Posts Tagged LEV

[ARTICLE] Levetiracetam and brivaracetam: a review of evidence from clinical trials and clinical experience – Full Text

Until the early 1990s, a limited number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were available. Since then, a large variety of new AEDs have been developed and introduced, several of them offering new modes of action. One of these new AED families is described and reviewed in this article. Levetiracetam (LEV) and brivaracetam (BRV) are pyrrolidone derivate compounds binding at the presynaptic SV2A receptor site and are thus representative of AEDs with a unique mode of action. LEV was extensively investigated in randomized controlled trials and has a very promising efficacy both in focal and generalized epilepsies. Its pharmacokinetic profile is favorable and LEV does not undergo clinically relevant interactions. Adverse reactions comprise mainly asthenia, somnolence, and behavioral symptoms. It has now been established as a first-line antiepileptic drug. BRV has been recently introduced as an adjunct antiepileptic drug in focal epilepsy with a similarly promising pharmacokinetic profile and possibly increased tolerability concerning psychiatric adverse events. This review summarizes the essential preclinical and clinical data of LEV and BRV that is currently available and includes the experiences at a large tertiary referral epilepsy center.

Since the introduction of bromides as the first effective antiepileptic drugs (AEDs),1 chronic AED treatment that consisted of the sustained prevention of epileptic seizures has remained the standard of epilepsy therapy.2 Before to the introduction of the newer generation of AEDs, a limited number of drugs were available that addressed the blockade of sodium channels, acting on gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) type A receptors, or interacting with calcium channels as the leading modes of action.3 With the introduction of the newer AEDs a heterogeneous group of drugs appeared, some of them offering new mechanisms of action2 including the blockade of GABA aminotransferase (vigabatrin [VGB]), GABA re-uptake from the synaptic cleft (tiagabine [TGB]), the modulation of calcium channels (gabapentin [GBP], pregabalin [PGB]), the selective non-competitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolproprionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonism (perampanel [PER]), and the binding to the presynaptic SV2A receptor site which is the unique mode of action of levetiracetam (LEV) and brivaracetam (BRV), the AEDs this review will cover. The authors will summarize the development of both compounds as derivatives of piracetam, review the currently available preclinical and clinical data, and discuss the question of whether BRV has the potential to be recognized as being superior to LEV and if it can replace it as the standard AED with the main mode of action both AEDs reflect.[…]

 

Continue —-> Levetiracetam and brivaracetam: a review of evidence from clinical trials and clinical experience – Bernhard J. Steinhoff, Anke M. Staack, 2019

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Levetiracetam for epilepsy: an evidence map of efficacy, safety and economic profiles – Full Text

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and economics of levetiracetam (LEV) for epilepsy.
Materials and methods: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey.eu and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for systematic reviews (SRs), meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, case reports and economic studies published from January 2007 to April 2018. We used a bubble plot to graphically display information of included studies and conducted meta-analyses to quantitatively synthesize the evidence.
Results: A total of 14,803 records were obtained. We included 30 SRs/meta-analyses, 34 RCTs, 18 observational studies, 58 case reports and 2 economic studies after the screening process. The included SRs enrolled patients with pediatric epilepsy, epilepsy in pregnancy, focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy and refractory focal epilepsy. Meta-analysis of the included RCTs indicated that LEV was as effective as carbamazepine (CBZ; treatment for 6 months: 58.9% vs 64.8%, OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.50–1.16; 12 months: 54.9% vs 55.5%, OR=1.24, 95% CI: 0.79–1.93), oxcarbazepine (57.7% vs 59.8%, OR=1.34, 95% CI: 0.34–5.23), phenobarbital (50.0% vs 50.9%, OR=1.20, 95% CI: 0.51–2.82) and lamotrigine (LTG; 61.5% vs 57.7%, OR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.90–1.66). SRs and observational studies indicated a low malformation rate and intrauterine death rate for pregnant women, as well as low risk of cognitive side effects. But psychiatric and behavioral side effects could not be ruled out. LEV decreased discontinuation due to adverse events compared with CBZ (OR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.41–0.65), while no difference was found when LEV was compared with placebo and LTG. Two cost-effectiveness evaluations for refractory epilepsy with decision-tree model showed US$ 76.18 per seizure-free day gained in Canada and US$ 44 per seizure-free day gained in Korea.


Conclusion: 
LEV is as effective as CBZ, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital and LTG and has an advantage for pregnant women and in cognitive functions. Limited evidence supports its cost-effectiveness

Background

Epilepsy ranks fourth after tension-type headache, migraine and Alzheimer disease in the world’s neurological disorders burden.1 A systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis of international studies reported that the point prevalence of active epilepsy was 6.38 per 1,000 people, while the lifetime prevalence was 7.60 per 1,000 people. The annual cumulative incidence of epilepsy was 67.77 per 100,000 people, while the incidence rate was 61.44 per 100,000 person-years.2 As a fairly common clinical condition affecting all ages and requiring long-term, sometimes lifelong, treatment, epilepsy incurs high health care costs for the society.1 In 2010, the total annual cost for epilepsy was 13.8 billion and the total cost per patient was €5,221 in Europe.3 Meanwhile, in the USA, epilepsy-related costs ranged from $1,022 to $19,749 per person annually.4 What is more, drug-refractory epilepsy was a major cost driver,5 with main costs from anticonvulsants, hospitalization and early retirement.6

Currently, antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are the main treatment method for epilepsy patients, and it was reported that approximately two-thirds of epileptic seizures were controlled by AEDs.7 Conventional AEDs such as carbamazepine (CBZ) and sodium valproate (VPA) have been proven to have good therapeutic effects and low treatment cost. However, some adverse events (AEs) related to these drugs, such as Stevens–Johnson syndrome, menstrual disorder and memory deterioration seriously affect the tolerance and compliance of patients. Compared with conventional AEDs, new AEDs have the potential to be safer, but also more expensive.8

Levetiracetam (LEV) is a novel AED that has been approved as an adjunctive therapy for adults with focal epilepsy since 1999 in the US. In 2006, it was licensed as monotherapy for adults and adolescents above 16 years of age with newly diagnosed focal-onset seizures with or without secondary generalization in Europe. Also, it has been indicated as an adjunctive therapy for partial-onset seizures in patients above 4 years of age in China since 2007. Although the precise mechanism of LEV is still unclear, current researches suggest that its pharmacological mechanism is different from those of other AEDs. It may bind to the synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A), which presents on the synaptic vesicles and some neuroendocrine cells. SV2A may participate in the exocytosis of synaptic vesicles and regulate the release of neurotransmitters, especially the release of excitatory amino acids, and thus depress the epilepsy discharge.9,10 Other possible mechanisms of LEV include the following: selective inhibition of voltage-dependent N-type calcium channels in hippocampal pyramidal cells and reduction of the negative allosteric agents’ inhibition, such as zinc ions and B-carbolines, on glycine and γ-aminobutyric acid neurons, which results in indirectly increasing central nervous system inhibition.11

LEV is almost completely absorbed after oral administration and the absorption is unaffected by food. The bioavailability is nearly 100% and the steady-state concentrations are achieved in 2 days if LEV is taken twice daily. Sixty-six percent of LEV is renally excreted unchanged and its major metabolic pathway is enzymatic hydrolysis of the acetamide group, which is independent of liver CYP/CYP450; so, no clinically meaningful drug–drug interactions with other AEDs were found.12 One published SR of LEV suggested LEV has an equal efficacy compared with conventional AEDs and it is well tolerated for long-term therapy without significant effect on the immune system.13 But in recent years, apart from the most frequent AEs of LEV, such as nausea, gastrointestinal symptoms, dizziness, irritability and aggressive behavior, some rare AEs of LEV have been reported, including eosinophilic pneumonia, rhabdomyolysis, thrombocytopenia, elevated kinase and reduced sperm quality.1417

Thus, we conducted a mapping review to evaluate the efficacy, safety and economic profiles of LEV compared with all other AEDs for epilepsy, to provide evidence-based information for the rational use of LEV and research agendas.

[…]

 

Continue —>  [Full text] Levetiracetam for epilepsy: an evidence map of efficacy, safety and ec | NDT

, , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] The adverse event profile of levetiracetam: A meta-analysis on children and adults – Full Text HTML/PDF

Article Outline

  1. 1. Introduction
  2. 2. Methods
    1. 2.1. Criteria for considering studies in this review
      1. 2.1.1. Types of studies
      2. 2.1.2. Types of participants
      3. 2.1.3. Search methods for identification of studies
    2. 2.2. Analysis of adverse events
      1. 2.2.1. Selection of adverse events
      2. 2.2.2. Statistical analysis
  3. 3. Results
    1. 3.1. Included studies
    2. 3.2. General tolerability
    3. 3.3. Treatment withdrawals
    4. 3.4. Adverse effects
    5. 3.5. Dose–effect correlations of statistically significant levetiracetam adverse effects
  4. 4. Discussion
  5. 5. Conclusions
  6. Conflict of interest statement
  7. Appendix A. Supplementary data
  8. References

Highlights

  • We analyzed the adverse events (AEs) profile of levetiracetam with a meta-analysis.
  • A combined analysis of children and adults with any disease was performed.
  • The risk of withdrawals was higher for patients taking levetiracetam than placebo.
  • A general good tolerability profile of levetiracetam has been evidenced.
  • We did not find a clear dose–response relationship for the significant AEs.

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the adverse events (AEs) significantly associated with levetiracetam (LEV) therapy through a meta-analysis of all available double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs), performed in any age, gender, ethnic background and disease. General tolerability and study withdrawals due to AEs associated with LEV treatment were also investigated. In addition, a dose–effect responses relationship for all variables was assessed.

Methods: RCTs were identified searching Medline (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL for the words “Levetiracetam” and “randomized controlled trial”, with different search strategies, setting the limits “humans” and “English”. Very common and common AEs according to the summary of product characteristics were investigated. RevMan version 5.2 was used for the statistical analyses. Risk difference with 95% confidence intervals was used to investigate the association of any AEs and withdrawal with LEV.

Results: Twenty-six studies with 2832 patients were included in the RCTs analysis. Nasopharyngitis, somnolence, dizziness, nervousness/irritability and asthenia/fatigue were statistically significant associated with LEV. In addition, LEV was significantly associated with an increased risk of AEs-related withdrawals. No dose–response relationship was found for any of the assessed variables.

Conclusions: This first large meta-analysis suggests that participants were more likely to discontinue LEV than placebo.The AE profile confirmed that LEV is associated with few unfavorable sedative, vestibulocerebellar and behavioral effects, such as nervousness and irritability. However, there does not seem to be a clear dose–response relationship.

Continue —> The adverse event profile of levetiracetam: A meta-analysis on children and adults – Seizure – European Journal of Epilepsy

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Post-traumatic epilepsy: current and emerging treatment options – Full Text

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) leads to many undesired problems and complications, including immediate and long-term seizures/epilepsy, changes in mood, behavioral, and personality problems, cognitive and motor deficits, movement disorders, and sleep problems.

Clinicians involved in the treatment of patients with acute TBI need to be aware of a number of issues, including the incidence and prevalence of early seizures and post-traumatic epilepsy (PTE), comorbidities associated with seizures and anticonvulsant therapies, and factors that can contribute to their emergence.

While strong scientific evidence for early seizure prevention in TBI is available for phenytoin (PHT), other antiepileptic medications, eg, levetiracetam (LEV), are also being utilized in clinical settings. The use of PHT has its drawbacks, including cognitive side effects and effects on function recovery. Rates of recovery after TBI are expected to plateau after a certain period of time. Nevertheless, some patients continue to improve while others deteriorate without any clear contributing factors.

Thus, one must ask, ‘Are there any actions that can be taken to decrease the chance of post-traumatic seizures and epilepsy while minimizing potential short- and long-term effects of anticonvulsants?’ While the answer is ‘probably,’ more evidence is needed to replace PHT with LEV on a permanent basis. Some have proposed studies to address this issue, while others look toward different options, including other anticonvulsants (eg, perampanel or other AMPA antagonists), or less established treatments (eg, ketamine). In this review, we focus on a comparison of the use of PHT versus LEV in the acute TBI setting and summarize the clinical aspects of seizure prevention in humans with appropriate, but general, references to the animal literature.

Full Text–> Post-traumatic epilepsy: current and emerging treatment options.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: