Lack of effect of repeated administration of levetiracetam on the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiles of warfarin

Lack of effect of Imrecoxib, an innovative and moderate COX-2 inhibitor, on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin in healthy volunteers

Imrecoxib is a registered treatment for osteoarthritis pain symptoms in China. This study aims to assess the effect of imrecoxib on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of warfarin. 12 healthy male volunteers with CYP2C9*3 AA and VKORC1 AA genotypes took a 5 mg dose of warfarin both alone and concomitantly with steady-state imrecoxib. Both warfarin alone and concomitantly with imrecoxib have safey and good tolerance across the trial. Following warfarin and imrecoxib co-administration, neither C_max, AUC_0-t and t_1/2 of warfarin enantiomers nor AUC of international normalized ratio (INR) were markedly different from those of warfarin alone. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) (warfarin + imrecoxib: warfarin alone) of INR_(AUC) was 1 (0.99, 1.01). The GMRs of warfarin AUC_0-∞ (90% confidence interval, CIs) for warfarin + imrecoxib: warfarin alone were 1.12 (1.08, 1.16) for R-warfarin and 1.13 (1.07, 1.18) for S- warfarin. The 90% CIs of the GMRs of AUC_0-∞, C_max and INR _(AUC) were all within a 0.8–1.25 interval. The combination of warfarin and imrecoxib did not impact the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of single-dose warfarin; therefore, when treating a patient with imrecoxib and warfarin, it is not required to adjust the dosage of warfarin.

The critical interaction between valproate sodium and warfarin: case report and review

BACKGROUND

Valproic acid (VPA) and warfarin are commonly prescribed for patients with epilepsy and concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF). When VPA and warfarin are prescribed together, clinically important interactions may occur. VPA may replace warfarin from the protein binding sites and result in an abnormally increased anticoagulation effect. This is commonly underrecognized.

CASE PRESENTATION

In our case, we report a 78-year-old woman with a glioma who presented with status epilepticus. The patient was on warfarin to prevent cardiogenic embolism secondary to AF. Intravenous loading dose of VPA was administered, but international normalized ratio (INR) increased significantly to 8.26. Intravenous vitamin K1 was then given and the patient developed no overt bleeding during the hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

By reviewing the literature and discussing the critical interaction between valproate sodium and warfarin, we conclude that intravenous VPA and the co-administrated warfarin may develop critical but underrecognized complications due to effects on the function of hepatic enzymes and displacement of protein binding sites.

Treatment Strategies for Dravet Syndrome

Dravet syndrome (DS) is a medically refractory epilepsy that onsets in the first year of life with prolonged seizures, often triggered by fever. Over time, patients develop other seizure types (myoclonic, atypical absences, drops), intellectual disability, crouch gait and other co-morbidities (sleep problems, autonomic dysfunction). Complete seizure control is generally not achievable with current therapies, and the goals of treatment are to balance reduction of seizure burden with adverse effects of therapies. Treatment of co-morbidities must also be addressed, as they have a significant impact on the quality of life of patients with DS. Seizures are typically worsened with sodium-channel agents. Accepted first-line agents include clobazam and valproic acid, although these rarely provide adequate seizure control. Benefit has also been noted with stiripentol, topiramate, levetiracetam, the ketogenic diet and vagal nerve stimulation. Several agents presently in development, specifically fenfluramine and cannabidiol, have shown efficacy in clinical trials. Status epilepticus is a recurring problem for patients with DS, particularly in their early childhood years. All patients should be prescribed a home rescue therapy (usually a benzodiazepine) but should also have a written seizure action plan that outlines when rescue should be given and further steps to take in the local hospital if the seizure persists despite home rescue therapy.

Lack of effect of lacosamide on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of warfarin

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the antiepileptic drug lacosamide on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the anticoagulant warfarin.

METHODS

In this open-label, two-treatment crossover study, 16 healthy adult male volunteers were randomized to receive a single 25-mg dose of warfarin alone in one period and lacosamide 200 mg twice daily on days 1-9 with a single 25 mg dose of warfarin coadministered on day 3 in the other period. There was a 2-week washout between treatments. Pharmacokinetic end points were area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0,last) and AUC(0,∞) ) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) for S- and R-warfarin. Pharmacodynamic end points were area under the international normalized ratio (INR)-time curve (AUCINR ), maximum INR (INRmax ), maximum prothrombin time (PTmax ) and area under the PT-time curve (AUCPT ).

KEY FINDINGS

Following warfarin and lacosamide coadministration, Cmax and AUC of S- and R-warfarin, as well as peak value and AUC of PT and INR, were equivalent to those after warfarin alone. In particular, the AUC(0,∞) ratio (90% confidence interval) for coadministration of warfarin and lacosamide versus warfarin alone was 0.97 (0.94-1.00) for S-warfarin and 1.05 (1.02-1.09) for R-warfarin, and the AUCINR ratio was 1.04 (1.01-1.06). All participants completed the study.

SIGNIFICANCE

Coadministration of lacosamide 400 mg/day did not alter the pharmacokinetics of warfarin 25 mg or the anticoagulation level. These results suggest that there is no need for dose adjustment of warfarin when coadministered with lacosamide.

Levetiracetam: Relative Bioavailability and Bioequivalence of a 10% Oral Solution (750 mg) and 750-mg Tablets

Levetiracetam, an antiepileptic drug, is used worldwide as an adjunctive treatment for partial-onset seizures. The availability of a new oral solution formulation would provide an additional treatment option for patients who have difficulty swallowing tablets. A phase I single-center, randomized, open-label, two-way crossover, single-dose study was conducted to confirm that a 10% oral solution of levetiracetam was bioequivalent to the 750-mg oral tablet and to characterize its pharmacokinetics. Each of 24 healthy subjects received a single oral 750-mg dose of the randomized levetiracetam formulation (7.5 mL of 10% solution or 750-mg tablet) on day 1 and a single oral dose of the alternate formulation on day 8. Serial blood samples were collected from 0 to 36 hours after each dose administration for determination of plasma levetiracetam concentrations. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated, and bioequivalence of the two formulations was evaluated. The mean levetiracetam plasma concentration-time curves and pharmacokinetic parameters essentially were identical for the oral 10% solution and tablet and consistent with previously reported levetiracetam pharmacokinetics. The 90% confidence limits of the geometric mean ratio of the two formulations for area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity, area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to last measurable time point, and maximum plasma concentration were within the 80% to 125% range, demonstrating bioequivalence of the two formulations. Both levetiracetam formulations were well tolerated. The levetiracetam 10% oral solution is a bioequivalent, well-tolerated alternative to the tablet formulation in patients who have difficulty swallowing.

Management of seizures following a stroke: what are the options?

Post-stroke seizures are a frequent cause of remote symptomatic epilepsy in adults, especially in older age. About 10% of stroke patients will suffer a seizure, depending on risk factors, such as the type, location and severity of the stroke. Previous stroke accounts for 30-40% of all cases of epilepsy in the elderly. Compared with that in younger patients, the appearance of seizures in old age is less specific and may take time before a diagnosis can be proven. The optimal timing and type of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment for patients with post-stroke seizures is still a controversial issue. Many population- and hospital-based studies have been performed, ending with generalized recommendations, but still the decision to initiate AED treatment after a first or second seizure should be individualized. Prospective studies in the literature showed that immediate treatment after a first unprovoked seizure does not improve the long-term remission rate. However, because of the physical and psychological influences of recurrent seizures, prophylactic treatment should be considered after a first unprovoked event in an elderly person at high risk of recurrence, taking into consideration the individuality of the patient and a discussion with the patient and his/her family about the risks and benefits of both options. The latest studies regarding post-stroke seizure treatment showed that 'new-generation' drugs, such as lamotrigine, gabapentin and levetiracetam, in low doses would be reasonable because of their high rate of long-term seizure-free periods, improved safety profile, and fewer interactions with other drugs, especially anticoagulant ones, compared with first-generation AEDs. On the other hand, first-generation drugs, such as phenytoin, carbamazepine and phenobarbital, have the potential to have a harmful impact on recovery, bone health, cognition and blood sodium levels and may interact with other treatments used by the elderly population. The drug chosen for use in the elderly population should possess a wide spectrum of activity and have few side effects. An assessment should be done to identify possible drug-drug interactions, the drug should be started at a low dose and titrated slowly to the lowest maintenance dose possible, and enhanced quality of life should be a focus of treatment. So, in the end, further research is needed to determine, more appropriately, the type of AED therapy, timing and duration of treatment.

[Seizures and epilepsies after stroke]

Epilepsies after stroke represent 20% of all adult-onset epilepsies and exhibit special characteristics with respect to diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Patients are frequently amnestic for their seizures the signs of which can be very subtle. Postictal pareses and confusional states can last for days, which further complicate diagnosis. Single seizures after stroke were reported in 2% to 10% of cases, and community-based studies found epilepsies in 3% to 4% of stroke patients. Analyses of subgroups identified epilepsy risks of 3% after ischemic infarction, 6% to 10% after intracerebral hemorrhage, and 9% after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Status epilepticus developed in less than 1% of stroke patients. Besides etiology, further risk factors for epilepsy comprise: remote seizures (latency >2 weeks, risk of recurrence >50%) more than early seizures (latency <2 weeks, risk of recurrence <50%), extent of stroke, cortical involvement, and degree of neurological deficit. The first appearance of seizures in patients older than 60 years represents a risk factor for future stroke with a hazard ratio of 2.89.There is currently no sufficient evidence for starting AED treatment before seizures occur. The benefit is still unclear of starting AED after a single early post-stroke seizure. Most authors recommend AED treatment after the second seizure but also after a first remote seizure because of the high risk of seizure recurrence in these situations. Possible pharmacokinetic interactions should be considered when choosing AED. Especially the first-generation AED carry the potential to interact with comedication, which is usually seen in stroke patients receiving substances such warfarin and salicylates. Only very few studies investigate specific AED exclusively in stroke patients. Lamotrigine and gabapentin have been successfully tested in these patients.

Review of levetiracetam, with a focus on the extended release formulation, as adjuvant therapy in controlling partial-onset seizures

Levetiracetam is a second-generation antiepileptic drug (AED) with a unique chemical structure and mechanism of action. The extended release formulation of levetiracetam (Keppra XR(); UCB Pharma) was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for adjunctive therapy in the treatment of partial-onset seizures in patients 16 years of age and older with epilepsy. This approval is based on a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter, multinational trial. Levetiracetam XR allows for once-daily dosing, which may increase compliance and, given the relatively constant plasma concentrations, may minimize concentration-related adverse effects. Levetiracetam's mode of action is not fully elucidated, but it has been found to target high-voltage, N-type calcium channels as well as the synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A). Levetiracetam has nearly ideal pharmacokinetics. It is rapidly and almost completely absorbed after oral ingestion, is <10% protein-bound, demonstrates linear kinetics, is minimally metabolized through a pathway independent of the cytochrome P450 system, has no significant drug-drug interactions, and has a wide therapeutic index. The most common reported adverse events with levetiracetam XR were somnolence, irritability, dizziness, nausea, influenza, and nasopharyngitis. Levetiracetam XR provides an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option for adjunctive therapy in the treatment of partial-onset seizures.

Levetiracetam in the treatment of epilepsy

Epilepsy is a common chronic disorder that requires long-term antiepileptic drug therapy. Approximately one half of patients fail the initial antiepileptic drug and about 35% are refractory to medical therapy, highlighting the continued need for more effective and better tolerated drugs. Levetiracetam is an antiepileptic drug marketed since 2000. Its novel mechanism of action is modulation of synaptic neurotransmitter release through binding to the synaptic vesicle protein SV2A in the brain. Its pharmacokinetic advantages include rapid and almost complete absorption, minimal insignificant binding to plasma protein, absence of enzyme induction, absence of interactions with other drugs, and partial metabolism outside the liver. The availability of an intravenous preparation is yet another advantage. It has been demonstrated effective as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial-onset seizures, primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures, and myoclonic seizures of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy. In addition, it was found equivalent to controlled release carbamazepine as first-line therapy for partial-onset seizures, both in efficacy and tolerability. Its main adverse effects in randomized adjunctive trials in adults have been somnolence, asthenia, infection, and dizziness. In children, the behavioral adverse effects of hostility and nervousness were also noted. Levetiracetam is an important addition to the treatment of epilepsy.

The SKATE™ study: An open-label community-based study of levetiracetam as add-on therapy for adults with uncontrolled partial epilepsy

The Safety of Keppra as Adjunctive Therapy in Epilepsy (SKATE) study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of levetiracetam (Keppra, LEV) as add-on therapy for refractory partial seizures in clinical practice. This Phase IV, 16-week, open-label study recruited patients > or =16-year old with treatment-resistant partial seizures. LEV (1000 mg/day) was added to a stable concomitant antiepileptic drug regimen. LEV dosage was adjusted based on seizure control and tolerability to a maximum of 3000 mg/day. 1541 patients (intent-to-treat population) were recruited including 1346 (87.3%) who completed the study and 77.0% who declared further continuing on LEV after the trial. Overall, 50.5% of patients reported at least one adverse event that was considered related to LEV treatment. The most frequently reported drug-related adverse events were mild-to-moderate somnolence, fatigue, dizziness and headache. Serious adverse events considered related to LEV occurred in 1.0% of patients. 7.5% of patients reported adverse events as the most important reason for study drug discontinuation. The median reduction from baseline in the frequency of all seizures was 50.2%; 15.8% of patients were seizure free; 50.1% had seizure frequency reduction of > or =50%. At the end of the study, 60.4% of patients were considered by the investigator to show marked or moderate improvement. There was a significant improvement in health-related quality of life as assessed with the QOLIE-10-P (total score increasing from 55.6 to 61.6; p<0.001). This community-based study suggests that LEV is well tolerated and effective as add-on therapy for refractory partial seizures in adults. These data provide supportive evidence for the safety and efficacy of LEV demonstrated in the pivotal Phase III placebo-controlled studies.

The safety of levetiracetam

Levetiracetam is an antiepileptic drug approved for use as an adjunct agent in partial-onset seizures in adults and children aged > or = 4 years. It was also approved as adjunctive therapy in the treatment of adults and adolescents aged > or = 12 years with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy. A parenteral intravenous formulation has recently become available allowing for its use when oral administration is temporarily not feasible. Available literature has demonstrated and supported that levetiracetam has an acceptable safety profile and this review discusses the safety profile of levetiracetam, with attention to special populations. The most common adverse effects are somnolence, asthenia and dizziness, which usually appear early after initiation of levetiracetam therapy and generally resolve without medication withdrawal. The most serious adverse effects are behavioral in nature and are more common in children and in patients with a prior history of behavioral problems.

Risk and predictability of drug interactions in the elderly

The issue of drug-drug interactions is particularly relevant for geriatric patients with epilepsy because they are often treated with multiple medications for concurrent diseases such as cardiovascular disease and psychiatric disorders (e.g., dementia and depression). The antidepressants with the least potential for altering antiepileptic drug (AED) metabolism are citalopram, escitalopram, venlafaxine, duloxetine, and mirtazapine. The use of established AEDs with enzyme-inducing properties, such as carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital, may be associated with reductions in the levels of drugs such as donepezil, galantamine, and particularly warfarin. Carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital have been reported to decrease prothrombin time in patients taking oral anticoagulants, although with phenytoin, an increase in prothrombin time has also been reported. Drugs associated with increased risk of bleeding in patients taking oral anticoagulants include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (especially fluoxetine), gemfibrozil, fluvastatin, and lovastatin. Other drugs affected by enzyme inducers include cytochrome P450 3A4 substrates, such as calcium channel blockers (e.g., nimodipine, nilvadipine, nisoldipine, and felodipine) and the 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors atorvastatin, lovastatin, and simvastatin. Although there have been no reports of AEDs altering ticlopidine metabolism, ticlopidine coadministration can result in carbamazepine and phenytoin toxicity. Also, there is a significant risk of elevated levels of carbamazepine when diltiazem and verapamil are administered. In addition, there are case reports of phenytoin toxicity when administered with diltiazem. Drugs with a lower potential for metabolic drug interactions include (1) cholinesterase inhibitors (although the theoretical possibility of a reduction in donepezil and galantamine levels by enzyme-inducing AEDs should be considered) and the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine and (2) antihypertensives such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, hydrophilic beta-blockers, and thiazide diuretics. There is a moderate risk that enzyme-inducing AEDs will decrease levels of lipophilic beta-blockers. Newer AEDs have a lower potential for drug interactions. In particular, levetiracetam and gabapentin have not been reported to alter enzyme activity. In summary, there is a significant potential for drug interactions between AEDs and drugs commonly prescribed in geriatric patients with epilepsy.

Levetiracetam Intravenous Infusion: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Safety and Pharmacokinetic Study

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this placebo-controlled study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of levetiracetam (LEV) administered intravenously (IV) at higher doses and/or at a faster infusion rate than proposed. The secondary objective was to assess LEV pharmacokinetics.

METHODS

Single ascending doses of LEV administered by IV infusion (2,000, 3,000, 4,000 mg over 15 min; 1,500, 2,000, 2,500 mg over 5 min) were evaluated in 48 healthy subjects in a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled study.

RESULTS

All randomized subjects completed the study. Adverse events reported after IV administration of LEV (<or=4,000 mg infused over 15 min and <or=2,500 mg infused over 5 min) were primarily related to the CNS (dizziness, 52.8%; somnolence, 33.3%; fatigue, 11.1%; headache, 8.3%) and were consistent with the established safety profile for the oral formulation. Safety profiles were similar for each dose level of LEV and for both IV infusion rates, with no clear relation noted between incidence of adverse events and IV dose level or infusion rate. The pharmacokinetics of LEV administered by IV infusion was comparable across all dose groups and infusion rates. Respective geometric means (coefficient of variation) for 4,000 mg administered over 15 min and 2,500 mg infused over 5 min were maximum plasma concentration, 145 (24.6%) and 94.3 (36.2%) mug/ml; area under the plasma concentration-time curve, 1,239 (19.2%) and 585 (9.6%) mug/h/ml; terminal half-life, 8.0 (14.5%) and 7.0 (12.7%) h.

CONCLUSIONS

LEV administered by IV infusion at dosages and/or infusion rates higher than those proposed was well tolerated in healthy subjects, and the pharmacokinetic profile was consistent with that for LEV administered orally.

Use of levetiracetam in treating epilepsy associated with other medical conditions

OBJECTIVE

This prospective, open-label study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of levetiracetam in patients with epilepsy in whom unfavorable metabolism, complex drug interactions, or direct toxic effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) had caused a worsening of comorbid conditions.

METHODS

Study design included the introduction of levetiracetam, discontinuation of other AEDs, and a serial assessment comprising electroencephalograms and blood tests at baseline and 2, 6, and 12 months. Of 21 patients, 16 had partial and five generalized epilepsy. Concomitant pathologies were gastroenterological (six), vascular (four), endocrinological (four), or complex conditions including hematological (four) or dermatological (three) disease. A change of regimen was necessitated by drug-drug interactions in four patients, direct real or potential toxic effects of previous AEDs in 13, and a combination of interactions/toxic effects in four.

RESULTS

After 12 months, 12 patients were seizure-free, nine had reductions in seizure frequency of 50-75%, and improvement in concomitant medical conditions was observed. No side effects were reported.

CONCLUSION

Levetiracetam appears to be effective, well tolerated, and safe in patients with epilepsy and other medical conditions that are difficult to manage because of drug interactions or AED-related side effects.

Oral absorption kinetics of levetiracetam: the effect of mixing with food or enteral nutrition formulas

BACKGROUND

Levetiracetam (LEV) is an antiepileptic drug with a favorable pharmacokinetic profile, including negligible protein binding and linear elimination kinetics. Because LEV is likely to be used in populations that include children and the elderly, alternative techniques of administration, such as crushing the tablet and mixing its contents with semisolid food or enteral nutrition formulas (ENFs), may be required in some clinical settings. Although previous studies have suggested that administration with food does not affect the overall absorption of LEV, there is a lack of data regarding concomitant administration with ENFs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the oral absorption of LEV after concomitant administration with food or ENFs.

METHODS

This was an unblinded, 3-way crossover study. After an overnight fast, subjects received a single dose of LEV 500 mg administered either as an intact tablet with 120 mL water (control, treatment A) or crushed and mixed with 4 oz applesauce (treatment B) or 120 mL of a common ENF (treatment C). All subjects received each treatment in a randomized sequence; there was a 7-day washout period between treatments. Serial blood samples were obtained over 24 hours for determination of the LEV serum concentration-time profile using gas chromatography with nitrogen phosphorus detection. AUC(0-24), C(max), and T(max) were calculated using noncompartmental methods and analyzed using analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Ten healthy adult volunteers (6 men, 4 women) participated in the study (mean [SD] age, 28.9 [6.5] years; mean body weight, 78.6 [12.9] kg). No significant differences were noted between control and any other study treatment. Mean AUC values were 191.9 (50.2), 165.7 (43.4), and 168.3 (43.9) microg/mL . h for treatments A, B, and C, respectively. Mean T(max) values were 1.08 (0.65), 1.32 (0.75), and 1.62 (0.73) hours, respectively. Mean C(max) values were 14.8 (5.6), 12.1 (2.8), and 10.8 (2.0) microg/mL for the respective treatments. Mean LEV serum concentrations at 12 hours after dosing were similar for all study treatments (3.9, 4.1, and 4.0 microg/mL). The long-term stability of LEV in the various combinations was not assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

In these healthy volunteers, the overall rate and extent of absorption of oral LEV were not significantly impaired after crushing and mixing of the tablet with either a food vehicle or a typical ENF product. The data suggest that peak serum concentrations of LEV may be slightly reduced after mixing with ENFs, although the difference was not significant compared with control values.

Levetiracetam: treatment in epilepsy

A large number of new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have become available over the last 10 years. Results from placebo-controlled clinical trials and community-based practice have demonstrated that levetiracetam has a broad spectrum of activity in suppressing seizures as add-on treatment and monotherapy and that it is safe and well-tolerated. Levetiracetam also has a favourable pharmacokinetic profile characterised by rapid and nearly complete absorption, very low potential for drug interactions and a prolonged pharmacodynamic effect that permits twice-daily dosing. Although, the mechanism of action of levetiracetam is not completely understood, preclinical studies suggest that it may have antiepileptogenic and neuroprotective effects, with the potential to slow or arrest disease progression.

Effect of levetiracetam on the pharmacokinetics of adjunctive antiepileptic drugs: a pooled analysis of data from randomized clinical trials

The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of levetiracetam on the steady-state serum concentrations of other commonly used antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Serum AED concentrations were measured at baseline and after adjunctive therapy with levetiracetam (1000-4000 mg/day) or placebo in four phase III trials in patients with refractory partial epilepsy receiving stable AED dosages. The data were pooled, and repeated measures covariance analysis was used to calculate the ratio (and 90% confidence intervals) of the geometric mean serum drug concentrations during adjunctive levetiracetam therapy relative to baseline. Levetiracetam did not increase or decrease mean steady-state serum concentrations of carbamazepine, phenytoin, valproic acid, lamotrigine, gabapentin, phenobarbital, or primidone. For each of these AEDs, the 90% confidence interval of the geometric mean drug concentrations ratio was included within the 80-125% bioequivalence range. Serum concentrations of these AEDs did not change over time after adjunctive levetiracetam therapy, irrespective of the dosage of levetiracetam used. For vigabatrin, there was no evidence for a significant change in serum drug concentration after the addition of levetiracetam, but the number of observations was too small for the limits of the confidence interval to fall within the 80-125% range. Thus, adjunctive therapy with levetiracetam does not influence the steady-state serum concentrations of concomitantly administered carbamazepine, phenytoin, valproic acid, lamotrigine, gabapentin, phenobarbital, or primidone. Consequently, no need for adjusting the dosages of these AEDs is anticipated when levetiracetam is added on or removed from a patient's therapeutic regimen.

Benefit-Risk Assessment of Levetiracetam in the Treatment of Partial Seizures

Levetiracetam is a novel antiepileptic drug that has been demonstrated as being effective in the management of partial seizures. It is rapidly and completely absorbed after oral administration and it is predominantly eliminated as unchanged drug in the urine. Its metabolism is independent of the cytochrome P450 enzyme system, nor does it induce cytochrome P450 enzymes. As a result of its pharmacokinetic features, levetiracetam has not been demonstrated to interact with other drugs in either direction. In double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, all the levetiracetam dosages tested were effective, including 1000 mg/day, 2000 mg/day and 3000 mg/day. The ineffective dose is not known. Efficacy seemed to be maintained in long-term studies, with no evidence of tolerance. In major double-blind, placebo-controlled trials discontinuation rates because of adverse events were 6.9-10.9% for levetiracetam-treated patients (all doses) compared with 5.3-8.6% for placebo-treated patients. The most common adverse events that differed between treatment groups and placebo control groups were somnolence, asthenia, dizziness and, in the US study, infection. Since levetiracetam was marketed, behavioural effects have been reported, namely irritability, agitation, anger and aggressive behaviour. These adverse effects are more likely in learning disabled individuals, those with prior psychiatric history and those with symptomatic generalised epilepsy. Overall, the risk has been estimated at 12-15%. Laboratory parameters overall seem to be not significantly affected by levetiracetam, although slight trends to lower white and red blood cell counts were detected in the studies. No organ toxicity has been described so far, with patient exposures exceeding 500,000. In summary, levetiracetam exhibits a very favourable safety profile in patients with partial onset seizures. Whereas somnolence, asthenia and dizziness were the most prominent adverse effects in clinical trials, behavioural adverse effects have generally been the most common reason for drug discontinuation in clinical practice.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Levetiracetam

Since 1989, eight new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have been licensed for clinical use. Levetiracetam is the latest to be licensed and is used as adjunctive therapy for the treatment of adult patients with partial seizures with or without secondary generalisation that are refractory to other established first-line AEDs. Pharmacokinetic studies of levetiracetam have been conducted in healthy volunteers, in adults, children and elderly patients with epilepsy, and in patients with renal and hepatic impairment. After oral ingestion, levetiracetam is rapidly absorbed, with peak concentration occurring after 1.3 hours, and its bioavailability is >95%. Co-ingestion of food slows the rate but not the extent of absorption. Levetiracetam is not bound to plasma proteins and has a volume of distribution of 0.5-0.7 L/kg. Plasma concentrations increase in proportion to dose over the clinically relevant dose range (500-5000 mg) and there is no evidence of accumulation during multiple administration. Steady-state blood concentrations are achieved within 24-48 hours. The elimination half-life in adult volunteers, adults with epilepsy, children with epilepsy and elderly volunteers is 6-8, 6-8, 5-7 and 10-11 hours, respectively. Approximately 34% of a levetiracetam dose is metabolised and 66% is excreted in urine unmetabolised; however, the metabolism is not hepatic but occurs primarily in blood by hydrolysis. Autoinduction is not a feature. As clearance is renal in nature it is directly dependent on creatinine clearance. Consequently, dosage adjustments are necessary for patients with moderate to severe renal impairment. To date, no clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interactions between AEDs and levetiracetam have been identified. Similarly, levetiracetam does not interact with digoxin, warfarin and the low-dose contraceptive pill; however, adverse pharmacodynamic interactions with carbamazepine and topiramate have been demonstrated. Overall, the pharmacokinetic characteristics of levetiracetam are highly favourable and make its clinical use simple and straightforward.

Clinically important drug interactions in epilepsy: interactions between antiepileptic drugs and other drugs

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are commonly prescribed for long periods, up to a lifetime, and many patients will require treatment with other agents for the management of concomitant or intercurrent conditions. When two or more drugs are prescribed together, clinically important interactions can occur. Among old-generation AEDs, carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital, and primidone are potent inducers of hepatic enzymes, and decrease the plasma concentration of many psychotropic, immunosuppressant, antineoplastic, antimicrobial, and cardiovascular drugs, as well as oral contraceptive steroids. Most new generation AEDs do not have clinically important enzyme inducing effects. Other drugs can affect the pharmacokinetics of AEDs; examples include the stimulation of lamotrigine metabolism by oral contraceptive steroids and the inhibition of carbamazepine metabolism by certain macrolide antibiotics, antifungals, verapamil, diltiazem, and isoniazid. Careful monitoring of clinical response is recommended whenever a drug is added or removed from a patient's AED regimen.

The KEEPER trial: levetiracetam adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures in an open-label community-based study

PURPOSE

Three randomized, placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of levetiracetam, a new antiepileptic medication, as add-on therapy for partial-onset seizures. The purpose of this study was to gather additional safety and efficacy data on levetiracetam in the real-world setting of community-based practice.

METHODS

This was a phase IV prospective, open-label, multicenter, community-based trial. A total of 1030 patients (intent-to-treat (ITT) population) at least 16 years old (mean, 42.2 years) with partial-onset seizures were enrolled by over 300 investigators. Patients whose partial-onset seizures were inadequately controlled on their current medications had levetiracetam 500 mg bid added to their regimens. The levetiracetam dose was increased by 500 mg bid at the end of weeks 2 and 4 to a maximum dose of 1500 mg bid, unless the patient had been seizure-free during the preceding 2-week period. The dose was then to remain the same for 12 weeks. The main outcome measures were reduction in seizure frequency, global evaluation scale (GES), and adverse events.

RESULTS

During the 16 weeks of the trial, 57.9% (542/936) experienced at least a 50% reduction in the frequency of partial-onset seizures, 40.1% (375/936) experienced at least a 75% reduction, and 20% (187/936) demonstrated a 100% seizure reduction. During the last 6 weeks of the study, 66.7% (500/750) experienced at least a 50% reduction in the frequency of partial seizures, 52.4% (393/750) experienced at least a 75% reduction, and 42.1% (316/750) demonstrated a 100% seizure reduction. On the investigator-completed clinical impression rating (GES), 74.3% (734/988) of patients were considered improved, with 37% of patients showing marked improvement. The most common adverse events were somnolence, dizziness, asthenia, and headache; these events were predominantly mild-to-moderate in nature.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide further evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam as adjunctive treatment for partial-onset seizures.

Effects of antiepileptic comedication on levetiracetam pharmacokinetics: a pooled analysis of data from randomized adjunctive therapy trials

PURPOSE

To assess the influence of commonly used antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) on levetiracetam pharmacokinetics at steady state.

METHODS

Plasma levetiracetam concentrations at steady state were determined by capillary gas chromatography in 590 epilepsy patients included in phase III trials and treated with doses of 1000-4000 mg per day in two divided daily doses. The data were pooled and kinetic parameters estimated by repeated measurement covariance analysis on log-transformed dose-adjusted concentrations (regression line as function of time elapsed since last dose).

RESULTS

Estimated pharmacokinetic values, normalized to a dose of 1 mgkg(-1) b.i.d., were: concentration at 1h (C(1h)) 2.1 microgram ml(-1), concentration at 12h (C(12h)) 0.8 microgram ml(-1), area under the curve from 0 to 12h (AUC(0-12h)) 17.1 microgram ml(-1)h, half-life (t(1/2)) 8.1h, and apparent oral clearance (CL/F) 0.97 mlmin(-1)kg(-1). Parameters were similar between genders and among dosage subgroups. Compared with patients receiving comedication not considered to affect drug metabolizing enzymes (gabapentin, lamotrigine, vigabatrin), levetiracetam concentrations and t(1/2) tended to be lower in patients receiving enzyme-inducing AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital, primidone) and higher in patients receiving valproic acid, but the differences were modest.

CONCLUSIONS

Estimated parameters were dose independent, comparable to those from smaller scale studies and not affected to any major extent by gender or comedication with other AEDs. Based on this, no need is anticipated for adjusting levetiracetam dosage according to type of concomitantly prescribed AEDs.