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

Cardiac adverse events associated with lacosamide: a disproportionality analysis of the FAERS database

Lacosamide was the first approved third-generation antiepileptic drug. However, real-world data regarding its adverse cardiac reactions in large samples still need to be completed. We evaluated the cardiac safety profile of lacosamide using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). We performed disproportionality analysis computing reporting odds ratio (ROR) as a quantitative metric to assess the signal of lacosamide-related cardiac adverse events (AEs) from 2013 Q1 to 2022 Q4. The signal was considered significant when the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the ROR exceeded 1, and ≥ 5 AEs were reported. Serious and nonserious cases were compared by statistical analysis, and signals were further prioritized using a rating scale. A total of 812 cardiac AEs associated with lacosamide were identified, and 92 signals were detected, of which 17 AEs were significantly associated signals. The median time-to-onset (TTO) for moderate priority signals was 10 days, whereas for weak priority signals, it was 54 days. Notably, all cardiac AEs exhibited an early failing pattern, indicating the risk gradually decreasing. Based on the comprehensive analysis of the FAERS database and prioritization of cardiac AE signals, our research enhances the awareness among healthcare professionals regarding cardiac AEs associated with lacosamide.

Risk assessment of arrhythmias related to three antiseizure medications: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis

Objective

Antiseizure medications (ASMs) are first line therapy for seizure disorders. Their effects on arrhythmias, especially the risk of arrhythmias associated with lacosamide (LCM), levetiracetam (LEV), and perampanel (PER), have been intensely investigated.

Methods

We searched four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) until August 6, 2023. We used a common effects model and reported data as pooled incidence with 95% CIs. Meta-analyses were conducted to elucidate the risk of arrhythmias with different drugs, and Egger's regression was performed to detect publication bias analysis.

Results

We included 11 clinical trials with 1,031 participants. The pooled incidence of arrhythmias in the LEV group was 0.005 (95% CI: 0.001-0.013), while it was 0.014 in the LCM group (95% CI: 0.003-0.030). Publication bias analyses indicated no significant bias in the LEV group (t = 0.02, df = 4, p-value = 0.9852) but a significant bias in the LCM group (t = 5.94, df = 3, p-value = 0.0095). We corrected for this bias in the LCM group using the trim-and-fill method, which yielded a similar pooled incidence of 0.0137 (95% CI: 0.0036-0.0280), indicating good reliability. Due to insufficient studies, we could not conduct a meta-analysis for PER, and we analyzed them in our systematic review.

Conclusion

The use of LCM significantly elevated the risk of arrhythmias, while LEV had non-significant arrhythmogenic effects. As for the arrhythmogenic effects of PER, more clinical trials are needed in the future.

Neonatal Cardiac Arrest Following Lacosamide Treatment: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

Lacosamide is an antiepileptic drug with US Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of partial-onset seizures in patients older than one month. Lacosamide works by selective enhancement of proteins that induce preferential slow promotion of sodium channels to the hyperpolarized inactive state. Lacosamide is generally well-tolerated; however, clinical and nonclinical studies have linked its use with cardiac side effects including PR prolongation and atrioventricular (AV) block.

RESULTS

We present the case of a three-week-old female neonatal patient born at 25 weeks' gestation who developed second-degree AV heart block and cardiac arrest after initiating lacosamide therapy. The patient was being treated for neonatal seizure complicated by intraventricular hemorrhage (grade II) and electrolyte disturbances with phenobarbital, levetiracetam, and phenytoin. Before addition of lacosamide therapy, the patient had an unremarkable electrocardiogram and no known cardiac risk factors for lacosamide. After medication discontinuation, the patient experienced no reoccurring episodes or other cardiac events.

CONCLUSION

Use of lacosamide for neonatal populations is currently under evaluation. This is the first report of adverse cardiac event (AV block) in the setting of neonatal lacosamide use. Risk of future adverse cardiac events should be evaluated when determining the safety and efficacy of lacosamide in the neonatal population.

Safety Profile of High-Dose Intravenous Push Lacosamide

Lacosamide (LCM) is an antiseizure medication used to manage status epilepticus (SE). Previous retrospective analyses have demonstrated safety and efficiency in intravenous push (IVP) administration at 80 mg per minute. Quick administration can be achieved in a high-acuity setting without the additional time required for compounding. However, previous literature only partially represents high doses of IVP LCM, which limits the understanding of the safety profile of these doses. Our study was a single-center, retrospective, single-arm analysis of patients who received IVP LCM 300 mg or 400 mg during admission. The primary outcome was the incidence of infusion site reactions, hypotension, and bradycardia within 2 hours of IVP administration. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of PR prolongation. A total of 113 patients were evaluated for infusion site reactions. Of these, 108 patients had vital signs assessed within 2 hours of IVP LCM and could be evaluated for hypotension and bradycardia. The sample primarily consisted of LCM 400 mg IVP (85.8%). The primary outcome consisted of 7 (6.2%) infusion reactions, 12 (11.1%) hypotensive events, and no reports of bradycardia. Each adverse event was assessed using the Naranjo Adverse Drug Probability Scale. All events scored less than two, suggesting the possibility was likely related to factors other than the medication. In conclusion, LCM 300 mg and 400 mg IVP administration have the potential to facilitate more rapid treatment of seizures without additional risk of infusion site reactions, hypotension, and bradycardia.

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.

The therapeutic effects of lacosamide on epilepsy-associated comorbidities

Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder associated with severe social and psychological effects, and most epilepsy patients often report at least one comorbidity. Accumulating evidence have suggested that lacosamide, a new generation of anti-seizure medications, may exhibit efficacy in the management of both epilepsy and its related comorbidities. Therefore, this narrative review aimed to elucidate the recent advancements regarding the therapeutic role of lacosamide in epilepsy-associated comorbidities. The possible pathophysiological mechanisms between epilepsy and epilepsy-associated comorbidities have been also partially described. Whether lacosamide improves cognitive and behavioral functions in patients with epilepsy has not been conclusively established. Some studies support that lacosamide may alleviate anxiety and depression in epilepsy patients. In addition, lacosamide has been found to be safe and effective in the treatment of epilepsy in people with intellectual disabilities, epilepsy of cerebrovascular etiology, and epilepsy associated with brain tumors. Moreover, lacosamide treatment has demonstrated fewer side effects on other systems. Hence, future larger and higher quality clinical studies are needed to further explore both the safety and efficacy of lacosamide in the treatment of epilepsy-associated comorbidities.

Cardiac adverse effects of antiseizure medications

INTRODUCTION

Patients with severe epilepsy are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease and arrhythmias. Although antiseizure medications (ASMs) may have indirect protective effects against cardiovascular events by reducing seizure frequency and hence sudden death in epilepsy, some of them exert cardiotoxic effects.

AREAS COVERED

Patients with epilepsy, mainly those with severe forms, are at higher risk of cardiac disease because their heart can have structural alterations and electrical instability as a consequence of repeated seizures. Some ASMs have direct protective effects through anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, hypotensive, and lipid-reducing properties. Antiseizure medications can also have toxic cardiac effects including both long-term consequences, such as the increased risk of atherogenesis and subsequent cardiovascular disease due to the influence on lipid profile and pro-inflammatory milieu, and immediate effects as the increased risk of potentially fatal arrhythmias due to the influence on ion channels. Sodium channel blocking ASMs may also affect cardiac sodium channels and this effect is particularly observed in subjects with genetic mutations in cardiac ion channels. Fenfluramine cause valvulopathies in obese subjects and this effect need to be evaluated in epilepsy patients.

EXPERT OPINION

For the selection of treatment, cardiotoxic effects of ASMs should be considered; cardiac monitoring of treatment is advisable.

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.

Cardiac effects of rapid intravenous loading of lacosamide in patients with epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Lacosamide (LCM) is a new antiseizure medication, and intravenous (IV) loading of LCM is recently used against status epilepticus. IV loading of LCM is usually well-tolerated; however, there are concerns about LCM-induced serious adverse cardiac events. This study was aimed at investigating whether rapid IV loading of LCM is associated with adverse cardiac or hemodynamic events in cases of epilepsy emergencies in real-world settings.

METHODS

We reviewed medical records of consecutive adult epilepsy patients who received a single loading dose (400 mg) of IV LCM between January 2019 and December 2020 and included patients who exhibited status epilepticus or acute repetitive seizures. Electrocardiography findings, blood pressure, and heart rate before and after the IV infusion of LCM were collected.

RESULTS

Of the 85 patients included, 32.9 % (28/85 patients) had experienced at least one cardiac adverse event. The most common adverse events were new-onset first-degree atrioventricular block (19 patients) and hypotension (seven patients). Atrial fibrillation and bradycardia developed in two patients and atrial flutter in one. There were significant increases in the mean PR interval (from 169.3 msec to 184.5 msec, P < 0.01) and decreases in the mean heart rate (from 91.7 to 86.9, P = 0.01) after IV loading of LCM. Older age was significantly associated with a higher magnitude of the PR interval difference between before and after IV loading of LCM.

CONCLUSIONS

In cases of epilepsy emergencies, adverse cardiac events commonly developed after IV loading of LCM, although most adverse events were mild in severity or not clinically significant. Elderly patients or patients with underlying cardiac diseases were prone to exhibiting a more prolonged PR interval after IV loading of LCM. Thus, the loading dose of IV LCM should be infused under careful ECG monitoring in these patients.

Pharmacotherapy for Nonconvulsive Seizures and Nonconvulsive Status Epilepticus

Most seizures in critically ill patients are nonconvulsive. A significant number of neurological and medical conditions can be complicated by nonconvulsive seizures (NCSs) and nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE), with brain infections, hemorrhages, global hypoxia, sepsis, and recent neurosurgery being the most prominent etiologies. Prolonged NCSs and NCSE can lead to adverse neurological outcomes. Early recognition requires a high degree of suspicion and rapid and appropriate duration of continuous electroencephalogram (cEEG) monitoring. Although high quality research evaluating treatment with antiseizure medications and long-term outcome is still lacking, it is probable that expeditious pharmacological management of NCSs and NCSE may prevent refractoriness and further neurological injury. There is limited evidence on pharmacotherapy for NCSs and NCSE, although a few clinical trials encompassing both convulsive and NCSE have demonstrated similar efficacy of different intravenous (IV) antiseizure medications (ASMs), including levetiracetam, valproate, lacosamide and fosphenytoin. The choice of specific ASMs lies on tolerability and safety since critically ill patients frequently have impaired renal and/or hepatic function as well as hematological/hemodynamic lability. Treatment frequently requires more than one ASM and occasionally escalation to IV anesthetic drugs. When multiple ASMs are required, combining different mechanisms of action should be considered. There are several enteral ASMs that could be used when IV ASM options have been exhausted. Refractory NCSE is not uncommon, and its treatment requires a very judicious selection of ASMs aiming at reducing seizure burden along with management of the underlying condition.

A prospective, multicenter, noninterventional study in Taiwan to evaluate the safety and tolerability of lacosamide as adjunctive therapy for epilepsy in clinical practice

RATIONALE

Lacosamide (LCM) was initially approved in Taiwan in March 2014 for use as adjunctive therapy for focal impaired awareness seizures and secondarily generalized seizures (SGS) in patients with epilepsy ≥16 years of age. The efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive LCM for the treatment of patients with focal seizures have been demonstrated in randomized, placebo-controlled trials. However, the trials do not reflect a flexible dose setting. This study (EP0063) was conducted to assess the safety and tolerability of LCM in real-world clinical practice in Taiwan. Effectiveness of LCM was also assessed as an exploratory objective.

METHODS

EP0063 was a multicenter, prospective, noninterventional study with an expected observation period of 12 months ± 60 days. Eligible patients were ≥16 years of age, had focal impaired awareness seizures and/or SGS (in line with approved indication in Taiwan at the time of the study), were taking at least one concomitant antiseizure medication (ASM), and had at least one seizure in the 3 months before baseline. Patients were prescribed LCM by their treating physician in the course of routine clinical practice. The primary safety variable was treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) spontaneously reported to, or observed by, the treating physician. Based on safety data from previous studies of LCM and known side effects of other ASMs, certain TEAEs (including but not limited to cardiac and electrocardiogram, suicidality, and rash related terms) were analyzed separately. Effectiveness variables included Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) and change in 28-day seizure frequency from baseline to 12 months (or final visit), and freedom from focal seizures.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were treated with LCM, of whom 139 (81.3%) completed the study. The Kaplan-Meier estimated 12-month retention was 82.9%. Patients had a mean (standard deviation [SD], range) age of 38.5 (14.0, 16-77) years, and 96 (56.1%) were male. Patients were taking a mean (SD, range) of 2.8 (1.1, 1-6) ASMs at baseline. Mean (SD, range) duration of LCM treatment was 288.7 (111.9, 2-414) days, and the mean (SD, range) daily dosage of LCM was 205.0 (82.7, 50.0-505.2) mg/day. Overall, 95 (55.6%) patients reported at least one TEAE, most commonly dizziness (33 [19.3%] patients). Drug-related TEAEs were reported in 74 (43.3%) patients, and drug-related TEAEs leading to discontinuation of LCM were reported in 14 (8.2%) patients. Two (1.2%) patients died during LCM treatment, which were considered not related to LCM. Two (1.2%) patients had suicidality-related TEAEs; these TEAEs were considered either not related to LCM or the relationship was not recorded. Rash-related TEAEs were reported in five (2.9%) patients (considered LCM-related in two patients). Based on the CGIC, at 12 months (or final visit), 109 (63.7%) patients were considered to have improved, 54 (31.6%) had no change, and the remaining eight (4.7%) were minimally worse. At 12 months (or final visit), the median percentage change in focal seizure frequency was -50.0. During the first 6 months of the study, 21 (12.3%) patients were free from focal seizures; 37 (21.6%) patients were free from focal seizures in the last 6 months of the study; and 14 (8.2%) were free from focal seizures for the full 12 months of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this prospective, noninterventional study suggest that adjunctive LCM was generally safe and well tolerated in this patient group in real-world practice in Taiwan. Effectiveness was also favorable, with more than 60% of patients considered to be improved by their physician at 12 months (or final visit).

New anti-seizure medication for elderly epilepsy patients - a critical narrative review

Introduction: The number of elderly patients with epilepsy is growing in resource rich countries due to demographic changes and increased longevity. Management in these patients is challenging as underlying etiology, co-morbidities, polypharmacy, age-related pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes need to be considered.Areas covered: Lacosamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, brivaracetam, and perampanel have been approved in the USA and Europe for monotherapy and/or adjunctive treatment of seizures in the last few years. The authors review the pharmacological properties and safety profile of these drugs and provide recommendations for their use in in the elderly.Expert opinion: There are only limited data available on more recent antiseizure medications (ASMs). Drugs with a low risk of interaction (lacosamide, brivaracetam) are preferred choices. Once daily formulations (perampanel and eslicarbazepine acetate) have the advantage of increased compliance. Intravenous formulations (brivaracetam and lacosamide) are useful in emergency situations and in patients who have difficulties to swallow. Dose adjustments are necessary for all ASMs used in the elderly with slow titration and lower target doses than in the regulatory trials. The adverse event profile does not significantly differ from that found in the general adult population.

Lacosamide-associated second-degree atrioventricular block in a healthy, young athlete

Lacosamide enhances slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels and can lead to dose-dependent PR interval prolongation. Previously, lacosamide has been associated with second-degree atrioventricular (AV) heart block in the context of multiple medical comorbidities and/or in the elderly with multimorbidity on other dromotropic agents. We report a case of second-degree AV block occurring in a healthy, athletic young adult. The patient had baseline bradycardia with no known cardiac comorbidities. He was exquisitely sensitive to lacosamide with EKG and telemetry changes developing on the order of hours after receiving intravenous lacosamide. Lacosamide was subsequently stopped, the second-degree AV block was no longer present and EKG returned to baseline. We hypothesize that his sensitivity to lacosamide-induced AV block was possibly secondary to his baseline bradycardia with early repolarization changes. The case underscores the importance of surveillance cardiac monitoring. While medical comorbidities and an older age may portend a greater risk of PR prolongation, routine EKGs should be considered in all patients receiving lacosamide.

•

This is a case of second-degree AV block with lacosamide in a healthy, young adult.

•

PR prolongation can be seen with lacosamide irrespective of medical comorbidities.

•

Surveillance cardiac monitoring should be considered in patients taking lacosamide.

Lacosamide in patients with epilepsy of cerebrovascular etiology

OBJECTIVES

To assess tolerability and efficacy of lacosamide in adults with cerebrovascular epilepsy etiology (CVEE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Exploratory post hoc analyses of a double-blind, initial monotherapy trial of lacosamide vs carbamazepine-controlled release (carbamazepine-CR) (SP0993; NCT01243177); a double-blind conversion to lacosamide monotherapy trial (SP0902; NCT00520741); and an observational study of adjunctive lacosamide added to one antiepileptic drug (SP0973 VITOBA; NCT01098162). Patients with CVEE were identified based on epilepsy etiology recorded at baseline.

RESULTS

In the initial monotherapy trial, 61 patients had CVEE (lacosamide: 27; carbamazepine-CR: 34). 20 (74.1%) patients on lacosamide (27 [79.4%] on carbamazepine-CR) reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), most commonly (≥10%) headache, dizziness, and fatigue (carbamazepine-CR: headache, dizziness). A numerically higher proportion of patients on lacosamide than carbamazepine-CR completed 6 months (22 [81.5%]; 20 [58.8%]) and 12 months (18 [66.7%]; 17 [50.0%]) treatment without seizure at last evaluated dose. In the conversion to monotherapy trial, 26/30 (86.7%) patients with CVEE reported TEAEs, most commonly (≥4 patients) dizziness, convulsion, fatigue, headache, somnolence, and cognitive disorder. During lacosamide monotherapy, 17 (56.7%) patients were 50% responders and six (20.0%) were seizure-free. In the observational study, 36/83 (43.4%) patients with CVEE reported TEAEs, most commonly (≥5%) fatigue and dizziness. Effectiveness was assessed for 75 patients. During the last 3 months, 60 (80%) were 50% responders and 42 (56.0%) were seizure-free.

CONCLUSIONS

These exploratory post hoc analyses suggested lacosamide was generally well tolerated and effective in patients with CVEE, with data from the initial monotherapy trial suggesting numerically better efficacy than carbamazepine-CR.

The adverse-effect profile of lacosamide

Introduction: Lacosamide has been used in epilepsy patients in the United States, Europe and Asia since it was approved by the FDA in 2008. Many patients have benefited from this drug as a new generation of sodium channel blocker. With the worldwide use of this drug, its adverse effects have gradually emerged, especially some rare adverse events.Areas covered: The present review aims to summarize the adverse effects of lacosamide reported in the literature in recent years to promote the safe clinical application of the drug.Expert opinion: In more than 10 years of experience in drug usage, adverse reactions of lacosamide have also been gradually discovered. The review showed that lacosamide is safe and effective in antiepileptic treatment, and its common side effects are dizziness, headache, drowsiness, diplopia, and cardiovascular abnormalities. Skin rashes, hematotoxicity and heart damage, psychological symptoms and suicide risk have also been reported and emphasized.

Comorbidity between epilepsy and cardiac arrhythmias: Implication for treatment

Epilepsy is often comorbid with either neurological or nonneurological diseases. The association between epilepsy and cardiac arrhythmias is not infrequent, mostly in patients with severe forms of epilepsy or critically ill. Remarkably, these medical conditions share many similarities. Vascular and genetic disorders may predispose to both seizures and abnormalities of cardiac electrophysiology. Repeated and uncontrolled seizures may favor potentially life-threatening arrhythmias. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) may facilitate the occurrence of cardiac arrhythmias by acting on ionic channels at heart level. Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) can have effects on ionic channels expressed in the brain, as suggested by their efficacy in treating patients with rare forms of epilepsy; AADs may also be proconvulsant, mainly during their overdosage. In clinical practice, the AEDs with the lowest risk to influence cardiac electrophysiology are to be preferred in patients presenting with either seizures or arrhythmias. Traditional AEDs should be avoided because of their arrhythmogenic properties and enzyme-inducing effects, which may make ineffective the concomitant treatment with AADs. Some of the newer AEDs can rarely affect cardiac rhythm, and electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring should be warranted.

Safety and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide in a pediatric population with focal seizures - An open-label trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate safety and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide in children with focal seizures.

METHODS

Patients were eligible for this open-label, fixed-titration trial (SP0847; NCT00938431) if aged 1 month-17 years with focal seizures taking 1-3 antiepileptic drugs. Findings from Cohort 1, aged 5-11 years, who received lacosamide ≤8 mg/kg/day, informed dosing for age-based cohorts 2-5, who then received ≤12 mg/kg/day (≤600 mg/day). Oral lacosamide was initiated at 2 mg/kg/day (1 mg/kg bid) and uptitrated by 2 mg/kg/day/week to the maximum cohort-defined dose (maximum trial duration: 13 weeks). Patients who did not achieve the maximum cohort-defined dose were discontinued.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients (aged 6 months-≤17 years) enrolled (≥1 month-<4 years: n = 15; ≥4-<12 years: n = 23; ≥12-≤17 years: n = 9). 24/47 (51.1%) patients completed the trial at the maximum cohort-defined dose and 40/47 (85.1%) continued lacosamide in the extension trial. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 42/47 (89.4%) patients. The most common TEAEs (≥10% of patients) were vomiting (21.3%), diarrhea (14.9%), somnolence (12.8%), irritability, dizziness, and pyrexia (10.6% each). Twenty (42.6%) patients discontinued due to TEAEs, most commonly vomiting (8.5%), gait disturbance, dizziness, and somnolence (6.4% each). Six (12.8%) patients reported serious TEAEs, most commonly status epilepticus (3/47; 6.4%).

CONCLUSION

This fixed-titration trial supports the safety of adjunctive lacosamide in children (aged 6 months-≤17 years) with focal seizures. The TEAE profile was generally consistent with that observed in trials in adults, and no new safety concerns were identified.

Long-term efficacy and safety of lacosamide and levetiracetam monotherapy in elderly patients with focal epilepsy: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

Epilepsy management in elderly patients is often complex because of several concomitant comorbidities that may limit the use of some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Levetiracetam (LEV) is a second-generation AED widely used in elderly patients with epilepsy while lacosamide (LCM), which has been recently approved in European Union (EU) as monotherapy for the treatment of focal onset seizures, is affected by a scarcity of data in such frail population. This study is aimed at assessing the efficacy and the tolerability of LCM as monotherapy in elderly patients affected by focal onset epilepsy compared with those receiving LEV.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients aged ≥65 years suffering from focal onset seizures, with or without secondary generalization on LCM monotherapy or LEV monotherapy, was performed. Data regarding demographic characteristics, seizure type and etiology, LCM and LEV daily dose, number of lifetime AEDs, seizure frequency at baseline and at 12 months of follow-up, and seizure freedom rates were reported.

RESULTS

In this observational retrospective study, 22 patients on LCM (10 males, 12 females, mean age: 76.23 ± 7.5) and 24 patients on LEV (10 males, 14 females, mean age: 73.58 ± 6.39) were enrolled. Mean LCM daily dose was 204.51 ± 88.51 mg and mean LEV daily dose was 1281.25 ± 378.15 mg. All patients had comorbidities on chronic treatment. At 12 months of follow-up, mean monthly seizure frequency reduced from 4.23 ± 8.53 to 0.33 ± 0.9 (p < .001) in LCM group and from 2.29 ± 6.11 to 0.2 ± 0.81 (p < .001) in LEV group. Furthermore, 16/22 (72.7%) LCM patients were seizure-free at 12 months of follow-up while seizure freedom was achieved by 17/24 (70.8%) patients in LEV group.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Epilepsy management in elderly patients is often challenging. In this retrospective real-life study, the efficacy and the tolerability of LCM as monotherapy was favorable even at low doses in older patients and comparable with LEV with a high rate of long-term seizure freedom. Considering the frequent comorbidities and the risk of drug-drug interactions, LCM monotherapy may be a valuable option in elderly patients with focal onset epilepsy because of its favorable pharmacokinetic profile.

Complete Atrioventricular Block in an Elderly Patient Treated with Low-Dose Lacosamide

Lacosamide, one of the last antiepileptic drugs marketed, can cause extension of PR interval. Precautions are recommended when used in elderly and with other drugs extending PR interval. Cases of severe third-degree atrioventricular block have been reported only in post-marketing case reports when used at high-doses and remain rare. We report the case of an 88-year-old woman treated with bisoprolol, who experienced a complete atrioventricular block after initiation of lacosamide for epilepsy associated with neurodegenerative disease. This dramatic event required a pacemaker implementation. Not being dose-dependent (initiation dosage used), it seemed partially explained by drug-drug interaction with bisoprolol.

Safety and tolerability profile of new antiepileptic drug treatment in children with epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of pediatric epilepsy requires a careful evaluation of the safety and tolerability profile of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) to avoid or minimize as much as possible adverse events (AEs) on various organs, hematological parameters, and growth, pubertal, motor, cognitive and behavioral development.

AREAS COVERED

Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) reported in the literature 2000-2018 regarding second- and third-generation AEDs used in the pediatric age, with exclusion of the neonatal period that exhibits specific peculiarities, have been described on the basis of their frequency, severity/tolerability, and particular association with a given AED.

EXPERT OPINION

Somnolence/sedation and behavioral changes, like irritability and nervousness, are among the most commonly observed TEAEs associated with almost all AEDs. Lamotrigine, Gabapentin, Oxcarbazepine, and Levetiracetam appear to be the best-tolerated AEDs with a ≤2% withdrawal rate, while Tiagabine and Everolimus are discontinued in up to >20% of the patients because of intolerable TEAEs. For some AEDs, literature data are scanty to draw a high-level evidence on their safety and tolerability profile. The reasons are: insufficient population size, short duration of treatments, or lack of controlled trials. A future goal is that of identifying clearer, easier, and more homogeneous methodological strategies to facilitate AED testing in pediatric populations.

Safety and tolerability of lacosamide monotherapy in the elderly: A subgroup analysis from lacosamide trials in diabetic neuropathic pain

Objective

To assess the safety profile of lacosamide monotherapy in elderly (≥65 years) subjects with diabetic neuropathic pain (DNP).

Methods

Of 1,863 DNP subjects in double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled trials of lacosamide monotherapy (NCT00861445, NCT00235469, NCT00238524, NCT00135109, NCT00350103), 502 were elderly. Safety data from elderly subjects were compared with that of younger subjects (<65 years) within these DNP trials. It should be noted that lacosamide is approved for the treatment of focal (partial‐onset) seizures; it is not approved/recommended for the treatment of DNP.

Results

Overall, cardiovascular diseases were prevalent in the DNP population, as was the use of cardiac, blood pressure, diabetes, and cholesterol‐lowering medications among both young and elderly subjects. The most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) for lacosamide monotherapy (200, 400, and 600 mg/day combined) in elderly versus younger subjects were dizziness (16.2% vs. 13.2%), nausea (10.0% vs. 9.4%), and headache (8.0% vs. 8.7%). Incidences of cardiac disorder AEs were higher in elderly versus younger subjects receiving placebo (6.2% vs. 3.9%), lacosamide 200 (4.8% vs. 3.3%), lacosamide 400 (7.0% vs. 4.1%), and lacosamide 600 mg/day (7.7% vs. 4.0%). Discontinuation rates because of any AE in the elderly versus younger subjects were similar for placebo (8.8% vs. 7.0%) and lacosamide 200 mg/day (9.6% vs. 11.9%) and higher for lacosamide 400 (25.1% vs. 10.8%) and lacosamide 600 mg/day (52.7% vs. 28.3%).

Significance

Lacosamide monotherapy was well tolerated in elderly subjects with DNP, with an overall AE profile consistent with that reported in epilepsy trials.

The Pharmacology and Toxicology of Third-Generation Anticonvulsant Drugs

Epilepsy is a neurologic disorder affecting approximately 50 million people worldwide, or about 0.7% of the population [1]. Thus, the use of anticonvulsant drugs in the treatment of epilepsy is common and widespread. There are three generations of anticonvulsant drugs, categorized by the year in which they were developed and released. The aim of this review is to discuss the pharmacokinetics, drug-drug interactions, and adverse events of the third generation of anticonvulsant drugs. Where available, overdose data will be included. The pharmacokinetic properties of third-generation anticonvulsant drugs include relatively fewer drug-drug interactions, as well as several unique and life-threatening adverse events. Overdose data are limited, so thorough review of adverse events and knowledge of drug mechanism will guide expectant management of future overdose cases. Reporting of these cases as they occur will be necessary to further clarify toxicity of these drugs.

Lacosamide in status epilepticus: Systematic review of current evidence

OBJECTIVE

The intravenous formulation of lacosamide (LCM) and its good overall tolerability and safety favor the use in status epilepticus (SE). The aim of this systematic review was to identify and evaluate studies reporting on the use of LCM in SE.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of electronic databases using a combined search strategy from 2008 until October 2016. Using a standardized assessment form, information on the study design, methodologic framework, data sources, efficacy, and adverse events attributed to LCM were extracted from each publication and systematically reported.

RESULTS

In total, 522 SE episodes (51.7% female) in 486 adults and 36 children and adolescents were evaluated with an overall LCM efficacy of 57%. Efficacy was comparable between use in nonconvulsive (57%; 82/145) and generalized-convulsive (61%; 30/49; p = 0.68) SE, whereas overall success rate was better in focal motor SE (92%; 34/39, p = 0.013; p < 0.001). The efficacy with later positioning of LCM decreased from 100% to 20%. The main adverse events during treatment of SE are dizziness, abnormal vision, diplopia, and ataxia. Overall, lacosamide is well tolerated and has no clinically relevant drug-drug interactions.

SIGNIFICANCE

The available data regarding the use of LCM in SE are promising, with a success rate of 57%. The strength of LCM is the lack of interaction potential and the option for intravenous use in emergency situations requiring rapid uptitration.

The efficacy of lacosamide as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy in focal epilepsy and its use in status epilepticus: clinical trial evidence and experience

Lacosamide (LCM) is approved for anticonvulsive treatment in focal epilepsy and exhibits its function through the slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels (VGSCs). LCM shows comparable efficacy with other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) licensed in the last decade: in three randomized placebo-controlled trials, significant median seizure reduction rates of 35.2% for 200 mg/day, 36.4-39% for 400 mg/day and 37.8-40% for 600 mg/day were reported. Likewise, 50% responder rates were 38.3-41.1% for 400 mg/day and 38.1-41.2% for 600 mg/day. Similar rates were reported in post-marketing studies. The main adverse events (AEs) are dizziness, abnormal vision, diplopia and ataxia. Overall, LCM is well tolerated and has no clinically-relevant drug-drug interactions. Due to the drug's intravenous availability, its use in status epilepticus (SE) is increasing, and the available data are promising.

Long-term exposure and safety of lacosamide monotherapy for the treatment of partial-onset (focal) seizures: Results from a multicenter, open-label trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess long-term use and safety of lacosamide (LCM) ≤800 mg/day monotherapy in patients with partial-onset seizures (POS) enrolled previously in a historical-controlled, conversion-to-monotherapy study (SP902; NCT00520741).

METHODS

Patients completing or exiting SP902 with LCM as monotherapy or as adjunctive therapy were eligible to enter this 2-year open-label extension (OLE) trial (SP904; NCT00530855) at a starting dose ±100 mg/day of their final SP902 dose. Investigators could adjust the LCM dose to 100-800 mg/day and add up to two antiepileptic drugs to optimize tolerability and seizure reduction.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-two patients received LCM: 210 patients (65.2%) completed and 112 (34.8%) discontinued, most commonly owing to withdrawal of consent (9.3%). Two hundred fifty-eight patients (80.1%) had ≥1 year of and 216 (67.1%) had ≥2 years of LCM exposure, of whom 179/258 (69.4%) achieved LCM monotherapy lasting for any 12-month period, and 126/216 (58.3%) patients exposed for ≥24 months achieved LCM monotherapy for any 24-month period. Total exposure = 525.5 patient-years. The median modal dose was 500 mg/day. Two hundred ninety-two patients (90.7%) achieved LCM monotherapy at some point during the study. Sixty-five of 87 patients who exited and 193/235 who completed SP902 were exposed for ≥12 months, and 43.1% and 78.2%, respectively, achieved LCM monotherapy for ≥12 months. Median LCM monotherapy duration was 587.0 days (2-791 days); 91.0% of patients reported treatment-emergent adverse events, of which the most common were dizziness (27.3%), headache (17.1%), and nausea (14.3%). Compared with the SP902 study baseline, 74.2% of patients had a ≥50% seizure reduction and 5.6% were seizure-free at 24 months.

SIGNIFICANCE

The majority of patients were receiving LCM monotherapy at 0, 12, and 24 months in this OLE. Lacosamide monotherapy (median dose of 500 mg/day) had a safety profile similar to that of adjunctive therapy studies. These results support the use of lacosamide as long-term monotherapy treatment for adults with POS.

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: a thorough QT/QTc trial in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether lacosamide prolongs the corrected QT interval (QTc).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, positive- and placebo-controlled, parallel-design trial, healthy volunteers were randomized to lacosamide 400 mg/day (maximum-recommended daily dose, 6 days), lacosamide 800 mg/day (supratherapeutic dose, 6 days), placebo (6 days), or moxifloxacin 400 mg/day (3 days). Variables included maximum time-matched change from baseline in QT interval individually corrected for heart rate ([HR] QTcI), other ECG parameters, pharmacokinetics (PK), and safety/tolerability.

RESULTS

The QTcI mean maximum difference from placebo was -4.3 ms and -6.3 ms for lacosamide 400 and 800 mg/day; upper limits of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval were below the 10 ms non-inferiority margin (-0.5 and -2.5 ms, respectively). Placebo-corrected QTcI for moxifloxacin was +10.4 ms (lower 90% confidence bound >0 [6.6 ms]), which established assay sensitivity for this trial. As lacosamide did not increase QTcI, the trial is considered a negative QTc trial. There was no dose-related or clinically relevant effect on QRS duration. HR increased from baseline by ~5 bpm with lacosamide 800 mg/day versus placebo. Placebo-subtracted mean increases in PR interval at tmax were 7.3 ms (400 mg/day) and 11.9 ms (800 mg/day). There were no findings of second-degree or higher atrioventricular block. Adverse events (AEs) were dose related and most commonly involved the nervous and gastrointestinal systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide (≤ 800 mg/day) did not prolong the QTc interval. Lacosamide caused a small, dose-related increase in mean PR interval that was not associated with AEs. Cardiac, overall safety, and PK profiles for lacosamide in healthy volunteers were consistent with those observed in patients with partial-onset seizures.

Safety and tolerability of lacosamide as adjunctive therapy for adults with partial-onset seizures: Analysis of data pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe a priori protocol-defined analyses to evaluate the safety and tolerability of adjunctive oral lacosamide (200-600 mg/day) in adults (ages 16-70 years) with partial-onset seizures (POS) using data pooled from three similarly designed randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (SP667, SP754 [NCT00136019], SP755 [NCT00220415]).

METHODS

Patients with POS (≥2 years' duration, ≥2 previous antiepileptic drugs [AEDs]) uncontrolled by a stable dosing regimen of 1-3 concomitant AEDs were randomized to treatment with lacosamide at doses of 200 mg/day, 400 mg/day, or 600 mg/day, or placebo. Studies comprised a 4- to 6-week titration phase to target dose followed by a 12-week maintenance phase. Safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of particular relevance to patients with POS, overall TEAEs, and discontinuations due to TEAEs. Post hoc analyses included evaluation of TEAEs potentially related to cognition and TEAEs leading to discontinuation analyzed by concomitant AEDs.

RESULTS

One thousand three hundred eight patients were randomized to and received treatment; 944 to lacosamide and 364 to placebo. Most patients (84.4%) were taking 2 or 3 concomitant AEDs. The most common drug-associated TEAEs (reported by ≥5% of patients in any lacosamide dose group and with an incidence at least twice that reported for placebo during the treatment phase) were dizziness (30.6% for lacosamide vs 8.2% for placebo), nausea (11.4% vs 4.4%), and diplopia (10.5% vs 1.9%). Common drug-associated TEAEs generally appeared to be dose-related, and the incidence of each was lower during the 12-week maintenance phase than during the titration phase. Most TEAEs were either mild or moderate in intensity; severe TEAEs were predominantly observed with lacosamide 600 mg/day. No individual serious TEAE occurred in ≥1% of all lacosamide-treated patients. Treatment-emergent adverse events led to discontinuation in 8.1%, 17.2%, and 28.6% of the lacosamide 200-, 400-, and 600-mg/day groups, respectively (vs 4.9% of placebo). Few TEAEs were related to rash, weight loss/gain, changes in clinical chemistry parameters, or psychiatric disturbances, or were seizure-related. The odds of reporting any potential cognition-related TEAE vs placebo increased with dose and were similar between lacosamide doses of 200 and 400mg/day and placebo (odds ratio 1.3, 95% confidence interval 0.7-2.4). Discontinuations due to TEAEs based on most commonly used AEDs taken in combination with lacosamide (all doses combined) were carbamazepine (15.3% [51/334] vs 3.9% [5/129] placebo), lamotrigine (19.2% [56/291] vs 4.3% [5/117]), and levetiracetam (10.1% [28/278] vs 3.9% [4/103]).

CONCLUSIONS

The safety and tolerability profile of adjunctive lacosamide in this detailed evaluation was similar to that observed in the individual double-blind trials. Adjunctive lacosamide was associated with TEAEs related to the nervous system and gastrointestinal tract, predominantly during titration.