-
Current Obesity Reports Mar 2021As a chronic and relapsing disease, obesity impairs metabolism and causes cardiovascular diseases. Although behavioral modification is important for the treatment of... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
As a chronic and relapsing disease, obesity impairs metabolism and causes cardiovascular diseases. Although behavioral modification is important for the treatment of obesity, it is difficult to achieve an ideal weight or sustain the process of long-term weight loss. Therefore, the obesity control guidelines strongly recommend lifestyle interventions along with medical treatment for patients who are overweight. There is sufficient evidence supporting that pharmacotherapy in combination with behavior-based interventions can result in significant weight loss and improved cardiometabolism.
RECENT FINDINGS
Recent meta-analyses of new anti-obesity drugs and their weight-loss efficacy have shown that the overall placebo-subtracted weight reduction (%) for at least 12 months ranged from 2.9 to 6.8% for the following drugs: phentermine/topiramate (6.8%), liraglutide (5.4%), naltrexone/bupropion (4.0%), orlistat (2.9%), and lorcaserin (3.1%). However, very recently, on February 13, 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ordered the withdrawal of lorcaserin from markets, as a clinical trial to assess drug safety showed an increased risk of cancer. Currently, the anti-obesity medications that have been approved by the FDA for chronic weight management are orlistat, phentermine/topiramate, naltrexone/bupropion, and liraglutide. However, they are costly and may have adverse effects in some individuals. Therefore, drug therapy should be initiated in obese individuals after weighing its benefits and risks. One of the strategies for long-term obesity control is that anti-obesity medications should be tailored for specific patients depending on their chronic conditions, comorbidities, and preferences.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Obesity Agents; Benzazepines; Bupropion; Humans; Liraglutide; Naltrexone; Obesity; Orlistat; Overweight; Phentermine; Topiramate; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration; Weight Loss
PubMed: 33410104
DOI: 10.1007/s13679-020-00422-w -
Revista de Neurologia Oct 2022Status epilepticus is defined as the situation resulting from the failure of the mechanisms responsible for terminating an epileptic seizure. In 2015, an operational... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Status epilepticus is defined as the situation resulting from the failure of the mechanisms responsible for terminating an epileptic seizure. In 2015, an operational concept was adopted internationally in which two times are identified: a first time, at which treatment must begin (five minutes for convulsive status, 10-15 minutes for focal and non-convulsive status); and a second time, after which there is considered to be a high risk of subsequent sequelae (30 minutes in the case of the convulsive). It occurs in 3-42/100,000 children per year, who are refractory or super-refractory in 10-40% of cases.
DEVELOPMENT
This article will review the different therapeutic options for status, from early treatment at home to the different first-line (benzodiazepines), second-line (phenobarbital, valproic acid, phenytoin, levetiracetam and lacosamide) or third-line treatments, which include both pharmacological (anaesthetics, propofol, ketamine, lidocaine, topiramate, brivaracetam or perampanel) and non-pharmacological (ketogenic diet, immunomodulatory treatments or epilepsy surgery) therapies.
CONCLUSIONS
Early identification and treatment of a prolonged crisis are essential to prevent progression to status. Although with fewer sequelae than in adults, status epilepticus in children represents a cause of mortality of up to 3-5%, while 25% of them will develop subsequent epilepsy, as well as a considerable percentage of neurological sequelae.
Topics: Adult; Anesthetics; Anticonvulsants; Benzodiazepines; Child; Epilepsy; Humans; Ketamine; Lacosamide; Levetiracetam; Lidocaine; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Propofol; Seizures; Status Epilepticus; Topiramate; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 36218253
DOI: 10.33588/rn.7508.2022196 -
CNS Drugs Oct 2022The developmental and epileptic encephalopathies encompass a group of rare syndromes characterised by severe drug-resistant epilepsy with onset in childhood and... (Review)
Review
The developmental and epileptic encephalopathies encompass a group of rare syndromes characterised by severe drug-resistant epilepsy with onset in childhood and significant neurodevelopmental comorbidities. The latter include intellectual disability, developmental delay, behavioural problems including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder, psychiatric problems including anxiety and depression, speech impairment and sleep problems. Classical examples of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies include Dravet syndrome, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and tuberous sclerosis complex. The mainstay of treatment is with multiple anti-seizure medications (ASMs); however, the ASMs themselves can be associated with psychobehavioural adverse events, and effects (negative or positive) on cognition and sleep. We have performed a targeted literature review of ASMs commonly used in the treatment of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies to discuss the latest evidence on their effects on behaviour, mood, cognition, sedation and sleep. The ASMs include valproate (VPA), clobazam, topiramate (TPM), cannabidiol (CBD), fenfluramine (FFA), levetiracetam (LEV), brivaracetam (BRV), zonisamide (ZNS), perampanel (PER), ethosuximide, stiripentol, lamotrigine (LTG), rufinamide, vigabatrin, lacosamide (LCM) and everolimus. Bromide, felbamate and other sodium channel ASMs are discussed briefly. Overall, the current evidence suggest that LEV, PER and to a lesser extent BRV are associated with psychobehavioural adverse events including aggressiveness and irritability; TPM and to a lesser extent ZNS are associated with language impairment and cognitive dulling/memory problems. Patients with a history of behavioural and psychiatric comorbidities may be more at risk of developing psychobehavioural adverse events. Topiramate and ZNS may be associated with negative effects in some aspects of cognition; CBD, FFA, LEV, BRV and LTG may have some positive effects, while the remaining ASMs do not appear to have a detrimental effect. All the ASMs are associated with sedation to a certain extent, which is pronounced during uptitration. Cannabidiol, PER and pregabalin may be associated with improvements in sleep, LTG is associated with insomnia, while VPA, TPM, LEV, ZNS and LCM do not appear to have detrimental effects. There was variability in the extent of evidence for each ASM: for many first-generation and some second-generation ASMs, there is scant documented evidence; however, their extensive use suggests favourable tolerability and safety (e.g. VPA); second-generation and some third-generation ASMs tend to have the most robust evidence documented over several years of use (TPM, LEV, PER, ZNS, BRV), while evidence is still being generated for newer ASMs such as CBD and FFA. Finally, we discuss how a variety of factors can affect mood, behaviour and cognition, and untangling the associations between the effects of the underlying syndrome and those of the ASMs can be challenging. In particular, there is enormous heterogeneity in cognitive, behavioural and developmental impairments that is complex and can change naturally over time; there is a lack of standardised instruments for evaluating these outcomes in developmental and epileptic encephalopathies, with a reliance on subjective evaluations by proxy (caregivers); and treatment regimes are complex involving multiple ASMs as well as other drugs.
Topics: Autism Spectrum Disorder; Bromides; Cannabidiol; Clobazam; Cognition; Ethosuximide; Everolimus; Felbamate; Fenfluramine; Humans; Lacosamide; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Pregabalin; Spasms, Infantile; Sulfides; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Vigabatrin; Zinc Compounds; Zonisamide
PubMed: 36194365
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-022-00955-9 -
Drugs Feb 2022Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a highly prevalent but severely under-treated disorder, with only three widely-approved pharmacotherapies. Given that AUD is a very... (Review)
Review
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a highly prevalent but severely under-treated disorder, with only three widely-approved pharmacotherapies. Given that AUD is a very heterogeneous disorder, it is unlikely that one single medication will be effective for all individuals with an AUD. As such, there is a need to develop new, more effective, and diverse pharmacological treatment options for AUD with the hopes of increasing utilization and improving care. In this qualitative literature review, we discuss the efficacy, mechanism of action, and tolerability of approved, repurposed, and novel pharmacotherapies for the treatment of AUD with a clinical perspective. Pharmacotherapies discussed include: disulfiram, acamprosate, naltrexone, nalmefene, topiramate, gabapentin, varenicline, baclofen, sodium oxybate, aripiprazole, ondansetron, mifepristone, ibudilast, suvorexant, prazosin, doxazosin, N-acetylcysteine, GET73, ASP8062, ABT-436, PF-5190457, and cannabidiol. Overall, many repurposed and novel agents discussed in this review demonstrate clinical effectiveness and promise for the future of AUD treatment. Importantly, these medications also offer potential improvements towards the advancement of precision medicine and personalized treatment for the heterogeneous AUD population. However, there remains a great need to improve access to treatment, increase the menu of approved pharmacological treatments, and de-stigmatize and increase treatment-seeking for AUD.
Topics: Acamprosate; Alcohol Deterrents; Alcoholism; Baclofen; Disulfiram; Humans; Naltrexone; Topiramate
PubMed: 35133639
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-021-01670-3 -
The Lancet. Neurology Jun 2018Evidence for the comparative teratogenic risk of antiepileptic drugs is insufficient, particularly in relation to the dosage used. Therefore, we aimed to compare the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Evidence for the comparative teratogenic risk of antiepileptic drugs is insufficient, particularly in relation to the dosage used. Therefore, we aimed to compare the occurrence of major congenital malformations following prenatal exposure to the eight most commonly used antiepileptic drugs in monotherapy.
METHODS
We did a longitudinal, prospective cohort study based on the EURAP international registry. We included data from pregnancies in women who were exposed to antiepileptic drug monotherapy at conception, prospectively identified from 42 countries contributing to EURAP. Follow-up data were obtained after each trimester, at birth, and 1 year after birth. The primary objective was to compare the risk of major congenital malformations assessed at 1 year after birth in offspring exposed prenatally to one of eight commonly used antiepileptic drugs (carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital, phenytoin, topiramate, and valproate) and, whenever a dose dependency was identified, to compare the risks at different dose ranges. Logistic regression was used to make direct comparisons between treatments after adjustment for potential confounders and prognostic factors.
FINDINGS
Between June 20, 1999, and May 20, 2016, 7555 prospective pregnancies met the eligibility criteria. Of those eligible, 7355 pregnancies were exposed to one of the eight antiepileptic drugs for which the prevalence of major congenital malformations was 142 (10·3%) of 1381 pregnancies for valproate, 19 (6·5%) of 294 for phenobarbital, eight (6·4%) of 125 for phenytoin, 107 (5·5%) of 1957 for carbamazepine, six (3·9%) of 152 for topiramate, ten (3·0%) of 333 for oxcarbazepine, 74 (2·9%) of 2514 for lamotrigine, and 17 (2·8%) of 599 for levetiracetam. The prevalence of major congenital malformations increased with the dose at time of conception for carbamazepine (p=0·0140), lamotrigine (p=0·0145), phenobarbital (p=0·0390), and valproate (p<0·0001). After adjustment, multivariable analysis showed that the prevalence of major congenital malformations was significantly higher for all doses of carbamazepine and valproate as well as for phenobarbital at doses of more than 80 mg/day than for lamotrigine at doses of 325 mg/day or less. Valproate at doses of 650 mg/day or less was also associated with increased risk of major congenital malformations compared with levetiracetam at doses of 250-4000 mg/day (odds ratio [OR] 2·43, 95% CI 1·30-4·55; p=0·0069). Carbamazepine at doses of more than 700 mg/day was associated with increased risk of major congenital malformations compared with levetiracetam at doses of 250-4000 mg/day (OR 2·41, 95% CI 1·33-4·38; p=0·0055) and oxcarbazepine at doses of 75-4500 mg/day (2·37, 1·17-4·80; p=0·0169).
INTERPRETATION
Different antiepileptic drugs and dosages have different teratogenic risks. Risks of major congenital malformation associated with lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and oxcarbazepine were within the range reported in the literature for offspring unexposed to antiepileptic drugs. These findings facilitate rational selection of these drugs, taking into account comparative risks associated with treatment alternatives. Data for topiramate and phenytoin should be interpreted cautiously because of the small number of exposures in this study.
FUNDING
Bial, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, the Netherlands Epilepsy Foundation, and Stockholm County Council.
Topics: Abnormalities, Drug-Induced; Adult; Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Epilepsy; Female; Humans; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Logistic Models; Male; Oxcarbazepine; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Young Adult
PubMed: 29680205
DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30107-8 -
Epilepsy & Behavior : E&B May 2021To understand the currently available post-marketing real-world evidence of the incidences of and discontinuations due to the BAEs of irritability, anger, and aggression... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To understand the currently available post-marketing real-world evidence of the incidences of and discontinuations due to the BAEs of irritability, anger, and aggression in people with epilepsy (PWE) treated with the anti-seizure medications (ASMs) brivaracetam (BRV), levetiracetam (LEV), perampanel (PER), and topiramate (TPM), as well as behavioral adverse events (BAEs) in PWE switching from LEV to BRV.
METHODS
A systematic review of published literature using the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Embase was performed to identify retrospective and prospective observational studies reporting the incidence of irritability, anger, or aggression with BRV, LEV, PER, or TPM in PWE. The incidences of these BAEs and the rates of discontinuation due to each were categorized by ASM, and where possible, weighted means were calculated but not statistically assessed. Behavioral and psychiatric adverse events in PWE switching from LEV to BRV were summarized descriptively.
RESULTS
A total of 1500 records were identified in the searches. Of these, 44 published articles reporting 42 studies met the study criteria and were included in the data synthesis, 7 studies were identified in the clinical trial database, and 5 studies included PWE switching from LEV to BRV. Studies included a variety of methods, study populations, and definitions of BAEs. While a wide range of results was reported across studies, weighted mean incidences were 5.6% for BRV, 9.9% for LEV, 12.3% for PER, and 3.1% for TPM for irritability; 3.3%* for BRV, 2.5% for LEV, 2.0% for PER, and 0.2%* for TPM for anger; and 2.5% for BRV, 2.6% for LEV, 4.4% for PER, and 0.5%* for TPM for aggression. Weighted mean discontinuation rates were 0.8%* for BRV, 3.4% for LEV, 3.0% for PER, and 2.2% for TPM for irritability and 0.8%* for BRV, 2.4% for LEV, 9.2% for PER, and 1.2%* for TPM for aggression. There were no discontinuations for anger. Switching from LEV to BRV led to improvement in BAEs in 33.3% to 83.0% of patients (weighted mean, 66.6%). *Denotes only 1 study.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review characterizes the incidences of irritability, anger, and aggression with BRV, LEV, PER, and TPM, and it provides robust real-world evidence demonstrating that switching from LEV to BRV may improve BAEs. While additional data remain valuable due to differences in methodology (which make comparisons difficult), these results improve understanding of the real-world incidences of discontinuations due to these BAEs in clinical practice and can aid in discussions and treatment decision-making with PWE.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Humans; Levetiracetam; Nitriles; Observational Studies as Topic; Pyridones; Pyrrolidinones; Retrospective Studies; Topiramate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33839453
DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.107939 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Oct 2022Multiple clinical trials with different exercise protocols have demonstrated efficacy in the management of migraine. However, there is no head-to-head comparison of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple clinical trials with different exercise protocols have demonstrated efficacy in the management of migraine. However, there is no head-to-head comparison of efficacy between the different exercise interventions.
METHODS
A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed involving all clinical trials which determined the efficacy of exercise interventions in reducing the frequency of monthly migraine. Medical journal search engines included Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus spanning all previous years up to July 30, 2022. Both aerobic and strength/resistance training protocols were included. The mean difference (MD, 95% confidence interval) in monthly migraine frequency from baseline to end-of-intervention between the active and control arms was used as an outcome measure. Efficacy evidence from direct and indirect comparisons was combined by conducting a random effects model network meta-analysis. The efficacy of the three exercise protocols was compared, i.e., moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, high-intensity aerobic exercise, and strength/resistance training. Studies that compared the efficacy of migraine medications (topiramate, amitriptyline) to exercise were included. Additionally, the risk of bias in all included studies was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias version 2 (RoB2).
RESULTS
There were 21 published clinical trials that involved a total of 1195 migraine patients with a mean age of 35 years and a female-to-male ratio of 6.7. There were 27 pairwise comparisons and 8 indirect comparisons. The rank of the interventions was as follows: strength training (MD = -3.55 [- 6.15, - 0.95]), high-intensity aerobic exercise (-3.13 [-5.28, -0.97]), moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (-2.18 [-3.25, -1.11]), topiramate (-0.98 [-4.16, 2.20]), placebo, amitriptyline (3.82 [- 1.03, 8.68]). The RoB2 assessment showed that 85% of the included studies demonstrated low risk of bias, while 15% indicated high risk of bias for intention-to-treat analysis. Sources of high risk of bias include randomization process and handling of missing outcome data.
CONCLUSION
Strength training exercise regimens demonstrated the highest efficacy in reducing migraine burden, followed by high-intensity aerobic exercise.
Topics: Adult; Amitriptyline; Exercise; Female; Humans; Male; Migraine Disorders; Network Meta-Analysis; Resistance Training; Topiramate
PubMed: 36229774
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01503-y -
The Medical Clinics of North America Jan 2022Extending from the triple wave epidemic of opioid-related overdose deaths, a fourth wave of high mortality involving methamphetamine and cocaine use has been gathering... (Review)
Review
Extending from the triple wave epidemic of opioid-related overdose deaths, a fourth wave of high mortality involving methamphetamine and cocaine use has been gathering force. This article provides a review of the published literature on stimulants including epidemiology, pharmacology, neurobiology, medical and psychiatric consequences, withdrawal management, and medical and behavioral treatments.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Antagonists; Adult; Anticonvulsants; Behavior Therapy; Bupropion; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Cognitive Dysfunction; Comorbidity; Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Illicit Drugs; Male; Mental Disorders; Methamphetamine; Mirtazapine; Neurobiology; Neurodegenerative Diseases; Opiate Overdose; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome; Topiramate; Transgender Persons; United States
PubMed: 34823736
DOI: 10.1016/j.mcna.2021.08.010 -
Seizure Dec 2020Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders, affecting approximately 50 million people worldwide. Despite a dramatic increase in treatment options over the... (Review)
Review
Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders, affecting approximately 50 million people worldwide. Despite a dramatic increase in treatment options over the past 30 years, it still ranks fourth in the world's disease burden. There are now close to 30 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), with more than two thirds introduced to the market after carbamazepine (CBZ) and one third after its derivative, oxcarbazepine (OXC). Following the introduction of these newer AEDs, the role of CBZ and OXC in the therapeutic armamentarium for seizure control and effective epilepsy management needs to be reviewed. The main guidelines list both CBZ and OXC as first-line options or second-line alternatives for the treatment of focal-onset epilepsy and primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures. While evidence suggests that overall AEDs have similar efficacy, some newer AEDs may be better tolerated than CBZ. In line with this, there have been changes in treatment patterns, with many variations across different countries. However, CBZ remains among the two or three most prescribed drugs for focal epilepsy in many countries, and is widely used across Europe, Africa, South America, and Asia, where it represents a good compromise between cost, availability, and effectiveness. OXC is among the first-choice options for the initial treatment of focal-onset seizures in several countries, including the US and China, where the oral suspension is commonly prescribed. This review provides guidance on the optimal use of these two drugs in clinical practice, including in children, the elderly, and in pregnancy.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Epilepsy; Epilepsy, Generalized; Humans; Oxcarbazepine; Topiramate
PubMed: 33334546
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2020.10.018 -
CNS Drugs Mar 2022Dravet syndrome is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterised by refractory seizures and cognitive dysfunction. The treatment is challenging, not...
Dravet syndrome is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterised by refractory seizures and cognitive dysfunction. The treatment is challenging, not least because the seizures are highly drug resistant, requiring multiple anti-seizure medications (ASMs), while some ASMs can exacerbate seizures. Initial treatments include the broad-spectrum ASMs valproate (VPA), and clobazam (CLB) in some regions; however, they are generally insufficient to control seizures. With this in mind, three adjunct ASMs have been approved specifically for the treatment of seizures in patients with Dravet syndrome: stiripentol (STP) in 2007 in the European Union and 2018 in the USA, cannabidiol (CBD) in 2018/2019 (in combination with CLB in the European Union) and fenfluramine (FFA) in 2020. These "add-on" therapies (mostly to VPA/CLB) are used as escalation therapies, with the choice dependent on availability in different countries, patient characteristics and caregiver preferences. Topiramate is also frequently used, with evidence of efficacy in Dravet syndrome, and there is anecdotal evidence of efficacy with bromide, which is frequently used in Germany and Japan. With a growing treatment landscape for Dravet syndrome, there can be practical challenges for clinicians, particularly with issues associated with polypharmacy. This practical guide provides an overview of these main ASMs including their indications/contraindications, mechanism of action, efficacy, safety and tolerability profile, dosage requirements, and laboratory and clinical parameters to be evaluated. Standard laboratory and clinical parameters include blood counts, liver function tests, serum concentrations of ASMs, monitoring the growth of children, as well as weight loss and acceleration of behavioural problems. Regular cardiac monitoring is also important with FFA as it has previously been associated with cases of cardiac valve disease when used in adults at high doses (up to 120 mg/day) in combination with phentermine as a therapy for obesity. Importantly, no signs of heart valve disease have been documented to date at the low doses used in patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies. In addition, potential drug-drug interactions and their consequences are a key consideration in everyday practice. Interactions that potentially require dosage adjustments to alleviate adverse events include the following: STP + CLB resulting in increased plasma concentrations of CLB and its active metabolite norclobazam may increase somnolence, and an interaction with STP and VPA may increase gastrointestinal adverse events. Cannabidiol has a bi-directional interaction with CLB producing an increase in plasma concentrations of 7-OH-CBD and norclobazam resulting in the potential for increased somnolence and sedation. In addition, CBD is associated with elevations of liver transaminases particularly in patients taking concomitant VPA. The interaction between FFA and STP requires a dose reduction of FFA. Furthermore, concomitant administration of VPA with topiramate has been associated with encephalopathy and/or hyperammonaemia. Finally, we briefly describe other ASMs used in Dravet syndrome, and current key clinical trials.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Cannabidiol; Child; Clobazam; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsies, Myoclonic; Epileptic Syndromes; Fenfluramine; Humans; Sleepiness; Spasms, Infantile; Topiramate
PubMed: 35156171
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-022-00898-1