Introduction
Antiepileptic drug-level monitoring has been a common clinical practice since the advent of antiepileptic drugs or antiseizure medications.[1] Maintaining antiepileptic drugs within laboratory-defined therapeutic ranges is a myth, with professionals overestimating values in most clinical settings.
Epilepsy is primarily diagnosed through clinical evaluation, with diagnostic modalities such as electroencephalogram and magnetic resonance imaging considered complementary investigations.[2] The assessment of antiepileptic drug efficacy should also be clinical, and the antiepileptic drug level should be utilized as a complementary tool in selected situations.
Function
Register For Free And Read The Full Article
- Search engine and full access to all medical articles
- 10 free questions in your specialty
- Free CME/CE Activities
- Free daily question in your email
- Save favorite articles to your dashboard
- Emails offering discounts
Learn more about a Subscription to StatPearls Point-of-Care
Function
Patient-Specific Antiepileptic Drug Levels
A single antiepileptic drug level can reasonably be assessed while the patient is seizure-free, serving as a benchmark for future reference if seizure control deteriorates or symptoms suggestive of toxicity develop.[3] Regular monitoring of valproic acid levels is crucial in cases of toxicity, with intervals typically set every 2 to 4 hours until a decrease in serum valproate levels is observed.[4]
Breakthrough Seizures
In cases of patients with epilepsy who have remained stable over a period and present with unprovoked breakthrough seizures, assessing drug levels may provide valuable guidance for treatment decisions.[5]
Status Epilepticus
In managing status epilepticus, the primary goal is to abort the attack using a benzodiazepine followed by an antiepileptic drug load, often with phenytoin. Monitoring antiepileptic drug levels in this setting could guide further loading if clinically indicated.[5]
Drug Substitution
Variations exist between different generic and brand-name antiepileptic drugs. Therefore, guidelines recommend against switching between different generics and brands. However, monitoring antiepileptic drug levels can aid in dose adjustments when substitution is necessary.[6]
Pharmacokinetics
The efficacy of antiepileptic drugs can be influenced by factors such as pregnancy, liver and renal diseases, drug interactions in polypharmacy, and aging. Therefore, drug levels can assist in dose adjustments to achieve a seizure-free quality of life.[3]
Issues of Concern
Variability in Antiseizure Medication Levels
Multiple clinical studies have been conducted to test the efficacy of monitoring antiepileptic drug levels in various clinical settings. One such study involved 114 inpatients in the United Kingdom. The medications studied included phenytoin, valproate, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and phenobarbitone. To a lesser extent, other levels had been ordered, such as benzodiazepines, topiramate, gabapentin, and vigabatrin. The findings of the study indicated that antiepileptic drug levels proved beneficial with phenytoin, carbamazepine, and phenobarbitone. Lamotrigine has different therapeutic ranges, making interpretation of the levels difficult and leading to inappropriate dosage adjustments.[7] Valproate has a short half-life, making its measurement low-yield and primarily reflective of short-term compliance.
Conversely, phenytoin has a long half-life; hence, the antiepileptic drug level reflects long-term usage. The newer antiepileptic drugs have broader indications and are safer compared to the older ones. However, some of these newer agents lack generalizable reference ranges. For these reasons, level monitoring with newer agents is not useful.[8] Furthermore, variability in antiepileptic drug levels exists within patient populations and between clinical settings and is often based on the type and severity of the seizure.[9]
A study demonstrated that antiepileptic drug levels vary considerably among patients treated for idiopathic generalized tonic-clonic seizures with phenytoin. While some patients achieve a seizure-free quality of life with certain antiepileptic drug levels, others may experience symptoms of toxicity. Thus, it is impractical to generalize the efficacy of antiepileptic drug-level monitoring.[10]
Drug-Drug Interactions Affecting Antiseizure Medications
Clinicians should be aware of the pharmacokinetics of medications, particularly in cases of polypharmacy. Medications utilizing metabolic pathways through the liver are often affected by interactions, which are commonly observed in medications such as valproic acid and carbamazepine. Non-seizure medications are also an important consideration, especially in hospital settings. Carbapenem can reduce valproic acid levels significantly and cause breakthrough seizures.[11] In such cases, it is important to monitor levels to guide therapy. Enzyme-inhibiting medications such as valproic acid can affect the metabolism of lamotrigine, increasing the level and its half-life. Conversely, medications such as estrogen-containing oral contraceptives reduce lamotrigine levels by increasing glucuronidation.[12][13][14] New-generation antiseizure medications such as gabapentin, levetiracetam, pregabalin, and vigabatrin are excreted unchanged by the kidneys and show minimal potential for drug-drug interactions.[15]
Clinical Monitoring Versus Drug-Level Monitoring
Multiple studies have concluded that clinical monitoring could optimally achieve seizure control. An investigation examined patients taking phenytoin and compared medication adjustments based on clinical assessment in one group to adjustments based on drug level in the other group. The study found that the majority of cases could be managed clinically, with only a few patients benefiting from drug-level monitoring.[16] This study was conducted using an old antiepileptic drug with a long half-life; therefore, antiepileptic drug levels are more closely correlated with medication compliance. Attempts to achieve therapeutic levels in seizure-free patients with subtherapeutic levels have not shown any difference in seizure control and have been associated with increased neurotoxicity.[10]
Antiseizure Medication Compliance
Compliance with epilepsy treatment plans is challenging due to the chronic nature of the disease, often requiring long-term pharmacologic therapy. Non-compliance manifests in various forms, with erratic non-compliance, characterized by inconsistent dosing, being the most prevalent. This inconsistency results in unreliable therapeutic antiepileptic drug levels and variability in seizure control.[17] Some patients exhibit white coat adherence, wherein they take their medications 1 or more days before their medical appointments, often resulting in antiepileptic drug levels within the normal ranges. In general, compliance studies are limited by their short-term nature and are difficult to correlate with actual behavior, which is known to vary over long periods in chronic conditions such as epilepsy.[18]
Compliance and adherence are terms used interchangeably to describe the status of not taking the medication or following the treatment plan.[19] Compliance implies a paternalistic approach and fails to consider the patient's perspective. Adherence reflects the patient's role and perspective in the treatment plan. Compliance or adherence to a treatment plan is a complex process stemming from the strength of the relationships between physicians, patients, and the healthcare system. Compliance is paternalistic, passive, and episodic. Conversely, adherence is collaborative, active, and continuous. Therefore, many clinicians prefer to use the term adherence over compliance to position the patient at the center of their treatment plan and emphasize a holistic approach to achieving positive long-term outcomes when treating complex chronic conditions such as epilepsy.[20]
Other Ways to Promote Antiepileptic Drug-Level Monitoring
To effectively guide patients in managing their medications, clinicians must investigate the reasons for non-adherence and assist patients in overcoming them. However, it depends on the patient's ability to adhere to their medications eventually. Various methods can be employed to assess compliance, including:
- Patient reporting, which depends on the patient recalling, their reliability as a historian, and the pattern of compliance with other medications
- Monitoring drug levels, which has traditionally been used as the only reliable way to monitor adherence by most clinicians
- Utilization of diaries [21]
- Direct observation of medication administration
- Pill counts
- Implementation of behavioral interventions and intensive reminders [22]
There are many effective ways to help patients adhere to their medication other than monitoring drug levels. However, relying solely on drug level monitoring presents challenges, as it can be expensive, unreliable, and, in some cases, lead to unnecessary dosage adjustments, potentially increasing the risk of adverse effects.
Clinical Significance
Achieving optimal outcomes in the treatment of epilepsy rarely requires monitoring of antiepileptic drug levels.[23] Although this has been a common clinical practice for years, newer antiepileptic drugs and more recent evidence suggest that the value of antiepileptic drug-level monitoring is low except for the few scenarios mentioned above. Clinical monitoring within the broader context of a supportive, patient-centered treatment plan based on a therapeutic physician-patient relationship is the key to success.
- Although levetiracetam and brivaracetam levels are not routinely monitored, it is important to note that they may be altered during the first trimester.[24] Monitoring of levetiracetam serum levels is important during pregnancy.[25]
- Due to its complex pharmacokinetics, adjusting phenytoin dosage accurately in critically ill patients with low albumin levels is challenging. The commonly used Sheiner-Tozer equation often fails to predict free phenytoin concentration accurately, potentially leading to inappropriate dosing.
- To address this, the corrected phenytoin level can be calculated using the formula: Corrected phenytoin = obtained phenytoin level / ((adjustment x albumin) + 0.1). Here, adjustment = 0.275; if creatine clearance is <20 mL/min, adjustment = 0.2.
- This study compared the Sheiner-Tozer equation with direct measurement of free phenytoin concentration using high-performance liquid chromatography in such patients, revealing discrepancies between the 2 methods. Direct measurement of free phenytoin concentration is recommended for individualizing phenytoin dosage in critically ill patients with low albumin levels.[26]
Other Issues
In the current environment of patients seeking healthy foods and herbal and non-proprietary medications, therapeutic drug monitoring can pose challenges. A comprehensive understanding of the patient's medication regimen is essential to consider potential drug-drug interactions and minimize undesired changes in antiepileptic drug levels. The recent increase in the use of cannabidiol as an antiepileptic drug has heightened the need for frequent monitoring of certain medications, such as clobazam, during concomitant therapy.[27] In combination with valproate or clobazam, cannabidiol can cause increased liver enzymes, notably alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase; therefore, patients receiving this combination may benefit from additional liver enzyme monitoring. Animal studies have shown cannabidiol to increase clobazam anticonvulsant activity through CYP3A4 activity, but only when an anticonvulsant dose of cannabidiol was used. Despite increased serum clobazam concentrations, administering sub-therapeutic doses of cannabidiol did not result in heightened anticonvulsant effects.[23][28][29]
Trough Versus Free levels
Trough levels and free levels of antiepileptic drugs are crucial parameters for therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with epilepsy.
Trough levels represent the concentration of antiepileptic drugs in the blood at the lowest point, typically just before the next dose is due. This consideration is especially important in antiepileptic drugs with short half-lives. These levels are significant as they indicate the minimum concentration of the drug between doses, ensuring that therapeutic levels are maintained throughout the dosing interval. For antiepileptic drugs, maintaining adequate trough levels is essential for preventing breakthrough seizures and optimizing therapeutic efficacy.
On the other hand, free levels denote the concentration of the unbound, pharmacologically active fraction of the drug in the bloodstream. Measuring free levels becomes crucial when protein binding may be altered, such as during severe systemic illness or drug interactions. When protein binding is altered, it can influence the availability of the active form of the drug, potentially leading to inaccurate assessments of therapeutic efficacy based on total drug concentrations alone. Considerable variability exists in the free fraction of phenytoin, carbamazepine, and valproic acid among individuals, particularly when influenced by concurrent disease or drug interactions. Alterations in binding can render total concentrations unreliable indicators of pharmacologically active drug levels in plasma, potentially leading clinicians to make inappropriate dosage adjustments. Prioritizing the measurement of free drug concentration can mitigate interpretative errors and may be the preferred method for monitoring therapy in specific patient populations.[30][31][32]
Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes
Nurse practitioners, internists, primary care providers, neurologists, or emergency department physicians frequently encounter patients undergoing treatment with antiepileptic drugs. In the past, it was widely believed that routine drug monitoring of antiepileptics was beneficial, but except for a few cases, this practice is no longer recommended. Instead, clinical monitoring within the context of a supportive, patient-centered, interprofessional team treatment plan based on a therapeutic clinician-patient relationship with the support of nurses and pharmacists is the key to success. A systematic review emphasizes that not every antiepileptic drug requires therapeutic drug monitoring. Therapeutic drug monitoring can enhance clinical care, particularly for antiepileptic drugs such as phenytoin with complex pharmacokinetics, but its requirement differs based on the drug and individual patient factors.[33]
This interprofessional team includes physicians, neurologists, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses, and pharmacists. In addition to verifying appropriate dosing and performing medication reconciliation, pharmacists should emphasize the importance of medication compliance to patients and the need for close follow-up. If there is evidence of non-compliance, pharmacists should discuss the situation with clinicians managing the case. Pharmacists and nurses should assist in educating patients about the adverse effects of the drugs so that they know when to report back to clinicians; they must also be alert to signs of therapeutic failure, which must be documented and reported to other team members as necessary so that regimen modification can be implemented if required. Only through such an interprofessional team approach with open communication channels between all team members can the morbidity of anticonvulsants be reduced and safe outcomes be achieved.
Nursing, Allied Health, and Interprofessional Team Interventions
Nurses responsible for administering antiepileptic drugs should independently verify the dose and route of administration. They should also understand the potential adverse effects of the drugs and educate patients to enhance safety measures. If a dose does not appear reasonable, the nurse should contact the prescribing clinician immediately.
Nursing, Allied Health, and Interprofessional Team Monitoring
Several anticonvulsants have the potential to cause adverse cardiac effects when administered intravenously.[34] Thus, patients should be placed on a cardiac monitor, and their vital signs should be measured frequently. Any adverse effects should be immediately reported to the prescriber.
References
French JA, Perucca E. Time to Start Calling Things by Their Own Names? The Case for Antiseizure Medicines. Epilepsy currents. 2020 Mar:20(2):69-72. doi: 10.1177/1535759720905516. Epub 2020 Feb 20 [PubMed PMID: 32077329]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceBenbadis SR, Beniczky S, Bertram E, MacIver S, Moshé SL. The role of EEG in patients with suspected epilepsy. Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape. 2020 Apr 1:22(2):143-155. doi: 10.1684/epd.2020.1151. Epub [PubMed PMID: 32364504]
St Louis EK. Monitoring antiepileptic drugs: a level-headed approach. Current neuropharmacology. 2009 Jun:7(2):115-9. doi: 10.2174/157015909788848938. Epub [PubMed PMID: 19949569]
Patel AR, Nagalli S. Valproate Toxicity. StatPearls. 2024 Jan:(): [PubMed PMID: 32809733]
Stepanova D, Beran RG. The benefits of antiepileptic drug (AED) blood level monitoring to complement clinical management of people with epilepsy. Epilepsy & behavior : E&B. 2015 Jan:42():7-9. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.09.069. Epub 2014 Dec 10 [PubMed PMID: 25499154]
Atif M, Azeem M, Sarwar MR. Potential problems and recommendations regarding substitution of generic antiepileptic drugs: a systematic review of literature. SpringerPlus. 2016:5():182. doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-1824-2. Epub 2016 Feb 25 [PubMed PMID: 27026878]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceWalters RJ, Hutchings AD, Smith DF, Smith PE. Inappropriate requests for serum anti-epileptic drug levels in hospital practice. QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians. 2004 Jun:97(6):337-41 [PubMed PMID: 15152107]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceKrasowski MD. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of the Newer Anti-Epilepsy Medications. Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland). 2010 Jun 11:3(6):1909-1935 [PubMed PMID: 20640233]
Schmidt D, Haenel F. Therapeutic plasma levels of phenytoin, phenobarbital, and carbamazepine: individual variation in relation to seizure frequency and type. Neurology. 1984 Sep:34(9):1252-5 [PubMed PMID: 6540414]
Woo E, Chan YM, Yu YL, Chan YW, Huang CY. If a well-stabilized epileptic patient has a subtherapeutic antiepileptic drug level, should the dose be increased? A randomized prospective study. Epilepsia. 1988 Mar-Apr:29(2):129-39 [PubMed PMID: 3280304]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceFratoni AJ, Colmerauer JL, Linder KE, Nicolau DP, Kuti JL. A Retrospective Case Series of Concomitant Carbapenem and Valproic Acid Use: Are Best Practice Advisories Working? Journal of pharmacy practice. 2023 Jun:36(3):537-541. doi: 10.1177/08971900211063301. Epub 2021 Dec 27 [PubMed PMID: 34958247]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceArmstrong AG, Kalia R, Troutman M. Lamotrigine Drug Interactions: Ignorance is not Bliss. Kansas journal of medicine. 2022:15():109-111. doi: 10.17161/kjm.vol15.15798. Epub 2022 Mar 15 [PubMed PMID: 35345572]
Mostacci B, Esposto R, Lello S, Bisulli F, Licchetta L, Tinuper P. Estrogen-related seizure exacerbation following hormone therapy for assisted reproduction in women with epilepsy. Seizure. 2018 Oct:61():200-202. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2018.08.024. Epub 2018 Aug 30 [PubMed PMID: 30199820]
King A, Bachman E, Macken MP, Lee J, Gerard EE. Contraceptive vaginal ring reduces lamotrigine levels. Epilepsy & behavior : E&B. 2020 Oct:111():107162. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2020.107162. Epub 2020 Jun 20 [PubMed PMID: 32575009]
Gunasekera CL, Sirven JI, Feyissa AM. The evolution of antiseizure medication therapy selection in adults: Is artificial intelligence -assisted antiseizure medication selection ready for prime time? Journal of central nervous system disease. 2023:15():11795735231209209. doi: 10.1177/11795735231209209. Epub 2023 Oct 18 [PubMed PMID: 37868934]
Jannuzzi G, Cian P, Fattore C, Gatti G, Bartoli A, Monaco F, Perucca E. A multicenter randomized controlled trial on the clinical impact of therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. The Italian TDM Study Group in Epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2000 Feb:41(2):222-30 [PubMed PMID: 10691121]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceSherwin AL, Robb JP, Lechter M. Improved control of epilepsy by monitoring plasma ethosuximide. Archives of neurology. 1973 Mar:28(3):178-81 [PubMed PMID: 4631034]
Eatock J, Baker GA. Managing patient adherence and quality of life in epilepsy. Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment. 2007 Feb:3(1):117-31 [PubMed PMID: 19300542]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceFraser S. Concordance, compliance, preference or adherence. Patient preference and adherence. 2010:4():95-6. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S17167. Epub 2010 Dec 30 [PubMed PMID: 22090796]
Aronson JK. Compliance, concordance, adherence. British journal of clinical pharmacology. 2007 Apr:63(4):383-4 [PubMed PMID: 17378797]
Fisher RS. Tracking epilepsy with an electronic diary. Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992). 2010 Apr:99(4):516-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2010.01694.x. Epub 2010 Jan 27 [PubMed PMID: 20105139]
Al-Aqeel S, Gershuni O, Al-Sabhan J, Hiligsmann M. Strategies for improving adherence to antiepileptic drug treatment in people with epilepsy. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020 Oct 22:10(10):CD008312. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008312.pub4. Epub 2020 Oct 22 [PubMed PMID: 33089492]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceVázquez M, Guevara N, Maldonado C, Guido PC, Schaiquevich P. Potential Pharmacokinetic Drug-Drug Interactions between Cannabinoids and Drugs Used for Chronic Pain. BioMed research international. 2020:2020():3902740. doi: 10.1155/2020/3902740. Epub 2020 Aug 13 [PubMed PMID: 32855964]
Hahn W, Möller L, Menzler K, Poeplau T, Wagner U, Knake S. Brivaracetam and topiramate serum levels during pregnancy and delivery: a case report and a review of literature. Neurological research and practice. 2024 Mar 21:6(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s42466-024-00312-9. Epub 2024 Mar 21 [PubMed PMID: 38509597]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceBerlin M, Barchel D, Gandelman-Marton R, Brandriss N, Blatt I, Ziv-Baran T, Neufeld MY, Dinavitser N, Kohn E, Shaniv D, De-Haan T, Ofek F, Koren G, Stepensky D, Berkovitch M. Therapeutic levetiracetam monitoring during pregnancy: "mind the gap". Therapeutic advances in chronic disease. 2019:10():2040622319851652. doi: 10.1177/2040622319851652. Epub 2019 May 27 [PubMed PMID: 31191874]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceWilfred PM, Mathew S, Chacko B, Prabha R, Mathew BS. Estimation of Free Phenytoin Concentration in Critically Ill Patients with Hypoalbuminemia: Direct-measurement vs Traditional Equations. Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. 2022 Jun:26(6):682-687. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24235. Epub [PubMed PMID: 35836626]
Gilmartin CGS, Dowd Z, Parker APJ, Harijan P. Interaction of cannabidiol with other antiseizure medications: A narrative review. Seizure. 2021 Mar:86():189-196. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2020.09.010. Epub 2020 Oct 3 [PubMed PMID: 33541771]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceAnderson LL, Absalom NL, Abelev SV, Low IK, Doohan PT, Martin LJ, Chebib M, McGregor IS, Arnold JC. Coadministered cannabidiol and clobazam: Preclinical evidence for both pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions. Epilepsia. 2019 Nov:60(11):2224-2234. doi: 10.1111/epi.16355. Epub 2019 Oct 17 [PubMed PMID: 31625159]
Franco V, Perucca E. Pharmacological and Therapeutic Properties of Cannabidiol for Epilepsy. Drugs. 2019 Sep:79(13):1435-1454. doi: 10.1007/s40265-019-01171-4. Epub [PubMed PMID: 31372958]
Tobler A, Hösli R, Mühlebach S, Huber A. Free phenytoin assessment in patients: measured versus calculated blood serum levels. International journal of clinical pharmacy. 2016 Apr:38(2):303-9. doi: 10.1007/s11096-015-0241-x. Epub 2016 Jan 8 [PubMed PMID: 26746902]
Zhang X, Boyert N, Mitro M, Tang X, Bowers K, McShane AJ. Development and Validation of a Free Carbamazepine Assay on an Automated Chemistry Analyzer. The journal of applied laboratory medicine. 2020 Mar 1:5(2):357-362. doi: 10.1093/jalm/jfz003. Epub [PubMed PMID: 32445379]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceLin K, Cao VFS, Au C, Dahri K. Clinical Pharmacokinetic Monitoring of Free Valproic Acid Levels: A Systematic Review. Clinical pharmacokinetics. 2022 Oct:61(10):1345-1363. doi: 10.1007/s40262-022-01171-w. Epub 2022 Aug 30 [PubMed PMID: 36040614]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceAl-Roubaie Z, Guadagno E, Ramanakumar AV, Khan AQ, Myers KA. Clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring of antiepileptic drugs: Systematic review. Neurology. Clinical practice. 2020 Aug:10(4):344-355. doi: 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000000722. Epub [PubMed PMID: 32983615]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceSivathamboo S, Liu Z, Sutherland F, Minato E, Casillas-Espinosa P, Jones NC, Todaro M, Seneviratne U, Cahill V, Yerra R, French C, Nicolo JP, Perucca P, Kwan P, Sparks P, O'Brien TJ. Serious Cardiac Arrhythmias Detected by Subcutaneous Long-term Cardiac Monitors in Patients With Drug-Resistant Epilepsy. Neurology. 2022 May 10:98(19):e1923-e1932. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000200173. Epub 2022 Apr 6 [PubMed PMID: 35387849]