Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic considerations for epilepsy - depression comorbidities.

INTRODUCTION: Epilepsy may be frequently associated with psychiatric disorders and its co-existence with depression usually results in the reduced quality of life of patients with epilepsy. Also, the efficacy of antiepileptic treatment in depressed patients with epilepsy may be significantly reduced. AREAS COVERED: Results of experimental studies indicate that antidepressants co-administered with antiepileptic drugs may either increase their anticonvulsant activity, remain neutral or decrease the protective action of antiepileptic drugs in models of seizures. Apart from purely pharmacodynamic interactions, pharmacokinetic mechanisms have been proven to contribute to the final outcome. We report on clinical data regarding the pharmacokinetic interactions of enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs with various antidepressants, whose plasma concentration may be significantly reduced. On the other hand, antidepressants (especially selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) may influence the metabolism of antiepileptics, in many cases resulting in the elevation of plasma concentration of antiepileptic drugs. EXPERT OPINION: The preclinical data may provide valuable clues on how to combine these two groups of drugs - antidepressant drugs neutral or potentiating the anticonvulsant action of antiepileptics are recommended in this regard. Avoidance of antidepressants clearly decreasing the convulsive threshold or decreasing the anticonvulsant efficacy of antiepileptic drugs (f.e. bupropion or mianserin) in patients with epilepsy is recommended.

Isobolographic analysis of interactions between remacemide and conventional antiepileptic drugs in the mouse model of maximal electroshock.

Using the mouse maximal electroshock-induced seizure model, indicative of tonic-clonic seizures in humans, the present study was aimed at characterizing the interaction between remacemide and valproate, carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital. Isobolographic analysis indicated additive interactions between remacemide and valproate, carbamazepine, and phenytoin (for all fixed ratios of tested drugs: 1:3, 1:1, and 3:1). Additivity was also observed between remacemide and phenobarbital applied in proportions of 1:1 and 3:1. In contrast, the combination of remacemide and phenobarbital at the fixed-ratio of 1:3 resulted in antagonism. Neither motor performance nor long-term memory was impaired by remacemide or by carbamazepine, phenobarbital, phenytoin, and valproate whether or not these drugs were administered singly or in combination. In combination with remacemide, brain concentrations of carbamazepine, phenobarbital, and phenytoin were increased by 71, 21, and 16%, respectively. Although brain valproate concentrations were unaffected by remacemide co-administration, brain concentrations of remacemide and its active metabolite, desglycinyl-remacemide, were increased by 68 and 162%, respectively. In contrast, phenobarbital co-administration was associated with decreases in brain remacemide (27%) and desglycinyl-remacemide (9%) concentrations, whereas only remacemide concentrations (increased by 131%) were affected by carbamazepine co-administration. In conclusion, significant and desirable pharmacodynamic interactions were observed between remacemide and valproate, carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital. However, the concurrent pharmacokinetic interactions associated with remacemide complicate these observations and do not make remacemide a good candidate for adjunctive treatment of epilepsy.

Perspectives of losigamone in epilepsy treatment.

Patients with drug resistant epilepsy represent about 40% of the whole population of epileptic patients. These patients require more than one antiepileptic drug. In animal models of epilepsy, it is possible to determine which combinations produce supra-additive anticonvulsive effects with minimal or even no adverse reactions. The experimental data can be helpful for predicting effective drug combinations in patients with refractory epilepsy. Losigamone is a new antiepileptic drug with an unknown mechanism of action. The drug belongs to the group of beta-methoxy-butenolides, and exists as a racemic mixture of two enantiomers (AO-242 and AO-294). The drug is eliminated by oxidation. Cytochrome CYP2A6 appears to be the main isoenzyme responsible for the metabolism of losigamone. In vitro, losigamone exerts anticonvulsant activity in the picrotoxin model in CA1 and CA3 hippocampal areas, the low Ca(2+) model in CA1 area and the low Mg(2+) model in the entorhinal cortex and hippocampus. In vivo, the drug exhibits significant efficacy against maximal electroshock-induced seizures in rodents and pentetrazole-induced clonic convulsions in mice. Potency of losigamone varies with the respective seizure test, animal species used in experiments and route of drug administration. Toxicity studies do not indicate any teratogenic risk of the drug, at least in animals. In clinical trial, losigamone proved to have satisfactory effectiveness and good tolerance in the treatment of partial and secondary generalized seizures. The enantiomer AO-242 seems to be more potent than AO-294 or racemate.

Effect of some convulsants on the protective activity of loreclezole and its combinations with valproate or clonazepam in amygdala-kindled rats.

Loreclezole (5 mg/kg) exerted a significant protective action in amygdala-kindled rats, reducing both seizure and afterdischarge durations. The combinations of loreclezole (2.5 mg/kg) with valproate, clonazepam, or carbamazepine (applied at their subprotective doses) also exhibited antiseizure effect in this test. However, only two first combinations occurred to be of pharmacodynamic nature. Among several chemoconvulsants, bicuculline, N-methyl-D-aspartic acid and BAY k-8644 (the opener of L-type calcium channels) reversed the protective activity of loreclezole alone and its combination with valproate. On the other hand, bicuculline, aminophylline and BAY k-8644 inhibited the anticonvulsive action of loreclezole combined with clonazepam. The results support the hypothesis that the protective activity of loreclezole and its combinations with other antiepileptics may involve potentiation of GABAergic neurotransmission and blockade of L-type of calcium channels.

Niguldipine impairs the protective activity of carbamazepine and phenobarbital in amygdala-kindled seizures in rats.

There is evidence that some calcium (Ca(2+)) channel inhibitors enhance the protective activity of antiepileptic drugs. Since clinical trials have not provided consistent data on this issue, the objective of this study was to evaluate the interaction of a dihydropyridine, niguldipine, with conventional antiepileptics in amygdala-kindled rats. Niguldipine (at 7.5 but not at 5 mg/kg) displayed a significant anticonvulsant effect, as regards seizure and afterdischarge durations in amygdala-kindled convulsions in rats, a model of complex partial seizures. No protective effect was observed when niguldipine (5 mg/kg) was combined with antiepileptics at subeffective doses, i.e. valproate (75 mg/kg), diphenylhydantoin (40 mg/kg), or clonazepam (0.003 mg/kg). Unexpectedly, the combined treatment of niguldipine (5 mg/kg) with carbamazepine (20 mg/kg) or phenobarbital (20 mg/kg) resulted in a proconvulsive action. BAY k-8644 (an L-type Ca(2+) channel activator) did not modify the protective activity of niguldipine (7.5 mg/kg) or the opposite action of this dihydropyridine (5 mg/kg) in combinations with carbamazepine or phenobarbital. A pharmacokinetic interaction is not probable since niguldipine did not affect the free plasma levels of the antiepileptics. These data indicate that the opposite actions of niguldipine alone or combined with carbamazepine (or phenobarbital) were not associated with Ca(2+) channel blockade. The present results may argue against the use of niguldipine as an adjuvant antiepileptic or for cardiovascular reasons in patients with complex partial seizures.