The use of monotherapy in patients with epilepsy: an appraisal of the new antiepileptic drugs

Cannabinoids and Genetic Epilepsy Models: A Review with Focus on CDKL5 Deficiency Disorder

Pediatric genetic epilepsies, such as CDKL5 Deficiency Disorder (CDD), are severely debilitating, with early-onset seizures occurring more than ten times daily in extreme cases. Existing antiseizure drugs frequently prove ineffective, which significantly impacts child development and diminishes the quality of life for patients and caregivers. The relaxation of cannabis legislation has increased research into potential therapeutic properties of phytocannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD) and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). CBD's antiseizure properties have shown promise, particularly in treating drug-resistant genetic epilepsies associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS), Dravet syndrome (DS), and Tuberous Sclerosis Complex (TSC). However, specific research on CDD remains limited. Much of the current evidence relies on anecdotal reports of artisanal products lacking accurate data on cannabinoid composition. Utilizing model systems like patient-derived iPSC neurons and brain organoids allows precise dosing and comprehensive exploration of cannabinoids' pharmacodynamics. This review explores the potential of CBD, THC, and other trace cannabinoids in treating CDD and focusing on clinical trials and preclinical models to elucidate the cannabinoid's potential mechanisms of action in disrupted CDD pathways and strengthen the case for further research into their potential as anti-epileptic drugs for CDD. This review offers an updated perspective on cannabinoid's therapeutic potential for CDD.

Perampanel Monotherapy for Focal and Generalized Epilepsy in Clinical Practice

Objectives. To investigate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of perampanel (PER) when used as monotherapy to treat focal or generalized epilepsy in everyday clinical practice, using data from the PERMIT study. Methods. PERMIT was a pooled analysis of 44 real-world studies from 17 countries, in which people with focal and generalized epilepsy were treated with PER. This post hoc analysis included people with epilepsy (PWE) from PERMIT who were treated with PER monotherapy at baseline. Retention and effectiveness were assessed after 3, 6, and 12 months. Effectiveness assessments included ≥50% responder rate and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit). Safety and tolerability were assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation due to AEs. Results. Overall, 268 PWE were treated with PER monotherapy at baseline. Retention was assessed for 168 PWE, effectiveness for 183 PWE, and safety and tolerability for 197 PWE. Retention rates were 91.1%, 87.3%, and 73.3% at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. At 12 months, responder rates were 84.2% overall, 82.9% in PWE with only focal-onset seizures at baseline, and 88.0% in those with only generalized-onset seizures at baseline; corresponding freedom rates were 62.9%, 57.7%, and 80.0%, respectively. AEs were reported for 45.2% of PWE. The most frequently reported AEs (≥5% of PWE) were dizziness/vertigo (16.8%), irritability (11.2%), somnolence (9.1%), and depression (6.6%). Over 12 months, 13.7% discontinued due to AEs. Conclusions. PER was effective when used as monotherapy in clinical practice, particularly in those with generalized-onset seizures, and was generally well tolerated.

Movement Disorders Secondary to Novel Antiseizure Medications in Pediatric Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Risk

Novel antiseizure medications are thought to be safer than their conventional counterparts, though no dedicated analysis of movement disorder risk among pediatric populations using novel antiseizure medications has been completed. We report a systematic review with meta-analysis describing the relationship between novel antiseizure medications and movement disorders in pediatrics.MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched up to October 2020 for randomized controlled trials investigating novel antiseizure medications in pediatric populations. Antiseizure medications included lacosamide, perampanel, eslicarbazepine, rufinamide, fenfluramine, cannabidiol, and brivaracetam. Outcomes were pooled using random effects models; risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.Twenty-three studies were selected from 1690 nonredundant manuscripts (n = 1912 total). There was a significantly increased risk of movement disorders associated with perampanel (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.13; n = 133), though only 1 relevant trial was found. No increased risk of movement disorders was found with other antiseizure medications.Our findings indicate most novel antiseizure medications are safe to use in pediatric populations with respect to movement disorders. However, findings were limited by quality of adverse event reporting.

Epilepsy treatment in adults and adolescents: Expert opinion, 2016

INTRODUCTION

There are over twenty anti-seizure medications and anti-seizure devices available commercially in the United States. The multitude of treatment options for seizures can present a challenge to clinicians, especially those who are not subspecialists in the epilepsy field. Many clinical questions are not adequately answered in double-blind randomized controlled studies. In the presence of a knowledge gap, many clinicians consult a respected colleague with acknowledged expertise in the field. Our survey was designed to provide expert opinions on the treatment of epilepsy in adults and adolescents.

METHOD

We surveyed a group of 42 physicians across the United States who are considered experts based on publication record in the field of epilepsy, or a leadership role in a National Association of Epilepsy Centers comprehensive epilepsy program. The survey consisted of 43 multiple-part patient scenario questions and was administered online using Redcap software. The experts provided their opinion on 1126 treatment options based on a modified Rand 9-point scale. The patient scenarios focused on genetically-mediated generalized epilepsy and focal epilepsy. The scenarios first focused on overall treatment strategy and then on specific pharmacotherapies. Other questions focused on treatment of specific patient populations (pregnancy, the elderly, patients with brain tumors, and post organ transplant patients), epilepsy patients with comorbidities (renal and hepatic disease, depression), and how to combine medications after failure of monotherapy. Statistical analysis of data used the expert consensus method.

RESULTS

Valproate was considered a drug of choice in all genetically-mediated generalized epilepsies, except in the population of women of child-bearing age. Ethosuximide was a drug of choice in patient with absence seizures, and levetiracetam was a drug of choice in patients with genetic generalized tonic-clonic seizures and myoclonic seizures. Lamotrigine, levetiracetam and oxcarbazepine were considered drugs of choice for initial treatment of focal seizures. Lamotrigine and levetiracetam were the drugs of choice for women of child-bearing age with either genetic generalized epilepsy or focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine and levetiracetam were the drugs of choice in the elderly population. Lamotrigine was preferred in patients with co-morbid depression. Levetiracetam was the drug of choice in treating patients with hepatic failure, or who have undergone organ transplantation. Compared to the 2005 and 2001 surveys, there was increased preference for the use of levetiracetam and lamotrigine, and decreased preference for the use of phenytoin, gabapentin, phenobarbital and carbamazepine.

DISCUSSION

The study presented here provides a "snapshot" of the clinical practices of experts in the treatment of epilepsy. The experts were very often in agreement, and reached consensus in 81% of the possible responses. However, expert opinion does not replace the medical literature; instead, it acts to supplement existing information. Using the study results is similar to requesting an expert consultation. Our findings suggest options that the clinician should consider to achieve best practice.

Identifying the barriers to antiepileptic drug adherence among adults with epilepsy

PURPOSE

To identify the barriers to antiepileptic drug (AED) adherence among adults with epilepsy (AWE). The impact of AED non-adherence on quality of life (QoL) was also examined.

METHOD

Systematic design (SR) study. A search strategy was undertaken with no time limits, for articles published in English, in MEDLINE, CINANL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane databases and grey literature sources. Eligibility criteria included participants with epilepsy over 18 years, who were prescribed AEDs. Adherence had to be defined and adherence assessment measurements identified. A screening process was undertaken to select eligible studies. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in a quantitative synthesis. Quality of evidence was conducted using the EBL critical appraisal checklist and assessing risk of bias within individual studies.

RESULTS

Across the included studies a high prevalence of non-adherence was identified. AED non-adherence was associated with specific beliefs about medications, being depressed or anxious, poor medication self-administration management, uncontrolled recent seizures, frequent medication dosage times, poor physician-patient relationship and perceived social support. Additionally, AED non-adherence impacted negatively on QoL as a result of poor seizure control.

CONCLUSION

Although included studies were of good quality, risk of biases reduced the generalisability of results. Findings suggested that comprehensive adherence assessments should routinely be performed. Recommendations for future research include the use of longitudinal research designs and a follow up SR to include the 16-18-year-old population.

A prospective study of adverse drug reactions to antiepileptic drugs in children

OBJECTIVES

To prospectively determine the nature and rate of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in children on antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and to prospectively evaluate the effect of AEDs on behaviour.

SETTING

A single centre prospective observational study.

PARTICIPANTS

Children (<18 years old) receiving one or more AEDs for epilepsy, at each clinically determined follow-up visit.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Primary outcome was adverse reactions of AEDs. Behavioural and cognitive functions were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

180 children were recruited. Sodium valproate and carbamazepine were the most frequently used AEDs. A total of 114 ADRs were recorded in 56 of these children (31%). 135 children (75%) were on monotherapy. 27 of the 45 children (60%) on polytherapy had ADRs; while 29 (21%) of those on monotherapy had ADRs. The risk of ADRs was significantly lower in patients receiving monotherapy than polytherapy (RR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79, p<0.0001). Behavioural problems and somnolence were the most common ADRs. 23 children had to discontinue their AED due to an ADR.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural problems and somnolence were the most common ADRs. Polytherapy significantly increases the likelihood of ADRs in children.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT (2007-000565-37).

Pattern of adverse events of antiepileptic drugs: results of the aESCAPE study in Poland

INTRODUCTION

The Adverse Event Scale in Patients With Epilepsy (aESCAPE) European study (NCT00394927) explored and analyzed adverse events (AEs) and reasons for modifying treatment in patients treated with newer and older antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) used in monotherapy or polytherapy. The present analysis concerns the results of patients recruited in Poland.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Multicentre, international, observational, cross-sectional study investigating AEs in patients with epilepsy (aged ≥ 4 years), on stable AED treatment with one or two AED(s) for ≥ 3 months, using standardized questionnaires completed by a physician during a single study visit.

RESULTS

Out of 309 patients, 24.6% were treated exclusively with newer AED(s) in monotherapy or in combination, while 75.4% were treated with older AED(s) or a combination of older and newer AED(s). 60.8% were on monotherapy, and 39.9% on polytherapy. In general, 73.8% of patients reported ≥ 1 AE(s). There were no significant differences in the frequency of reported AEs in compared groups. The most common were disturbances in cognitive function (40.5%), psychological problems (36.2%), and sedation (32.7%). Some AEs were found to be more specific for particular types and treatment regimens. Changes in treatment or dose during the study visit occurred in 22.3% of the patients, mainly due to lack of efficacy (10.7%), AEs (5.2%) or absence of seizures (4.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A detailed structured interview revealed high frequency of AEs in patients treated with AEDs. The main reasons for treatment modifications at the study visit were lack of efficacy, adverse events and absence of seizures.

Effects of antiepileptic drug characteristics on medication adherence

PURPOSE

To determine whether antiepileptic drug (AED) characteristics are associated with medication adherence.

METHODS

We reviewed pharmacy and clinical records of 108 patients with epilepsy from the indigent care program at Shands-Jacksonville. We calculated the mean medication possession ratio (MMPR) for each AED. Using univariate analysis, we determined whether differences exist in the MMPR of various AEDs. We also determined whether the MMPR differs accordingly to the use of mono- or combination therapy, dosing frequency, release-type, or brand-name formulation. We employed multivariable analysis to determine if these differences persisted in the context of other demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Mean medication possession ratio was higher (better) when using older AEDs, in monotherapy, and with more frequent dosing intervals. These variables remained significant on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our findings contradict some commonly held beliefs on medication adherence and suggest that specific AED characteristics may be superseded by factors such as overall patient satisfaction with the drug regimen.

Non-interventional surveillance study of adverse events in patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

Compare adverse events (AEs) in patients with epilepsy taking different antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) using standardized physician-completed questionnaires.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multicenter, observational, cross-sectional study in epilepsy patients aged ≥4 , stable on 1-2 AED(s) for ≥3 months.

RESULTS

One thousand and nineteen patients were evaluated: 28.7% took newer, 71.3% older (or older + newer) AED(s); 56.9% monotherapy; 43.1% polytherapy. Overall, 68.3% reported ≥1 AE (61.3% newer; 71.1% older AEDs), most commonly: cognitive function disturbances, sedation, psychological problems. Patients taking newer AEDs were significantly less likely to report ≥1 AE (OR [95% CI]: 0.64 [0.46-0.89], P = 0.008). Treatment/dose changed at study visit: 22.8% (17.5% newer; 24.9% older AEDs) because of (newer/older); lack of efficacy (6.2%/7.8%); AEs (4.1/8.4%); absence of seizures (3.8/4.0%). Patients receiving levetiracetam or lamotrigine were significantly less likely to report AEs/modify treatment.

CONCLUSION

Patients taking newer AEDs were significantly less likely to report AEs, although the non-randomized study design does not allow the lower rate of AEs to be attributed with certainty to the use of newer AEDs. A standardized AE questionnaire appeared useful for monitoring AEs/optimizing AED therapy.

Update on anticonvulsant drugs

In 2009, the US Food and Drug Administration approved three medications for the treatment of epilepsy: rufinamide, lacosamide, and vigabatrin. In addition, extended-release formulations of lamotrigine and levetiracetam were approved recently. When added to the dozen medications for treating epilepsy, the choice is a luxury in terms of additional options, but also a challenge for practitioners to use them all with expertise. Recently, there has been much interest surrounding medications for epilepsy and their possible association with osteoporosis, safety during pregnancy, biological equivalence to generic versions, and possible association with higher rates of suicidality. This review discusses these issues and provides a current overview for the medical management of epilepsy.

Efficacy and safety of lamotrigine monotherapy in children and adolescents with epilepsy

Lamotrigine (LTG) has shown to confer broad-spectrum, well-tolerated control of epilepsy. Monotherapy is preferable over polytherapy because of better compliance, fewer adverse events, less interactions, lower teratogenicity and lower cost. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LTG monotherapy on seizure control in a cohort of children and adolescents with epilepsy. We retrospectively reviewed the records of children and adolescents treated with LTG monotherapy at our institution between 2001 and 2006. Data collected included demographics, seizure type, etiology of seizures, age at onset of seizures and at initiation of LTG treatment, number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) prior to LTG, dose of LTG, length of follow-up, treatment response, and adverse events. Seventy-two children and adolescents were identified (mean age 12.1 years); 37.5% had mental retardation. Age at onset of epilepsy was 5.7 years (0-16). Twenty three percent had symptomatic focal epilepsy, 15.5% idiopathic focal epilepsy, 19.4% symptomatic generalized epilepsy and 41.6% idiopathic generalized epilepsy. LTG was used as first-line monotherapy in 26.4% of patients and as a second-line monotherapy in 73.6%. Age at initiation of LTG therapy was 10 years (2.8-19). Mean number of AEDs tried prior to LTG was 1.3 (0-6). Mean dose of LTG was 5.5mg/kg/day (1.1-13.7). Mean follow-up period was 33 months (3 weeks to 11.5 years). The degree of seizure reduction was as follows: seizure free in 42%, 75-90% reduction in 17.4%, 50-74% in 11.6%, 25-49% in 10%. Sixteen percent had no change in seizure control and 3% became worse. The most common adverse event was rash (6.9%). Six (8.3%) patients discontinued LTG because of the adverse events. No patient had Stevens-Johnson syndrome. In conclusion, LTG was effective and well-tolerated as monotherapy in children and adolescents for both focal and generalized epilepsies.

Management of breakthrough seizures in the emergency department: continuity of patient care

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a chronic disorder requiring long-term management. Communication between emergency physicians, neurologists, and primary care physicians (PCPs) is especially critical for the continuity of care for patients who present in an emergency department (ED) with a breakthrough seizure. Therefore, maximizing communication between the emergency physician and the PCP is of the utmost importance. The emergency physician, who is on the front line, must gather the information necessary to identify the underlying cause of the seizure and decide whether the pharmaceutical management must be changed.

SCOPE

This paper provides a clinical commentary on issues to consider when managing breakthrough seizures in the ED, to inform and facilitate communication between emergency physicians, consulting neurologists, and PCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical management decisions, especially when considering adjustment in an antiepileptic drug (AED) regimen, are often best made in coordination with a consulting neurologist. Increasing emergency physicians' comfort level regarding the use of newer-generation AEDs can improve the dialogue between the emergency physician and neurologist and the dialogue with the patient. Understanding the risks and benefits of the newer AEDs will assist the emergency physician in clinical decision making and, it is hoped, improve clinical outcomes. To preserve continuity of patient care, a patient's treating physician should be notified of all the particulars of the ED visit, and an appointment should be scheduled at the time of discharge for follow-up evaluation.

Medical management of patients with brain tumors

The most common medical problems in brain tumor patients include the management of seizures, peritumoral edema, medication side effects, venous thromboembolism (VTE), fatigue and cognitive dysfunction. Despite their importance, there are relatively few studies specifically addressing these issues. There is increasing evidence that brain tumor patients who have not had a seizure do not benefit from prophylactic antiepileptic medications. Patients on corticosteroids are at greater risk of Pneumocystis jerovecii pneumonia and may benefit from prophylactic therapy. There is also growing evidence suggesting that anticoagulation may be more effective than inferior vena cava IVC) filtration devices for treating VTE in brain tumor patients and the risk of hemorrhage with anticoagulation is relatively small. Low-molecular weight heparin may be more effective than coumadin. Medications such as modafinil and methylphenidate have assumed an increasing role in the treatment of fatigue, while donepezil and memantine may be helpful with memory loss.

Long-term efficacy and safety of monotherapy and adjunctive therapy with zonisamide

The long-term effects of zonisamide as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy were investigated in patients with seizure disorders. One hundred twelve adult neurology patients treated with zonisamide were retrospectively identified through a chart review; 90 patients (n=45 monotherapy, n=45 adjunctive therapy) who received zonisamide for 3 months were included in the efficacy-evaluable population, and all 112 patients were included in the safety population. The average duration of treatment was 24.3 months (range, 3-46 months), and the average zonisamide dosage was 324 mg/day (range, 100-1000 mg/day). Thirty-eight of 90 patients (42%; n=25 monotherapy, n=13 adjunctive therapy) were seizure-free, and an additional 26 patients (29%; n=9 monotherapy, n=17 adjunctive therapy) had 50% seizure frequency reduction at the last follow-up visit. Thirty of 112 patients (27%) reported mild to moderate adverse events, such as weight loss (5.4%), fatigue (4.5%), and sedation (2.7%). Zonisamide, as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, was a safe, effective, and well-tolerated long-term treatment option in patients with various seizure types.