Nonspecific oral medications versus anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To compare calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) versus nonspecific oral migraine preventives (NOEPs). BACKGROUND: Insurers mandate step therapy with NOEPs before approving CGRP mAbs. METHODS: Databases were searched for class I or II randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CGRP mAbs or NOEPs versus placebo for migraine prevention in adults. The primary outcome measure was monthly migraine days (MMD) or moderate to severe headache days. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs for CGRP mAbs, 5 RCTs for topiramate, and 3 RCTs for divalproex were included in the meta-analysis. There was high certainty that CGRP mAbs are more effective than placebo, with weighted mean difference (WMD; 95% confidence interval) of -1.64 (-1.99 to -1.28) MMD, which is compatible with small effect size (Cohen's d -0.25 [-0.34 to -0.16]). Certainty of evidence that topiramate or divalproex is more effective than placebo was very low and low, respectively (WMD -1.45 [-1.52 to -1.38] and -1.65 [-2.30 to -1.00], respectively; Cohen's d -1.25 [-2.47 to -0.03] and -0.48 [-0.67 to -0.29], respectively). Trial sequential analysis showed that information size was adequate and that CGRP mAbs had clear benefit versus placebo. Network meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between CGRP mAbs and topiramate (WMD -0.19 [-0.56 to 0.17]) or divalproex (0.01 [-0.73 to 0.75]). No significant difference was seen between topiramate or divalproex (0.21 [-0.45 to 0.86]). CONCLUSIONS: There is high certainty that CGRP mAbs are more effective than placebo, but the effect size is small. When feasible, CGRP mAbs may be prescribed as first-line preventives; topiramate or divalproex could be as effective but are less well tolerated. The findings of this study support the recently published 2024 position of the American Headache Society on the use of CGRP mAbs as the first-line treatment.

Effectiveness analysis of three-drug combination therapies for refractory focal epilepsy.

Selecting appropriate antiseizure medications (ASMs) for combination therapy in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) is a complex task that requires an empirical approach, especially in patients receiving polytherapy. We aimed to analyze the effectiveness of various three-drug combinations in a group of patients with DRE under real-world conditions. This single-center, longitudinal observational study investigated patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy who received three-drug regimens in the outpatient clinic of Tongji Hospital from September 2019 to December 2022. The effectiveness of each triple regimen was evaluated by the seizure-free rate and within-patient ratio of the seizure frequency (a seizure frequency ratio [SFR]<1 indicated superior efficacy). The independent t-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used for effectiveness analysis, and P values were adjusted by the Benjamini-Hochberg method for multiple comparisons. A total of 511 triple trials comprising 76 different regimens were conducted among 323 enrolled patients. Among these triple regimens, lamotrigine (LTG)/valproic acid (VPA)/topiramate (TPM) was the most frequently prescribed (29.4%, n â€‹= â€‹95). At the last clinical visit, 14.9% (n â€‹= â€‹48) of patients achieved seizure freedom after receiving triple therapy. LTG/VPA/TPM and LTG/VPA/levetiracetam (LEV) exhibited the highest seizure-free rates at 17.9% and 12.8%, respectively. These two regimens also had significantly lower median SFRs of 0.48 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.17-0.85; adjusted P â€‹< â€‹0.001) and 0.63 (IQR, 0.21-1.04; adjusted P â€‹< â€‹0.01), respectively. LTG/VPA/perampanel (PER) was another promising regimen that showed marginal effectiveness (median SFR â€‹= â€‹0.67; adjusted P â€‹= â€‹0.053). LTG/VPA/phenobarbital had the highest incidence of regimen-specific side effects (40.0%, 4/10), while the incidence of side effects from LTG/VPA/LEV was minimal (5.1%, 2/39). In conclusion, LTG/VPA/TPM and LTG/VPA/LEV exhibited superior efficacy and good tolerability in treating patients with DRE. Our results provide preliminary insights into the selection of ASMs for three-drug combination therapies in this clinically challenging population.

Topiramate-chitosan nanoparticles prevent morphine reinstatement with no memory impairment: Dopaminergic and glutamatergic molecular aspects in rats.

Besides their clinical application, chronic misuse of opioids has often been associated to drug addiction due to their addictive properties, underlying neuroadaptations of AMPA glutamate-receptor-dependent synaptic plasticity. Topiramate (TPM), an AMPAR antagonist, has been used to treat psychostimulants addiction, despite its harmful effects on memory. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a novel topiramate nanosystem on molecular changes related to morphine reinstatement. Rats were previously exposed to morphine in conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm and treated with topiramate-chitosan nanoparticles (TPM-CS-NP) or non-encapsulated topiramate in solution (S-TPM) during CPP extinction; following memory performance evaluation, they were re-exposed to morphine reinstatement. While morphine-CPP extinction was comparable among all experimental groups, TPM-CS-NP treatment prevented morphine reinstatement, preserving memory performance, which was impaired by both morphine-conditioning and S-TPM treatment. In the NAc, morphine increased D1R, D2R, D3R, DAT, GluA1 and MOR immunoreactivity. It also increased D1R, DAT, GluA1 and MOR in the dorsal hippocampus. TPM-CS-NP treatment decreased D1R, D3R and GluA1 and increased DAT in the NAc, decreasing GluA1 and increasing D2 and DAT in the dorsal hippocampus. Taken together, we may infer that TPM-CS-NP treatment was able to prevent the morphine reinstatement without memory impairment. Therefore, TPM-CS-NP may be considered an innovative therapeutic tool due to its property to prevent opioid reinstatement because it acts modifying both dopaminergic and glutamatergic neurotransmission, which are commonly related to morphine addiction.

Indirect Comparison of Topiramate and Monoclonal Antibodies Against CGRP or Its Receptor for the Prophylaxis of Episodic Migraine: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Head-to-head comparator trials between first-line oral migraine preventatives and the new monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) blocking the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway have not been published to date. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to indirectly compare the clinical efficacy and safety of mAbs against CGRP or its receptor (CGRPR) and topiramate in episodic migraine prophylaxis using meta-analysis. METHODS: We included controlled trials testing efficacy and safety of erenumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, eptinezumab, and topiramate in adults diagnosed with episodic migraine. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2000 to November 2020. We used the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool to assess the risk of bias and report pooled mean effects (mean difference and risk ratio) as estimated in a random effect model. For efficacy analysis, we determined the reduction of monthly migraine days (MMDs), reduction of days with acute medication (AMDs), and 50% responder rates (50% RR). For safety, we determined adverse events (AEs) occurring in ≥ 2% of study participants and the number of patients who discontinue treatment due to AEs (DAEs). The number needed to treat (NNT) and to harm (NNH) were estimated as well as the likelihood to help or harm (LLH). RESULTS: We included 13 trials involving 7557 patients: three trials with erenumab, two trials with galcanezumab, two trials with fremanezumab, one trial with eptinezumab, and five trials with topiramate, for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine in adults. The placebo-subtracted reduction (pooled mean difference) of MMDs were - 1.55 (95% CI - 1.86 to - 1.24; active drug n = 3326 vs placebo n = 2219, 8 studies) for the CGRP(R) mAb and - 1.11 (95% CI - 1.62 to - 0.59; active drug n = 1032 vs placebo n = 543, 4 studies) for topiramate (p for subgroup difference = 0.15). 'Cognitive' and 'sensory & pain'-related adverse events occurred more often in patients treated with topiramate compared with those treated with a CGRP(R) mAb (p for subgroup difference 0.03 and < 0.001, respectively). Based on the 50% RR and DAE, the NNT, NNH, and LHH for the CGRP(R) mAbs were 6, 130, and 24.3:1, respectively. For topiramate, these values were 7, 9, and 1.8:1, respectively. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of CGRP(R) mAbs to reduce migraine days does not differ from topiramate. However, the safety profile is in favor of the CGRP(R) mAbs, with a higher likelihood to help than to harm compared with topiramate. The diversity of endpoint determination and the heterogeneity between studies for some endpoints cause some limitations for this study.

Safety and tolerability of preventive treatment options for chronic migraine.

INTRODUCTION: Relative to migraine generally, chronic migraine (CM) imposes greater disability, healthcare utilization and socioeconomic burden. Six therapies currently possess a credible evidence base for prevention/suppression of CM. This review is intended to provide an assessment of their relative utility, defined as a blend of safety, tolerability and efficacy, focusing in particular on their safety and tolerability.Areas Covered: We discuss all six medications currently FDA-approved for migraine prevention which also specifically possess credible evidence of efficacy in treating CM. While we do address the efficacy of each, our primary emphasis involves assessment of safety and tolerability data derived from clinical trials and post-marketing experience.Expert Opinion: Recent research involving CM has led to the identification of highly targeted and typically well-tolerated therapies. For patients who experience obstacles to accessing these newer therapies, topiramate is available as an evidence-based alternative, but contraindications, drug-drug interactions and poor tolerability may limit or prevent its use. Although data to support such intervention presently is limited, clinically challenging CM cases may benefit from combination therapy. 'Real world' studies are needed to evaluate such polytherapy, along with studies intended to assess the long-term safety of the individual therapies and their use during pregnancy and breast-feeding.

Usefulness of extended-release topiramate in patients with epilepsy: A two-year retention study.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Extended-release topiramate (TPM-XR) was recently approved for the treatment of epilepsy, but there is only limited real-world information on the clinical usefulness of TPM-XR in epilepsy patients. We investigated the usefulness of TPM-XR in clinical practice by analysing the retention of TPM-XR in adult epilepsy patients. METHODS: We performed a single-centre retrospective study covering two years. Epilepsy patients taking TPM-XR were included in the study and classified into one of three groups: the monotherapy group, in which patients took only TPM-XR; the adjunctive therapy group, in which patients took TPM-XR concomitant with other AEDs; and the switching AED regimen group, in which patient's AED was switched from immediate-release TPM (TPM-IR) to TPM-XR. We evaluated the retention rates of TPM-XR and analysed the differences in retention rate among the three patient groups. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: We included 164 epilepsy patients who received TPM-XR for the treatment of epilepsy. The overall retention rate of TPM-XR was generally favourable: 79.1% after one year and 77.7% after two years. The switching AED regimen group had a better retention rate than the other two groups (p = 0.04), with a one-year retention rate of 90.6% and a two-year retention rate of 88.1%. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The favourable retention rate of TPM-XR shows that TPM-XR can be an effective treatment option for epilepsy patients, as either a monotherapy or as an adjunctive therapy. Additionally, switching AED regimen to TPM-XR from TPM-IR can be considered in selected epilepsy patients with poor adherence to TPM-IR.

Exenatide, Dapagliflozin, or Phentermine/Topiramate Differentially Affect Metabolic Profiles in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.

CONTEXT: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors reduce weight and improve insulin sensitivity via different mechanisms. OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of once-weekly exenatide (EQW) and dapagliflozin (DAPA) alone and coadministered (EQW/DAPA), DAPA/extended-release (ER) metformin (DAPA/MET), and phentermine topiramate extended release (PHEN/TPM) on metabolic parameters, body composition, and sex hormones were examined in obese women with PCOS. METHODS: Nondiabetic women (n = 119; aged 18-45 years) with a body mass index (BMI) greater than 30 and less than 45 and polycystic ovary syndrome (National Institutes of Health criteria) were randomly assigned in a single-blinded fashion to EQW (2 mg weekly); DAPA (10 mg daily), EQW/DAPA (2 mg weekly/10 mg daily), DAPA (10 mg)/MET (2000 mg XR daily), or PHEN (7.5 mg)/TPM (46 mg ER daily) treatment for 24 weeks. Study visits at baseline and 24 weeks included weight, blood pressure (BP), waist (WC) measures, and body composition evaluated by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Oral glucose tolerance tests were conducted to assess glycemia and mean blood glucose (MBG), and compute insulin sensitivity (SI) and secretion (IS) measures. Sex steroids, free androgen index (FAI), and lipid profiles were measured in the fasting sample. RESULTS: EQW/DAPA and PHEN/TPM resulted in the most loss of weight and total body fat by DXA, and WC. Despite equivalent reductions in BMI and WC with PHEN/TPM, only EQW/DAPA and EQW resulted in significant improvements in MBG, SI, and IS. Reductions in fasting glucose, testosterone, FAI, and BP were seen with all drugs. CONCLUSION: Dual therapy with EQW/DAPA was superior to either alone, DAPA/MET and PHEN/TPM in terms of clinical and metabolic benefits in this patient population.

Efficacy and Safety of Phentermine/Topiramate in Adults with Overweight or Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to examine the association between phentermine/topiramate therapy and weight loss and adverse events in adults with overweight or obesity by meta-analysis and systematic review. METHODS: Medical Subject Headings and free-text terms were selected to search for eligible trials in PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase up to April 18, 2020. The quality of randomized controlled trials was evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models. RESULTS: Phentermine/topiramate therapy resulted in an average weight loss of 7.73 kg (95% CI: 6.60-8.85) in general compared with placebo. The weight loss was related to the dose of phentermine/topiramate. Compared with placebo, the average weight loss was 3.55 kg (95% CI: 2.22-4.88) for 3.75/23 mg, 7.27 kg (95% CI: 6.40-8.13) for 7.5/46 mg, and 8.25 kg (95% CI: 6.92-9.79) for 15/92 mg. For phentermine/topiramate participants in different weight-loss subgroups, the weight loss of participants with ≥5%, ≥10%, and ≥15% baseline weight loss was 3.18 (95% CI: 2.75-3.67), 5.32 (95% CI: 4.53-6.25), and 5.65 (95% CI: 3.55-9.01), respectively. Compared with placebo, the adverse events associated with the treatment mainly included dysgeusia (odds ratio [OR] = 8.86, 95% CI: 5.65-13.89), paresthesia (OR = 8.51, 95% CI: 6.20-11.67), dry mouth (OR = 6.71, 95% CI: 5.03-8.94), disturbance in attention (OR = 4.48, 95% CI: 2.39-8.41), irritability (OR = 4.10, 95% CI: 2.29-7.33), hypoesthesia (OR = 3.81, 95% CI: 1.32-11.00), constipation (OR = 2.43, 95% CI: 2.02-2.93), and dizziness (OR = 2.26, 95% CI: 1.72-2.98). Phentermine/topiramate also reduced waist circumference, blood pressure, blood sugar levels, and lipid levels. CONCLUSIONS: Phentermine/topiramate has considerable benefit in reducing body weight, and the efficacy was closely related to the dosage. However, it increased the risk of nervous system-related adverse events.

Compounding and quality control of two pediatric topiramate pharmaceutical preparations.

In pediatric wards, topiramate is prescribed as an antiepileptic at non-licensed dosages. Compounding is the best way to obtain topiramate drug adapted to pediatric patients, but this practice requires to control the quality of batches and to manage a stability study to establish a beyond-use-date. With this objective, 6 mg. mL 1 topiramate oral suspension and 9 mg capsules were realized, and our laboratory was mandated for their quality control. Previously described dosing methods did not allow us to determine topiramate content in prescribed preparations. An original HPLC-UV derivatization dosing method of topiramate was validated and was proved to be stability indicating. This derivatization methodology, but also total aerobic microbial count (TAMC) and total combined yeasts and mold count (TYMC) allowed the quality control of topiramate capsules and topiramate suspension. Beyond-use-dates can be attributed with regards to United States Pharmacopoeia recommendations, and a stability study was performed on 6 mg. mL-1 topiramate suspension to confirm empirical data. Topiramate pediatric suspension was found to be stable for two months at +2/+8 °C, one month after opening and one day at ambient temperature.

Anti-seizure medications for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is an age-specific epilepsy syndrome characterised by multiple seizure types, including drop seizures. LGS has a characteristic electroencephalogram, an onset before age eight years and an association with drug resistance. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review published in 2013. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of anti-seizure medications (ASMs) for LGS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 28 February 2020) on 2 March 2020. CRS Web includes randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy; PubMed; Embase; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We imposed no language restrictions. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and colleagues in the field to seek any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered RCTs, including cross-over trials, of ASMs for LGS in children and adults. We included studies of ASMs used as either monotherapy or as an add-on (adjunctive) therapy. We excluded studies comparing different doses of the same ASM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, including independent, dual assessment for risk of bias and application of the GRADE approach to rate the evidence certainty for outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We found no trials of ASM monotherapy. The review included 11 trials (1277 participants; approximately 11 weeks to 112 weeks follow-up after randomisation) using add-on ASMs for LGS in children, adolescents and adults. Two studies compared add-on cannabidiol (two doses) with add-on placebo in children and adolescents only. Neither study reported overall seizure cessation or reduction. We found high-certainty evidence that 72 more people per 1000 (confidence interval (CI) 4 more to 351 more) had adverse events (AE) leading to study discontinuation with add-on cannabidiol, compared to add-on placebo (two studies; 396 participants; risk ratio (RR) 4.90, 95% CI 1.21 to 19.87). One study compared add-on cinromide with add-on placebo in children and adolescents only. We found very low-certainty evidence that 35 more people per 1000 (CI 123 fewer to 434 more) had 50% or greater average reduction of overall seizures with add-on cinromide compared to add-on placebo (one study; 56 participants; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.86). This study did not report participants with AE leading to study discontinuation. One study compared add-on clobazam (three doses) with add-on placebo. This study did not report overall seizure cessation or reduction. We found high-certainty evidence that 106 more people per 1000 (CI 0 more to 538 more) had AE leading to study discontinuation with add-on clobazam compared to add-on placebo (one study; 238 participants; RR 4.12, 95% CI 1.01 to 16.87). One study compared add-on felbamate with add-on placebo. No cases of seizure cessation occurred in either regimen during the treatment phase (one study; 73 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was low-certainty evidence that 53 more people per 1000 (CI 19 fewer to 716 more) with add-on felbamate were seizure-free during an EEG recording at the end of the treatment phase, compared to add-on placebo (RR 2.92, 95% CI 0.32 to 26.77). The study did not report overall seizure reduction. We found low-certainty evidence that one fewer person per 1000 (CI 26 fewer to 388 more) with add-on felbamate had AE leading to study discontinuation compared to add-on placebo (one study, 73 participants; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.97). Two studies compared add-on lamotrigine with add-on placebo. Neither study reported overall seizure cessation. We found high-certainty evidence that 176 more people per 1000 (CI 30 more to 434 more) had ≥ 50% average seizure reduction with add-on lamotrigine compared to add-on placebo (one study; 167 participants; RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.76). We found low-certainty evidence that 40 fewer people per 1000 (CI 68 fewer to 64 more) had AE leading to study-discontinuation with add-on lamotrigine compared to add-on placebo (one study; 169 participants; RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.82). Two studies compared add-on rufinamide with add-on placebo. Neither study reported seizure cessation. We found high-certainty evidence that 202 more people per 1000 (CI 34 to 567 more) had ≥ 50% average seizure reduction (one study; 138 participants; RR 2.84, 95% CI 1.31 to 6.18). We found low-certainty evidence that 105 more people per 1000 (CI 17 fewer to 967 more) had AE leading to study discontinuation with add-on rufinamide compared to add-on placebo (one study; 59 participants; RR 4.14, 95% CI 0.49 to 34.86). One study compared add-on rufinamide with another add-on ASM. This study did not report overall seizure cessation or reduction. We found low-certainty evidence that three fewer people per 1000 (CI 75 fewer to 715 more) had AE leading to study discontinuation with add-on rufinamide compared to another add-on ASM (one study; 37 participants; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.10 to 9.57). One study compared add-on topiramate with add-on placebo. This study did not report overall seizure cessation. We found low-certainty evidence for ≥ 75% average seizure reduction with add-on topiramate (one study; 98 participants; Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) 8.22, 99% CI 0.60 to 112.62) and little or no difference to AE leading to study discontinuation compared to add-on placebo; no participants experienced AE leading to study discontinuation (one study; 98 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: RCTs of monotherapy and head-to-head comparison of add-on ASMs are currently lacking. However, we found high-certainty evidence for overall seizure reduction with add-on lamotrigine and rufinamide, with low-certainty evidence for AE leading to study discontinuation compared with add-on placebo or another add-on ASM. The evidence for other add-on ASMs for overall seizure cessation or reduction was low to very low with high- to low-certainty evidence for AE leading to study discontinuation. Future research should consider outcome reporting of overall seizure reduction (applying automated seizure detection devices), impact on development, cognition and behaviour; future research should also investigate age-specific efficacy of ASMs and target underlying aetiologies.

Case Report: Off Label Utilization of Topiramate and Metformin in Patients With BMI ≥50 kg/m2 Prior to Bariatric Surgery.

FDA approved anti-obesity medications may not be cost effective for patients struggling with pre-operative weight loss prior to bariatric surgery. Metformin, a biguanide, and Topiramate, a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor, both cost effective medications, have demonstrated weight loss when used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes or seizures, respectively. The aim of the three cases is to demonstrate the clinical utility of topiramate and metformin for preoperative weight loss in patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 50 kg/m2 prior to bariatric surgery who are unable to follow the bariatric nutritional prescription due to a dysregulated appetite system Each patient was prescribed metformin and/or topiramate in an off-label manner in conjunction with lifestyle modifications and achieved >8% total body weight loss during the preoperative period.

Monitoring topiramate concentrations at delivery and during lactation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine transplacental passage of topiramate and its transport to colostrum, mature maternal milk and breastfed infants, we examined data from 27 women treated with topiramate from 2004 to 2020. METHODS: In this cohort study, maternal serum, umbilical cord serum, milk and infant serum levels were measured by gas chromatography in the delivery subgroup, the colostrum subgroup (3-4 days postpartum) and the mature milk subgroup (7-30 days postpartum). Paired umbilical cord serum, maternal serum, breastfed infant serum, and milk levels were used to assess the ratios of umbilical cord/maternal serum, milk/maternal serum and infant/maternal serum levels. RESULTS: Topiramate levels varied from 1.0 to 7.1 mg/L in maternal serum and from 0.8 to 6.2 mg/L in umbilical cord serum, and the mean umbilical cord/maternal serum ratio was 0.93 ± 0.11. At 3-4 days after delivery, topiramate concentrations were 1.4-8.4 mg/L in maternal serum, 1.5-8.6 mg/L in milk and 0.3-4.4 mg/L in infant serum. The mean milk/maternal serum ratio was 0.99 ± 0.45, and the mean infant/maternal serum ratio was 0.25 ± 0.15. At 7-30 days after delivery, maternal serum levels varied from 1.9 to 9.7 mg/L, milk levels ranged from 2.3 to 10.6 mg/L and infant serum levels ranged from 0.3 to 6.5 mg/L. The mean milk/maternal serum ratio was 1.07 ± 0.31, and the mean infant/maternal serum ratio was 0.51 ± 0.27. CONCLUSIONS: We extended information about free transplacental passage of topiramate and its extensive transport to maternal milk with lower serum concentrations in breastfed infants in the largest group of patients ever reported to our knowledge. DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT: Authors declare that take full responsibility for the data, the analyses and interpretation, and the conduct of the research; that they have full access to all of the data; and that they have the right to publish all data. Authors were not participations in industry-sponsored research and corporate activities for evaluation of a manuscript.

Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention: A systematic review and likelihood to help or harm analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway (anti-CGRP mAbs) have shown promising efficacy in randomised clinical trials for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine, but no head-to-head comparisons with established treatments are available. We aimed to examine absolute differences in benefit-risk ratios between anti-CGRP mAbs, topiramate and propranolol for the prevention of episodic migraine and between anti-CGRP mAbs, topiramate and onabotulinumtoxinA for the prevention of chronic migraine using a likelihood to help versus harm analysis. METHODS: The number of patients needed to be treated for a patient to achieve ≥ 50% reduction in migraine days (NNTB50%) was used as an effect size metric of efficacy. The number of patients needed to be treated for a patient to experience an adverse event that led to treatment discontinuation (NNTHD-AE) was used as a measure of risk. Likelihood to help versus harm values - which are the ratios of NNTH:NNTB - were calculated using data from phase 3 randomised clinical trials. RESULTS: All agents tested were more likely to be beneficial than harmful (likelihood to help versus harm > 1) with the exception of topiramate at 200 mg per day for the prevention of episodic migraine. Anti-CGRP mAbs in all tested doses had higher LHH values than propranolol or topiramate for episodic migraine and onabotulinumtoxinA or topiramate for chronic migraine prevention. Fremanezumab had the highest LHH ratio in episodic migraine and galcanezumab in chronic migraine. CONCLUSION: This analysis showed that anti-CGRP mAbs exhibit a more favourable benefit-risk ratio than established treatments for episodic and chronic migraine. Head-to-head studies are needed to confirm these results.

Use of Topiramate in the Spectrum of Addictive and Eating Disorders: A Systematic Review Comparing Treatment Schemes, Efficacy, and Safety Features.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Topiramate has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of epilepsy since the 1990s, and it has also been used off-label in the treatment of many types of addictive disorders. To date, no systematic review has embraced the entire field of addiction, both substance use and behavioral addictions, including eating disorders, to compare topiramate-based protocols and the related level of evidence in each addictive disorder. Our objective is to fill this gap. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using the MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases without a date or language limit. All trials and meta-analyses assessing the efficacy of topiramate in alcohol use disorder; cocaine use disorder; methamphetamine, nicotine, cannabis, opiate, and benzodiazepine use disorders; binge eating disorder; bulimia; and pathological gambling were analyzed. The quality of the studies was rated using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials (ROB-2), the Risk of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies (ROBINS-I), or the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, depending on the study design. Safety features were assessed based on a wider non-systematic review. RESULTS: Sixty-two articles were reviewed. Treatment protocols were relatively homogenous across addictive disorders, with slow dose titration schemes and a maximum dose range of 200-400 mg per day. The most supportive evidence for topiramate efficacy was found in alcohol use disorder for drinking reduction parameters only. To a lesser extent, topiramate could be a promising therapeutic option for binge eating disorder and cocaine use disorder. Evidence was weak for other addictive disorders. No major tolerability issues were found, provided that basic safety rules were followed. Adverse drug reactions could lead to early treatment discontinuation. DISCUSSION: Though off-label, addiction specialists should consider topiramate as a second-line option for drinking reduction in alcohol use disorder, as well as for binge eating disorder or cocaine use disorder.

Pharmacotherapy for Weight Loss in Cirrhosis and Liver Transplantation: Translating the Data and Underused Potential.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Thirty percent of patients with cirrhosis are obese and the prevalence of obesity increases after transplant to >40% post-transplant. There are currently four weight loss medications approved by the FDA for treatment of obesity (orlistat, phentermine-topiramate, naltrexone-bupropion, and liraglutide). The aim of this review was to investigate the data on the use of these weight loss medications and alternative medicines in patients with cirrhosis and in liver transplant recipients (LTRs). APPROACH AND RESULTS: While there is paucity of data for these medications in patients with cirrhosis and LTRs, Liraglutide appears to be generally safe in view of its pharmacokinetic properties. Phentermine-topiramate seems to have the highest weight loss potential but special consideration should be given to neuropsychiatric disorders, cardiovascular comorbidities, and drug interactions. There are emerging data on use of alternative medicines for weight loss but more data are needed. CONCLUSIONS: The use of weight loss medications is feasible in this patient population but the decision of which medication to prescribe should be individualized based on the degree of renal and hepatic impairment, other co-morbidities, and concomitant medications.

Efficacy and safety of topiramate in binge eating disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate in treating binge eating disorder (BED), using a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: The RCTs assessing topiramate vs placebo with or without adjunctive psychotherapy in BED were reviewed using a systematic search in the PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review, and ClinicalTrials.gov search Websites, from inception to November 2019. Main outcomes were the changes in binge frequency, quality of life, and weight, respectively. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effect models and presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Three studies were eligible for inclusion, involving 528 BED patients. Topiramate was found to be significantly more efficacious than placebo in reducing: (a) the number of binge episodes per week (MD = -1.31; 95% CI = -2.58 to -0.03; I2 = 94%); (b) the number of binge days per week (MD = -0.98; 95% CI = -1.80 to -0.16; I2 = 94%); and (c) weight (MD = -4.91 kg; 95% CI = -6.42 to -3.41; I2 = 10%). However, participants in the topiramate groups withdrew significantly more frequently for safety reasons, relative to placebo participants (RR = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.13-3.18, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings support a possible efficacy of topiramate for the treatment of BED, even if safety concerns could limit the practical use of this treatment in BED subjects.

Adjuvant Migraine Medications in the Treatment of Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To examine the hearing outcomes of patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) treated with oral and intratympanic (IT) steroid only or a combination of steroid and migraine treatment. Our hypothesis was that adjuvant migraine medications may improve outcomes in SSNHL. METHODS: A retrospective chart review at a tertiary otology center was conducted to identify patients with SSNHL who received oral steroid and IT dexamethasone injection(s) with or without migraine medications (a combination of nortriptyline and topiramate). RESULTS: A total of 47 patients received oral steroid and IT dexamethasone injection(s) only, and 46 patients received oral steroid and IT dexamethasone injection(s) as well as migraine lifestyle changes plus a combination of nortriptyline and topiramate. There were no significant differences in demographics and baseline audiometric data between the two groups. Both groups demonstrated improvements in pure tone average (PTA) and hearing thresholds at 250 Hz and 8000 Hz posttreatment. However, compared to steroid-only group, the adjuvant migraine medications group had significantly greater improvements in hearing thresholds at the lower frequencies (250 Hz, 500 Hz, 1000 Hz). Patients in the latter cohort also had greater improvement in PTA (P = .01) and received fewer IT injections (P = .04) PTA improvement of ≥ 10 dB was observed in 36 patients (78%) in the adjuvant migraine medications group and 22 patients (46%) in the control group (P < .001). CONCLUSION: In multimodal treatment of SSNHL, supplementing oral and IT steroid with migraine medications may result in greater improvements in lower frequency hearing thresholds and PTA. Furthermore, adjuvant migraine treatment can lead to decrease in number of IT injections, thus reducing procedure-related risks and complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:E283-E288, 2021.