Topiramate Versus Naltrexone for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Genotype-Stratified Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

There have been no well-controlled and well-powered comparative trials of topiramate with other pharmacotherapies for alcohol use disorder (AUD), such as naltrexone. Moreover, the literature is mixed on the effects of two polymorphisms-rs2832407 (in GRIK1) and rs1799971 (in OPRM1)-on response to topiramate and naltrexone, respectively. The authors sought to examine the comparative effectiveness of topiramate and naltrexone in improving outcomes in AUD and to examine the role of the rs2832407 and rs1799971 polymorphisms, respectively, on response to these medications.

METHODS

In a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multisite, genotype-stratified (rs2832407 and rs1799971) clinical trial comparing topiramate and naltrexone in treating AUD, 147 patients with AUD were randomly assigned to treatment with topiramate or naltrexone, stratified by genotype (rs2832407*CC and *AC/AA genotypes and rs1799971*AA and *AG/GG genotypes). The predefined primary outcome was number of heavy drinking days per week. Predefined secondary outcomes included standard drinks per drinking day per week, body mass index (BMI), craving, markers of liver injury, mood, and adverse events.

RESULTS

For the number of heavy drinking days per week, there was a near-significant time-by-treatment interaction. For the number of standard drinks per drinking day per week, there was a significant time-by-treatment interaction, which favored topiramate. There were significant time-by-treatment effects, with greater reductions observed with topiramate than naltrexone for BMI, craving, and gamma-glutamyltransferase level. Withdrawal due to side effects occurred in 8% and 5% of the topiramate and naltrexone groups, respectively. Neither polymorphism showed an effect on treatment response.

CONCLUSIONS

Topiramate is at least as effective and safe as the first-line medication, naltrexone, in reducing heavy alcohol consumption, and superior in reducing some clinical outcomes. Neither rs2832407 nor rs1799971 had effects on topiramate and naltrexone treatments, respectively.

Integrated application of transcriptomics and metabolomics provides insight into the mechanism of Eimeria tenella resistance to maduramycin

Avian coccidiosis, caused by Eimeria parasites, continues to devastate the poultry industry and results in significant economic losses. Ionophore coccidiostats, such as maduramycin and monensin, are widely used for prophylaxis of coccidiosis in poultry. Nevertheless, their efficacy has been challenged by widespread drug resistance. However, the underlying mechanisms have not been revealed. Understanding the targets and resistance mechanisms to anticoccidials is critical to combat this major parasitic disease. In the present study, maduramycin-resistant (MRR) and drug-sensitive (DS) sporozoites of Eimeria tenella were purified for transcriptomic and metabolomic analysis. The transcriptome analysis revealed 5016 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in MRR compared to DS, and KEGG pathway enrichment analysis indicated that DEGs were involved in spliceosome, carbon metabolism, glycolysis, and biosynthesis of amino acids. In the untargeted metabolomics assay, 297 differentially expressed metabolites (DEMs) were identified in MRR compared to DS, and KEGG pathway enrichment analysis indicated that these DEMs were involved in 10 pathways, including fructose and mannose metabolism, cysteine and methionine metabolism, arginine and proline metabolism, and glutathione metabolism. Targeted metabolomic analysis revealed 14 DEMs in MRR compared to DS, and KEGG pathway analysis indicated that these DEMs were involved in 20 pathways, including fructose and mannose metabolism, glycolysis/gluconeogenesis, and carbon metabolism. Compared to DS, energy homeostasis and amino acid metabolism were differentially regulated in MRR. Our results provide gene and metabolite expression landscapes of E. tenella following maduramycin induction. This study is the first work involving integrated transcriptomic and metabolomic analyses to identify the key pathways to understand the molecular and metabolic mechanisms underlying drug resistance to polyether ionophores in coccidia.

SMART use of medications for the treatment of adolescent severe obesity: A sequential multiple assignment randomized trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Severe obesity is a complex, chronic disease affecting nearly 9% of adolescents in the U.S. Although the current mainstay of treatment is lifestyle therapy, pediatric clinical practice guidelines recommend the addition of adjunct anti-obesity medication (AOM), such as phentermine and topiramate. However, guidance regarding when adjunct AOM should be started and how AOM should be used is unclear. Furthermore, an inherent limitation of current treatment guidelines is their "one-size-fits-all" approach, which does not account for the heterogeneous nature of obesity and high degree of patient variability in response to all interventions.

METHODS

This paper describes the study design and methods of a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART), "SMART Use of Medications for the Treatment of Adolescent Severe Obesity." The trial will examine 1) when to start AOM (specifically phentermine) in adolescents who are not responding to lifestyle therapy and 2) how to modify AOM when there is a sub-optimal response to the initial pharmacological intervention (specifically, for phentermine non-responders, is it better to add topiramate to phentermine or switch to topiramate monotherapy). Critically, participant characteristics that may differentially affect response to treatment will be assessed and evaluated as potential moderators of intervention efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Data from this study will be used to inform the development of an adaptive intervention for the treatment of adolescent severe obesity that includes empirically-derived decision rules regarding when and how to use AOM. Future research will test this adaptive intervention against standard "one-size-fits-all" treatments.

Topiramate ban in women of childbearing potential with idiopathic generalized epilepsy: Does effectiveness offset the teratogenic risks?

Regulatory agencies have recently discouraged the prescription of topiramate (TPM) to women of childbearing potential with epilepsy due to growing evidence of the teratogenic and neurodevelopmental risks associated with its use during pregnancy. It remains, however, unclear whether the use of TPM in this population can be supported to some extent by its high effectiveness. In this multicenter, retrospective, cohort study performed at 22 epilepsy centers, we investigated the comparative effectiveness of TPM and levetiracetam (LEV) given as first-line antiseizure medication in a cohort of women of childbearing potential with idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE). A total of 336 participants were included, of whom 24 (7.1%) received TPM and 312 (92.9%) LEV. Women treated with TPM had significantly higher risks of treatment failure and treatment withdrawal and were less likely to achieve seizure freedom at 12 months compared to women treated with LEV. In conclusion, this study highlighted a low tendency among clinicians to use TPM in women of childbearing potential with IGE, anticipating the recently released restrictions on its use. Furthermore, the available data on effectiveness do not appear to support the use of TPM in this population.

Population Pharmacokinetics of Topiramate in Patients with Epilepsy Using Nonparametric Modeling

BACKGROUND

Topiramate (TPM) is used for the treatment of various epileptic seizures and the prevention of migraine. This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic model and identify covariates that influence TPM behavior in patients with epilepsy in Kuwait.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively from 108 patients (2 years old and above) with epilepsy who were treated with oral TPM and 174 TPM blood samples from 3 hospitals in Kuwait from 2009 to 2016. Data were randomly divided into 2 groups for model development and validation. The population pharmacokinetic model was built using the nonparametric modeling algorithm (Pmetrics). The model was evaluated internally through the visual predictive check method and externally using a new data set.

RESULTS

A 1-compartment model with first-order elimination fitted the data well. Covariates showing a significant effect on the elimination rate constant were renal function and coadministration of carbamazepine (CBZ). The mean estimated clearance was 2.11 L/h; this was 50% higher for patients coadministered with CBZ. Age and sex were essential covariates for the volume of distribution (V). The visual predictive check of the final model could predict the measured concentrations. External validation further confirmed the favorable predictive performance of the model with low bias and imprecision for predicting the concentration in a particular population.

CONCLUSIONS

TPM elimination was increased with CBZ coadministration and was affected by renal function. Meanwhile, age and sex were the main predictors for V. The predictive performance of the final model proved to be valid internally and externally.

Artemisinin resistance in P. falciparum: probing the interacting partners of Kelch13 protein in parasite

OBJECTIVES

Artemisinin (ART) resistance in Plasmodium is threatening the artemisinin combination therapies-the first line of defence against malaria. ART resistance has been established to be mediated by the Plasmodium Kelch13 (PfK13) protein. For the crucial role of PfK13 in multiple pathways of the Plasmodium life cycle and ART resistance, it is imperative that we investigate its interacting partners.

METHODS

We recombinantly expressed PfK13-p (Bric a brac/Poxvirus and zinc finger and propeller domains), generating anti-PfK13-p antibodies to perform co-immunoprecipitation assays and probed PfK13 interacting partners. Surface plasmon resonance and pull-down assays were performed to establish physical interactions of representative proteins with PfK13-p.

RESULTS

The co-immunoprecipitation assays identified 17 proteins with distinct functions in the parasite life cycle- protein folding, cellular metabolism, and protein binding and invasion. In addition to the overlap with previously identified proteins, our study identified 10 unique proteins. Fructose-biphosphate aldolase and heat shock protein 70 demonstrated strong biophysical interaction with PfK13-p, with KD values of 6.6 µM and 7.6 µM, respectively. Additionally, Plasmodium merozoite surface protein 1 formed a complex with PfK13-p, which is evident from the pull-down assay.

CONCLUSION

This study adds to our knowledge of the PfK13 protein in mediating ART resistance by identifying new PfK13 interacting partners. Three representative proteins-fructose-biphosphate aldolase, heat shock protein 70, and merozoite surface protein 1-demonstrated clear evidence of biophysical interactions with PfK13-p. However, elucidation of the functional relevance of these physical interactions are crucial in context of PfK13 role in ART resistance.

Combined PMM2-CDG and hereditary fructose intolerance in a patient with mild clinical presentation

We report a patient with an extremely rare, combined diagnosis of PMM2-CDG and hereditary fructose intolerance (HFI). By comparing with other patients, under-galactosylation was identified as a feature of HFI. Fructose/sorbitol/sucrose restriction was initiated right afterwards. The patient is at the mild end of the PMM2-CDG spectrum, raising the question of sorbitol's role in the pathogenesis of PMM2-CDG and whether fructose/sorbitol/sucrose restriction could benefit other PMM2-CDG patients. Additionally, epalrestat, an emerging potential PMM2-CDG therapy, may benefit HFI patients.

Acetyl-11-Keto-Beta-Boswellic Acid Has Therapeutic Benefits for NAFLD Rat Models That Were Given a High Fructose Diet by Ameliorating Hepatic Inflammation and Lipid Metabolism

Acetyl-11-keto-beta-boswellic acid (AKBA), a potent anti-inflammatory compound purified from Boswellia species, was investigated in a preclinical study for its potential in preventing and treating non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), the most common chronic inflammatory liver disorder. The study involved thirty-six male Wistar rats, equally divided into prevention and treatment groups. In the prevention group, rats were given a high fructose diet (HFrD) and treated with AKBA for 6 weeks, while in the treatment group, rats were fed HFrD for 6 weeks and then given a normal diet with AKBA for 2 weeks. At the end of the study, various parameters were analyzed including liver tissues and serum levels of insulin, leptin, adiponectin, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β), interferon gamma (INF-ϒ), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α). Additionally, the expression levels of genes related to the inflammasome complex and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-ϒ), as well as the levels of phosphorylated and non-phosphorylated AMP-activated protein kinase alpha-1 (AMPK-α1) protein, were measured. The results showed that AKBA improved NAFLD-related serum parameters and inflammatory markers and suppressed PPAR-ϒ and inflammasome complex-related genes involved in hepatic steatosis in both groups. Additionally, AKBA prevented the reduction of the active and inactive forms of AMPK-α1 in the prevention group, which is a cellular energy regulator that helps suppress NAFLD progression. In conclusion, AKBA has a beneficial effect on preventing and avoiding the progression of NAFLD by preserving lipid metabolism, improving hepatic steatosis, and suppressing liver inflammation.

Narrative Review of Topiramate: Clinical Uses and Pharmacological Considerations

Due to the diverse mechanisms of action of antiseizure drugs, there has been a rise in prescriptions of these drugs for non-epileptic pathologies. One drug that is now being used for a variety of conditions is topiramate. This is a narrative review that used PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect to review literature on the clinical and pharmacologic properties of topiramate. Topiramate is a commonly prescribed second-generation antiseizure drug. The drug works through multiple pathways to prevent seizures. In this regard, topiramate blocks sodium and calcium voltage-gated channels, inhibits glutamate receptors, enhances gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors, and inhibits carbonic anhydrase. Topiramate is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for epilepsy treatment and migraine prophylaxis. Topiramate in combination with phentermine is also FDA-approved for weight loss in patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 30. The current target dosing for topiramate monotherapy is 400 mg/day and 100 mg/day to treat epilepsy and migraines, respectively. Commonly reported side effects include paresthesia, confusion, fatigue, dizziness, and change in taste. More uncommon and serious adverse effects can include acute glaucoma, metabolic acidosis, nephrolithiasis, hepatotoxicity, and teratogenicity. Related to a broad side effect profile, physicians prescribing this drug should routinely monitor for side effects and/or toxicity. The present investigation reviews various anti-seizure medications before summarizing indications of topiramate, off-label uses, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, adverse effects, and drug-drug interactions.

Current and future pharmacotherapies for obesity in children and adolescents

Obesity is a common chronic disease in children and adolescents and its prevalence is increasing worldwide. The causes are multifactorial but involve biological predisposition towards a specific body-weight set point and defended adipose tissue mass converging with an obesogenic environment. Comprehensive treatment of paediatric obesity includes lifestyle modification therapy, anti-obesity medications (AOMs) and/or metabolic surgery. Lifestyle modification therapy used alone produces fairly modest weight loss for most youth with obesity. The emergence of new AOMs has changed the landscape of paediatric weight management, improving the outlook for youth with obesity. This Review briefly highlights obesity development pathways in youth and the role that pharmacotherapy can play in counteracting these pathophysiological forces. Here, results from adolescent AOM clinical trials published since 2020 are reviewed, including the safety, efficacy and tolerability of the newest treatments (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists and phentermine-topiramate). The importance of a comprehensive and chronic care model, including both lifestyle modification and ongoing pharmacotherapy, will be discussed in the context of maximizing long-term health outcomes. Finally, insight will be provided into the emerging pipeline of AOMs (for example, incretin receptor co-agonists and tri-agonists) and how future therapies might fundamentally change the prognosis for youth with obesity.

Impact of preventive pill-based treatment on migraine days: A secondary outcome study of the Childhood and Adolescent Migraine Prevention (CHAMP) trial and a comparison of self-report to nosology-derived assessments

OBJECTIVE

To examine group differences in self-reported migraine days among youth who completed the Childhood and Adolescent Migraine Prevention (CHAMP) trial prior to its closure and explore the relationship between self-reported and "nosology-derived" (i.e., International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition [ICHD-3]) migraine days.

BACKGROUND

The CHAMP trial compared amitriptyline and topiramate to placebo for migraine prevention in youth and proposed to analyze change in migraine days as a secondary outcome. There is considerable variability in the field regarding what constitutes a "migraine day," how this is determined and reported in trials, and how consistent these measures are with diagnostic nosology.

METHODS

CHAMP trial completers (N = 175) were randomized to receive amitriptyline (n = 77), topiramate (n = 63), or placebo (n = 35). Participants maintained daily headache diaries where they reported each day with headache and if they considered that headache to be a migraine. For each headache day, participants completed a symptom record and reported about symptoms such as pain location(s) and presence of nausea/vomiting or photophobia and phonophobia. We examined group differences in self-reported migraine days at trial completion (summed from trial weeks 20-24) compared to baseline. We also used an algorithm to determine whether participants' symptom reports met ICHD-3 criteria for migraine without aura, and examined the association between self-reported and "nosology-derived" migraine days.

RESULTS

Results showed no significant differences between groups in self-reported migraine days over the course of the trial. Self-reported and "nosology-derived" migraine days during the baseline and treatment phases were strongly associated (r's = 0.73 and 0.83, respectively; p's < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Regardless of treatment, CHAMP trial completers showed clinically important reductions in self-reported migraine days over the course of the trial (about 3.8 days less). The strong association between self-reported and "nosology-derived" migraine days suggests youth with migraine can recognize a day with migraine and reliably report their headache features and symptoms. Greater rigor and transparency in the calculation and reporting of migraine days in trials is needed.

The potential of intravenous topiramate for the treatment of status epilepticus

There is considerable clinical evidence that topiramate (TPM) has a high potential in the treatment of refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus (RSE, SRSE). Because TPM is only approved for oral administration, it is applied as suspension via a nasogastric tube for SE treatment. However, this route of administration is impractical in an emergency setting and leads to variable absorption with unpredictable plasma levels and time to peak concentration. Thus, the development of an intravenous (i.v.) solution for TPM is highly desirable. Here we present data on two parenteral formulations of TPM that are currently being developed. One of these solutions is using sulfobutylether-β-cyclodextrin (SBE-β-CD; Captisol®) as an excipient. A 1% solution of TPM in 10% Captisol® has been reported to be well tolerated in safety studies in healthy volunteers and patients with epilepsy or migraine, but efficacy data are not available. The other solution uses the FDA- and EMA-approved excipient amino sugar meglumine. Meglumine is much more effective to dissolve TPM in water than Captisol®. A 1% solution of TPM can be achieved with 0.5-1% of meglumine. While the use of Captisol®-containing solutions is restricted in children and patients with renal impairment, such restrictions do not apply to meglumine. Recently, first-in-human data were reported for a meglumine-based solution of TPM, indicating safety and efficacy when used as a replacement for oral administration in a woman with epilepsy. Based on the multiple mechanisms of action of TPM that directly target the molecular neuronal alterations that are thought to underlie the loss of efficacy of benzodiazepines and other anti-seizure medications during prolonged SE and its rapid brain penetration after i.v. administration, we suggest that parenteral (i.v.) TPM is ideally suited for the treatment of RSE and SRSE. This paper was presented at the 8th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures held in September 2022.

TOP-PRO study: A randomized double-blind controlled trial of topiramate versus propranolol for prevention of chronic migraine

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the TOP-PRO-study, a double-blind randomized controlled trial, was to assess the efficacy (non-inferiority) and tolerability of propranolol compared to topiramate for the prevention of chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND

Except for topiramate, oral preventive treatment for chronic migraine lacks credible evidence.

METHODS

Chronic migraine patients aged above 18 years and less than 65 years of age, not on any preventive treatment were randomly allocated to receive topiramate (100 mg/day) or propranolol (160 mg/day). The primary efficacy outcome was the mean change in migraine days per 28 days at the end of 24 weeks from baseline. A mean difference of 1.5 days per four weeks was chosen as the cut-off delta value. Multiple secondary efficacy outcomes and treatment emergent adverse events were also assessed.

RESULTS

As against the planned sample size of 244, only 175 patients could be enrolled before the spread of the corona virus disease-2019 pandemic and enforcement of lockdown in India. Of the 175 randomized patients, 95 (topiramate 46 and propranolol 49) completed the trial. The mean change in migraine days was -5.3 ± 1.2 vs -7.3 ± 1.1 days (p = 0.226) for topiramate and propranolol groups respectively. Propranolol was found to be non-inferior and not superior to topiramate (point estimate of -1.99 with a 95% confidence interval of -5.23 to 1.25 days). Multiple secondary outcomes also did not differ between the two groups. Intention to treat analysis of 175 patients and per-protocol analysis of 95 patients yielded concordant results. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Propranolol (160mg/day) was non-inferior, non-superior to topiramate (100mg/day) for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine and had a comparable tolerability profile.Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Registry-India CTRI/2019/05/018997).

Post-treatment effects of topiramate on alcohol-related outcomes: A combined analysis of two placebo-controlled trials

Topiramate reduces drinking and alcohol-related problems and is increasingly being used to treat alcohol use disorder (AUD). In a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of topiramate, rs2832407, a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the GRIK1 gene moderated topiramate's effects (Study 1). However, a second RCT (Study 2) did not replicate the SNP's moderating effect during treatment. The current analysis combines data from these two studies to examine topiramate's effects on alcohol-related outcomes and on its pharmacogenetic moderation during a 6-month post-treatment period. This analysis includes 308 individuals with problematic alcohol use (67% male; mean age = 51.1; topiramate: 49%, placebo: 51%). It uses generalized linear mixed models to examine changes in self-reported alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems and concentrations of the liver enzyme γ-glutamyltransferase. The report combines published 3- and 6-month follow-up data from Study 1 with similar, unpublished data from Study 2. Despite robust effects of topiramate on drinking during treatment, the overall multivariate medication effects on outcomes during 3- and 6-month follow-up were not significant (p = 0.08 and p = 0.26, respectively). The moderating effect of the SNP on primary treatment outcomes was also not significant during either follow-up period (p = 0.13 and p = 0.16, respectively). However, during the 3-month post-treatment period, drinks per day was significantly lower in the topiramate group than the placebo group in the rs2832407*CC-genotype group. The robust effects of topiramate on alcohol-related outcomes during treatment diminish substantially once the medication is discontinued. Research is needed both to determine the optimal treatment duration and to identify clinically useful pharmacogenetic moderators of topiramate for treating AUD.

d-allulose protects against diabetic nephropathy progression in Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty rats with type 2 diabetes

d-allulose is a rare sugar that has been reported to possess anti-hyperglycemic effects. In the present study, we hypothesized that d-allulose is effective in attenuating the progression of diabetic nephropathy in the Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty (OLETF) rat model of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Drinking water with or without 3% d-allulose was administered to OLETF rats for 13 weeks. Long-Evans Tokushima Otsuka rats that received drinking water without d-allulose were used as non-diabetic control rats. d-allulose significantly attenuated the increase in blood glucose levels and progressive mesangial expansion in the glomerulus, which is regarded as a characteristic of diabetic nephropathy, in OLETF rats. d-allulose also attenuated the significant increases in renal IL-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α mRNA levels in OLETF rats, which is a proinflammatory parameter. Additionally, we showed that d-allulose suppresses mesangial matrix expansion, but its correlation with suppressing renal inflammation in OLETF rats should be investigated further. Collectively, our results support the hypothesis that d-allulose can prevent diabetic nephropathy in rats.

Long-term effects of weight-reducing drugs in people with hypertension

BACKGROUND

This is the third update of this review, first published in July 2009. All major guidelines on treatment of hypertension recommend weight loss; anti-obesity drugs may be able to help in this respect.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objectives: To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically-induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, and adverse events (including total serious adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, and total non-serious adverse events).. Secondary objectives: To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically-induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on change from baseline in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and on body weight reduction.

SEARCH METHODS

For this updated review, the Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to March 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The searches had no language restrictions. We contacted authors of relevant papers about further published and unpublished work.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of at least 24 weeks' duration in adults with hypertension that compared approved long-term weight-loss medications to placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias, and extracted data. Where appropriate and in the absence of significant heterogeneity between studies (P > 0.1), we pooled studies using a fixed-effect meta-analysis. When heterogeneity was present, we used the random-effects method and investigated the cause of the heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

This third update of the review added one new trial, investigating the combination of naltrexone/bupropion versus placebo. Two medications, which were included in the previous versions of this review (rimonabant and sibutramine) are no longer considered relevant for this update, since their marketing approval was withdrawn in 2010 and 2009, respectively. The number of included studies in this review update is therefore six (12,724 participants in total): four RCTs comparing orlistat to placebo, involving a total of 3132 participants with high blood pressure and a mean age of 46 to 55 years; one trial comparing phentermine/topiramate to placebo, involving 1305 participants with high blood pressure and a mean age of 53 years; and one trial comparing naltrexone/bupropion to placebo, involving 8283 participants with hypertension and a mean age of 62 years. We judged the risks of bias to be unclear for the trials investigating orlistat or naltrexone/bupropion. and low for the trial investigating phentermine/topiramate. Only the study of naltrexone/bupropion included cardiovascular mortality and morbidity as predefined outcomes. There were no differences in the rates of all-cause or cardiovascular mortality, major cardiovascular events, or serious adverse events between naltrexone/bupropion and placebo. The incidence of overall adverse events was significantly higher in participants treated with naltrexone/bupropion. For orlistat, the incidence of gastrointestinal side effects was consistently higher compared to placebo. The most frequent side effects with phentermine/topiramate were dry mouth and paraesthesia. After six to 12 months, orlistat reduced systolic blood pressure compared to placebo by mean difference (MD) -2.6 mm Hg (95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to -1.4 mm Hg; 4 trials, 2058 participants) and diastolic blood pressure by MD -2.0 mm Hg (95% CI -2.7 to -1.2 mm Hg; 4 trials, 2058 participants). After 13 months of follow-up, phentermine/topiramate decreased systolic blood pressure compared to placebo by -2.0 to -4.2 mm Hg (1 trial, 1030 participants) (depending on drug dosage), and diastolic blood pressure by -1.3 to -1.9 mm Hg (1 trial, 1030 participants) (depending on drug dosage). There was no difference in the change in systolic or diastolic blood pressure between naltrexone/bupropion and placebo (1 trial, 8283 participants). We identified no relevant studies investigating liraglutide or lorcaserin in people with hypertension.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with elevated blood pressure, orlistat, phentermine/topiramate and naltrexone/bupropion reduced body weight; the magnitude of the effect was greatest with phentermine/topiramate. In the same trials, orlistat and phentermine/topiramate, but not naltrexone/bupropion, reduced blood pressure. One RCT of naltrexone/bupropion versus placebo showed no differences in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality or morbidity after two years. The European Medicines Agency refused marketing authorisation for phentermine/topiramate due to safety concerns, while for lorcaserin the application for European marketing authorisation was withdrawn due to a negative overall benefit/risk balance. In 2020 lorcaserin was also withdrawn from the US market. Two other medications (rimonabant and sibutramine) had already been withdrawn from the market in 2009 and 2010, respectively.

Topiramate-phentermine combinations reduce cocaine self-administration in humans

RATIONALE

Cocaine use disorder is an unrelenting public health concern. Despite nearly four decades of research, an FDA approved medication is not yet available.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this human laboratory study was to demonstrate the initial efficacy, safety and tolerability of topiramate-phentermine combinations for cocaine use disorder.

METHODS

Thirty-one (31) participants with cocaine use disorder completed this mixed-model inpatient laboratory study. Participants were maintained on topiramate (0 [N = 11], 50 [N = 9] or 100 [N = 11] mg/day). Each topiramate group was concurrently maintained on phentermine (0, 15, 30 mg). Drug self-administration, subjective responses and cardiovascular effects following acute doses of intranasal cocaine (0, 40, 80 mg) were determined during separate experimental sessions after at least seven (7) days of maintenance on each condition.

RESULTS

The three groups of participants were well matched demographically and generally did not differ significantly in their responses to a range of doses of intranasal cocaine (0, 10, 20, 40, 80 mg) during a medical safety session. Maintenance on topiramate and phentermine alone significantly decreased cocaine self-administration although these effects were modest in magnitude. Combining topiramate and phentermine robustly decreased cocaine self-administration. Topiramate and phentermine were well tolerated alone and combined, as well as in conjunction with cocaine.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study support advancing topiramate-phentermine combinations as a putative pharmacotherapeutic for cocaine use disorder.

Nociceptive blink reflex habituation biofeedback in migraine

Reduced habituation of the nociceptive blink reflex (NBR) is considered a trait marker for genetic predisposition to migraine. In this open-label randomized controlled study, we aimed to test the efficacy of a biofeedback training based on learning of habituation of the NBR (NBR biofeedback) compared with pharmacological (topiramate) treatment and NBR biofeedback plus topiramate treatment in a cohort of migraine without aura patients eligible for prophylaxis. Thirty-three migraine patients were randomly assigned to three months of treatment with: 1) NBR biofeedback, 2) NBR biofeedback plus topiramate 50 mg (b.i.d.), or 3) topiramate 50 mg (b.i.d.). Frequency of headache and disability changes were the main study outcomes. Anxiety, depression, sleep, fatigue, quality of life, allodynia and pericranial tenderness were also evaluated. NBR biofeedback reduced the R2 area, without improving R2 habituation. However, it reduced the frequency of headache and disability, similarly to the combined treatment and topiramate alone. Reduced habituation of the NBR is a stable neurophysiological pattern, scarcely modifiable by learning procedures. Training methods able to act on stress-related responses may modulate cortical mechanisms inducing migraine onset and trigeminal activation under stressful trigger factors.

Study protocol and rationale for a randomized double-blinded crossover trial of phentermine-topiramate ER versus placebo to treat binge eating disorder and bulimia nervosa

INTRODUCTION

Bulimia nervosa (BN) and binge eating disorder (BED) are associated with severe psychological and medical consequences. Current therapies are limited, leaving up to 50% of patients symptomatic despite treatment, underscoring the need for additional treatment options. Qsymia, an FDA-approved medication for obesity, combines phentermine and topiramate ER. Topiramate has demonstrated efficacy for both BED and BN, but limited tolerability. Phentermine is FDA-approved for weight loss. A rationale for combined phentermine/topiramate for BED and BN is improved tolerability and efficacy. While a prior case series exploring Qsymia for BED showed promise, randomized studies are needed to evaluate Qsymia's safety and efficacy when re-purposed in eating disorders. We present a study protocol for a Phase I/IIa single-center, prospective, double-blinded, randomized, crossover trial examining safety and preliminary efficacy of Qsymia for BED and BN.

METHODS

Adults with BED (n=15) or BN (n=15) are randomized 1:1 to receive 12weeks Qsymia (phentermine/topiramate ER, 3.75mg/23mg-15mg/92mg) or placebo, followed by 2-weeks washout and 12-weeks crossover, where those on Qsymia receive placebo and vice versa. Subsequently participants receive 8weeks follow-up off study medications. The primary outcome is the number of binge days/week measured by EDE. Secondary outcomes include average number of binge episodes, percentage abstinence from binge eating, and changes in weight/vitals, eating psychopathology, and mood.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge this is the first randomized, double-blind protocol investigating the safety and efficacy of phentermine/topiramate in BED and BN. We highlight the background and rationale for this study, including the advantages of a crossover design.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02553824 registered on 9/17/2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02553824.

Obesity Pharmacotherapy

Although diet, physical activity, and behavioral modifications are the cornerstones of weight management, weight loss achieved by lifestyle modifications alone is often limited and difficult to maintain. Pharmacotherapy for obesity can be considered if patients have a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m² or greater or BMI of 27 kg/m² or greater with weight-related comorbidities. The 6 most commonly used antiobesity medications are phentermine, orlistat, phentermine/topiramate extended release, lorcaserin, naltrexone sustained release (SR)/bupropion SR, and liraglutide 3.0 mg. Successful pharmacotherapy for obesity depends on tailoring treatment to patients' behaviors and comorbidities and monitoring of efficacy, safety, and tolerability.

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.

Topiramate and metabolic acidosis: an evolving story

Topiramate is an anticonvulsant that is being increasingly used for a number of different off-label indications. Its inhibition of carbonic anhydrase isoenzymes can lead to metabolic acidosis, elevated urine pH, reduced urine citrate, and hypercalciuria, thereby creating a milieu that is ripe for calcium phosphate stone formation. In this review, we describe a case of topiramate-induced metabolic acidosis. We review the frequency of metabolic acidosis among children and adults, as well as the mechanism of hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis and renal tubular acidosis in topiramate users. Finally, we describe the long-term effects of topiramate-induced metabolic acidosis, including nephrolithiasis, nephrocalcinosis, and bone degradation. Patients who are prescribed topiramate should be carefully monitored for metabolic derangements, and they may benefit from alkali supplementation, or in extreme cases, discontinuation of the drug altogether.

The use of phenobarbital and other anti-seizure drugs in newborns

Neonatal seizures constitute the most frequent presenting neurologic sign encountered in the neonatal intensive care unit. Despite limited efficacy and safety data, phenobarbital continues to be used near-universally as the first-line anti-seizure drug (ASD) in neonates. The choice of second-line ASDs varies by provider and institution, and is still not supported by sufficient scientific evidence. In this review, we discuss the available evidence supporting the efficacy, mechanism of action, potential adverse effects, key pharmacokinetic characteristics such as interaction with therapeutic hypothermia, logistical issues, and rationale for use of neonatal ASDs. We describe the widely used neonatal ASDs, namely phenobarbital, phenytoin, midazolam, and levetiracetam, in addition to potential ASDs, including lidocaine, topiramate, and bumetanide.

Topiramate's effectiveness on weight reduction in overweight/obese persons with schizophrenia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a psychiatric disorder with a higher mortality than that of the general population. Most of the deaths are due to cardiovascular causes and are related to metabolic risks. This risk is due not only to antipsychotics but also to inherent factors of the disorder. Studies in the West have shown topiramate to be effective in schizophrenia to reduce weight gain and for symptomatic control. Whether this is effective for South Asians is not known. It is important because South Asians have a higher risk of metabolic syndrome. We aim to conduct a double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing topiramate add-on therapy with treatment as usual with antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia in an outpatient setting in Sri Lanka.

METHODS/DESIGN

Ninety patients with schizophrenia presenting to the Colombo North Teaching Hospital will be randomized to intervention and control groups equally using permuted block randomization. Patients with comorbid metabolic disorders and taking prescribed weight-controlling medications will be excluded. The intervention group will be prescribed topiramate in addition to their antipsychotics in a predefined dosing regimen targeting a dose of 100 mg per day. The control subjects are to receive a placebo. As the primary outcome, anthropometric measurements including weight, waist circumference, skinfold thickness, and body mass index will be recorded at baseline and monthly during the study period of 3 months. The secondary outcome is the change in symptoms according to the clinician-administered Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Assessment of capacity will be performed and informed consent obtained from all subjects. Ethics approval has been obtained from the ethical review committee of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, and the trial has been registered in the Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry.

DISCUSSION

In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, we will attempt to assess the effectiveness of topiramate as an add-on therapy compared with treatment as usual for weight control in patients with schizophrenia. To our knowledge, this is the first such study in South Asia, where metabolic risks are found to be higher than in the West and could have unique ethnic factors related to weight gain in schizophrenia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry, SLCTR/2017/003 . Registered on 20 February 2017. Universal trial number, U1111-1192-9439.

[Frequent episodic migraine and calcitonin gene-related peptide. Influence of treatment with topiramate and zonisamide on levels of the peptide]

INTRODUCTION

The pathophysiology of pain in migraine is related to the activation of the trigeminovascular system by releasing vasoactive neuropeptides, the most important of which is calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), which causes a neurogenic inflammation in the leptomeningeal vessels.

AIM

To study whether CGRP is increased in frequent episodic migraine and whether preventive treatment with topiramate or zonisamide modifies its levels.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We studied 28 patients with episodic migraine with or without aura, in accordance with the International Headache Society criteria, with a frequency of 4-14 days/month. Plasma levels of CGRP were determined in all the patients during an interictal period (> 72 hours without pain). Patients were divided at random into two treatment groups, one with 50 mg/day of topiramate and the other with 50 mg/day of zonisamide, for three months. At the end of the active period the CGRP level was analysed again. The control group consisted of nine healthy subjects.

RESULTS

CGRP was significantly higher in the episodic migraine group than in the control group (50.61 ± 22.5 pg/mL versus 34.96 ± 17.03 pg/mL; p = 0.037). After treatment with neuromodulators no significant differences were found in the level of CGRP (46.11 ± 24.2 pg/mL basal versus 47.5 ± 24.88 pg/mL post-treatment). Neither were any differences found on analysing the topiramate and zonisamide groups individually.

CONCLUSIONS

The plasma level of CGRP is increased in episodic migraine, and its levels are not modified by treatment with low doses of topiramate or zonisamide.

A case of severe movement disorder with GNAO1 mutation responsive to topiramate

We report the case of a 19-year-old female patient who had progressive chorea associated with a GNAO1 mutation. Chorea was refractory to multiple anticonvulsants, and the patient suffered from tiapride-induced neuroleptic malignant syndrome. After identification of a GNAO1 missense mutation at the age of 18years, topiramate treatment was initiated and the frequency of chorea decreased dramatically. The efficacy of topiramate may have been related to the inhibitory modulation of voltage-activated Ca²⁺ channels. Given the side effects and complications associated with neuroleptics and deep brain stimulation, respectively, topiramate is recommended for the first-line management of severe chorea associated with a GNAO1 mutation.

Pharmacotherapy of Obesity: Clinical Trials to Clinical Practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides an overview of the current state of drug therapy for obesity, with a focus on four new drug therapies-lorcaserin, phentermine/topiramate, naltrexone/bupropion, and liraglutide 3.0 mg-which have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for long-term management of obesity since 2012. Topics discussed in this paper include rationale for pharmacotherapy, history of antiobesity drugs, and efficacy and safety data from randomized controlled trials with implications for clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Weight loss achieved by currently approved drugs ranges from approximately 3 to 9%, above and beyond weight loss with lifestyle counseling alone, after a year. Response and attrition rates in clinical trials indicate that the benefits of pharmacotherapy range from substantial for some patients, modest for others, and no benefits for others still. Decisions regarding selection of a suitable drug from the available pharmacotherapy options and duration of treatment should be based on the expected and observed benefit-to-risk balance and tailored to the needs of each individual patient using the principles of shared decision-making.

Topiramate monotherapy for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Topiramate is a newer broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate monotherapy in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). However, there are no current systematic reviews to determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate monotherapy in people with JME. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 12, 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate monotherapy in the treatment of JME.

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, on 21 February 2017 we searched Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted study authors and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating topiramate monotherapy versus placebo or other AED treatment for people with JME, with the outcomes of proportion of responders or experiencing adverse events (AEs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to the limited available data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three studies with 83 participants. For efficacy, a greater proportion of participants in the topiramate group had a 50% or more reduction in primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS) compared with participants in the placebo group. There were no significant differences between topiramate versus valproate in participants responding with a 50% or more reduction in myoclonic seizures or in PGTCS or seizure-free. Concerning tolerability, we ranked AEDs associated with topiramate as moderate-to-severe, while we ranked 59% of AEDs linked to valproate as severe complaints. Moreover, systemic toxicity scores were higher in the valproate group than the topiramate group. We judged the quality of the evidence from the studies to be very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review we found no new studies. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support topiramate for the treatment of people with JME. Based on the current limited available data, topiramate seems to be better tolerated than valproate, but there were no more benefits of efficacy in topiramate compared with valproate. In the future, well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.

Topiramate for essential tremor

BACKGROUND

Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. The management is primarily based on pharmacological agents and in clinical practice propranolol and primidone are considered the first-line therapy. However, these treatments can be ineffective in 25% to 55% of people and are frequently associated with serious adverse events (AEs). For these reasons, it is worthwhile evaluating other treatments for ET. Topiramate has been suggested as a potentially useful agent for the treatment of ET but there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate in the treatment of ET.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a systematic search without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (January 1966 to January 2017), Embase (January 1988 to January 2017), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (1999 to January 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov (1997 to January 2017) and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 2004 to January 2017). We searched BIOSIS Citation Index (2000 to January 2017) for conference proceedings. We handsearched grey literature and the reference lists of identified studies and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of topiramate versus placebo/open control or any other treatments. We included studies in which the diagnosis of ET was made according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies conducted in people presenting with secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters to assess outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence. We used a fixed-effect meta-analysis for data synthesis.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included three trials comparing topiramate to placebo (309 participants). They were all at high overall risk of bias. The quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. Compared to placebo, participants treated with topiramate showed a significant improvement in functional disability and an increased risk of withdrawal (risk ratio (RR) 1.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 2.60). There were more AEs for topiramate-treated participants, particularly paraesthesia, weight loss, appetite decrease and memory difficulty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlighted the presence of limited data and very low to low quality evidence to support the apparent efficacy and the occurrence of treatment-limiting AEs in people with ET treated with topiramate. Further research to assess topiramate efficacy and safety on ET is needed.

Comparative pre-emptive analgesic efficacy study of novel antiepileptic agents gabapentin, lamotrigine and topiramate in patients undergoing major surgeries at a tertiary care hospital: a randomized double blind clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical injury leads to postoperative pain hypersensitivity preceded by central nervous sensitization, due to lowered pain threshold in peripheral nociceptors and increased excitability of the spinal neurons. Pre-emptive analgesia is intended to decrease pain perception and overall analgesic need by use of drug regimen seizing central nervous system sensitization before exposure to painful stimuli. Earlier, few studies support pre-emptive analgesic efficacy of novel antiepileptic agent gabapentin. But topiramate and lamotrigine though proven analgesic in animal models of chronic pain and clinical studies of gabapentin resistant neuropathic pain; literature search revealed scarce data on its pre-emptive analgesic efficacy. The present study is designed to study and compare the pre-emptive analgesic efficacy of lamotrigine, topiramate and gabapentin (as control) in postoperative pain control.

METHODS

This randomized clinical trial included 90 patients of either sex, between 18 and 70 years undergoing major surgeries. Patients were randomly allocated into control and test groups and received respective treatment 30 min before induction of anesthesia. Aldrete's score and pain score were recorded using visual analogue scale and facial and behavioral rating scales at awakening and at 1, 2, 4, 6 and 24 h. Postoperative rescue analgesic consumption for 24 h was recorded. Data were analyzed using OpenEpi and SciStatCalc statistical softwares.

RESULTS

Significantly higher pain scores were observed in the topiramate group postoperatively for 2 h on all pain scales (p<0.05). Lamotrigine-treated patients were more comfortable throughout the study with significantly less (p<0.05) postoperative analgesic requirement comparable to gabapentin.

CONCLUSIONS

Study results are strongly suggestive of pre-emptive analgesic efficacy of single oral dose lamotrigine comparable to gabapentin and superior to topiramate in postoperative pain control.

Obesity Epidemic: Pharmaceutical Weight Loss

Obesity is a chronic disease universally defined as an excess of adipose tissue resulting in body mass index (BMI) > 30.0 kg/m2. Over the past few years, the concept of prevention has gained increased awareness, thus leading to the development of additional pharmaceutical options for the treatment of obesity since 2012. Treating obesity revolves around an individualized, multi-disciplinary approach with additional focus on a healthy and supportive lifestyle to maintain the weight loss. [Full article available at http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal-2017-03.asp].

Trial of Amitriptyline, Topiramate, and Placebo for Pediatric Migraine

BACKGROUND

Which medication, if any, to use to prevent the headache of pediatric migraine has not been established.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of amitriptyline (1 mg per kilogram of body weight per day), topiramate (2 mg per kilogram per day), and placebo in children and adolescents 8 to 17 years of age with migraine. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to receive one of the medications or placebo. The primary outcome was a relative reduction of 50% or more in the number of headache days in the comparison of the 28-day baseline period with the last 28 days of a 24-week trial. Secondary outcomes were headache-related disability, headache days, number of trial completers, and serious adverse events that emerged during treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 361 patients underwent randomization, and 328 were included in the primary efficacy analysis (132 in the amitriptyline group, 130 in the topiramate group, and 66 in the placebo group). The trial was concluded early for futility after a planned interim analysis. There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcome, which occurred in 52% of the patients in the amitriptyline group, 55% of those in the topiramate group, and 61% of those in the placebo group (amitriptyline vs. placebo, P=0.26; topiramate vs. placebo, P=0.48; amitriptyline vs. topiramate, P=0.49). There were also no significant between-group differences in headache-related disability, headache days, or the percentage of patients who completed the 24-week treatment period. Patients who received amitriptyline or topiramate had higher rates of several adverse events than those receiving placebo, including fatigue (30% vs. 14%) and dry mouth (25% vs. 12%) in the amitriptyline group and paresthesia (31% vs. 8%) and weight loss (8% vs. 0%) in the topiramate group. Three patients in the amitriptyline group had serious adverse events of altered mood, and one patient in the topiramate group had a suicide attempt.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in reduction in headache frequency or headache-related disability in childhood and adolescent migraine with amitriptyline, topiramate, or placebo over a period of 24 weeks. The active drugs were associated with higher rates of adverse events. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; CHAMP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01581281 ).

Pharmacotherapy for obesity

BACKGROUND

Obesity is a serious, chronic, relapsing disease of energy regulation, with strong genetic and early-life environmental determinants. Pharmacotherapy can be a useful adjunct to lifestyle intervention in effecting and maintaining clinically meaningful weight loss.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to discuss the role of pharmacotherapy in obesity management. The efficacy, side effects and contraindications of available weight-loss medications are reviewed.

DISCUSSION

Long-term pharmacotherapy options, which can be effective in providing moderate weight loss, are available to treat obesity. Pharma-cotherapy should be considered an adjunct to lifestyle intervention in those with a body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m30 kg/m2, or in those with a BMI of 27-30 kg/m2 and obesity-related complications. Safety and efficacy should be monitored closely on commencement, and the medication should be discontinued if there are safety or tolerability issues, or if.

Topiramate versus carbamazepine monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

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, the majority of which may be able to achieve remission with a single antiepileptic drug (AED).The correct choice of first-line antiepileptic therapy for individuals with newly diagnosed seizures is of great importance. It is important that the choice of AED for an individual is based on the highest-quality evidence available regarding the potential benefits and harms of various treatments. It is also important to compare the efficacy and tolerability of AEDs appropriate to given seizure types.Topiramate and carbamazepine are commonly used AEDs. Performing a synthesis of the evidence from existing trials will increase the precision of results of outcomes relating to efficacy and tolerability, and may help inform a choice between the two drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of topiramate monotherapy versus carbamazepine monotherapy for epilepsy in people with partial-onset seizures (simple or complex partial and secondarily generalised) or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (14 April 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (14 April 2016) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 14 April 2016). We imposed no language restrictions. We also contacted pharmaceutical companies and trial investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in children or adults with partial-onset seizures or generalised-onset tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types with a comparison of monotherapy with either topiramate or carbamazepine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to first seizure post randomisation', 'time to 6-month remission, 'time to 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), and used the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HRs and 95% CIs.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were available for 1151 of 1239 eligible individuals from two of three eligible studies (93% of the potential data). A small proportion of individuals recruited into these trials had 'unclassified seizures;' for analysis purposes, these individuals are grouped with those with generalised onset seizures. For remission outcomes, a HR < 1 indicated an advantage for carbamazepine, and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes, a HR < 1 indicated an advantage for topiramate.The main overall results, given as pooled HR adjusted for seizure type (95% CI) were: for time to withdrawal of allocated treatment 1.16 (0.98 to 1.38); time to first seizure 1.11 (0.96 to 1.29); and time to 6-month remission 0.88 (0.76 to 1.01). There were no statistically significant differences between the drugs. A statistically significant advantage for carbamazepine was shown for time to 12-month remission: 0.84 (0.71 to 1.00).The results of this review are applicable mainly to individuals with partial-onset seizures; 85% of included individuals experienced seizures of this type at baseline. For individuals with partial-onset seizures, a statistically significant advantage for carbamazepine was shown for time to withdrawal of allocated treatment (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.45) and time to 12-month remission (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.00). No statistically significant differences were apparent between the drugs for other outcomes and for the limited number of individuals with generalised-onset tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types or unclassified seizures.The most commonly reported adverse events with both drugs were drowsiness or fatigue, 'pins and needles' (tingling sensation), headache, gastrointestinal disturbance and anxiety or depression The rate of adverse events was similar across the two drugs.We judged the methodological quality of the included trials generally to be good; however, there was some evidence that the open-label design of the larger of the two trials may have influenced the withdrawal rate from the trial. Hence, we judged the evidence for the primary outcome of treatment withdrawal to be moderate for individuals with partial-onset seizures and low for individuals with generalised-onset seizures. For efficacy outcomes (first seizure, remission), we judged the evidence from this review to be high for individuals with partial-onset seizures and moderate for individuals with generalised-onset or unclassified seizures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For individuals with partial-onset seizures, there is evidence that carbamazepine is less likely to be withdrawn and that 12-month remission will be achieved earlier than with topiramate. No differences were found between the drugs in terms of the outcomes measured in the review for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other seizure types or unclassified epilepsy; however, we encourage caution in the interpretation of these results due to the small numbers of participants with these seizure types.We recommend that future trials should be designed to the highest quality possible and take into consideration masking, choice of population, classification of seizure type, duration of follow-up, choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

Topiramate in the Treatment of Chronic Migraine

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of topiramate in the treatment of chronic migraine. This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled, parallel-group study. Patients suffering from chronic migraine with analgesic overuse were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive topiramate or placebo. Following a baseline phase of eight weeks, the study drug was titrated in 25-mg increments over one week to 50 mg daily. Titration phase was followed by a 8-week maintenance phase. Number of days with headache during a 28-day period was the efficacy variable. At baseline, there was no difference in the number of days with headache between patients treated with topiramate and those treated with placebo (mean ± SD: 20.9 ± 3.2 and 20.8 ± 3.2, respectively). During the last 4 week-maintenance phase, topiramate-treated patients experienced a significantly lower 28-day headache frequency in comparison to those treated with placebo (mean number of days with headache ± SD: 8.1 ± 8.1 vs. 20.6 ± 3.4, P < 0.0007). Topiramate at low doses proved to be an effective therapeutic approach to reduce headache frequency in patients with chronic migraine and analgesic overuse.

Binge-Eating Disorder in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The best treatment options for binge-eating disorder are unclear.

PURPOSE

To summarize evidence about the benefits and harms of psychological and pharmacologic therapies for adults with binge-eating disorder.

DATA SOURCES

English-language publications in EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Academic OneFile, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov through 18 November 2015, and in MEDLINE through 12 May 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

9 waitlist-controlled psychological trials and 25 placebo-controlled trials that evaluated pharmacologic (n = 19) or combination (n = 6) treatment. All were randomized trials with low or medium risk of bias.

DATA EXTRACTION

2 reviewers independently extracted trial data, assessed risk of bias, and graded strength of evidence.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Therapist-led cognitive behavioral therapy, lisdexamfetamine, and second-generation antidepressants (SGAs) decreased binge-eating frequency and increased binge-eating abstinence (relative risk, 4.95 [95% CI, 3.06 to 8.00], 2.61 [CI, 2.04 to 3.33], and 1.67 [CI, 1.24 to 2.26], respectively). Lisdexamfetamine (mean difference [MD], -6.50 [CI, -8.82 to -4.18]) and SGAs (MD, -3.84 [CI, -6.55 to -1.13]) reduced binge-eating-related obsessions and compulsions, and SGAs reduced symptoms of depression (MD, -1.97 [CI, -3.67 to -0.28]). Headache, gastrointestinal upset, sleep disturbance, and sympathetic nervous system arousal occurred more frequently with lisdexamfetamine than placebo (relative risk range, 1.63 to 4.28). Other forms of cognitive behavioral therapy and topiramate also increased abstinence and reduced binge-eating frequency and related psychopathology. Topiramate reduced weight and increased sympathetic nervous system arousal, and lisdexamfetamine reduced weight and appetite.

LIMITATIONS

Most study participants were overweight or obese white women aged 20 to 40 years. Many treatments were examined only in single studies. Outcomes were measured inconsistently across trials and rarely assessed beyond end of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Cognitive behavioral therapy, lisdexamfetamine, SGAs, and topiramate reduced binge eating and related psychopathology, and lisdexamfetamine and topiramate reduced weight in adults with binge-eating disorder.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Topiramate increases biochemical risk of nephrolithiasis

The incidence of renal stone disease in patients receiving topiramate (TopamaxTM) is 2-4 times that expected in the background population. This has been attributed to a weak carbonic anhydrase inhibitor effect, but published data are scant. Following three cases of renal stones in patients receiving topiramate, we evaluated biochemical risk for nephrolithiasis in eight further unselected patients. Most patients demonstrated inadequate urinary acidification and hypocitraturia; in some cases citrate was undetectable. Several patients also had other risk factors for nephrolithiasis, including increased urinary sodium, calcium and oxalate excretion. The biochemical changes induced by topiramate appear highly penetrant. Experience with this drug is relatively short-lived and it is being prescribed for long-term use in (often) relatively young patients. This report highlights the significantly increased metabolic risk of stone formation in patients receiving topiramate.

Comparative persistence of antiepileptic drugs in patients with epilepsy: A STROBE-compliant retrospective cohort study

We compared persistence of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) including carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, topiramate, valproic acid, and phenytoin in an Asian population with epilepsy.A retrospective cohort study was conducted by analyzing Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Adult epilepsy patients newly prescribed with AEDs between 2005 and 2009 were included. The primary outcome was persistence, defined as the treatment duration from the date of AED initiation to the date of AED discontinuation, switching, hospitalization due to seizure or disenrollment from databases, whichever came first. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk of non-persistence with AEDs.Among the 13,061 new users of AED monotherapy (mean age: 58 years; 60% men), the persistence ranged from 218.8 (gabapentin) to 275.9 (oxcarbazepine) days in the first treatment year. The risks of non-persistence in patients receiving oxcarbazepine (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.74-0.83), valproic acid (0.88; 0.85-0.92), lamotrigine (0.72; 0.65-0.81), and topiramate (0.90; 0.82-0.98) were significantly lower than in the carbamazepine group. Compared with carbamazepine users, the non-persistence risk was higher in phenytoin users (1.10; 1.06-1.13), while gabapentin users (1.03; 0.98-1.09) had similar risk. For risk of hospitalization due to seizure and in comparison with carbamazepine users, oxcarbazepine (0.66; 0.58-0.74) and lamotrigine (0.46; 0.35-0.62) users had lower risk, while phenytoin (1.35; 1.26-1.44) users had higher risk. The results remained consistent throughout series of sensitivity and stratification analyses.The persistence varied among AEDs and was better for oxcarbazepine, valproic acid, lamotrigine, and topiramate, but worse for phenytoin when compared with carbamazepine.

Cost-Effectiveness of Migraine Prevention: The Case of Topiramate in the UK

The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of topiramate vs. no preventive treatment in the UK. Model inputs included baseline migraine frequency, treatment discontinuation and response, preventive and acute medical cost per attack [2005 GBP (£)] and gain in health utility. Outcomes included monthly migraines averted, acute and preventive treatment costs and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Topiramate was associated with 1.8 fewer monthly migraines and a QALY gain of 0.0384. The incremental cost of topiramate vs. no preventive treatment was about £10 per migraine averted and £5700 per QALY. Results are sensitive to baseline monthly migraine frequency, triptan use rate and the gain in utility. Incorporating savings from reduced work loss (about £36 per month) suggests that topiramate would be cost saving compared with no preventive treatment. This analysis suggests that topiramate is a cost-effective treatment for migraine prevention compared with no preventive treatment.

Association of Pharmacological Treatments for Obesity With Weight Loss and Adverse Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Five medications have been approved for the management of obesity, but data on comparative effectiveness are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare weight loss and adverse events among drug treatments for obesity using a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Central from inception to March 23, 2016; clinical trial registries.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials conducted among overweight and obese adults treated with US Food and Drug Administration-approved long-term weight loss agents (orlistat, lorcaserin, naltrexone-bupropion, phentermine-topiramate, or liraglutide) for at least 1 year compared with another active agent or placebo.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two investigators identified studies and independently abstracted data using a predefined protocol. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed and relative ranking of agents was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Proportions of patients with at least 5% weight loss and at least 10% weight loss, magnitude of decrease in weight, and discontinuation of therapy because of adverse events at 1 year.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight randomized clinical trials with 29 018 patients (median age, 46 years; 74% women; median baseline body weight, 100.5 kg; median baseline body mass index, 36.1) were included. A median 23% of placebo participants had at least 5% weight loss vs 75% of participants taking phentermine-topiramate (odds ratio [OR], 9.22; 95% credible interval [CrI], 6.63-12.85; SUCRA, 0.95), 63% of participants taking liraglutide (OR, 5.54; 95% CrI, 4.16-7.78; SUCRA, 0.83), 55% taking naltrexone-bupropion (OR, 3.96; 95% CrI, 3.03-5.11; SUCRA, 0.60), 49% taking lorcaserin (OR, 3.10; 95% CrI, 2.38-4.05; SUCRA, 0.39), and 44% taking orlistat (OR, 2.70; 95% CrI, 2.34-3.09; SUCRA, 0.22). All active agents were associated with significant excess weight loss compared with placebo at 1 year-phentermine-topiramate, 8.8 kg (95% CrI, -10.20 to -7.42 kg); liraglutide, 5.3 kg (95% CrI, -6.06 to -4.52 kg); naltrexone-bupropion, 5.0 kg (95% CrI, -5.94 to -3.96 kg); lorcaserin, 3.2 kg (95% CrI, -3.97 to -2.46 kg); and orlistat, 2.6 kg (95% CrI, -3.04 to -2.16 kg). Compared with placebo, liraglutide (OR, 2.95; 95% CrI, 2.11-4.23) and naltrexone-bupropion (OR, 2.64; 95% CrI, 2.10-3.35) were associated with the highest odds of adverse event-related treatment discontinuation. High attrition rates (30%-45% in all trials) were associated with lower confidence in estimates.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among overweight or obese adults, orlistat, lorcaserin, naltrexone-bupropion, phentermine-topiramate, and liraglutide, compared with placebo, were each associated with achieving at least 5% weight loss at 52 weeks. Phentermine-topiramate and liraglutide were associated with the highest odds of achieving at least 5% weight loss.

Topiramate monotherapy for weight reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of topiramate as monotherapy for weight reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from inception to June 2015. We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated topiramate monotherapy versus control agents or placebo for weight loss in obese type 2 diabetes patients.

RESULTS

Of the 284 studies identified, 5 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Topiramate decreased weight by a mean difference of 3.4kg (95% CI, -3.79 to -3.04) compared to placebo. Mean HbA1c reduction of -0.4% (95% CI, -0.58 to -0.32) and mean BMI reduction of -1.43kg/m(2) (95% CI, -1.83 to -1.03) were both significantly observed with topiramate (p<0.00001). Serious and total adverse events occurred more commonly among topiramate users, with a risk ratio for serious adverse events of 1.69 (95% CI, 1.00-2.87). All but one study had high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Topiramate monotherapy reduced weight in obese type 2 diabetes patients, but increased adverse events including serious adverse events. Given these safety concerns and the absence of data on clinically meaningful efficacy endpoints, clinicians should generally avoid use of topiramate alone for this indication.

Migraine headache prophylaxis in adolescents

Migraine headache is estimated to affect up to 28 percent of adolescents, most of whom are female. Chronic migraine in this population has been associated with reduced quality of life and academic disruption due to missed school days. Historically, migraine headache was treated episodically as it occurred. In March 2014 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved an existing medication, topiramate (Topamax®), for migraine prophylaxis in adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17. This is the first FDA approval of a drug for migraine prevention in this population. There are several possible adverse effects of taking topiramate, some potentially serious, so adequate education for adolescents and their families on all the potential benefits and risks is imperative.

Long-term effects of weight-reducing drugs in people with hypertension

BACKGROUND

All major guidelines on antihypertensive therapy recommend weight loss; anti-obesity drugs may be able to help in this respect.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES

To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, and adverse events (including total serious adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, and total non-serious adverse events).

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES

To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on change from baseline in systolic blood pressure, change from baseline in diastolic blood pressure, and body weight reduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We obtained studies using computerised searches of the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, the clinical trials registry ClinicalTrials.gov, and from handsearches in reference lists and systematic reviews (status as of 13 April 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in hypertensive adults of at least 24 weeks' duration that compared long-term pharmacologic interventions for weight loss with placebo. 

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Where appropriate and in the absence of significant heterogeneity between studies (P > 0.1), we pooled studies using fixed-effect meta-analysis. When heterogeneity was present, we used the random-effects method and investigated the cause of heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

After updating the literature search, which was extended to include four new weight-reducing drugs, we identified one additional study of phentermine/topiramate, bringing the total number of studies to nine that compare orlistat, sibutramine, or phentermine/topiramate to placebo and thus fulfil our inclusion criteria. We identified no relevant studies investigating rimonabant, liraglutide, lorcaserin, or naltrexone/bupropion. No study included mortality and cardiovascular morbidity as predefined outcomes. Incidence of gastrointestinal side effects was consistently higher in those participants treated with orlistat versus those treated with placebo. The most frequent side effects were dry mouth, constipation, and headache with sibutramine, and dry mouth and paresthaesia with phentermine/topiramate. In participants assigned to orlistat, sibutramine, or phentermine/topiramate body weight was reduced more effectively than in participants in the usual-care/placebo groups. Orlistat reduced systolic blood pressure as compared to placebo by -2.5 mm Hg (mean difference (MD); 95% confidence interval (CI): -4.0 to -0.9 mm Hg) and diastolic blood pressure by -1.9 mm Hg (MD; 95% CI: -3.0 to -0.9 mm Hg). Sibutramine increased diastolic blood pressure compared to placebo by +3.2 mm Hg (MD; 95% CI: +1.4 to +4.9 mm Hg). The one trial that investigated phentermine/topiramate suggested it lowered blood pressure.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with elevated blood pressure, orlistat and sibutramine reduced body weight to a similar degree, while phentermine/topiramate reduced body weight to a greater extent. In the same trials, orlistat and phentermine/topiramate reduced blood pressure, while sibutramine increased it. We could include no trials investigating rimonabant, liraglutide, lorcaserin, or naltrexone/bupropion in people with elevated blood pressure. Long-term trials assessing the effect of orlistat, liraglutide, lorcaserin, phentermine/topiramate, or naltrexone/bupropion on mortality and morbidity are unavailable and needed. Rimonabant and sibutramine have been withdrawn from the market, after long-term trials on mortality and morbidity have confirmed concerns about the potential severe side effects of these two drugs. The European Medicines Agency refused marketing authorisation for phentermine/topiramate due to safety concerns, while the application for European marketing authorisation for lorcaserin was withdrawn by the manufacturer after the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use judged the overall benefit/risk balance to be negative.

Comparison of impact on seizure frequency and epileptiform discharges of children with epilepsy from topiramate and phenobarbital

OBJECTIVE

To study the impact on seizure frequency and epileptiform discharges of children with epilepsy from topiramate (TPM) and phenobarbital (PB).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred cases children with epilepsy from August 2010 to August 2013 in our hospital were sampled and randomly divided into two groups. The observation group was treated with TPM while the control group with PB, and then comparing seizure frequency, efficiency, and adverse reactions of two groups.

RESULTS

The reduced number of partial seizures, generalized seizures, and total seizures in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group, and the rate of cure, markedly effective and total efficiency in observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group. However, the adverse reactions in observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group. Thus, differences were statistically significant (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with PB, TPM showed a better effect on epilepsy treatment with less adverse reactions which were worthy of clinical recommendation.