Background: Women with epilepsy face difficult choices whether to continue antiepileptic drug treatment during pregnancy, as uncontrolled seizures carry great risk to mother and fetus but continuing treatment may have adverse effects on baby’s development. This study aimed at evaluating antiepileptic drug entry into developing brain. Methods: Anaesthetised pregnant, non-pregnant adult females, postnatal and fetal rats were injected intraperitoneally with different doses, single or in combinations, of valproate and lamotrigine, within clinical range. Injectate included 3H-labelled drug. After 30min, CSF, blood and brain samples were obtained; radioactivity measured using liquid scintillation counting. Some animals were also exposed to valproate in feed throughout pregnancy and into neonatal period. Drug levels measured by liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Results given as CSF or tissue/plasma% as index of drug entry. Results: Entry of valproate into brain and CSF was higher at E19 and P4 compared to adult and was dose-dependent except at E19; placental transfer increased significantly at highest dose of 100mg/kg. Lamotrigine entry into the brain was dose dependent only at E19. Chronic valproate treatment, or combination of valproate and lamotrigine had little effect on either drug entry, except for reduced valproate brain entry in adult brain with chronic treatment. Placental transfer decreased significantly after chronic valproate treatment. LC-MS measurement of valproate in adults confirmed that rat plasma values were within the clinical range and CSF/plasma and brain/plasma ratios for LC-MS and 3H-valproate were similar. Conclusion: Results suggest that entry of valproate may be higher in developing brain, the capacity of barrier mechanism is mostly unaffected by doses within the clinical range, with or without addition of lamotrigine. Chronic valproate exposure may result in upregulation in cellular mechanisms restricting its entry into the brain. Entry of lamotrigine was little different at different ages and was not dose dependent.
Background: Olanzapine is used to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder in women of childbearing age. Continuation of psychotropic medications throughout pregnancy and lactation is often required as cessation could be dangerous for both mother and child. However, there is a lack of information on the transfer of these drugs into the developing brain. Methods: Sprague Dawley rats at three developmental ages: embryonic day E19, postnatal day P4 and non-pregnant adult females were administered unlabelled or radiolabelled (3H) olanzapine (0.15 mg/kg) either as monotherapy or in combination with each of seven other common medications. Similar injections were administered to pregnant E19 females to investigate placental transfer. Olanzapine in plasma, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and brain was measured by liquid scintillation counting after a single dose (acute) or following 5 days of treatment (prolonged). Results: Olanzapine entry into brain and CSF was not age-dependent. Prolonged olanzapine treatment reduced placental transfer from 53% to 46% (p<0.05). Co-administration of digoxin or lamotrigine with olanzapine increased its entry into the fetal brain, whereas paracetamol decreased its entry into the CSF. Placental transfer of olanzapine was increased by co-treatment with cimetidine and digoxin, whereas co-treatment with lamotrigine, paracetamol or valproate led to a substantial decrease. Repeated co-treatment of digoxin and olanzapine increased olanzapine transfer into the brain and CSF, but not across the placenta. Overall entry of olanzapine from maternally administered drugs into the fetal brain was higher after combination therapy with cimetidine and digoxin. Conclusions: Co-administration of olanzapine with some commonly used drugs affected its entry into the fetus and its developing brain to a greater extent than in adults. It appears that protection of the fetal brain for these drugs primarily comes from the placenta rather than from the fetal brain barriers. Results suggest that drug combinations should be used with caution particularly during pregnancy.
The recent development of modulators of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) has allowed the life expectancy of cystic fibrosis patients to increase substantially resulting in more women with cystic fibrosis reaching child-bearing age. This however raises the issue of whether long-term use of CFTR modulators during pregnancy and breastfeeding is safe for the fetus and newborn, especially for their developing brain. A very limited number of case reports available so far has shown that the fetus or breastfed newborn is likely to be exposed to maternally administered CFTR modulators. Potential impacts of drug exposure on the developing brain are of particular importance as the consequences might not be immediately noticeable upon birth but may manifest later in life as permanent neurobehavioral problems. In order for drugs in maternal circulation to enter the fetal brain, they must overcome the placental barrier followed by a series of brain barriers, each consisting of cellular components and physiological mechanisms such as efflux transporters. The extent of protection they offer during development will provide valuable insights into the potential entry and the effects of CFTR modulators in the developing brain. This review aims to explore the current understanding of the safety of CFTR modulators, especially ivacaftor, during pregnancy and breastfeeding, characterize the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ivacaftor, both under normal conditions and during pregnancy, to provide context for its potential impact on the developing brain. Finally, we discuss the determinants that need to be taken into consideration when investigating the entry of drugs into the fetus and newborn.
Background: Women with epilepsy face difficult choices whether to continue antiepileptic drug treatment during pregnancy, as uncontrolled seizures carry great risk to mother and fetus but continuing treatment may have adverse effects on baby’s development. This study aimed at evaluating antiepileptic drug entry into developing brain. Methods: Anaesthetised pregnant, non-pregnant adult females, postnatal and fetal rats were injected intraperitoneally with different doses, single or in combinations, of valproate and lamotrigine, all within clinical range. Injectate included 3H-labelled drug. After 30min, CSF, blood and brain samples were obtained; radioactivity was measured using liquid scintillation counting. Some animals were also exposed to valproate in feed throughout pregnancy and into neonatal period. Drug levels were measured by liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Results are given as CSF or tissue/plasma% as index of drug entry. Results: Entry of valproate into brain and CSF was higher at E19 and P4 compared to adult but was not dose-dependent; placental transfer increased significantly at highest dose of 100mg/Kg. Lamotrigine entry into the brain was dose dependent only at E19. Chronic valproate treatment, or combination of valproate and lamotrigine had little effect on either drug entry, except for reduced valproate brain entry in adult brain with chronic treatment. Placental transfer decreased significantly after chronic valproate treatment. LC-MS measurement of valproate in adults confirmed that rat plasma values were within the clinical range and CSF/plasma and brain/plasma ratios for LC-MS and 3H-valproate were similar. Conclusion: Results suggest that entry of valproate may be higher in developing brain, the capacity of barrier mechanism is mostly unaffected by doses within the clinical range, with or without addition of lamotrigine. Chronic valproate exposure may result in upregulation in cellular mechanisms restricting its entry into the brain. Entry of lamotrigine was little different at different ages and was not dose dependent.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.