Maria Laura Sargentini-Maier

Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism of 14C-Brivaracetam, a Novel SV2A Ligand, in Healthy Subjects

This study was designed to investigate the human absorption, disposition, and mass balance of 14C-brivaracetam, a novel high affinity SV2A ligand with potent anticonvulsant activity. Six healthy male subjects received a single p.o. dose of 14C-brivaracetam (150 mg, 82 μCi, or 3.03 MBq). Serial blood and complete urine and feces were collected until 144 h postdose. Expired air samples were obtained until 24 h. Brivaracetam was rapidly absorbed, with Cmax of 4 μg/ml occurring within 1.5 h of dosing. Unchanged brivaracetam amounted to 90% of the total plasma radioactivity, suggesting a modest first-pass effect. Plasma protein binding of radioactivity was low (17.5%). Urinary excretion exceeded 90% after 2 days, and the final mass balance reached 96.8% of the radioactivity in urine and 0.7% in feces. Only 8.6% of the radioactive dose was recovered in urine as unchanged brivaracetam, the remainder being identified as non–cytochrome P450 (P450)- and P450-dependent biotransformation products resulting from hydrolysis of the amide moiety (M9, 34.2%), hydroxylation of the n-propyl side chain (M1b, 15.9%), and a combination of these two pathways leading to the hydroxy acid (M4b, 15.2%). Minor amounts of taurine and glucuronic acid conjugates and other oxidized derivatives were also identified. Brivaracetam is completely absorbed, is weakly bound to plasma proteins, extensively biotransformed through several metabolic pathways, and eliminated renally.

Brivaracetam Disposition in Renal Impairment

Brivaracetam is a novel high‐affinity SV2A ligand currently in clinical development for epilepsy. The objective was to characterize its disposition in patients with renal impairment. A single oral dose of 200 mg brivaracetam was administered to 9 patients with severe renal impairment not requiring dialysis (creatinine clearance <15 mL/ min, n = 6; 15–29 mL/min, n = 3) and 9 matched healthy controls. Plasma and urinary concentrations of brivaracetam and 3 pharmacologically inactive metabolites (acid, hydroxy, and hydroxyacid) were determined up to 72 hours postdose, and noncompartmental pharmacokinetic parameters were derived. The Cmax of brivaracetam was unchanged relative to healthy controls, whereas AUC was slightly increased (mean ratio, 1.21; 90% confidence interval, 1.01–1.45). Nonrenal and renal clearances of brivaracetam decreased from 47 and 4.5 to 41 and 1.7 mL/min/1.73 m2. Exposure to the acid, hydroxy, and hydroxyacid metabolites was markedly increased: Cmax by 2.4‐, 2.0‐, and 11.7‐fold and AUC by 3.2‐, 4.1‐, and 21.5‐fold. Renal clearance of these rapidly cleared metabolites was decreased 10‐fold in patients with severe renal impairment. Nonclinical toxicology studies concluded to the absence of safety issues related to the increased levels of metabolites. These observations suggest that dose adjustment of brivaracetam should not be required at any stage of renal dysfunction.

Retrospective Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis of Levetiracetam in Children and Adolescents with Epilepsy : Dosing Recommendations

AbstractObjective: To characterize levetiracetam pharmacokinetics, identify significant covariate relationships and identify doses in children that achieve blood concentrations similar to those observed in adults. Methods: Nonlinear mixed-effects modelling was used to analyse pooled data collected from 228 children with epilepsy aged 3 months to 18 years in five trials of adjunctive levetiracetam therapy. Simulations were used to identify dosing regimens achieving levetiracetam steady-state peak and trough plasma concentrations similar to those attained in adults receiving the recommended starting dose for adjunctive therapy (500 mg twice daily). The covariates considered for inclusion in the base model were age, bodyweight, gender, race, body surface area (BSA), body mass index (BMI), creatinine clearance (CLCR), levetiracetam dose, concomitant antiepileptic drug (AED) by category (neutral, enzyme inducer, inhibitor, combination of inducer and inhibitor), and benzodiazepines. Results: A one-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination best characterized the data. The following significant covariates were identified: (i) age on the absorption rate constant (ka); (ii) bodyweight, dose, CLCR and concomitant enzyme-inducing AED on plasma oral clearance (CL/F); and (iii) bodyweight on the apparent volume of distribution after oral administration (Vd/F). The main explanatory covariates were age on ka, bodyweight on CL/F and Vd/F, and enzyme-inducing AED on CL/F, of which bodyweight was the most influential covariate. Dosing can be carried out with either 10 mg/kg of oral solution twice daily in children weighing <50 kg and a 500-mg tablet twice daily in those weighing >50 kg or, when patients favour a solid formulation, 10 mg/kg of oral solution twice daily in children weighing <20 kg, a 250-mg tablet twice daily in those weighing 20–40 kg, and a 500-mg tablet twice daily in those weighing >40 kg. All of these doses achieved steady-state peak and trough plasma concentrations similar to those observed in adults following the recommended starting dose for adjunctive therapy (500 mg twice daily). Conclusions: The most influential covariate of levetiracetam pharmacokinetics in children is bodyweight. A starting dose of levetiracetam 10 mg/kg twice daily ensures the same exposure in children as does 500 mg twice daily in adults.

Brivaracetam disposition in mild to severe hepatic impairment.

Brivaracetam is a high‐affinity synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) ligand in clinical development for epilepsy. This open‐label, single‐dose study evaluated brivaracetam disposition in participants with different degrees of hepatic impairment versus matched healthy controls. Twenty‐six participants (38–72 years; 19 males and 7 females) with hepatic impairment classified by Child‐Pugh score (mild, n = 6; moderate, n = 7; severe, n = 7) or normal hepatic function (n = 6) received a single oral dose of 100 mg brivaracetam. The pharmacokinetics of brivaracetam and its three main metabolites (acid, hydroxy, hydroxyacid) were determined and correlated with impairment severity. Dynamic liver function tests correlated with hepatic impairment severity. The plasma half‐life of brivaracetam was 9.8, 14.2, 16.4, and 17.4 hours and the area under the plasma concentration‐time curve was 29.7, 44.6, 46.7, and 47.1 µg h/mL in healthy controls and participants with mild, moderate, and severe liver impairment, respectively. Production of the acid metabolite was increased and the hydroxylated metabolites were decreased in participants with hepatic impairment versus healthy controls. Exposure to brivaracetam increased by 50–60% in patients with hepatic impairment, irrespective of severity. The relative importance of biotransformation pathways was altered; cytochrome P450 (CYP)‐dependent hydroxylation decreased; CYP‐independent acid metabolite formation increased concomitantly.

Pharmacokinetics of levetiracetam XR 500 mg tablets

PURPOSE To compare the relative bioavailability of levetiracetam extended-release tablets (XR) with immediate release tablets (IR) following single and multiple dosing; to assess the food effect and the dose-proportionality of XR from 1000 to 3000mg. METHODS Two panels of 24 healthy subjects were enrolled. Study N01160 was a three-way crossover between IR fasted (single and repeated 500mg b.i.d.), XR fasted (single and repeated 1000mg o.d.) and XR with food (1000mg single dose). Study N01260 was a three-way crossover single dose-proportionality between XR 1000, 2000 and 3000mg. RESULTS After single dose, levetiracetam XR and IR were bioequivalent with respect to AUC((0-t)), AUC(infinity) and C(max). The median t(max) was delayed from 0.9 to 4h. For the fed/fasted comparison, the confidence intervals around the C(max) and AUC ratios were within the 80-125% limits. At steady-state, the AUC(24h) were also bioequivalent. In the dose-proportionality trial, the AUC and C(max) increased linearly with the dose. Levetiracetam XR was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS Levetiracetam XR 1000mg o.d. is bioequivalent to levetiracetam IR 500mg b.i.d. There is no food effect, and the absorption of XR is dose-proportional from 1000 to 3000mg.

Assessment of levetiracetam bioavailability from targeted sites in the human intestine using remotely activated capsules and gamma scintigraphy: Open-label, single-dose, randomized, four-way crossover study in healthy male volunteers

BACKGROUND Levetiracetam is a broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug that binds to synaptic vesicle protein SV2A. Levetiracetam is indicated in the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures, myoclonic seizures, and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. It is also approved in Europe as monotherapy for newly diagnosed partial-onset seizures. A Phase I clinical pharmacology trial was conducted during preregistration clinical development to better understand the regional gastrointestinal (GI) absorption of levetiracetam. OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the relative bioavailability of levetiracetam in various regions of the GI tract using a noninvasive, remote-controlled capsule device providing targeted drug delivery, relative to that after oral administration, and explored the drugs absorption characteristics in healthy volunteers. METHODS Pharmacokinetic data were obtained from healthy men aged 18 to 65 years in an open-label, single-dose, randomized, 4-way crossover study. Treatments included levetiracetam 250 mg administered as an immediate-release tablet and capsule delivery of 250 mg drug substance (levetiracetam powder without excipients) to the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, and ascending colon. The location of the capsule in the GI tract was monitored using γ-scintigraphic imaging. Blood samples for plasma levetiracetam concentration were collected before dosing; at 10, 20, 30, and 45 minutes; and at 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 16, 20, and 24 hours after tablet intake or after capsule activation. Pharmacokinetic parameters C(max), T(max), AUC₀₋(last), AUC₀₋(∞) and t(½) were calculated using noncompartmental methods. Tolerability was determined using clinical assessment, monitoring of vital signs, laboratory analysis, and interviews with the volunteers regarding adverse events. RESULTS Nine healthy men, 7 whites and 2 Asians, were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 31 [14] years; weight, 77 [5] kg; height, 176 [6] cm). Six volunteers completed all 4 treatments. Seven adverse events (headache [3], lethargy [2], tachycardia [1], and contusion [1]) were reported in 5 volunteers, but only 2 (headache and lethargy) were judged by the investigator to be possibly drug related. The geometric mean (%CV) AUC(0-last) values of levetiracetam delivered in the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, ascending colon, and stomach (oral tablet) were 58.2 (9.3%), 59.6 (8.9%), 51.5 (12.0%), and 59.0 (7.4%) μg · h/mL, respectively. Values for bioavailability in the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, and ascending colon relative to the tablet were 98.5% (95% CI, 89.7%-108.2%), 100.8% (95% CI, 91.4%-111.1%), and 87.1% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.5%). CONCLUSION After delivery in the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, or ascending colon, the systemic bioavailability of levetiracetam (AUC), but not C(max) and T(max), appeared comparable to that after oral administration and thus appeared site independent in this small group of healthy fasting men.

Modeling and simulation of intravenous levetiracetam pharmacokinetic profiles in children to evaluate dose adaptation rules

PURPOSE To develop a pharmacokinetic model for intravenous levetiracetam in children, based on adult intravenous data and pediatric oral data. METHODS Data from two adult Phase-I studies in which levetiracetam was given intravenously were utilized to develop the adult population pharmacokinetic two-compartment intravenous model. After model qualification, combination with an existing pediatric one-compartment oral population pharmacokinetic model enabled simulation of twice-daily intravenous infusions of levetiracetam in children. Median and 90% confidence intervals for C(trough), C(max) (end of infusion) and AUC(tau) were simulated for 2000 children and compared to the values observed in adults. RESULTS The population pharmacokinetic two-compartment model successfully described intravenous levetiracetam pharmacokinetics in healthy adults. After combination with the oral pediatric population model, steady-state concentrations at the end of 15-, 30- and 60 min b.i.d. levetiracetam intravenous infusions in children were predicted to be 29-41, 17-24 and 6-13% higher than those observed after oral dosing of 30 mg/kg b.i.d. Concentrations returned to the range of oral exposures within 1h after the infusion peak. The combined model predicted that steady-state peak plasma concentrations and AUC(tau) in children receiving 30 mg/kg twice daily as 15 min intravenous infusions were within the range of predicted and observed C(max,ss) and AUC(tau )values of adults receiving 15 min intravenous infusions of 1500 mg levetiracetam. CONCLUSIONS The simulations suggest that levetiracetam may be administered intravenously in children as 15 min infusions.

Pharmacokinetic interaction of brivaracetam on carbamazepine in adult patients with epilepsy, with and without valproate co-administration

OBJECTIVE This Phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study investigated the effects of steady-state brivaracetam on the pharmacokinetics of carbamazepine in patients with epilepsy, with and without valproate co-administration. Valproate and brivaracetam inhibit epoxide hydrolase and increase carbamazepine epoxide levels. METHODS Adult patients with epilepsy being chronically treated with carbamazepine alone (n=9) or with carbamazepine and valproate (n=9) received brivaracetam during successive 1-week periods at doses of 50mg, 100mg, 200mg, and 100mg twice daily (bid). Doses of carbamazepine and valproate must have been stable for at least 3 months. Trough plasma concentrations of carbamazepine, carbamazepine epoxide, and diol metabolites were determined on Days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29, and at the end of study visit (ESV, 2-3weeks later). RESULTS Eighteen patients with median (range) age of 45 (20-62) years and body weight of 74 (59-124) kg were enrolled and completed the study. In patients treated with carbamazepine alone, brivaracetam dose-dependently increased mean trough levels of carbamazepine epoxide from 1.38μg/mL on Day 1 pre-dose to 2.16μg/mL (+57%) on Day 8 (50mg bid), 2.72μg/mL (+97%) on Day 15 (100mg bid), 3.02μg/mL (+119%) on Day 22 (200mg bid), 2.67μg/mL (+94%) on Day 29 (100mg bid), and 1.22μg/mL (-12%) at ESV, respectively. In patients on carbamazepine and valproate, carbamazepine epoxide increased from 1.98μg/mL at baseline to 2.72μg/mL (+37%), 3.70μg/mL (+87%), 4.43μg/mL (+124%), 3.11μg/mL (+57%), and 1.94μg/mL (-2%), respectively. There was no trend for change in carbamazepine, carbamazepine diol or valproate levels. Brivaracetam levels increased linearly with dose. Brivaracetam was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS Carbamazepine epoxide plasma concentrations were approximately doubled by brivaracetam 100 or 200mg bid. Data are consistent with a dose-dependent and reversible inhibition of epoxide hydrolase by brivaracetam. Carbamazepine epoxide was approximately 0.7μg/mL higher in presence of valproate. There is no need to limit brivaracetam dosing when used concomitantly with carbamazepine.

From pharmacokinetics to therapeutics

Whilst pharmacokinetics describe the relationship between dose levels and concentration-time profiles of a drug in the body and pharmacodynamics describe the concentration-response relationships, pharmacokinectics - pharmacodynamics(PK-PD) models link these two items providing a framework for modelling the time course of drug response. In this chapter, PK -PD models, describing the therapeutic effects of drugs used for the therapy of allergic diseases have been reviewed. Emphasis was given also to the description of the receptor occupancy, which is tightly related to the downstream clinical response. PK - PD models describing unwanted effects were also commented. An integrated use of these models allows choosing appropriate dosing regimens and providing an objective evaluation of the benefit / risk balance.