
==== Front
Epilepsy Curr
Epilepsy Curr
EPI
spepi
Epilepsy Currents
1535-7597
1535-7511
SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA

10.1177/15357597241253500
10.1177_15357597241253500
Current Review in Clinical Research
Pre- and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis for HIV in Patients Taking Anti-Seizure Medications
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5546-5951
Kerr Wesley T. MD, PhD 123
Gidal Barry PharmD 4
Avedissian Sean N. PharmD 5
McAnaney Cara MD, AAHIVS 67
Wilmshurst Jo M. MBBS, MRCP, MD 8
Eley Brian S. MBChB, FCP 910
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1275-6094
Eyal Sarah PhD 11
Alick-Lindstrom Sasha MD, FAAN, FACNS, FAES 1213
1 Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
2 Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA
3 Department of Neurology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
4 Department of Neurology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
5 Antiviral Pharmacology Laboratory, College of Pharmacy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
6 Department of Family Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
7 National Clinician Consultation Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
8 Department of Paediatric Neurology, Red Cross War Memorial Children’s Hospital, Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
9 Paediatric Infectious Diseases Unit, Red Cross War Memorial Children’s Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa
10 Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
11 Institute for Drug Research, Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
12 Department of Neurology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
13 Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
Wesley T. Kerr, Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh, 3471 Fifth Ave, Kaufmann 810, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. Email: kerrw@pitt.edu
28 5 2024
Jul-Aug 2024
24 4 219231
3 4 2024
16 4 2024
22 4 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
SAGE Publications
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
The prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has recently emphasized the use of pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP), both of which were highly effective in prevention of HIV infection. Since the last published guidance regarding the cotreatment of people with anti-seizure medications (ASM) and antiretroviral treatments (ARTs) in 2012, both fields have numerous new medication options. Historically, cotreatment of HIV and seizures could be challenging with increased risk of virologic failure and barriers in access to health care due to global availability, social determinants of health, and stigma of both HIV and seizures. In this narrative review, we describe the data-driven and expected bidirectional pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions between guideline-based PrEP and PEP treatment and ASM, as well as overlapping side effects. There are many ASMs with no known interaction with PrEP or PEP regimens. The interactions focus on enzyme inducing ASMs, valproate, and lamotrigine. Most prominently, enzyme inducing ASMs lower serum levels of tenofovir-containing PrEP regimens and elements of PEP (dolutegravir, raltegravir, and ritonavir), which increased risk of virologic treatment failure in people with HIV but have unclear clinical significance on the effectiveness of PrEP and PEP. In addition, ritonavir treatment in PEP may significantly lower lamotrigine serum levels even during the 4 weeks of treatment, which may increase risk for breakthrough seizures during PEP and skin reactions after discontinuation of ritonavir. In addition to PK interactions, overlapping side effects are common including osteopenia, hepatic toxicity, and other gastrointestinal effects. This narrative review aims to be a resource for all clinicians prescribing ASMs so that they can create a welcoming environment to enable successful treatment of seizures and reduce the risk of HIV infection in people at risk. In addition, we highlight knowledge gaps and areas of unmet need that can be addressed with future studies.

acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)
occupational exposure
sexual risk
transgender health
intravenous drug use
cover-dateJuly–August 2024
typesetterts19
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Neurologists and epileptologists are experts in the diagnosis and treatment of seizures, but they may not be aware of the fundamental changes that have occurred in the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of HIV since the last guideline for cotreatment of HIV and epilepsy in 2012. 1,2 Because of these changes, it is important for clinicians treating epilepsy to be aware of current HIV treatments including pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), as well as the interactions between these antiretroviral therapies (ART) and anti-seizure medications (ASMs). 3 -6

HIV is a bloodborne pathogen most frequently transmitted through sexual contact, intravenous drug usage, and from mother to child during delivery. 7 Globally, there were an estimated 39.0 million people with HIV in 2022, of which 86% knew their HIV status, 76% were on ART, and 66% were located in sub-Saharan Africa. 8 In the United States, there were 1.2 million people with HIV in 2019, of which 87% knew that they have HIV and 75% were receiving ART. 9 If untreated, HIV influences many systems of the body, most notably the immune system, causing a reduction in CD4+ cells that can increase the risk of life-threatening opportunistic infections. In patients without HIV or other reasons for immunodeficiency, these infections do not tend to pose a threat to human health. The CDC defines stages of HIV infection from acute retroviral syndrome through Stage 3, also known as acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), which is defined by a CD4+ cell count less than 200 cells per microliter, CD4+ cells being less than 14% of all lymphocytes, or the presence of an AIDS-defining condition. 10 Currently, there is no cure for HIV, therefore national and international public health efforts aim to reduce transmission. Traditional methods to prevent HIV transmission include abstinence, barrier protection (eg, condoms), male circumcision, proper syringe disposal and hygiene for intravenous drug users, and mother to child transmission prevention programs. 11 However, these methods have limited efficacy when compared to effective treatment of those living with HIV and PrEP or PEP utilization. 7

Central to the treatment of HIV has been the development, access, and use of ART that can induce viral suppression, defined as less than 200 copies of HIV per milliliter of blood. 12 At this level, there is zero risk of sexual transmission of HIV. 13 In the United States, the prevalence of HIV suppression has improved from 19% in 2011 to 66% in 2019. 14 Global estimates of viral suppression are lower and show improving trends over time with availability of ART. 15 Lack of access to and suboptimal adherence to ART is the major driver of low suppression rates both globally and in the United States. In addition to access and adherence, patients taking certain enzyme inducing ASMs were more likely to have virologic treatment failure. 16 -19 This prompted the development of a guideline in 2012 for the cotreatment of HIV in patients taking ASMs. 1,2

Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis

In addition to improving the care of patients living with HIV, current public health efforts emphasize the usage of PrEP and PEP to prevent HIV transmission. 10 Pre-exposure prophylaxis includes use of ART to prevent transmission of HIV to exposed individuals. 7 It has been studied in multiple settings and is safe and effective for individuals with potential ongoing exposure to HIV. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended the use of PrEP since 2015 and the United States Preventive Services Task Force/Department of Health and Human Services (US DHHS) has recommended it since 2019. 4,20 Pre-exposure prophylaxis regimens include both oral options and long-acting injectables (LAI) for those at risk of sexual transmission (Table 1A). The oral regimens, but not the LAI regimens have been established for individuals who inject drugs. To reduce the stigma of HIV exposure and treatment and to ensure effective treatment is provided, PrEP should be offered without requiring explicit discussion an individual’s risk for HIV risk. Pre-exposure prophylaxis is indicated in any patient who requests it and is appropriately educated about the risks and benefits associated with use. A systematic review of randomized trials and observational studies demonstrated that the risk of HIV infection reduced from 4.2% to 2.4% with typical use and 1% when adherence was at least 70%. 21

Table 1A. First Line Regimens for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) From the United States Department of Health and Human Services (US DHHS) and World Health Organization (WHO).a

PrEP	US DHHS	WHO	
Cisgender men who have sex with people assigned male at birth at sexual risk	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (F/TDF)b	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)b	
OR		
Tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (F/TAF)		
OR	OR	
Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	
Transgender women at sexual risk	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (F/TDF)	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)c	
OR		
Tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (F/TAF)		
OR	OR	
Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	
Cisgender men who have sex with people assigned female at birth at sexual risk	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (F/TDF)	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)b	
OR		
Tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (F/TAF)		
OR	OR	
Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	
People assigned female at birth at sexual risk	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (F/TDF)	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)	
	OR	
	Dapivirine (DPV-VR) ring	
OR	OR	
Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	Cabotegravir (CAB) injection	
People who inject drugs	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (F/TDF)	No recommendation	
a The TDF-containing regimens generally are daily.

b Indicates non-daily can be effective.

c In transgender women at sexual risk, a daily regimen should be used if on exogenous estradiol-based hormones.

Post-exposure prophylaxis consists of giving an exposed person a fully active HIV regimen within the first 72 hours following exposure to prevent systemic infection. The practice of giving PEP to exposed health care workers began in the 1990s and has expanded to include nonoccupational exposures since the early 2000s, becoming fully incorporated into national guidelines in the United States in 2005 and WHO recommendations since 2014. 3 Post-exposure prophylaxis is used in isolated event driven situations and in infants born to HIV-infected mothers to disrupt vertical transmission. Outside of a health care occupational exposure, PEP can be used after unprotected sex, a condom breaking during sex, sexual assault, and after sharing needles to inject drugs. Sexual assault is not uncommon with 25% of women and 4% of men having experienced completed or attempted sexual assault in their lifetime in the United States. 22 Unfortunately, women with epilepsy or on ASMs reported higher rates of sexual assault than women without epilepsy (53% vs 32%). 23

The use of PEP is supported by animal studies and a single case–control study in exposed health care workers, as well as observational and case reports (Table 1B). Post-exposure prophylaxis may have decreased effectiveness 2 hours after exposure and must be started within 72 hours of possible exposure to HIV. 24 Many studies of PEP report no breakthrough infections on a diversity of regimens.

Table 1B. First Line Regimens for Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) From the United States Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and World Health Organization (WHO).

PEP	US DHHS	WHO	
Adults and adolescents	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (F/TDF)	Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)	
PLUS	PLUS	
Raltegravir (RAL)	OR	Dulotegravir (DTG)	Emtricitabine (FTC)	OR	Lamivudine (3TC)	
	PLUS	
	Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)	OR	Atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r)	
Children	4 weeks to <2 years	<10 years	
Zidovudine (AZT)	Zidovudine (AZT)	
PLUS	PLUS	
Lamivudine (3TC)	Lamivudine (3TC)	
PLUS	PLUS	
Raltegravir (RAL)	OR	Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)	Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)	
2-12 years		
Tenofovir disoproxil
fumarate/emtricitabine (F/TDF)		
PLUS		
Raltegravir (RAL)		

Clinicians should recognize the need and prevalence of PrEP and PEP in all patients, including those who are cisgender and heterosexual (not only men who have sex with men), as well as recognize the disparities in new infections in racial, sexual, and gender minorities. In sub-Saharan Africa and other similar regions, heterosexual transmission remains the main source of HIV infection, where 63% of new infections occur in women of all ages. 8 In the Unites States, 75% of new HIV infections were in non-white patients, including 11% in black women engaging in heterosexual contact, 5% in black men engaging in heterosexual contact, and 3.7% in Hispanic or Latina women engaging in heterosexual contact. In the United States, 7% of new diagnoses of HIV were attributed to injection drug use. 12 Therefore, awareness and appropriate use of PrEP and PEP is needed in all patients irrespective of sexual contacts.

The overlap between patients with epilepsy and undergoing treatment for HIV, or taking PrEP or PEP is not well established. In a neurology-HIV clinic, 23% of referrals were for advice on cotreatment of HIV and epilepsy. 25 While seizures in patients with HIV affects 2% to 14% of children, the anxiety and challenges in management vastly supersede this. 17 We attempted to estimate the degree of overlap from data regarding patients seen at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) based on International Classification of Disease codes and prescription records. In 2022, UPMC saw 23 300 patients with epilepsy or taking ASMs and 7000 patients with HIV or taking ARTs. There were 115 (0.5%) patients with both epilepsy and HIV as well as 415 (1.7%) patients with epilepsy and a documented exposure to HIV, the latter of which may be an indicator of who may benefit from either PrEP or PEP. When identified based on medication records alone, 950 (4%) patients took both ASMs and ARTs, including 150 (16% of 950) patients taking ASMs with either known or theoretical interaction with ARTs (see below). This highlights that a substantial number of patients are being cotreated with ASMs and ARTs, despite limited guidance regarding this combination since the guideline in 2012. 1,2

We expect that epilepsy specialists and clinicians treating people with epilepsy are likely to care for patients on PrEP or PEP and this rate of cotreatment may increase in the future. Additionally, there may be a stigma against disclosing PrEP or PEP usage to the clinician treating seizures, but there are important interactions between PrEP, PEP, and ASMs, particularly enzyme inducing ASMs (eg, phenytoin [PHY], carbamazepine [CBZ]). 26 Based on findings of increased virologic failure in the treatment of chronic HIV with enzyme-inducing ASMs, 16 -19 failure to account for these interactions theoretically could lead to ineffective prevention of HIV transmission due to reduced effectiveness of PrEP and PEP. However, there have not been studies demonstrating the clinical impact of these interactions on measured effectiveness of PrEP or PEP. Conversely, ARTs can influence ASM treatments. Additionally, adverse effects were more common with cotreatment with some ARTs and ASM. 27 Therefore, improving knowledge of these interactions may improve the health of patients with epilepsy.

ART Regimens Used for PrEP and PEP

Medication regimens used for PEP and PrEP are determined based on patient and local factors and vary in different regions of the world (Table 1). Patient factors to consider include comorbidities (particularly renal disease and hepatitis B), medication interactions (eg, ASMs), tolerability, and the ability to adhere to oral regimens. 3 -6,28 Regional factors include the availability of medications (eg, supply chain limitations in procurement, cost, local licenses, and WHO prequalified status), which varies significantly throughout the world and explains some of the different recommendations between the US DHHS and the WHO. The WHO defines carbamazepine (CBZ), phenytoin (PHY), lamotrigine (LTG), phenobarbital (PHB), valproate (VPA), levetiracetam (LEV), diazepam, lorazepam, midazolam as essential ASMs, but this may not reflect availability. 29 Epidemiological drives of the HIV epidemic differ by region, which also influences the recommendations. To improve readability due to the high number of abbreviations, we list both the full name and abbreviations each time.

The best data on effectiveness of PEP regimens are from animal studies and health care occupational exposure where the risk of HIV transmission from a single exposure was reduced by 81% using zidovudine for 28 days, with hypothesized further risk reduction when a 3-drug PEP regimen for 28 days is used. 30,31 Since the publication of PEP guidelines (Table 1B), newer ARTs, including tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and bictegravir, became available and studies have shown their efficacy in PEP. 32,33 These newer regimens may be used when available.

Direct and Indirect Pharmacologic Interactions Between ASMs and PrEP or PEP

The Liverpool drug–drug interaction checker and UpToDate are an enduring resource to monitor for emerging evidence as the treatment landscape of HIV and ASMs evolves. 34

Enzyme-Inducing Agents

The primary direct pharmacologic interactions between ASMs and the most used PrEP and PEP regimens consist of an interaction between tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and cabotegravir (CAB) with the ASMs known to have the most drug–drug interactions: enzyme inducing ASMs and valproate (Table 2). Tenofovir alafenamide and TDF are both prodrugs that require conversion to their active forms, tenofovir-diphosphate. 35 While the absence of interaction with other ASMs largely has not been studied (with the exception of lamotrigine), there also were limited theoretical interactions.

Table 2. Known and Theoretical Drug–Drug Interactions Between Anti-Seizure Medications (ASMs) and Anti-Retroviral Treatments (ARTs) Used in Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP).

ASMs	PrEP	PEP	
Inducing agents Phenobarbital (PHB), Primidone (PRM), Carbamazepine (CBZ), Oxcarbazepine (OXC), (Unknown effect of eslicarbazepine [ESL])	50% reduction in TDF & TAF levels	50% reduction in TDF & TAF levels	
Reduced CAB levels	Greater virologic failure with Ritonavir (r) a	
Reduces DTG levels by 50%a	
Theoretically increased RAL levels	
Inducing agent with additional considerations Phenytoin (PHY)	PHY toxicity reported in TDF requiring PHY dose reductiona	Reduces Ritonavir (r) levels by 28% and greater virologic failure,a and reduced PHY levels by 30%	
PHY toxicity in RAL, DTG, TDF requiring PHY dose reductiona	
Contra-indicated with DTG a	
Weak inducing agents Cenobamate (CEN), Clobazam (CLB), Rufinamide (RFM), Stiripentol (STI)	Theoretically reduced TAF levels	Theoretically reduced TAF levels	
Ethosuximide (ESM)	No known interactions	Ritonavir (r) increases levels of ESM	
Valproate (VPA) Valproic acid, divalproex sodium	Higher estrogen levels, affecting TDF dosing	Higher estrogen levels, affecting TDF dosing	
Reduced DTG levels	
Subtherapeutic VPA levelsa with RAL, DTG, or TDF	
80% increased AZT levelsa	
Lamotrigine (LTG) b	No known interactions	Ritonavir (r) reduces LTG concentration by 50%a	
Other ASMs Clonazepam (CZP), Cannabidiol (CBD), Levetiracetam (LEV), Brivaracetam (BRI), Lacosamide (LCM), Topiramate (TPM), Zonisamide (ZNS), Fenfluramine (FEN), Gabapentin (GBP), Pregabalin (PGB), Perampanel (PER), Everolimus	No known interactions	No known interactions	
Abbreviations: AZT, zidovudine; CAB, cabotegravir; DTG, dulotegravir; RAL, raltegravir; TAF, tenofovir alafenamide; TDF, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.

a Indicates a clinically significant interaction warranting dose changes of the ASM or ART.

bIndicates that lamotrigine was studied with raltegravir and had no clinically significant difference.

For patients with epilepsy who are eligible for PrEP, the primary drug–drug interactions focus on the interaction of TDF, TAF, and cabotegravir with the enzyme inducing ASMs, including phenytoin, phenobarbital, primidone, carbamazepine, and oxcarbazepine (Table 3). 36 These ASMs can induce CYP3A4 and other enzymes causing increased metabolism of the ARTs (Table 4). Tenofovir alafenamide or cabotegravir are components of all PrEP regimens; therefore, we recommend that these agents be avoided in patients with epilepsy eligible for or taking PrEP. The serum levels of TDF and TAF were 50% reduced in patients co-treated with carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine. 37 While therapeutic serum concentrations for TDF exist, TAF is metabolized mostly intracellularly by cathepsin A to tenofovir therefore the relevance of serum level reductions is unclear. 38 The effect of eslicarbazepine has not been studied but is theoretically expected to be similar in mechanism to carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine. 39 The magnitude of CYP450 induction is stronger for carbamazepine than oxcarbazepine or eslicarbazepine. Cenobamate, clobazam, rufinamide, and stiripentol also induce CYP3A4 enzymes to a lesser extent than the traditional inducers, which theoretically have a similar effect. 40 In addition, valproate treatment can be associated with higher estrogen levels, which can influence TDF dosing due to protein binding.

Table 3. Metabolism of Agents Used in PrEP or Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP).a

Class/Drug name	Metabolized by CYP/UGT	Inducer CYP/UGT	Inhibitor CYP/UGT	Transported by	Transporter inducer	Transporter inhibitor	
NRTIs	
Tenofovir (TDF and TAF)	No
(TAF: CYP3A4 minimal)	No	No
(TAF: weak CYP3A4 in vitro)	TDF: hOAT1/3, MRP4
TAF: Pgp, BCRP, OATP1B1/B3	No	MRP1/2-3	
Emtricitabine (FTC)	No (limited)	No (limited)	No	No	No	MRP1/2-3	
Zidovudine (ATZ)	No
(hepatic conjugation)	No	No	BCRP	No	BCRP (in vitro)	
Lamivudine (3TC)	No
(unchanged via renal)	No	No	MRP4, MRP8
(in vitro)	No	MRP1/2-3	
Integrase inhibitors	
Dolutegravir (DTG)	UGT1A 1 (major), UGT1A3, 1A9 (minor),
CYP3A4 (minor)	No	No	BCRP, Pgp	No	OCT2 (in vitro)	
Raltegravir (RAL)	UGT1A	No	No	Unknown	No	No	
Cabotegravir (CAB)	UGT1A1 (major),
UGT1A9 (minor)	No	No	Pgp
(in vitro), BCRP
(in vitro)	No	OAT1/3 (in vitro)	
Protease inhibitors	
Lopinavir (LPV)	CYP3A	No	CYP3A	Pgp, MRP1/2,
OATPs	No	BCRP (in vitro)	
Ritonavir (r)	CYP3A4,
CYP2D6	CYP1A2,
CYP2C8,
CYP2C9	CYP3A4,
CYP2D6	Pgp, MRP1	MRP1	MRP1,
OATP-C,
BCRP, Pgp	
Abbreviations: MRP, multidrug resistance protein; UGT, UDP glucuronosyltransferase; NRTI, nucleoside analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitor; OCT2, organic cation transporter-2 .

a This table does not contain all antiviral agents used in the treatment of HIV.

Table 4. Potential Impact of Anti-Seizure Medications (ASMs) on PrEP/Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) Medications—Specific Drug Metabolizing Isozymes and Transporters.

ASM	Inducer/Inhibitor	Enzymes and/or Transport proteins affected	
Brivaracetam	Inhibitor	Epoxide hydrolase	
Cannabidiol	Inhibitor	CYP2C19, CYP2C9, CYP2C8, UGT1A1, UGT1A9, UGT2B7	
Carbamazepine	Inducer	CYP1A2, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP3A, UGT, PGP	
Cenobamate	Inducer
Inhibitor	CYP3A4, unclear effect on UGT
CYP2C19, CYP2B6	
Clobazam	Inhibitor
Inducer	CYP2D6, (via active metabolite norclobazam) CYP2C19
CYP3A4	
Eslicarbazepine	Inducer
Inhibitor	CYP2C9, CYP3A4
CYP2C19	
Ethosuximide	No		
Everolimus	No		
Felbamate	Inducer
Inhibitor	CYP3A4
CYP2C19, β-oxidation	
Gabapentin	No		
Lacosamide	No		
Lamotrigine	Inducer	UGT (modest auto-induction)	
Levetiracetam	No		
Oxcarbazepine	Inducer
Inhibitor	CYP3A4 (modest)
CYP2C19	
Perampanel	No		
Phenobarbital
Primidone	Inducer	CYP1A, CYP2A6, CYP2B, CYP2C9, CYP2C19
	
Phenytoin	Inducer	CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP3A, UGT, PGP	
Pregabalin	No		
Rufinamide	Inducer	CYP3A4	
Stiripentol	Inhibitor	CYP1A2, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, CYP3A4	
Tiagabine	No		
Topiramate	Inducer
Inhibitor	CYP3A4 (modest, and dose dependent)
CYP2C19	
Valproic acid	Inhibitor	CYP2C9, UGTs, epoxide hydrolase	
Vigabatrin	No		
Zonisamide	No		
Abbreviations: CYP, cytochrome P450; UGT, UDP glucuronosyltransferase; PGP, P-glycoprotein; MRP, multidrug resistance protein; OAT, organic anion transporter.

There are clinical situations where these drug–drug interactions cannot be avoided. One practical dosing modification is that dosing of TDF for PrEP can be less than daily in specific situations. However, if the patient is taking an enzyme inducing ASM, we recommend daily dosing due to these potential interactions and otherwise good tolerability of daily TDF dosing.

In all patients, there is a paucity of data to demonstrate that these interactions have a clinically meaningful impact upon breakthrough HIV infections with PrEP or PEP. Historical data to suggest that cotreatment of HIV with enzyme inducing ASMs was associated with increased risk of virologic treatment failure, but these data primarily involve patients cotreated for HIV with boosting elements of PEP (ritonavir [/r], dolutegravir [DTG], and raltegravir [RAL]) as well as protease inhibitors, and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. The exception was one report of phenytoin toxicity with cotreatment with TDF that resolved with phenytoin dose reduction. 41 Therefore, the clinical significance of the interaction between enzyme-inducing ASMs and breakthrough HIV infections with PrEP is unclear and is an area of future study.

The interactions of enzyme inducing agents with boosting agents of PEP are more established. Enzyme-inducing agents may reduce dolutegravir (DTG) levels by 50%. For carbamazepine specifically, it is recommended to increase dolutegravir (DTG) dosing from once daily to 50 mg twice daily in adults and twice daily of the weight-based dosing in pediatrics based on data supporting safety and efficacy of this dosing. 42 This recommendation for twice daily dosing was generalized to other strong inducers of the CYP3A4 and UGT1A1 enzymes, including phenobarbital, primidone, but the safety and efficacy of more general recommendation was not specifically studied. Phenytoin is also a strong inducer of CYP3A4, but cotreatment with dolutegravir (DTG) is contraindicated. Phenytoin also has clinically significant interactions with raltegravir, TDF, and ritonavir (r). 1 There are no data regarding the combination of PEP components with moderate or weak enzyme inducing ASMs (eg, oxcarbazepine, clobazam, cenobamate).

Cotreatment of HIV with ritonavir (r), which is part of the PEP WHO regimen, together with these enzyme-inducing ASMs also was associated with greater virologic failure in long-term HIV. 18,19,26 This interaction also is theoretically present with the US DHHS alternative of RAL.

These complex interactions highlight the challenge in providing the short-term treatment of PEP or longer-term PrEP in patients on long-term enzyme inducing ASMs. While the need for PEP cannot always be predicted, we recommend avoidance of these enzyme inducing ASM regimens, if possible, when patients are anticipated to need PrEP or PEP.

Valproate

In addition to traditional enzyme-inducing agents, valproate has complex drug–drug effects on TDF, a component of both PrEP and PEP. 43 Increased estrogen levels associated with valproate may also warrant daily TDF dosing for PrEP, similar to the recommendation for transgender women taking exogenous estradiol-based hormones. 4,41,44 -46 Additionally, there is a single case report of lower valproate serum level and effectiveness in bipolar disease with ritonavir. 47 When PEP is needed, there can be bidirectional interactions that can reduce both ART levels as well as valproate serum levels, resulting in theoretical concerns regarding both breakthrough HIV infections and seizures. There is mixed evidence between peer-reviewed publications and the Liverpool drug–drug interaction checker regarding the details of interactions between valproate and individual elements of PEP. We did not identify empiric evidence or case reports regarding the clinical significance of these theoretical concerns for seizures, so we cannot confidently recommend empiric dosing changes of valproate, PrEP, or PEP.

For children under 10 years using the WHO regimen for PEP and children between 4 weeks and less than 2 years using the US DHHS regimen for PEP, valproate increased the levels of zidovudine (AZT). 48 Because PEP treatment is typically temporary for 4 weeks, patients requiring both valproate and PEP could receive both treatments, but providers should monitor for increased adverse effects related to zidovudine (AZT) including hematologic toxicity, anemia, and neutropenia. In absence of observed adverse effects, we cannot confidently recommend empiric dosing modifications.

Ritonavir Interactions With ASMs

Another potential clinically relevant interaction exists between lamotrigine (LTG) and ritonavir (r), an element of the WHO recommendation for PEP. Ritonavir (r) can reduce lamotrigine (LTG) concentration by 50% within days, therefore lamotrigine dosing may need to be modified during short-term PEP treatment containing ritonavir (r). 1,34,49 Irrespective of potential lamotrigine adjustments or decreases during PEP, the removal of ritonavir (r) may contribute to a rise in serum lamotrigine concentration. This may be associated with both transient increased adverse effects of lamotrigine, similar to those during the placebo week of estrogen-containing oral contraceptives, as well as increased risk of Steven’s Johnson Syndrome (SJS). 50 Data from withdrawal of lamotrigine during long-term inpatient monitoring suggest the risk of SJS is low if lamotrigine dosing was lower for less than 7 days, but the duration of ritonavir (r) in PEP typically lasts 4 weeks. Therefore, during this period of PEP and afterward, the dosing of lamotrigine may need to be increased and additional counseling provided regarding monitoring for SJS. 51 In addition to lamotrigine, the European Medicines agency recently issues a warning regarding the interaction with everolimus and ritonavir, which also is an element of treatment for Covid-19 in combination with nirmatrelvir in Paxlovid. 52

Other ASMs and Other ARTs Without Known Interactions

In addition to highlighting the presence of known or theoretical interaction between certain ASMs and many of the ARTs used in PrEP/PEP, we emphasize that there are several ASMs without known or limited interactions. When possible, patients with anticipated need for PrEP/PEP should aim to achieve seizure and side effect freedom with these noninteracting ASMs. However, one third of patients with epilepsy have medication-resistant epilepsy, defined by failure by 2 or more appropriately prescribed and tolerated ASMs, therefore this may not be possible. 53 Additionally, while levetiracetam (LEV) was recently added to the WHO essential medications list, these modern ASMs often are not widely available globally due to cost, regulatory approval, and supply chain challenges. Analogously, modern ARTs typically have fewer drug–drug interactions; therefore, they may emerge as preferred elements of PrEP and PEP regimens in people taking ASMs.

Overlapping Side Effects Between ASMs and PrEP or PEP

In addition to direct and indirect pharmacologic interactions between ASMs, it is also important to consider side effects that overlap between these medications and therefore may synergistically worsen with dual treatment (Table 5). 54 This worsening of adverse events was observed with enzyme inducing ASMs and historical ARTs that are not part of the current PrEP or PEP regimens. 27,43 While there are no data to support increased monitoring, these should be elements of counseling and can influence the selection of either ASMs or PrEP regimens. Because of the short duration of PEP treatment, the benefit of PEP treatment to avoid HIV infection outweighs the temporary adverse events during treatment.

Table 5. Overlapping Side Effects Between Anti-Seizure Medications (ASMs) and Anti-Retroviral Treatments (ARTs) Used in Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP).

Overlapping adverse effect	ASM	PrEP	PEP	
Osteoporosis & Osteopenia	PHY, PHB, PRM, CBZ, OXC, CEN, VPA, CZP, CLB, TPM, ZNS	TDF	TDF	
Hepatic & Gastrointestinal	CBD, ESM, TPM, ZNS, PER	TAF, TDF	TDF, AZT, 3TC	
Weight gain & Metabolic syndrome	VPA, CZP, CLB, CBD, GBP, PGB	TAF	DTG	
Stevens Johnson Syndrome & Rashes	LTGa , CBZ, OXC, ESL	CAB	r , RAL, DTG, AZT	
Dizziness	CBZ, OXC, ESL, PHY, PHB, LTG, CEN, LCM, TPM, ZNS, RFM, PER, PGB, GBP	TAF	RAL, 3TC	
Abbreviations: 3TC, lamivudine; AZT, zidovudine; CBD, cannabidiol; CBZ, carbamazepine; CEN, cenobamate; CLB, clobazam; CYP, cytochrome P450; CZP, clonazepam; DTG, dulotegravir; ESL, eslicarbazepine; ESM, ethosuximide; GBP, gabapentin; LCM, lacosamide; LTG, lamotrigine; MRP, multidrug resistance protein; OAT, organic anion transporter; OXC, oxcarbazepine; PGP, P-glycoprotein; PER, perampanel; PGB, pregabalin; PHB, phenobarbital; PHY, phenytoin; PRM, primidone; RAL, raltegravir; RFM, rufinamide; TAF, tenofovir alafenamide; TDF, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; TPM, topiramate; UGT, UDP glucuronosyltransferase; VPA, valproate; ZNS, zonisamide.

a Ending ritonavir (r) treatment may lead to elevations in LTG serum level, thereby increasing risk for Stevens Johnson Syndrome (SJS).

The primary overlapping adverse effect between TDF-containing regimens and ASMs was increased risk of osteoporosis and osteopenia. The American Epilepsy Society recommends monitoring for osteopenia and osteoporosis with DEXA scans after at least 10 years of treatment with a broad array of ASMs, as well as every 5 years thereafter (Table 3). 55 Similarly, the PrEP and PEP regimens containing TDF have been associated with osteopenia and osteoporosis. 56 -58 In cisgender men and transgender women at sexual risk, we recommend TAF, which has less impact upon bone health. 59 In all patients on PrEP for sexual risk, cabotegravir long-acting injections also do not have a known impact on bone health. However, neither TAF nor cabotegravir (CAB) have been studied in people who inject drugs.

The second most common overlapping adverse effect was hepatic and gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, TAF, and dolutegravir were associated with mild transaminitis, diarrhea, as well as other gastrointestinal effects. The zidovudine (AZT) and lamivudine (3TC) in PEP for children has been associated with severe hepatomegaly with steatosis and GI distress. This overlaps with the hepatic and gastrointestinal adverse effects seen in valproate, cannabidiol, ethosuximide, topiramate, zonisamide, felbamate, carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital, lamotrigine, and perampanel. Therefore, patients on these ASMs may opt for cabotegravir long-acting injections for PrEP due to sexual risk. 4,20,21

The next overlapping side effect was weight gain and dyslipidemia with TAF and dolutegravir as well as some ASMs. 60,61 Weight gain and metabolic syndrome can be meaningful side effects to valproate, clonazepam, clobazam, cannabidiol, gabapentin, and pregabalin. Additionally, the enzyme inducing ASMs have been associated with increased cardiovascular risk that may be compounded by increased by weight gain and dyslipidemia. Therefore, non-TAF and non-dolutegravir regimens may be preferentially selected in patients on those ASMs. In contrast, TDF was associated with weight loss and improved lipids, similar to topiramate and zonisamide. 62

While Stevens-Johnson-Syndrome (SJS) and rashes are rare both for ASMs and PrEP regimens, they represent meaningful overlapping concerns but there is no evidence that the risk of SJS increases when treated with multiple medications each independently associated with SJS. The concern for SJS is one of the reasons why lamotrigine requires a titration period when initiated, slow dose changes when doses are increased, and good medication adherence; but SJS was uncommon in patients on stable levels of medications. Increased SJS risk on lamotrigine may occur after discontinuation of ritonavir at the end of WHO-guideline driven PEP, therefore cotreatment with lamotrigine and ritonavir needs to be supervised carefully both during and after PEP. Additionally, SJS can occur during the first 3 months of treatment in patients with HLA-B*1502 taking carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, or eslicarbazepine. 63 -65 While not associated with SJS, we also highlight that cabotegravir (CAB) in PrEP is an injection medication and can be associated with injection site reactions that could be misinterpreted as the initial rash of SJS. Raltegravir in PEP also has case reports of association with SJS. The PEP alternative to raltegravir is dolutegravir, which also was associated with a rare hypersensitivity reaction including rash and hepatotoxicity in less than 1% of participants in phase 3 trials. 66,67 There also have been postmarketing reports of rashes and SJS with ritonavir, which is an element of some PEP regimens. Rashes also can be a common side effect of zidovudine-based PEP in children and the alternative PrEP regimen of rilpivirine.

The last commonly overlapping adverse effect of both ASMs and medications used in PrEP and PEP was dizziness. Dizziness is a common adverse effect across many ASMs and was most prominent in sodium channel blockers, especially with polytherapy of multiple sodium channel blockers. 68 Dizziness also was noted in TAF, used in PrEP, as well as raltegravir and lamivudine, both of which are elements of PEP.

Considerations for the Treatment of Specific Populations

It is of utmost importance to ensure that whichever medications are chosen for HIV prevention and seizure management are affordable and accessible because of pervasive barriers in access to health care and systematic determinants of health that influence both HIV and epilepsy care. 69 Due to associated stigma and concern for judgment regarding HIV care, it is highly important to avoid assumptions and present a welcoming, safe environment so anyone may feel comfortable disclosing if they are using PrEP/PEP so that they can avoid preventable medication interactions. The guidelines for PrEP regimens specifically describe differing treatments based on use of injection drugs, sexual behaviors, and people who are transgender/gender nonconforming/nonbinary/two-spirit or any variation and may be on feminizing hormones (Table 1A). The discussion with patients should focus on medication choices and not a detailed discussion of the reason why PrEP or PEP is needed. To assist in these conversations, clinicians may seek additional training in providing an open and welcoming environment for sexual or gender minorities and familiarizing themselves with epilepsy care in transgender patients. 70

There are many special populations to keep in mind when prescribing PrEP or PEP for HIV prevention. Most commonly, TDF/TAF dosing and use can change in individuals with preexisting renal or hepatic disease and alcohol or substance dependence. Regular monitoring of liver enzymes and renal function is advised for those on PEP, but serious hepatic complications have not been observed. In medically complex patients, collaborative consultation with HIV medicine, neurology, and other relevant specialties should occur, especially for patients who are immunosuppressed (eg, organ transplants, multiple sclerosis), undergoing chemotherapy, or considering any surgical intervention. PrEP is not explicitly contraindicated in any of these situations, but an individualized medication interaction check should occur (eg, Liverpool drug–drug interaction checker and UpToDate).

As for individuals of childbearing potential, gravid state, breast/chest-feeding, or expressing milk/lactating, there are no contraindications to PrEP use with TDF and TAF-containing regimens. 71,72 There is a lack of data regarding cabotegravir in the peri-partum time, but pharmacokinetic data suggests cabotegravir (CAB) levels are adequate during pregnancy. In people who are breast/chest-feeding, there may be small transfer of medication to the infant through milk, but this risk must be weighed against the risk of acute HIV infection. In people of childbearing potential who need PEP, prenatal vitamins can inhibit RAL and DTG absorption, so doses should be more than 2 hours apart. LactMed is an updating resource to evaluate for medication considerations for lactation. 73

Unmet Needs and Knowledge Gaps

The theme of this guide for the cotreatment of epilepsy and use of PrEP or PEP was the lack of data regarding interactions their clinically meaningful impact on breakthrough HIV infections. We have highlighted both objective and theoretical interactions between commonly used ASMs as well the common regimens for PrEP and PEP, but there are limited studies to address if these interactions impact the efficacy of PrEP or PEP in patients with epilepsy on these regimens. If there is reduced efficacy of PrEP or PEP in patients taking certain ASMs, then further studies should evaluate both the safety and efficacy of potential dosing modifications to allow for safe and effective cotreatment. For example, the safety and efficacy of twice daily dolutegravir (DTG) dosing in patients taking carbamazepine (CBZ) has been established, but similar studies for tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) do not yet exist. These further studies could support development of formulations with appropriate dosing, as well as insurance coverage for potential modified dosing recommendations.

Lastly, there are several options for noninteracting ASMs in the treatment of and prophylaxis for HIV. The presumed safety of these ASMs is largely based on a paucity of evidence to the contrary, but empiric data should be collected to support this presumption. Further studies on the overlap between epilepsy and the need for PrEP or PEP are needed, as well as studying the impact of switching ASMs to avoid interactions with PrEP or PEP.

Conclusions

This practical narrative review of the known and theoretical pharmacologic interactions and overlapping side effects between ASMs with PrEP and PEP highlights many clinically meaningful considerations when these treatments need to be used in combination. This can guide in selection of both ASMs and PrEP/PEP regimens to avoid or account for those considerations. In addition, we highlight that there are numerous ASMs without known or theoretical interactions with PrEP and PEP regimens. Therefore, there are viable cotreatment options for both epilepsy and provide appropriate prophylaxis for HIV infection. This is a marked development from the prior treatments, where interactions created challenges in cotreatment. 16 However, these current ASM and ART treatments are not globally available; therefore, providers should be aware of the known interactions. Due to the profound impact of HIV infection, patients taking ASMs and at sexual risk for HIV or who inject drugs should both be offered and counseled about the value of PrEP and PEP.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the invaluable contributions of the American Epilepsy Society Treatments Committee and the Council Activities in providing support, expertise, and guidance throughout the development and review of this manuscript. Their collective efforts have significantly enriched the content of this manuscript and contributed to its overall quality and relevance in advancing epilepsy care. The authors thank Lauren Orciuoli for her support throughout the process of creating this manuscript.

Author Contributions: Dr Alick-Lindstrom proposed this work and supervised all phases. Dr Kerr organized the team, wrote the first draft, and provided expertise on seizures. Dr Gidal systematically evaluated the pharmacologic interactions with additional insights by Dr Eyal. Dr Wilmshurst provided dual insight on epilepsy and HIV. Drs McAnaney, Eley, and Avedissian provided expertise in PrEP, PEP, and HIV both in the United States and globally. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript.

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: No pharmaceutical company contributed to or reviewed this manuscript in any stage of development. Dr Kerr received honoraria for his work as Associate Editor for Epilepsia and review articles for Medlink Neurology, is a paid consultant for SK Life Sciences (cenobamate), UCB (levetiracetam and brivaracetam), EpiTel, Jazz Pharmaceuticals (cannabidiol), Cerebral Therapeutics (intra-ventricular valproate), and Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, has collaborative or data use agreements with Eisai (perampanel), Janssen (topiramate), Radius Health, and GSK (levetiracetam, lamotrigine, cabotegravir, lamivudine, zidovudine, dolutegravir, rilpivirine). Prof. Wilmshurst has received honoraria for her work as Associate Editor for Epilepsia and Chief Editor for the Pediatric Neurology subsection of Frontiers in Neurology, and as a member of the national South African advisory boards for Novartis (carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine) and Sanofi (valproate). Dr. Eyal was a consultant for TrueMed, Israel (eslicarbazepine), BioPass, and the Israeli Ministry of Health. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr Kerr’s research time was funded by the US National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NIH R25NS089450, NIH U24NS107158), the American Epilepsy Society, the Epilepsy Foundation, the American Academy of Neurology, the American Brain Foundation, and the Epilepsy Study Consortium. Dr Eyal’s research time is funded by the Israel Science Foundation and the Israeli Ministry of Science and Technology.

ORCID iDs: Wesley T. Kerr https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5546-5951

Sarah Eyal https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1275-6094
==== Refs
References

1 Birbeck GL French JA Perucca E ; et al. Quality Standards subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology; Ad Hoc Task Force of the Commission on Therapeutic Strategies of the International League Against Epilepsy. Antiepileptic drug selection for people with HIV/AIDS: evidence-based guidelines from the ILAE and AAN. Epilepsia. 2012;53 (1 ):207–214.22221159
2 Birbeck GL French JA Perucca E , et al. Evidence-based guideline: antiepileptic drug selection for people with HIV/AIDS: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Ad Hoc Task Force of the Commission on Therapeutic Strategies of the International League Against Epilepsy. Neurology. 2012;78 (2 ):139–145.22218281
3 World Health Organization. Guidelines on post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV and the use of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis for HIV-related infections among adults, adolescents and children: recommendations for a public health approach: December 2014 supplement to the 2013 consolidated guidelines on the use of antiretroviral drugs for treating and preventing HIV infection. Global HIV, Hepatitis, and STIs Programmes; 2014. 2014. Accessed 2023. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241506830
4 World Health Organization. Differentiated and simplified pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention: update to WHO implementation guidance. Technical Brief. Global HIV, Hepatitis, and STIs Programs. 2014. Accessed 2023. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240053694
5 Kuhar DT Henderson DK Struble KA . Updated U.S. Public Health Service guidelines for the management of occupational exposure to HIV and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis. 2018. Accessed 2024. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/20711.
6 CDC. Preexposure prophylaxis for the prevention of HIV infection in the United States—2021 Update: a clinical practice guideline. Center for Disease Control & Prevention: US Public Health Service. 2021. Accessed 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/risk/prep/cdc-hiv-prep-guidelines-2021.pdf
7 Balogun K Slev PR . Towards achieving the end of the HIV epidemic: advances, challenges and scaling-up strategies. Clin Biochem. 2023;117 :53–59.35640680
8 UNAIDS. Global HIV & AIDS statistics—Fact sheet. 2024. Accessed March 6, 2024. https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/fact-sheet
9 HIV.gov. US Statistics. 2023. Accessed March 6, 2024. https://www.hiv.gov/hiv-basics/overview/data-and-trends/statistics#People%20Living%20with%20HIV
10 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Revised surveillance case definition for HIV infection—United States, 2014. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2014;63 (RR-03 ):1–10.
11 Elliott T Sanders EJ Doherty M , et al. Challenges of HIV diagnosis and management in the context of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), test and start and acute HIV infection: a scoping review. J Int AIDS Soc. 2019;22 (12 ):e25419.
12 CDC. HIV in the United States by age: viral suppression. 2023. Accessed March 30, 2024. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/age/viral-suppression.html
13 Broyles LN Luo R Boeras D Vojnov L . The risk of sexual transmission of HIV in individuals with low-level HIV viraemia: a systematic review. Lancet. 2023;402 (10400 ):464–471.37490935
14 Gardner EM McLees MP Steiner JF Del Rio C Burman WJ . The spectrum of engagement in HIV care and its relevance to test-and-treat strategies for prevention of HIV infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52 (6 ):793–800.21367734
15 Han WM Law MG Egger M , et al. Global estimates of viral suppression in children and adolescents and adults on antiretroviral therapy adjusted for missing viral load measurements: a multiregional, retrospective cohort study in 31 countries. Lancet HIV. 2021;8 (12 ):e766–e775.
16 Siddiqi OK Elafros MA Bositis CM , et al. New-onset seizure in HIV-infected adult Zambians: a search for causes and consequences. Neurology. 2017;88 (5 ):477–482.28003499
17 Zaporojan L McNamara PH Williams JA , et al. Seizures in HIV: the case for special consideration. Epilepsy Behav Case Rep. 2018;10 :38–43.30013932
18 Navis A Dallah I Mabeta C , et al. Evaluating the impact of antiretroviral and antiseizure medication interactions on treatment effectiveness among outpatient clinic attendees with HIV in Zambia. Epilepsia. 2020;61 (12 ):2705–2711.33084053
19 Okulicz JF Grandits GA French JA , et al. Virologic outcomes of HAART with concurrent use of cytochrome P450 enzyme-inducing antiepileptics: a retrospective case control study. AIDS Res Ther. 2011;8 :18.21575228
20 WHO. Guideline on when to start antiretroviral therapy and on pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV. World Health Organization; 2015.
21 Chou R Evans C Hoverman A , et al. Preexposure prophylaxis for the prevention of HIV infection: evidence report and systematic review for the US preventive services task force. JAMA. 2019;321 (22 ):2214–2230.31184746
22 Control C.f.D. Fast Facts: Preventing sexual violence. 2022. Accessed 2024. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/fastfact.html
23 Vederhus J Husebye ES Eid K Gilhus NE Bjørk MH . Prevalence of self-reported emotional, physical, and sexual abuse and association with fear of childbirth in pregnant women with epilepsy: the Norwegian Mother, Father, and Child Cohort Study. Epilepsia. 2022;63 (7 ):1822–1834.35352343
24 WHO. Guidelines on post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV and the use of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis for HIV-related infections among adults, adolescents and children. World Health Organization; 2014.
25 Burman RJ Wilmshurst JM Gebauer S Weise L Walker KG Donald KA . Seizures in children with HIV infection in South Africa: a retrospective case control study. Seizure. 2019;65 :159–165.30721872
26 Birbeck G Chomba E Ddumba E Kauye F Mielke J . Lack of appropriate treatment for people with comorbid HIV/AIDS and epilepsy in sub-Saharan Africa. Epilepsia. 2007;48 (7 ):1424–1425.17635568
27 Elafros MA Birbeck GL Gardiner JC , et al. Patient-reported adverse effects associated with combination antiretroviral therapy and coadministered enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;96 (6 ):1505–1511.28719255
28 Pironi V Ciccone O Beghi E , et al. Survey on the worldwide availability and affordability of antiseizure medications: report of the ILAE Task Force on Access to Treatment. Epilepsia. 2022;63 (2 ):335–351.34981508
29 WHO. Model List of Essential Medications. World Health Organization; 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. https://www.who.int/groups/expert-committee-on-selection-and-use-of-essential-medicines/essential-medicines-lists
30 Cardo DM Culver DH Ciesielski CA , et al. A case-control study of HIV seroconversion in health care workers after percutaneous exposure. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Needlestick Surveillance Group. N Engl J Med. 1997;337 (21 ):1485–1490.9366579
31 Nwaiwu CA Egro FM Smith S Harper JD Spiess AM . Seroconversion rate among health care workers exposed to HIV-contaminated body fluids: The University of Pittsburgh 13-year experience. Am J Infect Control. 2017;45 (8 ):896–900.28449921
32 Mayer KH Gelman M Holmes J Kraft J Melbourne K Mimiaga MJ . Safety and tolerability of once daily coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for postexposure prophylaxis after sexual exposure. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2022;90 (1 ):27–32.34991141
33 Liu A Xin R Zhang H , et al. An open-label evaluation of safety and tolerability of coformulated bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide for post-exposure prophylaxis following potential exposure to human immunodeficiency virus-1. Chin Med J (Engl). 2022;135 (22 ):2725–2729.36719359
34 Van der Lee MJ Dawood L ter Hofstede HJ , et al. Lopinavir/ritonavir reduces lamotrigine plasma concentrations in healthy subjects. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2006;80 (2 ):159–68.16890577
35 Wassner C Bradley N Lee Y . A review and clinical understanding of tenofovir: tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus tenofovir alafenamide. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care. 2020;19 :2325958220919231.
36 Healthcare V. Vocabria (cabotegravir oral and injection). European Summary of Product Characteristics; 2021.
37 Cattaneo D Baldelli S Cozzi V , et al. Drug-drug interactions between antiretrovirals and carbamazepine/oxcarbazepine: a real-life investigation. Ther Drug Monit. 2020;42 (2 ):330–334.31743292
38 Gibson AK Shah BM Nambiar PH Schafer JJ . Tenofovir alafenamide. Ann Pharmacother. 2016;50 (11 ):942–952.27465879
39 Peltola J Holtkamp M Rocamora R Ryvlin P Sieradzan K Villanueva V . Practical guidance and considerations for transitioning patients from oxcarbazepine or carbamazepine to eslicarbazepine acetate—expert opinion. Epilepsy Behav. 2015;50 :46–49.26114438
40 Cohen H Mahajna G Ben-Shushan T Matok I Eyal S . The extent of cytochrome P450 3A induction by antiseizure medications: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Epilepsia. 2024;65 (2 ):445–455.38010146
41 Cattaneo D Baldelli S Giacomelli A , et al. Assessment of antiepileptic drug concentrations in HIV-infected versus HIV-negative patients: a retrospective analysis. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2019;58 (10 ):1345–1350.30945117
42 Song I Weller S Patel J , et al. Effect of carbamazepine on dolutegravir pharmacokinetics and dosing recommendation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;72 (6 ):665–70.26898568
43 Brew BJ Thompson J . Epilepsy: issues with antiepileptic drug use in HIV-infected patients. Nat Rev Neurol. 2012;8 (4 ):187–188.22410581
44 Taubøll E Gregoraszczuk EL Wojtowicz AK Milewicz T . Effects of levetiracetam and valproate on reproductive endocrine function studied in human ovarian follicular cells. Epilepsia. 2009;50 (8 ):1868–1874.19490055
45 Johnson EL Kaplan PW . Caring for transgender patients with epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2017;58 (10 ):1667–1672.28771690
46 Vita R Settineri S Liotta M Benvenga S Trimarchi F . Changes in hormonal and metabolic parameters in transgender subjects on cross-sex hormone therapy: a cohort study. Maturitas. 2018;107 :92–96.29169588
47 Sheehan NL Brouillette MJ Delisle MS Allan J . Possible interaction between lopinavir/ritonavir and valproic acid exacerbates bipolar disorder. Ann Pharmacother. 2006;40 (1 ):147–150.16368918
48 Akula SK Rege AB Dreisbach AW Dejace PM Lertora JJ . Valproic acid increases cerebrospinal fluid zidovudine levels in a patient with AIDS. Am J Med Sci. 1997;313 (4 ):244–246.9099156
49 Burger DM Huisman A Van Ewijk N , et al. The effect of atazanavir and atazanavir/ritonavir on UDP-glucuronosyltransferase using lamotrigine as a phenotypic probe. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;84 (6 ):698–703.18528434
50 Wegner I Edelbroek PM Bulk S Lindhout D . Lamotrigine kinetics within the menstrual cycle, after menopause, and with oral contraceptives. Neurology. 2009;73 (17 ):1388–1393.19858461
51 Lardizabal DV Morris HH Hovinga CA Del Mar Carreño M . Tolerability and pharmacokinetics of oral loading with lamotrigine in epilepsy monitoring units. Epilepsia. 2003;44 (4 ):536–539.12681002
52 EMA. Meeting highlights from the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC). 2024. Accessed April 1, 2024. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/meeting-highlights-pharmacovigilance-risk-assessment-committee-prac-5-8-february-2024#contact-point-65479
53 Kwan P Arzimanoglou A Berg AT , et al. Definition of drug resistant epilepsy: consensus proposal by the ad hoc Task Force of the ILAE Commission on Therapeutic Strategies. Epilepsia. 2010;51 (6 ):1069–1077.19889013
54 Stolbach A Paziana K Heverling H Pham P . A review of the toxicity of HIV medications II: interactions with drugs and complementary and alternative medicine products. J Med Toxicol. 2015;11 (3 ):326–341.26036354
55 Sheth RD Harden CL . Screening for bone health in epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2007;48 (Suppl 9 ):39–41.
56 Gusmão MB Oliveira VV Santos NM Melo LC . Assessing bone mineral density in children and adolescents living with HIV and on treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: a systematic review. Rev Paul Pediatr. 2023;42 :e2023042.
57 Shiau S Arpadi SM Yin MT . Bone update: is it still an issue without tenofovir disoproxil fumarate? Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2020;17 (1 ):1–5.31953646
58 McComsey GA Kitch D Daar ES , et al. Bone mineral density and fractures in antiretroviral-naive persons randomized to receive abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine along with efavirenz or atazanavir-ritonavir: Aids Clinical Trials Group A5224s, a substudy of ACTG A5202. J Infect Dis. 2011;203 (12 ):1791–1801.21606537
59 Moore AE Burns JE Sally D , et al. Bone turnover change after randomized switch from tenofovir disoproxil to tenofovir alafenamide fumarate in men with HIV. AIDS. 2024;38 (4 ):521–529.38061030
60 Eckard AR McComsey GA . Weight gain and integrase inhibitors. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2020;33 (1 ):10–19.31789693
61 Lake JE Trevillyan J . Impact of integrase inhibitors and tenofovir alafenamide on weight gain in people with HIV. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2021;16 (3 ):148–151.33797433
62 Bosch B Akpomiemie G Chandiwana N , et al. Weight and metabolic changes after switching from tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (FTC)+dolutegravir (DTG), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/FTC + DTG, and TDF/FTC/efavirenz to TDF/lamivudine/DTG. Clin Infect Dis. 2023;76 (8 ):1492–1495.36519389
63 Rashid M Rajan AK Chhabra M , et al. Role of human leukocyte antigen in anti-epileptic drugs-induced Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis: a meta-analysis. Seizure. 2022;102 :36–50.36183454
64 Biswas M Ershadian M Shobana J Nguyen AH Sukasem C . Associations of HLA genetic variants with carbamazepine-induced cutaneous adverse drug reactions: an updated meta-analysis. Clin Transl Sci. 2022;15 (8 ):1887–1905.35599240
65 Leckband SG Kelsoe JR Dunnenberger HM , et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines for HLA-B genotype and carbamazepine dosing. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013;94 (3 ):324–328.23695185
66 Venter WD Sokhela S Simmons B , et al. Dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection (ADVANCE): week 96 results from a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet HIV. 2020;7 (10 ):e666–e676.
67 Walmsley SL Antela A Clumeck N , et al. Dolutegravir plus abacavir-lamivudine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2013;369 (19 ):1807–1818.24195548
68 Villanueva V López-Gomáriz E López-Trigo J , et al. Rational polytherapy with lacosamide in clinical practice: results of a Spanish cohort analysis RELACOVA. Epilepsy Behav. 2012;23 (3 ):298–304.22370116
69 Sikazwe I Elafros MA Bositis CM , et al. HIV and new onset seizures: slipping through the cracks in HIV care and treatment. HIV Med. 2016;17 (2 ):118–123.26200721
70 Waldman G Benson R . Epilepsy care in transgender patients. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2022;22 (8 ):451–458.35666366
71 Patel P Ford SL Baker M , et al. Pregnancy outcomes and pharmacokinetics in pregnant women living with HIV exposed to long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine in clinical trials. HIV Med.2023;24 (5 ):568–579.36411596
72 Goulding AN Meeks K Shay L Casey S Applegarth C McKinney J . Antiretroviral therapy in pregnancy: a 2023 review of the literature. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2024;21 (1 ):1–10.38277098
73 Tomasulo P . LactMed-new NLM database on drugs and lactation. Med Ref Serv Q. 2007;26 (1 ):51–58.17210549
