Lacosamide-induced atrial tachycardia in a child with hypoplastic left-heart syndrome: the importance of assessing additional proarrhythmic risks

Tolerability and Safety of Lacosamide in Neonatal Population

Lacosamide is a newer antiepileptic medication used in refractory neonatal seizures with limited safety and efficacy data. This case series spans 4 years and includes 38 neonates cared for in the neonatal, pediatric, and cardiovascular intensive care units, who received lacosamide for refractory seizures. Because lacosamide affects atrioventricular node function in adults, among other metrics, electrocardiogram (ECG) changes were monitored closely in these neonates. Within this cohort, 2 neonates were found to have atrial bigeminy on ECG and telemetry. Otherwise, lacosamide was generally well tolerated with sleepiness being the most common symptom noted. This case series reports data on the tolerability of lacosamide and emphasizes the importance of monitoring key cardiac intervals with ECG before and after the use of lacosamide in this population.

Lacosamide-Related Arrhythmias: A Systematic Analysis and Review of the Literature

Lacosamide (LCM) is a new antiepileptic drug used as an adjunctive treatment for partial seizures with and without secondary generalization. One of the modes of action is the enhancement of slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels. Experimental studies and clinical trials suggest that LCM acts upon both neurons and the heart and may increase the risk of cardiac arrhythmias. A systematic review was conducted to investigate characteristics of arrhythmias related to the use of LCM for the treatment of seizures. The search terms “lacosamide”, “arrhythmias”, “AV block”, “atrial fibrillations/flutter”, “cardiac conductions defects”, “ventricular tachycardia”, “ventricular fibrillation were used. Case reports and retrospective studies were gathered by searching Medline/PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Cochrane CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Web of Science databases. Seventeen articles were selected for review. Ventricular tachycardia was the most reported LCM related arrhythmia (29.4%), followed by new-onset atrial fibrillation (17.6%), complete heart block (17.6%), Mobitz type 1 Atrio-ventricular block (11.8%), sinus pauses (11.8%), pulseless electrical activity (5.9%) and widening QRS complex (5.9%). Further research and clinical trials are needed to explore the etiopathogenesis and causative relationship between the use of LCM and arrhythmias.

Treatment of Refractory Convulsive Status Epilepticus: A Comprehensive Review by the American Epilepsy Society Treatments Committee

Purpose:

Established tonic–clonic status epilepticus (SE) does not stop in one-third of patients when treated with an intravenous (IV) benzodiazepine bolus followed by a loading dose of a second antiseizure medication (ASM). These patients have refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and a high risk of morbidity and death. For patients with convulsive refractory status epilepticus (CRSE), we sought to determine the strength of evidence for 8 parenteral ASMs used as third-line treatment in stopping clinical CRSE.

Methods:

A structured literature search (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was performed to identify original studies on the treatment of CRSE in children and adults using IV brivaracetam, ketamine, lacosamide, levetiracetam (LEV), midazolam (MDZ), pentobarbital (PTB; and thiopental), propofol (PRO), and valproic acid (VPA). Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), magnesium sulfate, and pyridoxine were added to determine the effectiveness in treating hard-to-control seizures in special circumstances. Studies were evaluated by predefined criteria and were classified by strength of evidence in stopping clinical CRSE (either as the last ASM added or compared to another ASM) according to the 2017 American Academy of Neurology process.

Results:

No studies exist on the use of ACTH, corticosteroids, or IVIg for the treatment of CRSE. Small series and case reports exist on the use of these agents in the treatment of RSE of suspected immune etiology, severe epileptic encephalopathies, and rare epilepsy syndromes. For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists on the effectiveness of brivaracetam (level U; 4 class IV studies). For children and adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists on the effectiveness of ketamine (level U; 25 class IV studies). For children and adults with CRSE, it is possible that lacosamide is effective at stopping RSE (level C; 2 class III, 14 class IV studies). For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists that LEV and VPA are equally effective (level U, 1 class III study). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support the effectiveness of LEV (level U; 2 class IV studies). Magnesium sulfate may be effective in the treatment of eclampsia, but there are only case reports of its use for CRSE. For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support either that MDZ and diazepam infusions are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study) or that MDZ infusion and PTB are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support either that MDZ infusion and PRO are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study) or that low-dose and high-dose MDZ infusions are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For children and adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that MDZ is effective as the last drug added (level U; 29 class IV studies). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PTB and PRO are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For adults and children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PTB is effective as the last ASM added (level U; 42 class IV studies). For CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PRO is effective as the last ASM used (level U; 26 class IV studies). No pediatric-only studies exist on the use of PRO for CRSE, and many guidelines do not recommend its use in children aged <16 years. Pyridoxine-dependent and pyridoxine-responsive epilepsies should be considered in children presenting between birth and age 3 years with refractory seizures and no imaging lesion or other acquired cause of seizures. For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists that VPA and diazepam infusion are equally effective (level U, 1 class III study). No class I to III studies have been reported in adults treated with VPA for CRSE. In comparison, for children and adults with established convulsive SE (ie, not RSE), after an initial benzodiazepine, it is likely that loading doses of LEV 60 mg/kg, VPA 40 mg/kg, and fosphenytoin 20 mg PE/kg are equally effective at stopping SE (level B, 1 class I study).

Conclusions:

Mostly insufficient evidence exists on the efficacy of stopping clinical CRSE using brivaracetam, lacosamide, LEV, valproate, ketamine, MDZ, PTB, and PRO either as the last ASM or compared to others of these drugs. Adrenocorticotropic hormone, IVIg, corticosteroids, magnesium sulfate, and pyridoxine have been used in special situations but have not been studied for CRSE. For the treatment of established convulsive SE (ie, not RSE), LEV, VPA, and fosphenytoin are likely equally effective, but whether this is also true for CRSE is unknown. Triple-masked, randomized controlled trials are needed to compare the effectiveness of parenteral anesthetizing and nonanesthetizing ASMs in the treatment of CRSE.

Role of observational studies in supporting extrapolation of efficacy data from adults to children with epilepsy - A systematic review of the literature using lacosamide as an example

Extrapolation of efficacy data from adults to children is accepted for focal epilepsy - the antiepileptic drug, lacosamide, has been approved for the treatment of children ≥4 years of age on this basis. Since many small-scale, open-label studies are reported in the literature before approval, a systematic review was conducted to ascertain whether results of these could be used to support extrapolation in epilepsy in the future. In the absence of randomised trials, a second analysis was conducted for reports on lacosamide use in adults with generalized epilepsies. Twenty-seven articles were included in the paediatric qualitative synthesis, and 14 in the adult. Paediatric studies were analysed separately based on seizure type: focal, generalised and mixed. In focal epilepsy, safety and seizure-related findings mirrored those observed in the adult Phase II/III trials, supporting the feasibility of data extrapolation. Few studies reported outcomes in children with epilepsies associated with generalised seizures, and those that included children with different seizure types, mostly did not provide results separately. Lacosamide treatment appeared beneficial for children and adults experiencing tonic-clonic and myoclonic seizures. Reports of seizure aggravation were inconsistent and, in many cases, could not be clearly attributed to lacosamide. Given the absence of sufficient data, evidence for the feasibility of extrapolation was not as clear-cut as it was in focal epilepsy. These results highlight the complexities of conducting trials in the generalised epilepsy setting, and the importance of studies in the real-life setting and of analysing efficacy data per generalized seizure type and syndrome.

A long-term noninterventional safety study of adjunctive lacosamide therapy in patients with epilepsy and uncontrolled partial-onset seizures

This noninterventional, observational, postauthorization safety study (SP0942, NCT00771927) evaluated the incidence of predefined cardiovascular- (CV) and psychiatric-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), in patients with epilepsy and uncontrolled partial-onset seizures, when initiating adjunctive therapy with lacosamide or another approved antiepileptic drug (AED) according to standard medical practice. Active recording of predefined TEAEs of interest took place at three-monthly recommended visits for up to 12months. Of 1004 patients who received at least one dose of adjunctive AEDs, 511 initially added lacosamide therapy, 493 added another AED, 69 were ≥65years of age, and 72 took concomitant antiarrhythmic drugs. Patients in the lacosamide cohort had a higher median frequency of partial-onset seizures (6.0 versus 3.5 per 28days) despite taking more concomitant AEDs (84.9% versus 66.9% took ≥2) at baseline. Patients who added lacosamide took a modal dose of 200mg/day over the treatment period (n=501), and 50.1% (256/511) completed 12months of treatment. Fifty-one point nine percent (256/493) of patients who added another AED completed the study, with the most commonly added AED being levetiracetam (28.4%). Four patients (0.8%) in each cohort, all <65years of age, reported predefined CV-related TEAEs. None were considered serious or led to discontinuation. One event each of sinus bradycardia (lacosamide), atrioventricular block first degree (lacosamide), and syncope (other AED) were judged to be treatment-related. Another patient in the other AED cohort reported bradycardia while taking concomitant antiarrhythmic drugs. Predefined psychiatric-related TEAEs were reported by 21 patients (4.1%) in the lacosamide cohort and 27 patients (5.5%) in the other AED cohort. Depression was the most common to be treatment-related (7/11 and 12/18 of patients reporting treatment-related psychiatric TEAEs, respectively). Serious psychiatric-related TEAEs were reported by four patients who added lacosamide (two cases of depression, two of suicide attempt) and one who added another AED (depression). Seven deaths occurred, all of which were considered unrelated/unlikely related to study medication. This thorough evaluation revealed a low incidence of predefined CV- and psychiatric-related TEAEs in patients taking adjunctive AED therapy according to standard medical practice. No specific safety concerns related to adjunctive lacosamide therapy were noted.

Lacosamide cardiac safety: clinical trials in patients with partial-onset seizures

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cardiac safety of adjunctive lacosamide in a large pool of adults with partial-onset seizures (POS).

METHODS

Post-randomization changes from baseline for electrocardiographic (ECG) measurements, diagnostic findings, and relevant adverse events (AEs) were compared for pooled data from three randomized, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive lacosamide for the treatment of POS.

RESULTS

Lacosamide did not prolong the QTc interval or affect heart rate as determined by an analysis of data from patients randomized to lacosamide 200, 400, or 600 mg/day (n = 944) compared with placebo (n = 364). After 12-week maintenance treatment, mean changes from baseline for QRS duration were similar between the placebo and lacosamide 200 and 400 mg/day groups (0.0, -0.2, and 0.4 ms), but slightly increased for lacosamide 600 mg/day (2.3 ms). A small, dose-related mean increase in PR interval was observed (-0.3, 1.4, 4.4, and 6.6 ms for the placebo and lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day groups, respectively). First-degree atrioventricular (AV) block was reported as a non-serious AE in 0.0%, 0.7%, 0.2%, and 0.5% of patients in the same respective groups. Second- or higher degree AV block was not observed. There was no evidence of a PR-interval-related pharmacodynamic interaction of lacosamide with either carbamazepine or lamotrigine.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation of the pooled cardiac safety data from patients with POS showed that adjunctive lacosamide at the maximum recommended dose (400 mg/day) was not clearly associated with any cardiac effect other than a small, dose-related increase in PR interval that had no evident symptomatic consequence.