Remacemide hydrochloride as an add-on therapy in epilepsy: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of three dose levels (300, 600 and 800 mg/day) in a B.I.D. regimen

Targeting NMDA Receptor Complex in Management of Epilepsy

N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) are widely distributed in the central nervous system (CNS) and play critical roles in neuronal excitability in the CNS. Both clinical and preclinical studies have revealed that the abnormal expression or function of these receptors can underlie the pathophysiology of seizure disorders and epilepsy. Accordingly, NMDAR modulators have been shown to exert anticonvulsive effects in various preclinical models of seizures, as well as in patients with epilepsy. In this review, we provide an update on the pathologic role of NMDARs in epilepsy and an overview of the NMDAR antagonists that have been evaluated as anticonvulsive agents in clinical studies, as well as in preclinical seizure models.

The NMDA receptor complex as a therapeutic target in epilepsy: a review

A substantial amount of research has shown that N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) may play a key role in the pathophysiology of several neurological diseases, including epilepsy. Animal models of epilepsy and clinical studies demonstrate that NMDAR activity and expression can be altered in association with epilepsy and particularly in some specific seizure types. NMDAR antagonists have been shown to have antiepileptic effects in both clinical and preclinical studies. There is some evidence that conventional antiepileptic drugs may also affect NMDAR function. In this review, we describe the evidence for the involvement of NMDARs in the pathophysiology of epilepsy and provide an overview of NMDAR antagonists that have been investigated in clinical trials and animal models of epilepsy.

Factors determining response to antiepileptic drugs in randomized controlled trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Because of the lack of head-to-head adjunctive-therapy trials of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in refractory partial epilepsy, meta-analyses of placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent a potentially important source of evidence to guide treatment decisions. However, such indirect comparisons raise various methodologic issues that may hamper their relevance.

METHODS

All RCTs in adult refractory partial epilepsy were analyzed to assess whether efficacy outcomes are influenced by: characteristics of patients and trials ; use of last observation carried forward (LOCF) analysis; evaluation period (entire period versus maintenance period); and year of publication. A meta-analysis of these AEDs was then performed taking these factors into consideration.

KEY FINDINGS

Sixty-three RCTs evaluating 20 AEDs were included. The following variables influenced efficacy estimates: (1) responder rates correlated positively with duration of the entire treatment period (p = 0.038); (2) response to placebo was significantly greater in the maintenance period than in the entire treatment period (p = 0.005); (3) responder rates increased over the years both for AEDs (p < 0.001) and for placebo (p = 0.001); (4) LOCF analysis overestimated responder rates for AEDs (p < 0.001) and for placebo (p = 0.001) compared with completer-based analysis, and the overestimation correlated positively with withdrawal rates (p < 0.001). A meta-analysis of available data showed large differences in efficacy ranking in relation to dose selection and type of analysis, but these were mostly nonsignificant due to statistical power limitations.

SIGNIFICANCE

Several methodologic issues hamper the relevance of indirect comparisons of AEDs in the adjunctive-therapy of refractory partial epilepsy. Some of these issues could be overcome by improved standardization in the reporting of efficacy outcomes.

Placebo responses in randomized trials of antiepileptic drugs

This meta-analysis of published, randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of antiepileptic drugs in adults with focal drug-resistant epilepsy was performed to estimate a mean placebo effect, to evaluate variability in placebo response rates, to investigate associations between placebo effect rates and study characteristics, and to determine whether there were changes in placebo response rates over recent years in RCTs (so-called "placebo drift"). One hundred ninety-eight potentially appropriate studies were identified after MEDLINE search and carefully reviewed. Twenty-seven RCTs (with 5662 randomized patients, including 1887 patients in placebo arms) were included in the meta-analysis. A random effects meta-analytic model estimated the pooled placebo response at 12.5% (95% CI: 10.03-14.94%). A statistically significant correlation between baseline median seizure frequency and placebo response rates was not observed. "Placebo drift" was not considered statistically significant.

Placebo effects: clinical aspects and neurobiology

Placebo effects are beneficial health outcomes not related to the relatively direct biological effects of an intervention and can be elicited by an agent that, by itself, is inert. Understanding these placebo effects will help to improve clinical trial design, especially for interventions such as surgery, CNS-active drugs and behavioural interventions which are often non-blinded. A literature review was performed to retrieve articles discussing placebo implications of clinical trials, the neurobiology of placebo effects and the implications of placebo effect for several disorders of neurological relevance. Recent research in placebo analgesia and other conditions has demonstrated that several neurotransmitter systems, such as opiate and dopamine, are involved with the placebo effect. Brain regions including anterior cingulate cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia have been activated following administration of placebo. A patient's expectancy of improvement may influence outcomes as much as some active interventions and this effect may be greater for novel interventions and for procedures. Maximizing this expectancy effect is important for clinicians to optimize the health of their patient. There have been many relatively acute placebo studies that are now being extended into clinically relevant models of placebo effect.

Isobolographic analysis of interactions between remacemide and conventional antiepileptic drugs in the mouse model of maximal electroshock

Using the mouse maximal electroshock-induced seizure model, indicative of tonic-clonic seizures in humans, the present study was aimed at characterizing the interaction between remacemide and valproate, carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital. Isobolographic analysis indicated additive interactions between remacemide and valproate, carbamazepine, and phenytoin (for all fixed ratios of tested drugs: 1:3, 1:1, and 3:1). Additivity was also observed between remacemide and phenobarbital applied in proportions of 1:1 and 3:1. In contrast, the combination of remacemide and phenobarbital at the fixed-ratio of 1:3 resulted in antagonism. Neither motor performance nor long-term memory was impaired by remacemide or by carbamazepine, phenobarbital, phenytoin, and valproate whether or not these drugs were administered singly or in combination. In combination with remacemide, brain concentrations of carbamazepine, phenobarbital, and phenytoin were increased by 71, 21, and 16%, respectively. Although brain valproate concentrations were unaffected by remacemide co-administration, brain concentrations of remacemide and its active metabolite, desglycinyl-remacemide, were increased by 68 and 162%, respectively. In contrast, phenobarbital co-administration was associated with decreases in brain remacemide (27%) and desglycinyl-remacemide (9%) concentrations, whereas only remacemide concentrations (increased by 131%) were affected by carbamazepine co-administration. In conclusion, significant and desirable pharmacodynamic interactions were observed between remacemide and valproate, carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital. However, the concurrent pharmacokinetic interactions associated with remacemide complicate these observations and do not make remacemide a good candidate for adjunctive treatment of epilepsy.

Neuroprotective effect of memantine in different retinal injury models in rats

PURPOSE

To evaluate the neuroprotective effect of memantine, an NMDA receptor channel blocker, in two retinal ganglion cell (RGC) injury models in rats.

METHODS

Neuroprotective effect of memantine was tested in partial optic nerve injury and chronic ocular hypertensive models. In the optic nerve injury model, memantine (0.1 - 30 mg/kg) was injected intraperitoneally immediately after injury. Two weeks later, optic nerve function was determined by measuring compound action potential and surviving RGC was determined by retrograde labeling with dextran tetramethyl rhodamine. Chronic ocular hypertension was attained by laser photocoagulation of episcleral and limbal veins. Memantine (5 or 10 mg/kg) was administered continuously each day with an osmotic pump, either immediately after or 10 days after first laser photocoagulation, for 3 weeks, after which RGC survival was determined.

RESULTS

Two weeks after partial optic nerve injury, there was approximately 80% reduction in RGC number. Memantine (5 mg/kg) caused a twofold increase in compound action potential amplitude and a 1.7-fold increase in survival of RGCs, respectively. In the chronic ocular hypertension model there was 37% decrease in RGCs after 3 weeks of elevated intraocular pressure. Memantine (10 mg/kg daily) reduced ganglion cell loss to 12% when applied immediately after first laser photocoagulation, and prevented any further loss when applied 10 days after first laser photocoagulation.

CONCLUSION

The protective effect of memantine suggests that excessive stimulation of NMDA receptors by glutamate is involved in causing cell damage in these RGC injury models.