Systematic Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring of Patients Under Newer Antiepileptic Drugs Using Routine Clinical Data of Inpatients

Greater need for treatment optimization in patients with epilepsy initiating adjunctive therapy: Results of a retrospective claims analysis of antiseizure medication drug load in the United States

BACKGROUND

This retrospective, observational study used US claims data to assess changes in antiseizure medication (ASM) drug load for a cohort of patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

Adults (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of epilepsy (ICD-10 code G40.xxx) who started new adjunctive ASM treatment with one of 4 branded (brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, perampanel) or 4 unbranded (carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, topiramate) ASMs between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020 were identified from IBM MarketScan® research databases (primary study population). Patients must have been continuously enrolled 360 days before the start of the new ASM (eligibility period). Follow-up was from the start of new ASM until Day 540 (∼18 months). The primary endpoint was concomitant ASM drug load, which included all ASMs except the new (comparator) ASM. A sensitivity analysis population included adults with epilepsy who were continuously enrolled for ≥ 180 days during at least one calendar year in the study period (2016-2020), whether or not the comparator ASM was new or existing during that period. Total ASM drug load, which included comparator ASM and concomitant ASMs, was assessed in the sensitivity analysis population.

RESULTS

In total, 21,332 patients were included in the primary study population, of which 5767 initiated branded ASMs and 15,565 initiated unbranded ASMs. A total of 392,426 patients were included in the sensitivity analysis population during at least one calendar year 2016-2020. Concomitant ASM drug load increased in the 360 days prior to new ASM start and slightly declined thereafter. Mean concomitant ASM drug load for the primary population was 1.6 (SD 1.8) at new ASM start. Concomitant drug load was higher among those starting branded ASM comparators compared to those starting unbranded comparators. Mean total ASM drug load for patients increased over time and was approximately double for patients exposed to branded ASMs (mean range 2.1 to 2.7) compared to that of patients exposed to any unbranded ASM (mean range 1.0 to 1.3).

CONCLUSION

Concomitant ASM drug load increased prior to addition of new ASM, with higher increases observed among patients starting branded vs unbranded ASMs, followed by slight decreases thereafter. Total drug load increased linearly among all patients. These findings underscore the need for ongoing ASM regimen evaluation and treatment optimization in patients with epilepsy.

Comparing patient reported and medical record data of adverse drug reactions to anti-seizure drugs

BACKGROUND

Anti-seizure drugs (ASDs) can potentially cause serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Patient self-reporting can increase the rate of ADR detection, but studies examining patient self-reporting of ADRs caused by ASDs are lacking.

AIM

To determine the characteristics of ADRs reported by patients receiving ASDs, assess laboratory data and medical record confirmation of patient-reported ADRs, and explore factors associated with laboratory data and medical record confirmation.

METHOD

A self-reporting questionnaire was distributed to patients prescribed ASDs at outpatient clinics. Patients assessed the causality of suspected ADRs using Causality Assessment Tool. Naranjo's algorithm was used by researchers for causality assessment. Medical records were used to gather information on ADR symptoms, ASD medication, and abnormal laboratory data.

RESULTS

From 478 distributed questionnaires, 93.1% completed the questionnaire and 67.4% of respondents reported at least one ADR. The most common ADRs were drowsiness (50.7%), dizziness (9.7%), and ataxia (4.3%). For causality, suspected ADRs were classified as possible in 52.3% of cases and probable in 46.3% of cases by patients, and possible in 64.7% of cases and probable in 25.7% of cases by researchers. Only 12.7% of patients had laboratory data and/or medical record confirmation of suspected ADRs. The psychiatry clinic was less likely to confirm suspected ADRs compared to the epilepsy clinic (OR = 0.412, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Confirmation of patient-reported ADRs with either laboratory data or medical records was uncommon. Recording patient-reported ADRs in patients' medical history and monitoring laboratory tests related to patient-reported symptoms should be promoted to increase the safety of ASD treatment.

Reductions in concomitant antiseizure medication drug load during adjunctive cenobamate therapy: Post-hoc analysis of a subset of patients from a phase 3, multicenter, open-label study

OBJECTIVE

Many patients with epilepsy require polytherapy, which increases their antiseizure medication (ASM) drug load, a measure that considers the doses of all ASMs a patient is taking. Changes in concomitant ASM drug load after adding cenobamate were evaluated post-hoc in a subset of the open-label, phase 3 study.

METHODS

Patients 18-70 years old with uncontrolled focal seizures taking 1-3 ASMs were enrolled. Total concomitant ASM drug load (not including cenobamate) was calculated by dividing the patient's prescribed dose for each ASM by its defined daily dose, per the World Health Organization, then summing the ratios. Changes in concomitant ASM drug load were measured from baseline in 3-month intervals up to 24 months by both total and class-specific ASM drug load. Subgroups of interest included: older adults (65-70 years), prior epilepsy-related surgery vs none, and baseline seizure frequency < 3 vs ≥ 3 seizures/28 days.

RESULTS

Data from 240 patients were available (mean age 41.8 years, mean baseline drug load 3.57). Following cenobamate initiation, the mean concomitant ASM drug load was reduced by 29.4 % at Month 12 % and 31.8 % at Month 24. Reductions occurred in all assessed ASM drug classes, with the largest reduction in benzodiazepines (55.2 % at Month 24). Each assessed subgroup exceeded a 30 % reduction in concomitant ASM drug load at Month 24. Over 24 months, maintenance of ≥ 50 % response occurred in 89.3 %, 86.4 %, and 90.6 % of patients with low (-0.25 to <0), moderate (-0.59 to -0.25), or high (-3.3 to -0.59) numerical reductions in concomitant ASM drug load from baseline, respectively, compared with 86.0 % in patients with no change in drug load; maintenance of 100 % response occurred in 80.7 %, 84.3 %, and 70.0 % of patients with low, moderate, or high numerical reductions in concomitant ASM drug load, compared with 82.0 % in patients with no change.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding cenobamate led to reduced mean concomitant ASM drug loads during 1 and 2 years of treatment. Reductions occurred regardless of ASM drug class, patient age, or epilepsy disease characteristics and did not impact maintenance of response rates.

Pharmacovigilance in Pediatric Patients with Epilepsy Using Antiepileptic Drugs

Objective: To investigate the occurrence of adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in pediatric epileptic patients on mono- or polytherapy. Method: We evaluated eighty consecutive patients that met the following inclusion criteria: aged ≤18 years; diagnosed with epilepsy for at least one year; a stable dose of AED for at least three months; verbal consent to participation in the study. Patients were asked if they had experienced any adverse drug reaction (ADR) related to the AED. Afterward, regardless of the answer, they were interviewed based on a detailed semi-structured questionnaire about the presence of ADRs associated with the AED. The data were analyzed regarding the use of monotherapy or polytherapy. Results: Ninety-seven percent of the patients reported having experienced ADRs related to AEDs. The greatest number of seizures affected the group of patients treated with monotherapy (both at baseline and at followup), but the greatest number of ADRs were observed among patients treated with polytherapy. In patients on monotherapy, the most frequent ADRs reported at baseline included fatigue and somnolence, and among patients with polytherapy, it was fatigue and hair loss. Conclusion: Children on polytherapy were significantly more likely to develop ADRs compared to those on monotherapy, but a statistically significant improvement in seizure frequency was also observed in the group of patients on polytherapy. Pharmacovigilance is very important in children with AEDs, so that ADRs can be identified early and managed appropriately.

Social Media Analytics for Pharmacovigilance of Antiepileptic Drugs

Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder worldwide and antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy is the cornerstone of its treatment. It has a laudable aim of achieving seizure freedom with minimal, if any, adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Too often, AED treatment is a long-lasting journey, in which ADRs have a crucial role in its administration. Therefore, from a pharmacovigilance perspective, detecting the ADRs of AEDs is a task of utmost importance. Typically, this task is accomplished by analyzing relevant data from spontaneous reporting systems. Despite their wide adoption for pharmacovigilance activities, the passiveness and high underreporting ratio associated with spontaneous reporting systems have encouraged the consideration of other data sources such as electronic health databases and pharmaceutical databases. Social media is the most recent alternative data source with many promising potentials to overcome the shortcomings of traditional data sources. Although in the literature some attempts have investigated the validity and utility of social media for ADR detection of different groups of drugs, none of them was dedicated to the ADRs of AEDs. Hence, this paper presents a novel investigation of the validity and utility of social media as an alternative data source for the detection of AED ADRs. To this end, a dataset of consumer reviews from two online health communities has been collected. The dataset is preprocessed; the unigram, bigram, and trigram are generated; and the ADRs of each AED are extracted with the aid of consumer health vocabulary and ADR lexicon. Three widely used measures, namely, proportional reporting ratio, reporting odds ratio, and information component, are used to measure the association between each ADR and AED. The resulting list of signaled ADRs for each AED is validated against a widely used ADR database, called Side Effect Resource, in terms of the precision of ADR detection. The validation results indicate the validity of online health community data for the detection of AED ADRs. Furthermore, the lists of signaled AED ADRs are analyzed to answer questions related to the common ADRs of AEDs and the similarities between AEDs in terms of their signaled ADRs. The consistency of the drawn answers with the existing pharmaceutical knowledge suggests the utility of the data from online health communities for AED-related knowledge discovery tasks.

Indirect treatment comparison of cenobamate to other ASMs for the treatment of uncontrolled focal seizures

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of cenobamate relative to other antiseizure medications (ASMs) has not been evaluated. An indirect treatment comparison (network meta-analysis) was performed to determine if adjunctive cenobamate increases the odds ratio (OR) for ≥50% responder rate or for withdrawals due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) leading to ASM discontinuation versus adjunctive therapy with other ASMs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (maintenance phase ≥ 12 weeks) assessing adjunctive ASMs in adults with uncontrolled focal seizures. Cenobamate was compared to a group of seven other ASMs, and to subgroups of branded (brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide, and perampanel) and older (lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate) ASMs at FDA-recommended daily maintenance doses (FDA-RDMD), at all doses, and at maximum and minimum daily doses. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were eligible for analysis. The placebo-adjusted ≥ 50% responder rate for FDA-RDMD of cenobamate was superior (OR 4.200; 95% CI 2.279, 7.742) to FDA-RDMD of all seven assessed (OR 2.202 95% CI 1.915, 2.532; p = 0.044) and branded ASMs (OR 2.148; 95% CI 1.849, 2.494; p = 0.037). There was no significant difference for ≥50% responder rate between FDA-RDMD of cenobamate and FDA-RDMD of older ASMs (OR 2.617; 95% CI 1.767, 3.878; p = 0.202). No significant differences were identified for ≥50% responder rate when comparing all doses and maximum/minimum doses of cenobamate to all seven, branded, and older ASMs. Cenobamate demonstrated comparable TEAE withdrawal rates to all seven ASMs, branded ASMs, and older ASMs across each of the four dose ranges (all p > 0.05).

SIGNIFICANCE

Patients receiving FDA-RDMD of cenobamate were more likely to have ≥50% seizure reduction compared with FDA-RDMD of the seven assessed ASMs and branded ASMs, without an increase in treatment discontinuation due to TEAEs.

Role of clinical pharmacists in epilepsy management at a general hospital in Vietnam: a before-and-after study

Background

Clinical pharmacists have an important role in inter-professional healthcare collaboration for epilepsy management. However, the pharmacy practices of managing epilepsy are still limited in Vietnam, deterring pharmacists from routine adjustments of antiepileptic drugs, which could decrease the patients’ quality of life. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of pharmacist interventions in epilepsy treatment at a Vietnamese general hospital.

Methods

A before-and-after study was conducted from January 2016 to December 2018. All patients with a diagnosis of epilepsy and being treated at the investigated hospital were recruited and screened for eligibility and exclusion criteria. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in good control of their epilepsy (with two seizures or less in a year). The secondary outcome was the number of patients maintaining optimized concentrations within the therapeutic range of carbamazepine (4–12 mg/L), phenytoin (10–20 mg/L), or valproic acid (50–100 mg/L). Collected data were analyzed using two proportions Z-test or Chi-square test.

Results

A total of 141 participants were enrolled in the study. While most patients were given lower prescribed daily doses than the recommendations from the World Health Organization, over 56% of the participants still experienced adverse drug effects. More than half of the patients received at least one pharmacists’ intervention, which increased by 25.0% the effectiveness of the therapy (p < 0.001) and by 14.6% the number of patients with optimized drug concentrations (p = 0.018).

Conclusion

Epilepsy management requires a multiple-stepped and comprehensive approach, with a focus on the health and safety of the patients. As part of the healthcare team, pharmacists need to engage at every stage to monitor the patient’s response and determine the most effective treatment with the fewest adverse drug reactions.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04967326. Registered July 19, 2021—Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04967326

Developing precision treatments for epilepsy using patient and animal models

Introduction: Phenytoin was the first antiepileptic drug (AED) discovered in an animal model of seizures whose clinical efficacy was subsequently confirmed. This clearly indicated that a search for other AEDs had to consider animal studies.Areas covered: Main seizure tests used for the evaluation of possible anticonvulsive activity of potential anticonvulsants and their predictive values have been reviewed. Procedures used for the estimation of antiepileptogenic effects have been also included.Expert opinion: First-line seizure models comprise maximal electroshock (MES)-, pentylenetetrazol (PTZ)- and kindling-induced convulsions in rodents. The MES test may be considered as a convenient and easy model of generalized tonic-clonic seizures, PTZ test - as a model of generalized myoclonic seizures and to a certain degree - absence seizures. Kindled seizures (for example, from amygdala) may be regarded as a model of focal seizures. Some tests have been suggested for the search of AEDs effective in drug-resistant seizures - for instance, 6 Hz (44 mA) test or intrahippocampal kainate model of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. There are also recommendations from experimental epileptology on synergistic AED combinations for patients with drug-resistant seizures. The clinical evidence on this issue is scarce and favors a combined treatment with valproate + lamotrigine.

The effects of lacosamide on cognitive function and psychiatric profiles in patients with epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Cognitive and psychiatric problems are common in people with epilepsy. They can have multiple causes, including structural brain lesions, the active epilepsy, and the effect of anti-epileptic therapy. Since patients' treatment compliance and quality of life are affected by cognitive and emotional status, it is crucial for clinicians to understand how anti-seizure medications (ASMs) affect cognition and mood, and to choose the proper ASM.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a literature review of the impact on cognition and mood status of lacosamide (LCM) in people with epilepsy.

METHODS

Wesearched PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and reference lists of articles for all types of articles with no limitations on publication date.

RESULTS

A total of 251 records were obtained, including 247 articles in PubMed and 4 articles from reference lists. We included 2 meta-analyses, one randomized controlled trials and 14 observational studies after the screening process. Most studies agree LCM has low risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) on cognition. Comparisons with other ASMs, LCM may be preferable to carbamazepine, topiramate and perampanel, and not inferior to lamotrigine. In spite of low incident rate, depression is the most common psychiatric change of LCM. There are no consistent positive or negative psychiatric effects of LCM.

CONCLUSION

Lacosamide has limited impact on cognitive and mood status in this review. Several factors including mechanism of co-administration of ASMs and personal history of psychiatric disorder should be considered as important in the development of cognitive and psychiatric side effects. However, the heterogeneity between studies make the quality of evidence weaker and further trials are needed.

Mass spectrometry-based metabolomics in health and medical science: a systematic review

Metabolomics is the study of the investigation of small molecules derived from cellular and organism metabolism, which reflects the outcomes of the complex network of biochemical reactions in living systems.

A viewpoint on rational and irrational fixed-drug combinations

INTRODUCTION

Considering that there are around 30% of patients with epilepsy resistant to monotherapy, the use of synergistic combinations of antiepileptic drugs is of particular importance. This review shows most beneficial as well as irrational combined treatments both from an experimental and clinical point of view. Areas covered: Preferably, experimental data derived from studies evaluating synergy, additivity, or antagonism by relevant methods, in terms of anticonvulsant or neurotoxic effects and pharmacokinetic data have been considered. Although there have been no randomized clinical trials on this issue, the clinical data have been analyzed from studies on considerable numbers of patients. Case-report studies have been not considered. Expert commentary: The experimental data provide a strong support that co-administration of lamotrigine with carbamazepine is negative, considering the anticonvulsant and neurotoxic effects. Clinical reports do not entirely support this conclusion. Other experimentally documented negative combinations comprise lamotrigine+ oxcarbazepine and oxcarbazepine+ phenytoin. From the experimental and clinical point of view, a combination of lamotrigine+ valproate may deserve recommendation. Other most positive experimental and clinical combinations include carbamazepine+valproate, phenytoin+phenobarbital, carbamazepine+gabapentin, carbamazepine+topiramate, levetiracetam+valproate, levetiracetam+carbamazepine. Certainly, experimental data have some limitations (non-epileptic animals, acute administration of antiepileptic drugs) so all experimental recommendations need a careful clinical evaluation.