The Application of Half-Life in Clinical Decision Making: Comparison of the Pharmacokinetics of Extended-Release Topiramate (USL255) and Immediate-Release Topiramate

Objective: For extended-release drugs with multi-compartment kinetics, such as topiramate, effective half-life (t1/2eff) may be a more clinically relevant parameter than elimination half-life (t1/2z). Using topiramate as a real-life example, the objective was to compare these half-life values for immediate- and extended-release topiramate (TPM-IR and USL255, respectively) to understand how drug pharmacokinetics may impact drug dosing recommendations. Methods: The t1/2z and t1/2eff for USL255 and TPM-IR were compared using data from a phase I study (N = 36) of 200 mg USL255 administered once daily (QD) or TPM-IR twice daily (BID); effect of sampling duration on t1/2z was investigated. To further explore the relationship between half-life and dosing, steady-state PK was simulated for USL255 and TPM-IR. Results: As previously reported, mean t1/2z was similar between USL255 (80.2 h) and TPM-IR (82.8 h); TPM-IR t1/2z was ∼4 times longer than reported in the Topamax label (21 h). In contrast, USL255 displayed a 1.5 fold longer t1/2eff (55.7 vs 37.1 h for TPM-IR). When t1/2z was calculated from 48 to 336 h, values ranged from 28.8 to 82.8 h. Simulated steady-state PK profiles of USL255 QD exhibited reduced plasma fluctuations during a dosing interval vs TPM-IR QD or BID. Significance: As expected for the same moiety, t1/2z of USL255 and TPM-IR were similar; however, the longer t1/2eff for USL255 better approximates differences in recommend dosing (QD USL255 vs BID TPM-IR). Further, sampling duration impacted t1/2z, diminishing its predictive value for determining dose regimens; sampling-time differences may also explain t1/2z discrepancy between TPM-IR here versus Topamax label. As expected, steady-state simulations confirm that although TPM-IR has a long t1/2z, taking TPM-IR QD would lead to large plasma fluctuations. These data demonstrate that t1/2z may be less clinically meaningful than t1/2eff, and using t1/2z for some drugs may lead to erroneous conclusions regarding dosing regimens

Effects of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate on serum lipids in patients with partial-onset seizures: Impact of concomitant statins and enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) on lipid metabolism and to determine whether reduced statin exposure during ESL therapy has clinical consequences. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of pooled data for serum lipids (laboratory values) from three phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive ESL therapy (400, 800, or 1200 mg once daily) in patients with treatment-refractory partial-onset seizures. Changes from baseline in serum lipid levels were analyzed according to use of statins and/or enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAEDs) during the baseline period. KEY FINDINGS: In total, 426 and 1021 placebo- and ESL-treated patients, respectively, were included in the analysis. With regard to the changes from baseline in serum concentrations, there were statistically significant differences between the placebo and ESL 1200 mg QD groups, for both total cholesterol (TC) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), but the effect sizes were small (+4.1 mg/dL and +1.8 mg/dL, respectively). A small but significant difference in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; -5.0 mg/dL) was observed between the ESL 400 mg QD group and the placebo group. In patients not taking a concomitant EIAED, there were no changes with ESL 400 mg QD, but modest and statistically significant increases in cholesterol fractions (TC, LDL-C and HDL-C) with ESL 800 mg QD (/dL) and ESL 1200 mg QD (/dL). ESL had no consistent effect on lipids in patients taking a concomitant EIAED. In patients taking statins during baseline, there were no clinically relevant changes in serum lipids during use of ESL, although the subgroups were small. SIGNIFICANCE: These results suggest that ESL does not appear to have clinically significant effects on serum lipids, nor does the pharmacokinetic interaction between ESL and statins have an impact on serum lipid concentrations