Risk of a lamotrigine-related skin rash: Current meta-analysis and postmarketing cohort analysis

PURPOSE We systematically reviewed studies to provide current evidence on the incidence and risk of skin rash in patients with LTG therapy. METHODS PubMed and Scopus databases, up to 15 March 2014 were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective studies, retrospective studies and postmarketing reports, which included data of skin rash in patients with LTG therapy. RESULTS Forty-one articles met the entry criteria. A total of 4447 patients with LTG therapy from 26 prospective studies, 2977 patients from 8 retrospective studies, and 26,126 patients from 5/7 postmarketing reports were included. The overall incidence of skin rash with LTG therapy was 9.98% (444/4447) from prospective studies, 7.19% (214/2977) from retrospective studies, and 2.09% (547/26,126) from postmarketing reports. A meta-analysis of the risk of skin rash in 21 prospective studies, did not show a significant difference between patients with LTG and other drugs, including placebo, other ADEs or lithium (OR 0.99-2.41). In 6 respective studies, there was a significantly higher OR in patients with LTG compared with those with non-aromatic AEDs. However, there was no significant difference in rash risk between patients with LTG and aromatic AEDs. CONCLUSIONS Our study showed that LTG significantly increased the risk of developing a skin rash compared to non-aromatic AEDs. Our results support the need for large prospective population-based studies and clinical trials to determine whether LTG increases the risk of developing a skin rash than compared to other drugs.