Many drug classes, including antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), are known to cause conduction and rhythm abnormalities (1, 2). While the risk for non-cardiovascular drugs to induce fatal arrhythmias is low, the potential consequences necessitate a rigorous evaluation of all new drugs (3). Lacosamide is a newer AED with demonstrated efficacy and a favorable tolerability profile for the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures (POS) in adults with epilepsy (4–8). Lacosamide is the first AED to selectively enhance slow inactivation of the voltage-gated sodium (Nav)
G. D. Rudd, W. Haverkamp1, J. W. Mason2, T. Wenger3, G. Jay4, D. Hebert5, P. Doty5, R. Horstmann6 1 Department of Cardiology, Campus Virchow Clinic, Charite0 -University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany; 2 Cardiology Division, Department of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT USA; 3Wenger Consulting, Durham, NC USA; 4RAPID Pharmaceuticals, Rockville, MD USA; 5UCB Pharma, Raleigh, NC USA; 6 Consulting Early Development, Bonn, Germany
Key words: cardiac safety; electrocardiographic intervals; lacosamide; partial seizures; PR interval G. D. Rudd, PharmD, 4002 Kildrummy Dr, Durham, NC 27705-6314, USA Tel.: +1 919 452 2238 Fax: +1 919 767 2521 e-mail: [email protected] Accepted for publication April 6, 2015
channel, without any effects on fast inactivation (9, 10). AEDs that act on neuronal Nav channels – including carbamazepine, phenytoin, and lamotrigine – may also act on cardiac sodium channels (11, 12). Prolongation of PR interval has been reported for such drugs (13, 14). Preclinical safety studies of intravenous lacosamide revealed effects on atrioventricular and intraventricular conduction times (15) prompting incorporation of frequent electrocardiograms (ECGs) into the lacosamide clinical development program to fully characterize its cardiac safety profile. Herein, we report data pooled from the three similarly designed, multicenter, randomized, 355
Rudd et al. double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of lacosamide in patients with POS: SP667 (4), SP754 (5), and SP755 (6). Methods Trial design
The pooled trials included an 8-week baseline period followed by randomization to lacosamide 200, 400, 600 mg/day or placebo and a 12-week maintenance phase. Lacosamide was initiated at 50 mg BID and titrated to the randomized dose in 100 mg/day weekly increments. ECG-related exclusion criteria were confirmed clinically significant ECG abnormality (including prolonged QTc); resting heart rate (HR) <45 beats per minute (bpm; SP667) or <50 bpm (SP754/ 755). ECG acquisition and evaluation
Variables included Fridericia-corrected QT interval (QTcF) (16), QRS duration, HR, and PR interval. Three 12-lead ECGs were acquired just prior to randomization. The average of the latter three baseline values for each ECG variable for an individual patient was compared to postrandomization on-treatment ECG values for that patient. Post-randomization, ten single ECGs per patient were acquired 2–4 h after dosing in trial SP667 (the first controlled study of lacosamide in patients with POS in which an ECG was obtained at steady state after each dose titration step and during maintenance treatment). In subsequent trials [SP754 (n = 6 ECGs) and SP755 (n = 5 ECGs)], ECGs could be acquired at any time during the 12-h dosing interval. If a patient developed a treatmentemergent (TE) QTc value >500 ms, an increase in QTc from baseline ≥60 ms, or a clinically significant ECG finding, then the patient was to be withdrawn from the trial. It was the responsibility of the individual investigator to determine whether an ECG finding was clinically significant based on the complete clinical picture of the patient. Adverse Events
Adverse event (AE) data were reviewed to identify potentially cardiac-related AEs. The individual investigator made the judgment regarding whether an AE was reported to be serious or not serious. 356
Post-randomization blood samples were collected under steady-state conditions as close as possible to the acquisition of each ECG. Lacosamide plasma concentrations were determined using a standard method (17). Summary statistics were calculated separately for each of the three POS studies. Statistical analyses
ECG intervals were secondary variables, and thus, the studies were not powered to evaluate interval changes. Summary statistics for changes from baseline and outlier frequency were calculated; no statistical comparisons were performed. Analyses included a mean maximum change value [maximum change value calculated for each patient as maximum absolute value observed at any time during the treatment phase (titration + maintenance) minus the baseline value]. Frequencies of TE ECG diagnostic findings and MedRA preferred terms for AEs relevant to cardiac safety were summarized. Results Patient disposition, demographics, and baseline characteristics
Overall, 1308 patients were randomized to adjunctive lacosamide or placebo (Table 1); 84.4% were also taking two or three concomitant AEDs, most commonly carbamazepine (35%), lamotrigine (31%), and levetiracetam (29%). Over 80% of patients were taking a concomitant sodium channel-blocking AED. Mean lacosamide plasma concentrations from patients who remained in the trial until the end of the 12-week maintenance phase were dose proportional within each study (Table 2). ECG analyses
QTc interval – Comparison of the lacosamide and placebo groups did not show any tendency for lacosamide to increase or decrease QTcF (Tables 3 and 4). A non-serious TE adverse event (TEAE) of QTc prolongation was reported in 0.0%, 0.4%, 0.2%, and 0.5% of patients in the placebo and lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day groups, respectively. Heart rate – Comparison of the lacosamide and placebo groups did not show any tendency for
Clinical cardiac safety of lacosamide Table 1 Patient disposition, demographics, and baseline characteristics for pooled partial-onset seizure population Lacosamide group Placebo (n = 364) Patients completed, 317 (87.1) n (%) Age, mean years (SD) 38.5 (11.3) Female, n (%) 177 (48.6) BMI, mean (SD) kg/m2 26.4 (5.6) Reasons for discontinuation, n (%) Adverse event 19 (5.2) Withdrew consent 12 (3.3) Protocol deviation 5 (1.4) Unsatisfactory 3 (0.8) compliance Lack of efficacy 5 (1.4) Other 2 (0.5) Lost to follow-up 5 (1.4) Concomitant sodium channel AED usea Yes 296 (81.3) No 68 (18.7)
Table 2 Mean lacosamide plasma concentration at the end of the 12-week maintenance phase Trial
200 mg/day (n = 270)
400 mg/day (n = 471)
600 mg/day (n = 203)
38.1 (11.8) 134 (49.6) 25.6 (5.0)
39.2 (12.4) 245 (52.0) 27.5 (6.8)
38.1 (11.2) 111 (54.7) 27.3 (6.4)
Lacosamide actual dose (mg/day)
200 400 600 400 600 200 400
71 67 41 123 35 135 98
Mean SDa (lg/ml) 5.26 9.64 13.63 7.19 9.50 3.77 7.35
2.21 4.16 6.21 2.92 4.29 1.90 3.88
26 11 3 4
(9.6) (4.1) (1.1) (1.5)
81 14 4 7
(17.2) (3.0) (0.8) (1.5)
58 9 5 3
(28.6) (4.4) (2.5) (1.5)
3 (1.1) 2 (0.7) 1 (0.4)
3 (0.6) 3 (0.6) 0
2 (1.0) 1 (0.5) 0
219 (81.1) 51 (18.9)
388 (82.4) 83 (17.6)
174 (85.7) 29 (14.3)
a Sodium channel AED use includes carbamazepine, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, and phenytoin derivatives.
lacosamide to decrease or increase HR (Table 3). Treatment-emergent bradycardia (<60 bpm) was the most common ECG finding and had a similar frequency in the placebo and lacosamide groups (Table 4). TEAEs of bradycardia or sinus bradycardia were reported in 0.3%, 0.4%, 0.4%, and 0.0% of the patients in the placebo and lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day groups, respectively; sinus tachycardia or increased HR was reported in 0.0%, 0.0%, 0.6%, and 0.0% of patients in the same treatment groups. Serious AEs of sinus bradycardia were reported for one placebo patient and one lacosamide patient who had a HR of 68 bpm at baseline and HR of 47 bpm and mild asthenia while taking 200 mg/day during titration. After taking 300 mg/day for 2 days, lacosamide was discontinued, and after 3 days, HR was 49 bpm. After 40 days, asthenia continued and HR was 59 bpm. QRS duration – Change from baseline – Mean change from baseline in QRS duration was comparable among patients treated with placebo (0.0 ms) or lacosamide 200 mg/day (0.2 ms) and 400 mg/day (0.4 ms; Table 3). In the lacosamide 600 mg/day group, a mean increase of 2.3 ms was observed. The placebo-subtracted mean maximum QRS change from baseline values (derived from Table 3) were 0.9, 0.5, and
Samples taken 2–4 h post-dose in trial SP667 and at any time during the dosing interval in trials SP754 and SP755.
0.4 ms for the lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/ day groups, respectively. Outlier analysis – At baseline, 24.7%, 1.0%, and 0.1% of patients had QRS duration values of >100, >120, and >140 ms. The frequency of TE QRS duration >100 ms was 29.5%, 34.4%, 39.7%, and 29.0%, and >120 ms was 1.4%, 0.0%, 2.6%, and 3.5% for the placebo and lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day groups. Two placebo patients (0.6%) and one 400 mg/day patient (0.2%) had a TE QRS duration >140 ms. The lacosamide patient had a prolonged baseline QRS value of 132 ms, right bundle branch block (BBB) before and during treatment, and QRS values of 143 and 141 ms during successive visits in the maintenance phase. No AE related to these QRS values was reported and the patient continued treatment in an open-label extension trial. ECG findings – An increased frequency of TE intraventricular (IV) block was observed in patients randomized to lacosamide 400 mg/day (3.5%) and 600 mg/day (7.9%) versus placebo (2.4%; Table 4). Complete right BBB was infrequent in all treatment groups; complete left BBB was not reported. Adverse events – Across datasets, non-serious TEAEs of right BBB were noted in 0.5%, 0.0%, 0.6%, and 1.0% of patients treated with placebo and lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/ day. One placebo-treated patient had a TEAE with a reported term of non-specific IV conduction delay; one patient treated with lacosamide 400 mg/day had a TEAE reported as IV block. Additionally, there was one TEAE of QRS complex prolonged (reported as elevated QRS complex = 111 ms) and one TEAE of QRS complex abnormal (reported as low QRS voltage) in the lacosamide 600 mg/day group. None
Rudd et al. Table 3 Summary of changes from baseline in electrocardiographic intervals and heart rate Lacosamide group Placebo (n = 364) n QTcF, ms Baselinea Change from BL, Minc Maxc QRS duration, ms Baselinea Change from BL, Minc Maxc Heart rate, bpm Baselinea Change from BL, Minc Maxc PR interval, ms Baselinea Change from BL, Minc Maxc
BL, baseline; bpm, beats per minute; MP, maintenance phase. Baseline was the average of all predose measurements at baseline (just prior to randomization) during the double-blind trial. b End of MP = End of 12-week maintenance phase. c Change from baseline; min (max) of all reported values (including unscheduled visits) during the treatment phase. Max calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the maximum absolute value observed at any time during the treatment phase (titration + maintenance) for each patient to calculate a mean maximum change from baseline value for each group. The corresponding mean minimum change value for each group was calculated using the same approach. a
of these TEAEs were serious or resulted in discontinuation.
completed the trial and transitioned into an open-label extension trial.
PR Interval – Change from baseline A small, dose-related increase in mean PR interval was observed (0.3, 1.4, 4.4, and 6.6 ms for the placebo and lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day groups, respectively; Table 3). Placebo-subtracted mean maximum change from baseline values were 1.5, 3.1, and 4.5 ms, respectively.
ECG findings – In the SP754/SP755 pool, there was little difference between the placebo and lacosamide groups for TE first-degree AV block (Table 4). In SP667, the frequency was higher for the lacosamide groups but not dose related. Second-degree or higher AV block was not reported.
Outlier analysis – At baseline, 3.4%, 0.7%, and 0.1% of patients had PR-interval values >200, >220, and >250 ms; 14.0%, 7.0%, and 0.0% of patients aged 61–71 years (n = 43) exceeded these values. There was a higher frequency of TE PR interval >200 ms in each lacosamide group compared to placebo, although this did not appear to be dose related (Table 5). Four patients had a TE PR-interval value >250 ms. Details for one patient are provided in the adverse event section below. The other three patients were aged 63–68 years with prolonged PR intervals at baseline (223–241 ms). No AE related to PR interval was reported; all
Adverse events – Non-serious TEAEs of firstdegree AV block were reported in 0.0%, 0.7%, 0.2%, and 0.5% of patients in the placebo and lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day groups. There was also a single TEAE of PR prolongation in a 61-year-old with a history of sick sinus syndrome and an implanted pacemaker. The baseline PR interval (213 ms) for this patient was reported as a serious AE. The patient had recorded PR-interval values of 192 ms during titration (200 mg/day); 294 ms (400 mg/day); 208 ms when tapered from 400 to 200 mg/day; and 205 ms 7 days following discontinuation of lacosamide for the AE of PR-interval prolongation. The AE did not resolve until 121 days following discontinuation; the patient’s pacemaker
Clinical cardiac safety of lacosamide Table 4 Summary of interval- and heart rate-based treatment-emergent diagnostic electrocardiographic (ECG) findingsa
Table 5 Summary of patients with treatment-emergent PR-interval outlier values Lacosamide group
PR-interval outlier cutpoint >200 ms 336 15 (4.5) >220 ms 351 10 (2.8) >250 ms 353 0 (0.0)
1 (0.9) 0 (0.0)
0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
4 (3.8) 9 (2.6)
1 (1.0) 4 (4.7)
N = number of patients who did not have a PR-interval value greater than cutpoint at baseline. n = number of patients who had one or more PR-interval value greater than the cutpoint anytime during treatment phase but not at baseline. a Patients in the 200 ms interval include those counted in the >220 and >250 ms intervals; likewise, patients counted in the >220 ms interval include those in the >250 ms interval.
0 (0.0) 2 (0.6)
2 (1.9) 1 (1.1)
was reported to have been adjusted following discontinuation from the trial.
16 (19.3) 32 (13.3)
10 (14.9) 7 (10.0)
0 (0.0) 3 (0.8)
2 (1.9) 0 (0.0)
2 (1.9) 11 (3.1)
1 (0.9) 4 (4.3)
5 (4.9) 8 (2.3)
5 (4.9) 1 (1.1)
AV, atrioventricular; bpm, beats per minute; HR, heart rate; RBBB, right bundle branch block. ECGs were acquired using a common make and model of ECG recorder (SP667, Marquette MAC-1200; SP754/755, MTX-2). The central ECG reader used for trial SP667 was BioMedical Systems Inc., St. Louis, MO; for trials SP754 and SP755, the central ECG reader was Covance Cardiac Safety Services, Reno, NV. Each ECG was transmitted to the central ECG laboratory facility for a cardiologist overread under blinded conditions. N = the number of patients who did not have the specific ECG finding present on screening ECG or any one of the three baseline ECGs; n = number of subjects who had the finding at least once during the treatment phase. a Treatment-emergent ECG finding was one that occurred at least once during the treatment phase, but was not previously observed to be present on the screening visit ECG or any one of the three ECGs collected at baseline. b QT ≥ 460 ms if <50 years, ≥470 ms for females >50 years (Covance Labs). c QRS > 120 ms for age <35 years, >110 ms for age >36 for Covance Labs (SP754/SP755). d Heart rate threshold for marked bradycardia was based on the internal standard at each central ECG reader [<45 bpm for Covance Labs (SP754/755); <50 bpm for BioMedical Systems (SP667)]. e PR-interval threshold for first-degree (AV) block was based on the internal standard at each central ECG reader [>209 ms for Covance Labs (SP754/755); >220 ms for BioMedical Systems (SP667)].
Pharmacodynamic assessment – A large number of patients were taking a PR-interval-prolonging drug – carbamazepine and/or lamotrigine – when lacosamide or placebo was added to their AED regimen. The potential for a PR-interval-related pharmacodynamic interaction of lacosamide with either carbamazepine or lamotrigine was evaluated. In the lacosamide 400 mg/day group, there was little difference in PR-interval change from baseline to the end of the maintenance phase between patients taking carbamazepine (mean = 4.9 ms, 95% CI [2.3, 7.5]; n = 110) and those not taking carbamazepine (mean = 4.0 ms, 95% CI [2.4, 5.6]; n = 279), and those taking lamotrigine (mean = 2.5 ms, 95% CI [0.0, 4.9]; n = 117), compared with those not taking lamotrigine (mean = 5.1 ms, 95% CI [3.4, 6.7]; n = 272). Similar findings were observed in corresponding analyses for the other lacosamide groups. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic assessment – The results of a regression analysis of PR-interval change from baseline on corresponding lacosamide plasma concentration are shown in Fig. 1. Solution of the regression equation, using the average lacosamide plasma concentration at steady state for a 400 mg/day dose (~8.3 lg/ml), predicted an average PR-interval increase of ~4.5 ms. Other TEAEs relevant to cardiac safety
TEAEs that were potentially related to AV block included palpitations and syncope or loss of
Rudd et al.
Figure 1. Change from baseline in PR interval and lacosamide plasma concentration. Individual patient data points and the associated regression (solid line) for all lacosamide-treated patients (number of observations = 7012). Regression equation: PR-interval change = 0.607892499 + 0.6200861546 * LCM plasma concentration. Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.2062. For reference and comparison, the spread of the placebo data points for change in PR interval is shown at zero lacosamide concentration (gray), and the vertical dotted line at 11 lg/ml represents the mean maximum plasma concentration at steady state for lacosamide 400 mg/day (21).
consciousness. An ECG was not taken at the time of these events; however, there were no instances of prolonged PR interval on ECGs acquired prior to the event. Four non-serious TEAEs of palpitations were reported (0.4%, 0.4%, and 0.5% of patients in the lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/ day groups), and each patient continued treatment. Syncope or loss of consciousness was reported in one patient each in the placebo and lacosamide 200 and 400 mg/day groups. A 48 kg (BMI = 19.3 kg/m2) female taking oxcarbazepine (1800 mg/day) and levetiracetam (1750 mg/day) had serious AEs of fluctuating intoxication symptoms (reported term) and loss of consciousness while also having intermittent dizziness and lightheadedness. These events occurred during the last week of the titration phase while the patient was taking lacosamide 400 mg/day and discontinued due to fluctuating intoxication. Loss of consciousness (not serious) was reported again in the taper phase while patient was taking placebo, 1 day following the end of the lacosamide 200 mg/day taper dose. Both loss of consciousness events resolved on the day of onset. A second patient who completed maintenance phase dosing with lacosamide 200 mg/day had an AE of syncope on the first day of transition to an open-label extension trial. This event was not serious, did not result in discontinuation, and resolved on the same day. Other TEAEs included chest pain or discomfort, reported in 1.6%, 2.2%, 1.5%, and 2.0% of patients randomized to placebo or lacosamide 360
200, 400, or 600 mg/day, respectively. Three patients who were randomized to lacosamide discontinued due to chest pain; however, two of these patients were taking placebo during titration at the time of the event. Extrasystoles or ventricular extrasystoles were reported as TEAEs for two patients each in the placebo and lacosamide 400 mg/day groups. Although these events were not serious, both lacosamide patients were discontinued due to this TEAE. Additional TEAEs that were not serious and did not result in discontinuation were angina pectoris (one patient in the lacosamide 200 mg/day group and two patients in the lacosamide 400 mg/day group [reported terms: heart pain and cardialgia]), and ECG T-wave abnormality and abnormal heart sounds (one patient each in the lacosamide 600 mg/day group).
An overall evaluation of the controlled clinical trial data from the large pool of generally healthy patients with POS showed that lacosamide did not prolong the QTc interval or have an effect on HR. After 12-week maintenance treatment, there was little or no change in QRS duration from baseline for the placebo and the maximum recommended lacosamide dose (400 mg/day), but a slight increase in QRS duration (+2.3 ms) was observed in the lacosamide 600 mg/day group. AEs related to QRS duration were infrequent and did not result in patient discontinuation. The mean change from baseline in PR interval after 12-week maintenance treatment was +4.4 ms for the maximum recommended lacosamide dose (400 mg/day). The small increase in PR interval associated with adjunctive lacosamide in patients with POS was similar to increases observed with other AEDs that predominantly act on sodium channel fast inactivation (e.g., carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and eslicarbazepine) (13, 14, 18, 19) and those with other mechanisms of action (e.g., pregabalin) (20). A subset analysis revealed that the magnitude of the PR-interval increase associated with lacosamide was similar in the presence or absence of carbamazepine or lamotrigine, thus offering little evidence of pharmacodynamic interaction with regard to PR interval. ECG results in the POS pooled analysis were quantitatively and qualitatively consistent with a controlled thorough QT (TQT) study of lacosamide safety in healthy volunteers (21). These observations may be related to similarities in the study populations as both were relatively young and generally in good health. The placebo-subtracted
Clinical cardiac safety of lacosamide mean increase of +2.3 ms for QRS duration observed at the end of maintenance in the lacosamide 600 mg/day group was greater than the placebo-subtracted change in QRS duration observed at tmax for the 400 and 800 mg/day lacosamide groups in the TQT study (+0.2 and 0.7 ms, respectively) (21). Together, the POS and TQT findings suggest the absence of a dose-related or clinically relevant effect of lacosamide on QRS duration at recommended doses (21). For the maximum recommended lacosamide dose (400 mg/day), the placebo-subtracted mean increase in PR interval was +4.7 ms for the POS group at the end of maintenance and +7.3 ms at tmax in the TQT trial (21). The small difference in the magnitude of the PR-interval increase for the POS pool and the TQT result is likely due to the timing of ECG acquisitions. The relatively flat relationship between lacosamide plasma concentration and change from baseline PR interval observed in both POS patients (Fig. 1) and healthy volunteers (21) suggests a wide margin of safety for lacosamide with regard to PR interval in patients who are in good health. In first-degree AV block, conduction is most often delayed within the AV node; however, all atrial impulses reach the ventricles. First-degree AV block is an ECG finding that is not commonly associated with symptoms. TE first-degree AV block in the lacosamide groups was not dose related (range: 1.1–4.9%), and incidence was similar to or greater than that reported for the placebo groups in SP754/755 and SP667 (2.4% and 3.2%, respectively). In second-degree AV block, not all atrial impulses are conducted to the ventricles. This type of block may be accompanied by symptoms such as slow or irregular pulse, lightheadedness, and fainting, particularly during exercise. There were no reports of second-degree or higher AV block in this pooled analysis of POS patients or in healthy volunteers taking lacosamide doses up to 800 mg/day (21). Few patients with POS recruited into the controlled lacosamide trials were elderly or had significant underlying cardiovascular disease. However, over 80% of the pooled patients with POS were also taking at least one concomitant sodium channel-blocking AED. To more completely evaluate the safety associated with lacosamide in potentially higher risk groups, patients with a prolonged PR interval or bradycardia (HR 45 or 50 to <60 bpm) at baseline were not excluded from the trials, and patients who had TE ECG findings of first-degree AV block or bradycardia were allowed to continue in each study. Inclusion and continuance of these patients did
not lead to an increase in AEs in the pooled population with POS. Subsequent to the marketing approval for lacosamide in August 2008, the estimated worldwide exposure to lacosamide (through August 2014) has been 544,257 patient years (22). Following approval, there was an open-label, multicenter, non-interventional study conducted using a physician-driven decision to prescribe adjunctive treatment with lacosamide (n = 511) or another marketed AED therapy (n = 493) to patients with POS (23). The primary end point of the study was frequency of predefined cardiovascular TEAEs. The mean (median) duration of exposure to treatment was 262 days (325) in the lacosamide group and 252 days (321) in the other marketed AED group. The study results did not identify an increased incidence of the predefined cardiovascular TEAEs in the lacosamide treatment group compared with the other marketed AED group. There have been published reports of cardiacrelated AEs in patients whose seizure disorders were treated with lacosamide. These have included individual case reports of bradycardia (24); second-degree AV block (Mobitz Type I) (25); ventricular tachycardia (26); sinus node dysfunction (27); and atrial flutter/fibrillation (28, 29). Each of these six reports involved a patient with POS. Five of these patients were <50 years of age, and five were concomitantly taking a fast sodium channel-blocking drug (carbamazepine and/or lamotrigine). Each of these reports noted that the AE was resolved following the interruption or discontinuation of lacosamide. There have also been individual cardiac-related AE reports for patients administered lacosamide for non-approved uses. These have included thirddegree AV block in two elderly patients who received lacosamide for the acute treatment of non-convulsive status epilepticus (30, 31), and a report of atrial tachycardia in a 3-year-old intensive care unit patient administered lacosamide for subclinical seizures which were observed on EEG (32). It should be recognized that the effect of lacosamide on PR interval could be magnified in certain patient populations. For instance, if voltage-dependent inhibition of slow inactivation of Nav channels is the mechanism by which lacosamide increases the PR interval, the presence of myocardial ischemia in a patient may potentiate the effect of lacosamide on these channels. Lacosamide should be used with caution in patients with known conduction problems, in patients who are taking medicinal products known to be associated 361
Rudd et al. with PR-interval prolongation, and in patients with severe cardiac disease such as a history of myocardial infarction or heart failure (7, 8). In conclusion, evaluation of a large pool of cardiac safety data from a generally healthy population of adult patients with POS showed that treatment with adjunctive lacosamide at the maximum recommended dose (400 mg/day) was not clearly associated with any cardiac effect other than a small, dose-related increase in PR interval that had no evident symptomatic consequence.
7. 8. 9.
Acknowledgments Medical writing support was provided by Kristen A. Andersen, PhD of Prescott Medical Communications Group (Chicago, IL) and Jonathon Gibbs, BSc of Evidence Scientific Solutions Ltd (Horsham, UK). Publication management in the form of publication coordination was provided by Azita Tofighy, PhD and Jesse Fishman, PharmD; employees of UCB Pharma.
Conﬂict of interests G. David Rudd, PharmD initiated work on this manuscript while an employee of UCB Pharma, Raleigh, NC and completed work on this manuscript as a paid consultant to UCB, and as a UCB retiree has received deferred compensation and holds stock options. W. Haverkamp, MD, PhD has previously served as a paid cardiology consultant to UCB Pharma, but has not received compensation for his contributions as an author on this publication. J. Mason, MD was the Medical Director for the Covance Labs at the time of trial SP754/SP755 conduct, has previously served as a paid cardiology consultant to UCB Pharma, but was not paid for authorship on this publication. T. Wenger, MD has previously served as a paid cardiology consultant to UCB Pharma, but was not paid for authorship on this publication. G. Jay, MD and R. Horstmann, MD are former employees of UCB Pharma. D. Hebert, PhD and P. Doty, PhD are employees of UCB Pharma, Raleigh, NC.
Sources of funding Funding for the clinical trials, data analysis, and manuscript generation were provided by UCB Pharma.
1. RODEN DM, VISWANATHAN PC. Genetics of acquired long QT syndrome. J Clin Invest 2005;115:2025–32. 2. SLORDAL L, SPIGSET O. Heart failure induced by non-cardiac drugs. Drug Saf 2006;29:567–86. 3. ICH. Guidance for Industry. E14 Clinical Evaluation of QT/QTc Interval Prolongation and Proarrhythmic Potential for Non-Antiarrhythmic Drugs. October 2005; http:// www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm073153.pdf (accessed 27 February 2013). 4. BEN-MENACHEM E, BITON V, JATUZIS D, ABOU-KHALIL B, DOTY P, RUDD GD. Efficacy and safety of oral lacosa-
mide as adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset seizures. Epilepsia 2007;48:1308–17. CHUNG S, SPERLING MR, BITON V et al. Lacosamide as adjunctive therapy for partial-onset seizures: a randomized controlled trial. Epilepsia 2010;51:958–67. € € P, KALVI R, MAZURKIEWICZ-BELDZINSKA M AINEN HALASZ et al. Adjunctive lacosamide for partial-onset seizures: Efficacy and safety results from a randomized controlled trial. Epilepsia 2009;50:443–53. VIMPATÒ. (lacosamide) Prescribing Information: Smyrna, GA: UCB Pharma, 2014. VIMPATÒ. (lacosamide) Summary of Product Characteristics: SA, Belgium: UCB Pharma, 2014. ERRINGTON AC, STOHR T, HEERS C, LEES G. The investigational anticonvulsant lacosamide selectively enhances slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels. Mol Pharmacol 2008;73:157–69. NIESPODZIANY I, LECLERE N, VANDENPLAS C, FOERCH P, WOLFF C. Comparative study of lacosamide and classical sodium channel blocking antiepileptic drugs on sodium channel slow inactivation. J Neurosci Res 2013;91:436– 43. CATTERALL WA. Molecular mechanisms of gating and drug block of sodium channels. Novartis Found Symp 2002;241:206–18. SHAH RR. Cardiac effects of antiepileptic drugs. In: Panayiotopoulos CP, ed. Atlas of Epilepsies. London: Springer-Verlag, 2010;1479–86. DIXON R, ALEXANDER S, BRICKEL N. Effect of lamotrigine on the PR interval in healthy subjects. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2011;71:961–2. KENNEBACK G, BERGFELDT L, TOMSON T. Electrophysiological evaluation of the sodium-channel blocker carbamazepine in healthy human subjects. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1995;9:709–14. DELAUNOIS AC, COLOMAR A, DEPELCHIN B, CORNET M. Cardiac safety of lacosamide: the non-clinical perspective. Acta Neurol Scand 2015; In Press. FRIDERICIA LS. Die Systolendauer im Elektrokardiogramm bei normalen Menchen und bei Herzkranken. Acta Med Scand 1920;53:469–86. CAWELLO W, BONN R. No pharmacokinetic interaction between lacosamide and valproic acid in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 2012;52:1739–48. MATSUO F, BERGEN D, FAUGHT E et al. Placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of lamotrigine in patients with partial seizures. Neurology 1993;43:2284– 91. VAZ-DA-SILVA M, NUNES T, ALMEIDA L, GUTIERREZ MJ, LITWIN JS, SOARES-DA-SILVA P. Evaluation of eslicarbazepine acetate on cardiac repolarization in a thorough QT/ QTc study. J Clin Pharmacol 2012;52:222–33. LYRICAÒ. (pregabalin) CV Prescribing Information: New York, NY: Pfizer, 2012. KROPEIT D, JOHNSON M, CAWELLO W, RUDD G, HORSTMANN R Cardiac safety of lacosamide: a thorough QT/ QTc trial in healthy volunteers. Acta Neurol Scand 2015; In Press. UCB PHARMA. Lacosamide Development Safety Update Report Number 4 for the Period 01-Sept-2013 to 31-Aug-2014. Data on File. STEINHOFF BJ, ECKHARDT K, DOTY P, DE BACKER M, BRUNNERT M, SCHULZE-BONHAGE A. Long-term non-interventional study of lacosamide safety as add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy and uncontrolled partial-onset seizures. Epilepsia 2014;55:113–4, P344.
Clinical cardiac safety of lacosamide 24. KRAUSS G, BEN-MENACHEM E, MAMENISKIENE R et al. Intravenous lacosamide as short-term replacement for oral lacosamide in partial-onset seizures. Epilepsia 2010;51:951–7. 25. NIZAM A, MYLAVARAPU K, THOMAS D et al. Lacosamideinduced second-degree atrioventricular block in a patient with partial epilepsy. Epilepsia 2011;52:e153–5. 26. DEGIORGIO AC, DESSO TE, LEE L, DEGIORGIO CM. Ventricular tachycardia associated with lacosamide co-medication in drug-resistant epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav Case Rep 2013;1:26–8. 27. CHINNASAMI S, RATHORE C, DUNCAN JS. Sinus node dysfunction: an adverse effect of lacosamide. Epilepsia 2013;54:e90–3. 28. DEGIORGIO CM. Atrial flutter/atrial fibrillation associated with lacosamide for partial seizures. Epilepsy Behav 2010;18:322–4.
29. KAUFMAN KR, VELEZ AE, WONG S, MANI R. Low-dose lacosamide-induced atrial fibrillation: case analysis with literature review. Epilepsy Behav Case Rep 2013;1:22–5. 30. KRAUSE LU, BRODOWSKI KO, KELLINGHAUS C. Atrioventricular block following lacosamide intoxication. Epilepsy Behav 2011;20:725–7. 31. GARCES M, VILLANUEVA V, MAURI JA et al. Factors influencing response to intravenous lacosamide in emergency situations: LACO-IV study. Epilepsy Behav 2014;36:144–52. 32. LOOMBA RS, SINGH AK, KOVACH J, GUDAUSKY TM. Lacosamide-induced atrial tachycardia in a child with hypoplastic left-heart syndrome: the importance of assessing additional proarrhythmic risks. Cardiol Young 2015;25:806–9.
We conducted a 6-month observational study at 112 sites across Germany. Adult patients (≥ 16 years) with POS received lacosamide adjunctive to only one baseline AED. Seizure frequency reduction at the end of the observation period was compared with a
Tiotropium is generally well tolerated; however, there has been debate whether antimuscarinics, particularly tiotropium administered via Respimat(®) Soft Mist(™) Inhaler, may induce cardiac arrhythmias in a vulnerable subpopulation with cardiovascula
•7 of 9 patients with GGE reduced ≥ 50% their tonic-clonic seizure frequency on LCM.•All 7 patients remained seizure free for > 1 year, and 2 of them for > 5 years.•In 2 of the 9 patients, both with Juvenile Absence Epilepsy, absences aggravated.•One