Statin action favors normalization of the plasma lipidome in the atherogenic mixed dyslipidemia of MetS: potential relevance to statin-associated dysglycemia.

The impact of statin treatment on the abnormal plasma lipidome of mixed dyslipidemic patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS), a group at increased risk of developing diabetes, was evaluated. Insulin-resistant hypertriglyceridemic hypertensive obese males (n = 12) displaying MetS were treated with pitavastatin (4 mg/day) for 180 days; healthy normolipidemic age-matched nonobese males (n = 12) acted as controls. Statin treatment substantially normalized triglyceride (-41%), remnant cholesterol (-55%), and LDL-cholesterol (-39%), with minor effect on HDL-cholesterol (+4%). Lipidomic analysis, normalized to nonHDL-cholesterol in order to probe statin-induced differences in molecular composition independently of reduction in plasma cholesterol, revealed increment in 132 of 138 lipid species that were subnormal at baseline and significantly shifted toward the control group on statin treatment. Increment in alkyl- and alkenylphospholipids (plasmalogens) was prominent, and consistent with significant statin-induced increase in plasma polyunsaturated fatty acid levels. Comparison of the statin-mediated lipidomic changes in MetS with the abnormal plasma lipidomic profile characteristic of prediabetes and T2D in the Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study and San Antonio Family Heart Study cohorts by hypergeometric analysis revealed a significant shift toward the lipid profile of controls, indicative of a marked trend toward a normolipidemic phenotype. Pitavastatin attenuated the abnormal plasma lipidome of MetS patients typical of prediabetes and T2D.

Efficacy and Safety of Pitavastatin in Children and Adolescents at High Future Cardiovascular Risk.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of pitavastatin in children and adolescents with hyperlipidemia. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 106 children and adolescents with hyperlipidemia, ages 6 to 17 years, were enrolled in a 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study and randomly assigned to pitavastatin 1 mg, 2 mg, 4 mg, or placebo. During a 52-week extension period, subjects were up-titrated from 1 mg pitavastatin to a maximum dose of 4 mg in an effort to achieve an optimum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment target of <110 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L). Adverse events rates, including abnormal clinical laboratory variables, vital signs, and physical examination were assessed. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, pitavastatin 1, 2, and 4 mg significantly reduced LDL-C from baseline by 23.5%, 30.1%, and 39.3%, respectively, and in the open-label study 20.5% of the subjects reached the LDL-C goal <110 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L). No safety issues were evident. CONCLUSIONS: Pitavastatin at doses up to 4 mg is well tolerated and efficacious in children and adolescents aged 6-17 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with EudraCT 2011-004964-32 and EudraCT 2011-004983-32.

Pitavastatin therapy in polymedicated patients is associated with a low risk of drug-drug interactions: analysis of real-world and phase 3 clinical trial data.

OBJECTIVES: Medications that interact with the pathways responsible for statin metabolism may increase the risk of statin-associated myalgia. Pharmacokinetic studies show that pitavastatin is carried into the liver by a range of transporters and is minimally metabolized by cytochrome P450 in healthy volunteers, indicating a reduced potential for drug-drug interactions (DDIs). This post hoc analysis investigates the incidence of adverse events in patients receiving pitavastatin with concomitant medication in two large data sets. METHODS: The largest pitavastatin patient data sets are the LIVALO Effectiveness and Safety (LIVES) postmarketing surveillance study in Japan (n = 19,925) and the European phase 3 clinical trial program (n = 2,396). Adverse events were classified according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (Med-DRA) and whether they occurred in patients taking medications that interact with hepatocyte organic anion-transporting polypeptide or cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzyme pathways. RESULTS: Concomitant administration of pitavastatin with other medications was not associated with clinically significant increases in the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), even when given with medications that interact with CYP2C9, responsible for the minimal CYP metabolism of pitavastatin. There was a significant interaction with biguanides in LIVES, but this was associated with a reduced risk of muscle ADRs. CONCLUSION: In clinical trials, pitavastatin is associated with a low incidence of adverse events related to DDIs, consistent with data from healthy volunteers. Prescribing a metabolically stable statin, such as pitavastatin, may improve patient adherence to medication, thus facilitating the attainment of lipid targets and reducing cardiovascular risk.

Drug-drug interactions between pemafibrate and statins on pharmacokinetics in healthy male volunteers: Open-label, randomized, 6-sequence, 3-period crossover studies.

Elevated triglyceride levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events despite guideline-based statin treatment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα) agonists exert a significant triglyceride-lowering effect. However, combination therapy of PPARα agonists with statins poses an increased risk of rhabdomyolysis, which is rare but a major concern of the combination therapy. Pharmacokinetic interaction is suspected to be a contributing factor to the risk. To examine the potential for combination therapy with the selective PPARα modulator (SPPARMα) pemafibrate and statins, drug-drug interaction studies were conducted with open-label, randomized, 6-sequence, 3-period crossover designs for the combination of pemafibrate 0.2 mg twice daily and each of 6 statins once daily: pitavastatin 4 mg/day (n = 18), atorvastatin 20 mg/day (n = 18), rosuvastatin 20 mg/day (n = 29), pravastatin 20 mg/day (n = 18), simvastatin 20 mg/day (n = 20), and fluvastatin 60 mg/day (n = 19), involving healthy male volunteers. The pharmacokinetic parameters of pemafibrate and each of the statins were similar regardless of coadministration. There was neither an effect on the systemic exposure of pemafibrate nor a clinically important increase in the systemic exposure of any of the statins on the coadministration although the systemic exposure of simvastatin was reduced by about 15% and its open acid form by about 60%. The HMG-CoA reductase inhibitory activity in plasma samples from the simvastatin and pemafibrate combination group was about 70% of that in the simvastatin alone group. In conclusion, pemafibrate did not increase the systemic exposure of statins, and vice versa, in healthy male volunteers.

Efficacy and Safety of K-877 (Pemafibrate), a Selective PPARα Modulator, in European Patients on Statin Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: High plasma triglyceride (TG) is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Fibrates lower TG levels through peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα) agonism. Currently available fibrates, however, have relatively low selectivity for PPARα. The aim of this trial was to assess the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of K-877 (pemafibrate), a selective PPARα modulator, in statin-treated European patients with hypertriglyceridemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 408 statin-treated adults were recruited from 68 European sites for this phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. They had fasting TG between 175 and 500 mg/dL and HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) ≤50 mg/dL for men and ≤55 mg/dL for women. Participants were randomly assigned to receive placebo or one of six pemafibrate regimens: 0.05 mg twice a day, 0.1 mg twice a day, 0.2 mg twice a day, 0.1 mg once daily, 0.2 mg once daily, or 0.4 mg once daily. The primary end points were TG and non-HDL-C level lowering at week 12. RESULTS: Pemafibrate reduced TG at all doses (adjusted P value <0.001), with the greatest placebo-corrected reduction from baseline to week 12 observed in the 0.2-mg twice a day treatment group (54.4%). Reductions in non-HDL-C did not reach statistical significance. Reductions in TG were associated with improvements in other markers for TG-rich lipoprotein metabolism, including reductions in apoB48, apoCIII, and remnant cholesterol and an increase in HDL-C levels. Pemafibrate increased LDL-cholesterol levels, whereas apoB100 was unchanged. Pemafibrate was safe and well-tolerated, with only minor increases in serum creatinine and homocysteine concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Pemafibrate is effective, safe, and well-tolerated for the reduction of TG in European populations with hypertriglyceridemia despite statin treatment.

Pitavastatin demonstrates long-term efficacy, safety and tolerability in elderly patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined (mixed) dyslipidaemia.

AIMS: To assess the long-term efficacy, safety and tolerability of pitavastatin (2 and 4 mg) in elderly patients (≥ 65 years of age) with primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined (mixed) dyslipidaemia. DESIGN: Patients (n = 545) who had completed a 12-week double-blind comparative study (core study) of pitavastatin and pravastatin entered a 60-week, open-label, multicentre extension study of pitavastatin. The initial daily dose was 2 mg, increasing to 4 mg after 8 weeks if necessary to achieve treatment targets. The proportion of patients attaining European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Plan III (NCEP ATP III) targets for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was determined. RESULTS: Of the patients enrolled, 539 received at least one dose of pitavastatin (safety population: men, 45.5%; Caucasian, 99.1%; mean age, 70.3 years; range, 65-89 years). Only 17% of patients required up-titration to pitavastatin 4 mg. After 60 weeks, NCEP ATP III and EAS targets were attained by 93.8% and 89.0% of patients, respectively. Plasma LDL-C declined by 43.4% and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased by 9.6% versus core-study baseline values. Pitavastatin was well tolerated: the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were nasopharyngitis, mild/moderate myalgia and hypertension. There were no cases of severe myalgia, myopathy, myositis or rhabdomyolysis, and no significant findings on urinalysis, vital signs or 12-lead ECG. CONCLUSION: Long-term pitavastatin treatment (2 and 4 mg) is effective in lowering LDL-C levels and has a good safety and tolerability profile in elderly patients.

Pitavastatin Concentrations Are Not Increased by CYP3A4 Inhibitor Itraconazole in Healthy Subjects.

Itraconazole is a synthetic triazole antifungal agent which is known to be a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4, and may cause drug-drug interactions with the many drugs metabolized by this route, including some statins. In this study, the influence of concomitant administration of a single oral dose of pitavastatin with itraconazole at steady state was investigated to determine the potential for pharmacokinetic interaction and any effects on safety. Eighteen subjects were enrolled into the study. The AUC and Cmax of pitavastatin alone were 138 ng h/mL and 63.8 ng/mL, and pitavastatin with itraconazole were 106 ng h/mL and 49.5 ng/mL, respectively. Comparison of the 90% confidence interval of the geometric mean ratio of AUC0-t and Cmax against a standard reference of 0.80-1.25 demonstrated that the lower limit was breached for both pitavastatin and its lactone metabolite (0.71-0.84 and 0.69-0.88 for AUC0-t and Cmax , respectively, for pitavastatin, 0.86-0.97 and 0.76-0.86 for AUC0-t and Cmax , respectively, for pitavastatin lactone). The safety and tolerability of pitavastatin was not affected by co-administration with itraconazole. This study suggests that pitavastatin is not a CYP3A4 substrate in humans.

Pitavastatin shows greater lipid-lowering efficacy over 12 weeks than pravastatin in elderly patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined (mixed) dyslipidaemia.

AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of once-daily pitavastatin (1, 2, and 4 mg) and pravastatin (10, 20, and 40 mg) in elderly patients (≥ 65 years of age) with primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined (mixed) dyslipidaemia. DESIGN: After a 6-8-week washout/dietary period, patients were randomized to six treatment groups (1, 2, or 4 mg pitavastatin vs. 10, 20, or 40 mg pravastatin) in a 12-week multicentre double-blind study. Patients (n = 942; men, 44.3%; Caucasian, 99.3%; mean age, 70 years; age range, 65-89 years) in all groups were well matched for duration of disease and diagnosis. RESULTS: Mean decreases in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol over 12 weeks were 31.4-44.3% with pitavastatin 1-4 mg and 22.4-34.0% with pravastatin 10-40 mg (p < 0.001 for all dose comparisons). Compared with pravastatin, pitavastatin provided greater decreases in total cholesterol and apolipoprotein B in all dose groups (p < 0.001) and triglycerides in the low-dose (p = 0.001) and higher-dose (p = 0.016) groups, and greater increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the intermediate-dose (p = 0.013) and higher-dose (p = 0.023) groups. The proportions of patients achieving the European Atherosclerosis Society target with pitavastatin and pravastatin, respectively, were: low doses, 59.9 and 37.9%; intermediate doses, 79.5 and 51.0%; higher doses, 88.1 and 65.7% (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Both statins were well tolerated, with no reports of myopathy or rhabdomyolysis. CONCLUSION: Pitavastatin provides superior efficacy and comparable tolerability to pravastatin in elderly patients.

Long-term efficacy of pitavastatin versus simvastatin.

INTRODUCTION: Pitavastatin is a novel, potent, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor. This study compared the long-term efficacy of pitavastatin and simvastatin in dyslipidemic patients at high risk of coronary heart disease. METHODS: A 44-week blinded extension study was conducted at 24 centers in five European countries for patients who had previously completed a 12-week randomized, double-blind core study in which they received pitavastatin 4 mg or simvastatin 40 mg once daily. Patients originally randomized to pitavastatin 4 mg continued at the same dose throughout the extension study (n = 121). In simvastatin-treated patients (n = 57), the dose was increased to 80 mg in five patients who had not attained the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) target for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) during the core study. Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients attaining the NCEP and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) LDL-C targets, and the NCEP target for non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) at weeks 16 and 44. RESULTS: Of the 178 patients who entered the extension study, 156 patients (109 in the pitavastatin group, 47 in the simvastatin groups) completed the 44-week treatment period. At week 44, NCEP and EAS targets were attained by 81.7% and 84.2%, respectively, of pitavastatin-treated patients, and 75.4% and 73.7%, respectively, of simvastatin-treated patients. NCEP targets for non-HDL-C were achieved by 79.2% of pitavastatin-treated patients and 70.2% of simvastatin-treated patients. Both treatments were generally well tolerated, but pitavastatin 4 mg was associated with a numerically lower incidence of discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events (5.8% vs. 10.5% of patients) and a lower rate of myalgia (4.1% vs. 12.3%) compared with simvastatin 40-80 mg. CONCLUSION: Pitavastatin 4 mg provides long-term efficacy similar to that of simvastatin 40-80 mg. Further studies should ascertain whether trends suggesting that pitavastatin may exhibit a more favorable long-term tolerability profile are statistically significant.

Comparative efficacy of pitavastatin and simvastatin in high-risk patients: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the proven efficacy of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) in lowering total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), many patients do not reach recommended lipid targets. This study compared pitavastatin, a new and highly effective statin, and simvastatin in patients at high risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of pitavastatin to simvastatin. METHODS: The study was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, active-controlled study conducted at 37 centers in five European countries. Following a dietary run-in period of 6-8 weeks, patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or combined dyslipidemia and at least two CHD risk factors were randomized 2:1 to receive pitavastatin 4 mg or simvastatin 40 mg once daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the change in LDL-C from baseline. RESULTS: In total, 355 patients were randomized, 236 to pitavastatin and 119 to simvastatin; 330 patients (223 and 107, respectively) completed the study. In the pitavastatin group, mean (± SD) reduction in LDL-C concentrations from baseline was -44.0 ± 12.8% compared with -43.8 ± 14.4% in the simvastatin group. The adjusted mean treatment difference (simvastatin--pitavastatin) was 0.31% (95% confidence interval -2.47, 3.09; P = 0.829), which was within the predefined noninferiority range. More than 80% of patients in each group reached recommended LDL-C targets. Pitavastatin provided a greater increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; 6.8% vs. 4.5%; P = 0.083) and a significantly greater decrease in triglycerides (-19.8% vs. -14.8%; P = 0.044) than simvastatin. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Pitavastatin 4 mg is as effective as simvastatin 40 mg in lowering LDL-C in dyslipidemic patients at high risk of CHD, with additional effects on HDL-C and triglycerides. Therefore, pitavastatin may be appropriate for the management of dyslipidemic patients at high cardiovascular risk.

Comparison of the pharmacokinetics of pitavastatin by formulation and ethnic group: an open-label, single-dose, two-way crossover pharmacokinetic study in healthy Caucasian and Japanese men.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pitavastatin is a highly effective lipid-lowering drug (approved dose range 1-4 mg/day) with a distinctive metabolic pathway that has a low potential for drug interactions. The efficacy and safety of pitavastatin have been characterized in a broad clinical development programme conducted initially in Japanese patients. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence of the European (EU) and Japanese (JP) formulations of pitavastatin 2 mg in healthy Japanese and Caucasian men, and to assess whether the bioavailability of each formulation was similar in the two ethnic groups. METHODS: In this open-label, single-dose, two-way crossover pharmacokinetic study, healthy men aged 18-45 years were randomized to receive: the JP formulation of pitavastatin 2 mg followed by the EU formulation; or the EU formulation of pitavastatin 2 mg followed by the JP formulation. The main outcome measures were maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) during a dosage interval (τ) [AUC(τ)] and AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC(∞)) for pitavastatin and its main (inactive) metabolite pitavastatin lactone. Plasma concentrations of pitavastatin and pitavastatin lactone were determined using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. RESULTS: Forty-eight Caucasian and 12 Japanese men completed the study. Compared with the Japanese men, the Caucasian men were of greater mean body weight (76.1 vs 58.9 kg), height (180.8 vs 170.8 cm) and body mass index (23.2 vs 20.2 kg/m2). Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of the pharmacokinetic parameters of pitavastatin demonstrated bioequivalence of the EU and JP formulations: GMRs and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) fell within the range 80-125% in Caucasian men and in Caucasian and Japanese groups combined for pitavastatin C(max) (combined analysis: GMR 103.1% [90% CI 96.0, 110.6]), AUC(τ) (GMR 99.6% [90% CI 95.5, 104.0]), and AUC(∞) (GMR 104.2% [90% CI 96.2, 112.8]). After adjusting for age and body weight in the pooled formulation analysis, bioequivalence between the Caucasian and Japanese groups was similarly demonstrated for pitavastatin C(max) (GMR 96.8% [90% CI 90.2, 103.8]), AUC(τ) (GMR 98.3% [90% CI 94.2, 102.7]) and AUC(∞) (GMR 85.9% [90% CI 81.1, 91.0]). CONCLUSION: The EU and JP formulations of pitavastatin showed pharmacokinetic bioequivalence, and there were no clinically relevant differences in exposure to pitavastatin between Caucasian and Japanese participants when differences in body weight were taken into account.

Long-term treatment with pitavastatin is effective and well tolerated by patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or combined dyslipidemia.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of pitavastatin 4mg once daily during 52 weeks treatment. The secondary objectives were to assess the effect on lipid and lipoprotein fractions and ratios, and LDL-C target attainment. METHODS: Patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or combined dyslipidemia who had previously received pitavastatin, atorvastatin or simvastatin for 12 weeks during double-blind phase III studies received open-label pitavastatin 4mg once daily for up to 52 weeks. RESULTS: Investigators at 72 sites enrolled 1353 patients who received at least one dose of pitavastatin 4mg; 155 (11.5%) patients discontinued treatment during the 52-week follow up. The proportion of patients achieving NCEP and EAS LDL-C targets at week 52 was 74.0% and 73.5% respectively. The reduction in LDL-C levels seen during the double-blind studies was sustained, while HDL-C levels rose continually during follow up, ultimately increasing by 14.3% over the initial baseline. Changes in other efficacy parameters (triglycerides, total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, Apo-A1 and Apo-B, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, oxidised LDL) and ratios (total cholesterol: HDL-C, non-HDL-C:HDL-C and Apo-B:Apo-A1) were sustained during 52-weeks treatment compared with the end of the double-blind studies. Pitavastatin was well tolerated: 4.1% of patients withdrew from the study due to treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and none of the serious adverse events were considered treatment-related. No clinically significant abnormalities were associated with pitavastatin in routine laboratory variables, urinalysis, vital signs or 12-lead ECG. There were no reports of myopathy, myositis or rhabdomyolysis. The most common TEAEs were: increased creatine phosphokinase (5.8%), nasopharyngitis (5.4%) and myalgia (4.1%). CONCLUSION: Pitavastatin 4mg once daily was effective and well tolerated during 52-weeks treatment in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or combined dyslipidemia. Around three-quarters of patients achieved NCEP and EAS LDL-C targets at week 52, HDL-C levels rose continually during follow up, while changes in other efficacy parameters were sustained over the year-long study.

Comparison of pitavastatin with simvastatin in primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined dyslipidaemia.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to demonstrate equivalence of pitavastatin compared with simvastatin in the reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined dyslipidaemia. Secondary objectives included achievement of National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel (NECP) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) LDL-C goals, comparison of other lipid parameters, and assessment of safety and tolerability of the two statins. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective, randomised, active-controlled double-blind, double-dummy, 12-week therapy trial was conducted in 857 patients with either primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined dyslipidaemia. The trial was designed to demonstrate the equivalence (non-inferiority of presumed equipotent doses) of pitavastatin compared with simvastatin. Patients were randomised to one of four groups: pitavastatin 2 mg/day, pitavastatin 4 mg/day, simvastatin 20 mg/day or simvastatin 40 mg/day. The main study limitation was restriction of the study population to those eligible for administration of simvastatin. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT# NCT00309777. RESULTS: Pitavastatin 2 mg showed significantly better reductions of LDL-C (p = 0.014), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) (p = 0.021) and total cholesterol (TC) (p = 0.041) compared with simvastatin 20 mg and led to more patients achieving the EAS LDL-C treatment target. Reduction of LDL-C in the pitavastatin 2 mg group was 39% compared with 35% in the simvastatin 20 mg group. Pitavastatin 4 mg showed similar effects on all lipid parameters to simvastatin 40 mg. The reductions in LDL-C were 44% and 43%, respectively. The safety profiles of pitavastatin and simvastatin were similar at the two dose levels. Pitavastatin was considered superior to simvastatin in terms of percent reduction of LDL-C in the lower dose group comparison and proved to be equivalent to simvastatin in percent reduction of LDL-C in the higher-dose group. CONCLUSION: As compared with simvastatin, an established first-line lipid-lowering agent, pitavastatin is an efficacious treatment choice in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia or combined dyslipidaemia.

Pregabalin drug interaction studies: lack of effect on the pharmacokinetics of carbamazepine, phenytoin, lamotrigine, and valproate in patients with partial epilepsy.

PURPOSE: Pregabalin (PGB) is an alpha2-delta ligand with demonstrated efficacy in epilepsy, neuropathic pain, and anxiety disorders. PGB is highly efficacious as adjunctive therapy in patients with refractory partial seizures. METHODS: Given its efficacy as adjunctive therapy, the potential for interaction of PGB with other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) was assessed in patients with partial epilepsy in open-label, multiple-dose studies. Patients received PGB, 600 mg/day (200 mg q8h) for 7 days, in combination with their individualized maintenance monotherapy with valproate (VPA), phenytoin (PHT), lamotrigine (LTG), or carbamazepine (CBZ). RESULTS: Trough steady-state concentrations of CBZ (and its epoxide metabolite), PHT, LTG, and VPA were unaffected by concomitant PGB administration. Likewise, PGB steady-state pharmacokinetic parameter values were similar among patients receiving CBZ, PHT, LTG, or VPA and, in general, were similar to those observed historically in healthy subjects receiving PGB alone. The PGB-AED combinations were generally well tolerated. PGB may be added to VPA, LTG, PHT, or CBZ therapy without concern for pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions.