Feasibility and Limitations of Oxcarbazepine Monitoring Using Salivary Monohydroxycarbamazepine (MHD)

Salivary Biomarkers of Anti-Epileptic Drugs: A Narrative Review

Saliva is a biofluid that reflects general health and that can be collected in order to evaluate and determine various pathologies and treatments. Biomarker analysis through saliva sampling is an emerging method of accurately screening and diagnosing diseases. Anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) are prescribed generally in seizure treatment. The dose-response relationship of AEDs is influenced by numerous factors and varies from patient to patient, hence the need for the careful supervision of drug intake. The therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of AEDs was traditionally performed through repeated blood withdrawals. Saliva sampling in order to determine and monitor AEDs is a novel, fast, low-cost and non-invasive approach. This narrative review focuses on the characteristics of various AEDs and the possibility of determining active plasma concentrations from saliva samples. Additionally, this study aims to highlight the significant correlations between AED blood, urine and oral fluid levels and the applicability of saliva TDM for AEDs. The study also focuses on emphasizing the applicability of saliva sampling for epileptic patients.

Development and Validation of a Highly Sensitive and Rapid LC-MS3 Strategy to Determine Oxcarbazepine and Its Active Metabolite in the Serum of Patients with Epilepsy and Its Application in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

A sensitive and rapid bioanalytical method based on the LC-triple-stage fragmentation (LC-MS³) strategy on a hybrid triple quadrupole-linear ion trap mass spectrometer in combination with protein precipitation extraction for sample pretreatment has been developed and validated for the simultaneous determination of the antiepileptic drug oxcarbazepine (OXC) and its main active metabolite (MHD) in human serum. The separation was performed on a Waters XBridge BEH C18 column (2.5 µm, 2.1 × 50 mm) in isocratic elution with 0.1% formic acid in water and methanol (50:50, v:v) as the mobile phase. The run time for each sample was 2.0 min. The calibration curves ranging from 25 to 1600 ng/mL for OXC and from 0.5 to 32 μg/mL for MHD showed correlation coefficients (r) better than 0.99. All of the validation data, such as precision, accuracy and other parameters, fit the requirements of the current bioanalytical method validation guidelines. The LC-MS³ method for quantitation of OXC and MHD was compared with the LC-MRM based method. Passing–Bablok regression coefficients and Bland–Altman plots showed that the developed LC–MS³ method is a reliable method for quantitative analysis of OXC and MHD. The proposed LC-MS³ method was successfully applied to determine the serum concentrations of OXC and MHD to support a clinical study.

Feasibility of Using Oral Fluid for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Antiepileptic Drugs

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antiepileptic drugs (AED) using blood is well established but limited by its invasiveness, accessibility, cost, interpretation errors, and related disturbances in protein binding. TDM using oral fluid (OF) could overcome these limitations. This paper provides a summary of the current evidence for using OF as a matrix to perform TDM of AEDs, as well as practical considerations. A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted on April 9, 2018 (and then updated on May 20, 2020) using all AEDs as keywords along with "oral fluid," "saliva," "salivary," "seizure," "epilepsy," "antiepileptic," and "anticonvulsant." A total of 18 relevant articles were found and included in this review. There is evidence to suggest that AED TDM using OF is feasible and that reference ranges can be calculated for the following drugs: carbamazepine, ethosuximide, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone, topiramate, and valproic acid. For all other AEDs, there is either a lack of evidence on the feasibility of TDM using OF or the evidence indicates that TDM using OF is not feasible. Practical considerations should include the timing and method of OF collection (stimulated or unstimulated) due to their probable impact on the reliability of AED TDM. Using OF may improve the acceptability and accessibility and reduce the cost of AED TDM. Clinical implementation requires standardized collection protocols, more rigorously defined OF reference ranges, and further studies to determine the relevance to clinically important outcomes.

Usefulness of saliva for perampanel therapeutic drug monitoring

OBJECTIVE

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) helps optimize drug management for patients with epilepsy. Salivary testing is both noninvasive and easy, and has several other advantages. Due to technical advances, salivary TDM has become feasible for several drugs, including AEDs, and its value has been investigated. Until recently, saliva TDM of perampanel (PER) had not been reported. The purpose of our study was to confirm whether saliva is a biological substitute for plasma in PER TDM.

METHODS

Adult patients diagnosed with epilepsy who received PER from August 2018 to March 2019 at Seoul National University Hospital were enrolled. Total and free PER were measured in simultaneously obtained plasma and saliva samples using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and high-performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC). We examined the correlations between saliva and plasma PER concentrations and whether the use of concomitant medications classified as cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 inducers affected the correlations.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled, aged 16 to 60; 10 (33%) were women. Patients received 2 to 12 mg (mean, 6 mg) of PER. The average total and free concentrations of PER were 343.02 (46.6-818.0) and 1.53 (0.51-2.92) ng/mL in plasma and 9.74 (2.21-33.0) and 2.83 (1.01-6.8) ng/mL in saliva, respectively. A linear relationship was observed between the total PER concentrations in saliva and the total and free PER concentrations in plasma (both P < .001; r = .678 and r = .619, respectively). The change in the PER concentration caused by the CYP3A4 inducer did not affect the correlation between saliva and plasma concentrations (all P < .001).

SIGNIFICANCE

The PER concentration in saliva was correlated with that in plasma. This correlation was not affected by CYP3A4 inducers. Our results demonstrate for the first time that PER is measurable in saliva and suggest the potential for the clinical application of the saliva PER TDM matrix.

A descriptive systematic review of salivary therapeutic drug monitoring in neonates and infants

AIMS

Saliva, as a matrix, offers many benefits over blood in therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), in particular for infantile TDM. However, the accuracy of salivary TDM in infants remains an area of debate. This review explored the accuracy, applicability and advantages of using saliva TDM in infants and neonates.

METHODS

Databases were searched up to and including September 2016. Studies were included based on PICO as follows: P: infants and neonates being treated with any medication, I: salivary TDM vs. C: traditional methods and O: accuracy, advantages/disadvantages and applicability to practice. Compounds were assessed by their physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties, as well as published quantitative saliva monitoring data.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies and their respective 13 compounds were investigated. Four neutral and two acidic compounds, oxcarbazepine, primidone, fluconazole, busulfan, theophylline and phenytoin displayed excellent/very good correlation between blood plasma and saliva. Lamotrigine was the only basic compound to show excellent correlation with morphine exhibiting no correlation between saliva and blood plasma. Any compound with an acid dissociation constant (pKa) within physiological range (pH 6-8) gave a more varied response.

CONCLUSION

There is significant potential for infantile saliva testing and in particular for neutral and weakly acidic compounds. Of the properties investigated, pKa was the most influential with both logP and protein binding having little effect on this correlation. To conclude, any compound with a pKa within physiological range (pH 6-8) should be considered with extra care, with the extraction and analysis method examined and optimized on a case-by-case basis.

Salivary Monitoring of Antiepileptic Drugs

Therapeutic drug monitoring is widely used in the anticonvulsant treatment of persons with epilepsy. Most monitoring uses serum, but many anticonvulsant drugs can as easily be monitored using saliva, including phenobarbital, phenytoin, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, levetiracetam, and gabapentin. For highly protein-bound medications such as phenobarbital, phenytoin, and carbamazepine, saliva has the advantage of providing an approximation of the serum free level, the free level presumably being the active moiety. Salivary therapeutic drug monitoring offers a number of advantages over serum therapeutic drug monitoring, including lack of pain, lower cost, and wide potential acceptability by patients and physicians. It has the potential to open new approaches to treatment with strategic at-home monitoring at the time a seizure or adverse event occurs and to allow the collection of cohort-based, pharmacokinetic, and pharmcodynamic data for populations of persons of varying ages and with different medical conditions who require anticonvulsant medications.

Advances in anti-epileptic drug testing

In the past twenty-one years, 17 new antiepileptic drugs have been approved for use in the United States and/or Europe. These drugs are clobazam, ezogabine (retigabine), eslicarbazepine acetate, felbamate, gabapentin, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, perampanel, pregabalin, rufinamide, stiripentol, tiagabine, topiramate, vigabatrin and zonisamide. Therapeutic drug monitoring is often used in the clinical dosing of the newer anti-epileptic drugs. The drugs with the best justifications for drug monitoring are lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, stiripentol, and zonisamide. Perampanel, stiripentol and tiagabine are strongly bound to serum proteins and are candidates for monitoring of the free drug fractions. Alternative specimens for therapeutic drug monitoring are saliva and dried blood spots. Therapeutic drug monitoring of the new antiepileptic drugs is discussed here for managing patients with epilepsy.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of antiepileptic drugs by use of saliva

Blood (serum/plasma) antiepileptic drug (AED) therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has proven to be an invaluable surrogate marker for individualizing and optimizing the drug management of patients with epilepsy. Since 1989, there has been an exponential increase in AEDs with 23 currently licensed for clinical use, and recently, there has been renewed and extensive interest in the use of saliva as an alternative matrix for AED TDM. The advantages of saliva include the fact that for many AEDs it reflects the free (pharmacologically active) concentration in serum; it is readily sampled, can be sampled repetitively, and sampling is noninvasive; does not require the expertise of a phlebotomist; and is preferred by many patients, particularly children and the elderly. For each AED, this review summarizes the key pharmacokinetic characteristics relevant to the practice of TDM, discusses the use of other biological matrices with particular emphasis on saliva and the evidence that saliva concentration reflects those in serum. Also discussed are the indications for salivary AED TDM, the key factors to consider when saliva sampling is to be undertaken, and finally, a practical protocol is described so as to enable AED TDM to be applied optimally and effectively in the clinical setting. Overall, there is compelling evidence that salivary TDM can be usefully applied so as to optimize the treatment of epilepsy with carbamazepine, clobazam, ethosuximide, gabapentin, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone, topiramate, and zonisamide. Salivary TDM of valproic acid is probably not helpful, whereas for clonazepam, eslicarbazepine acetate, felbamate, pregabalin, retigabine, rufinamide, stiripentol, tiagabine, and vigabatrin, the data are sparse or nonexistent.

Utility of noninvasive biomatrices in pharmacokinetic studies

Blood and plasma are the biomatrices traditionally used for drug monitoring and their pharmacokinetic profiling. Blood is the circulating fluid in contact with all organs and tissues of body and thus is the most representative fluid for measuring systemic drug levels. However, venipuncture suffers from the caveat of being an invasive technique which often makes people reluctant to participate in clinical studies. Thus, there is a need for noninvasive bio-fluids that are ethically appropriate, cost-efficient and toxicologically relevant. These alternate bio-fluids may prove clinically useful as alternatives to plasma/serum in therapeutic drug monitoring, pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic studies, doping control in sports medicine and to monitor local adverse effects. These may be of particular interest in the case of special population groups such as neonates, children, the elderly, terminally ill patients and pregnant or lactating women, and offer the advantage of circumvention of the demand for specialized personnel for sample collection. This review describes such noninvasive bio-fluids (saliva, sweat, tears and milk) that have been considered for pharmacokinetic drug analysis, emphasizing their sample preparation, its associated difficulties and their correlation with plasma.

Pharmacotherapy of the third-generation AEDs: lacosamide, retigabine and eslicarbazepine acetate

INTRODUCTION

The search for new, more effective antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) continues. The three most recently approved drugs, the so-called third-generation AEDs, include lacosamide, retigabine and eslicarbazepine acetate and are licensed as adjunctive treatment of partial epilepsy in adults.

AREAS COVERED

For the above three AEDs, their mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetic characteristics, drug-drug interactions, pharmacotherapeutics, dose and administration and therapeutic drug monitoring are reviewed in this paper.

EXPERT OPINION

Lacosamide and retigabine act through novel mechanisms, while eslicarbazepine acetate, a pro-drug for eslicarbazepine, acts in a similar manner to several other AEDs. All three AEDs are associated with linear pharmacokinetic and rapid absorption and undergo metabolism. Their drug-drug interaction profile is low (lacosamide and retigabine) to modest (eslicarbazepine) in propensity. At the highest approved doses for the three AEDs, responder rates were similar. The most commonly observed adverse effects compared with placebo were dizziness, headache, diplopia and nausea for lacosamide; dizziness, somnolence and fatigue for retigabine and dizziness and somnolence for eslicarbazepine acetate. The precise role that these new AEDs will have in the treatment of epilepsy and whether they will make a significant impact on the prognosis of intractable epilepsy is not yet known and will have to await further clinical experience.

Saliva and serum lacosamide concentrations in patients with epilepsy

PURPOSE

Lacosamide is a new antiepileptic drug that has a novel mechanism of action, linear pharmacokinetics, and proven efficacy in the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures. We ascertained the relationship between serum and saliva lacosamide concentrations so as to determine whether saliva may be a useful alternative to serum for therapeutic drug monitoring.

METHODS

Blood samples were obtained from 98 people with intractable epilepsy (51 male; mean age 43 ± 12; range 19-76 years) prescribed lacosamide as adjunctive therapy. For 48 patients, concurrent saliva samples were also collected. Lacosamide concentrations in serum (free and total) and in saliva were determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC).

RESULTS

Linear regression analysis showed a good correlation between lacosamide dose and both total (r(2) = 0.825; n = 32) and free (r(2) = 0.815; n = 29) serum concentrations, and lacosamide serum total and free concentrations were linearly related (r(2) = 0.721; n = 97). There was also a good correlation between saliva lacosamide and both total (r(2) = 0.842; n = 49) and free (r(2) = 0.828; n = 47) serum lacosamide concentrations. Based on the saliva data, the protein binding of lacosamide in serum is calculated to be 87 ± 4% and is comparable to the value calculated by direct measurement of the free and total lacosamide concentration in serum (91 ± 4%).

DISCUSSION

These data support the use of saliva as a viable alternative to serum for monitoring lacosamide therapy in patients with epilepsy.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of the Newer Anti-Epilepsy Medications

In the past twenty years, 14 new antiepileptic drugs have been approved for use in the United States and/or Europe. These drugs are eslicarbazepine acetate, felbamate, gabapentin, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, pregabalin, rufinamide, stiripentol, tiagabine, topiramate, vigabatrin and zonisamide. In general, the clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring has not been established in clinical trials for these new anticonvulsants, and clear guidelines for drug monitoring have yet to be defined. The antiepileptic drugs with the strongest justifications for drug monitoring are lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, stiripentol, and zonisamide. Stiripentol and tiagabine are strongly protein bound and are candidates for free drug monitoring. Therapeutic drug monitoring has lower utility for gabapentin, pregabalin, and vigabatrin. Measurement of salivary drug concentrations has potential utility for therapeutic drug monitoring of lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate. Therapeutic drug monitoring of the new antiepileptic drugs will be discussed in managing patients with epilepsy.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of the Newer Anti-Epilepsy Medications

In the past twenty years, 14 new antiepileptic drugs have been approved for use in the United States and/or Europe. These drugs are eslicarbazepine acetate, felbamate, gabapentin, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, pregabalin, rufinamide, stiripentol, tiagabine, topiramate, vigabatrin and zonisamide. In general, the clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring has not been established in clinical trials for these new anticonvulsants, and clear guidelines for drug monitoring have yet to be defined. The antiepileptic drugs with the strongest justifications for drug monitoring are lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, stiripentol, and zonisamide. Stiripentol and tiagabine are strongly protein bound and are candidates for free drug monitoring. Therapeutic drug monitoring has lower utility for gabapentin, pregabalin, and vigabatrin. Measurement of salivary drug concentrations has potential utility for therapeutic drug monitoring of lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate. Therapeutic drug monitoring of the new antiepileptic drugs will be discussed in managing patients with epilepsy.

Antiepileptic drugs--best practice guidelines for therapeutic drug monitoring: a position paper by the subcommission on therapeutic drug monitoring, ILAE Commission on Therapeutic Strategies

Although no randomized studies have demonstrated a positive impact of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) on clinical outcome in epilepsy, evidence from nonrandomized studies and everyday clinical experience does indicate that measuring serum concentrations of old and new generation antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) can have a valuable role in guiding patient management provided that concentrations are measured with a clear indication and are interpreted critically, taking into account the whole clinical context. Situations in which AED measurements are most likely to be of benefit include (1) when a person has attained the desired clinical outcome, to establish an individual therapeutic concentration which can be used at subsequent times to assess potential causes for a change in drug response; (2) as an aid in the diagnosis of clinical toxicity; (3) to assess compliance, particularly in patients with uncontrolled seizures or breakthrough seizures; (4) to guide dosage adjustment in situations associated with increased pharmacokinetic variability (e.g., children, the elderly, patients with associated diseases, drug formulation changes); (5) when a potentially important pharmacokinetic change is anticipated (e.g., in pregnancy, or when an interacting drug is added or removed); (6) to guide dose adjustments for AEDs with dose-dependent pharmacokinetics, particularly phenytoin.

Simultaneous quantitative analysis of oxcarbazepine and 10,11-dihydro-10-hydroxycarbamazepine in human plasma by liquid chromatography–electrospray tandem mass spectrometry

A fast and sensitive method to quantify oxcarbazepine (OXC) and its active metabolite, 10,11-dihydro-10-hydroxycarbamazepine (MHD) in human plasma using HPLC-MS/MS has been developed. The method involved liquid-liquid extraction (LLE), with diethyl ether-diclhoromethane (60:40v/v) using deuterade carbamazepine (d10-carbamazepine) as internal standard (IS). The analytes and IS were separated using an isocratic mobile phase (acetonitrile/water (50:50v/v)+20 mM acetic acid) on the analytical column Phenomenex Luna C18 5 microm (150 mm x 4.6 mm) at room temperature. Detection was performed by a Micromass Quatro LC mass spectrometer in the reaction monitoring mode using positive electrospray ionization (ESI+). The MS-MS ion transition monitored were m/z 253>208 for OXC, m/z 255>194 for MHD and m/z 247>204 for IS. Over the range 20-5250 ng/ml for OXC and 40-10,500 ng/ml for MHD, the calibration curves were defined by the following equations: y = 0.00568 + 0.00296x -5.70e - 8x(2) and y = 0.00749 + 0.00178x - 5.70e - 8x(2) for OXC and MHD, respectively. All coefficient of determination (r(2)) were close to unity (0.9986-0.9994). The lower limits of quantification obtained as a result of the LLE procedure was 20 ng/ml for OXC and 40 ng/ml for MHD. The statistical evaluation of the developed method was conducted by examining within-batch and between-batch precision data, which were within the required limits. The suitability of the assay for pharmacokinetics studies was determined by measuring OXC and MHD concentration after administration of a single 10 ml of OXC oral suspension (6%) in plasma human of healthy volunteers.

The use of oral fluid for therapeutic drug management: clinical and forensic toxicology

One of the underlying tenets of clinical pharmacology is that only free drugs are pharmacologically active. It is thought that only free drugs can cross biological membranes to interact with a given receptor to alter its function, and that drug responses, both efficacious and toxic, are a function of unbound concentrations. The rationale for measuring drugs in oral fluid is that the free fraction of a drug in plasma reaches equilibrium with the drug in saliva. Although reports concerning the appearance of organic solutes in saliva have been in the literature for over 70 years, it has only been in the past 30 years that there has been emphasis on the appearance of drugs. Although many assumptions for drug level monitoring in saliva are made, the primary requisite for salivary monitoring to be useful is a constant or predictable relationship between the drug concentration in saliva and the drug concentration in plasma. Measurement of oral fluid drug levels for the purpose of managing patients and making dosage adjustments may be useful for select drugs or drug classes. However, it does not appear to be useful for the majority of drugs therapeutically monitored. Some work with antipsychotic medications has indicated that although the measurement of drug concentrations themselves may not be useful for dosage adjustment, the ratio of parent drug to metabolite may reflect altered metabolic status due to either pharmacogenetic variation or other clinical conditions. Furthermore, analysis of saliva may provide a cost-effective approach for the screening of large populations.

Novel anticonvulsant drugs

Principles of complex mechanisms of action of anticonvulsants including latest reports concerning new antiepileptic drugs (AED) are considered. Different aspects of new anticonvulsant drugs (2nd generation) from preclinical and clinical testing, pharmacokinetics, and mono or combination therapy in children and adults are summarized. In the following condensed synopsis pharmacological and clinical characteristics of gabapentin (GBP), lamotrigine (LTG), levetiracetam (LEV), oxcarbazepine (OXC), pregabalin (PGB) and tiagabine (TGB) as well as topiramate (TPM) and zonisamide (ZNS) are discussed. In addition to the mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics, interactions, indications and dosages as well as side effects are considered. Important data concerning the effect and tolerability of anticonvulsant drugs can be obtained from controlled studies. In comparison to drugs of the first generation (phenobarbital [PB], primidon [PRD], phenytoin [PHT], carbamazepine [CBZ] and valproic acid [VPA]) the potential for interactions and side effects due to enzyme induction or inhibition is reduced by most of the anticonvulsant drugs of the second generation. New anticonvulsant drugs increase the spectrum of treatment and represent further steps with regard to the optimization of an individual therapy of the epilepsies.

Stability of salivary concentrations of the newer antiepileptic drugs in the postal system

Saliva antiepileptic drug (AED) concentrations strongly correlate with serum concentrations. Saliva collection is painless and noninvasive, and untrained personnel can easily be taught the collection process. Remote patients could mail saliva samples to a laboratory for monitoring, and samples could be obtained in the immediate postictal state to provide a "real-time" concentration. The objectives of this study were to assess the stability of saliva lamotrigine (LMT), levetiracetam (LEV), oxcarbazepine (OXC), topiramate (TPM), and zonsiamide (ZNS) concentrations sent through the United States Postal Service (USPS) and to quantify the amount of time needed for patients and the USPS to return samples to clinic. Saliva samples were obtained from patients currently taking 1 of the targeted AEDs. Samples were split into 2 storage vials. One sample was sealed in an addressed envelope, which the patient mailed from home, whereas the other sample was frozen immediately. Postmark date and day returned were collected for mailed samples. Saliva concentrations were determined using HPLC. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to compare the immediately-frozen and mailed sample means. Correlations were determined by the Spearman test. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled in the study. The median time between collection and postmark was 1 day (range 0-6 days); and between collection and receipt was 4 days (range 1-160 days). The mean concentrations for mailed and immediately frozen samples were similar for each AED (P > 0.15). Spearman rank order correlations between mailed and immediately frozen aliquots were strong (LMT rs = 1, LEV rs = 1, OXC rs = 0.964, TPM rs = 0.90, and ZNS rs = 1). Saliva samples mailed by patients maintain stability and can be returned in a reasonable length of time. Further studies are needed to assess patient/caretaker capability of obtaining an adequate sample.