Oxcarbazepine monotherapy for partial-onset seizures: a multicenter, double-blind, clinical trial

Application of Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling to Predict Maternal Pharmacokinetics and Fetal Exposure to Oxcarbazepine

Pregnancy is associated with physiological changes that may affect drug pharmacokinetics (PKs). The aim of this study was to establish a maternal-fetal physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of oxcarbazepine (OXC) and its active metabolite, 10,11-dihydro-10-hydroxy-carbazepine (MHD), to (1) assess differences in pregnancy, (2) predict changes in PK target parameters of these molecules following the current dosing regimen, (3) assess predicted concentrations of these molecules in the umbilical vein at delivery, and (4) compare different methods for estimating drug placental penetration. Predictions using the pregnancy PBPK model of OXC resulted in maternal concentrations within a 2-fold error, and extrapolation of the model to early-stage pregnancies indicated that changes in median PK parameters remained above target thresholds, requiring increased frequency of monitoring. The dosing simulation results suggested dose adjustment in the last two trimesters. We generally recommend that women administer ≥ 1.5× their baseline dose of OXC during their second and third trimesters. Test methods for predicting placental transfer showed varying performance, with the in vitro method showing the highest predictive accuracy. Exposure to MHD in maternal and fetal venous blood was similar. Overall, the above-mentioned models can enhance understanding of the maternal-fetal PK behavior of drugs, ultimately informing drug-treatment decisions for pregnant women and their fetuses.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2017. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for focal onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however, a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure of 12 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with focal onset seizures (simple focal, complex focal or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 12 April 2021: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to April 09, 2021). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) and network meta-analysis (NMA) review. Our primary outcome was 'time to treatment failure', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', and 'time to first seizure post-randomisation'. We performed frequentist NMA to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 12 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct 'pairwise' estimates and NMA results via node splitting. Results are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the CiNeMA approach, based on the GRADE framework. We have also provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were provided for at least one outcome of this review for 14,789 out of a total of 22,049 eligible participants (67% of total data) from 39 out of the 89 eligible trials (43% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 50 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions. No IPD were available from a single trial of eslicarbazepine acetate, so this AED could not be included in the NMA. Network meta-analysis showed high-certainty evidence that for our primary outcome, 'time to treatment failure', for individuals with focal seizures; lamotrigine performs better than most other treatments in terms of treatment failure for any reason and due to adverse events, including the other first-line treatment carbamazepine; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for lamotrigine versus: levetiracetam 1.01 (0.88 to 1.20), zonisamide 1.18 (0.96 to 1.44), lacosamide 1.19 (0.90 to 1.58), carbamazepine 1.26 (1.10 to 1.44), oxcarbazepine 1.30 (1.02 to 1.66), sodium valproate 1.35 (1.09 to 1.69), phenytoin 1.44 (1.11 to 1.85), topiramate 1.50 (1.23 to 1.81), gabapentin 1.53 (1.26 to 1.85), phenobarbitone 1.97 (1.45 to 2.67). No significant difference between lamotrigine and levetiracetam was shown for any treatment failure outcome, and both AEDs seemed to perform better than all other AEDs. For people with generalised onset seizures, evidence was more limited and of moderate certainty; no other treatment performed better than first-line treatment sodium valproate, but there were no differences between sodium valproate, lamotrigine or levetiracetam in terms of treatment failure; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for sodium valproate versus: lamotrigine 1.06 (0.81 to 1.37), levetiracetam 1.13 (0.89 to 1.42), gabapentin 1.13 (0.61 to 2.11), phenytoin 1.17 (0.80 to 1.73), oxcarbazepine 1.24 (0.72 to 2.14), topiramate 1.37 (1.06 to 1.77), carbamazepine 1.52 (1.18 to 1.96), phenobarbitone 2.13 (1.20 to 3.79), lacosamide 2.64 (1.14 to 6.09). Network meta-analysis also showed high-certainty evidence that for secondary remission outcomes, few notable differences were shown for either seizure type; for individuals with focal seizures, carbamazepine performed better than gabapentin (12-month remission) and sodium valproate (six-month remission). No differences between lamotrigine and any AED were shown for individuals with focal seizures, or between sodium valproate and other AEDs for individuals with generalised onset seizures. Network meta-analysis also showed high- to moderate-certainty evidence that, for 'time to first seizure,' in general, the earliest licensed treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for individuals with focal seizures; phenobarbitone performed better than both first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine. There were no notable differences between the newer drugs (oxcarbazepine, topiramate, gabapentin, levetiracetam, zonisamide and lacosamide) for either seizure type. Generally, direct evidence (where available) and network meta-analysis estimates were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping. There was no important indication of inconsistency between direct and network meta-analysis results. The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders; however, reporting of adverse events was highly variable across AEDs and across studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-certainty evidence demonstrates that for people with focal onset seizures, current first-line treatment options carbamazepine and lamotrigine, as well as newer drug levetiracetam, show the best profile in terms of treatment failure and seizure control as first-line treatments. For people with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types), current first-line treatment sodium valproate has the best profile compared to all other treatments, but lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be the most suitable alternative first-line treatments, particularly for those for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option. Further evidence from randomised controlled trials recruiting individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types) is needed.

Treatment of Focal-Onset Seizures in Children: Should This Be More Etiology-Driven?

To accelerate the process of licensing antiseizure medication (ASM) in children, extrapolation of efficacy data for focal-onset seizures from adults to children ≥2 or ≥4 years of age is now accepted. We summarized the efficacy evidence from randomized, controlled trials that was used to grant approval for the pediatric indication of focal-onset seizures for the different ASMs available in Europe. Data from high-quality randomized, controlled trials in young children are limited, especially on the use of ASMs in monotherapy. Licensure trials are typically focused on seizure type irrespective of etiology or epilepsy syndrome. We elaborate on the importance of etiology- or syndrome-driven research and treatment, illustrating this with examples of childhood epilepsy syndromes characterized by predominantly focal-onset seizures. Some of these syndromes respond well to standard ASMs used for focal-onset seizures, but others would benefit from a more etiology- or syndrome-driven approach. Advances in molecular genetics and neuroimaging have made it possible to reveal the underlying cause of a child's epilepsy and tailor research and treatment. More high-quality randomized, controlled trials based on etiology or syndrome type are needed, including those assessing effects on cognition and behavior. In addition, study designs such as "N-of-1 trials" could elucidate possible new treatment options in rare epilepsies. Broadening incentives currently in place to stimulate the development and marketing of drugs for rare diseases (applicable to some epilepsy syndromes) to more common pediatric epilepsy types and syndromes might be a means to enable high-quality trials, and ultimately allow more evidence-based treatment in children.

SCN8A Encephalopathy: Case Report and Literature Review

Epileptic encephalopathy is a condition resulting from extreme forms of intractable childhood epilepsy. The disease can cause severe delays in cognitive, sensory, and motor function development, in addition to being fatal in some cases. Missense mutations of SCN8A, which encodes Nav1.6, one of the main voltage-gated sodium channel subunits in neurons and muscles, have been linked to early infantile SCN8A encephalopathy. Herein, we report the case of a 5-month-old girl with SCN8A encephalopathy with a novel missense mutation. Apart from intractable seizures and autistic phenotypes, the results of blood and biochemical tests, electroencephalogram (EEG) results, and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results were all normal. As the phenotypes caused by these mutations cannot be identified by any clinical, neuroimaging, or electrophysiological features, genetic sequencing should be considered to identify the underlying genetic causes. Although phenytoin is recommended as a last-resort treatment for SCN8A encephalopathy, the administration of the oxcarbazepine, instead of phenytoin, mitigated this patient's intractable seizures.

Predicted Efficacy of Once-Daily Extended-Release Oxcarbazepine (Oxtellar XR®) Monotherapy in Adults and Children with Partial-Onset Seizures: Exposure-Response Modeling and Simulation

PURPOSE

We conducted exposure-response modeling and simulations to compare the predicted efficacy of extended-release oxcarbazepine (OXC-XR), an oral once-daily (qd) antiepileptic drug, with that of immediate-release (IR) OXC twice-daily (bid) when the agents are used as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy in patients with epilepsy characterized by partial-onset seizures (POS).

METHODS

Modeling assessed percent change from baseline 28-day seizure frequency (PCH) as a function of minimum concentration (Cmin) of monohydroxy derivative (MHD), the clinically relevant metabolite of OXC. For OXC-IR, the model used historical data; values for OXC-XR were derived from observed data. The model was simulated (N=100) to predict PCH at MHD Cmin concentrations achieved with 1200 and 2400 mg/day in adults and children receiving OXC-XR qd or OXC-IR bid. Mean PCH and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were generated and compared.

RESULTS

Predicted efficacy was not different (ie, 95% CI of mean PCH overlapped) for OXC-XR qd vs OXC-IR bid at mean MHD Cmin concentrations achieved with 1200 and 2400 mg/day adjunctive OXC-XR (47.4 and 76.4 µmol/L) and at target MHD Cmin concentrations for OXC-IR monotherapy (59.1 and 112 µmol/L) in adults. Predicted efficacy in adults vs children was not different between formulations. Depending on MHD Cmin, the predicted mean PCH in adults ranged from -51.4% to -73.4% with OXC-XR qd and -53.2% to -78.5% with OXC-IR bid. In children, the predicted mean PCH ranged from -48.4% to -58.1% (OXC-XR qd) and -32.5% to -70.4% (OXC-IR bid).

CONCLUSION

This model-based analysis predicted comparable efficacy for OXC-XR qd vs OXC-IR bid at MHD Cmin concentrations corresponding to 1200 and 2400 mg/day as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy. Based on this analysis, the US Food & Drug Administration approved OXC-XR for use as monotherapy in adults and children ≥6 years of age with POS.

Antiepileptic drug withdrawal and seizure severity in the epilepsy monitoring unit

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to identify a strategy for antiepileptic drug (AED) reduction to allow efficient recording of focal seizures (FS) in patients undergoing video-electroencephalography (EEG) in an epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) while avoiding the risk of complications associated with more severe seizure types.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients admitted to our institution's EMU from July 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017. We included 114 presurgical patients who had AEDs reduced and at least one seizure during the admission. We compared AED dosages at which FS versus focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (f-BTCS), seizure clusters, and lorazepam administration occurred. We also examined rate of AED reduction and seizure types. We used a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve to identify a dose maximizing FS and minimizing other seizure types.

RESULTS

Antiepileptic drug withdrawal rates ranged from 0 to 100% in the first 24 h (mean: 20%, standard deviation: 20%). Focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures and lorazepam administration occurred at a lower median AED dose than did FS (0%, 7.2%, and 43.8%, respectively, expressed as a percentage of the patient's outpatient daily AED dose; p < 0.001). A daily EMU-administered dose of one-third of the patient's outpatient AED dose allowed 55.0% of FS to occur while avoiding 82.0% of more severe seizure types. The seizure types had no difference in rate of AED withdrawal in the first 24 h of EMU stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Focal seizures occurred at a higher AED dose than did f-BTCS. This may imply that a low minimally effective dose of AED could allow FS to be recorded while providing protection against f-BTCS. This strategy could improve efficacy and safety in the EMU.

Pharmacotherapy for Focal Seizures in Children and Adolescents

Focal-onset seizures are among the most common forms of seizures in children and adolescents and can be caused by a wide diversity of acquired or genetic etiologies. Despite the increasing array of antiseizure drugs available, treatment of focal-onset seizures in this population remains problematic, with as many as one-third of children having seizures refractory to medications. This review discusses contemporary concepts in focal seizure classification and pathophysiology and describes the antiseizure medications most commonly chosen for this age group. As antiseizure drug efficacy is comparable in children and adults, here we focus on pharmacokinetic aspects, drug-drug interactions, and side effect profiles. Finally, we provide some suggestions for choosing the optimal medication for the appropriate patient.

Association between HLA-A*3201 allele and oxcarbazepine-induced cutaneous adverse reactions in Eastern Han Chinese population

PURPOSE

To determine genetic associations between oxcarbazepine (OXC)-induced cutaneous adverse drug reactions (cADRs) and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) variants in the Eastern Han Chinese population.

METHODS

A total of 120 patients were enrolled in this study, including 30 subjects with OXC-induced cADRs (case group) and 90 OXC-tolerant patients (control group). High-resolution HLA genotyping was conducted for HLA-A, HLA-B, HLA-C, and HLA-DRB1, and allele frequencies were compared.

RESULTS

No patient carried the HLA-B *1502 allele in the case group, the frequency of HLA-B *1502 allele in the control group was 6.1%. HLA-A*3201 allele was detected in 13.3% of 30 patients with OXC-induced cADRs (4/30) and 0% of 90 OXC-tolerant patients (0/90). The difference in HLA-A*3201 frequency between the two groups was statistically significant [P = 0.004, odds ratio (OR) = 15.877, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.817-138.720].

CONCLUSIONS

Eastern Han Chinese patients with the HLA-A*3201 allele may be more susceptible to OXC-induced cADRs, while the HLA-B*1502 allele is not correlated with it. The precise association between HLA alleles and OXC-induced cADRs warrants further study.

Oxcarbazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2013. This review is one in a series of Cochrane Reviews investigating pair-wise monotherapy comparisons.Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in which abnormal electrical discharges from the brain cause recurrent unprovoked seizures. It is believed that with effective drug treatment, up to 70% of individuals with active epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free and go into long-term remission shortly after starting drug therapy with a single antiepileptic drug in monotherapy.Worldwide, phenytoin is a commonly used antiepileptic drug. It is important to know how newer drugs, such as oxcarbazepine, compare with commonly used standard treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure with oxcarbazepine compared to phenytoin, when used as monotherapy in people with focal onset seizures or generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 20 August 2018: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 20 August 2018), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing monotherapy with either oxcarbazepine or phenytoin in children or adults with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review. Our primary outcome was time to treatment failure and our secondary outcomes were time to first seizure post-randomisation, time to six-month and 12-month remission, and incidence of adverse events. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain trial-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

Individual participant data were available for 480 out of a total of 517 participants (93%), from two out of three included trials. For remission outcomes, a HR of less than one indicated an advantage for phenytoin; and for first seizure and treatment failure outcomes, a HR of less than one indicated an advantage for oxcarbazepine.The results for time to treatment failure for any reason related to treatment showed a potential advantage of oxcarbazepine over phenytoin, but this was not statistically significant (pooled HR adjusted for epilepsy type: 0.78 95% CI 0.53 to 1.14, 476 participants, two trials, moderate-quality evidence). Our analysis showed that treatment failure due to adverse events occurred later on with oxcarbazepine than phenytoin (pooled HR for all participants: 0.22 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.51, 480 participants, two trials, high-quality evidence). Our analysis of time to treatment failure due to lack of efficacy showed no clear difference between the drugs (pooled HR for all participants: 1.17 (95% CI 0.31 to 4.35), 480 participants, two trials, moderate-quality evidence).We found no clear or statistically significant differences between drugs for any of the secondary outcomes of the review: time to first seizure post-randomisation (pooled HR adjusted for epilepsy type: 0.97 95% CI 0.75 to 1.26, 468 participants, two trials, moderate-quality evidence); time to 12-month remission (pooled HR adjusted for epilepsy type 1.04 95% CI 0.77 to 1.41, 468 participants, two trials, moderate-quality evidence) and time to six-month remission (pooled HR adjusted for epilepsy type: 1.06 95% CI 0.82 to 1.36, 468 participants, two trials, moderate-quality evidence).The most common adverse events reported in more than 10% of participants on either drug were somnolence (28% of total participants, with similar rates for both drugs), headache (15% of total participants, with similar rates for both drugs), dizziness (14.5% of total participants, reported by slightly more participants on phenytoin (18%) than oxcarbazepine (11%)) and gum hyperplasia (reported by substantially more participants on phenytoin (18%) than oxcarbazepine (2%)).The results of this review are applicable mainly to individuals with focal onset seizures; 70% of included individuals experienced seizures of this type at baseline. The two studies included in IPD meta-analysis were generally of good methodological quality but the design of the studies may have biased the results for the secondary outcomes (time to first seizure post-randomisation, time to six-month and 12-month remission) as seizure recurrence data were not collected following treatment failure or withdrawal from the study. In addition, misclassification of epilepsy type may have impacted on results, particularly for individuals with generalised onset seizures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence provided by this review indicates that treatment failure due to adverse events occurs significantly later with oxcarbazepine than phenytoin. For individuals with focal onset seizures, moderate-quality evidence suggests that oxcarbazepine may be superior to phenytoin in terms of treatment failure for any reason, seizure recurrence and seizure remission. Therefore, oxcarbazepine may be a preferable alternative treatment than phenytoin, particularly for individuals with focal onset seizures. The evidence in this review which relates to individuals with generalised onset seizures is of low quality and does not inform current treatment policy.We recommend that future trials should be designed to the highest quality possible with regards to choice of population, classification of seizure type, duration of follow-up (including continued follow-up after failure or withdrawal of randomised treatment), choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than current first-line treatment carbamazepine and other current first-line treatment lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam); carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.

Oxcarbazepine in Mood Disorders

Patients with bipolar illness or schizoaffective disorder–manic type can present with a variety of symptoms and have mixed responses to treatment. This is especially true for patients who have rapid cycling or mixed bipolar illness. The following cases describe the use of oxcarbazepine in patients with either bipolar illness or schizoaffective disorder. This agent, an analogue of carbamazepine, has fewer drug–drug interactions and side effects and thus may prove to be a better tolerated agent in the treatment of these very serious illnesses. A discussion of the properties of oxcarbazepine is also included.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam), and carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.

Hyponatremia induced by antiepileptic drugs in patients with epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Hyponatremia induced by antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) has not received sufficient attention in patients with epilepsy. Areas covered: We reviewed articles between 1966 and 2015 about hyponatremia as an adverse effect of AEDs in patients with epilepsy. The incidence, clinical symptoms, onset times of AEDs-induced hyponatremia are discussed in detail, as are the risk factors associated with AEDs-induced hyponatremia and mechanisms underlying its development. We also briefly describe strategies for treating AED-induced hyponatremia. Expert opinion: Carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are the most common AEDs which induce hyponatremia in patients with epilepsy. Recently, other AEDs, such as eslicarbazepine, sodium valproate, lamotrigine, levetiracetam and gabapentin have also been reported to cause hyponatremia. Understanding the risk associated with AED-induced hyponatremia and taking effective measures to combat serum sodium imbalance induced by AED therapy are necessary.

Relationship between mono-hydroxy-carbazepine serum concentrations and adverse effects in patients on oxcarbazepine monotherapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relationship between serum concentrations of mono-hydroxy-carbazepine (MHD), the main metabolite of oxcarbazepine (OXC), and the occurrence of adverse effects (AE) in a large group of patients on OXC monotherapy.

METHODS

An antiepileptic drug (AED) therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) database was analyzed especially with regard to OXC dosage, MHD serum concentration, and the occurrence of AE. In total, 893 blood samples of 442 patients were included in this retrospective study. The statistical evaluation was performed by means of Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests and generalized estimating equations (GEE).

RESULTS

At least one AE was reported in 78 (17.6%) of the 442 patients. At MHD serum concentrations of 30.0 μg/ml and 43.7 μg/ml and OXC dosages of 33.1 mg/kg and 62.3 mg/kg, 25% and 75% of patients, respectively, experienced at least one AE. Log-rank tests indicated that younger patients (<18 years) may be able to tolerate higher MHD serum levels (p = 0.006) and higher OXC dosages per body weight (p < 0.001) compared to adult patients (≥ 18 years). Furthermore, AEs occurred at higher body-weight adjusted OXC dosages of extended release formulations compared to immediate-release formulations (p = 0.010), whereas MHD serum levels at which AEs occurred did not differ significantly between formulations (p = 0.125). Multivariate GEE confirmed the results.

CONCLUSION

The occurrence of AEs is significantly (and non-linearly) dependent on MHD serum level, whereas the dependence of OXC dosage is less distinctive. But, tolerability of OXC seems to depend on age of the patients as well as on pharmaceutical formulation of OXC.

Time to prerandomization monthly seizure count in perampanel trials: A novel epilepsy endpoint

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a novel endpoint of time to prerandomization monthly seizure count could be used to differentiate efficacious and nonefficacious therapies in clinical trials of new add-on antiepileptic drugs (AEDs).

METHODS

This analysis used data from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trials of perampanel as an add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy who were experiencing refractory partial seizures: studies 304 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00699972), 305 (NCT00699582), and 306 (NCT00700310). Time to prerandomization monthly seizure count was evaluated post hoc for each trial, and findings were compared with the original primary outcomes (median percent change in seizure frequency and 50% responder rate). Outcomes were assessed for all partial-onset seizures, secondarily generalized (SG) tonic-clonic seizures only, and complex partial plus SG (CP + SG) seizures.

RESULTS

Perampanel 4-12 mg significantly prolonged median time to prerandomization monthly seizure count, generally by more than 1 week, compared with placebo, across all 3 studies, consistent with the original primary outcomes. Analysis of SG seizures only, and CP + SG seizures, also indicated a significantly prolonged median time to prerandomization monthly seizure count with perampanel 8 mg and 12 mg compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Time to prerandomization monthly seizure count is a promising novel alternative to the standard endpoints of median percent change in seizure frequency and 50% responder rates used in trials of add-on AEDs. Use of this endpoint could reduce exposure to placebo or ineffective treatments, thereby facilitating trial recruitment and improving safety.

Efficacy of low to moderate doses of oxcarbazepine in adult patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to explore the efficacy of low dose of oxcarbazepine (OXC) in adult patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy in an actual clinical setting. The associated factors influencing the poor control of seizures were also evaluated.

METHODS

The epilepsy database (2010-2014) from the Epilepsy Clinic of West China Hospital was retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 102 adult patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated partial epilepsy initially treated with OXC were included, and divided into good response group (64) and poor response group (38) according to whether they were seizure-free for at least 12 months. There were 27 (26.5%) patients becoming seizure-free with OXC 600 mg/day monotherapy. The remaining 75 patients had doses of either increasing OXC to 900 mg/day (n = 59) or the addition of another antiepileptic drug (AED) (n = 16), with another 20 (19.6%) and six (5.9%) patients becoming seizure-free, respectively (P = 0.788). In addition, two (2.0%) and nine (8.8%) patients became seizure-free with OXC > 900 mg/day monotherapy and OXC ≥ 900 mg/day combination therapy, respectively. Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis revealed that the time from onset of epilepsy to treatment initiation is significantly associated with seizure control (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicated that OXC at low to moderate doses is effective for the treatment of Chinese adult patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated partial epilepsy, and a longer time interval from the onset of epilepsy to the start of treatment significantly predicts poor seizure control.

Seizures in patients with cerebral hemiatrophy: A prognostic evaluation

PURPOSE

Cerebral hemiatrophy is a common childhood disease. It clinically manifests with seizures, hemiparesis and mental retardation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective study, previously untreated patients with seizures and cerebral hemiatrophy were recruited. Cerebral hemiatrophy was diagnosed on the basis of hemispheric ratio. Patients with acquired hemiconvulsion, hemiplegia, and epilepsy (HHE) syndrome were included in group A. Group B included patients with congenital HHE syndrome. Patients were followed up for 6 months for seizure recurrence.

RESULTS

Out of 42 patients 26 were in group A and 16 were in group B. After 6 months, there was significant reduction in seizure frequency (P < 0.0001) in both the groups. At least 50% reduction in seizure frequency was noted in all the patients. Complete seizure freedom was observed in 15 (35.7%) patients. Seizure recurrences were significantly higher (P = 0.008) in group A. On univariate analysis, predictors of seizure recurrences were history of febrile seizures (P = 0.013), hippocampal sclerosis (P = 0.001), thalamic atrophy (P = 0.001), basal ganglia atrophy (P = 0.001), cerebellar atrophy (P = 0.01), ventricular dilatation (P = 0.001), epileptiform discharges at presentation (P = 0.023), complex partial seizures (P = 0.006) and status epilepticus (P = 0.02). On multivariate analysis, hemispheric ratio was the only significant factor for seizure recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Patients with congenital hemiatrophy had better seizure control than that in patients with HHE syndrome.

Conversion to lacosamide monotherapy in the treatment of focal epilepsy: results from a historical-controlled, multicenter, double-blind study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of conversion to lacosamide 400 mg/day monotherapy in adults with focal epilepsy.

METHODS

This historical-controlled, double-blind study (NCT00520741) enrolled patients aged 16-70 years on stable doses of 1-2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and experiencing 2-40 partial-onset seizures per 28 days during the 8-week prospective Baseline. Patients were randomized to lacosamide 400 or 300 mg/day (3:1 ratio), starting at 200 mg/day and titrated over 3 weeks to randomized dose. Patients then withdrew background AEDs over 6 weeks and entered a 10-week Monotherapy Phase. The primary assessment was the Kaplan-Meier-predicted percentage of patients on 400 mg/day in the full analysis set (FAS) meeting ≥ 1 predefined seizure-related exit criterion by day 112, compared with the historical-control threshold (65.3%).

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty-five patients were enrolled and were eligible for safety analyses (400 mg/day, n = 319; 300 mg/day, n = 106). A total of 271 (63.8%) of 425 patients completed the Lacosamide Maintenance Phase (combined AED Withdrawal and Monotherapy Phases). Among 284 patients in the 400 mg/day group in the FAS, 82 (28.9%) met ≥ 1 exit criterion; the Kaplan-Meier-predicted exit percentage at day 112 for 400 mg/day (30.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 24.6-35.5%) was lower than the historical control. When exit events, withdrawal due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and withdrawal due to lack of efficacy were summed (n = 90), the predicted exit percentage (32.3%; 95% CI 26.8-37.8%) was also lower than the historical control. Most patients receiving 400 mg/day reported some improvement on the Clinical Global Impression of Change (75.4%) and Patient Global Impression of Change (74.3%). Overall, the most common (>10%) TEAEs were dizziness (24.0%), headache (14.4%), nausea (13.4%), convulsion (11.5%), somnolence (10.4%), and fatigue (10.1%); most (74.1%) were mild-to-moderate in intensity. Seventy-two patients (16.9%) discontinued due to TEAEs. Seventeen patients (4%, all receiving 400 mg/day) experienced serious AEs.

SIGNIFICANCE

Lacosamide 400 mg/day monotherapy was effective, with a favorable safety profile in patients with focal epilepsy.

Oxcarbazepine extended-release formulation in epilepsy

Oxcarbazepine (OXC) is a 10-keto-analogue of carbamazepine, which was developed and labeled as a follow-up antiepileptic drug, that was intended to overcome some of the pharmacological drawbacks of carbamazepine with similar efficacy. The main advantage is the nonoxidative metabolic pathway that allows a lower enzyme-induction profile and fewer drug interactions. OXC is rapidly and extensively reduced by cytosolic hepatic enzymes to its monohydroxylated derivative (MHD), thus OXC may be regarded as a prodrug with MHD representing the active antiepileptic agent. The immediate-release (IR) formulation of OXC (Trileptal(®), Timox(®)) has an almost complete bioavailibilty. It is rapidly absorbed and reaches peak concentrations after 1-3 h. MHD peak concentrations are measured within 4-12 h. Elimination half-life in healthy subjects is 1-5 h for OXC and 7-20 h for MHD. The OXC plasma concentration peak may have been responsible for side effects, such as dizziness, vertigo, coordination problems or blurred vision, which appeared more often with this formulation in individual cases than with the formulation available prior to 2000, or with another formulation that has been distributed in Scandinavian countries. Both possibilities offer a profile approaching the characteristics of an extended-release (ER) formulation. ER OXC was labeled in Germany in 2008 (Apydan(®) extent, Desitin Arzneimittel GmbH, Hamburg, Germany). Under steady-state conditions, Phase I studies show bioequivalence between IR and ER OXC. With ER OXC, OXC plasma peak concentrations and both OXC and MHD peak-trough fluctuations are markedly reduced. In clinical trials, comparisons between IR OXC twice daily versus ER OXC once daily failed to show significant differences; efficacy tended to be better with IR OXC, whereas OXC ER showed insignificant tolerability advantages. Another study is currently ongoing to compare the tolerability of both formulations under twice-daily administration conditions in patients with difficult-to-treat epilepsies who require a dosage increase of OXC and who are randomized to IR or ER OXC.

Oxcarbazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 2.Worldwide, phenytoin is a commonly used antiepileptic drug. For the newer drugs such as oxcarbazepine, it is important to know how they compare with standard treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To review the best evidence comparing oxcarbazepine and phenytoin when used as monotherapy in participants with partial onset seizures or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialised Register (22 January 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12) and MEDLINE (1946 to 22 January 2013). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures with a comparison of oxcarbazepine monotherapy with phenytoin monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data review. Outcomes were time to (a) treatment withdrawal (b) 12-month remission (c) six-month remission and (d) first seizure post randomisation. We used Cox proportional hazards models to obtain study-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) with the generic inverse variance method used to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

Individual participant data were available for 480 out of 517 participants (93%) from three included trials. For remission outcomes, a HR > 1 indicates an advantage to phenytoin and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes a HR > 1 indicates an advantage to oxcarbazepine.The main overall results (pooled HR, 95% CI) were: (i) time to withdrawal of allocated treatment 1.65 (1.08 to 2.52), (ii) time to 12-month remission 0.92 (0.68 to 1.24), (iii) time to six-month remission 0.90 (0.70 to 1.15), (iv) time to first seizure 1.07 (0.83 to 1.39). Results indicate a statistically significant advantage for oxcarbazepine over phenytoin for time to treatment withdrawal, but insufficient evidence to suggest a difference between the drugs for other outcomes. By epilepsy type, there is no significant advantage for either drug for generalised epilepsy, however there is a significant advantage for partial epilepsy with oxcarbazepine for time to treatment withdrawal (HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.15 to 3.33).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For participants with partial onset seizures oxcarbazepine is significantly less likely to be withdrawn, but current data do not allow a statement as to whether oxcarbazepine is equivalent, superior or inferior to phenytoin in terms of seizure control. However, the design of the studies may have biased seizure outcomes and misclassification of epilepsy type may have biased withdrawal rates.

Cutaneous reactions induced by oxcarbazepine in Southern Han Chinese: incidence, features, risk factors and relation to HLA-B alleles

PURPOSE

Oxcarbazepine (OXC) is a promising alternative for patients who cannot tolerate carbamazepine. Recently, however, it has been reported that OXC-induced cutaneous adverse drug reactions (cADRs) are prevalent and may lead to drug discontinuation. Additionally, these reactions are thought to be associated with HLA-B*1502. This study aims to investigate the incidence, features and risk factors of OXC-cADRs, and to explore their relation to HLA-B alleles in Southern Han Chinese.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed to investigate the incidence, features and risk factors of OXC-cADRs, in which 252 new users were recruited. To examine the association between OXC-cADRs and HLA-B alleles, 14 maculopapular eruption (MPE) cases, including 9 additional cases beyond this prospective observation, were genotyped by PCR-SSP and sequencing. Thirty-five OXC-tolerant patients served as controls.

RESULTS

Five patients (2.0%) developed an OXC-cADR, and all were mild MPE. History of other AED allergy (p=0.005, OR=121.23) and non-AED allergy (p=0.006, OR=59.92) were significant risk factors for OXC-cADRs in multivariate logistic regression analysis. Only one patient with OXC-MPE was positive for HLA-B*1502; and the frequency of HLA-B*1502 in OXC-MPE did not differ significantly from that in OXC-tolerant controls. Four HLA-B*1302 alleles were detected in OXC-MPE cases, which was significantly different from that in general population of southern Han Chinese (p=0.001, OR=7.83).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of OXC-induced cADRs was low, and no severe reactions occurred. Patients with a history of allergy are more susceptible to OXC-cADRs. No significant association between HLA-B*1502 and OXC-MPE was found. The associations between OXC-MPE and HLA alleles warrant further studies.

Tolerability of antiepileptic drugs: can we determine differences?

Patient tolerability of adverse effects is integral to successful treatment. Although standard antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are well tolerated by many patients, the promise of newer AEDs has been the potential for diminished burden of problems with similar seizure control. This report reviews the prevalence of systemic and neurological adverse effects reported in clinical trials of AED monotherapy. A central finding in this report was the unidirectional higher prevalence of selected adverse effects from standard compared with newer AEDs. A system of questioning every patient at every visit to elicit information may be helpful when balancing benefit-to-risk ratio of individualized therapy during everyday practice.

Serum insulin, cortisol, leptin, neuropeptide Y, galanin and ghrelin levels in epileptic children receiving oxcarbazepine

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate whether oxcarbazepine (OXC) monotherapy causes weight gain in epileptic children.

METHODS

A total of 22 children with epilepsy (age 3.0-16.4 years) were assigned to OXC therapy. Serum levels of glucose, insulin, cortisol, leptin, neuropeptide Y (NPY), galanin and ghrelin were assessed before OXC therapy (month 0) and after the 6th and 18th months.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in weight-standard deviation score (SDS), Height-SDS, BMI-SDS, serum glucose, insulin, cortisol, leptin, NPY, galanin and ghrelin levels between initial values (month 0) and those in the 6th and 18th months after OXC therapy (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that OXC therapy causes neither weight change nor alterations in serum glucose, insulin, cortisol, leptin, NPY, galanin and ghrelin levels in children with epilepsy.

Risk factors of oxcarbazepine-induced hyponatremia in patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

To determine the risk factors for hyponatremia in patients with epilepsy treated with oxcarbazepine (OXC).

METHODS

Seventy-three adult patients with epilepsy aged older than 17 years who received OXC therapy were enrolled in this study. Patients who had hyponatremia due to any etiology before OXC therapy and patients receiving OXC therapy for nonepileptic disorders were excluded from this study. The baseline level of serum sodium of the patients was measured before the OXC therapy. During OXC therapy, serum sodium levels were measured at least once per 3 months.

RESULTS

The frequency of hyponatremia (Na+, ≤ 134 mEq/L) was 24.7% (n = 18) in patients with OXC therapy, and 8.2% (n = 6) of the patients had severe hyponatremia (Na+, ≤ 128 mEq/L). The degree of decline in serum sodium concentration was significantly negatively correlated with the dosage of OXC. An increase of 1 mg in the dosage of OXC increased the risk of hyponatremia by 0.2%. Moreover, increasing the number of combination antiepileptic drugs increased the risk of hyponatremia.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher dosages of OXC and the number of combination antiepileptic drugs may increase the risk of OXC-induced hyponatremia in patients with epilepsy. Most patients are asymptomatic, but if symptoms of hyponatremia, such as headache, general malaise, gait disturbance, and somnolence, are suspected, the serum sodium level should be measured; it may be necessary to decrease the OXC dose or to discontinue the drug.

Historical control monotherapy design in the treatment of epilepsy

PURPOSE

Monotherapy approvals have been difficult to obtain from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and have almost all been achieved using a trial design entitled "withdrawal to monotherapy" in treatment-resistant patients, which employs a so-called "pseudo-placebo" as a comparator arm. The authors submitted a white paper to the FDA advocating use of a virtual placebo historical control as an alternative to pseudo-placebo. Such an approach reduces patient risk that would result from exposure to pseudo-placebo. In this article, we present the data submitted to the FDA to justify a historical control.

METHODS

We analyzed individual patient data from eight previously completed withdrawal to monotherapy studies, which we determined had similar design. All studies employed percent meeting predetermined exit criteria (denoting worsening of seizure control) as the outcome measure. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the percent exiting were calculated at 112 days.

RESULTS

The percent meeting exit criteria were uniformly high, ranging from 74.9-95.9%. The eight studies appear to meet the criteria set forth for use of historical control. The estimate of the combined percent exit based on the noniterative mixed-effects model is 85.1%, with a lower bound of the 95% prediction interval of 65.3%, and 72.2% for an 80% prediction interval.

CONCLUSION

There is justification for proposing that these data can serve as a historical control for future monotherapy studies, obviating the need for a placebo/pseudo-placebo arm in trials intended to demonstrate the efficacy of approved drugs as monotherapy in treatment-resistant patients.

The safety and tolerability of newer antiepileptic drugs in children and adolescents

The newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) provide more therapeutic options and overall improved safety and tolerability for patients. To provide the best care, physicians must be familiar with the latest tolerability and safety data. This is particularly true in children, given there are relatively fewer studies examining the effects of AEDs in children compared with adults. Since we now have significant paediatric literature on each of these agents, we provide a comprehensive and current literature review of the newer AEDs, focusing on safety and tolerability data in children and adolescents. Because the safety profiles in children differ from those in adults, familiarity with this literature is important for child neurologists and other paediatric caregivers. We have organized the data by organ system for each AED for easier reference.

Short-term impact of the switch from immediate-release to extended-release oxcarbazepine in epilepsy patients on high dosages

Extended-release oxcarbazepine (OXC) was introduced in Germany in January of 2008. In principle, this formulation should allow a better tolerability due to the less marked serum peak concentration of OXC prior to metabolization to its monohydroxy derivate (MHD) that is the active compound. Twenty-seven in-patients who had been referred to our epilepsy centre because of their difficult-to-treat localization-related epilepsies and had been on immediate-release OXC were abruptly switched to extended-release OXC at identical dosages. The adverse event profile (AEP) and the QOLIE-10 questionnaire were obtained immediately prior to and 5 days after this switch. On both days MHD fasting serum concentrations were also measured. After the switch a significant improvement of tolerability and quality of life was reported according to AEP and QOLIE-10 (p<0.001). Ameliorations were apparent in almost every patient (AEP: 26 of 27 patients, QOLIE-10: 23 of 27 patients). The improvement not explained by a drop of MHD levels. On the contrary and in line with preclinical data, serum levels of MHD rose significantly (p<0.001). We suggest that patients on extended-release OXC experience a lower serum concentration peak of the pro-drug OXC.

Drug treatment of epilepsy in the century of the ILAE: the second 50 years, 1959-2009

The drug therapy of epilepsy evolved enormously in this 50 year period. Advances in therapeutics included the incorporation of pharmacokinetics into clinical practice, enormous advances in neurochemistry, a trend to antiepileptic drug monotherapy, better drug assessment, better understanding of therapeutic outcomes, and the recognition of the large epilepsy treatment gap in many countries. An unprecedented range of new drugs was introduced in this period. Before 1989, these included carbamazepine, valproate, ethosuximide, and the benzodiazepines. Since 1989, 13 more new drugs have been licensed and marketed and there are others in the pipeline. The International League Against Epilepsy and its leading figures have played an important role in these developments. In this period, too, there has been a rapid expansion in research and development within the pharmaceutical industry and a rise in the value of the antiepileptic drug market. In parallel, governmental regulation of pharmaceuticals has greatly increased. To what extent the overall prognosis of epilepsy has improved as a result of these activities is an interesting and perplexing question.

Designing clinical trials to assess antiepileptic drugs as monotherapy : difficulties and solutions

Designing monotherapy trials in epilepsy is fraught with many hurdles, including diagnostic and classification difficulties, sparse information regarding the natural history of the disorder, and ethical objections to the use of placebo or a suboptimal comparator in a condition where the consequences of therapeutic failure can be serious. These issues are further complicated by regulatory differences between the US and the EU.In the US, the FDA considers that evidence of efficacy requires demonstration of superiority to a comparator. Because available antiepileptic drugs possess relatively high efficacy, in most settings it is unrealistic to expect that a new treatment will be superior to a standard treatment used at optimized dosages. To circumvent this problem, trial designs have been developed whereby patients in the control group are assigned to receive a suboptimal comparator and are required to exit from the trial if seizure deterioration occurs. This allows demonstration of a between-group difference in efficacy endpoints, such as time to exit or time to first seizure. Although these trials have come under increasing criticism because of ethical concerns, extensive information is now available on the outcome of patients with chronic epilepsy randomized to suboptimal treatment in similarly designed conversion to monotherapy trials. This has allowed the construction of a dataset of historical controls against which response to a fully active treatment can be compared. A number of studies using this novel approach are now in progress.In the EU, in addition to requiring data on conversion to monotherapy in refractory patients, the European Medicines Agency stipulates that a monotherapy indication in newly diagnosed epilepsy can only be granted if a candidate drug has shown at least a similar benefit/risk balance compared with an acknowledged standard at its optimal use during an assessment period of no less than 1 year. This has led to the implementation of noninferiority trials, one of which has been completed and which led to approval of the monotherapy indication for levetiracetam in the EU. Noninferiority trials provide valuable data in a setting that most closely resembles routine clinical practice, but their interpretation can be complicated by uncertainties on assay sensitivity.Major evidence gaps in the treatment of epilepsy still remain and it is hoped that these will be addressed in the near future. High quality monotherapy trials are particularly needed to assess the comparative efficacy of older and newer drugs in less common epilepsy syndromes, including most generalized epilepsies, and to investigate the different treatment options in populations homogeneous not only in terms of syndromic classification, but also in terms of underlying aetiology and associated phenotypes.

Oxcarbazepine for refractory epilepsy: systematic review of the literature

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

It has been estimated that 50 million people worldwide suffer from epilepsy and around 30% will not achieve adequate control over the disease. The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of oxcarbazepine for refractory partial or generalized epilepsy.

METHODS

Systematic review. A search was conducted in the PubMed, Lilacs, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases. Studies were analyzed using the Cochrane Collaboration methodology.

RESULTS

Four randomized clinical trials of medium to poor methodological quality were included. Among the adult patients, the chances that they would obtain a 50% reduction in seizure frequency were greater after using oxcarbazepine at doses of 600 mg (relative risk, RR 2.11; 95% confidence interval, CI 1.32 to 3.35), 1,200 mg (RR 3.24; 95% CI 2.11 to 4.98) and 2,400 mg (RR 3.83; 95% CI 2.59 to 5.97). Among the children, the response in the group using oxcarbazepine was also greater (RR 2.11; 95% CI 1.32 to 3.35). The oxcarbazepine doses of 1,200 mg (RR 17.59; 95% CI 2.37 to 130.35) and 2,400 mg (RR 25.41; 95% CI 6.26 to 103.10) were effective for keeping patients probably free from seizures, but the dose of 600 mg was not. There was no significant difference between oxcarbazepine and carbamazepine for controlling the crises.

CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate evidence indicating that oxcarbazepine is effective as an alternative treatment for partial or generalized epilepsy in children and adults who were refractory to previous treatment.

The synergistic inhibitory actions of oxcarbazepine on voltage-gated sodium and potassium currents in differentiated NG108-15 neuronal cells and model neurons

Oxcarbazepine (OXC), one of the newer anti-epileptic drugs, has been demonstrating its efficacy on wide-spectrum neuropsychiatric disorders. However, the ionic mechanism of OXC actions in neurons remains incompletely understood. With the aid of patch-clamp technology, we first investigated the effects of OXC on ion currents in NG108-15 neuronal cells differentiated with cyclic AMP. We found OXC (0.3-30 microm) caused a reversible reduction in the amplitude of voltage-gated Na+ current (INa). The IC50 value required for the inhibition of INa by OXC was 3.1 microm. OXC (3 microm) could shift the steady-state inactivation of INa to a more negative membrane potential by approximately -9 mV with no effect on the slope of the inactivation curve, and produce a significant prolongation in the recovery of INa inactivation. Additionally, OXC was effective in suppressing persistent INa (INa(P)) elicited by long ramp pulses. The blockade of INa by OXC does not simply reduce current magnitude, but alters current kinetics. Moreover, OXC could suppress the amplitude of delayed rectifier K+ current (IK(DR)), with no effect on M-type K+ current (IK(M)). In current-clamp configuration, OXC could reduce the amplitude of action potentials and prolong action-potential duration. Furthermore, the simulations, based on hippocampal pyramidal neurons (Pinsky-Rinzel model) and a network of the Hodgkin-Huxley model, were analysed to investigate the effect of OXC on action potentials. Taken together, our results suggest that the synergistic blocking effects on INa and IK(DR) may contribute to the underlying mechanisms through which OXC affects neuronal function in vivo.

Advancements in the Treatment of Epilepsy

Diagnostic tools and treatment options for epilepsy have expanded in recent years. Imaging techniques once confined to research laboratories are now routinely used for clinical purposes. Medications that were unavailable a few years ago are now first-line agents. Patients with refractory seizures push for earlier surgical intervention, consider treatment with medical devices, and actively seek nonpharmacologic alternatives. We review some of these recent advances in the management of epilepsy.

Oxcarbazepine in neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain is a frequent condition that can result from a variety of underlying conditions and is frequently chronic and difficult to treat. A number of drugs are used to treat neuropathic pain, including anticonvulsants and antidepressants. Oxcarbazepine, a recently introduced antiepileptic drug, was found to possess antineuralgic properties in animal models of neuropathic pain. Several double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have evaluated oxcarbazepine in painful diabetic neuropathy and trigeminal neuralgia. There is good evidence that oxcarbazepine is effective in relieving the pain associated with trigeminal neuralgia. Its efficacy in treating painful diabetic neuropathy is less clear; however, it seems to be useful when tolerated at doses of 1800 mg/day.

Conversions between monotherapies in epilepsy: expert consensus

To develop expert consensus for conversion between antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapies, an 11-member panel used the Delphi Technique over three rounds to: (1) identify relevant issues, (2) vote on the issues, and (3) develop consensus. The panel agreed on the basic principle to taper the existing AED only after a presumably efficacious dose of the planned AED was reached. Application is modified by adverse effects possibly attributable to the existing drug, in which case earlier or more rapid tapering of the existing drug should be considered. Patients with uncontrolled seizures, as well as seizure-free patients for whom driving privileges are a consideration, may benefit from slower tapering by smaller dosage decrements of the existing AED. For 10 of the 12 AEDs considered, the panel made titration recommendations concerning initial and target doses for the planned AED, supplementing limited data in the prescribing information. This expert guidance will aid in the period of transitional polytherapy with AEDs from monotherapy to monotherapy.

Long-term safety and tolerability of oxcarbazepine in painful diabetic neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Painful diabetic neuropathy is a common complication of diabetes and often resistant to treatment with standard analgesics. Treatment of diabetic neuropathy with antiepileptic drugs may provide pain relief.

AIM

To evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of oxcarbazepine in two studies investigating the treatment of diabetic neuropathy.

OBJECTIVES

Patients with diabetes and a history of neuropathic pain were included. Study 1 was a multicenter, open-label study comprising a screening and 12-month treatment phase. Study 2 was a multicenter, open-label extension to a double-blind, randomized study. Oxcarbazepine was initiated at 300 mg/day and titrated over 4 weeks to tolerability or a maximum dose of 900 mg b.i.d. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), hematology, blood chemistry, urinalysis values, and vital signs.

RESULTS

Adverse events were most frequently reported in the nervous and gastrointestinal systems; 20.5% and 21.6% of patients withdrew because of AEs in study 1 and study 2, respectively. SAEs were reported in 13.7% and 14.4% of patients in study 1 and study 2, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with oxcarbazepine is generally well tolerated in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. Rapid titration of oxcarbazepine may be responsible for discontinuations resulting from AEs during early stages of treatment.

Comparison of cognitive effects of lamotrigine and oxcarbazepine in epilepsy patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study compared the cognitive effects of 1 year of treatment with lamotrigine (LTG) and oxcarbazepine (OXC) in epilepsy patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study investigated 60 epilepsy patients undergoing neuropsychological tests who were either newly diagnosed or untreated in the preceding 6 months. The cognitive function in 30 patients receiving LTG monotherapy and 30 age-matched patients receiving OXC monotherapy was compared after 1 year. The neuropsychological scores at baseline and all of the epilepsy-relevant variables except seizure type did not differ between the groups. The mean daily dosages of LTG and OXC at 1 year were 93 mg and 825 mg, respectively.

RESULTS

The posttreatment list-learning performance was better in the LTG group than in the OXC group (p<0.05). The incidence of cognitive complaints did not differ between the two groups. The list-learning performance and Trail Making Test scores were better in each group after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

LTG and OXC monotherapies have similar, slightly beneficial effects on cognitive function, and are probably not harmful.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oxcarbazepine monotherapy

OBJECTIVE

This prospective, open-label, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of oxcarbazepine as monotherapy in patients with partial seizures who switched from their current antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy because of lack of efficacy or poor tolerability.

METHOD

Patients (>or=12 years old) experiencing 2-40 seizures per month while receiving an AED were included. During a 16-week treatment phase, oxcarbazepine was initiated (8-10mg/kg for children; 600 mg/day for adults) and titrated up over 4 weeks while the existing AED was tapered off. Improvement in seizure frequency (defined as >or=50% reduction compared with baseline) was evaluated for all patients, as well as the subgroups of patients switched due to poor tolerability or lack of efficacy.

RESULTS

Overall, 52% of patients experienced a 50% reduction in seizure frequency, 35% had a >or=75% reduction, and 18% were seizure-free. The most frequent (>10%) adverse events were dizziness, nausea, headache, somnolence, and fatigue. Overall, 17% of patients prematurely withdrew because of an adverse event; 62% of these withdrawals occurred during the conversion period.

CONCLUSION

Oxcarbazepine as monotherapy may be a favorable treatment option for patients with partial seizures or poor tolerability of their existing monotherapy regimen.

Improved quality of life in patients with partial seizures after conversion to oxcarbazepine monotherapy

OBJECTIVE

Quality of life (QOL) was assessed in patients who switched to oxcarbazepine monotherapy because of the lack of efficacy or poor tolerability of their current antiepileptic drug (AED).

METHOD

This open-label, single-arm study consisted of patients aged 12 >or= years with partial onset seizures. Oxcarbazepine (8-10mg/kg/day for children, 600 mg/day for adults) was titrated up over 4 weeks while the existing AED was tapered off. QOL was evaluated at baseline and end of study (Week 16) using the validated-in-epilepsy QOLIE-31 questionnaire.

RESULTS

For all patients who completed the QOLIE-31 at baseline and completion, a statistically significant improvement was noted for both the composite and multi-item subscale QOL scores (P<0.05 vs baseline). Statistically significant mean percentage improvements of >or=10% from baseline (range=10.8-50.1%) were also noted. Significant improvements were seen in health-related QOL for patients who experienced seizure freedom or >or=50% reductions in seizure frequency with oxcarbazepine monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with partial seizures who switched to oxcarbazepine monotherapy showed statistically significant, clinically relevant improvements in QOL.