RESUMEN
Objective: Cenobamate is approved by the European Medicine Agency for the treatment of adult patients with epilepsy (PWEs) with ongoing focal-onset seizures despite appropriate treatment with at least two established antiseizure medications. Pivotal trials and post-marketing real-world observational studies suggest high efficacy with unusually high seizure-free rates. The authors sought to investigate the plasma levels of cenobamate under steady-state conditions in seizure-free versus non-responding PWEs, and in PWEs who experienced adverse events versus those who did not. Methods: Blood samples were collected from adult PWEs who were treated with adjunct cenobamate under steady-state conditions. Daily doses, concomitant medications, efficacy, and tolerability were assessed. The plasma cenobamate levels of seizure-free versus non-responding PWEs and between PWEs with and those without clinical adverse events were compared. Results: Samples from 101 PWEs were included. Thirty-six PWEs were seizure-free and 65 were non-responders. In 31 PWEs, adverse events were apparent, whereas in the remaining 70, no tolerability issues were reported. A linear correlation was found between the daily doses (range: 100 mg-400 mg) and the plasma levels (3.8 mg/L-54.6 mg/L). Neither the daily doses nor the plasma levels differed significantly between the investigated subgroups. The main reason for this result was that the individual therapeutic ranges varied widely: seizure freedom and adverse effects were observed alongside low doses and plasma levels in some PWEs. Conversely, there were examples of PWEs who did not respond or who reported no tolerability issues at high doses or plasma levels. Conclusions: To evaluate the individual therapeutic range and to better understand the influence of other drugs in cases where concomitant medications are used, the therapeutic drug monitoring of cenobamate may be useful. A general therapeutic range cannot be defined.
RESUMEN
Brivaracetam (BRV) was recently introduced for the treatment of patients with focal epilepsy. BRV undergoes relatively few interactions, but one of them leads to the elevation of carbamazepine (CBZ)-10,11-CBZ-epoxide (CBZ-E) if BRV is co-administered with CBZ. This interaction has been considered to be clinically negligible. We present a case series of nine patients. In eight of them, levetiracetam (LEV) was switched to BRV. In the remaining case, oxcarbazepine was replaced by CBZ and added to a stable BRV dose. A marked increase of CBZ-E occurred in every case and was associated with clinically relevant symptoms including blurred vision, diplopia, dizziness, or fatigue in three of them. However, in the remaining six, the elevated CBZ-E levels were not associated with any tolerability problems. The importance of CBZ-E for adverse events under CBZ may have been overemphasized in the past and is not clinically impairing in most cases treated with the combination of BRV and CBZ.
