Stability of levetiracetam oral solution repackaged in oral plastic syringes

Purpose The long-term stability of levetiracetam solution in oral syringes was investigated in order to define a suitable beyond-use date and demonstrate the feasibility of storing prepared syringes for extended periods as an alternative to commercial levetiracetam unit dose cups. Methods Levetiracetam oral solution (100 mg/mL) was drawn into 1- and 10-mL amber polypropylene oral syringes. Triplicate samples of the syringe preparations were stored at refrigeration (2–8 °C) or room temperature (20–25 °C) and evaluated at monthly intervals for up to six months. At each time point, the samples were visually inspected and levetiracetam stability was assessed via pH measurement and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). A short-term forced degradation study was conducted to confirm that the HPLC assay method was stability indicating. Results Over the six-month storage period, there was no significant change in either the visual appearance or pH of any of the levetiracetam samples. The results of serial HPLC assessment indicated that at least 97% of the initial levetiracetam concentration was retained in all samples of 1- and 10-mL oral syringes at both refrigeration and room temperature. Although this study was conducted using a generic product, the stability data obtained may be applied in repackaging decisions regarding other generic formulations of levetiracetam with similar excipient compositions. Conclusion Commercial levetiracetam 100-mg/mL oral solution was stable for up to six months in amber polypropylene oral syringes stored at both refrigeration and room temperature conditions

Newer drugs for focal epilepsy in adults

A 28 year old woman sees her general practitioner after experiencing what sounds like a convulsion without any apparent provoking factor. Over the past month she has also had “blank spells” during which her husband noticed her to be unresponsive. Her general practitioner suspects she may have developed focal epilepsy and refers her to an epilepsy specialist. The specialist elicits from the patient and her husband additional features in the history that are highly compatible with seizures arising from the temporal lobe (lip smacking, ipsilateral motor automatism, and contralateral dystonia) and confirms the diagnosis by finding focal epileptiform discharges on electroencephalography and cortical dysplasia in the left temporal lobe on brain imaging. To prevent further seizures the specialist advises treatment with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). The patient is reluctant to start treatment because she has read that AEDs have many adverse effects, could interact with her oral contraception, and are harmful for babies. She wonders if there are newer AEDs that for her might be better than the traditional ones

2015 ACVIM Small Animal Consensus Statement on Seizure Management in Dogs

This report represents a scientific and working clinical consensus statement on seizure management in dogs based on current literature and clinical expertise. The goal was to establish guidelines for a predetermined, concise, and logical sequential approach to chronic seizure management starting with seizure identification and diagnosis (not included in this report), reviewing decision‐making, treatment strategies, focusing on issues related to chronic antiepileptic drug treatment response and monitoring, and guidelines to enhance patient response and quality of life. Ultimately, we hope to provide a foundation for ongoing and future clinical epilepsy research in veterinary medicine

Audiogenic reflex seizures in cats

This study aims at characterizing feline audiogenic reflex seizures (FARS). An online questionnaire was developed to capture information from owners with cats suffering FARS. This was collated with the medical records from the primary veterinarian. Ninety-six cats were included. Myoclonic seizures were one of the cardinal signs of this syndrome (90/96), frequently occurring prior to generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) in this population. Other features include a late-onset (median 15 years) and absence seizures (6/96), with most seizures triggered by high frequency sounds amid occasional spontaneous seizures (up to 20%). Half the population (48/96) had hearing impairment or were deaf. One third of cats (35/96) had concurrent diseases, most likely reflecting the age distribution. Birmans were strongly represented (30/96). Levetiracetam gave good seizure control. The course of the epilepsy was non-progressive in the majority (68/96) with an improvement over time in some (23/96). Only 33/96 and 11/90 owners respectively felt the GTCS and myoclonic seizures affected their cat’s quality of life (QoL). Despite this, many owners (50/96) reported a slow decline in their cat’s health becoming less responsive (43/50), not jumping (41/50), uncoordinated or weak in the pelvic limbs (24/50), and exhibiting dramatic weight loss (39/50). These signs were exclusively reported in cats experiencing seizures for >2 years with 42/50 owners stating these signs affected their cat’s QoL. In gathering data on audiogenic seizures in cats, we have identified a new epilepsy syndrome named FARS with a geriatric-onset. Further studies are warranted to investigate potential genetic predispositions to this condition

Short-Term Neurodevelopmental Outcome in Term Neonates Treated with Phenobarbital versus Levetiracetam: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND: Phenobarbital (PB) has been traditionally used as the first-line treatment for neonatal seizures. More recently, levetiracetam (LEV) has been increasingly used as a promising newer antiepileptic medication for treatment of seizures in neonates. OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to compare the effect of PB vs. LEV on short-term neurodevelopmental outcome in infants treated for neonatal seizures. METHOD: This randomized, one-blind prospective study was conducted on term neonates admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit of S. Bambino Hospital, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele," Catania, Italy, from February 2016 to February 2018. Thirty term neonates with seizures were randomized to receive PB or LEV; the Hammersmith Neonatal Neurological Examination (HNNE) was used at baseline (T0) and again one month after the initial treatment (T1). RESULTS: We found a significantly positive HNNE score for the developmental outcomes, specifically tone and posture, in neonates treated with LEV. There was no significant improvement in the HNNE score at T1 in the neonates treated with PB. CONCLUSION: This study suggests a positive effect of levetiracetam on tone and posture in term newborns treated for neonatal seizures. If future randomized-controlled studies also show better efficacy of LEV in the treatment of neonatal seizures, LEV might potentially be considered as the first-line anticonvulsant in this age grou

Systematic review of antiepileptic drugs’ safety and effectiveness in feline epilepsy

Understanding the efficacy and safety profile of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in feline epilepsy is a crucial consideration for managing this important brain disease. However, there is a lack of information about the treatment of feline epilepsy and therefore a systematic review was constructed to assess current evidence for the AEDs’ efficacy and tolerability in cats. The methods and materials of our former systematic reviews in canine epilepsy were mostly mirrored for the current systematic review in cats. Databases of PubMed, CAB Direct and Google scholar were searched to detect peer-reviewed studies reporting efficacy and/or adverse effects of AEDs in cats. The studies were assessed with regards to their quality of evidence, i.e. study design, study population, diagnostic criteria and overall risk of bias and the outcome measures reported, i.e. prevalence and 95% confidence interval of the successful and affected population in each study and in total

Levetiracetam in clinical practice: efficacy and tolerability in epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam (LEV) in patients with different epilepsy syndromes. METHODS: We evaluated epileptic patients seen in the previous 18 months, including all patients with present or past exposure to LEV. Tolerability of LEV therapy was evaluated in all patients; efficacy was evaluated only in patients who had received LEV for at least six months. Two hundred and two patients were included in the study. Patients were considered responsive when showing a > 50% reduction in seizures frequency and non-responders when seizure frequency was unchanged, worsened or showed a reduction < 50%. RESULTS: Thirty patients did not complete six months of LEV treatment and dropped out. 57.4% of the patients with uncontrolled seizures treated for at least six months were responders, with 27.7% seizure free. Adverse effects were observed in 46 patients (23%) and were responsible for early drop out in 26. Adverse effects occurred significantly more often in females than in males (30.6% vs 13.2%); moreover, nearly 30% of women with adverse effects complained of more than one adverse effect, while this was never observed in male patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows LEV as a well tolerated and effective treatment, both in monotherapy and as an add-on. Further investigations on larges samples are needed to investigate the issue of gender-related tolerability

Antiepileptic drugs’ tolerability and safety – a systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse effects in dogs

<p>Various anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) are used for the management of idiopathic epilepsy (IE) in dogs. Their safety profile is an important consideration for regulatory bodies, owners and prescribing clinicians. However, information on their adverse effects still remains limited with most of it derived from non-blinded non-randomized uncontrolled trials and case reports.</p><p><span>This poster won third place, which was presented at the Veterinary Evidence Today conference, Edinburgh November 1-3, 2016. </span></p><br /> <img src="https://www.veterinaryevidence.org/rcvskmod/icons/oa-icon.jpg" alt="Open Access" /

Efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam in patients with prior antiepileptic drug exposure: A post-hoc study.

Brivaracetam (BRV), a selective, high-affinity ligand for synaptic vesicle protein 2A, is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) for adjunctive treatment of focal (partial-onset) seizures in adults with epilepsy. This post-hoc analysis was conducted to explore the efficacy of adjunctive BRV in patients with prior levetiracetam (LEV) exposure and whether changes in efficacy were related to the similar mechanism of action of these two drugs. Data were pooled from three Phase III studies (NCT00490035; NCT00464269; NCT01261325) of adults with focal seizures taking 1-2 AEDs who received placebo or BRV 50-200mg/day without titration over a 12-week treatment period. Patients taking concomitant LEV at enrollment were excluded from this analysis. Patients were categorized by their status of prior exposure to LEV, carbamazepine (CBZ), topiramate (TPM), or lamotrigine (LTG), to investigate any consistent trend towards reduced response in AED-exposed subgroups compared to AED-naïve subgroups, regardless of the mechanism of action. Study completion rates, percent reduction from baseline in focal seizure frequency over placebo, ≥50% responder rates, and tolerability were evaluated for each subgroup. A total of 1160 patients were investigated. Study completion rates were similar in the AED-exposed subgroups and AED-naïve subgroups. In subgroups with (531 patients) or without (629 patients) prior LEV exposure, ≥50% responder rates for each dose of BRV compared with placebo were generally higher among the LEV-naïve subgroups than the previously LEV-exposed subgroups. LEV-exposed subgroups receiving BRV doses ≥50mg/day showed greater ≥50% responder rates than those receiving placebo. Similar results were observed for CBZ, TPM, and LTG. Previous treatment failure with commonly prescribed AEDs (LEV, CBZ, TPM, or LTG) is associated with a reduced response to BRV irrespective of the mechanism of action. Hence, this post-hoc analysis indicates that previous treatment failure with LEV does not preclude the use of BRV in patients with epilepsy