevent Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions: A Systematic Review of Actionable HLA Recommendations in CPIC and DPWG Guidelines

Introduction

Certain HLA variants are associated with an increased risk of hypersensitivity reactions to specific drugs. Both the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) have issued actionable HLA gene - drug interaction guidelines but diagnostic test criteria remain largely unknown. We present an overview of the diagnostic test criteria of the actionable HLA - drug pairs.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. Original case-control and cohort studies were selected and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and number needed to genotype (NNG) were calculated for the actionable HLA-drug pairs.

Results

In general, the HLA tests show high specificity and NPV for predicting hypersensitivity reactions. The sensitivity of HLA tests shows a wide range, from 0-33% for HLA-B*1502 testing to predict lamotrigine induced SJS/TEN up to 100% for HLA-B*5701 to predict immunologically confirmed abacavir hypersensitivity syndrome (ABC-HSR). PPV is low for all tests except for HLA-B*5701 and ABC-HSR which is approximately 50%. HLA-B*5701 to predict ABC-HSR shows the lowest NNG followed by HLA-B*5801 for allopurinol induced severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions and HLA-B*1502 for carbamazepine induced SJS/TEN.

Discussion

This is the first overview of diagnostic test criteria for actionable HLA-drug pairs. Studies researching HLA genes and hypersensitivity are scarce for some of the HLA-drug pairs in some populations and patient numbers in studies are small. Therefore, more research is necessary to calculate the diagnostic test criteria more accurately.

Treatment of status epilepticus with zonisamide: A multicenter cohort study of 34 patients and review of literature

INTRODUCTION

We present a summary of clinical cases of oral zonisamide (ZNS) used to treat refractory and super-refractory episodes of status epilepticus (SE).

METHODS

Zonisamide administration in SE was identified in the clinical records of patients treated in Frankfurt and Marburg between 2011 and 2017.

RESULTS

Zonisamide was administered during a total of 37 SE episodes in 34 patients with a mean age of 58.7 ± 17.8 years, 21 of them were female (61.7%). The median latency from the onset of SE to administration of ZNS was 6.3 days. Patients had already undergone unsuccessful treatment with a median of three other antiseizure drugs (ASDs). The median initial dose of ZNS was 100 mg/d, titrated to a median maintenance dose of 400 mg/d. Patients underwent ZNS treatment for a median period of 7 days. Zonisamide was the final drug administered in 9 of 37 (24.3%) episodes, with a clinical effect attributed to ZNS observed in 6 of 37 (16.2%) episodes. An effect attributed to ZNS was observed in 5 out of 30 episodes of refractory SE (RSE) and in one out of 7 episodes of super-refractory SE (SRSE). Possible negative side effects of ZNS were observed in two patients (one patient each with ataxia and skin rash). The mortality rate in hospitalized patients was 10.4% (n = 4).

CONCLUSION

The rate of SE resolution attributed to ZNS treatment (16.2%) can be considered relevant, particularly since ZNS treatment tends to be administered only after several other options have been tried, and has a treatment latency of over six days. Zonisamide may therefore be considered as an alternative oral treatment option in RSE and SRSE.

The economics of drug allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As drug allergy research aims to inform clinical practice, implementation of best practices may be influenced by financial resources required to incorporate new interventions and the resulting clinical and economic returns on those resource investments. The present review summarizes new insights into the economics of drug allergy over the past year.

RECENT FINDINGS

While considering economic implications of recent drug allergy research, many studies have addressed different contextual factors related to the setting, provider, or outcomes. Advances in technology have enabled specialized allergists to support remote settings through telemedicine consultation. Training opportunities and interdisciplinary approaches to address drug allergy challenges have enabled multiple provider types to play a role in screening, diagnosis, and management. Penicillin allergy testing has been a major focus for many institutions, with several studies focused on de-labeling strategies including confirmatory skin testing and direct oral challenges.

SUMMARY

Studies over the past year provide new opportunities for the field of drug allergy research. The focus of current research to capture direct health costs or savings associated with drug allergy interventions demonstrates opportunity for more cost-effective care delivery and opportunity to explore greater benefits to society.

Evaluation of adverse drug reaction profile of antiepileptic drugs in persons with epilepsy: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are preferred over conventional AEDs with the perception of better safety profile and efficacy though there is a lack of confirmatory evidence. The present study assessed the adverse drug reactions' (ADRs) profile of AEDs prescribed in persons with epilepsy (PWE) as per the System Organ Class (SOC) and compared them on the basis of demographics and treatment pattern.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospective, cross-sectional, and observational study was conducted in PWE attending Neurology Outpatient-Department from February 2016 to April 2019 who were presented with any ADR. World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) scale was used for the causality assessment of suspected ADRs.

RESULTS

Among the 1011 PWE on AEDs, male:female ratio was 622:389, adult:pediatric ratio 736:275, and conventional:newer AEDs ratio 624:387. Among monotherapy PWE (47.1%), commonly used AEDs were levetiracetam (34.4%), valproic acid (22.9%), carbamazepine (18.3%), phenytoin (11.9%), and other AEDs (12.5%). A total of 1990 ADRs (1.96 ADRs per PWE) were reported as per SOC; among them, newer vs. conventional AEDs did not reveal any significant difference; however, monotherapy vs. polytherapy showed differences in nervous system disorders (p = 0.01) and skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (p = 0.005). Causality assessment revealed 0.3% certain, 27.3% probable, 61.3% possible, and 11.1% unlikely association of ADRs with AEDs. Depending on the ADRs, there was either withdrawal of AED (0.9%), reduction in dose (48.4%), or continuation in the same dose as before (50.7%).

CONCLUSION

The ADR analysis showed that newer AEDs were associated with a similar trend of ADRs as that of conventional AEDs. Thus, the choice among newer and conventional AEDs should preferably focus on the experience of better efficacy in addition to safety data.