Steady-state plasma and cerebrospinal fluid pharmacokinetics and tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate and oxcarbazepine in healthy volunteers

Thirteen years of experience with eslicarbazepine acetate in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland: A safety perspective

OBJECTIVE

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a once-daily oral antiseizure medication. Its safety and tolerability from clinical trials have been mostly confirmed by real-world data. The main purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the safety profile of ESL in the United Kingdom (UK) and Republic of Ireland (ROI).

METHODS

Safety data were obtained from the UK and ROI post-marketing sources (October 2009-April 2022) by the marketing authorization holder. All individual reports were included in the Argus Safety™ database. All adverse events (AEs) were coded using MedDRA® version 24.1. Only valid cases (meeting the minimum pharmacovigilance reporting requirements) were included.

RESULTS

During 13 years of ESL marketing, with cumulative estimated exposure of 2 210 395 patients-years, 183 reports were received. A total of 402 AEs were reported for the 155 valid reports. The most common reported AEs (≥6% of total reported), per system organ class (SOC), were: nervous system disorders (23.4%), injury, poisoning, and procedural complications (18.9%), general disorders and administration site conditions (12.9%), psychiatric disorders (12.7%) and gastrointestinal disorders (6.7%). The most frequently reported (≥2% of total reported) AEs were: seizure (4.5%), hyponatremia (4.2%), dizziness (2.7%), rash, fatigue (2.5% each), and somnolence (2.0%). Twenty-six percent of events were classified as serious (including six fatal cases).

SIGNIFICANCE

The current analysis supports the known safety profile of ESL, as generally well-tolerated with most AEs being non-serious. The most common AEs were considered either expected according to the disease itself or to the reference safety information. ESL continues to be a relevant medication in the treatment of partial (focal-onset) epilepsy, as also confirmed by the 2022 NICE guidelines.

Potential efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate oral loading in patients with epilepsy

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a new antiseizure medication (ASM) approved as an adjunctive therapy or monotherapy for focal onset seizures. We performed this study to explore the potential efficacy and safety of ESL oral loading in selected patients with epilepsy. Thirty adult patients with status epilepticus or acute repetitive seizures were enrolled, and ESL was administered at a single loading dosage of 30 mg/kg. Plasma levels of an active metabolite of ESL, monohydroxy derivative (MHD), were measured at 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h after ESL oral loading. Two thirds of the patients reached a therapeutic level of MHD 2 h after ESL loading, and most of the patients achieved a therapeutic range within 12 h after loading. Plasma MHD levels did not rise above the supratherapeutic level in any patient throughout the study. The reported adverse effects included one patient with gaze-evoked nystagmus and another patient with a rash. No serious adverse events leading to drug discontinuation occurred. There was no discernible difference in sodium levels before and after ESL oral loading. Our study findings suggest that ESL oral loading could be a useful therapeutic option for patients with epilepsy who need rapid elevations in the therapeutic levels of ASMs.

In vitro effects of eslicarbazepine (S-licarbazepine) as a potential precision therapy on SCN8A variants causing neuropsychiatric disorders

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Variants in SCN8A, the Na_V 1.6 channel's coding gene, are characterized by a variety of symptoms, including intractable epileptic seizures, psychomotor delay, progressive cognitive decline, autistic features, ataxia or dystonia. Standard anticonvulsant treatment has a limited impact on the course of disease.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

We investigated the therapeutic potential of eslicarbazepine (S-licarbazepine; S-lic), an enhancer of slow inactivation of voltage gated sodium channels, on two variants with biophysical and neuronal gain-of-function (G1475R and M1760I) and one variant with biophysical gain-of-function but neuronal loss-of-function (A1622D) in neuroblastoma cells and in murine primary hippocampal neuron cultures. These three variants cover the broad spectrum of Na_V 1.6-associated disease and are linked to representative phenotypes of mild to moderate epilepsy (G1475R), developmental and epileptic encephalopathy (M1760I) and intellectual disability without epilepsy (A1622D).

KEY RESULTS

Similar to known effects on Na_V 1.6 wildtype channels, S-lic predominantly enhances slow inactivation on all tested variants, irrespective of their particular biophysical mechanisms. Beyond that, S-lic exhibits variant-specific effects including a partial reversal of pathologically slowed fast inactivation dynamics (A1622D and M1760I) and a trend to reduce enhanced persistent Na⁺ current by A1622D variant channels. Furthermore, our data in primary transfected neurons reveal that not only variant-associated hyperexcitability (M1760I and G1475R) but also hypoexcitability (A1622D) can be modulated by S-lic.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

S-lic has not only substance-specific effects but also variant-specific effects. Personalized treatment regimens optimized to achieve such variant-specific pharmacological modulation may help to reduce adverse side effects and improve the overall therapeutic outcome of SCN8A-related disease.

Treatment and care of women with epilepsy before, during, and after pregnancy: a practical guide

Women with epilepsy (WWE) wishing for a child represent a highly relevant subgroup of epilepsy patients. The treating epileptologist needs to delineate the epilepsy syndrome and choose the appropriate anti-seizure medication (ASM) considering the main goal of seizure freedom, teratogenic risks, changes in drug metabolism during pregnancy and postpartum, demanding for up-titration during and down-titration after pregnancy. Folic acid or vitamin K supplements and breastfeeding are also discussed in this review. Lamotrigine and levetiracetam have the lowest teratogenic potential. Data on teratogenic risks are also favorable for oxcarbazepine, whereas topiramate tends to have an unfavorable profile. Valproate needs special emphasis. It is most effective in generalized seizures but should be avoided whenever possible due to its teratogenic effects and the negative impact on neuropsychological development of in utero-exposed children. Valproate still has its justification in patients not achieving seizure freedom with other ASMs or if a woman decides to or cannot become pregnant for any reason. When valproate is the most appropriate treatment option, the patient and caregiver must be fully informed of the risks associated with its use during pregnancies. Folate supplementation is recommended to reduce the risk of major congenital malformations. However, there is insufficient information to address the optimal dose and it is unclear whether higher doses offer greater protection. There is currently no general recommendation for a peripartum vitamin K prophylaxis. During pregnancy most ASMs (e.g. lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, and levetiracetam) need to be increased to compensate for the decline in serum levels; exceptions are valproate and carbamazepine. Postpartum, baseline levels are reached relatively fast, and down-titration is performed empirically. Many ASMs in monotherapy are (moderately) safe for breastfeeding and women should be encouraged to do so. This review provides a practically oriented overview of the complex management of WWE before, during, and after pregnancy.

Update on Antiseizure Medications 2022

EDITORS NOTE

The article "Update on Antiseizure Medications 2022" by Dr Abou-Khalil was first published in the February 2016 Epilepsy issue of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology as "Antiepileptic Drugs," and at the request of the Editor-in-Chief was updated by Dr Abou-Khalil for the 2019 issue and again for this issue.

Biologically active metabolites in drug discovery

Biologically active metabolites are a valuable resource for development of drug candidates and lead structures for drug design. This digest highlights a selection of biologically active metabolites that have been used as new chemical entities for development or as lead structures for drug design.

Complex effects of eslicarbazepine on inhibitory micro networks in chronic experimental epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

Many antiseizure drugs (ASDs) act on voltage-dependent sodium channels, and the molecular basis of these effects is well established. In contrast, how ASDs act on the level of neuronal networks is much less understood.

METHODS

In the present study, we determined the effects of eslicarbazepine (S-Lic) on different types of inhibitory neurons, as well as inhibitory motifs. Experiments were performed in hippocampal slices from both sham-control and chronically epileptic pilocarpine-treated rats.

RESULTS

We found that S-Lic causes an unexpected reduction of feed-forward inhibition in the CA1 region at high concentrations (300 µM), but not at lower concentrations (100 µM). Concurrently, 300 but not 100 μM S-Lic significantly reduced maximal firing rates in putative feed-forward interneurons located in the CA1 stratum radiatum of sham-control and epileptic animals. In contrast, feedback inhibition was not inhibited by S-Lic. Instead, application of S-Lic, in contrast to previous data for other drugs like carbamazepine (CBZ), resulted in a lasting potentiation of feedback inhibitory post-synaptic currents (IPSCs) only in epileptic and not in sham-control animals, which persisted after washout of S-Lic. We hypothesized that this plasticity of inhibition might rely on anti-Hebbian potentiation of excitatory feedback inputs onto oriens-lacunosum moleculare (OLM) interneurons, which is dependent on Ca²⁺ -permeable α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptors. Indeed, we show that blocking Ca²⁺ -permeable AMPA receptors completely prevents upmodulation of feedback inhibition.

SIGNIFICANCE

These results suggest that S-Lic affects inhibitory circuits in the CA1 hippocampal region in unexpected ways. In addition, ASD actions may not be sufficiently explained by acute effects on their target channels, rather, it may be necessary to take plasticity of inhibitory circuits into account.

Eslicarbazepine in patients with brain tumor-related epilepsy: a single-center experience

PURPOSE

Brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is frequent in patients affected with glioma. Most patients have refractory seizures and require polytherapy. Promising treatment options derive from the development of novel anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs), like Eslicarbazepine (ESL), whose role in BTRE has not yet been explored. Our aim was to report a retrospective cohort of patients affected by BTRE treated with ESL as an adjunctive therapy and to discuss the potential role of this third-generation AED in this clinical context.

METHODS

We analyzed a single-center, retrospectively collected cohort of patients affected by glioma and BTRE, treated with ESL as an adjunctive therapy.

RESULTS

Analysis included 5 males and 3 females with age ranging from 37 to 75 years (mean = 55.5). Mean baseline Karnofsky performance status was 87.5 (range 70-100). Patients were affected by diffuse astrocytoma (3), low grade oligodendroglioma (2), anaplastic glioma (2) and glioblastoma (1). Mean follow-up was 19 months (range 6-59). Mean dose at the last follow-up was 950 mg daily. Mean weekly seizures in the month before initiation of ESL numbered 17.6 (range 0.25-50). At the last follow-up, mean weekly seizures were 2.2 (range 0-10), i.e. significantly lower than baseline (p = 0.03). The mean reduction of seizures achieved after introduction of ESL was 65%, with 6/8 patients (75%) showing a reduction of more than 50%. Two patients (25%) were seizure free.

CONCLUSIONS

This single-center experience suggests that ESL may be a well-tolerated, efficacious option as an add-on drug in the treatment of BTRE.

Safety, tolerability and effectiveness of transition to eslicarbazepine acetate from carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine in clinical practice

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in patients transitioning from carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine to ESL in clinical practice, by analysing data from the Euro-Esli study.

METHODS

Euro-Esli was a pooled analysis of 14 European clinical practice studies. Effectiveness assessments included responder rate (≥50 % seizure frequency reduction) and seizure freedom rate (seizure freedom at least since prior visit), assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months of ESL treatment, and at the last visit. Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout follow-up by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and ESL discontinuation due to AEs, respectively. Data were analysed for cohorts of patients who transitioned from carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine to ESL either due to lack of efficacy or poor tolerability.

RESULTS

Euro-Esli included 2058 patients, of whom 233 (11.3 %) transitioned from carbamazepine to ESL and 134 (6.5 %) transitioned from oxcarbazepine to ESL. After 12 months of ESL treatment, responder and seizure freedom rates for patients transitioning from carbamazepine due to lack of efficacy (n = 163) were 70.0 % and 30.9 %, respectively. Corresponding values for patients transitioning from oxcarbazepine due to lack of efficacy (n = 90) were 57.1 % and 25.0 %, respectively. Among patients who transitioned from carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine to ESL due to poor tolerability (n = 64 and n = 61, respectively), 26.6 % and 39.5 % experienced AEs, and 8.3 % and 6.8 % discontinued ESL due to AEs, respectively.

CONCLUSION

ESL was efficacious and generally well tolerated in patients transitioning from carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine in clinical practice due to inadequate seizure control or intolerable AEs with these agents.

Update on Antiepileptic Drugs 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article is an update from the article on antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy published in the last Continuum issue on epilepsy and is intended to cover the vast majority of agents currently available to the neurologist in the management of patients with epilepsy. Treatment of epilepsy starts with AED monotherapy. Knowledge of the spectrum of efficacy, clinical pharmacology, and modes of use for individual AEDs is essential for optimal treatment for epilepsy. This article addresses AEDs individually, focusing on key pharmacokinetic characteristics, indications, and modes of use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the previous version of this article was published, three new AEDs, brivaracetam, cannabidiol, and stiripentol, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and ezogabine was removed from the market because of decreased use as a result of bluish skin pigmentation and concern over potential retinal toxicity.Older AEDs are effective but have tolerability and pharmacokinetic disadvantages. Several newer AEDs have undergone comparative trials demonstrating efficacy equal to and tolerability at least equal to or better than older AEDs as first-line therapy. The list includes lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, levetiracetam, topiramate, zonisamide, and lacosamide. Pregabalin was found to be less effective than lamotrigine. Lacosamide, pregabalin, and eslicarbazepine have undergone successful trials of conversion to monotherapy. Other newer AEDs with a variety of mechanisms of action are suitable for adjunctive therapy. Most recently, the FDA adopted a policy that a drug's efficacy as adjunctive therapy in adults can be extrapolated to efficacy in monotherapy. In addition, efficacy in adults can be extrapolated for efficacy in children 4 years of age and older. Both extrapolations require data demonstrating that an AED has equivalent pharmacokinetics between its original approved use and its extrapolated use. In addition, the safety of the drug in pediatric patients has to be demonstrated in clinical studies that can be open label. Rational AED combinations should avoid AEDs with unfavorable pharmacokinetic interactions or pharmacodynamic interactions related to mechanism of action.

SUMMARY

Knowledge of AED pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and tolerability profiles facilitates the choice of appropriate AED therapy for patients with epilepsy.

Development and validation of a specific and sensitive LC-MS/MS method for determination of eslicarbazepine in human plasma and its clinical pharmacokinetic study

In this work, we developed and validated the specific, sensitive and simple LC-MS/MS method for quantification of eslicarbazepine in human plasma. The analyte samples were prepared through a simple one-step protein precipitation method by acetonitrile. The chromatographic separation was operated on an economical Hanbon ODS-2 C18 column (150 mm × 2.1 mm, 10 μm) with isocratic elution using 10 mM ammonium acetate containing 0.01% formic acid and acetonitrile (72:28, v/v) as the mobile phase at the flow rate of 0.5 mL/min. The mass quantification was carried on the multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) of the transitions of m/z 255.1 → 194.1 for eslicarbazepine and m/z 446.1 → 321.1 for glipizide (the internal standard), respectively. The established method was validated with acceptable specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, extraction recovery, matrix effect and stability in accordance with FDA regulations. At last, the validated method was successfully applied to determination of eslicarbazepine in human plasma obtained from clinical study.

Dibenzazepine Agents in Epilepsy: How Does Eslicarbazepine Acetate Differ?

Carbamazepine (CBZ), oxcarbazepine (OXC), and eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) belong to the dibenzazepine family of antiepileptic drugs and are all thought to primarily act as sodium channel blockers (SCBs). However, ESL is structurally distinct from CBZ and OXC, resulting in differences in metabolism, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. Despite a lack of direct comparative data, evidence for potential differences in effectiveness and tolerability within the dibenzazepine family has emerged from studies in which patients being treated with one dibenzazepine agent have received adjunctive treatment with another (having achieved insufficient seizure control with the first) or have transitioned from one dibenzazepine agent to another because of lack of effectiveness or poor tolerability. Most of these studies have been conducted in the real-world clinical practice setting. ESL has been shown to be effective as adjunctive therapy in patients who have previously achieved inadequate seizure control with CBZ, indicating that the use of different dibenzazepine agents in combination can provide additive effectiveness benefits, which may reflect underlying differences in their mechanisms of action. Similarly, ESL monotherapy can be effective in patients who have switched from another dibenzazepine, such as CBZ or OXC, because of inadequate efficacy. There is also considerable evidence to demonstrate that patients transitioning from OXC or CBZ to ESL as a result of adverse events experience improvements in tolerability, which may also be associated with improvements in quality of life, alertness, and/or lipid profiles. Current evidence therefore demonstrates that ESL differs from other dibenzazepine agents in terms of effectiveness and tolerability.

Funding: Eisai Ltd.

Exposure-safety and efficacy response relationships and population pharmacokinetics of eslicarbazepine acetate

Objectives

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a once‐daily (QD) oral antiepileptic drug (AED) for focal‐onset seizures (FOS). Pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) models were developed to assess dose selection, identify significant AED drug interactions, and quantitate relationships between exposure and safety and efficacy outcomes from Phase 3 trials of adjunctive ESL.

Methods

Eslicarbazepine (the primary active metabolite of ESL) population PK was evaluated using data from 1351 subjects enrolled in 14 studies (11 Phase 1 and three Phase 3 studies) after multiple oral doses ranging from 400 to 1200 mg. Population PK and PD models related individual eslicarbazepine exposures to safety outcomes and efficacy responses.

Results

Eslicarbazepine PK was described by a one‐compartment model with linear absorption and elimination. The probability of a treatment‐emergent adverse event (TEAE; dizziness, headache, or somnolence) was higher with an initial dose of ESL 800 mg than with an initial dose of ESL 400 mg QD. Body weight, sex, region, and baseline use of carbamazepine (CBZ) or lamotrigine were also found to influence the probability of TEAEs. Eslicarbazepine exposure influenced serum sodium concentration, standardized seizure frequency, and probability of response; better efficacy outcomes were predicted in patients not from Western Europe (WE; vs WE patients) and those not taking CBZ (vs taking CBZ) at baseline.

Conclusions

Pharmacokinetic and PK/PD modeling were implemented during the development of ESL for adjunctive treatment of FOS in adults. This quantitative approach supported decision‐making during the development of ESL, and contributed to dosing recommendations and labeling information related to drug interactions.

Eslicarbazepine Acetate: A New Improvement on a Classic Drug Family for the Treatment of Partial-Onset Seizures

Eslicarbazepine acetate is a new anti-epileptic drug belonging to the dibenzazepine carboxamide family that is currently approved as adjunctive therapy and monotherapy for partial-onset (focal) seizures. The drug enhances slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels and subsequently reduces the activity of rapidly firing neurons. Eslicarbazepine acetate has few, but some, drug–drug interactions. It is a weak enzyme inducer and it inhibits cytochrome P450 2C19, but it affects a smaller assortment of enzymes than carbamazepine. Clinical studies using eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive treatment or monotherapy have demonstrated its efficacy in patients with refractory or newly diagnosed focal seizures. The drug is generally well tolerated, and the most common side effects include dizziness, headache, and diplopia. One of the greatest strengths of eslicarbazepine acetate is its ability to be administered only once per day. Eslicarbazepine acetate has many advantages over older anti-epileptic drugs, and it should be strongly considered when treating patients with partial-onset epilepsy.

Safety Profile of Eslicarbazepine Acetate as Add-On Therapy in Adults with Refractory Focal-Onset Seizures: From Clinical Studies to 6 Years of Post-Marketing Experience

INTRODUCTION

Eslicarbazepine acetate was first approved in the European Union in 2009 as adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset seizures with or without secondary generalization.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to review the safety profile of eslicarbazepine acetate analyzing the data from several clinical studies to 6 years of post-marketing surveillance.

METHODS

We used a post-hoc pooled safety analysis of four phase III, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies (BIA-2093-301, -302, -303, -304) of eslicarbazepine acetate as add-on therapy in adults. Safety data of eslicarbazepine acetate in special populations of patients aged ≥65 years with partial-onset seizures (BIA-2093-401) and subjects with moderate hepatic impairment (BIA-2093-111) and renal impairment (BIA-2093-112) are also considered. The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events, treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation, and serious adverse events were analyzed. The global safety database of eslicarbazepine acetate was analyzed for all cases from post-marketing surveillance from 1 October, 2009 to 21 October, 2015.

RESULTS

From a pooled analysis of four phase III studies, it was concluded that the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events, treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation, and adverse drug reactions were dose dependent. Dizziness, somnolence, headache, and nausea were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (≥10% of patients) and the majority were of mild-to-moderate intensity. No dose-dependent trend was observed for serious adverse events and individual serious adverse events were reported in less than 1% of patients. Hyponatremia was classified as a possibly related treatment-emergent adverse event in phase III studies (1.2%); however, after 6 years of post-marketing surveillance it represents the most frequently (10.2%) reported adverse drug reaction, with more than half of these cases occurring with eslicarbazepine acetate at daily doses of 1200 mg. Other adverse drug reactions reported in post-marketing surveillance are seizure (5.8%), dizziness (4.1%), rash (2.6%), and fatigue (2.1%). The safety profile of eslicarbazepine acetate in renal and hepatic impairment subjects (phase I studies) and in elderly patients (phase III study) did not raise any specific concern.

CONCLUSION

After 6 years of post-marketing surveillance, eslicarbazepine acetate maintains a similar safety profile to that observed in pivotal clinical studies.

Modeling and simulations to support dose selection for eslicarbazepine acetate therapy in pediatric patients with partial-onset seizures

Modeling and simulations were used to support body weight-based dose selection for eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in pediatric subjects aged 4–17 years with partial-onset seizures. A one-compartment pediatric population pharmacokinetic model with formulation-specific first-order absorption, first-order elimination, and weight-based allometric scaling of clearance and distribution volume was developed with PK data from subjects 2–18 years of age treated with ESL 5–30 mg/kg/day. Covariate analysis was performed to quantify the effects of key demographic and clinical covariates (including body weight and concomitant use of carbamazepine, levetiracetam, and phenobarbital-like antiepileptic drugs [AEDs]) on variability in PK parameters. Model evaluation performed using a simulation-based visual predictive check and a non-parametric bootstrap procedure indicated no substantial bias in the overall model and in the accuracy of estimates. The model estimated that concomitant use of carbamazepine or phenobarbital-like AEDs with ESL would decrease the exposure of eslicarbazepine, and that concomitant use of levetiracetam with ESL would increase the exposure of eslicarbazepine, although the small effect of levetiracetam may not represent a true difference. Model-based simulations were subsequently performed to apply target exposure matching of selected ESL doses for pediatric subjects (aged 4–17 years) to attain eslicarbazepine exposures associated with effective and well-tolerated ESL doses in adults. Overall, model-based exposure matching allowed for extrapolation of efficacy to support pediatric dose selection as part of the submission to obtain FDA approval for ESL (adjunctive therapy and monotherapy) in subjects aged 4–17 years, without requiring an additional clinical study.

A Review of the New Antiepileptic Drugs for Focal-Onset Seizures in Pediatrics: Role of Extrapolation

Most antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) receive regulatory approval for children years after the drug is available in adults, encouraging off-label use of the drug in children and hindering attempts to obtain quality pediatric data in controlled trials. Extrapolating adult efficacy data to pediatrics can reduce the time between approval in adults and that in children. To extrapolate efficacy from adults to children, several assumptions must be supported, such as (1) a similar disease progression and response to interventions in adults and children, and (2) similar exposure response in adults and children. The Pediatric Epilepsy Academic Consortium for Extrapolation (PEACE) addressed these assumptions in focal-onset seizures (FOS), the most common seizure type in both adults and children. PEACE reviewed the biological and clinical evidence that supported the assumptions that children with FOS have a similar disease progression and response to intervention as adults with FOS. After age 2 years, the pathophysiological underpinnings of FOS and the biological milieu in which seizures are initiated and propagated in children, seizure semiology, electroencephalographic features, etiology and AED response to FOS in children are similar to those in adults with FOS. PEACE concluded that extrapolation of efficacy data in adults to pediatrics in FOS is supported by strong scientific and clinical evidence. However, safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) data cannot be extrapolated from adults to children. Based on extrapolation, eslicarbazepine is now approved for children with FOS, down to age 4 years. Perampanel, lacosamide and brivaracetam are now undergoing PK and safety studies for the purposes of extrapolation down to age 2 or 4 years. When done in conjunction with PK and safety investigations in children, extrapolation of adult data from adults to children can reduce the time delay between approval of effective and safe AEDs in adults and approval in children.

Eslicarbazepine acetate in the treatment of adults with partial-onset epilepsy: an evidence-based review of efficacy, safety and place in therapy

INTRODUCTION

Up to 30% of the patients diagnosed with epilepsy will continue suffering from seizures despite treatment with antiepileptic drugs, either in monotherapy or polytherapy. Hence, there remains the need to develop new effective and well-tolerated therapies.

AIM

The objective of this article was to review the evidence for the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as adjunctive treatment in adult patients with focal onset seizures.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

ESL is the newest, third-generation, single enantiomer member of the dibenzazepine family. Following oral administration, ESL is rapidly and extensively metabolized by hepatic first-pass hydrolysis to the active metabolite eslicarbazepine, which has linear, dose-proportional pharmacokinetics and low potential for drug-drug interactions. Eslicarbazepine works as a competitive blocker of the voltage gated sodium channels; unlike carbamazepine (CBZ) and oxcarbazepine (OXC), it has a lower affinity for the resting state of the channels, and reduces their availability by selectively enhancing slow inactivation. Efficacy and safety of ESL have been assessed in four randomized, Phase III clinical trials: the median relative reduction in standardized seizure frequency was 33.4% and 37.8% in the ESL 800 and 1,200 mg daily dose groups, and the responder rates were 33.8% and 43.1%, respectively. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) increased with raising the dosage (ESL 400 mg: 63.8%, ESL 800 mg: 67.0%, ESL 1,200 mg: 73.1%). The TEAEs were generally mild to moderate in intensity, and the most common were dizziness, somnolence, headache and nausea. Open-label studies confirmed the findings from the pivotal trials and demonstrated sustained therapeutic effect of ESL over time and improvement of tolerability profile in patients switching from OXC/CBZ. No unexpected safety signals emerged over >5 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily adjunctive ESL at the doses of 800 and 1,200 mg was effective to reduce the seizure frequency and was fairly well tolerated in adults with focal onset epilepsy. Starting treatment at 400 mg/day, followed by 400 mg increments every 7-14 days, could provide the optimal balance of efficacy and tolerability.

Eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive treatment in partial-onset epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess the clinical response to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as add-on therapy in adult patients with partial-onset epilepsy by means of the time-to-baseline seizure count method.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified consecutive patients with partial-onset seizures, with or without secondary generalization, prescribed to ESL add-on therapy. The primary endpoint was the time-to-baseline monthly seizure count. Subgroup analysis was performed according to carbamazepine (CBZ)/oxcarbazepine (OXC) status (prior vs never use). Secondary outcomes were the rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and the AEs affecting ≥5% of patients.

RESULTS

One-hundred and eighteen patients were included. The median time-to-baseline monthly seizure count was 46 (35-101) days in the overall study cohort. The number of concomitant anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) was associated with the time-to-endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio [_adj HR]=2.22, 95% CI 1.18-4.14, P=.013 for two AEDs vs one; _adj HR=3.65, 95% CI 1.66-8.06, P=.001 for three or more AEDs vs one). Groupwise, the median times-to-baseline seizure count were 47 (35-97) and 43 (34-103) in patients with prior and never exposure to CBZ/OXC, respectively (P for log-rank test=.807). Adverse events occurred in 53.4% (63 of 118) of patients; the most frequently reported were dizziness (13.6%), somnolence (11.9%), nausea (6.8%), and fatigue (5.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Add-on ESL improved seizure control and was overall well-tolerated in adult patients with partial-onset epilepsy.

Eslicarbazepine acetate in epilepsies with focal and secondary generalised seizures: systematic review of current evidence

INTRODUCTION

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a third-generation antiepileptic drug (AED) approved for adjunctive treatment in adults, children, and adolescents with focal-onset seizures. Recently ESL was approved for initial monotherapy in adults. The intention of this article is to review current evidence for ESL and to summarise its pharmacological profile in comparison to other AEDs of the dibenzazepine group. Areas covered: We performed a systematic literature search in electronic databases (MEDLINE database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Excerpta Medica dataBASE) using a combined search strategy including the following keywords: eslicarbazepine, epilepsy and seizure. The search was performed from 2000 until December 2017. Using a standardised assessment form, information on the study design, methodological framework, data sources and efficacy and adverse events attributed to ESL were extracted from each publication and systematically reported. Expert commentary: ESL is an effective, safe and well tolerated third-generation AED for the treatment of focal epilepsies. During therapy, especially serum sodium levels and possible interactions with other substances have to be monitored. As of yet, long-term experience is still needed to make severe late-occurring adverse events unlikely and to obtain data regarding its use in pregnancy.

Pooled efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate as add-on treatment in patients with focal-onset seizures: Data from four double-blind placebo-controlled pivotal phase III clinical studies

Purpose

Pooled evaluation of the key efficacy and safety profile of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) added‐on to stable antiepileptic therapy in adults with focal‐onset seizures.

Methods

Data from 1703 patients enrolled in four phase III double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled studies were pooled and analyzed. Following a 2 week titration period, ESL was administered at 400 mg, 800 mg, and 1200 mg once‐daily doses for 12 weeks (maintenance period). Pooled efficacy variable was standardized (/4 weeks) seizure frequency (SSF) analyzed over the maintenance period as reduction in absolute and relative SSF and proportion of responders (≥50% reduction in SSF). Pooled safety was analyzed by means of adverse events and clinical laboratory assessments.

Results

SSF was significantly reduced with ESL 800 mg (P < 0.0001) and 1200 mg (P < 0.0001) compared to placebo. Median relative reduction in SSF was 33.4% for ESL 800 mg and 37.8% for 1200 mg (placebo: 17.6%), and responder rate was 33.8% and 43.1% (placebo: 22.2%). ESL was more efficacious than placebo regardless of gender, geographical region, epilepsy duration, age at time of diagnosis, seizure type, and type of concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AED). Incidence of adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation was dose dependent. Most common AEs (>10% patients) were dizziness, somnolence, and nausea. The incidence of treatment‐emergent AEs (dizziness, somnolence, ataxia, vomiting, and nausea) was lower in patients who began taking ESL 400 mg (followed by 400 mg increments to 800 or 1200 mg) than in those who began taking ESL 600 mg or 800 mg.

Conclusions

Once‐daily ESL 800 mg and 1200 mg showed consistent results across all efficacy and safety endpoints, independent of study population characteristics and type of concomitant AEDs. Treatment initiated with ESL 400 mg followed by 400 mg increments to 800 or 1200 mg provides optimal balance of efficacy and tolerability.

Euro-Esli: a European audit of real-world use of eslicarbazepine acetate as a treatment for partial-onset seizures

The Euro-Esli study was an exploratory pooled analysis of data from 14 European clinical practice studies, which was conducted to audit the real-world effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as an adjunctive treatment for partial-onset seizures. Retention and effectiveness were assessed after 3, 6, and 12 months of ESL treatment, and at the final visit. Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout ESL treatment by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and ESL discontinuation due to AEs. Data from 2058 patients (52.1% male; mean age 44.0 years) were included. All 2058 patients were assessed for safety and 1975 (96.0%) patients were assessed for effectiveness. After 12 months, retention, responder (≥50% seizure frequency reduction), and seizure freedom rates were 73.4, 75.6, and 41.3%, respectively. AEs were reported for 34.0% of patients and led to discontinuation in 13.6% of patients. The most frequently reported AEs were dizziness (6.7% of patients), fatigue (5.4%), and somnolence (5.1%). No unexpected safety signals emerged over a median duration of follow-up of >5 years. Subgroup analyses revealed that ESL was significantly more effective in patients aged ≥65 versus <65 years, in patients who were not receiving treatment with other sodium channel blockers versus those who were receiving treatment with other sodium channel blockers, and in patients who were receiving <2 versus ≥2 concomitant antiepileptic drugs at baseline. Euro-Esli is the largest ESL clinical practice study conducted to date. This study provides strong and reassuring evidence of ESL’s safety profile, and complements the data from clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate monotherapy for partial-onset seizures: Experience from a multicenter, observational study

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL, Aptiom™) is a once-daily anticonvulsant, approved as adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures (POS). Historical-controlled trials investigating the use of ESL as monotherapy have demonstrated a favorable efficacy and tolerability profile in patients with POS. This prospective, non-interventional study recruited POS patients in 17 hospitals in Spain. After a 3-month baseline period, ESL therapy was initiated as 400mg QD and up-titrated to an optimal maintenance dose based on clinical response and tolerance. The incidence of seizures was assessed via seizure calendars and the nature and severity of adverse events (AEs) were also recorded. A total of 117 patients (aged 9-87years) enrolled in the study and were treated with ESL at either 400mg/day (3.4% patients), 800mg/day (61% patients), 1200mg/day (27.1% patients) or 1600mg/day (8.5% patients). At 3months, 82.0% (n=72) of patients achieved a ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency, compared to 79.7% (n=67) of patients at 6months and 83.0% (n=49) at 12months. Patients who suffered secondary generalized tonic-clonic (SGTC) seizures had seizure-free rates of 71% (n=27), 69.6% (n=29), and 72.7% (n=16) at 3, 6, and 12months, respectively. Overall, 18 patients (15.3%) reported AEs of instability and dizziness (n=9), somnolence (n=3), mild hyponatremia (n=3), headache (n=1), hypertriglyceridemia (n=1), and allergic reaction (n=1), which caused ESL discontinuation of ESL treatment. ESL is effective and well tolerated as monotherapy for patients with POS, which supports previous findings. Early use is supported by its frequent use as monotherapy in this study and lack of severe side effects.

Overnight switching from oxcarbazepine to eslicarbazepine acetate: an observational study

OBJECTIVES

There are clinical situations where it might be appropriate to switch patients from immediate-release oxcarbazepine (OXC) to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL). We investigated the effects of transitioning patients overnight from OXC to ESL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, single-center study was conducted in which patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy on a stable dose of immediate-release OXC for at least 4 weeks were switched overnight to ESL. Patients were switched because they experienced persistent seizures with OXC but were unable to tolerate increased OXC dosing due to adverse events. Tolerability was assessed using the Adverse Events Profile (AEP), quality of life was assessed using the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory 10 (QOLIE-10), and alertness was assessed as reaction time using a subtest of the Test Battery for Attention Performance version 2.3. Assessments were performed immediately prior to and 5 days after switching from OXC to ESL (days 0 and 5, respectively).

RESULTS

The analysis included 21 patients (12 women, 9 men; mean age 36 years). After switching from OXC to ESL, there were significant improvements in mean scores for AEP (P<.001), QOLIE-10 (P=.001), and alertness (P<.05). Adverse Events Profile total scores improved for 21/21 (100.0%) patients, QOLIE-10 total scores improved for 17/21 (81.0%) patients, and alertness scores improved for 16/21 (76.2%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this short-term, single-center study, an overnight switch from twice-daily OXC to once-daily ESL in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsies resulted in improvements in side effects, quality of life, and alertness.

Eslicarbazepine acetate for neuropathic pain, headache, and cranial neuralgia: Evidence and experience

INTRODUCTION

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), together with carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine, belongs to the dibenzazepine family. According to the latest clinical practice guidelines, tricyclic antidepressants, dual antidepressants (venlafaxine, duloxetine), and some antiepileptics (gabapentin, pregabalin) are first-line drugs for neuropathic pain; tramadol, lidocaine 5% patches, and capsaicin 8% patches are considered second-line drugs; and strong opioids constitute a third line of treatment. Such other antiepileptics as lamotrigine and lacosamide are not authorised as treatments for neuropathic pain by the regulatory agencies, but are nonetheless prescribed off-label in routine clinical practice. Carbamazepine, on the other hand, is indicated for trigeminal and glossopharyngeal neuralgia.

DEVELOPMENT

We conducted a literature search to gather evidence on the use of ESL for neuropathic pain, headache, and cranial neuralgia.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence is insufficient to recommend ESL for neuropathic pain, headache, and cranial neuralgia. Most of the available evidence comes from open and observational studies with small sample sizes and no control group; however, their favourable results call for further studies on the usefulness of ESL for neuropathic pain, headache, and cranial neuralgia.

Eslicarbazepine acetate: its effectiveness as adjunctive therapy in clinical trials and open studies

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a once-daily antiepileptic drug that is approved as adjunctive therapy in adults with focal-onset seizures. Following oral administration, ESL is rapidly metabolized to its active metabolite, eslicarbazepine, which acts primarily by enhancing slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels. The efficacy and safety/tolerability of ESL in the adjunctive setting were established in a comprehensive Phase III program (n = 1702 randomized patients) and this evidence has been supported by several open studies (n = 864). ESL treatment has demonstrated improvements in health-related quality of life, in both randomized clinical trials and open studies. ESL has also been shown to be usually well tolerated and efficacious when used in the adjunctive setting in elderly patients. The effectiveness of ESL as the only add-on to antiepileptic drug monotherapy has been demonstrated in a multinational study (n = 219), subgroup analyses of which have also shown it to be efficacious and generally well tolerated in patients who had previously not responded to carbamazepine therapy. Open studies have also demonstrated improvements in tolerability in patients switched overnight from oxcarbazepine to ESL. Due to differences in pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and metabolism, there may be clinical situations in which it is appropriate to consider switching patients from oxcarbazepine or carbamazepine to ESL.

Eslicarbazepine Acetate Monotherapy: A Review in Partial-Onset Seizures

Eslicarbazepine acetate (Aptiom(®)) is a once-daily, orally administered antiepileptic drug (AED) approved previously in the EU, USA and several other countries for use as adjunctive therapy for the treatment of partial-onset seizures. Based on the findings of two randomized, dose-blinded, conversion-to-monotherapy phase III trials in patients with uncontrolled partial epilepsy, the US license for eslicarbazepine acetate has recently been expanded to include use as monotherapy for partial-onset seizures. The pivotal trials demonstrated that seizure control following conversion from other AEDs was superior for eslicarbazepine acetate monotherapy (1200 or 1600 mg once daily) compared with a pseudo-placebo historical control. Other efficacy outcomes appeared to support the benefit of treatment, with up to 10 % of patients remaining seizure free and up to 46 % of patients experiencing a ≥50 % reduction from baseline in standardized seizure frequency during the monotherapy periods of the trials. Eslicarbazepine acetate monotherapy was generally well tolerated, with most treatment-emergent adverse events being mild to moderate in severity. Its tolerability profile was generally consistent with the established profile of the drug based on its use as adjunctive therapy. Thus, once-daily eslicarbazepine acetate, either as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, represents a useful option for the treatment of patients with partial-onset seizures. The recent licensing of the drug in the USA as monotherapy expands the range of treatment options for patients with partial-onset seizures and increases the opportunity to tailor therapy to the individual patient.

Pharmacokinetic variability, efficacy and tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate-A national approach to the evaluation of therapeutic drug monitoring data and clinical outcome

BACKGROUND

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a new antiepileptic drug (AED), still insufficiently studied regarding pharmacokinetic variability, efficacy and tolerability. The purpose of this study was to evaluate therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) data in Norway and relate pharmacokinetic variability to clinical efficacy and tolerability in a long-term clinical setting in patients with refractory epilepsy.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included TDM-data from the main laboratories and population data from the Norwegian Prescription Database in Norway, in addition to clinical data from medical records of adult patients using ESL for up to three years, whenever possible.

RESULTS

TDM-data from 168 patients were utilized for assessment of pharmacokinetic variability, consisting of 71% of the total number of patients in Norway using ESL, 2011-14. Median daily dose of ESL was 800mg (range 400-1600mg), and median serum concentration of ESL was 53μmol/L (range 13-132μmol/L). Inter-patient variability of ESL was extensive, with 25-fold variability in concentration/dose ratios. Additional clinical data were available from 104 adult patients out of the 168, all with drug resistant focal epilepsy. After 1, 2 and 3 years follow-up, the retention rate of ESL was 83%, 72% and 64%, respectively. ESL was generally well tolerated as add-on treatment, but sedation, cognitive impairment and hyponatremia were reported. Hyponatremia (sodium <137mmol/L) was present in 36% of the patients, and lead to discontinuation in three.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacokinetic variability of ESL was extensive and the demonstration of usefulness of TDM requires further studies. In patients with drug resistant focal Epilepsy, the high retention rate indicated good efficacy and tolerability. Hyponatremia was observed in one third of the patients. The present results point to a need for individualization of treatment and TDM may be useful.

EPICON consensus: recommendations for proper management of switching to eslicarbazepine acetate in epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

The objective of the EPICON Project is to develop a set of recommendations on how to adequately switch from carbamazepine (CBZ) and oxcarbazepine (OXC) to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in some patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

A steering committee drafted a questionnaire of 56 questions regarding the transition from CBZ or OXC to ESL in clinical practice (methodology and change situation). The questionnaire was then distributed to 54 epilepsy experts in 2 rounds using the Delphi method. An agreement/disagreement consensus was defined when a median ≥ 7 points or ≤ 3 was achieved, respectively, and a relative interquartile range ≤ 0.40. We analysed the results obtained to reach our conclusions.

RESULTS

Our main recommendations were the following: switching from CBZ to ESL must be carried out over a period of 1 to 3 weeks with a CBZ:ESL dose ratio of 1:1.3 and is recommended for patients who frequently forget to take their medication, those who work rotating shifts, polymedicated patients, subjects with cognitive problems, severe osteoporosis-osteopaenia, dyslipidaemia, or liver disease other than acute liver failure, as well as for men with erectile dysfunction caused by CBZ. The transition from OXC to ESL can take place overnight with an OXC:ESL dose ratio of 1:1 and it is recommended for patients who frequently forget to take their medication, those who work rotating shifts, polymedicated patients, or those with cognitive problems. The transition was not recommended for patients with prior rash due to CBZ or OXC use.

CONCLUSION

The EPICON Project offers a set of recommendations about the clinical management of switching from CBZ or OXC to ESL, using the Delphi method.

Eslicarbazepine acetate for the treatment of partial epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a third generation AED structurally related to carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine, but without several of the drawbacks associated with these compounds. ESL is completely metabolized to its eslicarbazpine, which selectively binds inactivated voltage-gated sodium channels and thus selectively reduces the activity of rapidly firing (epileptic) neurons. In addition, ESL has pharmacokinetic properties allowing once daily dosing.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes data from the initial phase I to III studies, which demonstrated efficacy of ESL as add-on treatment in partial onset epilepsy, and more recent studies that demonstrate efficacy of ESL as monotherapy. Real-life observational studies are also reviewed, and seem to confirm the notion of ESL as a well-tolerated AED. As a new AED, ESL needs to be subject to close monitoring regarding long-term adverse events. Future independent studies will most likely clarify the role of ESL in the management of partial onset seizures.

EXPERT OPINION

The role of ESL in management of partial onset seizures is discussed, as is the need for close monitoring and evaluation for broad-spectrum pharmacodynamics properties. The characteristics of the molecule and efficacy and safety profiles seem, however, very promising.

Pharmacokinetic characteristics of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs)

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are routinely prescribed for the management of a variety of neurologic and psychiatric conditions, including epilepsy and epilepsy syndromes. Physiologic changes due to aging, pregnancy, nutritional status, drug interactions, and diseases (ie, those involving liver and kidney function) can affect pharmacokinetics of AEDs. This review discusses foundational pharmacokinetic characteristics of AEDs currently available in the United States, including clobazam but excluding the other benzodiazepines. Commonalities of pharmacokinetic properties of AEDs are discussed in detail. Important differences among AEDs and clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interactions in absorption, distribution, metabolism, and/or elimination associated with AEDs are highlighted. In general, newer AEDs have more predictable kinetics and lower risks for drug interactions. This is because many are minimally or not bound to serum proteins, are primarily renally cleared or metabolized by non–cytochrome P450 isoenzymes, and/or have lower potential to induce/inhibit various hepatic enzyme systems. A clear understanding of the pharmacokinetic properties of individual AEDs is essential in creating a safe and effective treatment plan for a patient.

A Pharmacokinetic Study Comparing Eslicarbazepine Acetate Administered Orally as a Crushed or Intact Tablet in Healthy Volunteers

The relative bioequivalence of crushed versus intact eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) tablets (800 mg) administered orally in healthy adults was evaluated in an open-label, randomized, 2-period crossover study with a 5-day washout between treatments. Sample blood levels of eslicarbazepine and (R)-licarbazepine were determined; pharmacokinetic parameters were derived for eslicarbazepine. Bioequivalence was established if the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the geometric mean treatment ratios of eslicarbazepine AUC(0-∞) and Cmax were within the prespecified 80%-125% range. Twenty-seven subjects in the intent-to-treat population (n = 28) completed both treatment periods. Eslicarbazepine exposure measures were similar for crushed versus intact ESL tablets: average Cmax , 11 700 versus 11 500 ng/mL; AUC(0-∞) , 225 000 versus 234 000 ng·h/mL; AUC(0-last) , 222 000 versus 231 000 ng·h/mL, respectively. Geometric least squares mean ratios (90%CIs) comparing eslicarbazepine exposure measures were within the 80%-125% range (Cmax , 102.63% [97.07%-108.51%]; AUC(0-∞) , 96.72% [94.36%-99.13%]; AUC0-last , 96.69% [94.24%-99.21%]). In conclusion, ESL administered orally as a crushed tablet sprinkled on applesauce, or intact were bioequivalent in healthy subjects. Eslicarbazepine bioavailability was not significantly altered by crushing, indicating that ESL tablets can be administered intact or crushed.

Practical guidance and considerations for transitioning patients from oxcarbazepine or carbamazepine to eslicarbazepine acetate--Expert opinion

There is currently a lack of guidance on methodology and special considerations for transitioning patients from oxcarbazepine (OXC) or carbamazepine (CBZ) to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), if deemed clinically necessary. An advisory panel of epilepsy experts was convened to share their experience on the use of adjunctive ESL in clinical practice and to provide practical recommendations to help address this gap. When changing over from OXC to ESL, an OXC:ESL dose ratio of 1:1 should be employed to calculate the ESL target dose, and the changeover can take place overnight. No changes to comedication are required. Since CBZ has a different mechanism of action to ESL and is a stronger inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, the transitioning of patients from CBZ to ESL requires careful consideration on a patient-by-patient basis. In general, a CBZ:ESL dose ratio of 1:1.3 should be employed to calculate the ESL target dose, and patients should be transitioned over a minimum period of 1-2weeks. Special considerations include adjustment of titration schedule and target dose in elderly patients and those with hepatic or renal impairment and potential adjustment of comedications metabolized by CYP enzymes. In summary, due to structural distinctions between ESL, OXC, and CBZ, which affect mechanism of action and tolerability, there are clinical situations in which it may be appropriate to consider transitioning patients from OXC or CBZ to ESL. Changing patients over from OXC to ESL is generally more straightforward than transitioning patients from CBZ to ESL, which requires careful consideration.

A review of the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate in the management of partial-onset seizures

Eslicarbazepine acetate is a is a once-daily antiepileptic drug (AED) that was approved in 2009 by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) (Zebinix™), and in 2013 by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (Aptiom™) as adjunctive therapy in adults with refractory partial-onset seizures, with or without secondary generalization. It is a third-generation member of the dibenzazepine family of AEDs with distinctive mechanism of action, posology and tolerability profile. The eslicarbazepine acetate development program included an initial phase II study (study BIA 2-093) and three subsequent phase III, multicentre, randomized, double-blinded and placebo-controlled clinical trials (studies BIA-2093-301, BIA- 2093-302 and BIA -2093-303). A fourth phase III placebo-controlled trial (study BIA-2093-304) was designed in order to meet specific requirements of the FDA. All performed studies have consistently shown that eslicarbazepine acetate (800 to 1200 mg/day) is effective and well tolerated as adjunctive therapy for adults with partial-onset seizures.

Efficacy and safety of conversion to monotherapy with eslicarbazepine acetate in adults with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures: a historical-control phase III study

Background

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL, Aptiom®) is a once-daily (QD) anticonvulsant, approved as adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures (POS). It is extensively converted after oral administration to eslicarbazepine, and is believed to exert its effect through inhibition of voltage-gated sodium channels. The possible role of ESL as monotherapy to treat POS has not yet been established.

Methods

This study was an 18-week, multicenter, randomized double-blind trial of gradual conversion to ESL monotherapy in adults with POS not well controlled by 1–2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), using historical data as the control. The study comprised an 8-week baseline period, a 2-week titration period, a 6-week AED conversion period, a 10-week monotherapy period, and either a 1-week taper period or optional entry to an open-label extension study. The primary endpoint compared the Kaplan–Meier (KM)-estimated 112-day exit rate with a threshold value calculated from the historical controls.

Results

There were 172 randomized patients; 154 (90%) entered the AED conversion period and 121 (70%) completed the study. The KM-estimated exit rates [confidence interval (CI)] were 15.6% [8.1–28.7%] for ESL 1200 mg, and 12.8% [7.5–21.5%] for ESL 1600 mg. The upper limits of the 95% CI KM-estimates were below the pre-specified threshold for historical control of 65.3%, indicating that ESL was efficacious in reducing seizure-related exits, compared with historical control. During the 18-week double-blind treatment period, median reductions in standardized seizure frequency occurred with ESL 1200 mg (36.1%) and ESL 1600 mg (47.5%). The responder rates (a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency from baseline) during the 18-week double-blind period and the monotherapy period, respectively, were 35.2% and 38.9% for ESL 1200 mg, and 46.0% and 46.0% for ESL 1600 mg. The overall adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of ESL.

Conclusions

These findings indicate that ESL monotherapy (1200 and 1600 mg QD) was efficacious and well tolerated in this study.

Trial registration

NCT01091662; EudraCT No. 2010-018684-42.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12883-015-0305-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate in acute mania and prevention of recurrence: experience from multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase II clinical studies in patients with bipolar disorder I

BACKGROUND

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is an anticonvulsant approved as an adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset seizures.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of ESL in the treatment of acute mania and prevention of recurrence in bipolar disorder I.

METHODS

Two 3-week multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled studies in acute mania (study BIA-2093-203: dose titrated by response, ESL 600-1800mg or 800-2400mg, once-daily; study BIA-2093-204: fixed doses of 600, 1200 and 1800mg, once-daily) were followed by a recurrence prevention study consisting of a 2-week open-label period (900mg, once-daily) continued by a double-blind, parallel-group, fixed dose (300, 900 and 1800mg, once-daily) period for a minimum of 6 months. The primary endpoint was changed from baseline until the end of the 3-week treatment period in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) in studies BIA-2093-203 and BIA-2093-204, and the proportion of patients showing no worsening according to the Clinical Global Impressions - Bipolar Version (CGI-BP) over Part II in study BIA-2093-205.

RESULTS

In study BIA-2093-203 (n=160, ITT), neither dose group was statistically different from placebo in the primary endpoint, though the ESL 800-2400mg showed a greater reduction in YMRS score (p=0.0523). CGI-BP score changes for mania and overall bipolar illness indicate a significant improvement in patient symptomatology for the ESL 800-2400mg group (from preceding and worst phase) and for ESL 600-1800mg group (from worst phase only) when compared to placebo. Study BIA-2093-204 (n=38) results were inconclusive due to premature termination caused by recruitment difficulties. In study BIA-2093-205 (n=85, ITT), at least 50% of patients showed no worsening in all treatment groups (p=0.250). ESL adverse events were mostly of mild and moderate intensities and consistent with previously reported observations for ESL.

CONCLUSION

ESL treatment was not significantly different from placebo in manic patients in the primary outcome, but secondary outcomes may be suggestive of efficacy. The recurrence prevention study provides preliminary support for efficacy of ESL in patients recovered from an acute manic episode.

Eslicarbazepine acetate for the treatment of focal epilepsy: an update on its proposed mechanisms of action

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a once daily antiepileptic drug (AED) approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada as an adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset seizures (POS). In humans and in relevant animal laboratory species, ESL undergoes extensive first pass hydrolysis to its major active metabolite eslicarbazepine that represents ∼95% of circulating active moieties. ESL and eslicarbazepine showed anticonvulsant activity in animal models. ESL may not only suppress seizure activity but may also inhibit the generation of a hyperexcitable network. Data reviewed here suggest that ESL and eslicarbazepine demonstrated the following in animal models: (1) the selectivity of interaction with the inactive state of the voltage-gated sodium channel (VGSC), (2) reduction in VGSC availability through enhancement of slow inactivation, instead of alteration of fast inactivation of VGSC, (3) the failure to cause a paradoxical upregulation of persistent Na(+) current (I NaP), and (4) the reduction in firing frequencies of excitatory neurons in dissociated hippocampal cells from patients with epilepsy who were pharmacoresistant to carbamazepine (CBZ). In addition, eslicarbazepine effectively inhibited high- and low-affinity hCaV3.2 inward currents with greater affinity than CBZ. These preclinical findings may suggest the potential for antiepileptogenic effects; furthermore, the lack of effect upon KV7.2 outward currents may translate into a reduced potential for eslicarbazepine to facilitate repetitive firing.

Efficacy and safety of conversion to monotherapy with eslicarbazepine acetate in adults with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures: a randomized historical-control phase III study based in North America

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as monotherapy in North American patients with partial‐onset seizures (POS).

Methods

This multicenter, randomized, double‐blind “withdrawal to monotherapy” study used historical control data as the comparator. Adults with POS medically uncontrolled by one to two antiepileptic drugs gradually converted to ESL monotherapy. Following an 8‐week baseline period, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ESL 1,600 mg (n = 128) or 1,200 mg QD (n = 65) for 18 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients meeting predefined exit criteria (signifying worsening seizure control). Treatment was considered effective if the 95% upper confidence limit (UCL) for the Kaplan‐Meier estimated exit rate was lower than the exit rate threshold calculated from the historical control (65.3%).

Results

Kaplan‐Meier estimated exit rates were: ESL 1,600 mg, 28.7% (95% CI 21.2–38.1%) and 1,200 mg, 44.4% (32.5–58.3%). The difference between doses was not significant (p = 0.07). For both doses, the 95% UCLs for the exit rate were ˂65.3%; ESL monotherapy was considered superior to the historical control. There was no statistically significant increase in the risk of study exit related to carbamazepine use. Nine (7.6%) and five patients (8.3%) remained seizure‐free during the 10‐week monotherapy period, while taking ESL 1,600 and 1,200 mg, respectively. The reductions in median standardized seizure frequency (seizures per 28 days) between baseline and the 18‐week treatment period were: ESL 1,600 mg, 42% and 1,200 mg, 31%. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurring in ≥10% of patients were dizziness, headache, fatigue, somnolence, nausea, and nasopharyngitis. The TEAE most frequently leading to discontinuation was hyponatremia (2.1%).

Significance

ESL was efficacious and well tolerated as monotherapy in North American patients, and led to a reduction in seizure frequency. Exit rates for ESL 1,600 and 1,200 mg QD were superior to the historical control; the difference in exit rates between doses was not statistically significant.

Clinical utility of eslicarbazepine: current evidence

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a new antiepileptic drug whose mechanism of action is blockade of the voltage-gated sodium channel (VGSC). However, in respect to carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine, the active ESL metabolite (eslicarbazepine) affects slow inactivation of VGSC and has a similar affinity for the inactivated state and a lower affinity for the resting state of the channel. This new antiepileptic drug has been recently approved in Europe (trade name Zebinix) and in the United States (trade name Stedesa) for adjunctive treatment in adult subjects with partial-onset seizures, with or without secondary generalization. Following oral administration, ESL is rapidly and extensively metabolized by hepatic esterases to eslicarbazepine. This active metabolite has a linear pharmacokinetic profile, a low binding to plasma proteins (<40%), and a half-life of 20-24 hours and is mainly excreted by kidneys in an unchanged form or as glucuronide conjugates. ESL is administered once a day and has a low potential for drug-drug interactions. Efficacy and safety of this drug in patients with focal seizures have been assessed in four randomized clinical trials, and responder rates (percentage of patients with a ≥50% improvement of their seizures) ranged between 17% and 43%. Adverse events were usually mild to moderate, and the most common were dizziness, somnolence, diplopia, abnormal coordination, blurred vision, vertigo, headache, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting. ESL may be considered an interesting alternative to current antiepileptic drugs for the treatment of drug-resistant focal epilepsies. Additionally, it is under investigation in children with focal epilepsies, in patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsies, and also in other neurological and psychiatric disorders.