Search

Objective: To report the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) treatment in reducing focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS)., Methods: Data were pooled from 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of adjunctive ESL in patients with focal seizures. Patients treated with 800 or 1200 mg/day ESL and who experienced ≥ 1 FBTCS during baseline were included. Efficacy was measured using FBTCS standardized seizure frequency (SSF), responder rates (≥50%, ≥75%, and 100%), and time to first FBTCS. Adverse events (AEs) were tabulated for each subgroup., Results: Of the original 1447 patients, 438 patients in the safety population were included with ≥ 1 FBTCS at baseline (efficacy population, n = 429). Patients with ≥ 2 FBTCS (safety, n = 354; efficacy, n = 346) and ≥ 3 FBTCS (safety, n = 294; efficacy, n = 288) at baseline were also analyzed. The 1200 mg/day ESL group experienced lower least squares mean SSF vs placebo in patients with ≥ 1 baseline FBTCS (P = 0.0395) and ≥ 3 baseline FBTCS (P = 0.0091). The 50% responder rates improved for 1200 mg/day ESL vs placebo (≥1 FBTCS, P = 0.005; ≥2 FBTCS, P = 0.0063; ≥3 FBTCS, P = 0.0016). The 75% responder rates improved with 1200 mg/day ESL vs placebo (≥1 FBTCS, P = 0.0315; ≥2 FBTCS, P = 0.0215; ≥3 FBTCS, P = 0.0099), and with 800 mg/day ESL for ≥ 2 FBTCS at baseline (P = 0.0486). The 100% responder rate was higher in patients treated with 1200 mg/day ESL (not significant). Time to first FBTCS was longer with both 800 (P = 0.0008) and 1200 mg/day (P = 0.0020) ESL vs placebo for the ≥ 1 FBTCS subgroup, and with 1200 mg/day ESL for ≥ 2 FBTCS (P = 0.0060) and ≥ 3 FBTCS (P = 0.0152) subgroups. Overall, AEs occurred at similar rates across subgroups, and were lower than the original RCTs., Conclusion: Adjunctive ESL produced a robust response in patients with FBTCS, a seizure type associated with SUDEP and high injury rates. Adjunctive ESL was well tolerated in patients who experienced FBTCS., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest SC: consulting/advisory board: Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., UCB, Inc., SK Life Science, Inc., speaker: Eisai Co., Ltd, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., UCB, Inc., SK Life Science, Inc. SG, DC, DH, YZ, TG: employee, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. JM, LM: employee, BIAL-PORTELA & C.ª, S.A., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Rapid and sustained clinical responses are critical in improving long-term outcomes in epilepsy. While a 50 % reduction from baseline in standardized seizure frequency (SSF) is often cited as a measure of clinically meaningful efficacy, sustained response (SR) is an alternative method that allows the assessment of onset and durability of the response. Time to sustained response in SSF of ≥ 50 %, ≥ 75 %, ≥ 90 %, and 100 % was assessed for pooled data from 3 similar randomized clinical trials of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL). Patients with focal seizures on stable doses of 1-2 antiseizure medications were randomized to placebo, ESL 800 mg/day, or ESL 1200 mg/day. SR50, SR75, SR90, and SR100 were defined as a ≥ 50 %, ≥ 75 %, ≥ 90 %, and 100 % reduction, respectively, in SSF compared to baseline occurring anytime during the 12-week maintenance period, sustained through the end of the maintenance period. Safety signals were assessed for patients with SR50 onset within the first 2 weeks of the maintenance period (early responders) and any point following the first 2 weeks (later responders). A total of 1221 patients were included in this analysis. SR50 was achieved as early as Day 1 (placebo, 4.7 %; ESL 800 mg/day, 8.8 %; ESL 1200 mg/day, 10.4 %). After 84 days, SR50 was achieved by 32.1 % of the placebo group, 46.9 % of the ESL 800 mg/day group (p = 0.0002 vs placebo), and 53.7 % of the ESL 1200 mg/day group (p < 0.0001 vs placebo). Both ESL groups demonstrated earlier SR50 onset compared with placebo (p < 0.0001). Time to SR50 onset was not statistically different between the 800 and 1200 mg/day ESL dose groups. SR75 (p = 0.0001), SR90 (p = 0.0019), and SR100 (p = 0.0014) were achieved significantly earlier in the ESL 1200 mg/day groups vs placebo. SR75 was achieved significantly earlier in the ESL 800 mg/day group vs placebo (p = 0.0188), while achievements of SR90 (p = 0.0525) and SR100 (p = 0.0540) trended toward earlier occurrence. A greater proportion of patients in the ESL groups compared to the placebo group achieved an SR50 during the maintenance period, and those patients in the ESL groups also achieved SR50 and SR75 sooner than placebo treated patients. Additionally, patients treated with the higher ESL dose achieved SR90 and SR100 sooner than those treated with placebo., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

By controlling seizures, anti-seizure medications can improve health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Data from a post-hoc pooled analysis of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) was used to describe HRQOL measures, including overall quality of life, seizure worry, emotional well-being, energy/fatigue, cognitive functioning, medication effects, social function, and overall score over a period of up to one year. Patients who completed a double-blind treatment phase (Part 1) of these trials were eligible to enter the open label extension (OLE; Part 2). Patients who continued into the OLE initiated adjunctive ESL at 800 mg/day for 1 month before investigators could titrate dosages based on efficacy and tolerability. HRQOL was measured at baseline and at the last assessment using the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory (QOLIE-31) in all patients who entered the 1-year OLE and in patients who completed the 1-year OLE. The mean QOLIE-31 scores and mean change in scores were analyzed using paired t-tests. The percentage of patients with improvements in QOLIE-31 scores beyond the minimally important change (MIC) threshold from baseline to end of 1-year OLE is described. Of 1410 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 1120 patients continued to part 2, and 795 patients completed the OLE. In patients who entered the OLE, mean improvements in scores for seizure worry, overall quality of life, emotional well-being, medication side effects, social functioning, and total score were statistically significant. In patients who completed the OLE, the mean change to final assessment was statistically significantly improved for all QOLIE categories. In patients who entered the OLE with a final assessment, the percentage of patients meeting the MIC for social functioning was the highest (46.9%), followed by medication effects (44.9%), and seizure worry (42.9%). Patients who completed the OLE with a final assessment found a similar rank ordering in QOLIE scale improvements compared with those who entered the OLE with a final assessment. For both sets of patient groups, the least number of subjects met MIC criteria for the energy/fatigue QOLIE category. Treatment with therapeutic doses of adjunctive ESL in patients with focal seizures was associated with improvements in HRQOL for a period of up to one year., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: SRK has nothing to disclose. DC, DH, and TG are employees of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. HG and AP are employees of Bial-Portela & C.(a), S.A., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To study the association between initiation of first adjunctive therapy with eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) vs. brivaracetam (BRV) on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and charges among patients with treated focal seizures (FS)., Materials and Methods: Symphony Health's Integrated Dataverse (IDV) claims data (1 April 2015 to 30 June 2018) were used to identify two cohorts as first adjunctive therapy with ESL or BRV following a generic anti-seizure drug (ASD). The index date was the earliest claim for a new ESL or BRV prescription. Key inclusion criteria were only 1 generic ASD in the 12 months before the index date; ≥1 medical claim with an FS diagnosis. Unit of analysis was the 90-day person-time-block. Changes in HCRU and charges were assessed using a difference-in-differences framework. Both unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed. The adjusted model utilized person-specific fixed effects and propensity score-based weighting to control for differences in baseline covariates. Bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for charge outcomes., Results: 208 and 137 patients initiated first adjunctive therapy with ESL (43.7 years, 51.9% female) or BRV (39.3 years, 51.8% female). Patients in the ESL cohort had numerically larger reductions in all-cause and FS-related inpatient hospitalizations and outpatient visits and FS-related emergency department visits. Compared to patients initiating BRV, patients treated with ESL had significantly larger reductions in total charges (-$3,446, CI: -$13,716, -$425), all-cause (-$3,166, CI: -$13,991, -$323) and FS-related (-$2,969, CI: -$21,547, -$842) medical charges, all-cause (-$3,397, CI: -$15,676, -$818) and FS-related (-$2,863, CI: -$19,707, -$787) outpatient charges, and non-ASD-related prescription charges (-$420, CI: -$1,058, -$78)., Limitations: Claims may be missing, or miscoded; outcomes may be influenced by variables not accounted for in the analysis; only information on submitted charges was included., Conclusions: Among patients with FS, initiation of first adjunctive therapy with ESL was associated with significantly larger reductions in medical and non-ASD-related prescriptions charges compared to BRV.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate long-term safety and tolerability outcomes in two open-label extension (OLE) studies of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in children with focal seizures., Methods: Safety data from patients aged 4-17 years in OLEs of Studies 2093-208 and -305 were pooled and analyzed. Studies 208 and 305 were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive treatment with ESL in children with focal seizures refractory to treatment with 1-2 antiseizure drugs; patients could continue into uncontrolled OLEs (up to 5 years total duration). The OLEs evaluated the safety and tolerability of ESL (10-30 mg/kg/day; maximum 1200 mg/day)., Results: The 1-year OLE and post-1-year OLE safety populations comprised 337 and 177 ESL-treated patients, respectively. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) with ESL was 64.1% during the 1-year OLE and 52.5% during the post-1-year OLE. Nasopharyngitis, partial seizures, vomiting, pyrexia, headache, somnolence, and respiratory tract infection were the most frequently reported TEAEs during the 1-year OLE. The overall incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) was 8.9% during the 1-year OLE and 10.2% during the post-1-year OLE. Partial seizures (1.2%) and pneumonia (1.2%) were the most frequently reported serious AEs during the 1-year OLE. The overall incidence of TEAEs leading to discontinuation was 4.2% during the 1-year OLE and 0.6% during the post-1-year OLE. Partial seizures (1.5%) was the most frequently reported TEAE leading to discontinuation during the 1-year OLE., Conclusions: Overall, long-term treatment with ESL was generally well tolerated in pediatric patients aged 4-17 years with focal seizures. TEAEs were comparable to those observed in adults with no new events of concern., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest RS reports employment at the University of California; receiving honoraria from Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., Supernus, Eisai, Greenwich Biosciences, UCB, LivaNova, BioMarin, and Encoded; receiving consulting fees from Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., Supernus, UCB, BioMarin, Encoded, West Therapeutic Development, and Aquestive Therapeutics; and receiving grants or funds from SK Life Science. FK reports being on advisory councils or committees and receiving honoraria from BIAL and Eisai; and receiving grants from Action Medical Research. GH reports being on advisory councils or committees for Eisai (Data Safety Monitoring Board), Marinus, Ovid, and Zogenix. JEP-G reports being on an advisory council or committee for and receiving honoraria and consulting fees from Aquestive, Eisai, Greenwich, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., Supernus, and UCB. JW reports receiving grants from Shainberg Foundation, Mallinckrodt, LivaNova, Eisai, Aquestive, Greenwich, Neuralis, Zogenix, and NeuroPace; consultancy for West, Mallinckrodt, Eisai, Supernus, Aquestive, Greenwich, Neuralis, and BioMarin; and is a speaker's bureau member for Mallinckrodt, LivaNova, Eisai, Supernus, Greenwich, UCB, and BioMarin. HG and JM report employment with BIAL – Portela & Cª, S.A. DC, RT, and TG report employment with Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc. DB reports that at the time of the research, he was an employee of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc.; and currently receives consulting fees from Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate cutaneous allergic reactions in clinical trials of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) for focal seizures., Materials and Methods: Data were analyzed from three phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive ESL in adults (placebo, n = 426; ESL, n = 1021) and two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (and open-label extensions [OLEs]) of adjunctive ESL in children aged 4-17 years (placebo, n = 160; ESL, n = 202; OLE, n = 337)., Results: Adult studies: Rash (ESL 1.9%, placebo 0.9%) and pruritus (ESL 1.2%, placebo 0.9%) were the most frequent rash-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Most rash-related TEAEs were mild or moderate in severity. Incidence of rash increased with increasing ESL dose, but was not higher for patients who initiated treatment with higher ESL doses. Pediatric studies: Allergic dermatitis (ESL 3.0%, placebo 0) and rash (controlled studies: ESL 1.0%, placebo 1.3%; OLE periods: ESL ≤1.2%) were the most frequent rash-related TEAEs. There was one case of DRESS in the ESL group. Most rash-related TEAEs were mild or moderate in severity and judged as not related to treatment with ESL., Conclusions: Serious skin rashes were rare during adult and pediatric clinical trials of ESL. Although the incidence of rash with ESL was low, it is important for patients/caregivers to be made aware of the potential signs and symptoms associated with serious skin rashes., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in pediatric patients (aged 4-17 years) with refractory focal seizures., Methods: Pooled safety data from patients aged 4-17 years in Study 208 (NCT01527513) and Study 305 (NCT00988156) were analyzed. Both were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of ESL as adjunctive treatment in pediatric patients with refractory focal seizures receiving 1 or 2 antiepileptic drugs. Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), TEAEs leading to discontinuation, and TEAEs of special interest were evaluated., Results: The safety population comprised 362 patients (placebo, n = 160; ESL, n = 202). The overall incidence of TEAEs was similar between the ESL (67.8%) and placebo groups (65.6%), with no clear dose-response relationship. The most frequently reported TEAEs with ESL were headache, somnolence, vomiting, and diplopia. Overall incidences of SAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation were higher with ESL versus placebo (9.9% vs 5.0% and 5.9% vs 2.5%, respectively). The majority of SAEs with ESL occurred in Study 305. Two deaths were reported, 1 with ESL (0.5%) due to cluster seizures (resulting in herniation of the cerebellar tonsils) and 1 with placebo (0.6%) due to asphyxia. TEAEs related to allergic reaction, hyponatremia, hypothyroidism, cytopenia, seizure exacerbation, cognitive dysfunction, psychiatric disorders, or suicide occurred infrequently (<9%)., Conclusion: Adjunctive ESL was generally well tolerated in children aged 4-17 years with focal seizures. The safety profile of ESL in children was comparable to that observed in adults.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) monotherapy on markers of bone and lipid metabolism., Methods: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of data pooled from two Phase III, dose-blind, conversion-to-ESL (1600 mg and 1200 mg) monotherapy studies in patients with focal seizures. Laboratory measurements included lipids (total cholesterol [TC]; high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C]; low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; and triglycerides) and markers of bone metabolism (alkaline phosphatase; 25-hydroxyvitamin D; osteocalcin; and parathyroid hormone [PTH]); measurements were taken at baseline, Week 18, and Month 12, and analyzed according to enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAEDs) use at baseline (+EIAED and -EIAED subgroups)., Results: Data from 337 treatment-compliant patients were used for the Week 18 analyses (+EIAED subgroup, n = 119; -EIAED subgroup, n = 218); data from 161 treatment-compliant patients were used for the Month 12 analyses (+EIAED subgroup, n = 53; -EIAED subgroup, n = 108). At baseline, alkaline phosphatase and PTH concentrations were higher in the + EIAED versus -EIAED subgroup. Changes from baseline in markers of bone turnover were generally insignificant, except for some elevation in alkaline phosphatase in the -EIAED subgroup (18 weeks and 12 months) and osteocalcin in both subgroups (18 weeks only). Regarding lipids, TC and HDL-C concentrations were higher in the + EIAED versus -EIAED subgroup at baseline. Concentrations of markers of lipid metabolism fell in the + EIAED group and rose in the -EIAED group, reaching very similar values that were intermediate between the -EIAED and + EIAED baseline values., Conclusions: Based on this retrospective analysis, ESL seems to have had only a modest and primarily clinically insignificant impact on plasma lipids. More prospective data are needed to definitively ascertain the effects of ESL on bone metabolism., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) monotherapy in adults with focal seizures (FS)., Methods: Study 050 was a long-term, multicenter, open-label (OL) safety extension of two conversion-to-ESL monotherapy studies in adults with refractory FS. After participating in Study 045 or 046, patients started on ESL 1600 mg once daily (QD) (or 1200 mg if they previously had a dose reduction), and could adjust the dose 400 mg/week to a dose between 800-2400 mg QD. Patients could add up to two additional antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). This post-hoc analysis focuses on the actual monotherapy subgroup, which included patients in Studies 045/046/050 who did not add additional AEDs. Study endpoints included treatment retention time, time on ESL monotherapy, change in standardized seizure frequency (SSF), change in quality of life (QoL) in epilepsy (QOLIE-31) and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores, and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); serious adverse events (SAEs), TEAEs leading to discontinuation, and TEAEs related to allergic reaction, hyponatremia and thyroid function were also evaluated., Results: There were 274 patients in the Study 050 full intent-to-treat (ITT) population and 140 patients in the actual monotherapy subgroup. Median treatment retention time and time on ESL monotherapy were both >5 years. Median reduction in SSF from baseline was 66.4% in the full ITT population and 78.3% in the actual monotherapy subgroup; responder (≥50% reduction in SSF) rates were 62.4% and 74.3%, respectively. QOLIE-31 scores increased from baseline in the full ITT population and the actual monotherapy subgroup (4.1- and 7.5-point increases, respectively). MADRS scores decreased from baseline in both the full ITT population and the actual monotherapy subgroup (0.7- and 2.9-point decreases, respectively). TEAEs occurred in 85.4% of patients in the full ITT population and 81.4% of patients in the actual monotherapy subgroup. Incidences of SAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation, as well as dizziness, depression, fall, partial seizures with secondary generalization, and complex partial seizures, were higher in the full ITT population than in the actual monotherapy subgroup. Allergic reactions, hyponatremia, and hypothyroidism were infrequent, particularly in the actual monotherapy subgroup., Conclusions: The results of this post-hoc analysis suggest that long-term treatment with ESL was effective and well tolerated, both as a monotherapy and in combination with other AEDs for FS. QoL and tolerability appeared to be better, and incidence of depression lower, in the patient population taking ESL as a monotherapy, compared with the population that included patients taking ESL as an adjunctive therapy., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine the frequency of hyponatremia and potentially related symptoms in clinical trials of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in adults with focal- (partial-) onset seizures., Methods: This post hoc, exploratory analysis included data from three controlled phase 3 trials of adjunctive ESL (400-1200 mg once daily), two phase 3 trials of ESL monotherapy (1200-1600 mg once daily), and their open-label extension studies. Exploratory endpoints included clinical laboratory measurements of serum sodium concentrations ([Na + ]), incidences of hyponatremia-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and incidences of TEAEs that are potential symptoms of hyponatremia., Results: The controlled trials of adjunctive ESL and ESL monotherapy included 1447 (placebo, n = 426; ESL, n = 1021) and 365 (ESL, n = 365) patients, respectively; 639 and 274 patients continued onto uncontrolled, open-label extensions. In the controlled and uncontrolled trials ≤3.3% of patients taking ESL had a minimum postdose [Na + ] measurement ≤125 mEq/L, <9% had a >10 mEq/L decrease in [Na + ] from baseline, <6% had a hyponatremia-related TEAE, and <2% discontinued the controlled trials due to a hyponatremia-related TEAE. Hyponatremia appeared to be more frequent in the monotherapy (vs adjunctive therapy) trials; in the controlled trials of adjunctive ESL and ESL monotherapy, incidence generally increased with increasing ESL dose. The majority of patients with an investigator-reported TEAE of "hyponatremia" or "blood sodium decreased" did not have a corresponding laboratory [Na + ] measurement ≤125 mEq/L. Some symptoms potentially related to hyponatremia (including nausea and vomiting) were more frequent in patients with a minimum postdose [Na + ] measurement ≤125 mEq/L., Significance: Reductions in serum sodium concentrations and hyponatremia-related TEAEs occurred in a small number of patients taking ESL. Suspected hyponatremia should be confirmed and monitored via [Na + ] measurements., (© 2019 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Objective: To evaluate and compare the effects of concomitant lamotrigine (LTG) or carbamazepine (CBZ) on the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in patients taking adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) for focal (partial-onset) seizures (FS)., Methods: These post-hoc analyses of data pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive ESL (BIA-2093-301, -302 and -304) included adults (≥16 years) with FS refractory to 1-3 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Patients were randomized equally to placebo, ESL 400 mg (Studies 301 and 302 only), 800 mg, or 1200 mg once daily (8-week baseline, 2-week titration, and 12-week maintenance periods). TEAEs, TEAEs leading to discontinuation, and serious AEs (SAEs) were evaluated in patients taking, or not taking, LTG (excluding those taking CBZ or phenytoin [PHT]; i.e., the +LTG and -LTG/-CBZ subgroups), or CBZ (excluding those taking LTG or PHT; i.e., the +CBZ and -LTG/-CBZ subgroups) at baseline., Results: LTG was used concomitantly by 248 patients (+LTG; placebo, n = 81; ESL, n = 167) and CBZ by 613 patients (+CBZ; placebo, n = 172; ESL, n = 441); 361 patients were taking neither LTG nor CBZ (-LTG/-CBZ; placebo, n = 109; ESL, n = 252). The overall incidence of TEAEs with ESL (any dose) was numerically higher for +CBZ (77%) than for +LTG (73%) or -LTG/-CBZ (68%; statistical significance not tested). Among patients taking ESL, dizziness, diplopia, and vomiting were reported more frequently in the +CBZ subgroup (30%, 14%, and 10%, respectively) than in the +LTG (16%, 8%, 5%) or -LTG/-CBZ (11%, 3%, 5%) subgroups. The overall incidence of TEAEs leading to discontinuation with ESL was higher for +CBZ (21%) than for +LTG (13%) or -LTG/-CBZ (15%). Dizziness leading to discontinuation with ESL was reported more frequently in the +CBZ subgroup than in the +LTG or -LTG/-CBZ subgroups (9%, 3%, and 3%, respectively). The overall incidence of SAEs in patients taking ESL was comparable across subgroups (+LTG, 5%; +CBZ, 6%; -LTG/-CBZ, 5%). The results were similar when evaluating placebo-adjusted incidences., Conclusion: There was a potential pharmacodynamic interaction between AEDs with a putatively similar mechanism of action, with a seemingly lesser interaction between ESL and LTG versus ESL and CBZ. If combining ESL with LTG or CBZ, clinicians should be aware of the potential risk for an increased incidence of TEAEs typically associated with voltage-gated sodium channel inhibitors (e.g., dizziness, blurred vision, vertigo, diplopia, headache, or vomiting)., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a once-daily oral antiepileptic drug (AED) indicated for partial-onset seizures (POS). ESL pharmacokinetics (PK) and exposure-response analyses were supported by 2 phase 3 conversion to ESL (1200, 1600 mg) monotherapy studies. The PK model development included 10 phase 1-2 studies (ESL 600-1200 mg daily). Seizure diaries were completed daily; subjects exited if seizures worsened. Exposure-response models were developed for time to study exit, probability of seizure freedom, time to first occurrence of dizziness, headache, and nausea; serum sodium levels were explored. A 1-compartment model with first-order absorption/elimination described ESL PK. Clearance and distribution volume were significantly related to body weight and sex. Higher eslicarbazepine minimum concentration (C min ) and use of 1 baseline AED were associated with significantly lower risk of study exit, whereas eslicarbazepine C min was a significant predictor of seizure freedom during the last 4 weeks of monotherapy. Eslicarbazepine exposure and the time to first occurrence of adverse events were not related. A shallow negative relationship described the relationship between change from baseline in serum sodium level and eslicarbazepine exposure. Eslicarbazepine apparent clearance and distribution volume estimates were similar to those reported for ESL adjunctive therapy. Dose adjustment based on body weight was not required. The time to study exit and probability of seizure freedom during the last 4 weeks of monotherapy were weakly related to eslicarbazepine exposure. Because the first occurrence of adverse events or hyponatremia were also not significantly related to eslicarbazepine exposure, dose adjustment using plasma eslicarbazepine concentrations is not supported., (© 2018, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Objective: To evaluate the influence of prior use of carbamazepine (CBZ) and other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) with a putatively similar mechanism of action (inhibition of voltage-gated sodium channels; VGSCs) on seizure outcomes and tolerability when converting to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), using data pooled from 2 controlled conversion-to-ESL monotherapy trials (studies: 093-045, 093-046)., Methods: Adults with treatment-resistant focal (partial-onset) seizures were randomized 2:1 to ESL 1600 or 1200 mg once daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was study exit (meeting predefined exit criteria related to worsening seizure control) versus an historical control group. Other endpoints included change in seizure frequency, responder rate, and tolerability. Endpoints were analyzed for subgroups of patients who received CBZ (or any VGSC inhibitor [VGSCi]) during baseline versus those who received other AEDs., Results: Of 365 patients in the studies, 332 were evaluable for efficacy. The higher risk of study exit in the subgroups that received CBZ (or any VGSCi) during baseline, versus other AEDs, was not statistically significant (hazard ratios were 1.49 for +CBZ vs -CBZ [P = .10] and 1.27 for +VGSCi vs. -VGSCi [P = .33]). Reductions in seizure frequency and responder rates were lower in patients who converted from CBZ or other VGSCi compared with those who converted from other AEDs. There were no notable differences in overall tolerability between subgroups, but the incidence of some adverse events (eg, dizziness, somnolence, nausea) differed between subgroups and/or between treatment periods., Significance: Baseline use of CBZ or other major putative VGSC inhibitors did not appear to significantly increase the risk of study exit due to worsening seizure control, or to increase the frequency of side effects when converting to ESL monotherapy. However, bigger improvements in efficacy may be possible in patients converting to ESL monotherapy from an AED regimen that does not include a VGSC inhibitor., (© 2018 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Purpose: To evaluate the effects of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) on lipid metabolism and to determine whether reduced statin exposure during ESL therapy has clinical consequences., Subjects and Methods: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of pooled data for serum lipids (laboratory values) from three phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive ESL therapy (400, 800, or 1200 mg once daily) in patients with treatment-refractory partial-onset seizures. Changes from baseline in serum lipid levels were analyzed according to use of statins and/or enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAEDs) during the baseline period., Key Findings: In total, 426 and 1021 placebo- and ESL-treated patients, respectively, were included in the analysis. With regard to the changes from baseline in serum concentrations, there were statistically significant differences between the placebo and ESL 1200 mg QD groups, for both total cholesterol (TC) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), but the effect sizes were small (+4.1 mg/dL and +1.8 mg/dL, respectively). A small but significant difference in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; -5.0 mg/dL) was observed between the ESL 400 mg QD group and the placebo group. In patients not taking a concomitant EIAED, there were no changes with ESL 400 mg QD, but modest and statistically significant increases in cholesterol fractions (TC, LDL-C and HDL-C) with ESL 800 mg QD (<6 mg/dL) and ESL 1200 mg QD (<10 mg/dL). ESL had no consistent effect on lipids in patients taking a concomitant EIAED. In patients taking statins during baseline, there were no clinically relevant changes in serum lipids during use of ESL, although the subgroups were small., Significance: These results suggest that ESL does not appear to have clinically significant effects on serum lipids, nor does the pharmacokinetic interaction between ESL and statins have an impact on serum lipid concentrations., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine the influence of titration schedule and maintenance dose on the incidence and type of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) associated with adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL)., Methods: Data from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were analyzed. Patients with refractory partial-onset seizures were randomized to maintenance doses of ESL 400, 800, or 1200mg QD (dosing was initiated at 400 or 800mg QD) or placebo. The incidence of TEAEs was analyzed during the double-blind period (2-week titration phase; 12-week maintenance phase), according to the randomized maintenance dose and the titration schedule., Results: 1447 patients were included in the analysis. During the first week of treatment, 62% of patients taking ESL 800mg QD had ≥1 TEAE, vs 35% of those taking 400mg QD and 32% of the placebo group; dizziness, somnolence, nausea, and headache were numerically more frequent in patients taking ESL 800mg than those taking ESL 400mg QD. During the double-blind period, the incidences of common TEAEs were lower in patients who initiated ESL at 400mg vs 800mg QD. For the 800 and 1200mg QD maintenance doses, rates of TEAEs leading to discontinuation were lower in patients who began treatment with 400mg than in those who began taking ESL 800mg QD., Conclusions: Initiation of ESL at 800mg QD is feasible. However, initiating treatment with ESL 400mg QD for 1 or 2 weeks is recommended, being associated with a lower incidence of TEAEs, and related discontinuations. For some patients, treatment may be initiated at 800mg QD, if the need for more immediate seizure reduction outweighs concerns about increased risk of adverse reactions during initiation., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with partial-onset seizures and comorbid cardiovascular disease may concomitantly receive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), an antiepileptic drug, and rosuvastatin, an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor. This study evaluated the effect of multiple-dose ESL on the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of a single dose of rosuvastatin in healthy subjects., Methods: This was a Phase I, single-center, fixed-sequence, open-label study. Healthy subjects received two treatments, in sequence. Treatment A: a single 40mg oral dose of rosuvastatin on Day 1, followed by a washout period (Days 1-4); treatment B: titration of ESL (400-800mg once daily) on Days 5-18, followed by ESL 1200mg once daily on Days 19-35, with a single dose of rosuvastatin (40mg) on Day 32. Subjects then entered a 2-week follow-up period. Plasma concentrations of rosuvastatin were quantified for PK analyses. Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout the study., Results: Thirty-three healthy subjects were enrolled and 30 completed the study. Mean rosuvastatin (standard deviation) t 1/2 was similar when rosuvastatin was used concomitantly with ESL and when it was used alone (26.5 [16.3]h, and 22.4 [9.5]h, respectively). The geometric least squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) of rosuvastatin exposure levels between rosuvastatin used concomitantly with ESL and rosuvastatin used alone were as follows: C max , 64.0% (55.9-73.3%); AUC (0-∞) , 63.0% (57.1-69.4%); and AUC (0-last) , 60.9% (55.2-67.1%). Concomitant use of ESL and rosuvastatin was generally well tolerated., Conclusions: Rosuvastatin exposure was 36-39% lower with steady-state administration of ESL, potentially due to reduced oral bioavailability of rosuvastatin. Consequently, when rosuvastatin is used with ESL, a rosuvastatin dose adjustment may be necessary if a clinically significant change in lipids is noted., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of once-daily (QD) adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL)., Methods: This post-hoc pooled analysis of three randomized, placebo-controlled trials (2093-301, -302, -304) involved adults with refractory partial-onset seizures (POS) receiving 1-3 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). All studies included 8-week baseline, 2-week titration, and 12-week maintenance periods. Patients were randomized equally to placebo, ESL 400mg (studies 301, 302), 800mg, or 1200mg QD. The primary endpoint was standardized seizure frequency (SSF; per 4weeks); secondary endpoints included responder rates (maintenance period), and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), TEAEs leading to discontinuation, serious AEs (SAEs), and deaths., Results: The safety and efficacy analysis populations totaled 1447 and 1410 patients, respectively. SSF was significantly reduced versus placebo with ESL 800mg (p=0.0001) and 1200mg (p<0.0001) but not 400mg (p=0.81). There were no significant interactions between treatment effect and age, gender, race/ethnicity, geographic region, epilepsy duration, or concomitant AED use. Incidences of TEAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation increased with ESL dose. Incidences of the most frequent TEAEs were lower for patients who initiated dosing at 400 versus 800mg QD, regardless of titration regimen and maintenance dose. SAE incidence was <10%; there were 3 deaths (placebo, n=2; ESL 800mg, n=1)., Conclusions: ESL (800 and 1200mg QD) was effective and well tolerated as adjunctive therapy for adults with refractory POS., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) monotherapy., Methods: This post hoc pooled analysis of 2 randomized double-blind studies (093-045 and -046) included adults with partial-onset seizures medically uncontrolled by 1 or 2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Following the baseline period (8 weeks), eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ESL 1,600 mg or 1,200 mg once daily for 18 weeks; the primary endpoint was study exit by meeting predefined exit criteria (signifying worsening seizure control). In each study, treatment was considered effective if the upper 95% confidence limit for exit rate was lower than the historical control threshold (65.3%)., Results: Pooled exit rates were as follows: ESL 1,600 mg = 20.6% (95% confidence interval: 15.6%-26.8%); ESL 1,200 mg = 30.8% (23.0%-40.5%). Use of 2 baseline AEDs or rescue medication, US location, epilepsy duration ≥20 years, and higher maximum baseline seizure frequency were associated with higher exit risks. Median percent reductions in standardized seizure frequency between baseline and the 18-week double-blind period were as follows: ESL 1,600 mg = 43.2%; ESL 1,200 mg = 35.7%; baseline carbamazepine use was associated with smaller reductions. Safety profiles were similar between ESL doses., Conclusions: Exit rates for ESL monotherapy (1,600 mg and 1,200 mg once daily) were lower than the historical control threshold, irrespective of baseline AED use and region, with no additional safety concerns identified. Clinical factors and location clearly influence treatment responses in conversion-to-monotherapy trials., Classification of Evidence: This pooled analysis provides Class IV evidence that for adults with medically uncontrolled partial-onset seizures, ESL monotherapy is well tolerated and effective., (© 2016 American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as monotherapy in North American patients with partial-onset seizures (POS)., Methods: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind "withdrawal to monotherapy" study used historical control data as the comparator. Adults with POS medically uncontrolled by one to two antiepileptic drugs gradually converted to ESL monotherapy. Following an 8-week baseline period, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ESL 1,600 mg (n = 128) or 1,200 mg QD (n = 65) for 18 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients meeting predefined exit criteria (signifying worsening seizure control). Treatment was considered effective if the 95% upper confidence limit (UCL) for the Kaplan-Meier estimated exit rate was lower than the exit rate threshold calculated from the historical control (65.3%)., Results: Kaplan-Meier estimated exit rates were: ESL 1,600 mg, 28.7% (95% CI 21.2-38.1%) and 1,200 mg, 44.4% (32.5-58.3%). The difference between doses was not significant (p = 0.07). For both doses, the 95% UCLs for the exit rate were ˂ 65.3%; ESL monotherapy was considered superior to the historical control. There was no statistically significant increase in the risk of study exit related to carbamazepine use. Nine (7.6%) and five patients (8.3%) remained seizure-free during the 10-week monotherapy period, while taking ESL 1,600 and 1,200 mg, respectively. The reductions in median standardized seizure frequency (seizures per 28 days) between baseline and the 18-week treatment period were: ESL 1,600 mg, 42% and 1,200 mg, 31%. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurring in ≥ 10% of patients were dizziness, headache, fatigue, somnolence, nausea, and nasopharyngitis. The TEAE most frequently leading to discontinuation was hyponatremia (2.1%)., Significance: ESL was efficacious and well tolerated as monotherapy in North American patients, and led to a reduction in seizure frequency. Exit rates for ESL 1,600 and 1,200 mg QD were superior to the historical control; the difference in exit rates between doses was not statistically significant., (© 2015 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Background: Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL, Aptiom®) is a once-daily (QD) anticonvulsant, approved as adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures (POS). It is extensively converted after oral administration to eslicarbazepine, and is believed to exert its effect through inhibition of voltage-gated sodium channels. The possible role of ESL as monotherapy to treat POS has not yet been established., Methods: This study was an 18-week, multicenter, randomized double-blind trial of gradual conversion to ESL monotherapy in adults with POS not well controlled by 1-2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), using historical data as the control. The study comprised an 8-week baseline period, a 2-week titration period, a 6-week AED conversion period, a 10-week monotherapy period, and either a 1-week taper period or optional entry to an open-label extension study. The primary endpoint compared the Kaplan-Meier (KM)-estimated 112-day exit rate with a threshold value calculated from the historical controls., Results: There were 172 randomized patients; 154 (90%) entered the AED conversion period and 121 (70%) completed the study. The KM-estimated exit rates [confidence interval (CI)] were 15.6% [8.1-28.7%] for ESL 1200 mg, and 12.8% [7.5-21.5%] for ESL 1600 mg. The upper limits of the 95% CI KM-estimates were below the pre-specified threshold for historical control of 65.3%, indicating that ESL was efficacious in reducing seizure-related exits, compared with historical control. During the 18-week double-blind treatment period, median reductions in standardized seizure frequency occurred with ESL 1200 mg (36.1%) and ESL 1600 mg (47.5%). The responder rates (a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency from baseline) during the 18-week double-blind period and the monotherapy period, respectively, were 35.2% and 38.9% for ESL 1200 mg, and 46.0% and 46.0% for ESL 1600 mg. The overall adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of ESL., Conclusions: These findings indicate that ESL monotherapy (1200 and 1600 mg QD) was efficacious and well tolerated in this study., Trial Registration: NCT01091662 ; EudraCT No. 2010-018684-42.

IntroductionWe report outcomes from an open-label, non-randomized, 24-week study of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in adults at earlier and later stages of their treatment history for focal seizures, conducted in a real-world clinical setting.MethodsESL was taken as the first adjunctive therapy to levetiracetam (LEV) or lamotrigine (LTG) monotherapy (Arm 1), or as a later adjunctive therapy in treatment-resistant patients (Arm 2). The primary objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of ESL (by retention rates). Secondary objectives were to evaluate efficacy (seizure frequency), safety, tolerability, behavioral changes, mood, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) associated with ESL treatment.ResultsThe modified intent-to-treat population included 96 patients (Arm 1: n = 41; Arm 2: n = 55) and the safety population included 102 patients (Arm 1: n = 44; Arm 2: n = 58). Overall, 81.8 % of patients in Arm 1 and 63.8 % of patients in Arm 2 completed the 24-week maintenance period. Median reductions in standardized seizure frequency (SSF) were markedly higher in Arm 1 (72.8 %) than Arm 2 (22.8 %), as were responder rates (≥50 % reduction in SSF; Arm 1: 62.5 %; Arm 2: 38.5 %) and rates of seizure freedom (Arm 1: 25.0 %; Arm 2: 9.6 %). Efficacy outcomes were generally more favorable in patients taking ESL in combination with LEV versus other anti-seizure medications (ASMs). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; 81 % vs 73 %) and TEAEs leading to discontinuation (16 % vs 2 %) were reported more frequently in Arm 2 than Arm 1, respectively. Serious adverse events were reported infrequently (Arm 1: 0; Arm 2: 7 %). The most common TEAEs were dizziness, nausea, headache, somnolence, fatigue, nasopharyngitis, vomiting, and anxiety. There were no notable changes in depressive symptoms, mood status, or aggression throughout the study. Health and HRQoL scores were generally high at baseline and did not change throughout the study. However, on average, both clinicians and patients perceived improvement in illness over the course of the study.ConclusionsESL was effective and well tolerated both as the first adjunctive therapy to either of the most prescribed first-line ASMs, LEV or LTG, and as a later adjunctive therapy in treatment-resistant patients.

Objective: Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a once‐daily (QD), oral anti‐seizure medication for the treatment of focal (partial‐onset) seizures. Here, we evaluate risk factors for the development of psychiatric treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in clinical trials of adjunctive ESL in adults with focal seizures. Methods: This post‐hoc analysis evaluated data pooled from three Phase III, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trials (BIA‐2093‐301, ‐302, ‐304). After an 8‐week baseline period, patients were randomized equally to receive placebo, ESL 400 mg (not reported here), 800 mg, or 1200 mg QD (up to 2‐week titration; 12‐week maintenance; optional open‐label extension [OLE]). Incidences of psychiatric TEAEs were evaluated according to three separate criteria: medical history of psychiatric disorders (yes/no); baseline use of psychotropic drugs (yes/no); Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score at baseline (0–6: normal; 7–19: mild depression; 20–34: moderate depression). Results: The analysis populations comprised 1251 patients for the controlled study period and 1137 patients for the 1‐year OLE. Psychiatric TEAE incidence was similar between patients taking ESL and placebo in the controlled and OLE study periods and was not related to ESL dose. Psychiatric TEAEs generally occurred more frequently in patients with a medical history of psychiatric disorders, using psychotropic drugs, or with depressive symptoms than in those without a history, not using psychotropic drugs, or with no depressive symptoms. Depression and anxiety were the most frequently reported psychiatric TEAEs. Significance: Overall, in clinical trials of ESL in adults with focal seizures, incidences of psychiatric events were not statistically different between patients taking ESL and placebo, were not related to ESL dose, and generally occurred more frequently in patients with baseline psychiatric symptoms or a history of psychiatric disorders. Long‐term exposure to ESL was not associated with a marked increase in the incidence of psychiatric TEAEs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]