SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • Antiepileptic drugs;
  • Antiretrovirals;
  • HIV;
  • Epilepsy;
  • Interactions;
  • ARV Resistance;
  • Toxicity;
  • Pharmacokinetics

Summary

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

A joint panel of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) convened to develop guidelines for selection of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) among people with HIV/AIDS. The literature was systematically reviewed to assess the global burden of relevant comorbid entities, to determine the number of patients who potentially utilize AEDs and antiretroviral agents (ARVs), and to address AED–ARV interactions. Key findings from this literature search included the following: AED–ARV administration may be indicated in up to 55% of people taking ARVs. Patients receiving phenytoin may require a lopinavir/ritonavir dosage increase of approximately 50% to maintain unchanged serum concentrations (Level C). Patients receiving valproic acid may require a zidovudine dosage reduction to maintain unchanged serum zidovudine concentrations (Level C). Coadministration of valproic acid and efavirenz may not require efavirenz dosage adjustment (Level C). Patients receiving ritonavir/atazanavir may require a lamotrigine dosage increase of approximately 50% to maintain unchanged lamotrigine serum concentrations (Level C). Coadministration of raltegravir/atazanavir and lamotrigine may not require lamotrigine dosage adjustment (Level C). Coadministration of raltegravir and midazolam may not require midazolam dosage adjustment (Level C). Patients may be counseled that it is unclear whether dosage adjustment is necessary when other AEDs and ARVs are combined (Level U). It may be important to avoid enzyme-inducing AEDs in people on ARV regimens that include protease inhibitors or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors because pharmacokinetic interactions may result in virologic failure, which has clinical implications for disease progression and development of ARV resistance. If such regimens are required for seizure control, patients may be monitored through pharmacokinetic assessments to ensure efficacy of the ARV regimen (Level C).

No formal antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment guidelines currently exist for individuals with HIV/AIDS. Seizure disorders are common in individuals infected with HIV, with a reported incidence as high as 11%; provoked seizures resulting from central nervous system (CNS) opportunistic infections may also require AED treatment (Wong et al., 1990; Holmberg et al., 1995; Kellinghaus et al., 2008) HIV/AIDS, especially prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa, is becoming a chronic condition as antiretroviral (ARV) therapies become increasingly available (Bradshaw et al., 2003). The indications for AEDs have expanded to include neurologic conditions other than epilepsy (e.g., painful peripheral neuropathy) and psychiatric conditions. Therefore, worldwide the concurrent use of AEDs and ARVs is substantial.

Potential interactions between ARVs and AEDs are complex and extensive. Potential interactions of greatest concern relate to the P450 system enzyme induction effects of several older-generation AEDs (e.g., phenobarbital, carbamazepine, phenytoin), which might be expected to lower the effective dose of nonnucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and protease inhibitors (PIs), which are also metabolized by the P450 system. But several additional potential mechanisms of interaction and the impact of ARVs on AEDs also warrant consideration. Effective HIV care requires lifelong treatment using regimens typically comprising at least three drugs (World Health Organization, 2006). Many patients with HIV also require treatment for tuberculosis, which also includes use of enzyme-inducing medications (Di Perri et al., 2005; Breen et al., 2006; Baciewicz et al., 2008). Specific guidelines for treating tuberculosis in the setting of HIV infection have been developed (World Health Organization, 2007), yet none currently exists for AED–ARV therapy.

AED–ARV interactions that raise blood levels of drugs in either class may increase toxicity risk. Use of ARVs that reduce AED levels could lead to loss of therapeutic AED effects, including seizure control. Use of AEDs that decrease ARV levels [e.g., the enzyme-inducing AEDs (EI-AEDs) phenytoin, phenobarbital, and carbamazepine] may lead to virologic failure, resulting in immunologic decline, clinical disease progression, and development of ARV resistance. Because first-line AED availability in most low- and middle-income countries is limited to phenobarbital, carbamazepine, and phenytoin, and ARV regimen options may also be limited, there is substantial risk for occurrence of clinically important drug interactions (Anon, 2007; Birbeck et al., 2007).

The panel asked the following questions: In people treated with ARVs for HIV/AIDS who also have conditions requiring AED use, does concurrent treatment with AEDs and ARVs lead to drug interactions? If so, are these interactions clinically meaningful? The panel also performed a systematic literature review to estimate the worldwide prevalence of potential co-usage of AEDs and ARVs.

Description of the Analytic Process

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

Panel selection

Given the topic’s global relevance, the AAN Quality Standards Subcommittee formed a joint panel with the International League Against Epilepsy and the World Health Organization (WHO). The AAN guideline development processes are consistent with those required by WHO (American Academy of Neurology, 2005).

Literature search

To estimate the worldwide prevalence of potential co-usage of AEDs and ARVs, a literature search (1950–April 2008, updated 2010) without language restrictions was conducted using MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, Web of Science, and EMBASE and the following strategy: [prevalence OR incidence OR epidemiology OR comorbid] AND [HIV OR AIDS] AND [neuropathy OR seizure OR epilepsy]. Given the prevalence of HIV-associated neuropathies in low-income countries and use of AEDs to treat neuropathic pain, we included neuropathy in the search. Because of the dearth of data and the potential clinical value of this information regarding specific AED–ARV combinations, details from case reports and uncontrolled series are provided in the evidence and summary tables.

To determine potential drug–drug interactions between AEDs and ARVs, a comprehensive list of AEDs and ARVs was developed. (See Table S1. Note that investigational drugs as of April 2008 were not included.) Using this list, the panel performed the following search (1950–2010): drug interaction AND (antiepileptic OR anticonvulsant OR AED OR [AED from Table S1]) AND (antiretroviral OR ARV OR ART OR [ARV from Table S1]). The authors’ literature files were also hand-searched for potentially relevant articles.

Literature review

The broad search yielded 4,480 articles with potential data (1,146 on co-usage of AEDS and ARVs; 3,334 on AED–ARV drug–drug interactions). At least two panelists reviewed the resulting articles’ titles and abstracts. Additional publications identified during review of selected articles were also obtained. The full article of any abstract deemed relevant was reviewed. At least two panelists independently reviewed 68 full articles. Of these, 42 articles were used for data abstraction using the elements listed below for each question. Where data abstraction findings from the two panel reviewers differed, a third panelist reviewed the primary source. Data are presented in Tables S2 and S3. The complete literature search strategy is provided in Appendices S1 and S2.

Findings in the systematic review of co-usage of AEDs and ARVs

Three class III studies (n = 434, 100, 550) suggest that 2.6–6.1% of people with HIV will experience a new-onset seizure, with most of these receiving AED treatment, at least initially (Holtzman et al., 1989; Holmberg et al., 1995; Pascual-Sedano et al., 1999; Kellinghaus et al., 2008). Three class III studies (n = 255, 101, 272) indicate that peripheral neuropathy symptoms occur in 6.7–52.5% of individuals infected with HIV who have not yet initiated ARV therapy, with the highest rates in advanced HIV and in low- and middle-income countries where dietary deficiencies may contribute to peripheral neuropathy development (Breen et al., 2000; Schifitto et al., 2002; Simpson et al., 2006; Birbeck et al., 2009). Two class III studies (n = 173, 272) indicate that 17–55% of people without peripheral neuropathy symptoms at ARV initiation will subsequently develop such symptoms (Breen et al., 2000; Schifitto et al., 2002; Birbeck et al., 2009). In an analysis of a U.S.-based cohort with HIV infection (class II study, n = 1,539) 57% had at least one sign of peripheral neuropathy (abnormal vibratory sensation in the feet or reduced ankle tendon reflexes) on neurologic examination (Ellis et al., 2010). Among those with peripheral neuropathy, 61% had symptoms, including paresthesias or pain.

Analysis of the Evidence

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

Does concurrent treatment with AEDs and ARVs lead to drug interactions? If so, are these interactions clinically meaningful?

To be included in the analysis, articles had to report human in vivo data and at least one outcome measure, either pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic, during coadministration of AEDs and ARVs in comparison with measures during intake of either AEDs or ARVs. For the purpose of characterizing a pharmacokinetic drug interaction, patients with the disease of interest and healthy volunteers were considered to be potentially representative populations. We considered pharmacokinetic crossover studies as equivalent to a prospective matched cohort with an objective outcome (serum concentration), thus meeting criteria for class II.

Thirty-one articles were identified. Five were rated class II (Lertora et al., 1994; Burger et al., 2008; Iwamoto et al., 2008; van Luin et al., 2009; Okulicz et al., 2011), and eight were rated class III (Honda et al., 1999; Berbel Garcia et al., 2000; Burman & Orr, 2000; Hugen et al., 2000; Kato et al., 2000; Olmedilla et al., 2000; Mateu-de Antonio et al., 2001; Cazali et al., 2003; Lim et al., 2003; DiCenzo et al., 2004; Bates & Herman, 2006; Sheehan et al., 2006; van der Lee et al., 2006; Bonora et al., 2007; Burger et al., 2008). Two additional articles described data in multiple cohorts, of which one cohort in each article produced class II evidence and the others class III (DiCenzo et al., 2004; Lim et al., 2004). Class IV studies are not discussed further (Table S3 presents study details).

Clinical significance of serum HIV viral load

We selected the impact of EI-AEDs on serum HIV viral load (VL) in patients treated with ARVs as a clinically important parameter of HIV treatment outcome, because of the abundance of supporting data. The inability to maintain virologic suppression during ARV therapy results in immunologic failure as measured by CD4+ T-cell decline and in clinical HIV disease progression, manifesting as susceptibility to opportunistic infections (Deeks et al., 2002; Ormaasen et al., 2003; Tenorio et al., 2003; Lohse et al., 2006). Patients with subtherapeutic ARV levels have decreased virologic suppression rates as compared with those with levels in the therapeutic range (Alexander et al., 2003). Lack of virologic suppression also leads to development of ARV resistance, limiting the number of potentially efficacious ARVs available for treatment (Al Mazari et al., 2007; Varella et al., 2009). In addition, potential person-to-person transmission of drug-resistant virus has significant public health implications.

What is the evidence for an interaction between AEDs and protease inhibitor (PI) ARVs?

Phenytoin: impact on lopinavir/ritonavir

A study of 12 healthy volunteers found that phenytoin (300 mg/day for 10 days) reduced mean steady-state area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) of lopinavir and ritonavir by 33% (90% CI 15–47%) and 28% (90% CI 3–46%), respectively, as compared with the pre-phenytoin period (class II) (Wong et al., 1990).

Stiripentol: impact on saquinavir

A randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study in healthy subjects assessed effects of stiripentol 2,000 mg/day for 8 days on the pharmacokinetics of a single 400-mg dose of saquinavir (Kellinghaus et al., 2008). Mean saquinavir AUC and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) were comparable in the stiripentol and the placebo periods, but variability was large, and appropriate sample size to determine equivalence was not calculated in advance (class III).

Valproic acid: impact on lopinavir, atazanavir, and ritonavir

A class III study in 11 HIV-positive subjects (eight evaluable) taking lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100 found that lopinavir AUC increased on average by 38% (90% CI −2% to 94%) after administration of valproic acid 500 mg/day for 7 days (DiCenzo et al., 2004). A class III study of HIV-positive subjects showed no effect of valproic acid on atazanavir (12 subjects) or ritonavir (9 subjects) levels (DiCenzo et al., 2008).

Atazanavir and atazanavir/ritonavir: impact on lamotrigine

A class II study of 21 healthy volunteers (17 evaluable) assessed the pharmacokinetics of single 100-mg doses of lamotrigine without comedication (day 1) and during coadministration of atazanavir (400 mg/day from day 8 to day 17, with lamotrigine given on day 13) and atazanavir/ritonavir (300/100 mg/day from day 18 to day 32, with lamotrigine given on day 27) (Burger et al., 2008). Lamotrigine treatment alone was bioequivalent to lamotrigine plus atazanavir, whereas atazanavir/ritonavir reduced lamotrigine AUC by 32% (90% CI 30–35%) and lamotrigine half-life by 27% (90% CI 24–30%).

Lopinavir/ritonavir: impact on lamotrigine

A class III study assessed the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg bid) on serum lamotrigine levels at steady state in 24 healthy volunteers (van der Lee et al., 2006), 18 of whom completed 20 days of treatment. Lamotrigine exposure (AUC) on day 20, after 10 days of cotreatment with lopinavir/ritonavir, was 50% (90% CI 47–54%) of the value on day 10 during lamotrigine monotherapy. A doubling of the lamotrigine dose was required to achieve serum lamotrigine levels comparable with those prior to lopinavir/ritonavir treatment. Pharmacokinetic parameters for lopinavir/ritonavir were similar to those for historical controls.

Lopinavir/ritonavir: impact on phenytoin

In eight healthy volunteers, lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg bid for 10 days) reduced mean steady-state exposure (AUC) to phenytoin by 31% (90% CI 16–43%) (downgraded to class III because of dropouts) (Lim et al., 2004).

Lopinavir/ritonavir: impact on valproic acid

Serum valproic acid levels in a cohort of subjects infected with HIV and not receiving lopinavir/ritonavir did not differ significantly from those in subjects comedicated with lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg twice daily; equivalence criteria were not defined (class III) (DiCenzo et al., 2004).

What is the evidence for interaction between AEDs and integrase inhibitors?

Raltegravir: impact on lamotrigine

One class II study of 24 healthy volunteers assessed the pharmacokinetics of a single lamotrigine dose (100 mg) with or without raltegravir coadministration (400 mg bid for 5 days) (van Luin et al., 2009). The 90% confidence limits for the geometric ratio of lamotrigine AUC and peak plasma concentration (Cmax) in the two occasions were within bioequivalence range (0.80–1.25), indicating lack of interaction as assessed by this criterion.

Raltegravir: impact on midazolam

A two-period study assessed the influence of raltegravir (800 mg/day) on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam (single 2-mg oral dose), a marker of CYP3A4 activity (class II) (Iwamoto et al., 2008). Midazolam AUC and Cmax in the presence and absence of raltegravir remained within bioequivalence limits, suggesting that raltegravir does not affect CYP3A4 activity.

What is the evidence for an interaction between AEDs and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) ARVs?

Benzodiazepines: impact on zidovudine

A class III study found no significant differences in zidovudine levels between patients on benzodiazepines and those off benzodiazepines; statistical power was low (Burger et al., 1994b).

Carbamazepine: impact on efavirenz

In a randomized, open-label, crossover study (class III due to dropouts), 18 healthy subjects (Ji et al., 2008) received efavirenz 600 mg/day on days 1–14; on days 15–35 efavirenz 600 mg/day was coadministered with carbamazepine titrated up to 400 mg/day. In the 14 evaluable subjects, carbamazepine reduced efavirenz AUC by 36% (90% CI 32–40%) as compared with efavirenz alone.

Carbamazepine: impact on nevirapine

In a class III pilot study in four healthy women (L’Homme et al., 2006), the mean half-life of nevirapine (single 200-mg dose) was reduced after a single 400-mg dose of carbamazepine (from 52 to 33 h, p = 0.021), which corresponds to a median decrease of 18.8 h (range 15.6–38). These data are difficult to interpret because of the study’s small sample size and single-dose design.

Phenobarbital: impact on nevirapine

This same class III study (L’Homme et al., 2006) in four women also found no significant change in mean nevirapine half-life after a single 200-mg dose of phenobarbital.

Phenytoin: impact on nevirapine

In the same class III study conducted in healthy women (discussed above) (L’Homme et al., 2006), the mean nevirapine half-life was reduced after phenytoin treatment 184 mg/day for either 3 days (from 46–27 h, p = 0.021) or 7 days (from 55–34 h, p = 0.021) (L’Homme et al., 2006). The median (range) decreases in nevirapine half-life were 19 h (11.4–25.4) and 16.9 h (10.9–37.4), respectively. There was no significant change in mean nevirapine half-life after a single 184-mg phenytoin dose. Interpretation of these data is limited by the small sample size, short treatment duration, and low phenytoin dose used.

Valproic acid: impact on efavirenz

A class II study in 11 HIV-positive subjects taking efavirenz 600 mg/day found that efavirenz AUC was not significantly affected (mean change 0%, CI −15% to 17%) after administration of valproic acid 500 mg/day for 7 days (DiCenzo et al., 2004).

Valproic acid: impact on zidovudine

In a class II open-label study, six patients with HIV received zidovudine 100 mg every 8 h (Lertora et al., 1994); valproic acid 250 mg every 8 h was added on days 6–9. Zidovudine levels were measured on days 5 and 10. Coadministration with valproic acid resulted in mean zidovudine AUC increase from 0.65 to 1.17 mg/h/L (p < 0.05).

Efavirenz: impact on carbamazepine

In a randomized, open-label, crossover study (class III due to dropouts), 18 healthy subjects (Ji et al., 2008) received carbamazepine titrated to 400 mg daily on days 1–21; on days 22–35 carbamazepine 400 mg/day was coadministered with efavirenz 600 mg/day. In the 12 evaluable subjects, efavirenz decreased carbamazepine AUC by 27% (90% CI 20–33%) but did not affect levels of the active metabolite carbamazepine-10,11 epoxide.

Efavirenz: impact on valproic acid

Valproic acid levels in a cohort of subjects with HIV not receiving efavirenz did not differ significantly from those measured in subjects comedicated with efavirenz 600 mg/day; equivalence criteria were not defined (class III) (DiCenzo et al., 2004).

Zidovudine: impact on phenytoin

Another class III study compared patients with AIDS on zidovudine (prospective study arm) plus phenytoin (n = 109 serum samples from 21 patients) with patients without AIDS (historical controls) on phenytoin (n = 1,231 serum samples from 557 patients) (Burger et al., 1994a). The most commonly prescribed phenytoin dose was 300 mg/day. Addition of zidovudine did not significantly affect phenytoin concentrations in the study patients when compared with levels in the historical controls (8.8 ± 0.88 and 8.9 ± 1.2 mg/L, respectively; p = 0.99).

What is the evidence that AED–ARV interactions are clinically meaningful?

One class II retrospective cohort study (Okulicz et al., 2011) (derived from a database with prospective outcome assessment) used data from the U.S. Military HIV Natural History Study. This study matched patients having episodes of overlap of EI-AED therapy and PI/NNRTI ARV combination therapy (n = 19 patients, 34 episodes of overlap) with patients having episodes of overlap of newer, non–EI-AEDs and PI/NNRTI ARV combinations (n = 85 patients, 142 episodes of overlap). Evidence of virologic failure, as determined by ≥2 consecutive VL of >400 copies/ml, was assessed. All patients were taking ARVs for >6 months, with episodes of AED and ARV overlap of ≥28 days. The EI-AED and non–EI-AED cohorts did not differ in CD4 count at ARV initiation, in prior AIDS-defining events, or in ARV therapy type and duration. Patients on EI-AED + ARV therapy had significantly higher rates of virologic failure (10 of 16, 63%) as compared with patients on non–EI-AED + ARV therapy (20 of 75, 27%) for the first ARV + AED period, with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.58 (90% CI 1.47–14.25, p = 0.009) (Okulicz et al., 2011).

In addition, 14 case studies (class IV) described patients whose AED concentrations changed after ARV therapy was initiated (Honda et al., 1999; Berbel Garcia et al., 2000; Burman & Orr, 2000; Hugen et al., 2000; Kato et al., 2000; Mateu-de Antonio et al., 2001; Robertson et al., 2005; Bates & Herman, 2006; Motoya et al., 2006; Saraga et al., 2006; Bonora et al., 2007). In some cases, this provides some confirmatory patient data supporting the significance of the human volunteer data. In other cases, it provides the only available interaction data. Table S3 presents details regarding these data.

Conclusions

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

Phenytoin possibly reduces lopinavir and ritonavir levels by about 30% (one class II study). Valproic acid possibly increases zidovudine exposure (one class II study). Valproic acid possibly has no effect on efavirenz exposure (one class II study). Ritonavir/atazanavir possibly reduces lamotrigine exposure by about 30% (one class II study). Raltegravir and atazanavir possibly have no effect on lamotrigine exposure (one class II study). Raltegravir possibly has no effect on midazolam exposure (one class II study). The evidence is insufficient to support or refute other pharmacokinetic AED–ARV interactions (single class III/multiple class IV studies). Coadministration of highly active antiretroviral therapy containing a PI or NNRTI and an EI-AED possibly results in higher virologic failure rates (one class II study).

Recommendations

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

Patients receiving phenytoin may require a lopinavir/ritonavir dosage increase of about 50% to maintain unchanged serum concentrations (Level C). Patients receiving valproic acid may require a zidovudine dosage reduction to maintain unchanged serum zidovudine concentrations (Level C). Coadministration of valproic acid and efavirenz may not require efavirenz dosage adjustment (Level C). Patients receiving ritonavir/atazanavir may require a lamotrigine dosage increase of about 50% to maintain unchanged lamotrigine serum concentrations (Level C). Coadministration of raltegravir or atazanavir and lamotrigine may not require lamotrigine dosage adjustment (Level C). Coadministration of raltegravir and midazolam may not require midazolam dosage adjustment (Level C). Patients may be counseled that it is unclear whether dosage adjustment is necessary when other AEDs and ARVs are combined (Level U).

It may be important to avoid EI-AEDs in people on ARV regimens that include PIs or NNRTIs, as pharmacokinetic interactions may result in virologic failure, which has clinical implications for disease progression and development of ARV resistance. If such regimens are required for seizure control, patients may be monitored through pharmacokinetic assessments to ensure efficacy of the ARV regimen (Level C).

Clinical Context

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

A retrospective cohort study and numerous pharmacokinetic studies indicate that EI-AEDs interact with ARVs. The optimal choice of epilepsy treatment in patients with HIV should reflect an accounting for the metabolic and inhibitory/inducing profiles of coadministered drugs. Clinicians who prescribe ARVs and AEDs are encouraged to refer to the Department of Health and Human Services treatment guidelines for HIV/AIDS, which provide specific recommendations for the management of possible drug–drug interactions with AED–ARV combinations (available at http://aidsinfo.nih.gov/contentfiles/AdultandAdolescentGL.pdf). For newer ARV agents, minimal data exist on drug interactions with AEDs.

Recommendations for Future Research

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

Future research regarding AED–ARV interactions is needed. Special priority should be given to the study of first-line AED–ARV combinations used in low- and middle-income countries where second-line agents may not be available.

Disclaimer

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

This statement is provided as an educational service of the American Academy of Neurology and the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). It is based on an assessment of current scientific and clinical information. It is not intended to include all possible proper methods of care for a particular neurologic problem or all legitimate criteria for choosing to use a specific procedure. Neither is it intended to exclude any reasonable alternative methodologies. The AAN and ILAE recognize that specific patient care decisions are the prerogative of the patient and the physician caring for the patient, based on all of the circumstances involved. The clinical context section is made available in order to place the evidence-based guideline(s) into perspective with current practice habits and challenges. No formal practice recommendations should be inferred. This report was written by experts selected by the ILAE and was approved for publication by the ILAE. Opinions expressed by the authors do not necessarily represent official policy or position of the ILAE.

Acknowledgment

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

This guideline was developed with financial support from the American Academy of Neurology and the International League Against Epilepsy.

Disclosure

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

Dr. Birbeck serves on the editorial boards of Epilepsia and Epilepsy & Behavior; and receives/has received research support from the NIH, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the Dana Foundation, and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Dr. French has served on scientific advisory boards for UCB, Johnson & Johnson, Eisai Inc., Novartis, Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Icagen, Inc., Intranasal Therapeutics Inc., Sepracor Inc., and Marinus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; has received funding for travel from UCB, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Pharma, Inc., Eisai Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, and GlaxoSmithKline; serves as an Associate Editor for Epilepsy Currents and the supplements editor for Epileptic Disorders; is president of the Epilepsy Study Consortium, which receives money from multiple pharmaceutical companies; 25% of her salary is paid to NYU by the consortium; and she has received research support from SK Pharma Co., Ltd., Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Pfizer Inc, UCB, Eisai, Johnson & Johnson, the NIH, and the Epilepsy Research Foundation. Dr. Perucca serves on scientific advisory boards for and has received funding for travel or speaker honoraria from Bial, Eisai Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, UCB, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc.; serves on editorial advisory boards for Epilepsia, Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, CNS Drugs, Epileptic Disorders, Epilepsy Research, Seizure, Lancet Neurology, Expert Reviews in Neurotherapeutics, Clinical Pharmacokinetics, Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety and Clinical Drug Investigation, European Neurological Journal, Neurosciences, and World Journal of Pharmacology and Clinical Investigation; receives publishing royalties for Antiepileptic Drugs (Raven Press/Lippincott, 2002), Epilepsy: A Comprehensive Textbook (Lippincott, 2008), and The Treatment of Epilepsy (Wiley Blackwell, 2009); serves as a consultant for Bial, Eisai Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Ibsa, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer Inc, sanofi-aventis, SK Holdings Co Ltd, UCB, Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Inc., World Health Organization, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc.; receives research support from UCB, European Commission, Italian Medicines Agency, Italian Ministry of Health, Italian Ministry for Education, and Institute of Neurology IRCCS C. Mondino Foundation, Pavia, Italy; and prepared an affidavit in a medical-legal case. Dr. Simpson serves/has served on scientific advisory boards for Cephalon, Inc., MEDA Pharmaceuticals Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals, NeurogesX, Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer Inc, GlaxoSmithKline, Allergan, Inc., Merz Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Merck Serono, Covidien, Astellas Pharma Inc., Alpharma, Biogen Idec, Ipsen, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Forest Laboratories, Inc., and Acorda Therapeutics Inc.; serves on the editorial boards of Clinical Journal of Pain and AIDS Patient Care; has served on the speakers’ bureau for Eli Lilly and Company and GlaxoSmithKline; serves as a consultant for NeurogesX, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Allergan, Inc., Merz Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Astellas Pharma Inc., Ipsen, and U.S. WorldMeds, LLC; has received speaker honoraria from Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Allergan, Inc., and Astellas Pharma Inc.; receives research support from NeurogesX, Pfizer Inc, Allergan, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, the NIH (NINDS, NIMH), and the Peripheral Neuropathy Foundation; and has given expert testimony regarding a case involving the myotoxicity of statins. Dr. Fraimow has received research support from JMI Laboratories and the NIH. Dr. Fraimow’s spouse has served on scientific advisory boards for UCB, Johnson & Johnson, Eisai Inc., Novartis, Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Icagen, Inc., Intranasal Therapeutics Inc., Sepracor Inc., and Marinus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; has received funding for travel from UCB, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Pharma, Inc., Eisai Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, and GlaxoSmithKline; serves as an Associate Editor for Epilepsy Currents and the supplements editor for Epileptic Disorders; is president of the Epilepsy Study Consortium, which receives money from multiple pharmaceutical companies; 25% of her salary is paid to NYU by the consortium; and she has received research support from SK Pharma Co., Ltd., Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Pfizer Inc, UCB, Eisai, Johnson & Johnson, the NIH, and the Epilepsy Research Foundation. Dr. George served on a scientific advisory board for Pfizer Inc. Dr. Okulicz reports no disclosures. Dr. Clifford serves/has served on scientific advisory boards for Biogen Idec, Elan Corporation, Roche, Forest Laboratories, Inc., Genentech, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Schering-Plough Corp., Bristol-Meyers Squibb, and Genzyme Corporation; received speaker honoraria and funding for travel from GlaxoSmithKline, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Genentech Inc.; has received research support from Pfizer Inc, Schering-Plough Corp., Bavarian Nordic, NeurogesX, GlaxoSmithKline, Tibotec Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Gilead Sciences, Inc.; and receives research support from the NIH (NIMH, NINDS, NIAID, and Fogarty Institutes). Dr. Hachad reports no disclosures. Dr. Levy serves on the editorial advisory board for Drug Metabolism Letters; has served as a consultant for Johnson & Johnson, Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc., Xenon, Biocodex, NeuroAdjuvants Inc., Allergan, Inc., Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and NeuroVista Corporation; has received publishing royalties for Antiepileptic Drugs, 5th ed. (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2002); and has served as an expert witness in medical-legal cases. We confirm that we have read the Journal’s position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this report is consistent with those guidelines.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information
  • Al Mazari A, Zomaya AY, Charleston M, Salem H, Maher A, Garsia RJ. (2007) Lability of antiretroviral drug resistance mutations – correlates with immunological and virological responses. Curr HIV Res 5:430439.
  • Alexander CS, Asselin JJ, Ting LS, Montaner JS, Hogg RS, Yip B, O’Shaughnessy MV, Harrigan PR. (2003) Antiretroviral concentrations in untimed plasma samples predict therapy outcome in a population with advanced disease. J Infect Dis 188:541548.
  • American Academy of Neurology. (2005) Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual: 2004 Edition. American Academy of Neurology, St. Paul, MN.
  • Anon. (2007) Epilepsy and HIV – a dangerous combination. Lancet Neurol 6:747.
  • Baciewicz AM, Chrisman CR, Finch CK, Self TH. (2008) Update on rifampin and rifabutin drug interactions. Am J Med Sci 335:126136.
  • Bates DE, Herman RJ. (2006) Carbamazepine toxicity induced by lopinavir/ritonavir and nelfinavir. Ann Pharmacother 40:11901195.
  • Berbel Garcia A, Latorre Ibarra A, Porta Etessam J, Martinez Salio A, Perez Martinez D, Siaz Diaz R, Toledo Heras M. (2000) Protease inhibitor-induced carbamazepine toxicity. Clin Neuropharmacol 23:216218.
  • Birbeck G, Chomba E, Ddumba E, Kauye F, Mielke J. (2007) Lack of appropriate treatment for people with comorbid HIV/AIDS and epilepsy in sub-Saharan Africa. Epilepsia 48:14241425.
  • Birbeck GL, Chomba E, Kvalsund M, Bradbury R, Mang’ombe C, Malama K, Kaile T, Byers PA, Organek N; RAAZ Study Team. (2009) Antiretroviral adherence in rural Zambia: the first year of treatment availability. Am J Trop Med Hyg 80:669674.
  • Bonora S, Calcagno A, Fontana S, D’Avolio A, Siccardi M, Gobbi F, Di Perri G. (2007) Clinically significant drug interaction between tipranavir-ritonavir and phenobarbital in an HIV-infected subject. Clin Infect Dis 45:16541655.
  • Bradshaw D, Groenewald P, Laubscher R, Nannan N, Nojilana B, Norman R, Pieterse D, Schneider M, Bourne DE, Timaeus IM, Dorrington R, Johnson L. (2003) Initial burden of disease estimates for South Africa, 2000. S Afr Med J 93:682688.
  • Breen RA, Lipman MC, Johnson MA. (2000) Increased incidence of peripheral neuropathy with co-administration of stavudine and isoniazid in HIV-infected individuals. AIDS 14:615.
  • Breen RA, Swaden L, Ballinger J, Lipman MC. (2006) Tuberculosis and HIV co-infection: a practical therapeutic approach. Drugs 66:22992308.
  • Burger DM, Meenhorst PL, Mulder JW, Kraaijeveld CL, Koks CH, Bult A, Beijnen JH. (1994a) Therapeutic drug monitoring of phenytoin in patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Ther Drug Monit 16:616620.
  • Burger DM, Meenhorst PL, ten Napel CH, Mulder JW, Neef C, Koks CH, Bult A, Beijnen JH. (1994b) Pharmacokinetic variability of zidovudine in HIV-infected individuals: subgroup analysis and drug interactions. AIDS 8:16831689.
  • Burger DM, Huisman A, Van Ewijk N, Neisingh H, Van Uden P, Rongen GA, Koopmans P, Bertz RJ. (2008) The effect of atazanavir and atazanavir/ritonavir on UDP-glucuronosyltransferase using lamotrigine as a phenotypic probe. Clin Pharmacol Ther 84:698703.
  • Burman W, Orr L. (2000) Carbamazepine toxicity after starting combination antiretroviral therapy including ritonavir and efavirenz. AIDS 14:27932794.
  • Cazali N, Tran A, Treluyer JM, Rey E, d’Athis P, Vincent J, Pons G. (2003) Inhibitory effect of stiripentol on carbamazepine and saquinavir metabolism in human. Br J Clin Pharmacol 56:526536.
  • Deeks SG, Barbour JD, Grant RM, Martin JN. (2002) Duration and predictors of CD4 T-cell gains in patients who continue combination therapy despite detectable plasma viremia. AIDS 16:201207.
  • DiCenzo R, Peterson D, Cruttenden K, Morse G, Riggs G, Gelbard H, Schifitto G. (2004) Effects of valproic acid coadministration on plasma efavirenz and lopinavir concentrations in human immunodeficiency virus-infected adults. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 48:43284331.
  • DiCenzo R, Peterson DR, Cruttenden K, Mariuz P, Rezk NL, Hochreiter J, Gelbard H, Schifitto G. (2008) Effects of minocycline and valproic acid coadministration on atazanavir plasma concentrations in human immunodeficiency virus-infected adults receiving atazanavir-ritonavir. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 52:30353039.
  • Di Perri G, Aguilar Marucco D, Mondo A, Gonzalez de Requena D, Audagnotto S, Gobbi F, Bonora S. (2005) Drug–drug interactions and tolerance in combining antituberculosis and antiretroviral therapy. Expert Opin Drug Saf 4:821836.
  • Ellis RJ, Rosario D, Clifford DB, McArthur JC, Simpson D, Alexander T, Gelman BB, Vaida F, Collier A, Marra CM, Ances B, Atkinson JH, Dworkin RH, Morgello S, Grant I; CHARTER Study Group. (2010) Continued high prevalence and adverse clinical impact of human immunodeficiency virus-associated sensory neuropathy in the era of combination antiretroviral therapy: the CHARTER Study. Arch Neurol 67:552558.
  • Holmberg SD, Buchbinder SP, Conley LJ, Wong LC, Katz MH, Penley KA, Hershow RC, Judson FN. (1995) The spectrum of medical conditions and symptoms before acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in homosexual and bisexual men infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. Am J Epidemiol 141:395404; discussion 405–396.
  • Holtzman DM, Kaku DA, So YT. (1989) New-onset seizures associated with human immunodeficiency virus infection: causation and clinical features in 100 cases. Am J Med 87:173177.
  • Honda M, Yasuoka A, Aoki M, Oka S. (1999) A generalized seizure following initiation of nelfinavir in a patient with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection, suspected due to interaction between nelfinavir and phenytoin. Intern Med 38:302303.
  • Hugen PW, Burger DM, Brinkman K, ter Hofstede HJ, Schuurman R, Koopmans PP, Hekster YA. (2000) Carbamazepine – indinavir interaction causes antiretroviral therapy failure. Ann Pharmacother 34:465470.
  • Iwamoto M, Kassahun K, Troyer MD, Hanley WD, Lu P, Rhoton A, Petry AS, Ghosh K, Mangin E, DeNoia EP, Wenning LA, Stone JA, Gottesdiener KM, Wagner JA. (2008) Lack of a pharmacokinetic effect of raltegravir on midazolam: in vitro/in vivo correlation. J Clin Pharmacol 48:209214.
  • Ji P, Damle B, Xie J, Unger SE, Grasela DM, Kaul S. (2008) Pharmacokinetic interaction between efavirenz and carbamazepine after multiple-dose administration in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 48:948956.
  • Kato Y, Fujii T, Mizoguchi N, Takata N, Ueda K, Feldman MD, Kayser SR. (2000) Potential interaction between ritonavir and carbamazepine. Pharmacotherapy 20:851854.
  • Kellinghaus C, Engbring C, Kovac S, Möddel G, Boesebeck F, Fischera M, Anneken K, Klönne K, Reichelt D, Evers S, Husstedt IW. (2008) Frequency of seizures and epilepsy in neurological HIV-infected patients. Seizure 17:2733.
  • Lertora JJ, Rege AB, Greenspan DL, Akula S, George WJ, Hyslop NE Jr, Agrawal KC. (1994) Pharmacokinetic interaction between zidovudine and valproic acid in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Clin Pharmacol Ther 56:272278.
  • L’Homme RF, Dijkema T, van der Ven AJ, Burger DM. (2006) Brief report: enzyme inducers reduce elimination half-life after a single dose of nevirapine in healthy women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 43:193196.
  • Lim ML, Min SS, Eron JJ, Bertz R, Robinson M, Gaedigk A, Kashuba AD. (2003) A two-way drug interaction between lopinavir/ritonavir and phenytoin. Proceedings from the 10th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. Feb 10–14, 2003; Boston, MA. Abstract 535.
  • Lim ML, Min SS, Eron JJ, Bertz RJ, Robinson M, Gaedigk A, Kashuba AD. (2004) Coadministration of lopinavir/ritonavir and phenytoin results in two-way drug interaction through cytochrome P-450 induction. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 36:10341040.
  • Lohse N, Kronborg G, Gerstoft J, Larsen CS, Pedersen G, Pedersen C, Sorensen HT, Obel N. (2006) Virological control during the first 6–18 months after initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy as a predictor for outcome in HIV-infected patients: a Danish, population-based, 6-year follow-up study. Clin Infect Dis 42:136144.
  • Mateu-de Antonio J, Grau S, Gimeno-Bayon JL, Carmona A. (2001) Ritonavir-induced carbamazepine toxicity. Ann Pharmacother 35:125126.
  • Motoya T, Thevanayagam LN, Blaschke TF, Au S, Stone JA, Jayewardene AL, Chi J, Aweeka FT. (2006) Characterization of nelfinavir binding to plasma proteins and the lack of drug displacement interactions. HIV Med 7:122128.
  • Okulicz JF, Grandits GA, French JA, George JM, Simpson DM, Birbeck GL, Ganesan A, Weintrob AC, Crum-Cianflone N, Lalani T, Landrum ML; Infectious Disease Clinical Research Program (IDCRP) HIV Working Group. (2011) Virologic outcomes of HAART with concurrent use of cytochrome P450 enzyme-inducing antiepileptics: a retrospective case control study. AIDS Res Ther 8:18.
  • Olmedilla ML, Fernandez AH, Merino GC. (2000) Interaccion indinavir-fenitoina en un paciente VIH+: a proposito de un caso. Farm Hosp 24:406407.
  • Ormaasen V, Bruun JN, Sandvik L, Holberg-Petersen M, Gaarder PI. (2003) Prognostic value of changes in CD4 count and HIV RNA during the first six months on highly active antiretroviral therapy in chronic human immunodeficiency virus infection. Scand J Infect Dis 35:383388.
  • Pascual-Sedano B, Iranzo A, Marti-Fabregas J, Domingo P, Escartin A, Fuster M, Barrio JL, Sambeat MA. (1999) Prospective study of new-onset seizures in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection: etiologic and clinical aspects. Arch Neurol 56:609612.
  • Robertson SM, Penzak SR, Lane J, Pau AK, Mican JM. (2005) A potentially significant interaction between efavirenz and phenytoin: a case report and review of the literature. Clin Infect Dis 41:e15e18.
  • Saraga M, Preisig M, Zullino DF. (2006) Reduced valproate plasma levels possible after introduction of efavirenz in a bipolar patient. Bipolar Disord 8:415417.
  • Schifitto G, McDermott MP, McArthur JC, Marder K, Sacktor N, Epstein L, Kieburtz K; Dana Consortium on the Therapy of HIV Dementia and Related Cognitive Disorders. (2002) Incidence of and risk factors for HIV-associated distal sensory polyneuropathy. Neurology 58:17641768.
  • Sheehan NL, Brouillette MJ, Delisle MS, Allan J. (2006) Possible interaction between lopinavir/ritonavir and valproic acid exacerbates bipolar disorder. Ann Pharmacother 40:147150.
  • Simpson DM, Kitch D, Evans SR, McArthur JC, Asmuth DM, Cohen B, Goodkin K, Gerschenson M, So Y, Marra CM, Diaz-Arrastia R, Shriver S, Millar L, Clifford DB; ACTG A5117 Study Group. (2006) HIV neuropathy natural history cohort study: assessment measures and risk factors. Neurology 66:16791687.
  • Tenorio AR, Smith KY, Kuritzkes DR, Sha BE, Donoval B, Young R, Jennings C, Bremer J, Shott S, Landay A, Kessler HA. (2003) HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-treated patients with prolonged partial viral suppression: clinical, virologic, and immunologic course. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 34:491496.
  • van der Lee MJ, Dawood L, ter Hofstede HJ, de Graaff-Teulen MJ, van Ewijk-Beneken Kolmer EW, Caliskan-Yassen N, Koopmans PP, Burger DM. (2006) Lopinavir/ritonavir reduces lamotrigine plasma concentrations in healthy subjects. Clin Pharmacol Ther 80:159168.
  • van Luin M, Colbers A, Verwey-van Wissen CP, van Ewijk-Beneken-Kolmer EW, van der Kolk M, Hoitsma A, da Silva HG, Burger DM. (2009) The effect of raltegravir on the glucuronidation of lamotrigine. J Clin Pharmacol 49:12201227.
  • Varella RB, Schrago CG, Zalis MG. (2009) Differential evolution of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease and reverse transcriptase genes between HAART-failing and naive-treated individuals. Curr HIV Res 7:601605.
  • Wong MC, Suite ND, Labar DR. (1990) Seizures in human immunodeficiency virus infection. Arch Neurol 47:640642.
  • World Health Organization. (2006) Patient Monitoring Guidelines for HIV Care and Antiretroviral Therapy. WHO Press, Geneva.
  • World Health Organization. (2007) Tuberculosis Care with TB-HIV Co-Management. WHO Press, Geneva.

Supporting Information

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Description of the Analytic Process
  4. Analysis of the Evidence
  5. Conclusions
  6. Recommendations
  7. Clinical Context
  8. Recommendations for Future Research
  9. Disclaimer
  10. Acknowledgment
  11. Disclosure
  12. References
  13. Supporting Information

Table S1. Antiepileptic drugs and antiretroviral drugs in the review.

Table S2. Systematic review of the global potential co-usage of AEDs and ARVs.

Table S3. Evidence table regarding potential interactions between AEDs and ARVs.

Table S4. Summary table.

Appendix S1. Original search strategy.

Appendix S2. Updated search strategy.

Appendix S3. Mission statement of QSS.

Appendix S4. Quality standards subcommittee members 2009–2011.

Appendix S5. Classification of evidence.

Appendix S6. Classification of recommendations.

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
EPI_3335_sm_AppendixS1.pdf829KSupporting info item
EPI_3335_sm_AppendixS2.pdf119KSupporting info item
EPI_3335_sm_AppendixS3-S6.doc16KSupporting info item
EPI_3335_sm_TableS1-S4.doc29KSupporting info item

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.