lacosamide and eslicarbazepine-acetate

Brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM) and perampanel (PER) are antiseizure medications (ASMs) approved for adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures. So far, no randomised controlled trial directly compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs.. We estimated the comparative efficacy and safety of these ASMs for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults with epilepsy using a network meta-analysis (NMA).. We systematically searched (June week 4, 2021) MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ). There were no date limitations or language restrictions. Randomised, double-blinded, controlled, parallel-group, add-on studies that compared oral BRV, CNB, ESL, LCM, and PER versus any comparator over maintenance periods of at least 12 weeks and included adult patients with focal seizures uncontrolled by concomitant ASMs were identified. The efficacy outcomes were the proportions of patients with ≥ 50% and 100% reduction in baseline seizure frequency during the maintenance period. The tolerability outcomes were the proportions of participants who experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and experienced at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation. Effect sizes were estimated by network meta-analyses within a frequentist framework. The hierarchy of competing interventions was established using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).. Sixteen trials (BRV: n = 3, CNB: n = 1, ESL: n = 4, LCM: n = 4, PER: n = 4) were included, overall enrolling 4507 patients randomised to add-on active treatments (BRV = 803, CNB = 221, ESL =9 90, LCM = 1104, and PER = 1389) and 2246 to add-on placebo. Cenobamate was associated with a higher rate of ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction than BRV [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.66], ESL (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.07-3.48), LCM (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04-3.32), and PER (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.16-3.70). There was a not statistically significant trend favouring CNB over ESL, LCM and PER for the seizure freedom outcome. Brivaracetam (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.86) and LCM (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.88) were associated with a lower proportion of participants experiencing TEAEs compared to ESL, and patients treated with PER were associated with a higher risk to experience at least one TEAE (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02-1.96) than BRV. According to SUCRA, CNB had the greatest likelihood of being the best option for the ≥ 50% and 100% seizure frequency reduction, and BRV and LCM had the highest probabilities of being the best-tolerated treatments.. Cenobamate ranked best for efficacy, and BRV and LCM were best tolerated over the other comparators. Although NMAs cannot replace direct comparisons, they may support physicians in clinical decision making.

Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Carbamates; Chlorophenols; Dibenzazepines; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Lacosamide; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Nitriles; Pyridones; Pyrrolidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures; Tetrazoles

The safety of switching between generic products of antiseizure medications (ASMs) continues to be a hot topic in epilepsy management. The main reason for concern relates to the uncertainty on whether, and when, two generics found to be bioequivalent to the same brand (reference) product are bioequivalent to each other, and the risk of a switch between generics resulting in clinically significant changes in plasma ASM concentrations. This article addresses these concerns by discussing the distinction between bioequivalence and statistical testing for significant difference, the importance of intra-subject variability in interpreting bioequivalence studies, the stricter regulatory bioequivalence requirements applicable to narrow-therapeutic-index (NTI) drugs, and the extent by which currently available generic products of ASMs comply with such criteria. Data for 117 oral generic products of second-generation ASMs approved in Europe by the centralized, mutual recognition or decentralized procedure were analyzed based on a review of publicly accessible regulatory assessment reports. The analysis showed that for 99% of generic products assessed (after exclusion of gabapentin products), the 90% confidence intervals (90% CIs) of geometric mean ratios (test/reference) for AUC (area under the drug concentration vs time curve) were narrow and wholly contained within the acceptance interval (90%-111%) applied to NTI drugs. Intra-subject variability for AUC was <10% for 53 (88%) of the 60 products for which this measure was reported. Many gabapentin generics showed broader, 90% CIs for bioequivalence estimates, and greater intra-subject variability, compared with generics of other ASMs. When interpreted within the context of other available data, these results suggest that any risk of non-bioequivalence between these individual generic products is small, and that switches across these products are not likely to result in clinically relevant changes in plasma drug exposure. The potential for variability in exposure when switching across generics is likely to be greatest for gabapentin.

Topics: Anticonvulsants; Area Under Curve; Biological Variation, Individual; Dibenzazepines; Drug Substitution; Drugs, Generic; Europe; Gabapentin; Humans; Lacosamide; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Oxcarbazepine; Pregabalin; Therapeutic Equivalency; Topiramate; Vigabatrin; Zonisamide

Four "third-generation" antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were approved for adjunctive treatment of refractory focal onset seizures during the past 10 years. Long-term efficacy and safety of the drugs were demonstrated in large extension studies and in reports of subgroups of patients not studied in pivotal trials. Reviewing extension study and post-marketing outcome series for the four newer AEDs-lacosamide, perampanel, eslicarbazepine acetate and brivaracetam-can guide clinicians in treating and monitoring patients. AED extension studies evaluate treatment retention, drug tolerability, and drug safety during individualized treatment with flexible dosing and thus provide information not available in rigid pivotal trials. Patient retention in the studies ranged from 75 to 80% at 1 year and from 36 to 68% at 2-year treatment intervals. Safety findings were generally similar to those of pivotal trials, with no major safety risks identified and with several specific adverse drug effects, such as hyponatremia, reported. The third-generation AEDs, some through new mechanisms and others with improved tolerability compared to related AEDs, provide new options in efficacy and tolerability.

Topics: Acetamides; Anticonvulsants; Dibenzazepines; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Lacosamide; Longitudinal Studies; Medication Adherence; Nitriles; Product Surveillance, Postmarketing; Pyridones; Pyrrolidinones; Seizures

Drugs marketed during the last few years (i.e. Lacosamide, Ruifinamide, Eslicarbazepine acetate, Brivaracetam and Perampanel) are increasingly regarded as third generation AEDs. This paper presents available data about monotherapy with third generation drugs and on-going clinical trials with special attention to the existing debate about monotherapy license in epilepsy.. References were identified by searches of Medline/PubMed. In addition, currently active studies for these AEDs were identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Expert commentary: Results of studies on Eslicarbazepine acetate and Lacosamide clearly suggest good efficacy and tolerability. The selective pharmacological profile, the lack of interactions, the good tolerability with low propensity for cognitive side effects and the availability of different pharmacological formulations represent evident advantages. Although third generation monotherapies are quite promising, long-term safety data is needed in order to understand how these compounds will place in the current armamentarium.

Topics: Acetamides; Adult; Anticonvulsants; Dibenzazepines; Epilepsy; Humans; Lacosamide; Time Factors

Brivaracetam (BRV), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM), and perampanel (PER) have been recently marketed as adjunctive treatments for focal onset seizures. To date, no randomized controlled trial (RCT) has directly compared BRV with ESL, LCM, or PER.. To compare BRV with the other add-on AEDs in patients with uncontrolled focal epilepsy, estimating their efficacy and tolerability through an adjusted, common-reference based indirect comparison meta-analysis.. We systematically searched RCTs in which add-on treatment with ESL or LCM in patients with focal onset seizures have been compared with placebo. Efficacy and tolerability outcomes were considered. Random-effects Mantel-Haenszel meta-analyses were performed to obtain odds ratios (ORs) for the efficacy of BRV, LCM, ESL, or PER versus placebo. Adjusted indirect comparisons were then made between BRV and the other three AEDs using the obtained results, comparing the minimum and the highest effective recommended daily dose of each drug.. Seventeen RCTs, with a total of 4971 patients were included. After adjusting for dose-effects, indirect comparisons showed no difference between BRV and LCM, ESL, or PER for responder rate and seizure freedom. Lower adverse events were observed with high dose BRV compared to high dose ESL or PER, but no difference was found in withdrawing because of adverse events.. Indirect comparisons do not demonstrate a significant difference in efficacy between add-on BRV and LCM, ESL, or PER in focal epilepsy, and might suggest a better tolerability of BRV than ESL, and possibly also PER, at the highest effective recommended dose.

Topics: Acetamides; Anticonvulsants; Dibenzazepines; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsies, Partial; Humans; Lacosamide; Nitriles; Pyridones; Pyrrolidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

This article lays the background for, and discusses the practical issues surrounding, the adjunctive use of the last four antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) to be licensed for the treatment of pharmacoresistant focal seizures in the UK and elsewhere. More than 30% of adolescent and adult patients will not be fully controlled on the currently available therapeutic armamentarium. After not responding to their first three AED schedules, only a handful of patients attained seizure freedom on subsequent regimens. To optimise the response to any new AED in this setting, it is often necessary to reduce the existing drug burden. The pharmacology, tolerability and safety, and everyday use of lacosamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, retigabine (ezogabine) and perampanel will be reviewed and discussed. This will be accompanied by data from prospective audits with each drug undertaken at the Western Infirmary in Glasgow, Scotland, and a report of their successful introduction in an illustrative case. Overall, there is a large variation in the course of refractory epilepsy and the effect of AED therapy on this process seems minimal. Nevertheless, a number of patients will benefit from the introduction of each new AED, with some becoming seizure-free.

Topics: Acetamides; Adult; Aged; Animals; Anticonvulsants; Carbamates; Dibenzazepines; Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Epilepsies, Partial; Female; Humans; Lacosamide; Male; Middle Aged; Nitriles; Phenylenediamines; Pyridones

Analysis of overall tolerability and neurological adverse effects (AEs) of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM) and oxcarbazepine (OXC) from double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Indirect comparisons of patients withdrawing because of AEs, and the incidence of some vestibulocerebellar AEs between these three antiepileptic dugs (AEDs).. We searched MEDLINE for all randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials investigating therapeutic effects of fixed oral doses of ESL, LCM and OXC in patients with drug resistant epilepsy. Withdrawal rate due to AEs, percentages of patients with serious AEs, and the proportion of patients experiencing any neurological AE, nausea and vomiting were assessed for their association with the experimental drug. Analyses were performed between recommended daily doses of each AED according to the approved summary of product characteristics (SPC). Risk differences were used to evaluate the association of any AE [99% confidence intervals (CIs)] or study withdrawals because of AEs (95% CIs) with the experimental drug. Indirect comparisons between withdrawal rate and AEs dizziness, coordination abnormal/ataxia and diplopia were estimated according to network meta-analysis (Net-MA).. Eight randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials (4 with ESL, 3 with LCM, and 1 with OXC) were included in our analysis. At high doses (OXC 1200mg, ESL 1200mg and LCM 400mg) there was an increased risk of AE-related study withdrawals compared to placebo for all drugs. Several AEs were associated with the experimental drug. Both number and frequency of AEs were dose-related. At high recommended doses, patients treated with OXC withdrew from the experimental treatment significantly more frequently than patients treated with ESL and LCM. Furthermore, the AEs coordination abnormal/ataxia and diplopia were significantly more frequently observed in patients treated with OXC compared to patients treated with LCM and ESL.. The overall tolerability of AEDs and the incidence of several neurological AEs were clearly dose-dependent. Indirect comparisons between these AEDs, taking into account dose-effect, showed that OXC may be associated with more frequent neurological AEs than LCM and ESL.

Topics: Acetamides; Anticonvulsants; Ataxia; Carbamazepine; Dibenzazepines; Diplopia; Dizziness; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Lacosamide; Nervous System Diseases; Oxcarbazepine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Sodium Channel Blockers; Treatment Outcome

The search for new, more effective antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) continues. The three most recently approved drugs, the so-called third-generation AEDs, include lacosamide, retigabine and eslicarbazepine acetate and are licensed as adjunctive treatment of partial epilepsy in adults.. For the above three AEDs, their mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetic characteristics, drug-drug interactions, pharmacotherapeutics, dose and administration and therapeutic drug monitoring are reviewed in this paper.. Lacosamide and retigabine act through novel mechanisms, while eslicarbazepine acetate, a pro-drug for eslicarbazepine, acts in a similar manner to several other AEDs. All three AEDs are associated with linear pharmacokinetic and rapid absorption and undergo metabolism. Their drug-drug interaction profile is low (lacosamide and retigabine) to modest (eslicarbazepine) in propensity. At the highest approved doses for the three AEDs, responder rates were similar. The most commonly observed adverse effects compared with placebo were dizziness, headache, diplopia and nausea for lacosamide; dizziness, somnolence and fatigue for retigabine and dizziness and somnolence for eslicarbazepine acetate. The precise role that these new AEDs will have in the treatment of epilepsy and whether they will make a significant impact on the prognosis of intractable epilepsy is not yet known and will have to await further clinical experience.

Topics: Acetamides; Anticonvulsants; Carbamates; Dibenzazepines; Drug Interactions; Epilepsy; Humans; Lacosamide; Phenylenediamines

Epilepsy is not a singular disease, but a variety of disorders. It affects up to 0.5% of the population. Over the past decade, researchers have made great advances in the field of epilepsy. These have been accompanied by the licensing of a great number of antiepileptic drugs. However, despite these efforts, up to 15-20% of patients have refractory epilepsy. The novel antiepileptic drugs must suit several requirements: higher efficacy, especially in resistant cases, better tolerability, and improved pharmacokinetic properties. Recently, three new drugs have been introduced to the market. Retigabine is a carbamic derivate, and its anticonvulsive properties are largely due to its ability to prolong the opening of neuronal voltage-gated potassium Kv7.2 and Kv7.3 channels. Lacosamide is a functionalized amino acid, and selectively enhances voltage-gated sodium channel slow inactivation. Eslicarbazepine acetate is a new member of the dibenzazepine family, and blocks the fast inactivated voltage-gated sodium channel. All three of them differ from the foregoing agents in several important ways, including new mechanism of action (retigabine, lacosamide), or pharmacokinetics (eslicarbazepine acetate). These novel anticonvulsants appear to be a safe and effective addition to the armamentarium for the treatment of patients with refractory epilepsy. However, it will take the consideration of new concepts in shaping the new therapeutic algorithm.

Topics: Acetamides; Anticonvulsants; Carbamates; Dibenzazepines; Epilepsy; Humans; Lacosamide; Phenylenediamines

INTRODUCTION. Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) licensed in Spain in February 2011 as an adjunctive therapy in adults with partial seizures with or without secondary generalization. Clinical trials with ESL have demonstrated acceptable efficacy and safety. AIM. To evaluate the results of ESL in our epilepsy unit during its first year of clinical experience with this AED. PATIENTS AND METHODS. We included all patients who started treatment with ESL at our epilepsy unit from March 2011 to May 2012. We collected the following variables: gender, aetiology of epilepsy, epileptogenic area, reason for switch to ESL, clinical response after initiation of ESL, adverse effects of ESL, refractoriness criteria and treatment discontinuation. A bivariate factor-to-factor correlation study was carried out to establish associations between the independent variables and the clinical response. RESULTS. We recruited 105 patients (51.4% male). 20,7% of patients remained seizure-free and 58.4% showed > 50% improvement after introduction of ESL. At 6 months, 18.1% had experienced some type of side effect, with cognitive disorders being the most common, and 11.5% had discontinued treatment. Combination with lacosamide proved to be significantly less effective in the control of seizures. Combination of ESL with the rest of sodium channel inhibitors was similar in efficacy to others combinations. CONCLUSIONS. ESL is a well-tolerated and effective AED when is used as adjunctive treatment with most of other AED in clinical practice.

Topics: Acetamides; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anticonvulsants; Cognition Disorders; Depression; Dibenzazepines; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsies, Partial; Epilepsy; Epilepsy, Generalized; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Lacosamide; Male; Middle Aged; Sodium Channel Blockers; Weight Gain; Young Adult

Topics: Acetamides; Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Delayed-Action Preparations; Dibenzazepines; Epilepsy; Humans; Lacosamide

Topics: Acetamides; Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Delayed-Action Preparations; Dibenzazepines; Epilepsy; Humans; Lacosamide

Psychiatric comorbidities are common in people with epilepsy. A retrospective study of characteristics associated with withdrawal due to psychiatric side effects was undertaken in patients with treated epilepsy participating in prospective audits with new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). A total of 1058 treated patients with uncontrolled seizures (942 focal-onset seizures, 116 generalized genetic epilepsies [GGEs]) participated in eight prospective, observational audits from 1996 to 2014. These patients were prescribed adjunctive topiramate (n=170), levetiracetam (n=220), pregabalin (n=135), zonisamide (n=203), lacosamide (n=160), eslicarbazepine acetate (n=52), retigabine (n=64), or perampanel (n=54). Doses were titrated according to efficacy and tolerability to optimize zeizure outcomes and reduce side effects. Psychiatric comorbidities were recorded prior to and after the addition of each AED. At baseline, patients with focal-onset seizures (189 of 942; 20.1%) were statistically more likely to have psychiatric diagnoses compared to patients with GGEs (14 of 116, 12.1%; p=0.039). Following adjunctive AED treatment, neuropsychiatric adverse effects led to AED withdrawal in 1.9-16.7% of patients. Patients with a pre-treatment psychiatric history (22 of 209; 10.5%) were statistically more likely to discontinue their new AED due to psychiatric issues compared to patients with no previous psychiatric diagnosis (50 of 849; 5.9%; p=0.017). Patients receiving sodium channel blocking AEDs (4 of 212, 1.9%) were statistically less likely to develop intolerable psychiatric problems, compared to those on AEDs possessing other mechanisms of action (68 of 846, 8.0%; p=0.012). Depression was the commonest problem, leading to discontinuation of AEDs in 2.8% (n=30) patients. Aggression was statistically more common in men (11 of 527, 2.1%) compared to women (1 of 531, 0.2%; p=0.004). Patients with learning disability (12 of 122, 9.8%; p=0.0015) were statistically less likely to have psychiatric issues prior to adjunctive AED treatment compared to other patients (208 of 936, 22.2%), but there were no statistically significant differences once the new AEDs were added (8 of 122 patients with learning disability, 6.6%; 64 of 936 other patients, 6.8%). Awareness of these issues may assist clinicians in avoiding, identifying and treating psychiatric comorbidities in people with epilepsy.

Topics: Acetamides; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticonvulsants; Dibenzazepines; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Epilepsy; Female; Fructose; Humans; Lacosamide; Levetiracetam; Male; Medical Audit; Mental Disorders; Middle Aged; Nitriles; Piracetam; Pregabalin; Prospective Studies; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Seizures; Sodium Channel Blockers; Topiramate; Young Adult