A multicentre comparative trial of sodium valproate and carbamazepine in adult onset epilepsy. Adult EPITEG Collaborative Group

Effect of clinical features on antiseizure medication doses in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy

Objective

We evaluate the effect of distinct clinical features on anti-seizure medication (ASM) doses in seizure-free and not seizure-free patients aged ≥16 years with new-onset epilepsy.

Materials and methods

This study included 459 patients with a validated diagnosis of epilepsy. The most prescribed ASMs were oxcarbazepine (OXC; n = 307), followed by valproic acid (VPA; n = 115), carbamazepine (CBZ; n = 81), and lamotrigine (LTG; n = 67). The seizure freedom rate with their first or subsequent ASM was 88.0%. A retrospective analysis of patient records was performed to determine any association between doses of ASMs and patient characteristics.

Results

The median OXC dose in seizure-free patients aged >60 years was 600 mg compared to 900 mg in younger patients. When controlling for age but not in an unadjusted model, the median dose of OXC was lower (300 mg, p = 0.018) for seizure-free patients compared to non-seizure-free patients, and the median dose of OXC was also 300 mg lower among older patients aged >60 years (p < 0.001). The median OXC doses for men aged ≤60 years were 300 mg higher than for women aged >60 years (900 mg vs. 600 mg, p = 0.021). The median dose of VPA was 400 mg higher in men than in women (p < 0.001) and 400 mg higher in not seizure-free patients compared to seizure-free patients only when adjusting for sex (p < 0.001). Higher median doses for CBZ were registered with FAS compared with FBTCS (difference in median doses of 200 mg; p = 0.017).

Conclusion

Significant OXC dose differences were detected between age groups, whereas VPA dosing was different in men and women. Moreover, CBZ doses were dependent on some seizure types. These data allow for the individualization of the initial target dosing based on key clinical characteristics.

Antiseizure Medication-Induced Alopecia: A Literature Review

Background: Adverse effects of antiseizure medications (ASMs) remain one of the major causes of non-adherence. Cosmetic side effects (CSEs) are among the most commonly reported side effects of ASMs. In this context, alopecia is one of the CSEs that has a high intolerance rate leading to poor therapeutical compliance. Methods: We performed a literature review concerning alopecia as a secondary effect of ASMs. Results: There are 1656 individuals reported with ASM-induced alopecia. Valproate (983), lamotrigine (355), and carbamazepine (225) have been extensively reported. Other ASMs associated with alopecia were cenobamate (18), levetiracetam (14), topiramate (13), lacosamide (7), vigabatrin (6), phenobarbital (5), gabapentin (5), phenytoin (4), pregabalin (4), eslicarbazepine (3), brivaracetam (2), clobazam (2), perampanel (2), trimethadione (2), rufinamide (2), zonisamide (2), primidone (1), and tiagabine (1). There were no reports of oxcarbazepine and felbamate with drug-induced alopecia. Hair loss seen with ASMs was diffuse and non-scarring. Telogen effluvium was the most common cause of alopecia. A characteristic feature was the reversibility of alopecia after ASM dose adjustment. Conclusions: Alopecia should be considered one important adverse effect of ASMs. Patients reporting hair loss with ASM therapy should be further investigated, and specialist consultation is recommended.

Obesity and metabolic syndrome in patients with epilepsy, their relation with epilepsy control

Obesity and metabolic syndrome (MetS) are commonly observed in patients with epilepsy (PWE). Obesity and MetS are not only affecting the physical fitness and quality of life of these patients, rather antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) compliance and seizure control have also been affected. The objective of this review is to search the published literature regarding the prevalence of obesity and MetS in PWE and their relation to the response to AEDs. A comprehensive search using PubMed, Cochrane Databases, and Google Scholar was performed. A supplementary citation search was also conducted by analyzing the reference lists of identified sources. The initial search revealed 364 articles of potential relevance. The studies were analyzed in detail to obtain clinical information relevant to the objectives of the review. Many observational, case control studies, randomized control trials and few review articles were included for critical appraisal and review writing. Epilepsy is associated with MetS and obesity in all age groups. AEDs and lack of exercise are the chief causes while metabolic disturbances such as adiponectin, mitochondrial dysfunction, valproic acid (VPA)-associated insulin resistance, leptin deficiency, and endocrine dysfunction are also addressable factors. Although the risk of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) is also higher among obese PWE, the interaction between, MetS, and its components with DRE remain to be fully investigated. Further research is required to elucidate their interplay. Appropriate and careful selection of AEDs without compromising therapeutic efficacy supplemented by lifestyle counseling for exercise and diet should be practiced to avoid weight gain and potential DRE.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2017. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for focal onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however, a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure of 12 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, eventrate, zonisamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with focal onset seizures (simple focal, complex focal or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 12 April 2021: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to April 09, 2021). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) and network meta-analysis (NMA) review. Our primary outcome was 'time to treatment failure', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', and 'time to first seizure post-randomisation'. We performed frequentist NMA to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 12 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct 'pairwise' estimates and NMA results via node splitting. Results are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the CiNeMA approach, based on the GRADE framework. We have also provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were provided for at least one outcome of this review for 14,789 out of a total of 22,049 eligible participants (67% of total data) from 39 out of the 89 eligible trials (43% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 50 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions. No IPD were available from a single trial of eslicarbazepine acetate, so this AED could not be included in the NMA. Network meta-analysis showed high-certainty evidence that for our primary outcome, 'time to treatment failure', for individuals with focal seizures; lamotrigine performs better than most other treatments in terms of treatment failure for any reason and due to adverse events, including the other first-line treatment carbamazepine; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for lamotrigine versus: eventrate 1.01 (0.88 to 1.20), zonisamide 1.18 (0.96 to 1.44), lacosamide 1.19 (0.90 to 1.58), carbamazepine 1.26 (1.10 to 1.44), oxcarbazepine 1.30 (1.02 to 1.66), sodium valproate 1.35 (1.09 to 1.69), phenytoin 1.44 (1.11 to 1.85), topiramate 1.50 (1.23 to 1.81), gabapentin 1.53 (1.26 to 1.85), phenobarbitone 1.97 (1.45 to 2.67). No significant difference between lamotrigine and eventrate was shown for any treatment failure outcome, and both AEDs seemed to perform better than all other AEDs. For people with generalised onset seizures, evidence was more limited and of moderate certainty; no other treatment performed better than first-line treatment sodium valproate, but there were no differences between sodium valproate, lamotrigine or eventrate in terms of treatment failure; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for sodium valproate versus: lamotrigine 1.06 (0.81 to 1.37), eventrate 1.13 (0.89 to 1.42), gabapentin 1.13 (0.61 to 2.11), phenytoin 1.17 (0.80 to 1.73), oxcarbazepine 1.24 (0.72 to 2.14), topiramate 1.37 (1.06 to 1.77), carbamazepine 1.52 (1.18 to 1.96), phenobarbitone 2.13 (1.20 to 3.79), lacosamide 2.64 (1.14 to 6.09). Network meta-analysis also showed high-certainty evidence that for secondary remission outcomes, few notable differences were shown for either seizure type; for individuals with focal seizures, carbamazepine performed better than gabapentin (12-month remission) and sodium valproate (six-month remission). No differences between lamotrigine and any AED were shown for individuals with focal seizures, or between sodium valproate and other AEDs for individuals with generalised onset seizures. Network meta-analysis also showed high- to moderate-certainty evidence that, for 'time to first seizure,' in general, the earliest licensed treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for individuals with focal seizures; phenobarbitone performed better than both first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine. There were no notable differences between the newer drugs (oxcarbazepine, topiramate, gabapentin, eventrate, zonisamide and lacosamide) for either seizure type. Generally, direct evidence (where available) and network meta-analysis estimates were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping. There was no important indication of inconsistency between direct and network meta-analysis results. The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders; however, reporting of adverse events was highly variable across AEDs and across studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-certainty evidence demonstrates that for people with focal onset seizures, current first-line treatment options carbamazepine and lamotrigine, as well as newer drug eventrate, show the best profile in terms of treatment failure and seizure control as first-line treatments. For people with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types), current first-line treatment sodium valproate has the best profile compared to all other treatments, but lamotrigine and eventrate would be the most suitable alternative first-line treatments, particularly for those for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option. Further evidence from randomised controlled trials recruiting individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types) is needed.

Definitions and Risk Factors for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy in an Adult Cohort

Background: Less than one-third of people with epilepsy will develop drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). Establishing the prognosis of each unique epilepsy case is an important part of evaluation and treatment.Most studies on DRE prognosis have been based on a pooled, heterogeneous group, including children, adults, and older adults, in the absence of clear recognition and control of important confounders, such as age group. Furthermore, previous studies were done before the 2010 definition of DRE by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE), so data based on the current definitions have not been entirely elucidated. This study aimed to explore the difference between 3 definitions of DRE and clinical predictors of DRE in adults and older adults.

Methods: Patients with a new diagnosis of epilepsy ascertained at a Single Seizure Clinic (SSC) in Saskatchewan, Canada were included if they had at least 1 year of follow-up. The first study outcome was the diagnosis of DRE epilepsy at follow-up using the 2010 ILAE definition. This was compared with 2 alternative definitions of DRE by Kwan and Brodie and Camfield and Camfield. Finally, risk factors were analyzed using the ILAE definition.

Results: In total, 95 patients with a new diagnosis of epilepsy and a median follow-up of 24 months were included. The median age of patients at the diagnosis of epilepsy was 33 years, and 51% were men. In the cohort, 32% of patients were diagnosed with DRE by the Kwan and Brodie definition, 10% by Camfield and Camfield definition, and 15% by the ILAE definition by the end of follow-up. The only statistically significant risk factor for DRE development was the failure to respond to the first anti-seizure medication (ASM).

Conclusion: There were important differences in the percentage of patients diagnosed with DRE when using 3 concurrent definitions. However, the use of the ILAE definition appeared to be the most consistent through an extended follow-up. Finally, failure to respond to the first ASM was the sole significant risk factor for DRE in the cohort after considering the age group.

Efficacy and tolerability of antiseizure drugs

Drug-resistant epilepsy occurs in 25-30% of patients. Furthermore, treatment with a first-generation antiseizure drug (ASD) fails in 30-40% of individuals because of their intolerable adverse effects. Over the past three decades, 20 newer- (second- and third-)generation ASDs with unique mechanisms of action and pharmacokinetic profiles have been introduced into clinical practice. This advent has expanded the therapeutic armamentarium of epilepsy and broadens the choices of ASDs to match the individual patient's characteristics. In recent years, research has been focused on defining the ASD of choice for different seizure types. In 2017, the International League Against Epilepsy published a new classification for seizure types and epilepsy syndrome. This classification has been of paramount importance to accurately classify the patient's seizure type(s) and prescribe the ASD that is appropriate. A year later, the American Academy of Neurology published a new guideline for ASD selection in adult and pediatric patients with new-onset and treatment-resistant epilepsy. The guideline primarily relied on studies that compare the first-generation and second-generation ASDs, with limited data for the efficacy of third-generation drugs. While researchers have been called for investigating those drugs in future research, epilepsy specialists may wish to share their personal experiences to support the treatment guidelines. Given the rapid advances in the development of ASDs in recent years and the continuous updates in definitions, classifications, and treatment guidelines for seizure types and epilepsy syndromes, this review aims to present a complete overview of the current state of the literature about the efficacy and tolerability of ASDs and provide guidance to clinicians about selecting appropriate ASDs for initial treatment of epilepsy according to different seizure types and epilepsy syndromes based on the current literature and recent US and UK practical guidelines.

Risk of Valproic Acid-Related Tremor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the incidence and risk of tremor in patients treated with valproic aid (VPA) monotherapy.

Methods: We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to gather relevant data on tremor in patients taking VPA and other drugs and performed a meta-analysis using Stata15.1 software.

Results: Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The overall incidence of tremor in patients receiving VPA therapy was 14% [OR = 0.14, 95% CI (0.10–0.17)]. The pooled estimate risk of tremor showed a significant difference between patients treated with VPA and all other drugs [OR = 5.40, 95% CI (3.22–9.08)], other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) [OR = 5.78, 95% CI (3.18–10.50)], and other non-AEDs [OR = 4.77, 95% CI (1.55–14.72)]. Both a dose of <1,500 mg/d of VPA [included 500 mg/d: OR = 3.57, 95% CI (1.24–10.26), 500–999 mg/d: OR = 3.99, 95% CI (1.95–8.20), 1,000–1,499 mg/d: OR = 8.82, 95% CI (3.25–23.94)] and a VPA treatment duration of <12 m [included ≤ 3 months: OR = 3.06, 95% CI (1.16–8.09), 3–6 months: OR = 16.98, 95% CI (9.14–31.57), and 6–12 months: OR = 4.15, 95% CI (2.74–6.29)] led to a higher risk of tremor than did other drugs, as did higher doses and longer treatment times.

Conclusion: Compared with other drugs, VPA led to a higher risk of tremor, and the level of risk was associated with the dose and duration of treatment.

Lessons learned from the discovery of sodium valproate and what has this meant to future drug discovery efforts?

INTRODUCTION

The discovery of the anticonvulsant properties of valproic acid and the development of valproic acid/valproate to market authorization for specific epilepsy types and syndromes, as well as their repurposing for other indications, are illustrative examples of both the strengths and weaknesses of drug development strategies.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes and interprets the development and repurposing history of valproic acid/valproate. The article is based on articles, including original studies and systematic reviews obtained from PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, SCIndeks and Google Scholar databases.

EXPERT OPINION

Random screening and careful observation of the experimental effects of tested substances were crucial for discovering the anticonvulsant effects of valproic acid, while rational drug design and clinical observation strategies led to repurposing valproic acid and valproate for bipolar disorder maintenance treatmentand prevention of migraine attacks. Early planning and feasibility studies of future clinical trials are essential for obtaining marketing authorization of new substances or new indications of old anticonvulsants. Significant progress has been made recently toward understanding, treatment and prevention of hepatotoxicity caused by valproic acid/valproate, making its long-term administration safer. There are ongoing efforts to repurpose valproic acid/valproate for augmentation with antipsychotic drugs for the treatment of schizophrenia.

A nationwide, retrospective, data-linkage, cohort study of epilepsy and incident dementia

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association of epilepsy with incident dementia by conducting a nationwide, retrospective data-linkage, cohort study to examine whether the association varies according to dementia subtypes and to investigate whether risk factors modify the association.

METHODS

We used linked health data from hospitalization, mortality records, and primary care consultations to follow up 563,151 Welsh residents from their 60th birthday to estimate dementia rate and associated risk factors. Dementia, epilepsy, and covariates (medication, smoking, comorbid conditions) were classified with the use of previously validated code lists. We studied rate of dementia and dementia subtypes in people with epilepsy (PWE) and without epilepsy using (stratified) Kaplan-Meier plots and flexible parametric survival models.

RESULTS

PWE had a 2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3-2.6) times higher hazard of incident dementia, a 1.6 (95% CI 1.4-1.8) times higher hazard of incident Alzheimer disease (AD), and a 3.1 (95% CI 2.8-3.4) times higher hazard of incident Vascular dementia (VaD). A history of stroke modified the increased incidence in PWE. PWE who were first diagnosed at ≤25 years of age had a dementia rate similar to that of those diagnosed later in life. PWE who had ever been prescribed sodium valproate compared to those who had not were at higher risk of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6, 99% CI 1.4-1.9) and VaD (HR 1.7, 99% CI 1.4-2.1) but not AD (HR 1.2, 99% CI 0.9-1.5).

CONCLUSION

PWE compared to those without epilepsy have an increased dementia risk.

Management of antiepileptic drug-induced nutrition-related adverse effects

Although antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are mainstay of the treatment of epilepsy, they are associated with significant adverse effects. The present study reviews the adverse effects of AEDs on some of the nutrition-related issues, including bone health, body weight, glucose and lipid metabolism, vitamin homeostasis, antioxidant defense system, and pregnancy. This paper also provides some nutritional recommendations for people with epilepsy. Patients with epilepsy should be regularly evaluated with regard to their nutrition status and any possible nutritional problems. Daily intake of adequate amounts of all nutrients from various sources should be encouraged, especially for vulnerable groups such as children, adolescents, elderly, and pregnant women. When necessary, preventative or therapeutic supplementation with appropriate micronutrients could be helpful. Graphical abstract.

Risk of valproic acid-related alopecia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We systematically reviewed studies to provide current evidence about the incidence and risk of alopecia in patients undergoing valproic acid (VPA) therapy.

METHODS

We retrieved relevant publications and gathered data on alopecia in patients taking VPA and other drugs from prospective studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-five articles met the inclusion criteria, and the overall incidence of alopecia in patients receiving VPA therapy was 11% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.08-0.13). The pooled risk of alopecia showed a significant difference between patients treated with VPA and all other drugs (odds ratio (OR) 5.02, 95% CI: 3.58-7.03), other epileptic drugs (AEDs) (OR 4.82, 95% CI: 3.32-7.00) and other non-AEDs (OR 5.84, 95% CI: 2.67-12.81). Compared to other drugs, VPA increased the risk of alopecia both in patients with migraine headaches (OR 6.05, 95% CI: 2.89-12.63) and patients with epilepsy (OR 5.29, 95% CI: 3.53-7.92), and the increase risk was reported more frequently in patients with migraine. Both lower doses (OR 4.38, 95% CI: 2.32-8.25) and shorter treatments (OR 4.98, 95% CI: 2.41-10.25) with VPA posed a high risk of alopecia compared to other drugs, as did higher doses and longer treatment times.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our findings, VPA was significantly associated with a risk of alopecia compared to other drugs, and the risk did not depend on the dose and treatment time.

The clinical characteristics and related factors of tremor in patients with epilepsy

PURPOSE

Tremor is frequently observed in patients with epilepsy (PWE), which is generally attributed to the side-effect of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) particularly valproate (VPA) with largely unknown mechanisms. The study aimed to assess the clinical features and related factors of tremor in PWE with tremor.

METHODS

PWE with tremor and a control group of age- and sex-matched PWE without tremor were enrolled. Detailed demographic and clinical information for each individual was recorded. PWE with tremor were evaluated by The Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) and Tremor Related Activities of Daily Living (TRADL) questionnaire.

RESULTS

132 individuals were enrolled, which including sixty-six (36 males) PWE with tremor with mean age of 33 years and epilepsy duration of 12.5 years. Tremor was postural in all, with median duration of four and one year from diagnosis and AED treatment to the onset of tremor respectively. The upper limbs were predominantly affected. VPA had been used in 62 (93.9%) PWE with tremor compared to 31 (47.0%) PWE without tremor (P < 0.001). The total CRST score was significantly associated with epilepsy duration and maximum VPA dosage (B = 0.30, p < 0.001; B = 0.32, p = 0.013). Patients with VPA dosage over 17.05 mg/kg/d might be more vulnerable to develop tremor.

CONCLUSIONS

PWE with tremor were more frequently treated with VPA, however, tremor was mild in most without any functional impairment. Epilepsy duration and maximum VPA dosage were important factors of tremor severity, suggesting mechanisms underlying tremor in PWE may be an elaborate interplay of AEDs and disease itself.

Comparative efficacy of antiepileptic drugs for patients with generalized epileptic seizures: systematic review and network meta-analyses

Background Valproate is a widely prescribed antiepileptic drug for generalized epilepsies, due to the extensive knowledge on its efficacy since it is on the market for many decades. However, a large number of new antiepileptic medicines was introduced into clinical practice and may be better options for treatment, considering that these medicines differ in terms of efficacy spectrum. Despite extensive research, questions regarding which medicine would constitute the first option for the monotherapy treatment of generalized epilepsy remain. Aim of the Review To compare the relative efficacy of all available antiepileptic drugs in the monotherapy treatment of generalized epileptic seizures; and also to compare all antiepoileptig drugs with valproate, which is the current first-line treatment for generalized epilepsy. Methods A systematic review for randomized controlled clinical trials was performed. Network meta-analyses used Bayesian random effects model. Sensitivity analyses determined the results´ robustness. The relative probability of two efficacy outcomes ("Seizure free" and "Therapeutic inefficacy") to happen for each medcicine was calculated using the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve. Results Seven papers (1809 patients) studied the efficacy of valproate, lamotrigine, phenytoin, carbamazepine, topiramate, levetiracetam, and phenobarbital in the treatment of generalized tonicclonic, tonic, and clonic seizures. Phenytoin demonstrated to be inferior to valproate in leaving the patient free of these seizures types [OR: 0.50 (95% CrI 0.27, 0.87)]. Lamotrigine (61%) showed the highest probability of presenting the outcome "Seizure free", followed by levetiracetam (47%), topiramate (44%), and valproate (38%) in the treatment of generalized tonic-clonic, tonic, and clonic seizures. Meanwhile, valproate exhibited greater chance of presenting the outcome "Therapeutic inefficacy" (62%). Regarding absence seizures itself, there was no difference in the efficacy of lamotrigine and ethosuximide when compared to valproate. However, the ranking indicates that ethosuximide (52%) and valproate (47%) are both more likely than lamotrigine to keep the patient free of seizures. Conclusions Lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate are as effective as valproate for treating generalized tonic-clonic, tonic, and clonic seizures. Meanwhile, valproate and ethosuximide are the best options for the treatment of absence seizures promoting better control of seizures, which is the primary goal of pharmacotherapy.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than current first-line treatment carbamazepine and other current first-line treatment lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam); carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Antiepileptic Drugs in Patients with Focal Epilepsy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analyses

Several newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have been introduced into clinical practice, offering choices for individualizing the treatment of epilepsy since AEDs have different efficacy and tolerability profiles. In particular, questions exist regarding which AEDs are the best options for the monotherapy of focal epilepsy. Is carbamazepine (CBZ), which is considered the standard treatment for focal epilepsy, still the best option for monotherapy of focal epilepsy, despite the emergence of new AEDs? In this systematic review, we compared the relative tolerability of all available AEDs for monotherapy of all types of epilepsy as well as their efficacy in the monotherapy of focal epilepsy. In addition, we compared CBZ with other AEDs for the monotherapy of focal epilepsy. We performed a search of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases for randomized controlled clinical trials. To compare the relative efficacy and tolerability of the AEDs, we performed network meta-analyses using a Bayesian random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the robustness of the results. A total of 65 studies were included in this review, composing 16,025 patients. Clobazam, levetiracetam, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, sulthiame, topiramate, and valproate had the best efficacy profiles and demonstrated no evidence of superiority or inferiority compared with CBZ. However, CBZ showed the greatest risk of patient discontinuation due to intolerable adverse reactions, whereas lamotrigine had the best safety profile and an 81% probability of being the best for the tolerability outcome of patient withdrawals from the study due to intolerable adverse reactions, followed by sulthiame (60%) and clobazam (51%). The newer AEDs-levetiracetam, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, sulthiame, and topiramate-should be considered for monotherapy of focal epilepsy because they were demonstrated to be as effective as the older ones (CBZ, clobazam, and valproate) for the treatment of focal epilepsy and were more tolerable. Lamotrigine was the AED with the best tolerability profile, suggesting that it may be the best option for the treatment of focal epilepsy in children and adults.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam), and carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.

Empirical estimation of under-reporting in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

BACKGROUND

To examine how closely reporting rates in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) reflect expected rates of known adverse drug events (ADEs).

METHODS

We selected three groups of drugs to reflect hypothesized variation in sensitivity to reporting, including statins, biologics, and narrow therapeutics index drugs (NTI). The numbers of ADEs in FAERS were divided by utilization estimates from ambulatory health care data (NAMCS/NHAMCS) to calculate a reported proportion. One sample z-test for proportions compared the proportion of ADEs reported to an expected ADE proportion derived from drug labels, reference databases, and peer-reviewed papers.

RESULTS

The majority of drug-ADE pairs showed significant under-reporting. For example, roughly 0.01% to 44% of statin events were reported (z-test p < 0.0001). Biological (0.002% to >100%) and NTI (20% to >100%) drugs had relatively higher reporting rates. Roughly 20% to 33% of the minimum number of expected serious events were reported with biologics and NTI drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports previous evidence of under-reporting of ADEs in spontaneous reporting data. But, under-reporting varies considerably by the type of drug and the type of ADEs, and this variability in under-reporting should be considered when interpreting safety signals.

Second monotherapy in childhood absence epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

To determine optimal second monotherapy for children with childhood absence epilepsy (CAE) experiencing initial treatment failure.

METHODS

Children with CAE experiencing treatment failure during the double-blind phase of a randomized controlled trial comparing ethosuximide, valproic acid, and lamotrigine were randomized to open-label second monotherapy with one of the 2 other study therapies. Primary study outcome was freedom from failure proportion at week 16-20 and month 12 visits after randomization. Secondary study outcome was percentage of participants experiencing attentional dysfunction at these visits.

RESULTS

A total of 208 children were enrolled, randomized, and received second therapy. At both week 16-20 visit and month 12 visit, ethosuximide's (63%, 57%) and valproic acid's (65%, 49%) freedom from failure proportions were similar to each other and higher than lamotrigine's (45%, 36%, p = 0.051 and p = 0.062). At both time points, ethosuximide and valproic acid had superior seizure control compared to lamotrigine (p < 0.0001). At both the week 16-20 and month 12 visits, attentional dysfunction was numerically more common with valproic acid than with ethosuximide or lamotrigine. For each medication, second monotherapy freedom from failure proportions demonstrated noninferiority to initial monotherapy freedom from failure proportions.

CONCLUSIONS

As second monotherapy, ethosuximide and valproic acid, demonstrated higher freedom from failure proportions and greater efficacy than lamotrigine; valproic acid was associated with more attentional dysfunction. Ethosuximide is the optimal second monotherapy for children with CAE not responding to initial therapy with other medications.

CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER

NCT00088452.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class III evidence that for children with CAE experiencing initial treatment failure, second monotherapy with ethosuximide or valproic acid is superior to lamotrigine.

Long-term Effectiveness of Antiepileptic Drug Monotherapy in Partial Epileptic Patients: A 7-year Study in an Epilepsy Center in China

BACKGROUND

It is important to choose an appropriate antiepileptic drug (AED) to manage partial epilepsy. Traditional AEDs, such as carbamazepine (CBZ) and valproate (VPA), have been proven to have good therapeutic effects. However, in recent years, a variety of new AEDs have increasingly been used as first-line treatments for partial epilepsy. As the studies regarding the effectiveness of new drugs and comparisons between new AEDs and traditional AEDs are few, it is determined that these are areas in need of further research. Accordingly, this study investigated the long-term effectiveness of six AEDs used as monotherapy in patients with partial epilepsy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, long-term observational study. Patients with partial epilepsy who received monotherapy with one of six AEDs, namely, CBZ, VPA, topiramate (TPM), oxcarbazepine (OXC), lamotrigine (LTG), or levetiracetam (LEV), were identified and followed up from May 2007 to October 2014, and time to first seizure after treatment, 12-month remission rate, retention rate, reasons for treatment discontinuation, and adverse effects were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 789 patients were enrolled. The median time of follow-up was 56.95 months. CBZ exhibited the best time to first seizure, with a median time to first seizure of 36.06 months (95% confidential interval: 30.64-44.07). CBZ exhibited the highest 12-month remission rate (85.55%), which was significantly higher than those of TPM (69.38%, P = 0.006), LTG (70.79%, P = 0.001), LEV (72.54%, P = 0.005), and VPA (73.33%, P = 0.002). CBZ, OXC, and LEV had the best retention rate, followed by LTG, TPM, and VPA. Overall, adverse effects occurred in 45.87% of patients, and the most common adverse effects were memory problems (8.09%), rashes (7.76%), abnormal hepatic function (6.24%), and drowsiness (6.24%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that CBZ, OXC, and LEV are relatively effective in managing focal epilepsy as measured by time to first seizure, 12-month remission rate, and retention rate.

Atherosclerosis in epilepsy: its causes and implications

Evidence from epidemiological, longitudinal, prospective, double-blinded clinical trials as well as case reports documents age-accelerated atherosclerosis with increased carotid artery intima media thickness (CA-IMT) in patients with epilepsy. These findings raise concern regarding their implications for age-accelerated cognitive and behavioral changes in midlife and risk of later age-related cognitive disorders including neurodegenerative processes such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). Chronic epilepsy, cerebral atherosclerosis, and age-related cognitive disorders including AD share many clinical manifestations (e.g. characteristic cognitive deficits), risk factors, and structural and pathological brain abnormalities. These shared risk factors include increased CA-IMT, hyperhomocysteinemia (HHcy), lipid abnormalities, weight gain and obesity, insulin resistance (IR), and high levels of inflammatory and oxidative stresses. The resulting brain structural and pathological abnormalities include decreased volume of the hippocampus, increased cortical thinning of the frontal lobe, ventricular expansion and increased white matter ischemic disease, total brain atrophy, and β-amyloid protein deposition in the brain. The knowledge that age-accelerated atherosclerosis may contribute to age-accelerated cognitive and behavioral abnormalities and structural brain pathologies in patients with chronic epilepsy represents an important research path to pursue future clinical and management considerations.

Time to 12-month remission and treatment failure for generalised and unclassified epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

To develop prognostic models for time to 12-month remission and time to treatment failure after initiating antiepileptic drug monotherapy for generalised and unclassified epilepsy.

METHODS

We analysed data from the Standard and New Antiepileptic Drug (arm B) study, a randomised trial that compared initiating treatment with lamotrigine, topiramate and valproate in patients diagnosed with generalised or unclassified epilepsy. Multivariable regression modelling was used to investigate how clinical factors affect the probability of achieving 12-month remission and treatment failure.

RESULTS

Significant factors in the multivariable model for time to 12-month remission were having a relative with epilepsy, neurological insult, total number of tonic-clonic seizures before randomisation, seizure type and treatment. Significant factors in the multivariable model for time to treatment failure were treatment history (antiepileptic drug treatment prior to randomisation), EEG result, seizure type and treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The models described within this paper can be used to identify patients most likely to achieve 12-month remission and most likely to have treatment failure, aiding individual patient risk stratification and the design and analysis of future epilepsy trials.

Single centre 20 year survey of antiepileptic drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disease which affects about 1% of the human population. There are 50 million patients in the world suffering from this disease and 2 million new cases per year are observed. The necessary treatment with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) increases the risk of adverse reactions. In case of 15% of people receiving AEDs, cutaneous reactions, like maculopapular or erythematous pruritic rash, may appear within four weeks of initiating therapy with AEDs.

METHODS

This study involved 300 epileptic patients in the period between September 1989 and September 2009. A cutaneous adverse reaction was defined as a diffuse rash, which had no other obvious reason than a drug effect, and resulted in contacting a physician.

RESULTS

Among 300 epileptic patients of Neurological Practice in Kielce (132 males and 168 females), a skin reaction to at least one AED was found in 30 patients. As much as 95% of the reactions occurred during therapies with carbamazepine, phenytoin, lamotrigine or oxcarbazepine. One of the patients developed Stevens-Johnson syndrome.

CONCLUSION

Some hypersensitivity problems of epileptic patients were obviously related to antiepileptic treatment. Among AEDs, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, vigabatrin, and phenobarbital were not associated with skin lesions, although the number of patients in the case of the latter was small.

Updated ILAE evidence review of antiepileptic drug efficacy and effectiveness as initial monotherapy for epileptic seizures and syndromes

The purpose of this report was to update the 2006 International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) report and identify the level of evidence for long-term efficacy or effectiveness for antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) as initial monotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed or untreated epilepsy. All applicable articles from July 2005 until March 2012 were identified, evaluated, and combined with the previous analysis (Glauser et al., 2006) to provide a comprehensive update. The prior analysis methodology was utilized with three modifications: (1) the detectable noninferiority boundary approach was dropped and both failed superiority studies and prespecified noninferiority studies were analyzed using a noninferiority approach, (2) the definition of an adequate comparator was clarified and now includes an absolute minimum point estimate for efficacy/effectiveness, and (3) the relationship table between clinical trial ratings, level of evidence, and conclusions no longer includes a recommendation column to reinforce that this review of efficacy/evidence for specific seizure types does not imply treatment recommendations. This evidence review contains one clarification: The commission has determined that class I superiority studies can be designed to detect up to a 20% absolute (rather than relative) difference in the point estimate of efficacy/effectiveness between study treatment and comparator using an intent-to-treat analysis. Since July, 2005, three class I randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 11 class III RCTs have been published. The combined analysis (1940-2012) now includes a total of 64 RCTs (7 with class I evidence, 2 with class II evidence) and 11 meta-analyses. New efficacy/effectiveness findings include the following: levetiracetam and zonisamide have level A evidence in adults with partial onset seizures and both ethosuximide and valproic acid have level A evidence in children with childhood absence epilepsy. There are no major changes in the level of evidence for any other subgroup. Levetiracetam and zonisamide join carbamazepine and phenytoin with level A efficacy/effectiveness evidence as initial monotherapy for adults with partial onset seizures. Although ethosuximide and valproic acid now have level A efficacy/effectiveness evidence as initial monotherapy for children with absence seizures, there continues to be an alarming lack of well designed, properly conducted epilepsy RCTs for patients with generalized seizures/epilepsies and in children in general. These findings reinforce the need for multicenter, multinational efforts to design, conduct, and analyze future clinically relevant adequately designed RCTs. When selecting a patient's AED, all relevant variables and not just efficacy and effectiveness should be considered.

Risk factors for obesity in adult survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

PURPOSE

Many Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) participants are at increased risk for obesity. The etiology of their obesity is likely multifactorial but not well understood.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated the potential contribution of demographic, lifestyle, treatment, and intrapersonal factors and self-reported pharmaceutical use to obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) among 9,284 adult (> 18 years of age) CCSS participants. Independent predictors were identified using multivariable regression models. Interrelationships were determined using structural equation modeling (SEM).

RESULTS

Independent risk factors for obesity included cancer diagnosed at 5 to 9 years of age (relative risk [RR], 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.24; P = .03), abnormal Short Form-36 physical function (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.33; P < .001), hypothalamic/pituitary radiation doses of 20 to 30 Gy (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.30; P = .01), and paroxetine use (RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.54; P = .01). Meeting US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for vigorous physical activity (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.97; P = .01) and a medium amount of anxiety (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = .04) reduced the risk of obesity. Results of SEM (N = 8,244; comparative fit index = 0.999; Tucker Lewis index = 0.999; root mean square error of approximation = 0.014; weighted root mean square residual = 0.749) described the hierarchical impact of the direct predictors, moderators, and mediators of obesity.

CONCLUSION

Treatment, lifestyle, and intrapersonal factors, as well as the use of specific antidepressants, may contribute to obesity among survivors. A multifaceted intervention, including alternative drug and other therapies for depression and anxiety, may be required to reduce risk.

Selection of antiepileptic drugs in adults

Epilepsy affects approximately 50 million people worldwide, with an annual incidence of 50 to 70 cases per 100,000 population. The condition can strike at any time of life, with an immediate impact on everyday activities and routine. Key to optimal management is swift referral to an epilepsy specialist, appropriate investigation, and timely institution of antiepileptic drug therapy. In the past 20 years, the explosion of 13 new agents into the marketplace has greatly increased the potential for therapeutic intervention. This article explores the rationale for treatment selection in adults with epilepsy.

States of serum leptin and insulin in children with epilepsy: risk predictors of weight gain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Weight gain is an adverse metabolic effect in some children with epilepsy. The studies done to detect the effect of antiepileptic drugs and weight homeostatic hormones, insulin and leptin, were limited and controversial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated the serum leptin and insulin as predictors of weight gain in children receiving long-term treatment with valproate (VPA), carbamazepine (CBZ), lamotrigine (LTG). This study included 90 patients (treated: 70; untreated: 20). Serum lipid profile, insulin and leptin were measured.

RESULTS

BMI, serum leptin and insulin were significantly elevated in VPA compared with controls, untreated patients and those treated with CBZ, LTG and combined therapy with LTG. Girls on VPA had higher BMI and leptin levels than boys. With VPA, serum insulin was correlated with BMI (r=0.625, p<0.01), leptin (r=0.823, p<0.001), treatment duration (r=0.775, p<0.01) and VPA dose (r=0.975, p<0.0001). Serum leptin was correlated with age (r=0.980, p<0.0001), BMI (r=0.704, p<0.01), serum insulin (r=0.823, p<0.001), LDL-c (r=0.630, p<0.01), HDL-c (r=-0.880, p<0.001), treatment duration (r=0.770, p<0.01) and VPA dose (r=0.970, p<0.001). BMI is correlated with serum insulin, leptin, LDL-c (r=0.835, p<0.001) and HDL-c (r=-0.955, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Hyperinsulinemia and hyperleptinemia are common with VPA and marked among epileptic children who gained weight suggesting states of insulin and leptin resistances. These alterations were not demonstrated with CBZ or LTG. The relationship between VPA, leptin and weight seems to be gender specific. Serum leptin may serve as a sensitive parameter for weight gain and reduction with intervention programs during follow-up of girls with epilepsy.

First-drug treatment failures in children newly diagnosed with epilepsy

In adults newly diagnosed with epilepsy, treatment with the first prescribed antiepileptic drug fails for approximately one half. In two studies that addressed this question in children, the failure rates were 20% and 40%. The present study used a detailed chart review of children newly diagnosed with epilepsy over a 4-year span in a major childhood epilepsy referral clinic to assess (1) the percentage of children for whom first-line antiepileptic drug treatment failed and (2) the reasons for the treatment failure. Charts were reviewed for 95 children who were diagnosed with epilepsy, started on their first antiepileptic drug, and then monitored for approximately 5 years. Of these 95 children, 48 were classified as having idiopathic epilepsy (50.5 %), 30 as having cryptogenic epilepsy (31.6%), and 17 as having symptomatic epilepsy (17.9%). The two main antiepileptic drugs used were valproic acid (43.2% of patients) and carbamazepine (38.9% of patients). Treatment with the first antiepileptic drug failed in 30/95 children (31.6%). Treatment failure was due to adverse effects in 12/30 children (40.0%), due to lack of efficacy in 11/30 (37.9%), and due to both adverse effects and lack of efficacy in 7/30 (24.1%). Also examined was the effect on treatment failure of patient age at diagnosis, antiepileptic drug choice, maximum drug dose, etiology of epilepsy, and particular epilepsy syndromes on treatment failures; there was no statistically significant effect of any of these variables on first-line treatment outcome. In this population, approximately one third of children newly diagnosed with epilepsy experienced treatment failure with the first antiepileptic drug used. Lack of efficacy and unacceptable adverse effects contributed equally to these treatment failures.

Behavioural abnormalities and retention rates of anti-epilepsy drugs during long-term treatment of epilepsy: a clinical perspective

Vigabatrin is among the most promising of the new anti-epilepsy drugs, but two unrelated complications have been noted in patients receiving vigabatrin for chronic refractory epilepsy. These are, transient behavioural abnormalities and falling numbers of patients continuing to take vigabatrin (decreasing retention rate) during long-term treatment. Psychotic reactions have been carefully documented both in patients receiving standard and new anti-epilepsy drugs, and in up to 6% of patients after epilepsy surgery. As many psychotic episodes are associated with a dramatic cessation of seizures (i.e. high efficacy of treatment), it is not surprising that behavioural abnormalities are more often seen in patients receiving higher, more effective doses of vigabatrin, particularly those taking more than 3 g/day. A gradual dose increase and slow withdrawal is recommended for possible prevention of behavioural abnormalities, at least in some patients. During treatment with standard anti-epilepsy drugs, approximately 50% of patients remain on randomized treatment with the same drug for several years. For oxcarbazepine, a new drug, the figure is 60%, and for vigabatrin it is about 50%. Although comparative trials are not available, the retention rate for vigabatrin does not appear to be strikingly different to that reported for conventional anti-epilepsy drugs. In summary, behavioural abnormalities and falling retention rates appear to be general features of chronic epilepsy, and are certainly not exclusively associated with the use of vigabatrin. Controlled trials are required to establish the specific contribution, if any, of vigabatrin in development of these complications of intractable epilepsy.

Metabolic effects of AEDs: impact on body weight, lipids and glucose metabolism

Epilepsy is a chronic disorder often requiring years of treatment. Accordingly, adverse effects of epilepsy and its treatment can impact general health for many decades. The psychological consequences of epilepsy are well documented, although the metabolic consequences of the treatment of epilepsy have only recently received attention. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are well known to alter weight, causing either weight gain or weight loss. The mechanism by which this occurs remains to be fully understood, although there appears to be an effect on lipid and glucose metabolism. This chapter examines current data available on the adverse effects of individual AEDs on somatic weight, serum lipid profile, and glucose metabolism. These issues are of importance to neurologists caring for patients with epilepsy.

An observational study of first-line valproate monotherapy in focal epilepsy

The objective of this multinational open-label, prospective study was to collect, under naturalistic conditions, data on the effectiveness and tolerability of first-line monotherapy with valproate in subjects newly or recently diagnosed with focal onset epilepsy. Patients were treated with sustained release sodium valproate. Seizure control and occurrence of adverse events were assessed after 6 months. Around 1192 adults and 792 children were included. The mean daily valproate dose was 683 mg in children and 987 mg in adults. The retention rate at 6 months was 90.0%. At this time, 77% of subjects were seizure free (83.7% of children and 72.7% of adults). Adverse events possibly related to treatment were observed in 10.2% of subjects, leading to treatment modification for 1.7%. The most common adverse events were weight gain, gastro-intestinal, neurological and skin disorders. Sustained release sodium valproate is effective and shows acceptable tolerability as first-line monotherapy in focal onset epilepsy.

Multiple treatment comparisons in epilepsy monotherapy trials

BACKGROUND

The choice of antiepileptic drug for an individual should be based upon the highest quality evidence regarding potential benefits and harms of the available treatments. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials should be a major source of evidence supporting this decision making process. We summarise all available individual patient data evidence from randomised controlled trials that compared at least two out of eight antiepileptic drugs given as monotherapy.

METHODS

Multiple treatment comparisons from epilepsy monotherapy trials were synthesized in a single stratified Cox regression model adjusted for treatment by epilepsy type interactions and making use of direct and indirect evidence. Primary outcomes were time to treatment failure and time to 12 month remission from seizures. A secondary outcome was time to first seizure.

RESULTS

Individual patient data for 6418 patients from 20 randomised trials comparing eight antiepileptic drugs were synthesized. For partial onset seizures (4628 (72%) patients), lamotrigine, carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine provide the best combination of seizure control and treatment failure. Lamotrigine is clinically superior to all other drugs for treatment failure but estimates suggest a disadvantage compared to carbamazepine for time to 12 month remission [Hazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) = 0.87(0.73 to 1.04)] and time to first seizure [1.29(1.13 to 1.48)]. Phenobarbitone may delay time to first seizure [0.77(0.61 to 0.96)] but at the expense of increased treatment failure [1.60(1.22 to 2.10)]. For generalized onset tonic clonic seizures (1790 (28%) patients) estimates suggest valproate or phenytoin may provide the best combination of seizure control and treatment failure but some uncertainty remains about the relative effectiveness of other drugs.

CONCLUSION

For patients with partial onset seizures, results favour carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine and lamotrigine. For generalized onset tonic clonic seizures, results favour valproate and phenytoin.

New statistical method for analyzing time to first seizure: example using data comparing carbamazepine and valproate monotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Time to first seizure is a common outcome in antiepileptic drug (AED) studies. Previous studies have typically failed to find statistically significant differences between carbamazepine (CBZ) and valproate (VPS). We re-analyzed a meta-analysis comparing CBZ and VPS monotherapy with new powerful statistical methods that incorporate baseline seizure rate information.

METHODS

Individual patient data were available on 1,265 patients from a meta-analysis of five trials. The outcome measure was time to first seizure after randomization, adjusted for background variables and baseline seizure rate.

RESULTS

We found strong evidence of an interaction between treatment and epilepsy type, and between treatment and age. For generalized onset seizures, VPS was statistically significantly better than CBZ: VPS delayed the first seizure after treatment 58%, 52%, 44%, and 36% longer than CBZ for individuals aged 10, 20, 30, or 40, respectively. For partial onset seizures in individuals older than 30, CBZ was significantly better then VPS; CBZ delayed the time to first seizure by 9%, 25%, 44%, and 66% longer than VPS for individuals aged 20, 30, 40, or 50, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results show clear age-varying differences between the effectiveness of CBZ and VPS for generalized onset and partial onset seizures, which have not been identified in previous studies using standard statistical methods. In future trials of AED monotherapy or add-on where time to first or Nth seizure is an outcome, methodology that can incorporate baseline seizure rate information would allow more powerful comparisons between treatments or between treatment and placebo.

Leptin and insulin homeostasis in epilepsy: relation to weight adverse conditions

During managing patients with epilepsy, there is a great risk of weight changes, particularly weight gain with some antiepileptic medications. Weight gain is not only a cosmetic problem that leads to non-compliance to medications but also increases the risk for atherosclerosis and its related complications. The mechanisms underlying weight gain in epilepsy are multiple and controversial and have been attributed to the effect of epilepsy and more commonly the effect of antiepileptic medications on the central and peripheral mechanisms regulating weight homeostasis including the two main homeostatic hormones, leptin, a protein product of obesity gene secreted by adipocytes and insulin, a protein product of pancreatic beta-cells. Increased blood levels of leptin and insulin due to leptin and insulin resistance is observed in patients with epilepsy. Leptin forms an important link between weight gain, insulin resistance, epilepsy and atherosclerosis. The knowledge of the novel roles of leptin in patients with epilepsy will help identification of early markers for the related adverse weight changes, thus allowing proper characterization of suitable antiepileptic medication as initial step during management and follow up of patients.

A cost-effectiveness decision model for antiepileptic drug treatment in newly diagnosed epilepsy patients

OBJECTIVE

To establish cost-effectiveness of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment strategies of newly diagnosed patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

A decision analysis was carried out comparing effectiveness and treatment cost of six treatment strategies comprising carbamazepine (CBZ), lamotrigine (LTG), and valproate (VPA) as first-line and second-line drugs. Three outcome groups were defined: complete success, partial success, and failure. Data on seizure control and failure due to adverse effects were derived from the literature. Data on resource use and costs were collected for each outcome group by means of a patient survey.

RESULTS

Cost data were obtained from 71 patients. Cost increased from complete success to failure outcome groups. The probability of obtaining complete success varied from 64% (VPA-CBZ strategy) to 74% (LTG-VPA strategy). The strategy LTG-VPA was more effective than the least expensive strategy CBZ-VPA, but at higher costs per additional effectively treated patient. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed these findings to be robust. Subsequent analysis showed that changing inclusion criteria used in the selection of the studies from the literature had a major effect on cost-effectiveness ratios of the various strategies. The probability that LTG first-line therapy is the most cost-effective option remains small, even defining a high cost-effectiveness threshold. Nevertheless, LTG second-line strategies can be cost-effective depending on the willingness to pay for patient improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a few studies satisfied our inclusion criteria for employment in our decision model. Our model supports the use of conventional AEDs as first-line options for patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. LTG second-line therapy is likely to be the most cost-effective option in case society is willing to pay more than Euro 6000 for an additional successfully treated patient. This study also illustrates that, with the data presently available, the outcome of decision analysis for AED treatment choice depends on the inclusion criteria used to select trials. Prospective real-life studies are needed in which first- and second-line treatment strategies are compared with respect to both effectiveness and costs.

Extended-release formulations in epilepsy

In the past years, the extended-release antiepileptic drug formulations have been developed and then approved for the treatment of many types of epilepsy. Among these extended-release formulations of antiepileptic drugs, the main drugs are valproic acid, carbamazepine, and phenytoin. This review analyzes the chemical and structural characteristics of the extended-release formulations of these 3 antiepileptic drugs, analyzing their bioequivalence and the studies about their clinical use. The results of these studies are encouraging and suggest a good tolerability and efficacy of these extended-release formulations, although larger studies are needed.

Importance of competing risks in the analysis of anti-epileptic drug failure

BACKGROUND

Retention time (time to treatment failure) is a commonly used outcome in antiepileptic drug (AED) studies.

METHODS

Two datasets are used to demonstrate the issues in a competing risks analysis of AEDs. First, data collection and follow-up considerations are discussed with reference to information from 15 monotherapy trials. Recommendations for improved data collection and cumulative incidence analysis are then illustrated using the SANAD trial dataset. The results are compared to the more common approach using standard survival analysis methods.

RESULTS

A non-significant difference in overall treatment failure time between gabapentin and topiramate (logrank test statistic = 0.01, 1 degree of freedom, p-value = 0.91) masked highly significant differences in opposite directions with gabapentin resulting in fewer withdrawals due to side effects (Gray's test statistic = 11.60, 1 degree of freedom, p = 0.0007) but more due to poor seizure control (Gray's test statistic = 14.47, 1 degree of freedom, p-value = 0.0001). The significant difference in overall treatment failure time between lamotrigine and carbamazepine (logrank test statistic = 5.6, 1 degree of freedom, p-value = 0.018) was due entirely to a significant benefit of lamotrigine in terms of side effects (Gray's test statistic = 10.27, 1 degree of freedom, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Treatment failure time can be measured reliably but care is needed to collect sufficient information on reasons for drug withdrawal to allow a competing risks analysis. Important differences between the profiles of AEDs may be missed unless appropriate statistical methods are used to fully investigate treatment failure time. Cumulative incidence analysis allows comparison of the probability of failure between two AEDs and is likely to be a more powerful approach than logrank analysis for most comparisons of standard and new anti-epileptic drugs.

Valproate as a mainstay of therapy for pediatric epilepsy

This article reviews relevant pharmacologic and clinical information gathered for valproate since it was introduced into clinical practice 37 years ago and the application of this information for the treatment of childhood epilepsy. Valproate is available for oral and parenteral use. Oral forms are almost completely bioavailable but the rate of absorption varies between formulations. The Chrono tablet formulation has not been adapted for children aged <6 years, in whom the oral solution or syrup, requiring two or three daily administrations, has been used until recently. A new formulation specifically adapted for children, Chronosphere, administrated once or twice daily, is a modified-release formulation of valproate that minimizes fluctuations in serum drug concentrations during a dosage interval. Plasma protein binding is 80-94% and tends to decrease with increasing drug concentration. Valproate elimination is markedly decreased in newborns compared with older children and adults. Elimination by glucuronidation only becomes fully effective by the age of 3-4 years. In children aged 2-10 years receiving valproate, plasma clearances are 50% higher than those in adults. Over the age of 10 years, pharmacokinetic parameters approximate those of adults. Valproate can increase plasma concentrations of concomitant drugs, such as phenobarbital and lamotrigine, by inhibiting their metabolism. As a result of its broad spectrum of efficacy in a wide range of seizure types and epilepsy syndromes, valproate is a drug of choice for children with newly diagnosed epilepsy (focal or generalized), idiopathic generalized epilepsy, epilepsies with prominent myoclonic seizures or with multiple seizure types, and photosensitive epilepsies. In the group of cognitive epilepsies, in which severe spike and wave discharges are accompanied by cognitive deterioration, valproate, ethosuximide, or both should be tested before using corticosteroids. In comparative trials with carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital in focal epilepsy and with ethosuximide in absence epilepsy, valproate was as effective and showed a favorable tolerability profile, with minimal adverse cognitive and CNS effects. The low potential for paradoxical seizure aggravation and the long-term efficacy of the drug are additional important factors that contribute to its excellent profile. Intravenous valproate may be effective for the treatment of convulsive and non-convulsive status epilepticus that is refractory to conventional drugs. In infants, potential benefits should be carefully weighed against the risk of liver toxicity. Gastrointestinal intolerance is a relatively frequent, dose-related adverse effect of the drug in children. Bodyweight increase and tremor may be observed in older children and adolescents. Despite the challenge of newer drugs, valproate remains a gold standard antiepileptic drug for the treatment of children.

Efficacy and tolerability of antiepileptic drugs in an Omani epileptic population

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this hospital-based study is to get an insight into the efficacy and tolerability of antiepileptic drugs (AED) in Omani epileptic patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All Omani patients (aged 14 years and above) suffering from epileptic seizures for at least 2 years and followed-up by board-certified neurologists in Sultan Qaboos University Hospital (SQUH) were evaluated. The treatment retention rate since first visit at SQUH and over the last 2 years was used as primary efficacy measure of AED therapy. Change in seizure-frequency and side effect profiles were also assessed.

RESULTS

In this population of 203 confirmed epileptic patients, generalized tonic-clonic (40%) and partial seizures (39%) were most commonly observed, idiopathic/cryptogenic origin (81%) being the most frequent encountered origin. Sixty one percent of the patients were controlled with an AED in monotherapy and overall 34% of patients could be successfully maintained on monotherapy during the whole follow-up period at SQUH (median 6 years). The treatment retention rates for carbamazepine (CBZ) at a daily dose of 400-600 mg, sodium valproate (VPA) at a daily dose of 500-1000 mg, and phenytoin (PHT) at a daily dose of 300 mg, in monotherapy over the total follow-up period was 51, 50, and 21%, respectively. In contrast, over the last 2 years these rates were highest for VPA (91%) followed by CBZ (83%) and PHT (73%). Adverse drug reactions were recorded in 67% of patients, and were most commonly encountered with VPA.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a higher adverse effect profile for VPA, long-term treatment with CBZ and VPA appeared to be equally effective in terms of treatment retention rates and seizure control.

ILAE treatment guidelines: evidence-based analysis of antiepileptic drug efficacy and effectiveness as initial monotherapy for epileptic seizures and syndromes

PURPOSE

To assess which antiepileptic medications (AEDs) have the best evidence for long-term efficacy or effectiveness as initial monotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed or untreated epilepsy.

METHODS

A 10-member subcommission of the Commission on Therapeutic Strategies of The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE), including adult and pediatric epileptologists, clinical pharmacologists, clinical trialists, and a statistician evaluated available evidence found through a structured literature review including MEDLINE, Current Contents and the Cochrane Library for all applicable articles from 1940 until July 2005. Articles dealing with different seizure types (for different age groups) and two epilepsy syndromes were assessed for quality of evidence (four classes) based on predefined criteria. Criteria for class I classification were a double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, >or=48-week treatment duration without forced exit criteria, information on >or=24-week seizure freedom data (efficacy) or >or=48-week retention data (effectiveness), demonstration of superiority or 80% power to detect a <or=20% relative difference in efficacy/effectiveness versus an adequate comparator, and appropriate statistical analysis. Class II studies met all class I criteria except for having either treatment duration of 24 to 47 weeks or, for noninferiority analysis, a power to only exclude a 21-30% relative difference. Class III studies included other randomized double-blind and open-label trials, and class IV included other forms of evidence (e.g., expert opinion, case reports). Quality of clinical trial evidence was used to determine the strength of the level of recommendation.

RESULTS

A total of 50 RCTs and seven meta-analyses contributed to the analysis. Only four RCTs had class I evidence, whereas two had class II evidence; the remainder were evaluated as class III evidence. Three seizure types had AEDs with level A or level B efficacy and effectiveness evidence as initial monotherapy: adults with partial-onset seizures (level A, carbamazepine and phenytoin; level B, valproic acid), children with partial-onset seizures (level A, oxcarbazepine; level B, None), and elderly adults with partial-onset seizures (level A, gabapentin and lamotrigine; level B, None). One adult seizure type [adults with generalized-onset tonic-clonic (GTC) seizures], two pediatric seizure types (GTC seizures and absence seizures), and two epilepsy syndromes (benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes and juvenile myoclonic epilepsy) had no AEDs with level A or level B efficacy and effectiveness evidence as initial monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This evidence-based guideline focused on AED efficacy or effectiveness as initial monotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed or untreated epilepsy. The absence of rigorous comprehensive adverse effects data makes it impossible to develop an evidence-based guideline aimed at identifying the overall optimal recommended initial-monotherapy AED. There is an especially alarming lack of well-designed, properly conducted RCTs for patients with generalized seizures/epilepsies and for children in general. The majority of relevant existing RCTs have significant methodologic problems that limit their applicability to this guideline's clinically relevant main question. Multicenter, multinational efforts are needed to design, conduct and analyze future clinically relevant RCTs that can answer the many outstanding questions identified in this guideline. The ultimate choice of an AED for any individual patient with newly diagnosed or untreated epilepsy should include consideration of the strength of the efficacy and effectiveness evidence for each AED along with other variables such as the AED safety and tolerability profile, pharmacokinetic properties, formulations, and expense. When selecting a patient's AED, physicians and patients should consider all relevant variables and not just efficacy and effectiveness.

Practical considerations for carbamazepine use in bipolar disorder

Carbamazepine (CBZ) has a long history of successful use in epilepsy and, therefore, has a safety profile that is well characterised. Additionally, an extended-release formulation of CBZ (CBZ-ERC; Equetro, Shire US) has recently been approved for use in bipolar disorder. The most frequent adverse events associated with CBZ are somnolence, fatigue, dizziness and headache. Rash and leukopoenia may occur in approximately 10% of patients, but are benign and transient in most cases. Rare serious adverse effects include agranulocytosis, aplastic anaemia, Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis. Although changes in lipid profiles have been noted, hyperglycaemia does not occur with CBZ, and clinically significant weight gain is uncommon. Proper monitoring and careful titration of the extended-release formulation should allow for successful use of CBZ in psychiatric patients.

Predictors of Lamotrigine-associated rash

PURPOSE

To determine the predictors of lamotrigine-associated rash (LTG-rash) and the incidence of serious and benign LTG-rash to individualize risk assessment in a given patient.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of all 988 outpatients seen at the Columbia Comprehensive Epilepsy Center between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2003, who received LTG. Charts were reviewed for documentation of rash developing from any medication, including antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and non-AEDs, and including remote histories of drug-related rashes. Demographics, medical history, and medication variables were tested as potential predictors of LTG-rash.

RESULTS

Fifty-six (5.7%) of 988 patients experienced rash attributed to LTG, and 39 (3.9%) discontinued LTG because of rash. No patients experienced toxic epidermal necrolysis or required hospitalization because of LTG-rash. One case of mild probable Stevens-Johnson syndrome occurred. In multivariate analysis, a history of rash after another AED was the strongest predictor of LTG-rash (13.9% vs. 4.6%; OR = 3.62; p < 0.001), with children younger than 13 years also experiencing significantly more LTG-rash (10.7% vs. 4.3%; OR = 2.77; p < 0.001). In children with a rash attributed to another AED, 18.2% experienced LTG-rash, whereas in adults without a rash from another AED, 3% experienced LTG-rash.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this retrospective analysis, a history of another AED-related rash is the greatest risk factor for developing rash to LTG; age younger than 13 years is also a risk factor. Severe rash is rare when using the currently recommended titration rate.